Opinion
Guest
Essay
Bernie
Sanders Is Not Doing the Democrats Any Favors
Aug. 6,
2026
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/06/opinion/democrats-bernie-sanders-dsa-el-sayed.html
Matthew
Yglesias
By
Matthew Yglesias
Mr.
Yglesias, a contributing Opinion writer, writes extensively about politics,
economics and more at the newsletter Slow Boring.
The
primary win in the Michigan Democratic Senate race by Dr. Abdul El-Sayed, a
progressive former public health official, marks the latest, and perhaps most
surprising, instance of the insurgent left’s electoral success at beating
establishment incumbents or candidates. It is another episode in the political
story of the summer — the sense that something like a left-wing Tea Party is
afoot.
These
candidates are running for a very progressive policy program. In primaries,
they have also run against something: the Democratic establishment. They have
stressed the perceived political failings of the establishment — above all, its
inability to defeat Donald Trump. The prominent figure at the center of this
critique is Bernie Sanders, the Vermont independent.
Primaries
are the place to have party fights about issues and hash out those
disagreements. But victories like Dr. El-Sayed’s call for greater scrutiny of
the political judgments of Mr. Sanders and his movement, forcing us to reckon
with exactly what their project is all about. Their focus on factional
organizing, while narrowly effective, has sometimes left them at odds with the
Democratic Party. And some candidates — particularly those in the Democratic
Socialists of America — are articulating a vision that could make it more
difficult for Democrats to expand their appeal across America.
The
Sanders presidential primary campaigns of 2016 and 2020 set the foundation for
the ascendance of the progressive left. Mr. Sanders responded to his losses in
those primaries by working tirelessly to promote the political careers of
people who supported him. When Sanders-backed candidates have won offices —
figures like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Zohran Mamdani — they have gone on to
pay it forward.
The
insurgent left has shown an impressive display of organizing. But they are
building this organization in part out of misleading narratives about the
Democratic Party.
Sign up
for the Opinion Today newsletter Get
expert analysis of the news and a guide to the big ideas shaping the world
every weekday morning. Get it sent to your inbox.
Take the
2024 election. For all the effort to hang that defeat on the flawed judgments
of the establishment, in the critical weeks after Joe Biden’s debate fiasco, it
was often moderate Democrats who led the charge to replace him. By contrast,
Mr. Sanders endorsed Mr. Biden, standing by him long after the debate and
urging Democrats to stop trying to get him out of the race.
Had
Democrats listened to his advice, Mr. Biden would almost certainly have lost in
a landslide. Successful Democratic Senate candidates in Michigan, Arizona,
Wisconsin and Nevada would likely have floundered, and House seats in Virginia,
New Mexico and Minnesota would have been at risk. Mr. Trump would have been
able to inflict far more damage with huge congressional majorities at his back.
In the
wake of Ms. Harris’s loss, Mr. Sanders proclaimed that “it should come as no
great surprise that a Democratic Party which has abandoned working class people
would find that the working class has abandoned them.” Yet earlier that summer
he explained that he was standing by Mr. Biden precisely because he so strongly
endorsed the Biden economic agenda.
The
influence of Sanders-aligned advisers in the Biden administration was enormous.
And it continues. Lina Khan, the former Federal Trade Commission chair, and a
top aide Sam Levine — are leading economic policy in Mr. Mamdani’s
administration.
The
progressive left has been savvy about obscuring their influence on Bidenomics
by shifting the center of the intraparty debate to Israel, where they have the
upper hand among Democratic Party primary voters. But the Middle East is a low
priority for most Americans (as foreign policy issues typically are).
The party
is already suffering from dismal favorability ratings. And broadly speaking, a
leftward tilt of the Democratic Party is not what voters want. A June New York
Times/Siena poll of voters in the Senate battleground states found that 53
percent of likely voters think Democrats are too far to the left. That — the
party brand, and not a difficult map — is the most basic, high-level reason
that Republicans are favored to retain control of the Senate, and the Sanders
faction has no answer to the problem.
It’s true
that, in Michigan, Democratic Party primary voters nominated Dr. El-Sayed and
were happy to blow off warnings not only from national party leaders but also
their own governor. Still, history suggests a leftist politician like Dr.
El-Sayed will be expected to run somewhat weaker than a conventional Democrat —
meaning he would likely lose a swing state like Michigan in a neutral political
environment. Current polling indicates that the national mood favors Democrats
by six or seven points. You would expect an effective politician like Senator
Elissa Slotkin of Michigan — who won narrowly in 2024 — to coast to an
eight-point victory this year. So Dr. El-Sayed has room to run four to five
points weaker than her and still win — which a scrupulous person would
characterize as a disappointment, but Mr. Sanders and his followers would hail
as a triumph.
Many
rank-and-file Democrats respect the progressive left’s zeal for punching back
hard at the Trump administration, which is easier to do from the safety of
Vermont or New York City than from the electoral front lines. What they have
not been as good at is winning in places that aren’t deep blue. In House races,
for example, members of the centrist Blue Dog and New Democrat caucuses perform
better than the average Democrat, while members of the Congressional
Progressive Caucus perform worse. Elevating Sanders supporters can also lead to
vetting failures, as we saw with Graham Platner in Maine and with Nate Blouin,
a House candidate in Utah with an unfortunate track record of posts mocking
sexual assault and Mormons.
The very
top electoral performers among Democrats — lawmakers who have a record of
results in districts most liberals would lose, like Vicente Gonzalez of Texas,
Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington State, Tom Suozzi of New York and Don
Davis of North Carolina — are independent thinkers who are critical of
Democratic Party leaders and the establishment. The difference is that rather
than positioning themselves even further left than a party that most Americans
think is too left-wing, they pick issues and rhetoric that are heterodox and
often more restrained.
The
insurgents benefit — or suffer, depending on your point of view — from a sort
of political conflict of interest. If their wild rhetoric or fanciful
position-taking hurts Democrats’ national image, that doesn’t hurt their
members in safe seats. Instead, moderate Democrats in competitive seats end up
losing. This in turn intensifies grass-roots anger at party leaders’ failure to
win, and benefits the insurgents.
Given Mr.
Trump’s unpopularity and Democrats’ generic ballot lead, Dr. El-Sayed could
carry Michigan in November. A useful way to de-escalate factional tensions
would be for people like Mr. Sanders to acknowledge that the bar for proving
their case that leftists can teach Democrats how to win is higher than narrowly
winning in a favorable cycle. Can he beat Ms. Slotkin’s performance by the
eight points suggested by the national swing? Can he outperform Roy Cooper and
Mary Peltola by amounts that account for Michigan’s bluer partisan lean than
North Carolina or Alaska? It’s fair to have a debate about the best direction
of the party, but that debate should be conducted on honest terms.
Matthew
Yglesias (@mattyglesias), a contributing Opinion writer, is the author of “One
Billion Americans: The Case for Thinking Bigger” and writes at the
newsletter Slow Boring.


Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário