Gary Peters (DEM, incumbent), Abdul El-Sayed (DEM), Bernadette Smith (REP), Frederick Heurtebise (REP), Genevieve Scott (REP), Haley Stevens (DEM), Joseph Allen Tate (DEM), Mallory McMorrow (DEM), Mike Rogers (REP), Rachel Elizabeth Howard (DEM).
108 ads analyzed, 54 with at least one technique in the copy.
Newest first. The paid-for-by line is the advertiser's own filing.
Findings
As of 2026-09-23. Counts are of distinct ads; the same text run many times is one ad.
Ads analyzed
108 (Meta 74, YouTube 34) · started running between 2026-07-10 and 2026-09-22
With at least one technique
54 of 108 (50%)
Most common techniques
Loaded Language · 43 adsAppeal to Prejudice · 33 adsName Calling · 30 ads
Meta
34 of 74 (46%) flagged · Loaded Language (25), Appeal to Prejudice (19), Name Calling (15)
YouTube
20 of 34 (59%) flagged · Loaded Language (18), Name Calling (15), Appeal to Prejudice (14)
Reported Meta spend
$143,200–209,435 on all ads, $97,800–138,494 on flagged ads · Meta reports ranges; these are the sums of their ends
Example
“billionaire-funded super PACs” — Loaded Language, paid for by Abdul for U.S. Senate
· the flagged ad with the highest reported spend that shows the most common technique
Money in this race
From FEC filings for 2025–26. Outside spending is money a group spends on its own about a candidate — TV and online ads, mail, canvassing. It is not a donation to the campaign, and the candidate does not control it. Supporting means it was spent to help that candidate win; Opposing means it was spent to defeat them, usually on attack ads. Groups report it within 24 or 48 hours as the election nears. Raised is the campaign's own fundraising, as of its latest quarterly report. Largest donors come from each outside spender's own FEC receipts, with each donor's share of its itemized receipts; donors under $100,000 are not named.
Gary Peters (DEM, incumbent)
Raised
$248K through 2026-06-30individuals $19K · PACs $9,500 · from the candidate's other committees $6,170 · cash on hand $6.5M
SENATE CONSERVATIVES FUND— $7,352 opposing PetersGIVEGREEN UNITED ACTION— $100 supporting PetersLargest donors: NRDC ACTION FUND INC. $917K (52%); LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS, INC. $840K (48%)
UNITED DEMOCRACY PROJECT ('UDP')— $20.1M opposing El-SayedLargest donors: AMERICAN ISRAEL PUBLIC AFFAIRS COMMITTEE $30.0M (29%); SINGER, PAUL $2.6M (2%); SABAN, HAIM $2.0M (2%); MANZANITA ACTION FUND $1.6M (2%); ROWAN, MARC $1.5M (1%)SLF PAC— $17.7M opposing El-Sayed
· 6 ads on this pageLargest donors: ONE NATION $70.7M (28%); ADELSON, MIRIAM $30.0M (12%); SCHWARZMAN, STEPHEN A. $17.0M (7%); SINGER, PAUL ELLIOTT $14.5M (6%); MUSK, ELON $10.0M (4%)NO GOING BACK PAC INC.— $8.1M opposing El-SayedAMERICANS FOR PROSPERITY ACTION, INC. (AFP ACTION) DBA CVA ACTION AND DBA LIBRE ACTION— $2.9M opposing El-SayedLargest donors: KOCH INC $30.0M (33%); STAND TOGETHER INC. $20.0M (22%); WALTON, JIM C. $7.0M (8%); WALTON, S ROBSON $7.0M (8%); STAND TOGETHER CHAMBER OF COMMERCE INC $6.5M (7%)FIGHTING FOR MICHIGAN PAC— $1.9M supporting El-Sayed
· 4 ads on this pageLargest donors: INSTITUTE FOR MIDDLE EAST UNDERSTANDING, INC. $400K (10%); TAYEB, JUKAKU $300K (8%); UAW - V - CAP (UAW VOLUNTARY COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM) 'INT'L UNION UNITED AUTOMOBILE AEROSPACE & AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA UAW $300K (8%); AHMED, MANSOOR $250K (7%); FORWARD BLUE $250K (7%)and 34 more
$11.4M through 2026-07-15individuals $11.1M · PACs $64K · candidate's own money, incl. loans $84 · from the candidate's other committees $17K · cash on hand $1.9M
GLCF, INC.— $10.5M supporting RogersLargest donors: DUNN, TIMOTHY M $5.0M (64%); SINGER, PAUL $500K (6%); TEAM ROGERS $332K (4%); PENSKE, ROGER $250K (3%); PENSKE CORPORATION $250K (3%)AMERICANS FOR PROSPERITY ACTION, INC. (AFP ACTION) DBA CVA ACTION AND DBA LIBRE ACTION— $9.4M supporting RogersLargest donors: KOCH INC $30.0M (33%); STAND TOGETHER INC. $20.0M (22%); WALTON, JIM C. $7.0M (8%); WALTON, S ROBSON $7.0M (8%); STAND TOGETHER CHAMBER OF COMMERCE INC $6.5M (7%)WINSENATE— $6.7M opposing Rogers
· 2 ads on this pageLargest donors: SMP $4.1M (100%)DEFEND THE VOTE— $4.6M opposing RogersLargest donors: AUGUSTINE, TED $1.1M (73%); DEFEND THE VOTE ACTION FUND $193K (13%); DEMOCRATIC MOVEMENT $143K (10%)THE SENTINEL ACTION FUND— $2.6M supporting RogersLargest donors: RESTORATION OF AMERICA PAC $3.0M (18%); LEXINGTON FUND $1.5M (9%); TOWNSEND SIX CORP. $1.2M (8%); RIGHT VOTE INC. $1.0M (6%); SINGER, PAUL $750K (5%)and 18 more
Paid for by WINSENATEfrom 2026-09-22spend $3,500–3,999300,000–349,999 impressions
Big Pharma never had a better friend than Mike Rogers. Now, Michigan families are paying the price.
Name CallingLoaded LanguageAppeal to Fear100.0% of sentences flagged
Name Calling: 'Big Pharma' is a derogatory label used to discredit the pharmaceutical industry and by association Mike Rogers, framing him negatively without substantive argument — for example: Big Pharma
Loaded Language: The phrase implies corrupt or improper closeness between Rogers and the pharmaceutical industry using emotionally charged framing rather than factual description — for example: never had a better friend and paying the price.
Appeal to Fear: Implies Michigan families are suffering harmful consequences as a direct result of Rogers's relationship with Big Pharma, creating anxiety to drive a negative reaction toward him — for example: paying the price
Looks up the ad's factual claims in fact-checkers, primary sources and wire reporting. Takes up to a minute.
An ad is on this page because its own "Paid for by" line is a campaign in this race; or it comes from a national Senate group and ran mostly in MI; or it ran mostly in MI and names a candidate — unless its sponsor is a campaign for some other office. Ads from outside groups appear alongside the campaigns' own.
Campaigns run one text as many separate ads. Identical text from the same sponsor is one card here, marked with its number of variants.
A technique is a specific manipulative move in the wording, found by our model and explained in one line. It is not a claim that the ad is false.
Claims are checked when a reader asks: press "Check this ad's claims" on a card. The check runs once and its result is shown to everyone afterwards. The ten ads with the most money behind them in each race are checked ahead of time.
Claim verdicts say what the cited sources say. A verdict that an ad is wrong or misleading is shown only when it cites an established fact-checker or an institutional record — Congress, a federal agency, a court — and its confidence is not low; a weaker one is not shown at all. Each verdict shows what it rests on and how confident it is. If we got one wrong, press Disagree: a verdict that readers dispute and no one defends comes down.
Video ads come from the campaigns' own YouTube channels; the transcript is analyzed. Meta ads are analyzed on their text; their video and images are not, yet.
Get notified as this improves — new detection models, the browser
extension, and outlet scorecards. Occasional email, no spam.
Semblen LLC · 5900 Balcones Drive STE 100, Austin, TX 78731 · unsubscribe any time