Ana Navarro sharply criticized Democratic Rep. Haley Stevens over her decision to endorse Republican Mike Rogers instead of her party’s Senate nominee, Abdul El-Sayed, questioning the congresswoman’s explanation for breaking with her fellow Democrats just before Election Day.
During a discussion on The View, Navarro, a longtime Republican commentator who opposed Donald Trump’s presidential campaigns, compared Stevens’ decision with her own experience crossing party lines.
“Look, I know what it’s like to break with your party. I did it in 2016 for the first time when I voted for Hillary Clinton instead of voting for Donald Trump,” Navarro said, according to a transcript circulating online.
Navarro explained that her decision had been driven by Trump’s public remarks about immigrants and people with disabilities, along with allegations of sexual misconduct against him.
“But it was not because I wasn’t invited to the party,” she continued. “It was not because I felt slighted. It was not because my, you know, frail little ego felt injured because I was not part of the campaign.”
She described Stevens’ recent television appearances as “cringeworthy and painful,” suggesting that the congresswoman had been looking for a justification to withdraw her support from El-Sayed.
“She seems to really have been searching for a reason not to support El Sayed,” Navarro said. “She wouldn’t even pronounce his name in most interviews.”
The criticism followed a dramatic reversal in Michigan’s Senate race.
Stevens had initially backed El-Sayed after losing the Democratic primary to him. But tensions escalated over disagreements involving Israel, political commentator Hasan Piker and an outside advertisement criticizing American financial support for Israel.
El-Sayed’s campaign distanced itself from the advertisement, which was not produced by his campaign. The dispute intensified after his team reportedly asked Stevens to stay away from his remaining campaign events.
Stevens subsequently endorsed Rogers, arguing that she could not support what she viewed as hateful rhetoric surrounding El-Sayed’s campaign.
“We have to stand with country. We can’t stand with hate,” Stevens told reporters while explaining her decision.
Navarro challenged that explanation by pointing to the rhetoric directed at El-Sayed by Trump and other Republicans.
“Lady, you’re standing next to people who are calling Abdul El-Sayed a jihadist, a terrorist, saying he’s going to need a metal detector to go through into the U.S. Senate!” she said.
Navarro questioned how Stevens could cite anger and intolerance as reasons to abandon the Democratic nominee while supporting a Republican campaign aligned with Trump, whose attacks on El-Sayed have repeatedly referenced his Muslim identity.
“I don’t get the part of how you go and stand in a campaign where I have seen nothing but Islamophobia and anger,” Navarro said.
The exchange reflected the broader controversy surrounding Stevens’ endorsement, which has drawn criticism from prominent Democratic figures, including veteran strategist James Carville.
Carville released his own profanity-filled video attacking Stevens’ decision and predicting that it would end her political career.
Trump, meanwhile, praised Stevens for supporting Rogers, describing her decision as an act of bravery.
El-Sayed has largely sought to redirect questions about the dispute toward economic concerns facing Michigan families.
Navarro echoed that focus, arguing that the public controversy was doing little to address the issues voters confront in their daily lives.
“All of this noise, all of this fighting, this is not going to help Michiganders one bit,” she said.
She pointed specifically to gasoline prices, grocery costs and the economic effects of tariffs involving Canada.
Navarro concluded by urging attention to those issues rather than the escalating political feud.
Her remarks added another prominent voice to the debate over Stevens’ endorsement, while raising a central question about the congresswoman’s stated reasons for crossing party lines.
