.png)
Is the rise of progressive and democratic socialist candidates necessary to energize working-class voters, or does it risk alienating swing voters and fracturing the party's broad coalition?
The Insight provides you the full picture of facts and viewpoints on a top issue for Americans each week, powered by your questions and balanced answers from our multipartisan news team.
The Questions
- Do progressive candidates perform better or worse than moderates in crucial swing-state primaries and general elections?
- How are outside spending and Super PACs impacting internal Democratic primaries?
- How does the rise in self-identified Democratic Socialists affect the national Democratic brand?
- Can progressives and moderates eventually unite behind the winner after they beat each other up in the primaries?
Do progressive candidates perform better or worse than moderates in crucial swing-state primaries and general elections?
It depends.
A 2025 paper from a group of political scientists suggested that “Voters were more likely to turn out and vote for their party’s candidate when they perceived that candidate as more ideologically extreme. This is consistent with the idea that a more ideological candidate ‘rallies’ the party.”
But there are different ways of looking at it. A 2025 analysis from Split Ticket (not rated) found that in each of the 2018, 2020, 2022, and 2024 election cycles, “the more moderate a congressional caucus was, the better its members did, on average.”
Swing state voters tend to be more moderate, which can hurt progressives. But in some traditionally-blue states, progressives – sometimes even self-described socialists – are gaining the upper hand.
And even in those toss-up states, some progressives – like Wisconsin’s Francesca Hong – are in competitive primary races.
“Democratic socialists need to do more than win in the big American cities. And they can, with the right message,” reads a piece from The Guardian (Left). “A politics aimed squarely at the plant closings and capital flight that devastated small towns in roughly the same way they devastated the urban working class a generation before can win everywhere.”
Not everyone agrees.
“More than a third of American voters say progressives have too much influence in the Democratic Party, Rasmussen Reports found,” according to an article from Newsmax (Right). “While most Democrats say progressives have either too little influence or about the right amount, 57% of Republicans and 40% of independents say progressives have too much sway over the party.”
How are outside spending and Super PACs impacting internal Democratic primaries?
“In the decade and a half since the Supreme Court opened the door to super PACs, which can take in unlimited contributions to support federal candidates,” Theodore Schleifer for The New York Times (Lean Left bias) says “the amount of money coming in from undisclosed donors has grown at a stunning rate”
The article highlights how “a relatively new collection of liberal nonprofits–some with dizzyingly similar names, and some operated by the same people–is playing a big role in this trend,” explaining that these nonprofits funnel hundreds of millions of dollars to Super PACs all while providing anonymity to the donors.
NewsNation (Center bias) focused on this issue with a specific focus on Democrat Socialists of America (DSA), saying that when prominent DSA leader Zohran Mamdani won the New York City mayoral race, “it was framed as a grassroots movement on the left.” However, the article explains that according to a former Democratic fundraiser, the movement “is not as organic as it looks.”
Evan Barker, author of Nothing Left: Confessions of a Democratic Operative, believes that Mamdani “was infused with a huge donation into a super PAC by a woman named Liz Simons, who is a billionaire hedge fund heiress.”
Mamdani is not the only DSA candidate being propped up in this way. Barker explains that DSA candidate Darlisa Chevallier, who touts that her campaign is 100% powered by the people and declares that she will never take any money from corporate PACs, had at least $500,000 provided for an ad buy through a super PAC called American Priorities.
In fact, according to Federal Election Commission (FEC) data, “over 60% of Chevallier’s campaign fundraising came from out of state,” and the majority of it from American Priorities, which is a “pro-Palestinian super PAC created this year to counter pro-Israel groups such as AIPAC and Justice Democrats.”
Regardless of how these campaigns are being funded, nearly 30 socialist candidates won primaries this year, leading President Donald Trump to say “the most serious threat to our country since its existence” comes from a group of “hardcore, godless communists” and sparking differing perspectives across the political spectrum.
How does the rise in self-identified Democratic Socialists affect the national Democratic brand?
This year, Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) has endorsed 150 candidates and won 35 races in locations from New York City and Seattle to Los Angeles, Philadelphia, and Minneapolis.
Democrats and Republicans are split on how they view the implications of Democratic Socialists making headway leading up to the midterms. Republicans generally see it as an opportunity for GOP wins this fall, while Democrats are split between what some see as a vibrant future for the progressive wing of the Democratic party, and others see as an existential threat to the moderate section of the party.
On the right, many conservative commentators have argued the DSA isn’t a fringe insurgency, but the natural endpoint to where Democrats were already headed. President Trump has called this surge in DSA candidates “the most serious threat to our country since its existence.” Byron York (Right) of the Washington Examiner (Lean Right) called the DSA’s updated platform a “blueprint for destroying the US government,” and predicted it would serve as a “rich source” of ammunition for GOP candidates. Additional conservative leaders like Rep. Carlos Gimenez have argued the DSA’s growing victories show the mainstream Democratic party is increasingly hostage to anti-capitalistic policy proposals and authoritarian ideas.
The left has criticized this framing – The New York Times (Lean Left) wrote, Republicans are “eager to…define the Democratic brand by its most boisterous and socialist voices” – however, opinions on the left are also split. Some news outlets have referred to it as an “identity crisis” within the party as traditional Democrats voice concerns over the implication on midterms, while others, including Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez praise the movement and attribute it to an increasingly detached Democratic party.
An opinion in USA Today (Lean Left) argued that the wins in New York were "terrific news" for those wanting a better future. Sen. Bernie Sanders said voters want Congressional members to have “the guts to stand up to big money and create a government that works for them and not just a few.” New York City DSA co-chair Grace Mausser said the movement offers “a new vision, and…more people are getting on board.”
Meanwhile, CNN (Lean Left) reported that Democratic voter openness to socialism doesn’t necessarily help the party’s brand, and that these DSA wins have left centrist Democrats “rather anxious.” Politico (Lean Left) also highlighted growing anxiety among Democrats over what it called an ideological civil war within the party. It quoted Liam Kerr, a co-founder of WelcomePAC, calling the rise “a long term structural problem” and that moderate Democrats need to realize they’re “the insurgents” and Democratic Socialists are “the new establishment.”
Can progressives and moderates eventually unite behind the winner after they beat each other up in the primaries?
Cross-partisan news outlets have suggested the Democratic Party may split in two – solidifying the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) and establishment left as separate parties.
The New York Post (Right) said, “The DSA’s recent rise as a viable force with the Democratic Party stoked chatter of an intraparty civil war between the far-left radicals and more moderate establishment figures sharply split on Israel and hiking taxes on the rich.”
The Guardian (Left) similarly wrote, “After a string of Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) primary victories, the loudest response from much of the Democratic establishment’s old guard was not reconciliation, but escalation.”
And Politico (Lean Left) cautioned, “Democratic Socialists of America leaders, eager to capitalize on their momentum, are already plotting their next act: making sure one of their own is on the presidential primary debate stage, whether the party wants them or not.”
However, recent history has exhibited staunch intra-party divisions that dissipated after primary elections concluded. Before Donald Trump won the Republican presidential primary in 2024, “MAGA” and “Never-Trumpers” highlighted a broad, fervent spectrum of conservative ideologies.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. called Trump a “threat to democracy” and “terrible president” before moving to endorse him in August 2024. Trump then tapped Kennedy as Health and Human Services Secretary in November 2025 and empowered him to enact the ongoing and extensive “Make America Healthy Again” movement.
Trump dubbed Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) a “DeSaster,” and Desantis sharply criticized Trump while running against him in the primary. Desantis endorsed Trump after suspending his presidential bid, and the two later collaborated on the “Alligator Alcatraz” prison in 2025. Trump then asserted, “We have a relationship that’s been a very strong one for a long period of time.”
Even Vice President JD Vance suggested Trump might be “America’s Hitler” in 2016.
Such divisions on the left may very well serve as ammo for critics on the right and even hurt candidates’ credibility in the upcoming general election, but recent elections like Trump’s reject the idea of an impending party split.
However, more extensive history may support the idea. In 1926, four parties were represented in the US Congress – Republicans, Democrats, Farmer–Labors, and Socialists.
.png.webp)
