With only about a month until the end of the primary season, progressives and democratic socialists have secured enough high-profile victories to suggest a seismic shift in the party’s direction. But the fuller picture tells a different story. The left-wing has won far fewer races than headlines suggest, and it remains almost entirely confined to safe Democratic districts.
According to an analysis from the New York Times, the progressive left has won less than 20 percent of primary races in open districts where Democrats are either strongly favored to win or expected to be competitive in November. Among these races, progressives have done quite well in solid-blue districts — winning roughly 80 percent of their primaries in safe urban seats — but have struggled to win in the battlegrounds that will actually determine control of Congress.
In other words, while blue districts are getting bluer, swing districts are going with what’s tried and true.
For instance, the same night Abdul El-Sayed defeated Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Mich.) in Michigan’s Senate primary, socialist Rep. Cori Bush (D-Mo.) lost her bid to reclaim her House seat. Moderate Wesley Bell beat her by a striking 22 points.
And in Washington’s 3rd District, moderate incumbent Rep. Marie Gluesenkemp Perez (D-Wash.) advanced to the general election over her progressive opponent Brent Hennrich, more than doubling his vote share (37 percent to 17 percent).
Indeed, it turns out that the narrative of an unstoppable progressive wave is incomplete. Still, El-Sayed’s victory in Michigan warrants concern and a close examination for the Democratic party, precisely because it’s exceptional.
Unlike other progressive primary wins in this cycle, El-Sayed’s race took place in a swing state with critical general election implications. And unlike the safe blue districts where the left-wing has dominated, a Senate race in Michigan cannot be won merely by consolidating young, white, urban voters with college degrees or higher.
On the surface, El-Sayed’s win looks significant: He overcame a spending disadvantage of more than $60 million from outside groups supporting Stevens, proving that grassroots energy and national progressive backing can in fact compete with establishment money. But the margin of his victory — just one point (49 percent to 48 percent) — was far below the double-digit lead prior polling had suggested. And this tells a more cautionary tale.
El-Sayed’s narrow win illustrates the left flank’s core problem: Outside of deep blue districts, progressives’ appeal has hard limits, some of which show up most clearly where Democrats can least afford them to.
According to an analysis from Bridge Michigan, El-Sayed is the first Democrat to win a statewide primary in Michigan without carrying Wayne, Oakland or Macomb counties since Bernie Sanders won Michigan’s 2016 presidential contest. Stevens carried all three by about 6 to 8 points each, securing roughly 52 percent of the combined metro Detroit vote.
So in the very places where Democratic strength in Michigan is rooted, Stevens prevailed decisively.
Crucially, though, this dynamic is not unique to Michigan. It is the same pattern that produced Zohran Mamdani’s mayoral victory in New York City and the primary defeats of Reps. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) and Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.). It is a younger, whiter, better educated and wealthier coalition than the broader Democratic Party. Socialist candidates consistently underperform with the Black and Hispanic voters who have anchored the party for decades.
Socialists Are Winning Battles, But Not The War
