Being anti-Trump is no longer a winning strategy — and his political foes are facing that harsh truth

Last week, the socialist wing of the Democratic Party notched another win when Melat Kiros defeated the almost 30-year incumbent Rep. Diana Degette in the primary for Colorado’s 1st congressional district.

It became the third successful primary challenge to an incumbent Democrat in two weeks.

The week before, progressives notched two victories against incumbent Democrats in New York: former comptroller Brad Lander beat Rep. Dan Goldman in the 10th district and Darializa Avila Chevalier defeated Rep. Adriano Espaillat in the 13th district.

A lot has been made about what this means for the ascendant far-left wing of the Democratic Party and what it means for Democrats’ electoral prospects. It also raises questions about whether support for Israel is viable in the Democratic Party after some voters believe Biden’s support for Israel’s war in Gaza cost Kamala Harris the election.

But perhaps the most surprising part was that all three of the incumbents had solid anti-Trump credentials. Goldman largely won his primary in 2022 not just because of a split field and his being an heir to the Levi Strauss fortune, but he also had massive name identification after he served as lead counsel for Trump’s first impeachment.

Degette, a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, served as an impeachment manager in the Senate for his second impeachment after Jan. 6. And Espaillat, as chairman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, had come under fire by Republicans, who called him an “illegal” because of his past immigration status.

The message is clear: being anti-Trump will not be enough to save a candidate, even an incumbent, in 2026.

There are multiple reasons for this, but perhaps the biggest one is that despite these efforts to take on Trump during the heady days of his first presidency, not only did he survive both of his impeachment trials; he returned to office with a Republican Party much more in thrall to him than in the second presidency.

That makes the previous efforts to impeach Trump feel a little more hollow.

Understandably, the primary challenges to incumbents in New York and Colorado naturally made people think that support for Israel is now politically toxic. That’s becoming increasingly true. An Economist/YouGov poll shows that 64 percent of self-identified Democrats support reducing military aid to Israel.

In Michigan, Abdul El-Sayed, a progressive, is hoping to topple Rep. Haley Stevens, who has received backing from pro-Israel groups, in the state’s open Senate primary. This comes after Mallory McMorrow dropped out of the race this past weekend.

In Maine, Gov. Janet Mills made her confrontation with Trump that led to a lawsuit a centerpiece of her campaign. But her campaign fizzled out compared to that of insurgent progressive Graham Platner despite Platner’s baggage.

But it’s not the entire story. The same night Avila Chevalier and Lander won their races, George Conway, the former spouse of Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway and co-founder of the Lincoln Project, performed dismally in New York’s 12th district primary. Conway, who jumped from the Republican Party, ran campaign ads focusing on defeating Trump in one of the bluest districts in the country. Micah Lasher, who is Jewish and holds a pretty old-school view on Israel, won his primary.

The same can be said in Maryland’s 5th district, which held its primary the same night. In that race, Harry Dunn, the former U.S. Capitol Police officer who fended off rioters on January 6, placed a distant third. By contrast, Adrian Boafo, whom outgoing Rep. Steny Hoyer backed and who received outside support from pro-Israel groups, won. When Boafo won, the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee congratulated him on social media.

In both of those cases, local ties beat out anti-Trump bona fides.

Of course, running against specific parts of Trump’s policies plays a big role. In Minnesota, Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan has hit Rep. Angie Craig over her past support for Trump’s immigration policies as both compete for the state’s open Senate seat. It has special salience after Immigration and Customs Enforcement all but occupied the state.

But simply opposing Trump or saying he is a unique threat to democracy alone simply does not animate Democratic voters of the moderate or progressive stripe anymore. Opposing Trump didn’t get them anywhere the first time. Democratic voters want to see actual results.