Ben Davis

Francesca Hong’s failure to win Wisconsin’s Democratic gubernatorial nomination shows that the party establishment remains capable of rapidly consolidating voters behind a preferred candidate. Although Hong’s organizing network and socialist base brought her close to victory and secured roughly 40% of the vote, they were insufficient at statewide scale. The left must develop stronger mass communication, paid media, opposition research, rapid response and message discipline, while translating radical principles into policies persuasive to median Democratic voters. The defeat nevertheless demonstrates the left’s substantial growth, particularly among educated renters and public- and nonprofit-sector workers, and should not lead the Democratic establishment to become complacent.

The Democratic left has expanded from a marginal force concentrated in deep-blue urban areas into a significant influence capable of winning statewide Democratic primaries, highlighted by Abdul El-Sayed’s narrow Michigan Senate victory. However, the movement’s gains are slower and less uniform than polling and media narratives suggested, and moderate voters, campaign organization, candidate quality and local conditions still matter. The decisive test will come in November, when left-backed candidates must win competitive general elections in swing states and demonstrate that they can assemble coalitions broad enough to defeat Republicans, retain governorships and help Democrats regain the Senate.

The Democratic Party is experiencing a rapid leftward shift, reflected in progressive and socialist victories in Pennsylvania, Los Angeles, Washington, DC and New York. The article attributes the surge to opposition to Donald Trump, Democratic voters’ growing rejection of Israel’s conduct in Gaza and AIPAC’s influence, generational change, urban organizing and the Democratic Socialists of America’s grassroots infrastructure. It argues that DSA-led mass politics is overtaking donor-driven progressive organizations and that Democratic leadership is increasingly disconnected from its base, though moderate Democrats may still be needed to appeal to centrist voters.

Zohran Mamdani’s New York City victory is presented as evidence that progressive campaigns can expand the electorate by mobilizing young people, immigrant communities, lower-income renters and public-transit users who typically do not vote. His campaign won across racial groups while drawing particular support from working-class residents, and about 100,000 volunteers helped create an unusually broad grassroots organization. The result is framed as part of a wider backlash against the Trump administration, although the administration is expected to intensify rather than moderate its agenda. The central implication is that defeating Trumpism requires rebuilding community institutions, solidarity and working-class political participation on a much larger scale.

Zohran Mamdani’s unexpectedly decisive New York mayoral primary victory is presented as a major rejection of the Democratic establishment and a breakthrough for democratic socialism. His campaign combined innovative social media, multilingual outreach, grassroots organizing through the Democratic Socialists of America and a forceful economic message that attracted working-class voters of color as well as progressive constituencies. The article argues that attacks portraying Mamdani as antisemitic failed, partly because of shifting Democratic voter sympathy toward Palestinians and his continued support for Gaza. Mamdani’s success is framed as evidence that an organized, economically focused left can win back voters who moved toward Donald Trump, while exposing the weakness of centrist politics. The broader lesson is that defeating the right and addressing crises such as climate change will require rebuilding unions, civic groups and durable working-class organizations.

The second Trump administration is portrayed as a battleground between two incompatible projects: a national-conservative effort to restore US manufacturing, national power and traditional social norms, and a Silicon Valley-led technolibertarian effort to reduce the state and place more power with transnational technology firms. Tariffs serve competing goals including industrial revival, revenue generation and coercive diplomacy, while Elon Musk’s DOGE cuts undermine the government capacity needed to support domestic manufacturing. The clash risks higher prices, weakened public institutions, economic crisis and long-term harm to US workers, with consequences that could take generations to repair.

The article argues that common explanations for Donald Trump’s 2024 victory—including low turnout, Democrats’ association with progressive identity politics, abandonment of the working class, culture-war appeals and inflation—fail to explain the election fully. It attributes voters’ greater economic trust in Trump largely to the brief expansion and subsequent collapse of the Covid-era welfare state, combined with the erosion of unions, working-class institutions and civil society. The author warns that Trump does not support social democracy and that Republicans’ agenda would weaken the safety net, while arguing that Democrats should have defended these programs more forcefully. The proposed response is to rebuild unions and democratic organizations around a pro-society, solidaristic left, including coordinated labor action in 2028.

The panel attributes Donald Trump’s victory to voter dissatisfaction with the economy, inflation and immigration, Joe Biden’s weakened candidacy, and Kamala Harris’s failure to offer a clear break from the administration. Contributors also argue that Democrats alienated young, Arab, Muslim and Latino voters by moving toward the center, courting Republicans and neglecting the war in Gaza. They call for the party to rebuild working-class institutions, embrace economic populism and defend human rights, while warning that Trump’s return could worsen threats to democracy, women’s rights, Palestinians and other groups at home and abroad.

The Guardian panel broadly judged the debate civil and unlikely to significantly affect the election, though several contributors gave JD Vance a modest advantage for his polished, disciplined performance and ability to present Trumpism in more moderate language. Tim Walz was praised for his strongest moments on abortion, healthcare and domestic policy but criticized by some as nervous or overly scripted. The panel also condemned the debate’s assumptions about immigration, Israel and Middle East escalation, highlighted Vance’s evasiveness over the 2020 election and January 6, and argued that his economic populism conflicts with Donald Trump’s record and agenda.

The panel overwhelmingly judged Kamala Harris the winner of the first 2024 presidential debate, crediting her preparation, composure and ability to provoke Donald Trump into defensive, incoherent and factually dubious responses. Trump was criticized over his conduct, January 6, abortion, immigration and his claims about migrants, while Harris was faulted for offering limited policy detail and for positions seen as inadequate or morally troubling on Gaza, the border, fracking and Israel. The contributors agreed that Harris’s performance improved her standing but cautioned that Trump remains electorally competitive and that portraying the contest mainly as a choice between competence and Trump’s instability may not address voters’ economic grievances.

Democrats should quickly consolidate behind Vice-President Kamala Harris rather than hold an open convention or rushed primary after Joe Biden’s withdrawal from the 2024 race. A contested nomination would consume scarce time, confuse voters, disrupt access to Biden’s campaign finances and infrastructure, and squander renewed grassroots enthusiasm. The proposed process is also criticized as donor-driven and potentially aimed at replacing the administration’s progressive economic policies. Harris should use the convention to define herself and address progressive concerns, including Gaza, while party leaders focus on unity and defeating Donald Trump.

The panelists broadly agree that Joe Biden’s withdrawal, though late and risky, gives Democrats a better chance of defeating Donald Trump. Kamala Harris is seen as capable of resetting the campaign, contrasting her relative youth and status as a woman of color with Trump, but she must prove herself publicly, unify the party, address Gaza policy and select a strong running mate. The commentators criticize Biden’s delayed decision, the Democratic Party’s inertia and the White House’s insularity, while noting that Democrats may now improve their prospects in congressional races as well as the presidential contest.

George Latimer defeated incumbent Jamaal Bowman in New York’s 16th Congressional District after AIPAC and allied groups spent more than $20 million, making the race the most expensive congressional primary in U.S. history. The result is a significant setback for progressive and pro-Palestinian movements and may deter elected officials from supporting a Gaza ceasefire in the short term. However, the scale of spending also signals that the longstanding bipartisan consensus supporting Israel has fractured: criticism of Israel and support for Palestinian rights have entered mainstream American politics through figures such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, and Rashida Tlaib. The victory is therefore presented as a costly rearguard action rather than a sustainable restoration of AIPAC’s former political dominance.

Michigan's Democratic primary revealed unexpectedly strong support for an uncommitted protest vote organized by the Listen to Michigan campaign. The vote exceeded organizers' expectations, reached at least 10% in many parts of the state and won 23% of election-day votes in Detroit, signaling deep dissatisfaction among key Democratic constituencies with Biden's support for Israel's war in Gaza. The campaign argues that Biden must call for a ceasefire, halt arms shipments and exert diplomatic pressure on Israel, saying that warnings about Donald Trump and appeals for party loyalty will not repair the damage without substantive action.

Joe Biden’s delayed visit to East Palestine, Ohio, exposed a broader Democratic messaging problem: Donald Trump has successfully portrayed himself as a champion of workers and victims of corporate negligence despite policies the author argues transferred wealth upward and weakened protections. Biden’s weak standing among working-class, younger, lower-income and voters of color reflects distrust that government is serving their economic interests. Rather than insisting that economic indicators are positive, Democrats should acknowledge voters’ concerns, show up in affected communities and emphasize the material risks of a second Trump presidency, including weaker safety and environmental regulations.

Joe Biden’s age, perceived cognitive decline and handling of the Israel-Gaza war are undermining Democratic support ahead of the 2024 election, particularly among young, Black, Arab and Muslim voters in Michigan. The column argues that Donald Trump’s authoritarian plans and threats to democratic rights make a second Biden term crucial, but says Democrats cannot simply rely on the status quo. Biden should demonstrate greater control over foreign policy and push for a ceasefire, while the Democratic National Committee should seriously assess alternatives such as Kamala Harris or Gretchen Whitmer despite the risks of changing candidates.

Donald Trump’s landslide victory in the Iowa Republican caucuses is presented as evidence of his extraordinary political comeback and continued dominance of the Republican nomination contest. The contributors argue that Nikki Haley and Ron DeSantis failed to offer a meaningful alternative, while Trump’s felony indictments, election-related conduct and civil liability have not weakened his support among Republican voters. The result reflects a Republican Party reshaped around Trump’s personal brand, cultural grievance and rejection of traditional conservative principles. Although Trump may remain vulnerable among college-educated voters in a general election, the caucus outcome makes a Trump-Biden rematch increasingly likely.

Gaddings Dam, a former 19th-century mill pond above Todmorden, has become a cherished year-round wild-swimming spot and is claimed to be England’s highest beach. The piece follows regular swimmers and the filmmakers behind the documentary Wild Water on a circular walk across Langfield Common and Stoodley Pike, highlighting the dam’s dramatic setting, cold-water swimming culture, peat bogs and surviving Victorian infrastructure. The reservoir was acquired by the Gaddings Dam Preservation Company in 2001 to preserve it for local people.

The panel concludes that Donald Trump remained the real winner of the first Republican presidential debate because his absence underscored his dominance of the field. Ron DeSantis was widely viewed as evasive and weakened, while Vivek Ramaswamy drew the most attention with aggressive far-right positions and repeated defenses of Trump. Nikki Haley and Chris Christie were seen as comparatively substantive, and Mike Pence was recognized for defending his refusal to overturn the 2020 election. The debate focused heavily on Trump, January 6, culture-war issues, spending and immigration, while largely minimizing climate change, gun violence and Trump’s criminal indictments.

John Fetterman’s 4.4% victory over Mehmet Oz in Pennsylvania, far exceeding Joe Biden’s 1.1% margin, is presented as evidence that an authentic progressive and economically populist Democrat can win back some working-class white voters who backed Donald Trump. His campaign defined Oz as an out-of-state elitist, connected Fetterman’s economic message to his personal identity, and benefited from his candid openness about his post-stroke disability. The result suggests that clear redistributive policies and trusted messengers may be more effective than establishment moderation, though Democrats have not yet broadly demonstrated that they can reclaim the working-class electorate.