US Democrats’ internal battles
The future of the US Democratic Party resides in the current trends.
As is the case for all democratic politics, parties that fail to take control of the government need to recoup from their loss and start looking forward not just for who could lead the party in the future, but what the broader organization stands for.
The same is true of the Democratic Party following Kamala Harris’ loss to Donald Trump in November 2024. The loss was not a normal one: not only did Trump win all seven critical swing states—Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia, North Carolina, Arizona, and Nevada—but almost all states saw a rightward shift compared to the 2020 election. To add insult to injury, the GOP saw massive gains in the House and Senate, giving the Republican Party total control of the government, the first time since 2019.
As such, the 2024 election proved disastrous not just for Kamala Harris, but for the Democratic Party as a whole. Vocal dissent against the party launched almost immediately from Democratic voters, liberals, and leftists.
Adding further flames to the fire, Democratic elected officials have smelt blood and have begun their own attacks against party leadership. Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) has led this charge for nearly a decade now, while increasingly vocal representatives such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D NY-14) have been providing backup. In a particularly intense situation, in response to 7 Democratic Senators voting to reopen the Government in late November, Congressman Ro Khanna (D CA-17) became the first democratic elected official to call on Democratic Senate Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) to resign.
Larger officials have also been throwing their hats in the ring. California’s Governor Gavin Newsom—who has been polling well as the Democratic presidential nominee for 2028—responded to news of the end of the shutdown by tweeting one word: pathetic.
This is all to say that the Democratic Party has been consumed by an internal battle since the 2024 loss. While one side of this conflict is made up of several factions including social democrats, neo-liberals, progressives, socialists, and economic conservatives, they have managed to temporarily unite by bashing Senatorial and executive leadership. Although his popularity remains poor, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D NY-8) has managed to escape a vocal uprising, likely attributable to his surprisingly highly effective effort in uniting House Democrats in critical votes. Additionally, with poor handling of immigration, the Epstein Files, tariffs, and foreign policy, House Democrats are poised to claim a decisive majority in the 2026 midterm elections.
This isn’t to say the House Democrats have not been facing their challenges. The unexpected ascension of democratic-socialist Zohran Mamdani in New York has given new life to progressives and fueled a new wave of challenges to Democratic leadership.
Shortly after Mamdani’s win in early November, NYC Comptroller Brad Lander announced he was running against establishment candidate Dan Goldman (D NY-10). The primary—which is taking place on the 23rd of June—is looking to be an intense showdown within the party, as Jeffries, alongside New York’s Governor Kathy Hochul have backed Goldman, while Lander is receiving immense support for AOC, Mamdani, Sanders, and Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA). For all the general success seen in the House, however, the Senate has failed to follow suit, with Senators failing to unite, and Republicans still projected to hold onto their majority.
Looking at a presidential ticket, polling indicates that the Democrats are failing to have a comfortable lead over otherwise unpopular GOP candidates like JD Vance. It, therefore, makes sense that most of the battles occurring within the party are spearheaded in the upper chambers of Congress and the White House.
The structure of the Senate makes it difficult for the Democrats to win enough seats to truly have a decisive majority over the Republicans. Unlike the House, the Senate lacks absolute democratic legitimacy, in that every state has the same number of Senators (2). Therefore, despite having a vastly larger population, states like California, New York, and Massachusetts have the same number of Senators as smaller states like Wyoming, Montana, and the Dakotas. As such, the literal number of states a party can win is the decider in who controls the Senate—and since the majority of the South, rust-belt, biblebelt, and mid-west votes Republican downticket—the Democrats struggle to really seize power.
Furthermore, the Democrats need to win 51 seats rather than 50, as all tie-breakers are decided by the Vice-President. This is not to say, however, that Democrats should abandon trying to take control of the Senate; the filibuster still exists which requires 60 votes, and the Democrats do not need a majority to exert political leverage. The very few number of Senators allows each individual to carry a great degree of political power, making an uprising incredibly difficult. It would seem unlikely that a serious challenge to Chuck Schumer would come in a primary rather than a direct challenge to his leadership position. Even relevant Senators, like Mark Kelly (D-AZ), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), or Tim Kaine (D-VA) who carry disproportionate power, have not been vocal against current leadership. With that being said, an extremely vocal candidate in Chris van Hollen (D-ML) has been more critical of Democratic leadership and may seek a direct challenge in the near future. When all is said and done, however, the Senate looks like it will remain more or less the same until Schumer’s resignation.
In contrast to the Senate, the presidency is an area where immense debate remains. While large battles are currently ongoing, we are noticing that Democratic voters and analysts see where things currently stand. In the long run and short of it, the establishment candidates are still leading.
Despite underperforming in 2020 and disastrously losing in 2024, Kamala Harris remains the top pick. Newsom trails close behind, and Pete Butteigeig—Joe Biden’s transportation minister—stays in contention.
But, are establishment candidates the bright future the democrats need? From what we have seen, the answer should be a decisive no. While current leadership has reached new lows, progressive and populist candidates have popped up with remarkable support.
The issues people are concerned about also matter. As a younger generation submerges itself into political discourse, issues like Israel’s brutal extermination of the Palestinians and Congress’s willingness to back it have become a matter of deep concern for young voters and how authentic they view their politicians. Immigration and housing are important issues, and legacy Democrats have failed to boost their own messaging, instead capitulating to Republican xenophobia.
Not only do voters deserve better than what they’ve gotten, but the Democrats need to set someone effective up for a 2028 run, lest they want a more competent Trumpian figure to win 8 years from now.
