With the little free time he has as mayor of Dearborn, Abdullah Hammoud is often glued to his phone fielding WhatsApp messages from family members with updates from Lebanon. He, like many Lebanese Americans, is trying to get loved ones out of the country after Israel’s recently expanded military offensive. Last week, Israeli airstrikes killed an American citizen in Lebanon who was from Dearborn.

In normal times, Hammoud is no stranger to the national press, often fielding interviews from reporters to speak about how the broader Middle Eastern and North African community in America is feeling. Dearborn is home to the largest Arab American community in the country and the largest Lebanese American one, too. Since the war began in Gaza, political analysts, pollsters, campaign officials, and journalists are keeping close tabs on his city, trying to gauge how voters will show up—or not—this November. 

In 2020, President Biden won the crucial swing state of Michigan by 154,000 votes. With an estimated 220,000 voters who identify as either MENA or Muslim in Michigan, Dearborn serves as a useful proxy for thinking about the anger and frustration many feel about Biden’s policies in the Middle East. The White House becomes much more difficult without the support of Mayor Hammoud’s city.

The Harris campaign has done little to win back the support of Hammoud or his constituents. The initial wave to get Biden off the ticket started in Dearborn in February. Mayor Hammoud penned an op-ed in the New York Times throwing his support behind the Uncommitted campaign over the Biden administration’s unwavering support for Israel.

In that letter, Hammoud said that he and his neighbors felt betrayed. Months have passed, and President Biden is no longer on the ticket. Mayor Hammoud spoke with Mother Jones about whether that feeling has shifted, his advice to the White House, and the problem with thinking of people in Dearborn as simply pawns in the 2024 election.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity. 

President Biden is no longer the candidate. But Israeli bombs are still dropping in Gaza and now in Lebanon, Yemen, Syria and Iran. How are you feeling now?

It’s getting all the more personal. Although we have many residents that have lost lives in Gaza, it seems that now—more than ever—we have funerals that we’re attending on a daily basis for loved ones that we’ve lost overseas. And so, how much has changed? The feeling of betrayal still exists. This idea that our administration, the leaders in this country have chosen [Israeli Prime Minister] Benjamin Netanyahu over the American people still persists. And I think it’s not just the feeling that Dearborn residents carry, but it’s the feeling that the broader American public carries.

This week, thousands of people showed up at the funeral of Dearborn resident Kamel Jawad, who was killed in an Israeli airstrike in Lebanon. He was an American citizen who was in Lebanon trying to help those who were unable to flee. How is your community handling that loss?

I’ve been to many funerals in this community. But this, this was very different.

It was much quieter. A lot more solemn. The grief was physically visible on so many, not just the family and close friends, and it’s because everybody knew somebody that had died or been injured or displaced or that they haven’t been able to contact.

“What they’re saying is we care about universal health care and we care about what’s unfolding in Gaza.”

Dearborn is the subject of a lot of national election coverage. What is something that is either underreported or overreported? 

What people often miss is they believe that this community only cares about foreign issues and global issues. That could not be further from the truth. As somebody who grew up in the post-9/11 era, we have not had alignment on a foreign policy agenda with any other presidents for the last 20 years. And so, for as long as I can remember, the community has made issues of foreign policy and global policy secondary. What you’re hearing now is people saying enough is enough, and the genocide is unprecedented. 

What they’re saying is we care about universal health care and we care about what’s unfolding in Gaza. We care about a green future and we care about what’s happening in Lebanon. We care about centering worker and union rights and we care about the crises in Yemen. And our values are universal and we’re looking for candidates to apply them universally. 

You can’t come to us and say you want to advocate to reduce gun violence but that you’re okay funding the Israeli government, which gives radical settlers assault weapons to kill Palestinians in the West Bank—each and every single day! You can’t come to our community and say you want to end mass shootings yet provide 2,000-pound JDAMs [Joint Direct Attack Munition bombs] to the Israeli government to drop and decimate every university across Gaza.

Our values are universal and we’re looking for somebody who has a very strong moral compass and who wants to bring decency back to the White House.

Obviously not everyone in the MENA community is Muslim, and I guess the same would apply for Dearborn, but what do you make of two recent endorsements for the Harris administration, one from 25 Muslim leaders across the country—it does include a DEI consultant for Raytheon and Lockheed Martin, some noted—as well as the backing of EMGAGE, one of the country’s oldest Muslim political advocacy organizations? 

The community is not a monolith—to your point. We have to acknowledge this. There’s differences within communities. I think the largest voting bloc, based on what I’m hearing, are those feeling great apathy toward this election. And apathy is very destructive. I think, for the 2016 election, it wasn’t the fact that Donald Trump won Michigan by 11,000 votes; it was the fact that 80,000 people skipped the presidential question in total that led to the presidency of Donald Trump. And so I think that is what is dangerous.

Is that something that you think can be used to put pressure on either campaign?

We’re trying to advocate through every means necessary to highlight the need to change course on Gaza, to change course on what’s unfolding overseas, to prevent a broader regional conflict, to bring home all the hostages and all the prisoners, to end the genocide.

If I can ask more pointedly, would you call for a campaign to skip the vote to make the case?

My advocacy is going to encourage people to come out to the ballot box and to make sure that they cast their ballots and take care of their moral conscience, and what that means for each individual may be different. Sitting on the side will not move the needle.

Hamtramck Mayor Amer Ghalib made headlines with his endorsement of Donald Trump. He’s not the only one. Some Yemeni leaders in the area have also thrown their support behind the Trump campaign. And the Arab American Institute just released a poll that says the community is split on who to support. Given the stakes of this election, some are going to blame leaders like you. Is that fair?

The blame lies within the candidates running for office. Right now, if you look at polling across America, the majority of Americans—the majority of Democrats, Independents, and Republicans—all agree that we need a ceasefire now.

And the majority of Americans also believe in bringing about an arms embargo against the Israeli government. Yet, we don’t see any of the mainstream candidates adopting these policy platforms. So, the blame lies there.

I have respect for Dr. Ghalib, but I wholeheartedly disagree with his endorsement. Donald Trump is a threat. Donald Trump, we know what he stands for, and bringing back the Muslim ban 2.0, we know that he moved the embassy to Jerusalem, he annexed the Golan Heights, and ended all humanitarian aid for Palestinians. This is an individual who tells Netanyahu to finish the job, and who’s advocating for the bombing of nuclear facilities in Iran. And so many in this community understand that he is not a friend, nor ally, to this community.

What do you make of this 2024 political conundrum that those who care about Palestinians should still vote for Harris if they truly care about them?

When you have residents pouring in saying, “I have lost a family member, I have missed the burial that would provide some semblance of peace, and we couldn’t even find the body of my family member—we only found limbs that were cast because of the size of the explosion,” how would you approach them and say, “While I understand this pain you’re feeling, you still should cast your vote for the quote-unquote lesser of two evils?” It is a very difficult conversation to be had, and so what we are doing is: one, comforting our residents, first and foremost, and secondly, advocating for the vote. That is what we can do. 

The conundrum is real, but ultimately what I keep pushing back on is it’s not this community that has to move in its values and principles and any issues that it’s taken a stance on. It’s the candidates who have to move. 

And don’t move because of Dearborn, by all means. I’m not telling you to move because this small city in the Midwest is telling you to move on these issues. Move because the general American populace has said these issues matter to them. And this idea that people will forget? Remember we heard this nine months ago: “People will forget come November.” People are not forgetting nothing. Genocide is not something you can cast aside.

When you hear Democrats, dare I say, chastise people for not voting at all or kind of expressing their frustration when it comes to US policy around Israel, what’s your response?

My response is why is voter turnout flailing all across this country? Because people want to be inspired to come out to the ballot, the continuous argument that they are the lesser of two evils or the fear factor of this other president will threaten democracy. So that’s what I push back on. Don’t blame the constituency if it doesn’t come out. If they don’t come out, you need to look in the mirror and ask yourself: What did you do wrong? Where did you fall short? What policy positions did you take that are not popular? And what position did you take that was absolutely morally wrong? 

That is the question people need to ask. In any traditional campaign, young people are knocking on doors. Correct? Correct. Now you have young people protesting on college campuses, calling for an end to our US taxpayer dollars funding a genocide. That is where young people are spending their time. That is where the organic energy that traditionally uplifts campaigns is being spent today to try to end our government from supporting a war criminal like Benjamin Netanyahu each and every single day.

What do you make of the recent reporting that US Secretary of State Antony Blinken rejected reports of blocked aid into Gaza? And what do you make of what is going on in so-called behind-the-scenes discussion—with Biden reportedly being frustrated with Netanyahu—amid what is happening daily in Gaza?

I am so tired of Biden expressing his grief in private. It is tiresome. Be an adult. You are the president of the greatest country in the world, of the most powerful country in the world. That speaks volumes about your character and about who you are. And somebody who’s unwilling—all this grief he’s expressing in private is a bunch of bullshit. I am tired of rhetoric and talking points. It’s all a bunch of bullshit. And you can quote me for that. I think this is all theatrics. You know, they think that if they leak Biden expressed grief or said he’s an asshole behind the scenes that we’re going to see that Biden is actually trying.

He’s not trying. We see it every time they want to advocate for millions in aid and billions in bombs. Well, here’s the problem: The billions in bombs only amplify the aid that you need. You can’t sign off on the invasion, sign off on the incursion, and then say you’re going to try to provide some level of—some semblance of—support and aid to people.

Can I ask you a deeply personal question? Who are you planning to vote for for president?

My wife and I have this conversation often. Typically the first thing my wife asks me when she wakes up is, what happened last night, did we lose anybody? Because all of our families are displaced in Lebanon. So, I don’t know what’s going to come November 5. I know I’m going to cast my vote. I can’t tell you in what direction.

But I do know what’s more important than November 5 is the work I’m doing today. I’m trying to advocate for this carnage and this war to end, for this genocide to cease, for our US taxpayer dollars to stop funding this and supporting this. And I do know regardless of what happens on November 5, I’ll probably be on the phone organizing people on the ground, November 6 and beyond, to begin to hold that new administration accountable as well.

With the little free time he has as mayor of Dearborn, Abdullah Hammoud is often glued to his phone fielding WhatsApp messages from family members with updates from Lebanon. He, like many Lebanese Americans, is trying to get loved ones out of the country after Israel’s recently expanded military offensive. Last week, Israeli airstrikes killed an American citizen in Lebanon who was from Dearborn.

In normal times, Hammoud is no stranger to the national press, often fielding interviews from reporters to speak about how the broader Middle Eastern and North African community in America is feeling. Dearborn is home to the largest Arab American community in the country and the largest Lebanese American one, too. Since the war began in Gaza, political analysts, pollsters, campaign officials, and journalists are keeping close tabs on his city, trying to gauge how voters will show up—or not—this November. 

In 2020, President Biden won the crucial swing state of Michigan by 154,000 votes. With an estimated 220,000 voters who identify as either MENA or Muslim in Michigan, Dearborn serves as a useful proxy for thinking about the anger and frustration many feel about Biden’s policies in the Middle East. The White House becomes much more difficult without the support of Mayor Hammoud’s city.

The Harris campaign has done little to win back the support of Hammoud or his constituents. The initial wave to get Biden off the ticket started in Dearborn in February. Mayor Hammoud penned an op-ed in the New York Times throwing his support behind the Uncommitted campaign over the Biden administration’s unwavering support for Israel.

In that letter, Hammoud said that he and his neighbors felt betrayed. Months have passed, and President Biden is no longer on the ticket. Mayor Hammoud spoke with Mother Jones about whether that feeling has shifted, his advice to the White House, and the problem with thinking of people in Dearborn as simply pawns in the 2024 election.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity. 

President Biden is no longer the candidate. But Israeli bombs are still dropping in Gaza and now in Lebanon, Yemen, Syria and Iran. How are you feeling now?

It’s getting all the more personal. Although we have many residents that have lost lives in Gaza, it seems that now—more than ever—we have funerals that we’re attending on a daily basis for loved ones that we’ve lost overseas. And so, how much has changed? The feeling of betrayal still exists. This idea that our administration, the leaders in this country have chosen [Israeli Prime Minister] Benjamin Netanyahu over the American people still persists. And I think it’s not just the feeling that Dearborn residents carry, but it’s the feeling that the broader American public carries.

This week, thousands of people showed up at the funeral of Dearborn resident Kamel Jawad, who was killed in an Israeli airstrike in Lebanon. He was an American citizen who was in Lebanon trying to help those who were unable to flee. How is your community handling that loss?

I’ve been to many funerals in this community. But this, this was very different.

It was much quieter. A lot more solemn. The grief was physically visible on so many, not just the family and close friends, and it’s because everybody knew somebody that had died or been injured or displaced or that they haven’t been able to contact.

“What they’re saying is we care about universal health care and we care about what’s unfolding in Gaza.”

Dearborn is the subject of a lot of national election coverage. What is something that is either underreported or overreported? 

What people often miss is they believe that this community only cares about foreign issues and global issues. That could not be further from the truth. As somebody who grew up in the post-9/11 era, we have not had alignment on a foreign policy agenda with any other presidents for the last 20 years. And so, for as long as I can remember, the community has made issues of foreign policy and global policy secondary. What you’re hearing now is people saying enough is enough, and the genocide is unprecedented. 

What they’re saying is we care about universal health care and we care about what’s unfolding in Gaza. We care about a green future and we care about what’s happening in Lebanon. We care about centering worker and union rights and we care about the crises in Yemen. And our values are universal and we’re looking for candidates to apply them universally. 

You can’t come to us and say you want to advocate to reduce gun violence but that you’re okay funding the Israeli government, which gives radical settlers assault weapons to kill Palestinians in the West Bank—each and every single day! You can’t come to our community and say you want to end mass shootings yet provide 2,000-pound JDAMs [Joint Direct Attack Munition bombs] to the Israeli government to drop and decimate every university across Gaza.

Our values are universal and we’re looking for somebody who has a very strong moral compass and who wants to bring decency back to the White House.

Obviously not everyone in the MENA community is Muslim, and I guess the same would apply for Dearborn, but what do you make of two recent endorsements for the Harris administration, one from 25 Muslim leaders across the country—it does include a DEI consultant for Raytheon and Lockheed Martin, some noted—as well as the backing of EMGAGE, one of the country’s oldest Muslim political advocacy organizations? 

The community is not a monolith—to your point. We have to acknowledge this. There’s differences within communities. I think the largest voting bloc, based on what I’m hearing, are those feeling great apathy toward this election. And apathy is very destructive. I think, for the 2016 election, it wasn’t the fact that Donald Trump won Michigan by 11,000 votes; it was the fact that 80,000 people skipped the presidential question in total that led to the presidency of Donald Trump. And so I think that is what is dangerous.

Is that something that you think can be used to put pressure on either campaign?

We’re trying to advocate through every means necessary to highlight the need to change course on Gaza, to change course on what’s unfolding overseas, to prevent a broader regional conflict, to bring home all the hostages and all the prisoners, to end the genocide.

If I can ask more pointedly, would you call for a campaign to skip the vote to make the case?

My advocacy is going to encourage people to come out to the ballot box and to make sure that they cast their ballots and take care of their moral conscience, and what that means for each individual may be different. Sitting on the side will not move the needle.

Hamtramck Mayor Amer Ghalib made headlines with his endorsement of Donald Trump. He’s not the only one. Some Yemeni leaders in the area have also thrown their support behind the Trump campaign. And the Arab American Institute just released a poll that says the community is split on who to support. Given the stakes of this election, some are going to blame leaders like you. Is that fair?

The blame lies within the candidates running for office. Right now, if you look at polling across America, the majority of Americans—the majority of Democrats, Independents, and Republicans—all agree that we need a ceasefire now.

And the majority of Americans also believe in bringing about an arms embargo against the Israeli government. Yet, we don’t see any of the mainstream candidates adopting these policy platforms. So, the blame lies there.

I have respect for Dr. Ghalib, but I wholeheartedly disagree with his endorsement. Donald Trump is a threat. Donald Trump, we know what he stands for, and bringing back the Muslim ban 2.0, we know that he moved the embassy to Jerusalem, he annexed the Golan Heights, and ended all humanitarian aid for Palestinians. This is an individual who tells Netanyahu to finish the job, and who’s advocating for the bombing of nuclear facilities in Iran. And so many in this community understand that he is not a friend, nor ally, to this community.

What do you make of this 2024 political conundrum that those who care about Palestinians should still vote for Harris if they truly care about them?

When you have residents pouring in saying, “I have lost a family member, I have missed the burial that would provide some semblance of peace, and we couldn’t even find the body of my family member—we only found limbs that were cast because of the size of the explosion,” how would you approach them and say, “While I understand this pain you’re feeling, you still should cast your vote for the quote-unquote lesser of two evils?” It is a very difficult conversation to be had, and so what we are doing is: one, comforting our residents, first and foremost, and secondly, advocating for the vote. That is what we can do. 

The conundrum is real, but ultimately what I keep pushing back on is it’s not this community that has to move in its values and principles and any issues that it’s taken a stance on. It’s the candidates who have to move. 

And don’t move because of Dearborn, by all means. I’m not telling you to move because this small city in the Midwest is telling you to move on these issues. Move because the general American populace has said these issues matter to them. And this idea that people will forget? Remember we heard this nine months ago: “People will forget come November.” People are not forgetting nothing. Genocide is not something you can cast aside.

When you hear Democrats, dare I say, chastise people for not voting at all or kind of expressing their frustration when it comes to US policy around Israel, what’s your response?

My response is why is voter turnout flailing all across this country? Because people want to be inspired to come out to the ballot, the continuous argument that they are the lesser of two evils or the fear factor of this other president will threaten democracy. So that’s what I push back on. Don’t blame the constituency if it doesn’t come out. If they don’t come out, you need to look in the mirror and ask yourself: What did you do wrong? Where did you fall short? What policy positions did you take that are not popular? And what position did you take that was absolutely morally wrong? 

That is the question people need to ask. In any traditional campaign, young people are knocking on doors. Correct? Correct. Now you have young people protesting on college campuses, calling for an end to our US taxpayer dollars funding a genocide. That is where young people are spending their time. That is where the organic energy that traditionally uplifts campaigns is being spent today to try to end our government from supporting a war criminal like Benjamin Netanyahu each and every single day.

What do you make of the recent reporting that US Secretary of State Antony Blinken rejected reports of blocked aid into Gaza? And what do you make of what is going on in so-called behind-the-scenes discussion—with Biden reportedly being frustrated with Netanyahu—amid what is happening daily in Gaza?

I am so tired of Biden expressing his grief in private. It is tiresome. Be an adult. You are the president of the greatest country in the world, of the most powerful country in the world. That speaks volumes about your character and about who you are. And somebody who’s unwilling—all this grief he’s expressing in private is a bunch of bullshit. I am tired of rhetoric and talking points. It’s all a bunch of bullshit. And you can quote me for that. I think this is all theatrics. You know, they think that if they leak Biden expressed grief or said he’s an asshole behind the scenes that we’re going to see that Biden is actually trying.

He’s not trying. We see it every time they want to advocate for millions in aid and billions in bombs. Well, here’s the problem: The billions in bombs only amplify the aid that you need. You can’t sign off on the invasion, sign off on the incursion, and then say you’re going to try to provide some level of—some semblance of—support and aid to people.

Can I ask you a deeply personal question? Who are you planning to vote for for president?

My wife and I have this conversation often. Typically the first thing my wife asks me when she wakes up is, what happened last night, did we lose anybody? Because all of our families are displaced in Lebanon. So, I don’t know what’s going to come November 5. I know I’m going to cast my vote. I can’t tell you in what direction.

But I do know what’s more important than November 5 is the work I’m doing today. I’m trying to advocate for this carnage and this war to end, for this genocide to cease, for our US taxpayer dollars to stop funding this and supporting this. And I do know regardless of what happens on November 5, I’ll probably be on the phone organizing people on the ground, November 6 and beyond, to begin to hold that new administration accountable as well.

Salma Hamamy wasn’t even watching the presidential debate when former President Donald Trump attempted a familiar verbal jab against Vice President Kamala Harris.

“I’m talking now if you don’t mind,” said Trump, as Harris grinned. “Does that sound familiar?”

The line hearkens back to a moment in the 2020 vice presidential debate, when Harris responded to an interruption from Mike Pence with the curt retort “I’m speaking.” The catchphrase, since then, has become a calling card for Harris; an indication of her toughness as the first female vice president.

But it has not always been completely effective. Earlier this summer, when Harris had just become the de facto Democratic nominee, she gave one of her first addresses on the trail in Detroit. Moments into her speech, she was heckled by Hamamy—a recent graduate from the University of Michigan—and other protesters clamoring for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza and end to weapon shipments to Israel.

The vice president responded to the demonstrators with a version of the same catchphrase she once used against Pence: “If you want Donald Trump to win, say that. Otherwise, I’m speaking.”

The July exchange instantly became another viral moment. Many ardent Harris fans cheered on social media while others, more sympathetic to the protesters, objected to Harris’ dismissal of not only the demonstrators but the topic that they were there to address—US support of Israeli military operations in Gaza. 

Shortly after Trump landed his attack Tuesday night, curious what Hamamy thought, we texted her to ask whether she had seen the moment. She had not. “I’m watching a debate amongst our central student government right now regarding divestment,” Hamamy replied. She was referring to her alma matter’s student government debate over withholding more than half a million dollars for campus groups until the school would divest from all business with ties to Israel and weapons manufacturers. (Once Hamamy got a chance to watch the debate clip, she said it sounded familiar.)

Other than this tiny moment, in the 90-plus-minute debate, the topic of Gaza, Palestine, and Israel was the subject of only two questions—one directed to each candidate. When asked how she’d push Netanyahu to “break through the stalemate” and sign onto a ceasefire deal, Harris’s response didn’t stray far from what she said at the Democratic National Convention.

“On October 7, Hamas, a terrorist organization, slaughtered 1,200 Israelis, many of them young people who were simply attending a concert,” Harris said. 

“Israel has a right to defend itself, and how it does so matters because it is also true far too many innocent Palestinians have been killed: children, mothers,” she added. “What we know is that this war must end.”

But in contrast to Harris’ enumeration of Israeli deaths, she made little effort to explain the scale of the death and carnage in Gaza beyond the vague qualifier “too many.” 

According to the official numbers from Gaza’s Ministry of Health, more than 41,000 Palestinians have been killed since October 7. A July letter published in the Lancet, one of the most famous medical journals in the world, estimated the total death toll may be closer to 186,000. (The study factored in the difficulty of accurately collecting data under crumbling infrastructure, and the indirect deaths caused by lack of access to health care, food, and aid.) Another letter published by international medics later that same month estimated that 92,000 Palestinians have been killed. 

The Israeli military, which has received more than $6 billion in US funding since October 7, has also killed Americans in both the West Bank and Gaza: US peace activist Aysenur Ezgi Eygi, 26, was shot and killed by an IDF soldier at a demonstration in the West Bank village of Beita last Friday. President Joe Biden initially called the death an accident. 

“She was fatally shot in the head by a bullet that came from an Israeli sniper positioned 200 meters away,” wrote Hamid Ali, Eygi’s partner. “This was no accident, and her killers must be held accountable.”

Harris issued a statement a day after the debate, saying “No one should be killed for participating in a peaceful protest. The shooting that led to her death is unacceptable and raises legitimate questions about the conduct of IDF personnel in the West Bank. Israel must do more to ensure that incidents like this never happen again.”

Trump was asked on the debate stage how he would negotiate with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Hamas on a hostage deal and prevent more civilians from being killed.

“If I were president, it would have never started,” said Trump, before attacking Harris for skipping Netanyahu’s address to Congress and falsely claiming that she didn’t meet with the Israeli prime minister on his July visit to the US. 

“She hates Israel,” Trump said. “At the same time, in her own way, she hates the Arab population because the whole place is going to get blown up: Arabs, Jewish people, Israel. Israel will be gone. It would have never happened.”

Harris replied, “That’s absolutely not true. I have my entire career and life supported Israel and the Israeli people.”

The short back-and-forth on Gaza probably didn’t do too much to move the political needle as far as activists for Palestinian human rights are concerned.

“Harris’s comments on Gaza continue to offend voters appalled by Netanyahu’s US-funded killing campaign,” wrote Abbas Alawieh, an organizer of the Uncommitted movement, after the debate. Alawieh had personally spoken with Harris in Detroit at a VIP greeting line. “They offer nothing new & perpetuate the murderous status quo. It’s simple: to stop the war, our government must stop sending the weapons fueling the war.”

According to a CBS/YouGov poll in April, nearly 70 percent of Democratic voters want the US to stop sending weapons to Israel. Neither candidate acknowledged an arms embargo as an option Tuesday night. Polls released the day before the debate show Harris leading Trump by only one point in the critical swing state of Michigan, which has been a center of anti-war organizing since October 2023.

The debate moved on, and shortly after it ended, Taylor Swift shared a post on Instagram endorsing Kamala Harris. On the same day, the Israeli military hit a crowded tent camp that it had designated as a humanitarian zone with an airstrike that left deep craters in the ground, killed at least 19 Palestinians, and wounded many more.

Salma Hamamy and Zainab Hakim are no strangers to disruption. 

Over the last few months at the University of Michigan, the two have loudly called for the school to officially divest from Israel and its ongoing military offensive in Gaza. They were involved in their school’s Gaza solidarity encampment and briefly took over their campus administration building for about eight hours (before the police department pepper sprayed, removed, and arrested them). 

But they never expected their action at Vice President Kamala Harris’ Detroit rally this week—in which they loudly yelled for a ceasefire, prompting Harris’ scorn—would gain so much attention. 

Related
Uncommitted Voters Had Hope for Harris’ Gaza Policy. It’s Fading.

The two shouted, “Kamala, you need to call for a ceasefire in Gaza. We demand an arms embargo and a free Palestine.” Then, they chanted: “Kamala, Kamala, you can’t hide, we won’t vote for genocide.” (Such actions have been common at President Joe Biden’s events for months.)

The vice president was both stern and direct in her response. “If you want Donald Trump to win, say that,” Harris commanded from the stage. “Otherwise, I’m speaking.” 

Her supporters at the rally roared in applause, drowning out both Hamamy and Hakim, who were escorted out of the rally.

Following the Hamamy and Hakim protest, Phil Gordon, an adviser to Vice President Harris posted on social media that her position has been clear. “She will always ensure Israel is able to defend itself against Iran and Iran-backed terrorist groups. She does not support an arms embargo on Israel,” Gordon wrote. “She will continue to work to protect civilians in Gaza and to uphold international humanitarian law.” (The Harris campaign did not respond to questions in time for publication.)

The two activists spoke with Mother Jones about their protest, what they make of the vice president’s response, and the implications it has for the upcoming election.

This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity.

Why did you interrupt Vice President Kamala Harris’ speech, and what were you hoping to achieve?

Hamamy: If she is expecting to come to Michigan—because it is such a crucial swing state in the election—she must understand that there is a primary issue for Michigan voters. And it is the entire reason as to why we are in this predicament in the very first place and to why she’s actually running and why Biden dropped: It is because of the approach to Palestine. 

And if she’s not going to take any crucial steps forward—or at least take a moral position—then there will be a movement that she must face. And she will face it through the protesters attending and disrupting and making it very clear where we stand.

How did you think she would react?

Hakim: I guess the closest thing that I had imagined is that we we would be told we weren’t interested in dialog and we were just interested yelling and that’s maybe what I imagined she would say.

And what do you make of the vice president’s retort? “If you want Donald Trump to win say that. Otherwise, I’m speaking.” Do you want Donald Trump to win?

Hamamy: No, of course not. 

I think it’s a really interesting response. And a questionable response to people who are saying, we want an end to the genocide. The fact that her first response is: Oh, so you want Donald Trump to win. It just shows her inability to understand what constituents are saying. 

“That is not a good way to act with people who have directly lost family members due to the ongoing genocide.”

When people are demanding a ceasefire and arms embargo and an end to the genocide and you say that we want Donald Trump to step in—it just shows a lack of accountability. It shows a lack of leadership, a lack of responsibility, and a lack of ownership.

There was a mix of reactions to her response online. I think some were applauding the vice president for being so direct—and shutting all of it down (like there was the head nod, the stare). And there were others who were far more skeptical, kind of realizing the Harris campaign is jeopardizing a win in Michigan by potentially alienating the large Arab-American community with that kind of response.

What did you make of how everyone reacted?

Hamamy: For the people who were applauding her body language or saying, “Oh, she shut those protesters up.” I was disturbed by them thinking that that was a good stance to take when someone is calling for a ceasefire. When someone’s calling for an end to weaponry shipments being sent overseas, that is not a good way to interact with constituents. That is not a good way to act with people who have directly lost family members due to the ongoing genocide.

Hakim: Obviously, I knew that this was going to be important. But I definitely did not process nearly how much attention it was going to get. 

I think that the genre of response that was most surprising to me is the people who are like: Oh, well, this has changed people’s mind; and this is showing people who Kamala Harris really is—and she’s losing Michigan because of this.

I think what was most surprising to me is the idea that this one sentence of hers—as opposed to her consistent, decades-long support for Israel—could be the thing for someone to feel like, yeah, maybe Kamala Harris isn’t a good person.

There was even some discourse around this idea of interrupting a woman of color, particularly a woman of color in this case, and there’s a lot to unpack there. But do you think that’s a fair critique of your particular protest?

Hakim: I thought that was just bullshit, the whole interrupting a woman of color thing.

It’s important to remember that this disruption was obviously about Harris and about election-related stuff. But that’s not the message to take from this. The message isn’t that this is going to have consequences on the election. The message is that Kamala is a bad person for supporting the genocide of Palestinians.

Anyone reading this might ask, okay, but when the other candidate in this race is Donald Trump, who has used the term Palestinian as an insult, does this not hurt the cause that you are advocating for in the long term?

Hamamy: In the long term, the Republican Party and the Democratic Party have basically taken the same approach and same stance on the issue of Palestine. They are both pro-Israel in the same way. Primaries are both bought by AIPAC; they are both taking money from Zionist organizations. The only difference is just how they try to appeal to their voters, to make it seem like they care about human life. 

Related
How We’ve Failed the Promise of Making “Genocide” a Crime

So to me, as someone who keeps track of the ongoing issues in Palestine, the Republican Party and the Democratic Party are one and the same on this. And for them to constantly keep saying that we need to vote a Democratic member in and not the Republican Party, because they’re the lesser of two evils—and because one just has a less intense version of genocide (which I actually don’t find that to be true considering that the genocide is being aided by the Democratic Party right now). They just seem so concerned about a hypothetical genocide when there is an actual genocide that is happening in the current moment.

Often, people do not realize there are different strains of those protesting. That this is a diverse group of people who have internal disagreements, too, about how to push for a change. It’s not all one movement. Are you part of the Abandon Biden camp? Are you part of the Uncommitted movement? Like, where do you and the broader student protest movement stand across Michigan—are you all in one camp versus the other?

Hamamy: I am not in the Abandon Biden movement or the Uncommitted campaign, both of them have done amazing work. I do think there are some differences in approach at times in comparison to the student movement. The student movement is primarily focused on the fact that these politicians will never save us. 

Communication is never going to get through their head. Us, you know, praying and hoping that they’re going to implement a ceasefire simply because we say that we have family members being killed—that is never going to happen. If the scenes and the video footage and the literal depiction of actual death, murder and slaughter—at one of the highest rates ever—coming out is not going to shake them enough to call for a ceasefire, then our words will never do that.

So what needs to happen is us withholding our vote and withholding any positive affiliation that we would give to the Democratic Party or to the Republican Party—or to whoever is perpetuating this genocide. And that is one of the main ways that I think the student movement goes forward. It is through continuous disruption and creating a social crisis throughout; to say that we will not operate as business as usual, so long as our tax dollars are funding a genocide that is killing so many people in Palestine.

Leaders of the Uncommitted Movement met with Vice President Harris before the rally and asked for another meeting—hoping to discuss an arms embargo and a permanent ceasefire. And we reported that she expressed openness to a meeting. Then, at the rally, there was the retort to you all. Is this a one-step forward, one-step back situation for the Harris campaign, or considering the ongoing Israeli offensive in both Gaza and the suffering currently in the West Bank, do you see it as no movement at all?

Hamamy: Kamala very clearly shared her words of sympathy with leaders of the Uncommitted campaign because of her worry about them not mobilizing the community to vote for her. She says one thing to one person and changes the moment she gets on stage, and there are several cameras around—it was very clear. And to me, what I’m going to prioritize is what her policies stand for, and what she said to the entire crowd and to the entire audience when she was challenged and when we said we’re not going to vote for genocide, as opposed to what her response would be to people on the side in private. So, to us, her response was one step forward in making the general population understand that she’s no different.

“The message isn’t that this is going to have consequences on the election. The message is that Kamala is a bad person for supporting the genocide of Palestinians.”

Hakim: In regards to Uncommitted: I definitely appreciate them for making clear the fact that Arab Americans and Muslim Americans are a significant voting bloc—and have power to sway the election whichever way, and I think that’s really important work that the committee did. But I also think that it’s important for all of us to remember that none of these options are gonna free Palestine or end the genocide and that appealing to Kamala Harris is not a solution in any way, shape, or form. 

What people seem to be forgetting is that she’s not just like some random person who decided to run for president. She has been the vice president for all 300-plus days of this genocide, and could have said something in all of that time. She deliberately chose not to do that.

If the Harris campaign called and tried to hash this out and have a conversation, would you take that call?

Hamamy:  If she wanted to hash this out, she needs to go to the Israeli government and say: We’re cutting off all military funding. There’s nothing to hash out with the voters. What needs to be hashed out is with the people who are committing genocide right now.

Salma Hamamy and Zainab Hakim are no strangers to disruption. 

Over the last few months at the University of Michigan, the two have loudly called for the school to officially divest from Israel and its ongoing military offensive in Gaza. They were involved in their school’s Gaza solidarity encampment and briefly took over their campus administration building for about eight hours (before the police department pepper sprayed, removed, and arrested them). 

But they never expected their action at Vice President Kamala Harris’ Detroit rally this week—in which they loudly yelled for a ceasefire, prompting Harris’ scorn—would gain so much attention. 

Related
Uncommitted Voters Had Hope for Harris’ Gaza Policy. It’s Fading.

The two shouted, “Kamala, you need to call for a ceasefire in Gaza. We demand an arms embargo and a free Palestine.” Then, they chanted: “Kamala, Kamala, you can’t hide, we won’t vote for genocide.” (Such actions have been common at President Joe Biden’s events for months.)

The vice president was both stern and direct in her response. “If you want Donald Trump to win, say that,” Harris commanded from the stage. “Otherwise, I’m speaking.” 

Her supporters at the rally roared in applause, drowning out both Hamamy and Hakim, who were escorted out of the rally.

Following the Hamamy and Hakim protest, Phil Gordon, an adviser to Vice President Harris posted on social media that her position has been clear. “She will always ensure Israel is able to defend itself against Iran and Iran-backed terrorist groups. She does not support an arms embargo on Israel,” Gordon wrote. “She will continue to work to protect civilians in Gaza and to uphold international humanitarian law.” (The Harris campaign did not respond to questions in time for publication.)

The two activists spoke with Mother Jones about their protest, what they make of the vice president’s response, and the implications it has for the upcoming election.

This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity.

Why did you interrupt Vice President Kamala Harris’ speech, and what were you hoping to achieve?

Hamamy: If she is expecting to come to Michigan—because it is such a crucial swing state in the election—she must understand that there is a primary issue for Michigan voters. And it is the entire reason as to why we are in this predicament in the very first place and to why she’s actually running and why Biden dropped: It is because of the approach to Palestine. 

And if she’s not going to take any crucial steps forward—or at least take a moral position—then there will be a movement that she must face. And she will face it through the protesters attending and disrupting and making it very clear where we stand.

How did you think she would react?

Hakim: I guess the closest thing that I had imagined is that we we would be told we weren’t interested in dialog and we were just interested yelling and that’s maybe what I imagined she would say.

And what do you make of the vice president’s retort? “If you want Donald Trump to win say that. Otherwise, I’m speaking.” Do you want Donald Trump to win?

Hamamy: No, of course not. 

I think it’s a really interesting response. And a questionable response to people who are saying, we want an end to the genocide. The fact that her first response is: Oh, so you want Donald Trump to win. It just shows her inability to understand what constituents are saying. 

“That is not a good way to act with people who have directly lost family members due to the ongoing genocide.”

When people are demanding a ceasefire and arms embargo and an end to the genocide and you say that we want Donald Trump to step in—it just shows a lack of accountability. It shows a lack of leadership, a lack of responsibility, and a lack of ownership.

There was a mix of reactions to her response online. I think some were applauding the vice president for being so direct—and shutting all of it down (like there was the head nod, the stare). And there were others who were far more skeptical, kind of realizing the Harris campaign is jeopardizing a win in Michigan by potentially alienating the large Arab-American community with that kind of response.

What did you make of how everyone reacted?

Hamamy: For the people who were applauding her body language or saying, “Oh, she shut those protesters up.” I was disturbed by them thinking that that was a good stance to take when someone is calling for a ceasefire. When someone’s calling for an end to weaponry shipments being sent overseas, that is not a good way to interact with constituents. That is not a good way to act with people who have directly lost family members due to the ongoing genocide.

Hakim: Obviously, I knew that this was going to be important. But I definitely did not process nearly how much attention it was going to get. 

I think that the genre of response that was most surprising to me is the people who are like: Oh, well, this has changed people’s mind; and this is showing people who Kamala Harris really is—and she’s losing Michigan because of this.

I think what was most surprising to me is the idea that this one sentence of hers—as opposed to her consistent, decades-long support for Israel—could be the thing for someone to feel like, yeah, maybe Kamala Harris isn’t a good person.

There was even some discourse around this idea of interrupting a woman of color, particularly a woman of color in this case, and there’s a lot to unpack there. But do you think that’s a fair critique of your particular protest?

Hakim: I thought that was just bullshit, the whole interrupting a woman of color thing.

It’s important to remember that this disruption was obviously about Harris and about election-related stuff. But that’s not the message to take from this. The message isn’t that this is going to have consequences on the election. The message is that Kamala is a bad person for supporting the genocide of Palestinians.

Anyone reading this might ask, okay, but when the other candidate in this race is Donald Trump, who has used the term Palestinian as an insult, does this not hurt the cause that you are advocating for in the long term?

Hamamy: In the long term, the Republican Party and the Democratic Party have basically taken the same approach and same stance on the issue of Palestine. They are both pro-Israel in the same way. Primaries are both bought by AIPAC; they are both taking money from Zionist organizations. The only difference is just how they try to appeal to their voters, to make it seem like they care about human life. 

Related
How We’ve Failed the Promise of Making “Genocide” a Crime

So to me, as someone who keeps track of the ongoing issues in Palestine, the Republican Party and the Democratic Party are one and the same on this. And for them to constantly keep saying that we need to vote a Democratic member in and not the Republican Party, because they’re the lesser of two evils—and because one just has a less intense version of genocide (which I actually don’t find that to be true considering that the genocide is being aided by the Democratic Party right now). They just seem so concerned about a hypothetical genocide when there is an actual genocide that is happening in the current moment.

Often, people do not realize there are different strains of those protesting. That this is a diverse group of people who have internal disagreements, too, about how to push for a change. It’s not all one movement. Are you part of the Abandon Biden camp? Are you part of the Uncommitted movement? Like, where do you and the broader student protest movement stand across Michigan—are you all in one camp versus the other?

Hamamy: I am not in the Abandon Biden movement or the Uncommitted campaign, both of them have done amazing work. I do think there are some differences in approach at times in comparison to the student movement. The student movement is primarily focused on the fact that these politicians will never save us. 

Communication is never going to get through their head. Us, you know, praying and hoping that they’re going to implement a ceasefire simply because we say that we have family members being killed—that is never going to happen. If the scenes and the video footage and the literal depiction of actual death, murder and slaughter—at one of the highest rates ever—coming out is not going to shake them enough to call for a ceasefire, then our words will never do that.

So what needs to happen is us withholding our vote and withholding any positive affiliation that we would give to the Democratic Party or to the Republican Party—or to whoever is perpetuating this genocide. And that is one of the main ways that I think the student movement goes forward. It is through continuous disruption and creating a social crisis throughout; to say that we will not operate as business as usual, so long as our tax dollars are funding a genocide that is killing so many people in Palestine.

Leaders of the Uncommitted Movement met with Vice President Harris before the rally and asked for another meeting—hoping to discuss an arms embargo and a permanent ceasefire. And we reported that she expressed openness to a meeting. Then, at the rally, there was the retort to you all. Is this a one-step forward, one-step back situation for the Harris campaign, or considering the ongoing Israeli offensive in both Gaza and the suffering currently in the West Bank, do you see it as no movement at all?

Hamamy: Kamala very clearly shared her words of sympathy with leaders of the Uncommitted campaign because of her worry about them not mobilizing the community to vote for her. She says one thing to one person and changes the moment she gets on stage, and there are several cameras around—it was very clear. And to me, what I’m going to prioritize is what her policies stand for, and what she said to the entire crowd and to the entire audience when she was challenged and when we said we’re not going to vote for genocide, as opposed to what her response would be to people on the side in private. So, to us, her response was one step forward in making the general population understand that she’s no different.

“The message isn’t that this is going to have consequences on the election. The message is that Kamala is a bad person for supporting the genocide of Palestinians.”

Hakim: In regards to Uncommitted: I definitely appreciate them for making clear the fact that Arab Americans and Muslim Americans are a significant voting bloc—and have power to sway the election whichever way, and I think that’s really important work that the committee did. But I also think that it’s important for all of us to remember that none of these options are gonna free Palestine or end the genocide and that appealing to Kamala Harris is not a solution in any way, shape, or form. 

What people seem to be forgetting is that she’s not just like some random person who decided to run for president. She has been the vice president for all 300-plus days of this genocide, and could have said something in all of that time. She deliberately chose not to do that.

If the Harris campaign called and tried to hash this out and have a conversation, would you take that call?

Hamamy:  If she wanted to hash this out, she needs to go to the Israeli government and say: We’re cutting off all military funding. There’s nothing to hash out with the voters. What needs to be hashed out is with the people who are committing genocide right now.