On with Kara Swisher - Are Insurgent Democrats Breaking the Party — or Rebuilding It?

Episode Date: July 20, 2026

With just a few months left until the midterms and President Trump’s approval ratings hovering in the 30s, Democrats believe they’re poised to retake power in Congress this November. But party leaders worry a slate of primary wins by insurgent-left candidates could undermine their chances. And yet, Democratic voters made it clear they are looking for change by rejecting some of the establishment’s top recruits in primaries from Colorado to New York and beyond. Kara is joined by three experts to talk about the rise of these insurgent candidates: Adam Jentleson, president and founder of Searchlight Institute and author of the forthcoming book "Supermajority: How Democrats Can Build Lasting Power”; Amanda Litman, co-founder and president of Run for Something,  a progressive group that works to recruit and support first-time candidates in state and local races; and Roshni Nedungadi, founding partner and chief research officer at HIT Strategies, a public opinion research company that specializes in researching young people and people of color. Kara, Adam, Amanda and Roshni explain why these candidates are gaining traction, what voters are looking for, and how Democrats can navigate these divides in the party over the next few months.  Questions? Comments? Email us at [e-mail] or find us on YouTube, Instagram, TikTok, Threads, and Bluesky @onwithkaraswisher. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

If you don't like DSA, it is possible for the establishment wings of the party or the old guard to offer a different vision. The fact that they have instead chosen to punch left, it's like, make an argument. Hi, everyone, from New York Magazine and the Vox Media Podcast Network. This is on with Kara Swisher, and I'm Kara Swisher. We're just a few months away from the midterm elections, if you can believe it. And with President Trump's popularity in the toilet, Democrats have a great chance of winning back power in Congress. but the party has been rocked by a group of insurgent progressive candidates that have unseated some long-time incumbents.

We saw it happen in New York and Colorado, and all eyes are now on Michigan's Senate primary in a few weeks to see whether a progressive or centrist can win there. It's an existential election year for Democrats, and the party will have to navigate these divides in real time as it tries to chart a path out of the political wilderness. The cautionary tale, of course, is Graham Platner in Maine, who wrote a wave of populist enthusiasm to the party's senator, nomination only to drop out earlier this month when a former girlfriend accused him of rape. He denies it.

I've got three experts here to talk about this. Adam Gentleson is the president and founder of Searchlight Institute, a Democratic think tank. He also served as chief of staff to Pennsylvania Senator John Federman and his new book, Supermajority, How Democrats Can Build Lasting Power, comes out in September. Amanda Littman is the co-founder and president of Run for Something. It's a progressive political group that works to recruit and support for first-time candidates in states and local races. And Rochney-Nedongadi is founding partner and chief research officer of hit strategies, a public opinion research company that specializes in researching

young people and people of color. I think what's really important right now is that the Democrats seem to always form a firing squad that shoots inward. And what's really important is to shoot outward, and it'll be interesting to see if they can tolerate differences of opinion, including from the left and the more conservative parts of the Democratic Party and still win elections, and that's what I want to talk about. All right, let's get into my conversation with Adam, Amanda, and Rochene. Our expert question comes from Democratic political strategist, Liz Smith. Don't go anywhere. Support for this show comes from Odu. Running a business shouldn't feel like surviving a software group project. One app for accounting, another for inventory, another for sales, and somehow

none of them ever talk to each other. That's where O-DU comes in, and an all-in-one business management software that brings every part of your business together, from sales and accounting to inventory and marketing, all in one powerful platform. No messy integrations, no bouncing between tabs, and best of all, no spreadsheets.

Stop managing software and start managing your business with one unified system. Try it today for free at O-D-com-Cara. That's O-D-O-O-O-O-O-com.com Recommendations can't be amazing. I mean, maybe someone recommended that TV show you've been obsessed with lately. But when it comes to home projects, it's different. If you don't like a show, you might lose a few minutes.

If you hire a friend of a friend of a friend to fix a leaky ceiling, you could end up with a flooded kitchen. Maybe I know a guy just isn't enough for your home. That's why Thumbtack works so well. They'll match you with a top-rated local pro, and you can see photos of past work, credentials, and reviews all right in the app. For your next home project, try Thumbtack. Hire the Right Pro today.

Megan Rapino here. This week on a touch more, the beautiful game. I am talking with U.S. Women's National Team and Denver Summit Captain Lindsay Heaps about her journey from Denver, over to Leon, France, and now back to Denver, and her hopes for the 27. As the U.S. Women's National Team captain, I'm also waiting. in on the biggest moments and controversies from the World Cup quarterfinals. Check out the latest episode of A Touchmore, The Beautiful Game, wherever you get podcasts, and on YouTube.

Adam, Amanda and Rocheney, thank you for coming on on. Great to be here. Thank you for having us. Thanks. So there's been a lot of ink spilled on the rise of these insurgent candidates in the Democratic Party. I'd love for each of you, what is the lens through which you're viewing this divide? Is it moderate versus centrist, insider versus outsider, young versus old? why don't we start with you, Adam, then Amanda, then Rocheney? I mean, there's definitely an ideological component to it, right?

You can't avoid that. I mean, the platforms that a lot of these insurgent candidates are running on are very clear. They often have a lot in common, things like Medicare for All. You know, the war in Gaza is a huge issue driving a lot of this. But I think you also, you know, if you were doing all those positions but you didn't have the outsider versus insider dynamic, they wouldn't be getting the traction they're getting. So I think it's a combination of those two things. They happen to be young.

They are definitely outsiders. but there are also a lot of the passion behind them what's driving the movement does have these strong ideological components to it as well. Okay, Amanda. So run for something, the organization I ran had nearly 100,000 people sign up to run for office in the last 18 months.

That's more than we had in the entirety of Trump's first term. And the thing that we heard this time around that was different than Trump 1.0 was very specific frustration with the Democratic Party with the sense that like my leaders are not fighting for me, they're not showing up for me, they don't care about me, they haven't delivered for me, I am not going to wait my turn. I'm not going to get to the back of the line. I am done being told to just, like, be patient. So when I look at these insurgent candidates, you know, in congressional levels, we're seeing them on the state ledge levels and the municipal levels. It is a deep frustration with the status quo. And as you think it is generational in many ways. It's not a coincidence that so many of them are millennials and Gen Z leaders. But it's not even outsider so much as anti-return to normal and anti-establishment as so much as the establishment, as so much as the establishment,

is the status quo. Rocheney? Yeah, very much agree with what Amanda was saying. And I'm a partner at HITS Strategies, which is a full-scale public opinion research firm. We do expansive voter population research, but we also focus in on audiences that are typically underrepresented in voter research. So people of color, young voters, women, LGBTQ, and all of the intersections of those voters. and they really make up the core of the Democratic Party, and I feel like should be the leaders on what the Democratic Party positions are. And exactly like Amanda said, over the last few years, we've been hearing them say they are fed up with the Democratic Party.

They don't see elected leaders as fighting for them. They don't believe that the systems are advocating for them, and they believe that the Democratic candidates are taking their votes for granted. And so all of this is creating an environment for them that is opening a lane for a more progressive insurgent left who are more responsive to the issues of the day to step in and fill the gap that they feel is lacking in their candidates. You know, Sizri, even though, Adam, you mentioned Gaza, you didn't mention policies as much as the vibe, right? I guess the feeling that people aren't representing them on policies. Is that correct? That's right, but I really think you can't understate how important the Gaza conflict is to a lot of this. I really think it's...

I have two sons, 21, and I know. Yeah. It's hugely important. Because, you know, there are young anti-establishment candidates running in other races who sort of don't fall into this category of left-wing insurgents. You know, people like Bobby Polito, who's running in the Rio Grande Valley in Texas, Bob Brooks, who's running in Pennsylvania's 7th district. You know, they're outsiders. They're anti-establishment, too. But I think what's a differentiator between them and this sort of insurgent left is those ideological components.

And there are some policy overlap with them as well. But I think it's, you know, you couldn't be included in this left-wing insurgency that is largely driven by the DSA and others if you had a centrist position on the Israeli conflict or if you were unwilling to call it a genocide. And I think that's a big, big differentiator. I just have noticed from my children, two of whom have very different political views. Interestingly, they do come together on the same idea of folks. focus on the Democrats. They don't like Trump, that's for sure. And none of you mentioned not liking Trump, correct, Amanda? It's the water people are swimming in. It's not the bait that's hooking them. Because you have to remember for this generation of leaders, this new generation of leaders in particular,

it's always been Trump. Like, it has been the Trump era since they came into political awareness. For most of them, at least especially if you're, you know, Gen Z, the first election you voted on, Trump was on the ballot. What do you think, Rocheley? Yeah, I mean, he is wildly unpopular, especially among the Democratic base. And when we're in focus groups with a lot of voters and trying to talk about all of the bad things that Trump has been doing, they are very well aware of what is going on

in Trump's administration. They hear it from their social media, they hear it from the news, they hear it from people in their community. We're not giving them new information when we talk about Trump's bad policies and bad decisions. So it's very much, the context that they're operating under already.

So let's talk about some of the candidates that represent what we're talking about here. Progressives saw two big wins in Colorado this month in the governor's race, state attorney general Phil Weiser, beat Democratic Senator Michael Bennett. That was a huge surprise, I think, to a lot of the establishment. And Democratic socialists, Maylott Keyrose, unseeded Democratic representative, Diana DeGette, who held the Denver seat for almost 30 years. Adam, Colorado is a blue state, but not a bright blue state. Talk about the dynamics of these races.

in particular how the insurgents were able to oust these incumbents. Yeah, it's ironic because if you know Michael Bennett, as I have had the privilege of getting to know him a little bit over the years, this guy was very against the current Democratic leadership. He had lots of problems with Chuck Schumer. You know, he was a big critic, both in private and in public. But I think, you know, it wasn't part of his public identity in a major way, and that is ultimately what really sort of did him in in this race

because he was seen as a DC insider. Phil Weiser, who beat him, isn't exactly a left-wing progressive, this definitely sort of is evidence for the idea that this is a lot more about outsider versus insider because Phil Weiser doesn't adopt Medicare for All as one of his policy positions. He actually is in line with us at Searchlight on free primary care for all. But then on the House Free side, you kind of had the opposite dynamic where Diana to get is a co-sponsor of Medicare for all, right? A big advocate for it and has been for a long time. Right.

But she didn't have as far left a position on Israel and Gaza, and that was part of the avenue that Malakiros and others used against her also. the fact that she's taking corporate money and some of these other aspects that were ultimately what did her in. So it's a mix of things and there are different things in different races, but, you know, some combination of outsider versus insider and some of these deep ideological issues that are driving this, when those things come together, incumbents really got to watch out because they could really be in trouble. Right. Now, in New York, three progressives backed by a New York city mayor, Zoran Mamdani's ousted House incumbents. Two of those candidates are also members of Democratic Socialists of America, House Speaker, Hakeem, Jeffreys was not pleased with Mamdani's decision to endorse these candidates. Amanda, what lessons do mainstream Democrats still need to learn about what's resonating with voters right now, and certainly the mayor is? What I thought was so interesting about those races, Claire Valdez and Dario-Eliza Chevalier,

while they got the attention for their comments on Gaza, and I think that speaks sort of their moral character, their campaigns were really focused on cost-of-living issues. It was about housing. It was about child care. It was about infrastructure. the things that they were knocking doors about, but the same things that Mondani was talking about in his campaign. It was, you have problems, we have solutions,

and the current leadership has not delivered them. I mean, in many ways, it speaks to kind of what Trump was getting out so long ago, which is like, the swamp is not serving you. I'm going to solve all your problems. I can fix it. This new class of Democratic leaders, and, you know, DSA or not, they are saying, we hear you. We hear how broken you feel everything is,

how much it feels like the system is not working for you. I don't care even if you are aligned with them or not in terms of policies. These folks in power have not solved it. They just haven't it. We've given them a chance. They've been in office in some cases as long as you've been alive. Throw them out. Give us a new try.

Now, Rochevni, Republicans are already trying to tie Democrats to Mamdani and these other DSA candidates. I've never heard the word communism so much since I studied in school. But for young voters and voters of color, how potent an attack line is that? I actually think that he has. very popular nationally and has only grown in popularity since he's been elected. And so his ideas and the policies that he is pushing and the candidates that are pushing these ideas and policies are very, very popular nationally. And so I don't think he is as effective of a boogeyman for

Republicans because people are seeing him make real change in New York City and seeing the voters of New York City be really appreciative of the work that he's doing. Why are they doing it then? They must have some poll they're dragging out or just is it a knee-jerk, say, communist and hope it works. I think the label of communism and socialism still has not caught up to Mamdani himself. I think voters are still unwilling to vote for a candidate that is explicitly socialist. And so the label is a potent attack. However, using him, in addition to the label, I think.

feel like cancel each other out. Adam, how do you look at that and then Amanda? Regardless of what you thought about Mumdami coming in, I think purely as a sort of game appreciates game, no one's doing it better than he is right now. I mean, he's really doing an incredible job. And I think that if you're trying to sort of draw lessons from it, it's his energy. You know, yesterday he was watching the World Cup Games and Rikers Island. At Rikers Island, you know, I mean, this guy is everywhere and everything he's doing is

conveying that he sees all of New York. You know, his love for the city is infectious. But he's also been very pragmatic in his governing choices so far, right? I mean, he sort of distanced himself from his previous comments about defunding the police. He embraced Jess Tisch, the New York City Police Commissioner, and kept her on, even though a lot of folks in the left wanted him to fire her. And he embraced a lot of sort of critics on the sort of abundance, you know, YIMB movement who have a, you know, sort of deregulatory approach to housing and the ideas you need to build more

to lower prices. He's really shifted in their direction and embraced a lot of. of their ideas. So part of what he's doing well, you know, a lot of it's his energy, his youth, his enthusiasm, has good looks, his charm, all that comes through. But he's also governing in a smart and pragmatic way. And I think those two things together. The last point I make is that crime is way down. He's not dealing with huge influxes of immigrants being shipped up from Texas. And I think some of the fundamental conditions for his affordability message to break through are those sorts of things of having, you know, New Yorkers feeling like they have basic security

in their homes, in their neighborhood, in their everyday lives. That really clears the way for that focus on affordability and day-to-day life improvements. Amanda? I would add one other thing, which is that he helps the credibility gap the Democrats have right now. You know, within eight days of taking office, he did that press conference where he announced the expansion of 3K and beginning a pilot program for 2K towards universal child care in the city. He's working towards fast and free buses. He is frozen the rent. You know, whether you maybe liked those policies or not, which, especially as a parent of toddlers, love the universal child care, it is really proof that you can keep your promises.

And I think one of the challenges the Democratic Party has right now is even if you promise the moon, voters don't believe we'll deliver it. So I honestly think making him the face of the party in many ways as someone who promises to do big things and then actually gets them done, helps close that credibility gap. Which we're going to have a big problem with going into 2028 because all of these people running for Congress right now, they're promising big legislation. They're not going to be able to govern until Trump is no longer president. So it's one of the challenges of this moment. Yeah, it is. So every episode we get a question from an outside expert, here's yours. Hi, I'm Liz Smith, and I am a Democratic strategist and advisor to majority Democrats in the bench.

My question for you is, since 2024, we have seen Democratic voters embrace a lot of anti-establishment candidates and insurgent candidates and all of the energy around them. But, of course, we've seen the pitfalls with this with the main Senate. raised. So my question for you is, how do Democrats harness that energy? And given your preferences, what do you think the basic vetting standards or thresholds should be for outsider candidates going forward? So we avoid another platinum-type situation. Adam, Amanda, and then Rochene. Yeah, I think this is where you can sort of envision a big tent, right? This is where big tentism, which is sort of a core principle for us at the Searchline Institute really comes through, which is, like, you know, welcome DSA into the party, but for folks who are running in tougher races, they should have the

anti-establishment vibe, they should criticize democratic leadership because it very much deserves to be criticized, but then don't take some of these far-left positions that are going to be hard to defend in swing states and purple states. You know, Maine is still pretty much a blue state. Kamala Harris won it by, I think, seven points. You know, so Platner could have probably gotten away with some of those left-wing positions if he hadn't had the scandals. And then, yeah, I mean, I think vetting people properly, is a good idea. I mean, there were signs. It's worth doing some introspection.

I mean, I supported him probably long past when there were a lot of red flags that should have signaled where this was going. We knew the circumstantial information about him having this decades-long struggles with PTSD and a pageant for violence and disrespectful and dismissive attitudes towards sexual assault. I mean, like, there were signs, right? And so it wasn't a shock. So the lack of vetting was bad. And then I think ignoring a lot of these signs was also a mistake in retrospect.

But fortunately, we'll get a hopefully. get a, you know, good candidate in that race soon and beat Susan Collins. Amanda? So, Rutford something over the last 10 years has endorsed more than 4,000 candidates. We do deep vetting on each one. We do background checks. We do social media scrubs. We do local operatives who got check us and tell us the context.

We've had to rescind endorsements less than 10 times in 10 years. It is possible to run a candidate recruitment program at scale that brings in people with integrity and also strong character. Now, to Adam's point about the Big Ten, the way we have structured this is that we are tight on values and flexible in policy, knowing that those values are going to show up differently in a city council race in New York than they might in a school board race in Alaska. That's how we were able to elect like a DSA person to the Atlanta City Council, but also a former Republican who left the party after January 6th. So was there all the way through Trump won in rural Pennsylvania, who's now running for State House, Andrew Harbao. It is possible. I do think you have to operate not as a king-making. I think one of the challenges that happened with Plattner is they were doing, you know, Madlib-style candidate recruitment. We are looking for X kind of occupation and X demographic with X kind of political engagement because that's who we think can win.

You cannot do top-down kingmaking. We have learned this. Voters smell the bullshit. They don't like it. And it inevitably backfires, as we saw in Maine. We cannot puppet master candidates anymore if we ever could. What we have to do is empower people who say, you know what, I think I can see myself in leadership. and then give them to tools to succeed, and do that in as wide as a way as we can.

Like, throw the doors open to as many people as possible. If we try to manufacture people, we'll get either inauthentic, unvetted, or the combination of the two that voters will reject. Right. Or something blows up in that case. Rojnie? I think that this is an opportunity for us. I mean, we saw what happened to the Republican Party when the Tea Party took over.

We have those lessons to learn. And we are experiencing the same groundswell of anger from our base, anger and frustration. We have the opportunity now to listen to that and amend the way that we are running candidates and promoting policy and just treating our voters. And so I think we just have to stop digging in our heels and actually listen to the voters and do hard things in order to prevent candidate disaster. Candid disaster can come in many forms, though, correct? I mean, presumably this one was invetted, and he seemed to be a kingmaid, essentially,

rather than he was interested in doing it in the first place. And I think the flip to that is also worth noting, which was that he was up in opposition to also someone who was not, if plucked from a security, chosen for this race. Like Schumer at all recruited Janet Mills, who did not want to run. And you can tell because she did not then throw herself into this opening now, did not really want to be campaigning, was deeply unpopular as governor, and was. so obviously not the right fit for an anti-establishment, anti-gerenterocratic moment. People did not want the 78-year-old governor to be dragged out of retirement to run for office.

And that I think is what made so much of the last couple of months in Maine so frustrating is that it actually didn't have to be this way. It didn't have to be Platner versus Mills and then ultimately the outcome against Collins. There was a really interesting, diverse field of folks running for governor. Some of them could have run for Senate. We're now seeing there's a pretty exciting bench in Maine that we're starting to build up. Like, there are villains on nearly every side of this story. And I think it is worth like pointing to that as we go. Yes, absolutely.

Schumer did try to King make there and made a mistake there. We'll be back in a minute. Support for this show comes from Built. There's no way around it. Housing is expensive. Rent, mortgage, it doesn't matter which one you're paying. Nobody likes letting that big chunk of change go every month. Built was created to help.

ease the sting. Becoming a built member means earning points on every housing payment no matter where you live. Redeem built points for flights, hotels, lift rides, Amazon.com purchases, future housing payments, and more. On top of that, you can access their agentic neighborhood concieres. It's basically an assistant in the built app that connects to both your home and over 50,000 merchant partners. It can pay your rent, make dinner reservations, book fitness classes, schedule a lift ride, and more. It helps you out while automatically applying your member benefits along the way. Built is not just for renters anymore. It works for mortgages now as well. When your housing payment is one of your biggest monthly expenses, you might as well earn points on it. Download the Built app and join membership for where you live

at joinbilt.com.com slash Kara. That's J-O-I-N-B-I-L-T.com slash Kara. K-A-R-A. Use our link so they know we sent you. Support for this show comes from What Not. When you want something, you have to work for it. Nothing in life comes easy. And the same can be said when you want to turn a side hustle into a lasting business. So why not get started with WhatNot? What Not is the largest dedicated live shopping platform, whether it's beauty, collectibles, electronics, luxury fashion, even cookies.

Sellers are building real, thriving businesses. Anyone can sell whether your business is big, small, or yet to exist. According to their data across What Not, a number of sellers making over $1 million a year has doubled. and people selling on What Not sell 10 times more than on other major marketplaces. That's because you're not just listing products, you're building real connections with buyers. When one of our producers tried What Not as a buyer,

she was surprised about how much you like their live stream buying process. The chat rooms and the real-time reaction from sellers made the whole thing kind of thrilling. What Not has found that buyers spend more than an hour a day in the app, and that time is spent more than just browsing. They're engaging, buying, building comedian, and coming back. As a seller, you go live, show off the products in real time, and turn what you love into real income. Search What Not W-H-A-T-N-O-T in the App Store download and you can start selling right away.

Support for this show comes from Quince. A nice linen set lets you get away with a lot of outfit repetitions in the summer. You could wear the same one to a laid-back barbecue or upscale seaside restaurant and still feel classy. For elevated summer wardrobe pieces, check out Quince. They offer just that, and they use premium materials like European linen, organic cotton, and washable silk without the traditional retail markup. Their 100% European linen pants, dresses and tops are the pieces you'll reach for all summer long. They're lightweight, effortless to style and start at just $32.

They also have beautiful 14K gold jewelry that adds a subtle finishing touch to any outfit. And it's not just clothing. Quince offers everything from home to travel to everyday essentials. Everything is affordable, too. all of Quince's items are priced 50 to 80% less than similar brands. In fact, I have used my Quince suitcase at least four or five times this summer. It's simple to use and it's very durable. I also use their shirts and T-shirts a lot this summer.

They're very breathable, easy to use, and very comfortable. Make your summer wardrobe easier. Go to quince.com slash Kara for free shipping on your order and 365-day returns. Now available in Canada, too. That's Q-U-I-N-C-E.com slash Kara for free shipping and 365-day returns, quince.com slash Kara. The Bix big test will be Michigan Senate primary. Progressive Abdul-L. Saeed is challenging Representative Haley Stevens, a third candidate who is trying to strike the middle ground between the two Michigan Senator Mallory McMorrow dropped out. She just never caught on. Democrats have to hold onto the seat if they want any chance to take back the Senate. Progressive, it's their last chance to show one of their Senate candidates can win in a purple state. It would be a big win if he won. The primary is August 4th. What are you all watching

right now? Roshney, you start and then Amanda, then Adam. I've been looking at the polling. It's going back and forth, but it seems like he's gaining a lot of momentum. He is running a similar playbook as Mamdani in New York City. He is money back in your pockets, hold him. corporations accountable and take corporate money out of politics, Medicare for all, reducing cost of living for voters and reducing that economic crunch that voters are feeling. And he's very consistently on message with those policy points. And voters are really resonating with that message in Michigan. What about you, Amanda? I'm looking at the spending discrepancy. They have spent, I think, over 50 million on behalf of Haley Stevens. She is outspending, um, Alcied

I believe 10 to 1 at this point, if that's how much you have to spend to get her over the finish line in the primary, is there going to be the enthusiasm for her in the general? If she wins this, I don't know. So that's what you're looking at. Is this amount of money? I'm keeping an eye on that of like, how can you, again, can you king make in a state like this? Adam? I'm looking at whether El Saeed decides to make some of the pragmatic choices in the way that Mamdami has in order to appeal to a broader audience as we approach. the general election because, you know, he was pressed on a CNN interview recently on his previous comments supporting defund the police, and he stood by them, and I thought that was

unfortunate. You know, that's, there are real electability concerns, but it's not about, you know, anything about him as a person. It's about some of these positions that he's taken that are going to be difficult to defend in a Michigan general election race. Now, on the other hand, similar to the dynamic in Maine, I'm no big fan of Haley Stevens either. I don't think she's been a particularly compelling candidate. There's not a really strong electability argument for her either, because her past performance, you know, her numbers are okay, but they're not amazing. So it's another one of these dynamics where the choice is difficult. El Saeed is probably a better political athlete. He's very talented. He's great on social media. But he has taken some positions that unless he starts

making some pragmatic choices and there's still time left for him to do so, I do think those things are going to be liabilities in a general election. Do either of you think, Amanda, do you think that or Rocheney? I think he has some liabilities. I go back up forth a little bit because on the one, like, if he genuinely does believe we should defend the police or whatever statement he's saying, like there is some value. and really saying what you believe. Even if he knows that it's not a practical position to take, and I think part of that is it can signal to people that they can trust you.

So, you know, I think this is where you get into some tension here of do you contort your policies for an electorate, or do you still true to what your value? Like, it's a tough call, and I think you have to be a really talented communicator to be able to do it. Well, Mamdami, you know, Mamdami just 100% reversed himself on, you know, apologizing to the New York City police officers and just distance in the, himself from Defund the Police. As we've talked about here, he's wildly popular and doing a great job. So I think it's possible to do it. Well, he's already mayor. He's already mayor, but, you know, listen, woke one was crazy. Everybody said a lot of stuff that they

probably didn't get caught up in the moment. I think there's also a level of forgiveness of saying, hey, listen, we all got a little carried away there. And with the benefit of hindsight, I've decided to sort of reevaluate those things. People don't, you know, mind people changing their mind if they're open and honest about their reasoning there. Yeah, I think it comes to whether he can, like, articulate how he got to a new place. And I think Momdani is able to do it in part because he has the trust of voters. I don't say he does like does it has not earned that yet. I think he's still got a little bit of work to do there.

Or are people allowed to change their mind, even if it's not genuine, necessarily? I think if it's a genuine change, then yes, they are allowed. Voters really, really value authenticity in candidates. And to voters, that means staying true to your beliefs. And so I think if you can explain to voters, here's why. I believed in defund the police, and here is why I have now changed my mind. That's not just, you know, I saw poll numbers that say it's unpopular, and so now I'm going to change my mind on it,

or my bank corporate donors have told me this is not a popular position for me to hold. And so now I'm going to flip-flop on it. If they can display that level of authenticity, I think it's totally appropriate to change your mind. All right. Let's talk about what's driving the rise of these insurgent candidates. Amanda, like you mentioned, run for something, saw a record number of people sign up to run for office after the 24 election, mainly because they were angry at the Democratic Party. Talk about specific ways these people felt the party was failing them and how it's driving where we are. I mean, angry is one thing, but particularly, what's the specific thing? When I look back at 25 and 26, the biggest moments we saw for candidate recruitment or first big wave of Doge fire rates.

So there's frustration with the federal government and, like, how could you let people lose their jobs? A lot of it was laid off federal workers who had public service experience and wanted to run in a different way. The second was Schumer's failure to resolve things during the first shutdown fight. They were pissed. They're like, how can you hand off our government to this guy? I thought we said that this was the end of democracy. If this is actually an existential crisis, why are you playing games with him? The third big moment was Momdani's win.

Like after Momdani won in June of last year, we had 10,000 people sign up in those two weeks. I think part of that was, you know, his joy, the inspiration, but also this idea that the establishment is not unbeatable, they just go unchallenged, and that you can take them on if you try. The fourth big one was right after the elections in the fall, when you see people like, you know, yes, Mamdani, but also Spanberger, Mikey Sherrill in New Jersey, just like, oh yeah, people can do this. Good people can run and good people can win. Now, I would say the thing that I have come back to a bunch over the last year is how much housing comes up in these conversations. And in particular, young people feeling like Democrats have not done enough to make

it possible to buy a home, they have not done enough for renters. And it is, I think, part of a larger sense that young people do not have agency over their lives. They don't have an ability to choose where they live, where they work, how they live, if they can start a family. Housing is the number one issue people are talking about when they talk about running for office. And I think it's connected to how young voters are feeling. That's a very good point. The political strategy now, James Carville, recently unloaded on these Democratic Socialists and Progressive candidates trying to challenge incumbents. He said they were, quote, so fucking stupid. I don't know what to say about it.

Adam, you mentioned the need for a Big Ten approach. Do you care what Carville has to say about this? Speaking of gerontocracy, to what extent is the emblematic of the generational divide that's animating some of these candidates? I think he's very emblematic of the generational divide. You know, I think he's wrong on this. Look, you know, there was a picture on Twitter the other day of a DSA meeting, right? And there were two things that I took away from it. One was that half the people in the room were wearing face masks. And so in July of 2026, that is an indication that a lot of these people are not representative of the broader American public, right? But the other thing that was equally important, if not more important, was that the room was packed. And you had 50 or so people, you know, deeply committed to the civic process who care deeply about issues who are debating, you know, Robert's Rules of Order and all these sort of, you know, arcane procedures that, you know, the DNC should be extremely jealous of that level of commitment and energy and organization, right?

And so we may not agree on every issue, but that passion and that commitment has a place in our big tent, and it must have a place in our big tent. You know, we can all disagree on issues and say what we believe and where we draw lines and distinguish ourselves and what's right for New York City is not right for Texas. But that energy is incredibly valuable, and we would be very dumb as a party to try to run it out of the party. Why are people like him doing that, then, Amanda? It threatens people like his power. I mean, the institutions will always protect himself.

Carville and many other of the older leaders like him are creatures of these institutions. They have built them from the ground up. They are scared. When we talk about the leaders who got us into this mess will not be the ones to get us out of it, we also mean people like him. This is not to say he did not do some good things in his service, but that dude does not understand what it's like to be a 20 or 30-something in the United States right now. He does not understand why people are angry.

He and so many others of his sort of generation of leaders, both literally and figuratively, are so removed from where people are. And I would just posit, if you don't like DSA, it is possible for the establishment wings of the party or the old guards such as it is to offer a different vision. Like, they could avail themselves

of selling something that would solve the problems and speaking to the anger people feel. The fact that they have instead chosen to punch left or to, you know, blame the young people who want these wild and crazy things, like make an argument. Yeah, I made that argument to one of them. Go ahead, Rochene.

I would add that I think the older generation too often minimizes the intelligence of young voters. And because a lot of young voters get their information on social media or from their friends, assume that it's not as good of information as they're getting in newspapers or on cable TV. And at least what we're seeing in our research and talking to young folks, that could not be farther from the truth. They're so well informed on the issues. I would agree. They really understand what's going on.

They are just saying consistently over and over again, they're fed up with the system. And so I think it's a really wrong take. Right. I do. Again, I think of my sons. They're very well informed. They just don't agree with them. You know what I mean?

And it's really hard because one of the things, I said, you tell young people to be involved and to vote. And when they do it, you tell them their vote is stupid. Like, I don't understand. They're doing what you said, and you just don't like their choice, which is very different. I also had political journalist, as Ed Herndon, on the show a few months ago, he talked about how voters now don't fit into neat ideological boxes. I think that's another truism, and it's more important for candidates to be clearly articulate in their values than it is to fit neatly into an ideological box. First, Rochene, how does that square through what you're seeing in the research with young and minority voters who've been moving away from the Democratic Party? And what animates them now?

I think we've heard a lot about young men, particularly young men of color over the last few election cycles moving further away from the Democratic Party or voting more for Republicans. And so we've undertaken a lot of research over the last couple of years with our partners at Third Way and at Black Men vote to dig into what's going on there, what is leading to these votes. And now that we're seeing these young men slowly move back towards Democratic Party, what is driving that as well. And what we've found a lot is young men, young people are severely economically strained. They heard Democrats in 2024 say the economy is fine. It's getting better. We don't have to worry about it. And so they were looking for candidates in that time, Trump,

who were making arguments that identified the pain that they were experiencing and found some sort of solution for it. Now they're hearing Trump say that. Now they have noticed that he is not going to help them at all. He's making their lives a lot worse. And so they're looking for an alternative. And I think that's where some of these insurgent candidates too have come in. But I think an important point there is to note that at no point, even while they were voting for Trump, did these young men, particularly young men of color, identify as MAGA or Republican? They're still overwhelming progressive or democratic or moderate. They just needed a place to land in the last election because they didn't feel like they had a home in the Democratic Party. And so I think what we're seeing is

more and more young people are not identifying cleanly with parties in the way that they have in the past. And so we have to be a little bit more flexible with our messaging and our policy positions. Now, Adam, you had some examples of what Rocheon was talking about in your book. Can you share some of those? Yeah, that's right. I mean, I think the overarching frame here is that the defining feature of the American people is their ideological heterodoxy, right? The American voters are not rigidly ideological. And so they don't take all their positions from the left or the right. You know, they mix things from column A and column B. And so when you've seen candidates who've been successful, especially in resisting attacks as being socialist or Republican smears, it's because they

mix those positions together and convey this heterodoxy that connects with the American people and makes people think, oh, when you face a tough decision, you're going to be an independent thinker thinker, you're a different kind of Democrat, you're going to think like me. And so, you know, when you look around the country now that candidates who are succeeding in some of these redder areas, people like James Talleyco are mixing in non-traditional democratic positions with their sort of liberal values. So Tala RICO running in Texas is talking about how valuable the oil and gas industry is to the Texas economy. It supports hundreds of thousands of working class jobs, hundreds of thousands of working class Hispanic men, you know, are employed by the oil and gas industry.

And so, you know, for a candidate like him who clearly is deeply committed to liberal values, if you're going to win in a state like Texas, you've got to mix in some of those heterodox positions. And that's part of why I think we're seeing him succeed. So, I mean, one of the things that's really isn't usually a top concern for voters, but like we talked about, support for Israel and taking money from APEC is still really dividing Democrats. You just saw this vote in the House, which was unprecedented, I think. Even if it's not voters' top concern like the economy, talk about the role of the issue of support of Israel is playing now on the campaign trail?

I think it's twofold. One is that it's a moral litmus test, especially for young voters, but even for older voters too, the sense that can you call a spade a spade, can you call what we are seeing in Gaza a genocide as it so clearly is? Can you see the atrocity and can you name it? And I think for younger voters in particular, that kind of moral clarity is necessary. The second is the way that APEC is trying to buy elections speaks to the larger problem of money in politics for people feeling like their voice can be drowned out by amount of money that feels undemocratic and unfair. I think APEC has become the boogeyman for that, but they are not alone here. We're seeing that from crypto. We're seeing that from tech. I think Elon Musk has

$90 million in right now. Yeah, them, the gambling, but I think the combination of the moral clarity around the issue and the money being spent that is so clearly removed from where the American people are, which I think is also the challenge here. We'll be back in a minute. Support for the show comes from Grooons. Summer can disrupt our routines with busy weekends that are full of travel and events, and with everything going on, it can be hard to remember to stick to your wellness habits. Well, Grooons is one of the wellness habit you don't have to think about.

It can be the easiest, tastiest part of your busy schedule. Grooons are a convenient, comprehensive formula in one delicious daily pack of gummy bears. This isn't a multivitamin, a greens gummy, or a prebiotic. It's all of these things, and then some are a fraction of the price. and it tastes great. They're able to pack in 20 vitamins and minerals in a daily pack with 60 ingredients, all of which include nutrient dense and whole foods. A Gruen's pack also contains six grams of prebiotic fiber. To help you visualize it, that's equivalent to more than two cups of broccoli. Groon's ingredients are backed by over 35,000 research publications. You can't fit the amount of nutrients

Grooens does into one daily gummy, which is why it comes in a pack. Save 52% off with the code Kara at Groo.co. That's code Kara, Kare. A-A-A-R-U-N-S dot CO. The Hulu original series Furious is coming to Disney Plus, starring Emmy Rossum. Furious follows FBI agent Alice Black on the hunt for a mysterious and calculating serial killer. Both walk their own paths toward justice, and as their lives start to intertwine, the line between right and wrong begins to blur. Don't miss the three-episode premiere of the Hulu original series Furious. on July 27th, only on Hulu on Disney Plus.

The first ever all-electric 2026 Subaru Trail Seeker is the EV for the Trail Obsessed, with up to 444 kilometers on a full charge and DC fast charging from 10 to 80% in about 30 minutes in ideal conditions. Plus, ample ground clearance and symmetrical all-wheel drive make the 2026 Trail Seeker the most capable EV Subaru has ever built.

Test drive it at your local, Subaru dealer or visit Subaru.ca. We're just a few months out from the midterms. The Democrats are going to have to figure out how to navigate these divides in real time if they want to retake power in Congress. Most people feel they have a lock on the House, we'll see.

Senate is in play. I think that's probably the fairest way to say it. But the big fears of Democrats are facing a moment like the Republicans did in 2010 and 2012 during the Tea Party wave when unqualified or just bad candidates cost them a Senate majority. Although 2010 was still a wave election for Republicans.

let's be clear. And when you're looking at, how can Democrats avoid that same fate between now and November? Although I think the Canada quality is pretty high from what I'm looking around the country. Yeah, I mean, you know, I live through those elections, candidates like Christine O'Donnell in Delaware, who famously had to run an ad saying I'm not a witch, you know, losing it, well, which should have been a winnable seat for Republicans because she beat Mike Castle. Being a witch today might win you a seat, but go ahead. That's true. Times change. You know, she should, hey, she should make another run. You know, so right. So, right. So we, we, we, We don't have anybody that's that bad in terms of candidate quality.

But I think, you know, this is why we really got to hone in on questions of electability. We only have a few primaries left. And I really genuinely believe that any of the major candidates in any of these primaries we have left on the Senate side can win, right? Especially in an environment that is really strong up for us on the fundamentals. People are deeply upset about Trump. They're really angry. They hate the economy. All that makes for a good midterm for Democrats.

We just have to get really smart and not let these – people need to be more focused on winning an election than winning. an argument. And if Abdul El-Said is the nominee, his job is to beat Mike Rogers the Republican, right? And put that first above everything else, even if it means conceding some issues on factional purity, you got to focus on winning. It would be not in his interest or the interest of his faction for him to lose. So everybody's just got to get really smart as we turn into general election season and focus on winning. And I think we don't have any candidates who are incapable of doing that as long as they put beating the Republican over winning these factional arguments. Amanda, does money play as big a role? Do you think there is a

enormous, I mean, Ken Griffin, Elon, the tech people are putting a lot in. Trump has some slush fund. Is that going to make a difference? It didn't make a difference in Wisconsin when Elon tried to get those judges put in, and it didn't make a difference for Tom Steyer in California, for example. I think money matters to the extent that candidates and their outside partners have the ability to run strong campaigns. I do not think you can buy elections the way that you used to. I think it is much, much harder to make the case that simply outspending your opponent will guarantee an outcome. I think especially in this election where Democrats and Democratic voters will ready to crawl over broken glass to vote, and their job is going to be convinced Republican voters that Trump's not on the ballot. You may not love the economy right now. You're sort of souring on this, but still show up. It's just a much harder case to make. I don't know if there's enough money that can sell a shitty product. I would add, too, that voters are a lot more skeptical of information that we're feeding them these days with the rise of AI and information coming on social media. they want to know who is responsible for the message

and why they're spending all of this money on political ads. And we hear that so often in focus groups when we test messages, when we test ads, when we test content, who's responsible for this? What's their angle? And so I think voters are a lot more skeptical when they look at the amount of money that's being spent in politics now.

Absolutely. So a lot more progressive candidates for campaigning on the message abolish ICE. A poll in March showed about half voters support the idea. I think it's higher now, and we just saw two more fatal shootings this month. It looks like it's animating a lot of voters. Is that the case? And, Roshney, you first, what are your surveys revealed about ice enforcement as a vehicle?

And then Amanda and Adam, please weigh in? I think voters hold a very nuanced view on this, actually, in the same way that they do around the slogan, defund the police. They very much are supportive of having some. sort of immigration enforcement mechanism in the country, but they are very, very unsupportive of the actions that Trump's ICE is taking in murdering Americans and forcing people into camps and kicking people out of the country. They do not like the way that ICE is operating. I think this is especially true among Latino communities right now and why he's losing so much ground that he gained in the last election among Latino communities. They are seeing their

neighbors and their friends and family being targeted. And so voters do hold a nuanced view in this. And I think running on the idea of abolishing or reforming ICE as a popular position for candidates now. Amanda? I totally agree. I also think this is one of those places where the Democratic Party leadership's failure to show sufficient anger really matters. Like Chris Van Hollen traveling to El Salvador and like putting his body on the line or even Bradlander doing the same in New York, Some of it is performative, but voters want to see that you're validating their feelings, that this is an atrocity, that this is horrific, that they should not be able to murder people in the streets. I also think the flip is also true, which is that voters have seen now over the last 18 months, totally ordinary people stand up against ICE in a way that I think is deeply inspiring. and in some ways restores some faith in the American people and in this idea that, like, you could be responsible for your neighbor that while our elites and our billionaires have been deeply cowardly, ordinary Americans have been incredibly brave.

So watching our leadership fail gives them an opportunity to rise. Yeah, I think we did a poll at Searchlight after the shooting in Minnesota. And it showed two things. One was that ICE was unpopular. The other was that people still wanted interior. enforcement of our immigration laws, right? And so however you message it, you have to make clear. And what people are saying is, you know, not like this, right? They want interior enforcement, but they don't, they're horrified, rightly so, by what they're seeing. So they want enforcement that abides by the rule of the law that treats people humanely, that isn't pulling people out of cars and certainly isn't shooting them in the head, you know, for just trying to get out of the way.

So that's the line that Democrats have to walk, where, you know, they should absolutely be harsh and their criticism of these atrocities that we're seeing and this incredibly reckless approach to interior enforcement while still making clear that we are a nation of laws and we do need interior enforcement of our immigration laws. It just has to be humane and it has to abide by the rule of law. Yeah, it's interesting because I do think it's a communications issue. There was a really interesting video,

some guy going on about what happened in Maine, a Mainer. And he's like, well, if it was in this country legally, he's in trouble, da-da. And then the guy was like, well, you know, he was in this country legally. And he goes, oh. And he goes, and he was just trying to leave. Oh, and he had all his papers right. Oh. And it was so interesting to watch in real time, this guy who was very loudmouth, shift rather quickly.

He was actually shifting. It was an interesting moment to watch. Real-time persuasion, you know? Right. It's amazing to see. Now, you all have two more questions. You all talked about the need to prioritize winning over ideological purity. But some of these progressive candidates, as they're pivoting to the general, how can they appeal to a broader electorate without compromising?

so much that they no longer seem genuine, especially in purple states and districts. I'd love each of you to answer it. Then I have one final question. You know, I think keeping it focused on the problems you want to solve and like speaking from a place of values, understanding that if you are clear about what your goal is, there's a lot of different ways to get at that goal. And that's, that's kind of what the policy conversation is about is we can all agree that everyone should have access to affordable health care. What are the different ways we can get there? And when candidates have a strong sense of values and of what they believe, the conversation about tactics and how you communicate that is much easier.

I think candidates get screwed and we see them fail at this when their campaign or themselves have to spend time figuring out what is it, I believe, as opposed to how do I communicate what I believe? Adam? Yeah, I think part of being authentic is saying what you believe and most people don't hold ideas that are consistent with an ideology on every single. topic, right? And so liberals are going to have mostly liberal views, and that's great, and that's what the role we play in this system. But they probably have a few things that they believe personally

that does diverge a little bit from sort of leftist purity tests. And they should just say that too, right? So that's part of what's being authentic means is saying all the things you believe out loud. And that's the right balance for a general election where, you know, you're mostly going to agree with the left, but on a few things, you're going to have an independent point of view. And that is authentic because it's what you believe. And it also demonstrates to general election voters and swing voters who might have voted for Trump last time that you're going to be someone who thinks for themselves and who's going to be guided by your own core values and commitments, not by a rigid ideology. And I also think outreach for candidates is paramount, making sure that they are speaking

to voters where they are, addressing the issues that are important to them and coming in at the level that they understand those issues. I mean, for example, Mom Donnie, in New York, AAPI voters had been voting more and more Republican over the course of the last few years. And Mamdani, in the general election, drove AAPI turnout higher than it has been in New York City in years, and actually got 87% of the South Asian vote in New York City, which is much more than Democratic candidates have been getting over the last few years. So having an authentic candidate and then having a candidate that is willing to go into their communities and authentically speak to their issues and problem solved with them, is the key there.

Yeah, yeah, I had suggested to a presidential candidate. I'm like, go where they are, not where you are. Like, they were in Nantucket. And I was like, leave Nantucket immediately. As we head into the 2008 presidential election, the eventual Democratic nominee is going to have to appeal to both sides of this divide and the broader electorate to win back the White House. Is this the start of a serious alignment for the party

or just another cyclical swing to the left that could prove politically costly like it was for Vice President Kamala Harris in 2024? I think this is an opportunity to build a lasting realignment and dominate not just the next election, but the next generation for Democrats. And I think it requires us to make some smart choices starting now with the midterms and going into 2028. I have this book coming out called Supermajority, and the idea is that this is what we need to think.

We need to think about how to build a supermajority and reject these narrow majorities that we've been trapped in for the last 10 years or so. And that means thinking about how to win in places like Nebraska and Texas and Ohio and the Dakotas where Democrats used to hold Senate seats. And if we make the choices we need to do that, we can build durable power that's not just going to swing back and forth because you can't, you know, everybody here wants to pass big, ambitious change. But you really can't do it on narrow majorities. I'd be the first to say we should eliminate the filibuster in the Senate.

My first book was about that. You know, we should definitely get rid of it. but you're going to need large Senate majorities to pass big ambitious bills and to reshape the courts, which are going to strike down anything we pass if we don't reshape them anyway, right? So we need to be smart and thoughtful about this and say, look, we will accept divergence from purity test, especially in purple and red states because the cost benefit is a no-brainer. And we need to be smart and strategic, starting now with these midterms, but taking that mindset forward into 2028 as we think about how to beat Republicans and win back the White House.

Roshney? At a base level, the Democratic Party brand is wildly unpopular right now. So it is ripe for a realignment and to start from the beginning. And all of the populace and progressive policies that we've been discussing over the last hour are wildly popular, not only with progressive self-proclaimed progressives, but also with moderates and independence and even some right-leaning voters. And so to build that big tent back for the Democratic Party, I think it is time for the that realignment. Amanda? I don't know if any of your listeners are romance novel readers, but there's a trope in romance novels about the looks like a cinnamon roll but could actually kill you of like the nice guy with like a little bit, a little bit mean. I think that's where the Democratic Party is going in the sense that I suspect after this cycle, we are going to be looking for a national leader who is both like kind and earnest and optimistic and imagines a world that is better, but also tough on accountability.

and is not going to mess around with holding Trump and the Republican Party accountable for what has been done. And the winning candidates, sort of winning part of the party that can combine those two things is going to be the part that moves us forward. All right, then I can't resist. Who's your cinnamon roll? And who is Adam and who is yours, Rosh? Oh, I think there's, I think Aosov has certainly got it. I think AOC's got it if she wants it. I think Warnock, Loki is a sleeper. He's got it if he wants it. There's lots of variations of cinnamon rolls with a little bit of could actually, kill you underneath. Adam? I'm shaking my head because those are literally the three that I would name. I mean, I think all of the emergency. I would also add, I would not be shocked if there's a total outsider candidate who takes us all by surprise and swoops in with that outsider energy, given how much

passion there is for that right now. Hmm. Anyone you can think of? You know, someone like Mark Cuban from the, from the who has a business background, but deeply held liberal principles. He's not right. Just so you know. Okay, well, that's, hey, that's news. You know, this is me just sort of fantasizing, but, you know, I saw Matthew Bacconahe, you know, getting in on the action a little bit with the 250th anniversary. He's shown interest in politics occasionally. Can I give you some advice? Go listen to my interview with him and then you'll change your mind. Okay, I'll do that right after this.

Well, you know, but someone like that, I think, who's sort of, you know, comfortable in their own skin, good on social media, you know, but has a commitment to the American values and wants to do more. You know, we'll see. We'll see. Yeah. Roche, you finish. I mean, I very much agree with the list of those three. And I think those are the three names that we hear voters bring up most often in focus groups as well when we ask who are candidates who are working for you right now. We hear those three names pop up a lot of Georgia in there.

A lot of cinnamon rolls from Georgia. All right. Thank you three all so much. I had him, Amanda, and Rocheney for being here today. I really appreciate it. Thank you. Thanks for having us. Thanks.

Today's show was produced by Michelle Aloy, Catherine Millsopp, Madeline LaPlante Duvie, Megan Barney, and Kaylin Lynch. Nishat Kirwa is Vox Media's executive producer of podcasts. Special thanks to Aiman Whalen, Dave Shaw, Corinne Ruff, and Julius Sharp Levine. Our engineers are Fernando Aruta and Rick Kwan, and our theme music is by Trackademics. If you're already following the show, you are not a witch, or maybe you are. If not, you're part of the establishment. So you need to go. Actually, where you need to go is wherever you listen to podcast, search for On with Caroswisher, and hit follow.

Thanks for listening to On With Caro Swisher from Podium. Media, New York Magazine, the Vox Media Podcast Network, and us. We'll be back on Thursday with more.