Politics

Centrist Democrats are freaking out about progressives’ winning streak

Published

4 months ago

June 25, 2026

Moderate Democrats are sounding the alarm after massive losses in New York’s primaries. They fear they’re on the verge of losing the party’s ideological civil war — and hurting its electoral chances.

Leftist candidates swept a trio of deep-blue House seats in New York City, a seismic victory that toppled two incumbents, including the powerful chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. And after a string of progressive battleground wins in earlier primaries, moderates are making it very clear that the left’s winning streak is potentially just starting.

The far left is eyeing even bigger targets in key battleground primaries that will determine control of Congress as well as governorships in crucial swing states. Most immediately, moderates fear that a progressive primary sweep could imperil the party’s hopes of beating Republicans this fall.

They also have a more fundamental fear: that progressives are becoming more mainstream as they keep winning — reshaping the Democratic Party.

“Centrist Democrats, normie Democrats, need to realize we’re the insurgents, and they’re the new establishment,” said Liam Kerr, a co-founder of the moderate-aligned WelcomePAC. “It’s a long term structural problem more than it is any one particular win.”

Progressives have romped through Democrats’ spring primaries, notching a series of wins across both safe and competitive districts and upending House and Senate Democrats’ battleplans. Left flank candidates Randy Villegas and Matt Dunlap trounced the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee’s preferred picks in a pair of battlegrounds in California and Maine. And populist insurgent Graham Platner pushed out Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer’s handpicked recruit in Maine, Gov. Janet Mills, before voting even began — only to see his poll numbers slip amidst a series of personal scandals.

With New York in the rearview, upcoming races in Colorado, Michigan and Wisconsin will test whether the insurgent left can continue its hot streak.

“It’s happening in New York, it’s happening in Michigan. I think we’re seeing it happen across the country now, that folks are sick and tired of being sick and tired,” said Michigan Democratic Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed, who is backed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and locked in a bitter three-way primary. “So, certainly we’re going to harness that.”

First up will be Colorado, where Democratic Socialist Melat Kiros is mounting a strong challenge against longtime Democratic incumbent Diana DeGette in a safe seat. In the state’s battleground 8th District, the more progressive-aligned Manny Rutinel is facing establishment-backed Shannon Bird. Whoever wins will face freshman GOP Rep. Gabe Evans.

Even if those progressive candidates end up falling short, establishment Democrats are worried that President Donald Trump and the GOP will be able to successfully tie their more centrist nominees to the most-fringe members of the party, forcing them to respond to progressives’ most controversial comments and positions — like defunding the police or getting rid of prisons entirely.

“These races might have some impact on 2026 if Republicans weaponize the craziest ideas of these candidates against mainstream Democrats running in blue districts,” said Matt Bennett, a co-founder of the moderate think tank Third Way.

The Blue Dogs, Democrats’ House centrist coalition and campaign allies, are worried as well.

Blue Dog Action’s Phil Gardner said it’s imperative that moderate Democrats in swing districts address Republican attacks head-on and put distance between themselves and the left flank of their party.

“The reason they do that is because it works,” Gardner said of GOP efforts to tie moderates to progressives. “Candidates running in these competitive seats should not rely on just anti-Trump sentiment or the Democratic brand, because you’re basically putting your destiny in the hands of forces far outside your control.”

Some on the left are growing frustrated as the establishment increasingly makes them pariahs.

“Having party leaders not make the newest and most exciting members of the party feel like they belong is counterproductive for a party that wants to keep growing,” said progressive strategist Rebecca Katz, whose firm Fight Agency works with El-Sayed and Platner, among others.

Still, establishment Democrats are rushing to shore up primary victories in key battlegrounds. In Michigan, where El-Sayed is leading in new polls, establishment Democrats have begun spending millions of dollars in recent weeks to boost Rep. Haley Stevens and stave off his rise. Reinforcements are also flowing in for El-Sayed.

And in Wisconsin, another key perennial battleground state with major down-ticket races, establishment panic about democratic socialist state Rep. Francesca Hong’s momentum in the crowded gubernatorial primary has led some in the party to start coalescing around moderate Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez. One Democrat dropped out and endorsed Rodriguez to try to consolidate the center-left vote.

“True leadership means stepping aside and making sure that we coalesce around someone who can win in November,” Democrat Missy Hughes said during a press conference shortly after she suspended her campaign on Monday.

Hong, in an interview Wednesday, said that the centrist lane is no longer the path to victory.

“I agree, we should coalesce around a leader that can win in November. And I think that I’m that leader,” Hong told Blue Light News. “The strategy of running moderates — we’ve lost the House, the Senate and the executive office. … Using the old playbook and looking at the results, I would hope that the course correction is to run some different plays.”But Republicans are salivating over Hong’s prior hardline stances and comments, including previous calls to defund the police. She has sought to alleviate concern about that issue: “there’s no way I’m going to cut public safety, I want to deliver it,” she said in a recent video.

While the left’s wins in safe seats are top of mind, there have been a string of victories for centrists in a number of other Democratic primaries in the most important battlegrounds. The Democratic establishment’s pick prevailed in the New York battleground seat to take on GOP Rep. Mike Lawler on Tuesday, and moderate Rebecca Bennett won the primary to take on GOP Rep. Tom Kean Jr. in a top New Jersey battleground. Some battleground wins for moderates came even as GOP groups meddled to try and boost left-leaning candidates in Texas and Nebraska.

In Senate races, moderate candidates like former Gov. Roy Cooper (D-N.C.) cleared the field with no real challenger. And Texas’ James Talarico and Iowa’s Josh Turek were able to best their more-progressive challengers.

“In most of the flippable seats, you still do have electable Democrats, either winning the primaries, or there was just never really a primary to begin with, and people sort of coalesced,” Gardner said.

Schumer told reporters on Wednesday that every wing of the Democratic Party — not just progressives — was on the rise.

“You’re seeing centrist energy in Virginia, Iowa, and New Jersey, progressive energy in New York City,” Schumer said. “We’re going to harness it all to win in November. Because all Democrats are united in the mission of taking back the Senate and defeating Trump.”

Some progressives were also quick to call for unity after their wins Tuesday, and vowed to help their moderate counterparts this fall.

“I’m going to go help some frontliners win their races,” former New York City Comptroller Brad Lander, who defeated Rep. Dan Goldman by more than 30 points, told reporters on Wednesday. “I hope some moderates will come help Randy Villegas and other progressives win theirs.”

But the prospect of the left picking off a battleground seat in November has major implications for the party’s direction.

“We love the statistic that [progressives have] never flipped any seats. We love to say, ‘look at the polling,” said Kerr, the co-founder of the centrist WelcomePAC. “But we haven’t been scared enough. We’ve been high on our own supply of data while they’ve been organizing.”

And outside of this year’s midterms, there’s a broader fight to come in 2028, where an open presidential primary will shape the party for years to come.

“It is vital that Democrats do not mistake the radicalism of a very small electorate in very blue places with the desire of the larger Democratic Party to move sharply to the left,” Bennett said. “Those things are not the same, and Democrats running for president must resist the urge to believe what they see on social media and the siren song of the DSA and the activist left.”

Politics

‘A warning sign for polling’: Why one GOP pollster thinks a blue wave may fall short

Published

13 hours ago

October 19, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Democrats are salivating over, and Republicans are bracing for, a potentially massive blue wave. One GOP pollster is urging everyone to calm down.

Patrick Ruffini, a founding partner at Echelon Insights, has been loudly throwing cold water on Democrats’ hopes of sweeping the red state Senate seats that have become battlegrounds in a worsening national environment for Republicans.

“The polls are, I think, intentionally inflating the size of the battleground,” Ruffini told Blue Light News.

Democrats are pushing to flip Senate seats in Iowa, Texas, Ohio and Alaska — all states that President Donald Trump won by at least 11 points in 2024 — with dreams of going even deeper into the map Kansas, South Carolina and even Mississippi. Sensing a potential disaster, Republicans have significantly curtailed their investments in North Carolina and Georgia to direct resources elsewhere.

Ruffini, who isn’t polling for candidates or party committees in any federal races, said he’s skeptical of Democrats flipping some of those seats, particularly in the Midwest, and gives the GOP a coin flip’s chance at keeping control of the Senate.

If a blue wave were to come, he said it would defy the ingrained partisanship in deep-red states that has mirrored growing political polarization around the country.

“I think it would be somewhat of a historic shift if that were to happen,” he said.

Here’s more from Blue Light News’s chat with Ruffini, edited for length and clarity. A more condensed version of this interview ran in Blue Light News’s Morning Score campaign newsletter.

You’ve been pretty publicly skeptical of polling that indicates a big tsunami for Democrats in November. Why is that?

I think we can read the environment right, but the map wrong.

The pretty large shift towards Democrats that we’re seeing on the generic ballot and in a lot of individual races, I’m not saying that’s not going to materialize. What I am more skeptical of is… the ability of any major party in this polarized era that we’re in to rack up significant gains in states that went double digits for the other side.

I’m not ruling out — I think there will be some [examples]. I think Alaska is one where it’s both an idiosyncratic state, and [Democratic nominee Mary] Peltola has shown some specific candidate-centered strength. Nor would it shock me if [Democrat] James Talarico wins, despite the history in Texas. That would not surprise me, just given the candidate quality disparity, particularly on the Ken Paxton side.

Where I get more skeptical is when you move into the Midwest, where there has historically been pretty large polling errors [overstating Democrats’ chances] in states like Iowa, Ohio. And I think you can extend that to the Democratic enthusiasm around Kansas.

Is your skepticism coming more from the quality of the individual polls that you’re seeing that are showing massive Democratic surges in the Midwest, or is it the history of these states that you’re betting will ultimately win out?

I think fundamentals are going to play an important role, particularly in states where there was a solid Trump advantage. We’re not talking about a state like North Carolina or Georgia that’s only for Trump narrowly, where Democrats, at least in the Senate races, are clearly favored.

Historically the presumption is that states tend to converge on their base partisanship in the closing days of an election, but especially that’s been the pattern in the Midwest.

Specifically as it relates to the polls this year, I think any pollster you would talk to, including myself, is experiencing significant non-response bias favoring Democrats.

When you’re seeing high-propensity Democrats [responding to polls] at twice the rate of high-propensity Republicans, when we know that the turnout on both sides would be roughly evenly paired, that’s a warning sign for polling in this cycle.

It seems like there’s some GOP internal polling saying that Republicans are worried about these states, because they are moving money around to triage certain races. I’m curious if you feel like they’re wrong to be making those decisions?

Absolutely not. They’re not wrong. You do have to take the polls somewhat seriously in the sense of, if you do get a poll that’s within the margin of error, I think you’re duty-bound to spend money in those places and not to ignore what could be a potential signal.

I think that control of the Senate comes down to Texas, so they’re right to be spending money there. If you just look at the amount of money being spent in Texas versus Kansas, obviously it’s a much, much bigger state, and you need to spend much more money.

But it’s not something along the lines of ‘the battleground has shifted. It’s a foregone conclusion. Democrats are going to win the Senate,’ and then the battleground entirely shifts to a state like Kansas or to Iowa, right? I don’t think we’re seeing that.

It sounds like the issue you have is how the broader public is interpreting these polls rather than the polls themselves?

The polls are, I think, intentionally inflating the size of the battleground. And to some extent it’s happening both ways. The polls showing a margin-of- error race in Minnesota is possible, right? I’m not as concerned about a polling error in Minnesota as I am in Kansas.

But because of the number of Democratic internals and because of the incentive of Democratic internals to show close races across the battleground, what you generally tend to see is more of an inflated sense of how big the battleground actually is. A lot of these races just break a certain way.

We’ve reported that Republicans are privately conceding that the House is lost. Is that your reading of the data too?

That’s the best reading of the data. That said, if there’s a three-point polling error or something, then I think it gets very, very tight and anything can happen. But I think that’s the most likely outcome.

What is your prediction for the number of Senate seats Republicans will have?

My prediction for both the probability and the seat count is 50-50. There’s a 50-50 chance Republicans hold the Senate. I think if they do, it’s with 50 seats, probably. But obviously, that can tilt very easily.

Which of these states do you think are going to flip for Democrats?

Alaska is clearly favored. I mean, I don’t know if it’s clearly favored, but I think it’s at least still Democrat. I think Texas is going to be very, very close. I just think the partisanship of the state is — people forget it’s a little bit more Republican than it was back in 2018. I think Republicans are probably being underestimated in Ohio because of the past Midwestern polling error.

At the same time, I would say it’s still uphill in Maine and Michigan to some degree. I think Susan Collins has really been the lone bright spot, at least in terms of the conventional wisdom, the narrative in the Senate for Republicans. I think she has a fighting chance, but I think Republicans are still probably under a 50% chance in both Michigan and Maine, just due to the nature of their partisan lean.

If at the end of all of this it is a real blue wave in the Senate, what will have happened to have made you wrong?

If that happens, we will have seen a level of depolarization in the electorate that we haven’t seen since around 2012. You really have to go back in history for a state like Kansas to flip.That would be pretty unique historically, where it’s a flip where you have an incumbent losing.

That’s the kind of thing that used to happen in Senate races a lot, and then things, starting with Trump, got a lot more polarized. So what that would mean is, maybe this is the start of a new political era. But I think it would be somewhat of a historic shift if that were to happen.

Politics

Ohio returns as a bellwether

Published

16 hours ago

October 19, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Ohio returns as a bellwether

lead image

Politics

Inside the quiet money pullback — for both parties — in Georgia’s Senate race

Published

17 hours ago

October 19, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

The money spigot is sputtering in Georgia’s Senate race amid growing expectations that Democratic Sen. Jon Ossoff will win reelection.

The Senate Leadership Fund, Republicans’ top Senate super PAC, did not spend on broadcast television in the state last week — the first week they were off air in the race, according to tracking firm AdImpact. Neither did Democrats’ Senate Majority PAC.

Senate Majority PAC will also be dark again this week, the Chuck Schumer-aligned group shared first with Blue Light News. It was not immediately clear whether SLF would follow suit. The group declined to comment on their future spending plans in the state.

The spending slowdown underscores how dramatically Georgia’s place on the Senate map has shifted, as Ossoff maintains wide margins over Republican Rep. Mike Collins in public polling and fundraising. Georgia was expected to be one of the cycle’s most expensive and preeminent battlegrounds — now some of the biggest outside spenders are pulling back and turning their attention to more competitive races in redder territory.

The two major Senate super PACs have closely mirrored each other’s spending decisions in recent weeks, with neither fully retreating from the state. They still both technically have future ad reservations booked past this week, but those are not binding, leaving both sides with the flexibility to redirect money as they assess the Senate map. And with two weeks until Election Day and early voting already underway in Georgia, it’s unclear whether either will spend any more in the state.

“National Republicans are abandoning Mike Collins as he continues to show Georgians why he’s unelectable and unfit for office. We are committed to seeing Jon Ossoff through to victory as we come to the final days of this campaign,” SMP spokesperson Lauren French said in a statement.

Collins’ campaign, in a statement, said they were “grateful to every group that’s standing with Rep. Collins and welcome their continued support.”

“With early voting underway, he’s working every day to earn the vote of every Georgian, because Jon Ossoff is a radical leftist who wants to raise their taxes and make their families less safe. Rep. Collins will keep making that case until Ossoff is held accountable on Election Day,” Collins spokesperson Meyer Siegfried said in a statement.

Ossoff’s campaign didn’t respond to a request for comment.

SMP had pledged in the spring to spend $20 million on television for the race, but as of Friday had only spent or reserved $11.5 million, per AdImpact. SLF had announced an initial $44 million investment, but has so far only spent or reserved roughly $20 million.

No Going Back PAC, which is affiliated with President Donald Trump’s MAGA Inc. super PAC, has also dramatically scaled back its own spending on the race over the last two weeks, according to AdImpact.

Republican operatives are still monitoring Georgia’s governor’s race, where recent public polling shows GOP nominee Rick Jackson slightly ahead of Democratic nominee Keisha Lance Bottoms. Republicans believe Jackson’s strength could keep the Senate race closer than currently expected.

But they have grown increasingly pessimistic about their prospects of flipping Georgia’s Senate seat, as Collins trails Ossoff in the polls and the overall environment for the GOP continues to grow more difficult. SLF’s decision to go dark last week — so close to the election — raises questions about how much more the group will ultimately invest in the state.

“Every dollar Schumer spends in Georgia is one not spent on offense in red states. Republicans’ financial advantage doesn’t just show up in more ads, it keeps Dems on defense,” a person familiar with SLF’s spending plans told Blue Light News.

Ossoff also holds a massive fundraising advantage over Collins, who had just over $1 million cash on hand as of Oct. 1, giving Ossoff a major financial cushion in the final stretch even before the major Senate super PACs pulled back their spending.

The GOP has been triaging races across the map: SLF shifted money out of North Carolina, another perennial battleground, while moving resources toward defending GOP-held seats in states like Kansas and South Carolina, where the Senate contests have become increasingly competitive.

Still, even as the money going into Georgia has continued to slow, Trump appears to be prioritizing the longtime battleground.

At a rally in Dalton on Friday, he urged voters to “pretend” he’s on the ballot, while praising Collins and the state’s GOP governor’s nominee, Rick Jackson.

Meredith Lee Hill and Andrew Howard contributed.