An anti-establishment wave shakes the leadership of the United States Democratic Party

WashingtonIn 2024, Vice President Kamala Harris attempted to replicate Donald Trump's effect by adopting parts of his political framework. However, the strategy of shifting further right resulted in an electoral defeat that left the party leadership rudderless. Now, figures like the progressive Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan or socialist Melat Kiros in Colorado are winning the Democratic primaries by doing the opposite: they maintain their own agenda and reject theTrump's brand, but they do use his tools, like the attack on the establishment, to channel social discontent.

The common thread of this shift, more than the agenda, is the way the proposal is presented to the voter. Attention has been heavily focused on the red wave driven by candidates further to the left, such as El-Sayed or the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), who have won primaries in New York, Colorado, and Michigan. But they are not the only ones within the Democratic orbit who have adopted the discourse of "the people versus the elites."

In Texas, a state marked by Republican red, Democrat James Talarico could make history if he wins the Senate seat in dispute. The 37-year-old candidate is often labeled a moderate, due to the strong religious component in his discourse. The Presbyterian seminarian draws inspiration from the more social aspect of Christianity to spearhead a progressive economic agenda in favor of the working classes. In different words, Talarico re-draws the axis of the people against the elites to attract the vote of independents and young people.

Talarico denounces that they have a "cost of living crisis" because they have "a corruption crisis" and calls for an end to tax breaks for the richest 1%. On the other side of the country, El-Sayed defends that he wants to "take money out of politicians, put it into [people's] pockets and pass Medicare for All". In Colorado, Kiros defends: "We are Democrats because it is the party that fights for the people [...] and with everything at stake now, it depends on us to push it forward again". In New York, Mamdani came to office promising to raise taxes on the city's wealthiest. "The paralysis of the party leadership led to a feeling of helplessness among the rank and file. Many people frustrated with this situation wanted exactly that: to fight fire with fire. And that's what these candidates are doing now," Sidney Milkis, a professor at the University of Virginia who has been following the advance of populism in American politics for years, explains to ARA. "The idea that money is corrupting politics is one of the main points they cling to. El-Sayed turned the huge amount of money his rival was receiving from the pro-Israel lobby AIPAC around by highlighting this idea.

Trump's ties with tech billionaires and reports of how the tycoon has enriched himself thanks to the presidency stand in contrast to the thousands of Americans who are increasingly having to tighten their belts. A survey published in July by the The Guardian indicated how half of Americans say they have trouble paying for groceries and gas.

The new progressive bloc gaining traction within the Democratic party is once again focused on the idea of building broad majorities through intersectionality. It's not that they are setting aside minority groups – as Harris tried to do by speaking cautiously about trans people – but rather they are seeking common elements across different realities, such as the housing crisis the country is experiencing or the cost of living. In this way, attacks like the one in 2024 are sidelined, in which Trump made an announcement that said: "Kamala is for them ("they/them), President Trump is for you". The they/them is used for non-binary people in the US.

The impact of the Biden presidency

"In 2020 there was a kind of consensus that Biden was the answer to Trump; a pragmatist who would return a less angry and less polarized policy. I think Biden's presidency killed that idea. And that is one of the reasons why Harris's campaign was a disaster: because when they asked her 'What would you have done differently?', she said: 'Little. Nothing.' That was it. She was dead," points out Milkis.

This sense of orphanhood that the 2024 defeat caused among some progressive sectors has been spreading as Trump has deployed his agenda. With Congress also in Republican hands and a conservative majority on the Supreme Court, the questions that have loomed for this year and a half have been: where is the opposition?, where are the Democrats?

It is here that all these new progressive and more populist candidates appear who respond to this disaffection with an establishment unable to channel the anger and impotence of many voters. A process that has certain similarities to the Republican Tea Party, which emerged from the other end of the ideological spectrum, with a strong component of white nationalism. 'I think the anger you see now has a lot to do with Trump. [...] Just as Obama fueled the rise of the Tea Party, I think Trump, particularly with his re-election, has fueled anger on the left,' he reflects.

However, this shift is not solely caused by the second Trump administration, but a process that has been developing since 2016. Milkis points to the moment when Hillary Clinton, more linked to the political establishment, ousted Bernie Sanders, one of the voices furthest to the left of the party, from the presidential candidacy, as a turning point.

Another element that characterized this insurgency within the Republican party was the "rebellion" against the Bush dynasty, according to historian Matt Dallek, speaking to ARA. "The 2016 rebellion was, in many ways, against the idea of a Bush dynasty. It was against Jeb Bush, right? The man with a hundred million dollars who got nowhere in the primaries. Therefore, there is a generational page turn with the Tea Party." In the Democratic case, it would be a rebellion against heavyweights, such as the Senate Minority Leader, Chuck Schumer, or the Democratic leader in the House of Representatives, Hakeem Jeffries.

Although there are some parallels with the transformation that the Tea Party represented for the Republican party, Milkis remains cautious. For the political scientist, what would confirm that it is a Democratic Tea Party would be if all these candidates reach Congress and dethrone Jeffries.

The alternative path that the progressive wave is proposing still has to pass the final test on November 3rd. But regardless of what happens during election day, Milkis emphasizes that "populism is spreading" throughout American politics and is the result of how polarization is changing the way politics is done: "Populism is not an ideology in itself. With the Tea Party, far-right populism took control of the Republican party, and now left-wing populism is spreading within the Democratic party." Whether this is a symptom or not of something larger on a social scale, we will have to wait and see.