Democrats are again acting like they occupy the high moral ground of American politics. But if 2026 has proven anything, it’s that there’s virtually nothing a left-wing candidate could say or do that would elicit condemnation from Democrats if doing so threatened their power.
Democrats, for example, demand credit for their opposition to Maureen Galindo, the Texas congressional candidate who proposed putting American “Zionists” (wink, wink) into concentration camps and castrating them, lost her Texas primary last week, winning 36% of the vote — not a bad showing for a politician championing mass imprisonment of her political enemies.
The question, though, is whether House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, or Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, or anyone at Pod Save America or the Bulwark had uttered a word in protest, had Galindo already won her primary before making those comments? All the evidence strongly suggests no.
And by evidence, I mean their explicit support for slightly less offensive cranks, extremists, bigots and terrorism apologists such as new party power broker Hasan Piker or the socialist Hezbollah fan Abdul el Sayed in Michigan or the Hamas apologist Chris Rabb in Pennsylvania, a guy who suggested the massacre of Jews at Bondi Beach was a “false flag” operation by “Zionists.”
Imagine telling someone 20 years ago that a leading congressional candidate in a New Jersey district situated right outside New York City had both volunteered for an al Qaeda front in Europe and spent years being friends with “The Blind Sheikh” Omar Abdel-Rahman, the longtime jihadi preacher who was sentenced for seditious conspiracy after planning a “day of terror” in 1995. Adam Hamawy defended Abdel-Rahman during his trial. And yet not a single notable Democrat has called him out on it.
Many of the same Democrats who expect Republicans to wring their hands over Republican Texas senatorial candidate Ken Paxton, a man tainted by corruption, have offered full-throated endorsement of a man who knowingly got and kept a Totenkopf SS Nazi tattoo for 20 years.
It’s not just that Graham Platner’s mentally unstable ravings, including saying a Purple Heart recipient didn’t “deserve to live,” or that “all cops are bastards,” or that white rural Americans were “racist and stupid,” or that the Virgin Mary was a “skank” or defending child killers of Hamas or contending that sexual assault victims bring it on themselves. It’s that he still uses unhinged Marxist language right now.
Platner isn’t the first skeeze to run for major office, but he might be the most extreme. Only two elected Democrats, as far as I can tell, have spoken out about Platner’s soft spot for Nazis. One is Sen. John Fetterman, who is under relentless attack from his own party for supporting Israel over Islamists, and Rep. Jake Auchincloss.
Now, if Platner’s opponent in Maine was a raging, corrupt ideologue, independents might be torn between two dangerous candidates. But the Republican in Maine is incumbent Sen. Susan Collins, perhaps the most milquetoast centrist member of the entire chamber.
Some Democrats rationalize their support for a self-described “communist” by noting that control of the Senate is far more important than worrying about the individual ravings of unhinged candidates. Though gutless establishment Democrats did virtually nothing to counter extremists during the primaries, there’s a utilitarian logic to this thinking. But then you’re in no position to lecture Republicans about Paxton or anyone else, for that matter.
The 2026 elections will be held during the second term of an unpopular presidency, so there’s no telling how many Democrats will win. Or, perhaps, the new reality is that pro-Islamist Marxists are now an influential part of the contemporary Democratic Party. How popular such a party will be nationally moving forward is yet to be seen.
I am constantly being assured that Democrats are the adults in the room. I’m supposed to believe that self-styled socialists are not only going to uphold norms, decency and democratic institutions but also improve the economic conditions of Americans. That contention clashes with every shred of historical evidence we possess.
Democrats had a chance to be normal. They chose crazy.
Agree/Disagree with the author(s)? Let them know in the comments below and be heard by 10’s of thousands of CDN readers each day!
