“‘Socialism’ is a scare word they have hurled at every advance the people have made in the last 20 years. ‘Socialism’ is what they called public power. ‘Socialism’ is what they called Social Security. ‘Socialism’ is what they called farm price supports. ‘Socialism’ is what they called bank deposit insurance. ‘Socialism’ is what they called the growth of free and independent labor organizations. ‘Socialism’ is their name for almost anything that helps all the people.” —President Harry Truman, Oct 10, 1952
“Working class people should be first in government.” —Francesca Hong, defining what “democratic socialist” means, Aug 11, 2026
Peggy Flanagan’s landslide win over a much better-funded centrist in Minnesota’s US Senate primary, along with Francesca Hong’s razor-thin loss in the Wisconsin Governor primary, is further evidence of a growing leftward, “socialist” shift in Democratic politics, spreading well beyond New York City, where it was supposedly limited to, according to the corporate media.
What’s more, the intra-party focus misses the larger picture of the entire electorate shifting left, as red states like Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, Ohio, Texas, Alaska and even South Carolina show neck-and-neck Senate races underway. And Democratic primary turnout has dwarfed the GOP, breaking records in some states.
While the New York Times headline read, “A Stunning Loss in Wisconsin Shows the Limits of the Left,” the reality on the ground was quite different—perhaps even the opposite—as Hong is arguably now the frontrunner for the 2028 US Senate race to unseat Ron Johnson. And Flanagan—backed by Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Ilhan Omar—appears to be a shoo-in for Senate this year.
Hong was a state legislator, just as Zorhan Mamdani was, running for governor, not mayor, and without the impressive big name endorsements he (or Flanagan) had. She was a self-described “wild-card” candidate. For comparison, imagine if Mike Gipson, Josh Lowenthal, or Al Muratsuchi were to run for governor and lose the primary by a few thousand votes. Would that seem like a defeat to you, or more like an unbelievable miracle?
Hong clearly inclined toward the latter.
“The last 11 months have been one of the greatest joys of my life,” she wrote on social media the morning after, in a brief message where she congratulated Crowley and pledged to support him to defeat the GOP nominee, election-denier Congressman Tom Tiffany.
“This campaign was not about getting one person into office,” Hong went on to say. “It is about building a movement for permanent affordability and a government that puts working people first. Our movement is strong, and the work isn’t done. I am overwhelmingly proud of our team and the work they have done to achieve that goal.”
As if to confirm what she was saying, Crowley almost echoed her.
“For the past few months, you’ve heard a lot of people try to define this election as a battle between the left and the center, between progressives and the establishment, between insiders and outsiders,” he said. “That narrative misses the entire point of what we’re doing. Because when I traveled across Wisconsin, I didn’t meet people who introduced themselves that way.”
“I met parents wondering how they’ll afford childcare,” he continued. “I met workers who want wages that keep up with the pace of living. I met farmers trying to preserve family traditions. I met small business owners trying to keep their doors open. And I met seniors who deserve security and dignity after a lifetime of work. I met young people who simply want a fair chance to build a life right here in this great state we call Wisconsin.”
In his campaign, Crowley promised to push for building more housing, improving the health care system and raise the state wage to $20/hr from the current $7.25 by 2030—an agenda that’s clearly better characterized as “progressive,” rather than “centrist,” as the corporate media would want you to believe.
In turn, Hong had no difficulty in enthusiastically supporting Crowley after he won, joining him in a unity rally the day after election day, and campaigning with him afterwards—hardly the sign of a bitter factional fight.
Hong’s loss by less than four thousand votes meant that any number of things could have made the difference, but one of them, repeated constantly by voters, was fear that she couldn’t win—which had nothing to do with support for her or her agenda. Rather, it was based on the out-of-date notion that more moderate candidates do better, along with past statements that could be used against her which surfaced in the campaign’s last days.
One example is that she once said she thought we should cancel Thanksgiving. But when asked if she was prepared for attacks framing her as far too extreme, Hong effortlessly shifted focus from the symbolic to the real, attacking the GOP nominee for his record:
What’s extreme is Congressman Tiffany, a longtime DC congressman, has voted against the interests of Wisconsinites over and over again. What’s extreme is that he is an election denier. What’s extreme is he continues to protect Epstein and pedophiles. What’s extreme is that he has voted to help raise gas prices and make life harder for Wisconsinites.
In contrast, Flanagan, whose ancestry is both Irish and Indigenous has shared Thanksgiving recipes in the past. She’s a member of the White Earth Nation of Ojibwe, and her Ojibwe name, as she always introduces herself, is Gizhiiwewidamikwe — “speaks in a loud and clear voice woman.”
Rather than facilely contrast them in static opposition, one should see them both reflecting ongoing dialogues that enrich us, and should welcome, institutionally within the Democratic Party, and culturally throughout America. They both represent a politics of listening to and representing people, while fighting against the power of concentrated wealth.
And while Flanagan didn’t identify herself as a Democratic socialist, she got her start in politics working for Senator Paul Wellstone, who did, long before it had its current visibility. She began working on his campaign while in college, and later joined Wellstone Action as a trainer of activists, organizers, and candidates to carry his legacy. She may not share the label, but she’s shared the work on common goals. And she may have served as Lt. Governor, but that didn’t really make her part of the establishment. The campaign spending figures show that: she was outspent about 3-1, but won by almost 20%, due to her grassroots campaign.
As the primary season nears its end, “What we’re seeing across the country, including in Los Angeles, is that voters are fed up with the political establishment,” Nithya Raman campaign spokeswoman Liz Garcia said. “That’s exactly why Nithya Raman is running against the current mayor, who has shown time and time again that she is beholden to corporations and special interests. In June, Nithya proved that campaigns win when people see city government as a tool to bring about the change, and we’re just getting started.”
Whether Raman wins or loses, there is no question she’s part of something much larger, including people with different labels who have much more that unites them than the labels might suggest. And this election cycle, at least, the voters seem to recognize that.