State Sen. Mallory McMorrow says voters don’t trust politicians who “talk out of both sides of your mouth.”
But as the Royal Oak Democrat tries to hold onto her narrow lead in the Democratic U.S. Senate primary, her opponents and others are questioning her changing positions on some of the race’s biggest issues, from corporate money and Israel’s war in Gaza to data centers and utility regulation.
The waffling has opened up McMorrow to scrutiny from her progressive rival Abdul El-Sayed, a former Wayne County public health director, and U.S. Rep. Haley Stevens, a center-left Democrat from Birmingham.
“I’ve learned through my time in the legislature that you can’t talk out of both sides of your mouth, that people won’t trust you,” McMorrow said in an interview earlier this month. “And also, not only can we fund campaigns without corporate PAC [political action committee] dollars, but frankly, we need to.”
But for years, McMorrow received PAC money.
It’s just one of several important issues that McMorrow has shifted on as she tries to appeal to both moderates and progressives, an almost impossible task given how polarized the party has become.
Her campaign says her decision-making process has remained consistent, even as her positions have evolved.
“Mallory’s process for how she comes to decisions has always been the same: looking at the facts on the ground, assessing them as they change, and making the best decision for the people she represents,” spokesperson Hannah Lindow tells Metro Times. “That’s what everybody deserves in their U.S. Senator.”
McMorrow entered the Senate race as a polished, media-savvy Democrat who built a national profile as a rising voice in the party after a fiery speech on the state Senate floor in 2022 condemning conservative Christians who she said were using religious rhetoric to attack fundamental rights and smear their critics.
But as the Aug. 4 primary approaches, her waffling positions are raising questions about where McMorrow stands on key issues and why her positions have shifted.
For example, McMorrow’s earlier views on corporate PAC money were much different before she ran for U.S. Senate. In a 2017 interview with Bustle, McMorrow defended the practice, saying, “We’ll never even win elections to get more seats at the table if we don’t take advantage of every opportunity out there. Right now, money wins elections.”
She also previously posted on social media that, “If we on the left continue to tear down candidates for taking money to win, we’ll continue to lose,” before later deleting the post.
Now she is presenting herself as a candidate who believes campaigns should be run without corporate PAC dollars.
El-Sayed is taking note.
McMorrow “waits until I take a position and then takes a halfway position, like two months later,” El-Sayed said on a private organizing call first reported by Punchbowl. “So some of us lead, and some of us follow, and I guess some of us get out of the way.”
El-Sayed said the difference between him and McMorrow isn’t just ideology, but consistency. “I’ve been saying the same things for eight years, since I got into politics,” El-Sayed recently said. “I didn’t shift.”
While Sayed has consistently barred corporate PAC money, including during his 2018 gubernatorial run, McMorrow had accepted the money — until she launched her U.S. Senate campaign and pledged not to. Her state Senate campaign committee and leadership PAC accepted more than $120,000 from corporate PACs and other business-aligned groups, including a $500 contribution from Dow’s corporate PAC in March 2025, a month before she launched her U.S. Senate campaign.
She also received nearly $20,000 from DTE Energy, CMS Energy, and SEMCO Energy, major utilities that set energy rates for millions of Michigan residents.
“So when you take corporate PAC money for every election you’ve ever run, and then all of a sudden, six months ago, you decide you’re not going to take it, I’m so sorry, I don’t take you seriously,” El-Sayed said at a town hall.
He added that voters should “be careful with politicians” who keep moving with public opinion.
“I just think, unfortunately, that most politicians change their beliefs based on what they think will get them elected,” El-Sayed said. “I think we need politicians who try to get elected because of what they believe.”
McMorrow’s shifting position on Israel and Gaza has also drawn scrutiny, especially in Michigan, where the war has become a key issue in Democratic politics.
At the start of her Senate campaign, McMorrow reached out to pro-Israel Democratic groups, attended a private pro-Israel leadership event, and traveled to Israel on a trip sponsored by a prominent pro-Israel organization. During a donor call, a supporter said she had prepared an “outstanding” position paper for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), though it was never released publicly.
Then her message changed.
Last fall, McMorrow said Israel’s war in Gaza met “the definition” of genocide. Later, after backlash, she pulled back, warning Democrats not to turn the term into what she called a political “purity test.”
Then last week, J Street, a center-left lobbying group that dubs itself as “pro-peace and pro-Israel,” endorsed McMorrow. The same group threatened Democrats in October 2023 to support a resolution that pledged Congress would stand “with Israel as it defends itself against the barbaric war launched by Hamas and other terrorists.”
El-Sayed, a consistent opponent of Israel’s actions, has argued that McMorrow only changed her tone after realizing she would not get the support she wanted from pro-Israel groups.
“And when it comes to Gaza, I didn’t have to wait until the coast was clear to say that it was a genocide,” El-Sayed said. “I understand genocide has a meaning.”
AIPAC is standing with Stevens, who described herself as a proud pro-Israel Democrat and a non-Jewish “Zionist.” Since 2022, Stevens has received more than $1.2 million in donations from the AIPAC. In a statement after the Democratic Majority for Israel’s PAC endorsed her in November 2025, Stevens said she would “support Israel’s security” and “ensure the ceasefire holds in Gaza.”
McMorrow’s campaign has pointed to a series of public comments emphasizing what she describes as a loss of shared humanity in the conflict.
McMorrow’s record on data centers has also come under scrutiny.
In 2019, she voted against legislation that would have provided property tax breaks for data centers. In 2024, she supported a different package that created sales and use tax exemptions tied to specific conditions, including requirements related to jobs, wages, water use, and protections against raising residential energy costs.
Her campaign says the later vote was designed to prevent projects from receiving broader tax breaks and to ensure data centers still pay into local services.
Her campaign also says her position has been consistent in opposing property tax exemptions while supporting more incentives with stricter conditions. In a video in early February, McMorrow said data center projects should only receive incentives if they do not raise residential energy costs, rely heavily on renewable energy, and use municipal water systems rather than drawing from the Great Lakes.
“Michigan, I believe, has an opportunity to show the rest of the country how we do this right,” she said. “I’m against any data center that raises residential rates, hurts our water, does not use union labor, and doesn’t actually create revenue for the state.”
But critics point to a shift in approach. Between 2020 and 2024, McMorrow and her leadership PAC accepted at least $21,750 from utility and telecom companies that stand to benefit from data center expansion. During that same period, she moved from opposing tax breaks tied to data centers to supporting new incentives.
Now, while running for U.S. Senate, McMorrow says data centers should be more tightly regulated and made to “pay their fair share.”
Her record on utilities has also become a point of dispute.
McMorrow is now making high energy costs a key part of her campaign message. Critics have pointed to her votes in 2023 against Republican-backed amendments related to rate caps and transparency.
Her campaign says that characterization is misleading. Those amendments, they say, were not stand-alone efforts to lower rates, but procedural moves that would have blocked a broader energy bill from taking effect. The legislation she supported, Senate Bill 502, included measures to strengthen oversight of utilities and expand resources for ratepayer advocates.
Still, the larger political challenge remains.
McMorrow has made authenticity and clarity central to her message. But as her rivals and outside groups point out changes in her positions, she is increasingly being forced to explain those shifts.
McMorrow is the current front-runner, but her lead is small, and more than a third of voters remain undecided, according to an Emerson College poll published on Jan. 29. The survey shows McMorrow leading with 22%, followed by Stevens at 17% and El-Sayed at 16%. About 38% are still undecided, leaving the race wide open.
A more recent internal poll released March 25 by McMorrow’s campaign shows her leading with 30%, followed by El-Sayed at 25% and Stevens at 23%, with 21% undecided. Campaign polls are not independent and are typically designed to present candidates in a favorable light.
With more than a third of Democratic voters still undecided, it’s still anyone’s race.