The Democratic Party’s big tent has widened this summer as five U.S. House candidates backed by the Democratic Socialists of America won primaries in safely Democratic districts and almost surely will join DSA-endorsed incumbents Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Rashida Tlaib.
Predictably, this development has raised questions regarding how welcoming the Democratic Party establishment should be of the DSA, how reflective the DSA is of the Democratic base, and whether an increasing association with socialism would help or hurt the party in the general election.
A new poll from CBS News and YouGov sheds some light on these and related matters.
On many bread-and-butter issues, we see a lot of common ground between Democrats, independents, liberals, and moderates in support of progressive goals. But when it comes to broader concepts of socialism and capitalism, Democrats and liberals sharply diverge from the rest of the electorate, including the crucial middle. In turn, there’s little reason for the Democratic Party to embrace the socialist label as they pursue progressive policies.
For example, 67 percent of respondents said, “wealthy people in the U.S. pay … less than their fair share,” with big majorities in agreement on the left and center. Only among Republicans and conservatives is support for that belief below 50 percent.
At the same time, majorities say they are “willing” to raise their own taxes when the extra money goes to various progressive priorities. For health care, it’s 65 percent. For education, 62 percent. For food assistance, 60 percent. For housing, 51 percent. In all these areas, Democrats, independents, liberals, and moderates make up the majority, while Republicans and conservatives fall short of 50 percent support.
The numbers reverse when respondents were asked if they are willing to raise their taxes to fund “police and law enforcement,” “border and immigration enforcement,” and “military and defense.” Republicans and conservatives say yes on all three issues (and 51 percent of moderates agree on police), but because Democrats and independents oppose them, that’s not enough to achieve majority support across the electorate.
But that left-center coalition breaks down when asked about socialism and ideological branding.
Only 35 percent overall have a “positive” view of socialism (including 9 percent with a “very positive” view), powered by 71 percent of liberals and 58 percent of Democrats. Support tanks among moderates (32 percent) and independents (36 percent).
Asked if socialist policies would “make your personal economic and financial situation better,” 61 percent of liberals and 52 percent of Democrats agree, but only 26 percent of moderates and 29 percent of independents.
Moreover, while the label “moderate” is treated with scorn by many on the left, it outpolls “progressive.” Asked if “do you think U.S. politics would be better, worse, or the same” with more “moderates” in office, 47 percent said better and only 14 percent said worse. A plurality of 43 percent of liberals agreed. The share among Democrats (50 percent), independents (49 percent), and even Republicans (47 percent) was similar.
Progressive-branded politicians earned a weaker plurality, with 40 percent offering better but 31 percent predicting worse. We see a steep decline in the “better” camp from Democrats to independents, from 66 to 38 percent, and from liberals to moderates, from 73 to 37 percent. (The weakest performer was “MAGA” politicians: only 24 percent of respondents overall believed they would make politics better.)
But the branding is less important than the product. If voters on the left and center largely agree about taxing the rich and paying more taxes in general so we can spend more on health care, education, food aid, and housing, then it shouldn’t matter how such a package of policies is labeled. Just don’t give it an unpopular label like “socialism.”
How can Democrats hold together a center-left coalition? On NBC’s Meet the Press last Sunday, we saw House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries try to articulate areas of common ground while distancing himself and his party from DSA. Asked if “there is room in the Democratic Party, under the tent of the Democratic Party, for democratic socialists?” Jeffries didn’t quite answer directly but did throw an elbow: “I don’t support the DSA agenda as has been articulated by the DSA itself. Now, you’re going to have individual members who have been elected in Democratic primaries and if they are elected in the general in November will be part of the House Democratic Caucus. It’s going to be a broad caucus. There will be progressives. There will be New Dems. There will be Blue Dogs.”
Jeffries was also asked about a position pushed not just by socialists but other progressives: “Would you bring a vote to abolish ICE to the House floor?” You can find polls where the “Abolish ICE” slogan polls well, but such polls often don’t explore if voters really mean ending all immigration law enforcement or replacing ICE with a more humane enforcement operation. However, a Navigator Research poll question from February gave respondents three choices: “abolishing ICE altogether,” “making significant reforms to ICE to put more checks on its power,” or “continuing to operate ICE as it exists today.” The reform option won a 43 percent plurality, with abolition coming in second with 27 percent.
Jeffries’ answer was clearly informed by such data: “First, we need a safe, secure, and strong border. We also need to proceed under the principle that immigration enforcement in this country should be fair, just, and humane. And clearly ICE is completely and totally out of control, which is why Democrats in this Congress haven’t given Donald Trump’s violent mass deportation machine a dime until we actually see dramatic, bold, and transformational reform.” This answer is designed to maintain a center-left coalition, though it requires those on the left-most edge to accept policies short of maximalism.
Jeffries also resisted embracing one of the most deeply held positions on the progressive and socialist left: Medicare for All. Asked if he would schedule a vote on it, Jeffries would only promise to “fight to make health care affordable for every single American,” while acknowledging that “I haven’t cosponsored the Medicare for All legislation that has been introduced over the last several years. I do think we need to figure out how to fix our broken health care system and then build something better once we repair the damage that has been done.”
This answer in particular prompted some incredulous reactions on social media, such as from Zeteo’s Mehdi Hasan, who posted, “The vast majority of Democrats across the country support Medicare for All. This man is so out of touch with his party. How is he their leader??” After all, Sunday’s CBS News/YouGov poll showed that 90 percent of Democrats want their party to “focus on plans for passing Medicare for All.” Independents and Republicans were not asked this question. But past polling shows that while Medicare for All often polls well in a vacuum, support erodes once potential trade-offs are raised, breaking any center-left coalition. In turn, going all in on single-payer health care poses political risk. (That’s why 62 percent of Democrats in the Senate and 46 percent in the House are not Medicare for All co-sponsors.)
While the CBS News/YouGov poll isn’t a comprehensive exploration of every issue and policy nuance, the data strongly suggests a foundation for a durable center-left coalition focused on investing in progressive priorities, welcoming self-described moderates, and eschewing the socialist brand. As the primary season nears its end and we head into the fall campaign, the more Democrats can focus on the vast terrain where liberals and moderates agree, the better off they will be come November.
