Copyright Salt Lake City Deseret News
Were the results of Tuesday’s elections hints of a mounting radicalization among Democrats likely to turn off future voters or a hopeful indicator of future Democratic victories amid the public’s continuing economic worries? Noting a widespread desire to make Zohran Mamdani’s victory in the New York mayor’s race “mean something beyond New York,” David Wallace-Wells acknowledged in The New York Times that we all see through a glass darkly: “Is this the arrival of a progressive Tea Party? The return of the Bernie Sanders surge and squad years? A repudiation of the Democratic Party’s cautious moderation in the run-up to the 2024 presidential election (and even more emphatically in the aftermath)? Or something else altogether new?” “Off-year elections are never quite the crystal ball for midterms that political junkies want,” cautioned David A. Graham in The Atlantic, before highlighting one point that did seem clear this week: “Democrats won up and down the ballot yesterday, riding a backlash to Donald Trump’s second term.” Washington Post commentator Henry Olsen, who lectures at Hillsdale College, agreed that from a GOP perspective, “the message that voters delivered Tuesday on the first year of Trump’s second term certainly was not good.” Here are some prominent national appraisals of the election results Tuesday, with an eye on what they might mean for the political horizon. ‘Democrats start their comeback’ In an article entitled, “Democrats Start Their Comeback,” the Wall Street Journal editorial board characterized the election as a “warning for the GOP” especially when it comes to “affordability and Trump’s unpopularity.” “President Trump rolled to victory in 2024 promising to reduce inflation and make middle-class life more affordable,” they recapped. “The warning to Republicans in Tuesday’s election results is that Democrats are turning the tables on affordability, especially when they steer clear of leftist cultural snares.” Their warning continued: “If Democrats can convince voters they’re a better bet for getting ahead economically, the GOP is in trouble in 2026. President Trump’s tariffs aren’t helping. Neither is the 3% inflation still eating away at the earnings and the raises of American workers.” Citing worrisome exit polls in New Jersey and Virginia in terms of Trump’s dropping popularity, the paper proclaimed, “The era of MAGA triumphalism should be over.” “Republicans need to take this rebuke seriously and literally,” Olsen repeated in The Washington Post, citing the surprisingly large margin of victory in otherwise predictable Democratic wins in Virginia and New Jersey. “It would also help if Trump paid more conspicuous attention to the cost of living and other domestic economic matters,” he added. In an article entitled, “The Anti-MAGA Majority Reemerges,” David Graham suggested the strong Democratic showing gives “some reason to doubt Trump’s claim that his 2024 victory was ‘a historic realignment’ of American politics.” CNN commentator Van Jones likewise argued, “Independents gave Donald Trump a shot. …The Latin community gave him a shot. …Black men gave Trump a shot,” before suggesting poll numbers confirm they have “come back home” due to “buyer’s remorse.” “People are sick of the status quo. That’s why they voted for Trump the first time. That’s why they voted him out the second time, that’s why they voted him back in. People want change, and Donald Trump said he was going to do something about grocery prices. He’s done everything but (that); he’s putting in gold toilets in the White House.” Signs of a more divisive Democratic future? “These are blue states that Democrats were supposed to win,” CNN commentator Scott Jennings said, pushing back on liberal giddiness about Tuesday’s results, “so I wouldn’t overread it.” Jennings went on to characterize Mamdani’s victory speech as “divisive,” suggesting that the new mayor of New York “clearly sees the world in terms of the people who are oppressing you and the oppressed.” “He went after everybody that he thinks is a problem: people who own things, people who have businesses” — drawing attention to one line in his speech that stood out: “there is no problem too large for government to solve, and no concern too small for it to care about.” “When you think of the world that way,” Jennings continued, “that every problem, no matter how small or how large, is something for government to do, let me just decipher this for you: Tax increases as far as the eye can see, which means that people who need to provide jobs to the young people that you say need jobs are going to flee as quickly as they possibly can.” About the victory speech, CNN commentator Van Jones agreed with his right-leaning counterpart: “I think he missed an opportunity. I think the Mamdani that we saw in the campaign trail, who was a lot more calm, who was a lot warmer, who was a lot more embracing, was not present in that speech.” Calling this change in tone a “character switch,” Jones continued: “I think he missed a chance tonight to open up and bring more people into the tent. I think his tone was sharp. I think he was using the microphone in a way that he was almost yelling.” Could Mamdani prove useful for Republicans? There are other reasons Republicans may be excited about Mayor Mamdani. “Mamdani is the foil Trump wants,” Jonathan Lemire wrote in The Atlantic. “Prepare to hear a lot about New York’s new mayor.” Remarking on how Mamdani had “thrilled” young voters on the campaign trail, he argued that “perhaps no one was more delighted by his election than President Donald Trump.” Despite Trump’s final-hour endorsement of former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, Lemire suggested the president sees the new mayor “as an effective foil” in the year leading up to midterm elections. “Even some who admired Mamdani’s campaign,” he continued, “were fearful that he would be elevated by Republicans as the face of the left, proof that Democrats were far too liberal for average Americans.” But is it ideology or tone Americans are more focused on? And would this contrast in personalities really go in Republicans’ favor as they hope? Time will tell. Referring to Mamdani’s Trump references in his victory speech, Graham highlighted “the contrast between the young, cheerful immigrant and aging, cranky nativist president was unmissable.” Wallace-Wells likewise wrote that, in online videos, “Mamdani’s haters have presented him as a destructive radical already in over his head. But in his real-life suit and smile, he looks the part of an eager-beaver student council president.” A model for winning future elections? Noting the “social-media-savvy, say-yes-to-every-interview approach” to Mamdani’s campaign, Lemire added that this “feels like a model for other ambitious Democrats.” “Young voters came out in huge numbers, early-voting totals exploded, and the overall turnout was the highest for a mayor’s race in more than 50 years,” Lemire said. “A wave of Mamdani-inspired candidates across the country is betting that class warfare and political progressivism can finally beat the Democratic establishment,” Jonas Du writes in a Free Press article entitled, “Meet the Socialists Following Mamdani’s Lead.” “When it comes to the future of the Democratic Party, the question is whether Mamdani’s win is an anomaly or a sign of things to come. Across America, a slate of progressive and socialist candidates are trying to prove it is the latter.” Yet Mamdani’s victory wasn’t the only clue to Democrats’ political futures, with more centrist Democratic governors winning handily in Virginia and New Jersey as well. The Wall Street Journal described this as a “potential silver lining” in the election results, namely that “Democrats can see a model of electoral success that isn’t rooted in radicalism.” “Democrats have two distinct models of winners tonight,” summed David Chalian, CNN’s Washington Bureau Chief, highlighting strong victories by both moderate centrists and left wing candidates. “The intra party conversation about the path forward for Democrats will continue, but it will do so with a real shot in the arm of competence.”
