In a rare moment of thoughtful reflection, ‘small government’ conservative pundits now acknowledge there was a never a massive wave of support for the Tea Party and their ilk. Voters wanted the loudest anti-Obama voice in the room, and the Tea Party delivered.
This history haunts me when I hear pundits call the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) the ‘Tea Party of the Left.’
But that’s not quite what pundits mean when the make the accusation. We’ll start with their actual meaning before moving on to the far more concerning reality.
The Tea Party of the Left?
Leave it to Bloomberg to publish the claim that DSA is the Tea Party of the Left. Or, for that matter, leave it to Axios, which never tires of its intellectually respectable brand of shit-stirring. They’re hardly alone.
Many – especially those within the Democratic Party fold – use the comparison to put DSA down. They see it as an ideologically rigid force that harms the Democratic Party with the electorate outside of deep blue districts. And these are the districts DSA House candidates seek to represent – and will represent in January 2027.
It’s not a difficult theory to understand. And few articulate it more clearly than South Carolina Democrat James Clyburn after the 2020 election. He attributed Democratic underperformance in Congressional districts to the slogan ‘defund the police.’ He believed this slogan alienated otherwise winnable moderate and independent voters.
The ‘Tea Party of the Left’ label draws on the same ideas. And it fails for the same reasons.
Why the Argument Fails
For all Clyburn’s intuitiveness, there’s little evidence in the claim’s favor, and there are plenty of alternative explanations for Democratic underperformance.
For one, Joe Biden was a deeply uninspiring candidate with no coattails. He ran a stripped down campaign from his basement in the face of his age and the Covid pandemic. He won due not to his own efforts but rather Trump’s massive unpopularity. It’s likely anyone with a D next to their name would’ve defeated Trump in 2020.
By contrast, the GOP ran a full campaign. It wasn’t enough to overcome Trump’s unpopularity, but it was enough to bag some seats down ballot. ‘Defund the police’ played no role in any of that. Clyburn merely showed moderate glibness.
This moderate glibness carries into 2026. Far from being ideologically rigid, DSA is one of the most ideologically diverse political organizations in the U.S. It’s far more diverse than either the Democratic or Republican Party.
DSA identifies as a ‘big tent’ organization that brings together people across the political left. Its politics run from liberal and progressive Democrats on the right to communists and anarchists on the left. This goes all the way from a redistributive liberalism that Elizabeth Warren would recognize to a fundamental restructuring of American life.
Neither Democrats nor Republicans have anywhere near this much ideological diversity. Most Democrats haven’t voted for someone who sharply disagree with them. Ever. DSA members do this regularly. The claims of Clymer or pundits about DSA rigidity are false, at best, and psychological projection, at worst.
Democrats looking to explain their party’s electoral problems should look elsewhere. A good first step? They should examine their party’s relentless focus on issues that don’t motivate voters and their failure to adopt popular policies that address the failures of neoliberal capitalism.
An Actual Concern
And yet, the DSA House primary wins feel tentative. I can’t shake the thought that there’s a sense in which DSA could be the Tea Party of the Left.
It’s not the sense that pundits talk about.
DSA candidates won their 2026 primaries, in large part, because they were the loudest anti-Trump voices in the room. Their politics are popular, particularly when they advocate social democratic ideas like Medicare for All. But DSA is nowhere near the point of building the broad, social democratic, working class coalition it seeks to build. In 2026, it’s punching well above its weight by pitching itself as the most anti-Trump faction.
This leaves it vulnerable.
There’s nothing wrong with taking advantage of an opportunity. But there’s a risk in it for DSA. And that’s especially true in 2026. The Democratic Party is likely to win the 2028 presidential election. Once that happens, the anti-Trump anger will recede, and complacency will set in. These new DSA members of Congress risk becoming as vulnerable as Jamaal Bowman and Cori Bush. The risk of backlash grows.
To fight against this requires DSA to not just build membership but to genuinely grow. We have to grow in the sense that we educate our new members and the broader public. At all steps, we must prepare DSA to not only take advantage of opportunities, but also to strengthen ourselves even for lean times.
Leave a Reply