JD Vance tells Michigan Senate opponent Abdul El-Sayed he is “crazy” after El-Sayed mocks him as “Peter Thiel’s boy”

Vice President JD Vance responded sharply to Democratic Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan, calling El-Sayed “crazy” after El-Sayed went after Vance in a separate line of attack that framed Vance as “Peter Thiel’s boy.” The exchange reflects a battle of rival narratives in a high-visibility campaign where surrogates and figures in the Trump administration have taken an active role in the Midwestern contest, according to The Hill’s reporting.

The Hill reported that El-Sayed, speaking on Wednesday, criticized Vance and tied him to Peter Thiel, the tech investor under whom Vance has worked, using the phrase “Peter Thiel’s boy.” El-Sayed also said, “I think we’ve had enough of him,” framing his criticism as a rejection of Vance’s influence and background.

In his reply, Vance took issue with El-Sayed’s characterization, telling reporters or an audience that El-Sayed is “crazy,” according to The Hill. The comment was made in the same campaign context in which El-Sayed had been directly challenging Vance’s ties and political approach.

Beyond the personal invective, the back-and-forth highlights how both campaigns are seeking control of the language around experience and influence. El-Sayed’s remarks, as described by The Hill, were aimed at portraying Vance as closely connected to Thiel and, by extension, aligned with wealthy interests. Vance’s response criticized the premise of that framing through a direct dismissal of El-Sayed’s credibility.

The dispute occurred as Democrats and Republicans continue to argue over who should represent Michigan in the U.S. Senate and what each candidate’s record and affiliations mean for the state and the country. While the exchange focused on style and personal labels, both sides are using the rhetoric to report broader themes about power, accountability, and the direction of federal policy.

No additional policy proposals were detailed in the The Hill account of the exchange, and the reporting centered on the rhetorical clash. With both candidates and the Trump administration’s top officeholders exchanging attacks, the next phase of the campaign is likely to include further contrast between each candidate’s priorities and the interpretation of their backgrounds and affiliations.

The Hill’s reporting indicates that the “crazy” remark and the “Peter Thiel’s boy” mockery became the headline lines in a campaign moment that both sides could use to motivate supporters. The comments also add to a broader pattern in Senate races where candidates increasingly prosecute debates through public exchanges rather than only through formal policy platforms.