Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed sat down with Bret Baier and spent most of the interview talking over the host, refusing to answer direct questions, and accusing the interviewer of attacking his faith. On a 2012 letter he signed and on the costs of his health care plan, he either denied what he had previously said or changed the subject. The performance left little doubt that he prefers to control the conversation rather than explain his positions.
He Would Not Address the 2012 Letter
Baier asked about a letter El-Sayed signed in 2012 concerning Egypt’s then-president Mohamed Morsi, who led the Muslim Brotherhood. El-Sayed cut him off before the question finished. He said he was “not interested” in anything from 2012 that might be taken “out of context.” He then accused Baier of raising a dual-loyalty issue and told him to “be a journalist” instead of repeating the opponent’s points. When pressed, he stated he had never been a member of the Muslim Brotherhood and never would be. He did not explain the content of the letter or why he signed it. He treated the question itself as illegitimate.
WOW this exchange.
@BretBaier tried to give Abdul El-Sayed a chance to finally explain the 2012 letter in support of the Muslim Brotherhood and Abdul awkwardly tries to speak over him.
This flailing defensiveness is why we’re on week 3 on this issue. https://t.co/xy8enk74fi
— Matt Whitlock (@MattWhitlock) October 23, 2026
He Denied His Own Words on Wait Times
Earlier in the campaign El-Sayed had responded to a question about longer waits for care under a government plan by saying “well, sucks for them.” When Baier quoted the line, El-Sayed first denied saying it. After the quote was repeated he called it selective and out of context. He then shifted to claiming current private-system wait times are already long. The original statement was on video. He did not walk it back or explain why families who need scans should accept longer delays.
He Would Not Say Whether Middle-Class Taxes Rise
Baier asked whether Medicare for All would raise taxes on middle-class families. El-Sayed answered that “prices that people pay are not going up.” When asked again whether taxes themselves would rise, he repeated variations of the same line about overall costs. He did not give a yes or no. He has previously written and spoken in favor of a system that replaces most private insurance with a single government plan. In this interview he described private coverage as something people could keep if they wished. The two descriptions do not match.
Abdul El-Sayed won’t say how much taxes would go up for middle class families under Medicare For All.
“Will middle class taxes go up – yes or no?”
El-Sayed: “Prices that people pay are not going up.”
“You’re saying middle class taxes are NOT going up?”
El-Sayed: “I said middle class prices are not going up. The price that we pay for healthcare is not going to go up.”
“So how much would the average family have to pay more [in taxes]?”
El-Sayed dodges again.
(He’s previously stated multiple times that he would raise taxes on the middle class to pay for Medicare For All – he just won’t say how much)
— Kyle Martinsen (@KyleMartinsen_) October 23, 2026
He Treated Questions About Past Statements as Attacks
On both the letter and the health care remarks, El-Sayed’s first move was to reframe the question as an assault on his loyalty or character. He told Baier not to act as the opponent’s campaign. He said raising the issues was “sad and beneath” both his opponent and the president. The pattern was consistent: when a prior statement or signature was cited, he interrupted, denied the premise, or redirected to his willingness to swear an oath to the Constitution. He answered the questions he preferred and blocked the rest.
He Added Conditions to Accepting Election Results
Baier noted El-Sayed’s earlier comment that Democrats must win by large margins so the outcome is unquestionable, then asked whether he would accept a narrow loss with no caveats. El-Sayed said he would accept the result of a “fair and free” election and hoped his opponent would do the same. He did not give a flat commitment to accept any certified result. The qualifier stayed in place.
He Claimed His Book Supports Keeping Private Insurance
When Baier pointed out that El-Sayed’s earlier descriptions of Medicare for All differed from the version offered in the interview, El-Sayed said the softer version was exactly what he had written in his 2021 book. He offered no page or passage. He continued to say he has “no issue” with private insurance while still calling for a guaranteed public system that would make most private coverage unnecessary. The distinction was left unexplained.
🚨 NEW: Fox’s @BretBaier challenges Abdul El-Sayed over his astonishing ‘well sucks for them’ response when asked about medical wait times https://t.co/klfF8bdMI4
— TV News Now (@TVNewsNow) October 23, 2026
He Interrupted and Talked Over the Host
Across the exchanges El-Sayed repeatedly began speaking before Baier finished. He said “no, no, no,” “let me just stop there,” and “I’m not interested.” The interruptions clustered around the topics he did not want to discuss in detail. When he did answer, the replies were short denials or restatements of loyalty rather than explanations of the underlying documents or policy trade-offs.
How Dishonest the Performance Was
El-Sayed did not invent new facts in real time. He did deny a recorded statement about wait times, refuse to discuss a letter he signed, and describe his health care plan in terms that conflict with earlier accounts he has given. He treated ordinary questions about those records as out of bounds. A candidate who will not explain his own past words or the practical effects of his main proposal is not giving voters a clear account of what he intends to do. The interview showed a consistent preference for interruption and redirection over direct answers.