A trio of democratic socialist victories in New York City has deepened the divide within the Democratic Party over its future direction. The wins have pushed long-held tensions into public view, with some in the establishment calling for candidates to stop identifying as Democrats if they detest its leaders.

Establishment vs. Progressives

Former Democratic National Committee Chair Jaime Harrison noted that constant bashing of the party hurts its brand, and there’s a difference between constructive and destructive criticism. He argued that weakening the party ultimately hurts the candidates who will need it to carry their message to the American people.

Progressive Democrats, on the other hand, argue that they are the ascendant wing of the party. Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., said the establishment needs to step aside and make way for a new generation of bold progressive leadership.

Implications for the Party

The latest primary wins have plunged Democrats deeper into a tug-of-war over the direction of their party. The fissures in the party extend beyond progressives versus moderates, with critics of Israel versus supporters, and those who accept corporate money versus those who refuse it.

Rebecca Katz, whose firm has worked with anti-establishment candidates, cautioned against taking too much from the victories in New York City when thinking about the broader party. She noted that voters care about what candidates will do for them, not labels like progressive or centrist.

Joseph Geevarghese, executive director of Our Revolution, was more blunt, saying that the far left is indeed trying to take over the Democratic Party. He argued that the group has cultivated a bench of candidates that is now rising to higher ranks of power.

Original reporting: Dallas TX News (HLL/CB) — read the source article.