During the recent Michigan Senate primary, the encounter between Haley Stevens and voter Jai Singletary highlights a critical tension in political campaigning: addressing human rights concerns authentically. Jai Singletary, deeply affected by international human rights issues, notably Israel's impact on children, shared these as key reasons for supporting Abdul El-Sayed. From personal observation, political conversations that touch on human rights can quickly become charged and revealing of a candidate's priorities. When Haley Stevens responded dismissively with “yea…right,” it raised questions about the sincerity with which candidates engage with voters' core motivations. Voters like Jai, who base their choices heavily on human rights stances, often seek representatives who acknowledge and deeply understand global and domestic human rights challenges. It’s important for candidates to listen and respectfully engage with such concerns rather than sidestepping them. This situation underscores a broader issue within voter-candidate interactions: the need for empathy and substantive dialogue on complex issues, rather than dismissiveness or avoidance. For candidates running in diverse and socially conscious electorates, addressing human rights transparently can forge stronger connections and trust. Reflecting on this, when I’ve participated in local elections, candidates who took time to truly listen to my concerns, be they about social justice, economic equality, or human rights abroad, made me feel valued as a voter. It also increased my engagement and likelihood of support. Ultimately, this episode in the Michigan primary reminds us of the power dynamics in political discourse and how essential it is for candidates to engage respectfully, especially when voters are motivated by deeply held values such as human rights.