SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
our revolution
Majority of Progressive Organizers Want Schumer and Jeffries Replaced With New Leadership
Progressive advocacy group Our Revolution is calling on leadership candidates to "publicly explain how they would use the new majority to challenge corporate influence, lower costs, and deliver for working people."
Nov 09, 2026
With Democrats poised to take over both chambers of the US Congress next year, a majority of progressive organizers are calling for the party to seek new leadership.
A survey of over 4,300 progressive activists released by Our Revolution on Monday shows that there is strong demand among organizers for replacing Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), who are seeking the majority leader and speaker roles.
In total, the survey finds that 72% of activists want a different leader than Schumer, compared to just 5% who say they support him and 22% who say they're willing to see what he delivers.
Support for Jeffries was stronger than for Schumer, although 52% of respondents said they wanted a different leader, with 18% offering full support and 29% taking a wait-and-see approach.
Our Revolution has been calling for "open, competitive leadership elections" for the new Democratic Congress, and is urging prospective candidates to "publicly explain how they would use the new majority to challenge corporate influence, lower costs, and deliver for working people."
Schumer and Jeffries have given no indication that they plan to step back from their ambitions to lead Democrats in Congress, and the two put out a joint statement on Monday outlining their priorities.
"The American people have forcefully rejected MAGA extremism and are demanding dramatic change in their lives," Schumer and Jeffries said. "House and Senate Democrats have been given a clear mandate to aggressively address the affordability crisis, stop the reckless war of choice in Iran, meaningfully expand access to affordable healthcare, and hold the crooks accountable who have unleashed unprecedented corruption on the country."
“A new day is coming on January 3rd," they added. "Democrats are united and ready to lead."
So far, no other Democrats have stepped forward to officially challenge either Schumer or Jeffries. According to a Monday report in Punchbowl News, Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) is opening to challenging Schumer for Senate leadership after receiving "received an outpouring of calls" urging him to do so.
Keep ReadingShow Less
After Blue Tsunami, Progressives Don't Trust Schumer and Jeffries to Lead Congress
"Schumer is bad at his job," said one organizer. "Jeffries is not ready for this moment."
Nov 06, 2026
After a Democratic "tsunami" in this week's midterm elections that has been widely seen as "a mandate to deliver big change," progressives within and beyond Congress have cast doubt on whether the New York Democrats likely to lead both chambers are actually up for facing Republican President Donald Trump's veto threats and fighting for the "bold agenda" sought by US voters.
As critics of artificial intelligence data centers prepared for a Friday protest outside the Brooklyn home of Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer over a "dirty" bill that House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries is suddenly speaking out about, political organizer Corbin Trent argued that "Schumer is bad at his job" and "Jeffries is not ready for this moment."
Although some races haven't yet been called, "Democratic voters, independent voters, and even some Republican voters spoke loudly and clearly: They want this country to go in a different direction," wrote Trent, a former communications director for Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and two-time presidential campaign staffer for Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).
Trent, who also co-founded Justice Democrats and now runs the super political action committee A Fight Worth Having, stressed that "this is an amazing, unprecedented moment in my lifetime. I'm 46 years old, and this is the most hopeful political moment I've ever experienced."
"Democrats have spoken loudly and clearly that they want new leadership. Unfortunately, too many of the people in Washington aren't listening," he added. While Trent and his group are far from alone in calling for new Democratic leadership when the party takes over Congress in January, Schumer and Jeffries are expected to become majority leader and speaker, respectively.
"Do you expect to face any kind of challenge in the election for Senate majority leader?" Michael Barbaro, who hosts The New York Times' podcast The Daily asked Chuck Schumer on Friday. He simply responded, "No."
Schumer ultimately added that "our caucus is focused on moving forward. Everyone's very happy with what we all did. But this is just the beginning. As I said before, and I'll say it again and again to my caucus, to the country, to everybody: If we don't deliver, all this will go away. This is just the first step. But I think we're united together to do that."
He delivered a similar message of unity during a Thursday night appearance on MS NOW, telling host Lawrence O'Donnell that the victorious Democrats—so far the party has 54 seats in the Senate and 253 in the House of Representatives, but those numbers could rise—were "all running on the same basic themes: costs, chaos, corruption."
As both majority and minority leader in recent years, Schumer has faced criticism from the party's left flank—and, as Al Jazeera noted Thursday, at least seven Democratic senators-elect have signaled or outright said they will not support him: Abdul El-Sayed (Mich.), Peggy Flanagan (Minn.), Adam Hamilton (Kan.), Chris Pappas (NH), Juliana Stratton (Ill.), and James Talarico (Texas).
However, as Fox News chief congressional correspondent Chad Pergram explained Friday, basic math and a lack of clear challengers suggest Schumer will win: "The selection of Senate majority leader is not a vote which plays out on the floor. The concept of 'Senate majority leader' has only been around since the early 20th Century and is not mentioned in the Constitution."
"Let's say Democrats do win Mississippi and Alaska, giving them 56 senators who caucus with the Democrats. All Schumer needs is 29 Democrats to support him in caucus, and he's the next majority leader," Pergram wrote on social media.
He noted that other possible contenders are Democratic Sens. Brian Schatz (Hawaii) and Chris Van Hollen (Md.), but the former is running to succeed retiring Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and the latter reportedly isn't seeking the post—though Van Hollen has said publicly that Democrats should demand an ambitious progressive agenda before backing Schumer or anyone else.
"Progressives are flipping Republican seats and winning critical battlegrounds where pundits told us our politics could never compete. Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan. Troy Jackson in Maine. James Talarico in Texas. Sam Forstag in Montana. Randy Villegas in California. Bob Brooks in Pennsylvania," said Joseph Geevarghese, executive director of Our Revolution, which grew out of Sanders' 2016 presidential run. "We gave people something to vote FOR, and they showed up."
"The progressive movement drove this victory. We spent a decade building the infrastructure, developing leaders, and making the argument that brought us here... This is a vindication of our politics and our theory of change: Organized people can beat organized money when we advance an anti-corporate, working-class agenda," he stressed, recalling when "the talking heads, academics, and party establishment scoffed at Bernie Sanders and our movement for talking about oligarchy."
The organizer said that "this was the corruption election. Affordability was central, but people were also asking why life keeps getting more expensive and who keeps cashing in. From AI and data centers to healthcare, Big Pharma, crypto, oil, and the war industry, people want a say over decisions being made at their expense. Corporate control of government is making their lives harder."
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)—which notably congratulated Jeffries and Schumer, who wasn't even on the ballot this cycle, by name on Wednesday—along with GOP megadonor Elon Musk "and other billionaires and corporate interests have poured money into shaping our politics," Geevarghese continued. "Our victories show that their money does not make their agenda inevitable. People can organize, fight back, and win."
In the wake of these victories "powered by a progressive wave," Geevarghese called on Democrats to "use every committee, hearing, and budget negotiation. Follow the contracts and conflicts of interest. Put executives and administration officials under oath. Fight for concrete gains and make Trump answer for what he blocks."
"People need to see Democrats using every bit of power they have to fight for them," he said. "That requires leadership ready to meet the moment. Chuck Schumer should step aside. Bernie Sanders has provided the clarity and urgency a real opposition party needs. Leadership must match that ambition, including by investing in candidates and communities too often written off."
Aru Shiney-Ajay, executive director of the youth-led climate group Sunrise Movement, similarly said in a statement after the midterms that "young people voted for change. We deserve a Senate majority leader who will end the filibuster so we can stop the Iran Oil War, end corporate control of our government, and create good green jobs, not more data centers."
"Young people won't get that with the same old Democratic leadership. Schumer, it's time to put the American people first–commit to ending the filibuster or step aside," Shiney-Ajay added, referring to controversial chamber rules that effectively block legislation unless at least 60 of the 100 senators support advancing it to a final vote.
As for Jeffries, he got "the majority of his dreams," as Axios put it earlier this week. The outlet reported:
The left's strategy is "going to look different from what it would have been with a smaller margin," one incoming House progressive told Axios, noting that "leaders have more flexibility when they have big majorities.
Progressives "can't really extract much now [with this] colossal majority," a progressive strategist acknowledged, adding that "we don't have to do this high-stakes Jeffries fight."
Although Jeffries is on track to secure the role, there are calls for him to not be the next speaker. Nearly 900,000 people have signed a related Change.org petition, Nicole Whitted, an author and social media creator who receives compensation in connection with the effort.
"After historic wins on Tuesday, I believe the Democratic Party and our country as a whole is at a crossroads," Whitted told Newsweek. "My opposition to Hakeem Jeffries is about more than any single policy disagreement. It's about real leadership that aligns with today's Democratic voter, real accountability, and whether the party is genuinely listening to the voters demanding change."
In anticipation of Jeffries serving as speaker, the outlet Sludge examined his "financial backing from executives at Anduril and Palantir, cryptocurrency industry interests, and major Wall Street investors—business interests with a stake in how aggressively the new majority pursues corporate beneficiaries of Trump's presidency."
In response to that reporting, Melanie D'Arrigo, executive director of the pro-single-payer Campaign for New York Health, said that "you can't lead the opposition party while being bankrolled by the opposition. This should not be a controversial take."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Not Counting on Blue Tsunami Predictions, Progressives Go Big for Final 'Get Out the Vote' Push
One progressive organizer said that with a strong showing on Tuesday, “we’re going to be the center of gravity."
Nov 02, 2026
New polling data out Monday suggests a "blue tsunami" could be coming in this week's midterms, with Democrats holding leads in seven competitive US Senate races.
The polling, from The New York Times/Siena, showed Democratic candidates with solid leads in marquee races in Michigan, Maine, and Texas, ahead in states once thought to be unreachably red, including Ohio and Kansas, and narrowly ahead in Alaska and Iowa, with those advantages falling within the margin of error.
Astonishingly, this data may actually understate Democratic support—as the Times' chief political analyst, Nate Cohn, explained Monday, the paper changed its methodology to correct for undercounting Trump voters in presidential elections, potentially overcorrecting in a midterm when those voters are less likely to turn out.
If that’s the case, it may point to a clobbering of epic proportions, with states like Florida and Nebraska, and potentially even Louisiana and Mississippi, within reach, and the Democrats potentially coming away with large majorities in both chambers of Congress.
The sky may be the limit for Democrats on Tuesday. But the candidates, organizers, and leaders from the nation's progressive movement are taking nothing for granted.
"I was elected mayor of [Burlington, Vermont] after a recount by 10 votes," Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said in a video message Monday. "My point: Every vote counts."
"We can win this election," said Sanders, who has appeared at events alongside Democratic nominees Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan, Angie Nixon in Florida, and Troy Jackson in Maine, among others, over the final weeks of the campaign. "But the only way we win it is if millions of people come out and vote; we bring our friends, our uncles, our aunts, our neighbors."
The progressive advocacy group Our Revolution, initially formed following Sanders’ 2016 presidential run, says it has sought to reach 5 million voters in battleground states as it works to counter unprecedented spending by superrich donors.
“Big money can buy ads, but it can’t knock on a door, make a call, or have a conversation,” the group said in an email to volunteers last week.
The AFL-CIO said it had reached more than 16 million union voters as of October 30 and had tens of thousands of volunteers conducting doorstep, phone, and workplace conversations with voters as part of its largest ever midterm operation. The labor federation cited internal polling showing 83% of union members are “extremely motivated” about voting in the election—10 percentage points higher than in 2022.
“For months, workers have been talking to their fellow workers and families. And in every community, we hear the same thing: Shit is too expensive, and working people are sick and tired of the failed economic status quo that prioritizes billionaires over the people who make this country run,” AFL-CIO president Liz Shuler said.
This weekend, nearly 100 union members took part in a Halloween canvass in Des Moines, Iowa, where they said they exceeded their door-knocking goal for the election cycle.
“Every door we knock between now and Tuesday counts and will make the difference,” said Iowa Federation of Labor president Charlie Wishman.
With President Donald Trump now at new lows in public approval, Democratic candidates have focused their closing message on accountability and blocking his agenda.
"This is for... control of the United States Senate, to put a check on Trump and this ridiculous war, whether it's a war with Canada over tariffs, or a war in Iran that's raising our gas prices and our groceries," El-Sayed said in a get-out-the-vote video Monday. "But it's also for the Supreme Court, because if we don't win this race, Donald Trump is going to have another two Supreme Court nominations."
El-Sayed also looked toward a future in which Democrats are back in power and can use their sizable majority to advance a progressive agenda.
“This movement,” he said, “is about getting money out of politics, putting money in your pocket, passing ‘Medicare for All,’ standing up for union rights, standing up for the right to choose, standing up for healthcare for everybody.”
Joseph Geevarghese, the executive director of Our Revolution, said Tuesday could be a make-or-break moment for a progressive movement that has won the hearts of the Democratic base but faced pushback from the party establishment.
“There are centrists who don’t want to see us win, and who will lay any setbacks on Election Day at the feet of progressives,” Geevarghese told The Wall Street Journal on Monday.
He said a strong showing on the left could set the tone for the direction of the party entering 2028: “We’re going to be the center of gravity.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Testing the Limits of 'Vote Blue No Matter Who'
Progressives spent a decade being told to rally behind whoever Democratic voters chose. With Election Day just weeks away, Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries face the same test.
Oct 14, 2026
For the better part of a decade, progressives have heard some version of the same argument every election cycle: Fight as hard as you want in the primary. Organize. Debate. Challenge the establishment. But when Democratic voters make their choice, the fight is over. You rally behind the nominee because defeating Republicans matters more than whatever divided us in the primary. “Vote Blue No Matter Who.”
Progressives have not always embraced that bargain enthusiastically, but we have largely honored it. Now the Democratic Party is confronting a question it has rarely had to answer: What happens when the candidates progressives fought for are the ones Democratic voters choose?
That is no longer hypothetical. Abdul El-Sayed is the Democratic nominee for Senate in Michigan. Angie Nixon is the nominee in Florida. Troy Jackson is carrying the Democratic banner in Maine. William Lawrence and other progressives have won House primaries across the country. They are entering November not as protesters outside the Democratic coalition, but as Democratic nominees. And something more consequential is happening alongside those victories: Progressives are no longer simply asking Democratic leadership to respect the results. We are accumulating enough political infrastructure to make ignoring them more difficult.
Voters are demanding a Democratic Party that offers a real alternative to Trumpism, one willing to take on oligarchs, corporate power, and endless blank checks for war.
Florida offers an early glimpse of what that looks like. For weeks, progressives pressed national Democrats to invest in Nixon. She said she asked Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer directly for help and got a “we’ll see.” Then Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont announced that he would put his own campaign resources behind Nixon and other progressive nominees.
That commitment has since become tangible. Sanders has contributed directly to Nixon's campaign and is heading to Florida for a series of campaign events alongside her, with other progressive leaders, including Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut and Rep. Ro Khanna of California, also joining the effort.
That matters for reasons larger than the money. Bernie is putting resources behind the same principle Democrats have spent years demanding progressives honor: The primary is where we fight over the direction of the party. When voters decide, we fight for the nominee. But he was also demonstrating something new. If the existing Democratic infrastructure is reluctant to invest in candidates emerging from the progressive movement, the movement is increasingly capable of deploying infrastructure of its own.
Since then, Nixon says Schumer has stepped up his support for her campaign. While the shift cannot be attributed to progressive pressure alone, it reflects a larger reality after a decade of organizing: What began as an insurgency has become infrastructure, and infrastructure creates leverage.
With just 20 days until Election Day, the question is no longer whether progressives can win Democratic primaries.
We have.
The question now is whether Democratic leadership will invest in those nominees with the same urgency it demands from progressive voters, and what happens when those candidates arrive in Washington with a mandate of their own. The decisions Schumer and Jeffries make between now and November 3 will help determine not only who wins, but who has the power to shape what comes next.
And that question has immediate implications for Schumer, who has made clear he intends to seek another term as Senate Democratic leader after November. His political future is already the subject of renewed scrutiny, with some Democratic Senate nominees unwilling to commit to supporting him for another term.
If Schumer wants to lead a coalition increasingly shaped by candidates emerging from the progressive movement, that relationship cannot begin with a leadership vote after Election Day. It is being shaped RIGHT NOW through decisions about where Democrats invest, which nominees receive institutional support and whether progressive victories are treated as opportunities to build upon or problems to manage.
If Schumer wants to lead a coalition increasingly shaped by candidates emerging from the progressive movement, that relationship cannot begin with a leadership vote after Election Day.
The same test is playing out in the House. William Lawrence, now the Democratic nominee in Michigan’s 7th District, declined during the primary to commit to supporting Hakeem Jeffries for speaker.
But the challenge for Jeffries goes deeper than whether he supports individual progressive nominees. It is about recognizing what is changing underneath the Democratic coalition. The primary results and the organizing now underway across the country make clear that much of the energy, infrastructure and voter mobilization powering the next Democratic majority is coming from the progressive movement. Jeffries cannot watch that wave build, retreat on Medicare for All, keep courting money from Big Tech, crypto and AIPAC, and then expect progressives to rubber-stamp the old order after Election Day.
Voters are demanding a Democratic Party that offers a real alternative to Trumpism, one willing to take on oligarchs, corporate power, and endless blank checks for war. Schumer and Jeffries cannot spend the final weeks before Election Day asking progressive organizers to deliver votes, volunteers and resources, only to treat their priorities as negotiable once the ballots are counted.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'We Want Real Change': Sanders-Backed Democratic Socialist Wins Mayoral Primary in Providence
"Nearly a year ago this day, we launched a campaign centered around the simple vision that the working people who make Providence home deserve to live here."
Sep 10, 2026
David Morales, a 27-year-old democratic socialist endorsed by Sen. Bernie Sanders, scored an upset victory on Wednesday to become the Democratic Party's nominee for mayor of Providence, Rhode Island.
As noted in a Thursday report in The Washington Post, Morales made concerns about housing affordability central to his campaign pitch, and he assailed incumbent Democratic Mayor Brett Smiley for vetoing a proposal passed by the Providence City Council to enforce a 4% annual cap on rent increases.
Morales reinforced this theme during his Wednesday night victory speech.
"Nearly a year ago this day, we launched a campaign centered around the simple vision," Morales said, "that the working people who make Providence home deserve to live here. A simple vision that our neighbors deserve a mayor who will fight for them."
"Together, we organized, day in and day out," Morales added, "sharing our vision of how we build a city all our neighbors can afford and feel safe calling home."
David Morales is 27 years old.
The youngest Latino ever elected to the Rhode Island legislature.
Tonight he beat an incumbent mayor in Providence — after that mayor vetoed rent stabilization for working families.
Bernie endorsed him. The people chose him.
Nobody can stop this… pic.twitter.com/qrP4BAwd0G
— Ezequiel Aguilar (@EzequielAguilar) September 10, 2026
Joseph Geevarghese, executive director of Our Revolution, hailed Morales' victory as "another sign that something powerful is taking root across this country."
"Working-class candidates are rejecting an establishment politics that asks people to settle for less and instead showing what government can actually do for them," Geevarghese emphasized. "From city councils and mayor’s offices to statehouses and Congress, we are seeing candidates build support by organizing from the bottom up and focusing directly on the economic pressures facing working people."
Sanders in a Thursday social media post congratulated Morales for his win, which he said was a sign that voters are fed up with politics as usual.
"From coast to coast, Americans are clear: No more status quo politics," wrote Sanders. "We want real change."
Morales wasn't the only progressive insurgent in Providence to declare victory on Wednesday.
As reported by the Brown Daily Herald, challenger Miguel Youngs, who received endorsements from the Rhode Island Working Families Party and the Providence Teachers Union, ousted incumbent John Goncalves to become the Democratic Party's nominee to represent Ward 1 on the Providence City Council.
Similar to Morales, Youngs made capping rent increases a major theme of his campaign, attacking Goncalves for voting against the rent control proposal earlier this year.
Progressives have been upsetting the Democratic establishment in mayoral races across the US, as both New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani and Seattle Mayor Katie Wilson last year won with the backing of the Democratic Socialists of America.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Following Platner Allegations, Progressives Warn Democratic Establishment: 'This Is Not Your Opening'
The campaign, said one organizer, "was never really about one candidate. It was about what Mainers ultimately wanted and deserved: a Senate seat that answers to them."
Jul 07, 2026
As calls mounted on Monday evening for US Senate candidate Graham Platner to drop out of the race in Maine following sexual assault allegations, progressive organizers emphasized that primary voters in the state have made clear their demand for a candidate who prioritizes the needs of working people.
Should Platner be replaced as the Democratic nominee, said the political action organization Our Revolution, the new candidate must be one "who has actually lived the fight Graham Platner ran on: a record with working people, with unions, against corporate money."
"To the Democratic establishment: This is not your opening," said Joseph Geevarghese, the group's executive director. "Mainers did not vote by an overwhelming margin against Janet Mills and the [Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee]'s handpicked pick just to be handed another status-quo candidate anyway. They deserve what they voted for... The movement will settle for nothing less, because that is what Mainers deserve."
Platner has not said whether he will end his campaign, during which he has traveled across the state and energized voters from across the political spectrum with his working-class-focused platform—one that calls for Medicare for All, a billionaire's minimum tax, a stop to "billionaires buying elections" through a repeal of Citizens United, and an end to US military aid for Israel.
In a video he posted on social media Monday in response to the allegations, which came from a woman he dated from 2019-21, he denied that he had committed sexual assault but said he was "mindful of the political reality” and that his campaign is "taking the time to reflect on the best path forward" in order to defeat five-term Republican Sen. Susan Collins. The Maine Senate race is crucial as Democrats aim to win back control of the US Senate.
An aide for Platner told The New York Times Monday evening that if he were to step aside, "it would only be with a guarantee of being replaced by a candidate who he believes is true to the values and vision and policy agenda of the campaign that Maine voted for."
Platner won the Democratic primary in June by nearly 53 points. His opponent, Gov. Janet Mills, was on the ballot despite having suspended her campaign in April, citing a lack of funds. Ahead of the primary, Platner had faced other controversies, including one regarding comments he made on Reddit several years ago; a skull-and-crossbones tattoo that resembled a Nazi symbol—a connection he said he was not aware of; and allegations of physical aggression from a GOP-affiliated ex-girlfriend.
Geevarghese said Monday that "everyone deserves a fair and open process, and Graham Platner is entitled to due process like anyone else. But the allegations against him are credible, and at this point they are too serious to treat as a distraction from the campaign or the issues. Sexual violence is a red line. We are withdrawing our endorsement and calling on him to withdraw from this race."
He emphasized that the campaign "engaged thousands of working people in Maine around a simple idea: that Maine's Senate seat should belong to its people, not corporate money."
"That was never really about one candidate," Geevarghese said. "It was about what Mainers ultimately wanted and deserved: a Senate seat that answers to them."
The sentiment was echoed by the Maine Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), which had not previously endorsed Platner.
"The power of the Platner campaign was undeniable, but that power does not come from a candidate; it comes from tens of thousands of Mainers who were inspired by his campaign's platform and urgency," said Maine DSA. "Over the last year, everyday people who had long ago written off electoral politics have shown up and worked to build power on a scale Maine has never seen before."
"Maine Democratic Party leadership has a choice: Nominate an establishment candidate who offers excuses, not answers, and ultimately loses to Susan Collins; or offer a candidate who harnesses the still-growing momentum, follows the platform that is so energizing to voters in Maine and across the country, and takes our state back for the many, not the money," said the group.
The state's Democratic candidate for governor, former state legislator Hannah Pingree, also said that Platner had "tapped into something real—voters hungry for change showed up with real passion and energy."
"That energy doesn't have to go away," said Pingree. "It needs a new candidate to carry it forward."
Under state law, Platner could be replaced on the ballot if he withdraws by July 13. The state Democratic Party would have until July 27 to name a replacement.
According to the Times, party officials in the state "have discussed possible plans to replace Mr. Platner on the ballot, with options including a pop-up convention on the weekend of July 25 to choose a nominee, or holding a statewide caucus to effectively redo the party’s primary election."
They have reportedly "ruled out having the state party’s committee, which includes about 100 members, choose the nominee."
Potential replacements who have been named include former Democratic gubernatorial candidates such as Secretary of State Shenna Bellows and former state Senate President Troy Jackson, who campaigned with Platner and was also endorsed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) when he ran for governor.
Jackson told Bangor Daily News reporter Benjamin Kail late Monday that potentially having to replace Platner on the ballot was "something I never considered, but if Graham's stepping away, I am very, very interested and think I'm the best person to replace him."
He said he "received dozens of calls and messages of support" after the news broke Monday.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Running for California Governor, Tom Steyer Says Billionaires Like Him ‘Should Pay More Taxes’
"I'm the billionaire who wants to tax people like me more. I'm the billionaire who's willing to stand up to the monopolies and the people who are ripping off Californians."
Apr 22, 2026
In a California gubernatorial race characterized by a lack of clear progressive choices and the specter of an all-Republican general election under the state's so-called "jungle primary," a hedge fund billionaire who believes that plutocrats like himself should pay more taxes is gaining progressive support.
On Tuesday, Farallon Capital founder Tom Steyer was endorsed by Our Revolution, the progressive political action group launched as a continuation of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) kneecapped 2016 presidential campaign.
Our Rev said that Steyer "has stepped forward with a platform that is clearly aligned with the priorities of our movement—single-payer healthcare, taxing extreme wealth, bold climate action, and getting money out of politics."
Steyer was interviewed Tuesday by The Lever's David Sirota, who asked about Our Revolution's support for a plebiscite to "tax billionaires like yourself," and how he squares "being the progressive movement's choice in this race while being one of the people who there's a ballot initiative to tax more."
The California Billionaire Tax would impose a one-time 5% wealth tax on people worth $1 billion or more, to be paid in annual installments of 1% over five years. According to Forbes, Steyer is currently worth $2.4 billion.
"Well, David, I think people like me who are billionaires should pay more taxes," Steyer said.
"I'm the billionaire who wants to tax people like me more," Steyer added. "I'm the billionaire who's willing to stand up to the monopolies and the people who are ripping off Californians. I've done it for 15 years and I'll keep doing it."
That message has been echoed in one of Steyer's campaign ads, in which he asserts that "it's time for billionaires like me and big corporations to buy into the future of California and be willing to pay more."
Steyer continues:
A lot of people in California are acting as if we have a zero-sum game and they're defending their wealth and they're trying to make sure that they minimize their taxes. I am not scared about paying more money. Working Californians are being priced out of this state. It is not okay. We are creating more than enough money in this state for us all to succeed together without anybody suffering... [I] think that everybody who succeeded in this state owes a huge debt to the people who built this state and the working people who make this state run and work their asses off.
"We need to change our tax system," Steyer concludes in the ad. "We need more revenue. We need to be fair and I pledge to do all of those things. This is not rocket science."
In addition to his stance on taxation, Steyer has gained progressive support by funding climate initiatives, opposing the Trump administration's deadly anti-immigrant crackdown, and pouring more than $120 million into efforts to impeach President Donald Trump and in support of Proposition 50, the successful state ballot measure to redraw the state's congressional map in retaliation for Trump-backed Republican gerrymandering in Texas. He is also a prolific philanthropist.
On the flip side, the fact that Steyer is a hedge fund billionaire whose heavily self-funded campaign is the opposite of grassroots continues to fuel skepticism among progressives, many of whom view the mere existence of billionaires as an abject public policy failure. Steyer also came under fire over the revelation that his portfolio had been invested in private prison stocks decades ago.
Steyer said during his interview with Sirota that he doesn't agree with the assertion that billionaires are a public policy failure.
"I think that phrase obviously goes back to Karl Marx," he said. "And I believe if someone wants to come to California who has an idea to change the world and forms a company around it and it does really well and as a result they make a lot of money, that's fine with me."
With a dearth of progressives to choose from, more and more left-leaning groups and individuals are throwing their support behind Steyer. These include Courage California, Third Act, the California Teachers Association and other labor groups, and state lawmakers including Assemblymen Ash Kalra (D-25) and Alex Lee (D-24).
Some progressives are reluctantly backing Steyer due to the very real possibility of an all-Republican general election under California's open primary—in which the top two vote-getters advance, regardless of party. The "jungle primary" is set for June 2.
The latest weighted polling shows Trump-backed Fox News host Steve Hilton leading the race with 16% support, followed closely by Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco at 14%. Those Republicans are trailed by Steyer (13%) and other Democrats: former California Attorney General Xavier Becerra (13%), former Congresswoman Katie Porter (10%), and San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan—the top choice of numerous Big Tech billionaires—at 5%.
Erstwhile Democratic frontrunner and now former Congressman Eric Swalwell suspended his race for governor and quit Congress earlier this month amid mounting allegations of rape and other sex crimes that he has denied.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Message to Senate Dems: No Confirmation of New AG Without Commitment on Epstein Files Release
“The American people are tired of a system where the powerful operate under a different set of rules. This is a moment to draw a line."
Apr 03, 2026
With Pam Bondi fired from her position as US attorney general, progressive campaigners on Friday said that Democrats in the Senate, although they are in the minority, must use the leverage they have to force a release of all the remaining files concerning convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
"Even in the minority, Senate Democrats have tools to exert pressure—by withholding votes, slowing proceedings, and setting clear conditions," said the grassroots group Our Revolution as it launched a nationwide petition demanding that Senate Democrats block the confirmation of Bondi's replacement unless they commit to the document release. "That leverage must be used."
Our Revolution elevated a call from US Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), who along with Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) has led the push for the US Department of Justice (DOJ) to release all of the Epstein files.
The latest release of files, which Bondi oversaw and which didn't occur until more than a month after a December 2025 deadline, failed to protect the identities of some survivors of the abuse perpetrated by Epstein and his vast network of powerful associates, while redacting the identities of many of the alleged abusers. Last month at a congressional hearing, Bondi refused to apologize to the survivors in attendance.
Khanna and Massie as well as Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) have led Democrats in demanding the release of 3 million more files that remain, which Garcia said in February include official FBI interviews regarding allegations that President Donald Trump sexually assaulted a 13-year-old child.
The release of files in late January included thousands of references to Trump, but Khanna said the release amounted to a "cover-up" due to the absence of many official FBI survivor statements.
Khanna said in an interview with NPR on Friday that "the Senate should make it absolutely clear they will not confirm a new attorney general unless that attorney general commits to the release of all these files and commits to starting investigations. And if that new attorney general doesn't live up to that word, they will have the same fate as Pam Bondi."
He added that acting Attorney General Todd Blanche—who stepped into the role vacated by Bondi without needing to go through the confirmation process due to his previous confirmation as Bondi's deputy—has falsely stated that "all the files" the DOJ can release have already been disclosed to the public.
"That's just not factual," said Khanna. "In the past, he said that there are 3 million files that have not been released. Now, he claims that they're not releasing those because they're protecting the identity of survivors. But if you talk to the survivors, if you talk to the survivors' lawyers, they will tell you, in fact, that the DOJ was reckless and did not protect their identity. And the 3 million files that haven't been released have the survivors' statements to the FBI agents, where the survivors name the rich and powerful people who raped them, abused them, showed up to Epstein's island, and that they are protecting a group of people who aren't playing by the same rules. This is about two tiers of justice in America."
Massie offered his congratulations to Blanche on Thursday before telling him, "Now you have 30 days to release the rest of the files before becoming criminally liable for failure to comply with the Epstein Files Transparency Act."
Our Revolution said Senate Democrats must condition any confirmation vote for Bondi's successor on "a clear commitment" to:
- Release all Epstein-related files with only the most limited and necessary redactions;
- Provide full disclosure of what the federal government knows about the Epstein files;
- Initiate credible investigations and prosecutions of the Epstein network and any co-conspirators; and
- Uphold the rule of law without targeting political opponents or shielding elites.
“The American people are tired of a system where the powerful operate under a different set of rules," said Joseph Geevarghese, executive director of Our Revolution. "This is a moment to draw a line. There should be no confirmation vote without a clear commitment to release the Epstein files, pursue prosecutions, and restore trust in the rule of law.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Conceding NJ Race, Malinowski Applauds Progressive Winner Mejía for ‘Inspiring So Many Voters’
Former Rep. Tom Malinowski also decried the influence of AIPAC “dark money” on the Democratic primary process.
Feb 10, 2026
Former Rep. Tom Malinowski on Tuesday conceded the 2026 Democratic primary race to represent New Jersey's 11th Congressional District to progressive challenger Analilia Mejía, whom he vowed to back in the general election.
In a statement posted on social media, Malinowski praised Mejía for "running a positive campaign and for inspiring so many voters," while also emphasizing that "it is essential that we send a Democrat to Washington to fill this seat, not a rubber stamp" for President Donald Trump.
Malinowski then unloaded on the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the largest pro-Israel lobbying group in the US. Through its super PAC, the United Democracy Project, AIPAC spent a significant sum hammering the former Democratic congressman with negative ads that accused him of supporting Trump and US Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) operations.
"The outcome of this race cannot be understood without also taking into account the massive flood of dark money that AIPAC spent on dishonest ads," he said. "I wish I could say today that this effort, which was meant to intimidate Democrats across the country, failed in NJ-11. But it did not. I met several voters in the final days of the campaign who had seen the ads and asked me, sincerely, 'Are you MAGA? Are you for ICE?'"
During his previous tenure serving in Congress from 2019 to 2023, Malinowski was a reliable vote in favor of sending military aid to Israel. However, AIPAC and some associated political action committees decided to target the New Jersey Democrat when he suggested putting conditions on future aid packages to Israel.
Malinowski said that no Democrat should accept support from AIPAC, which he described as a pernicious influence on US elections.
"Our Democratic Party should have nothing to do with a pro-Trump-billionaire-funded organization," he said, "that demands absolute fealty to positions that are outside of the American pro-Israel community, then smears those who don't fall in line."
Malinowski vowed to oppose any candidate that AIPAC backs "openly or surreptitiously" in future contests in the district.
"The threat unlimited dark money poses to our democracy," he emphasized, "is far more significant than the views of a single member of Congress on Middle East policy."
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who also endorsed Mejía in the Democratic primary, also congratulated her on her win, emphasizing the significant number of obstacles she needed to overcome before emerging victorious.
"Starting with almost no name recognition, Analilia Mejía took on the oligarchs, the Republican establishment and Democratic establishment—and WON," Sanders wrote on social media. "The American people want leaders who stand up to the billionaire class and fight for working families."
The progressive advocacy organization Our Revolution praised Mejía for beating New Jersey machine politics, and pointed to her past campaign work as a sign of what she could do if she wins the April general election and is sworn in as a congresswoman.
"As a grassroots organizer, she helped win a $15 minimum wage and paid sick days," Our Revolution wrote. "As national political director for Bernie 2020, she's built movements to un-rig the economy. Now, she's ready to take this fight to Washington. When we organize, we win!"
Keep ReadingShow Less
House Progressives Unveil 'Defund the Oligarchs, Fund the People' Resolution
"Trump promised to lower costs for families on day one, but a year since he took office, grocery, housing, and healthcare costs are out of control," said Rep. Rashida Tlaib. "It's time to tax the rich."
Jan 30, 2026
As President Donald Trump continues to serve billionaires over working people and degrade the US economy, a trio of progressive congresswomen on Friday introduced the Defund the Oligarchs, Fund the People Resolution.
"Trump promised to lower costs for families on day one, but a year since he took office, grocery, housing, and healthcare costs are out of control," said Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), who is leading the measure with Congresswomen Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.). Rep. Summer Lee (D-Pa.) is an original co-sponsor.
Tlaib took aim at Trump and Republicans who control both chambers of Congress for forcing through their so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act last year: "He signed into law the largest cuts to healthcare and food assistance in the history of our country, all to give trillions of dollars in tax breaks to his rich donors and their massive corporations."
"Meanwhile, 60% of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck, and CEOs are making 281 times more than their average worker," she stressed. "It's time to tax the rich, defund the oligarchy, and invest those funds in the needs of working families."
"Every dollar that gets plundered by billionaires through tax breaks, corporate giveaways, and political favoritism is a dollar that is taken away from healthcare, housing, education, and good jobs."
The resolution declares that "the United States was created to be a democracy, founded on the principle that all people are created equal, governed not by kings or corporate masters but by themselves as free citizens," and "the gravest threat to democracy and individual freedoms is the alliance of private wealth and authoritarian government."
At various moments over the past 250 years, Americans have "sounded the alarm" over oligarchy and the federal government "has vigorously combated excessive concentrations of power and wealth," the measure notes. However, in recent decades, the government "has forfeited its role safeguarding democracy."
The resolution highlights that the combined wealth of the country's 900 billionaires exceeds that of the 67,000,000 households in the poorest 50%, as working people contend with stagnant wages and struggle to afford everything from healthcare to housing. Trump notably said during a Thursday Cabinet meeting that "I don't want to drive housing prices down, I want to drive housing prices up for people that own their homes. And they can be assured that's what's going to happen."
While many measures introduced by progressives don't even receive votes in the GOP-controlled Congress, this one is especially unlikely to go anywhere, given that it explicitly calls out not only the superrich donors who use their money to control the US political system but also the president, whom many lawmakers in his party are afraid to criticize.
Blasting "the quid pro quo" between Trump and the ultrawealthy oligarchs and corporations, the resolution emphasizes that they "are corrupting United States politics through billions in open and hidden campaign contributions and by exploiting their monopoly control in key sectors of the economy, and especially over media, information, and emerging digital technologies."
"Trump has permitted pay-to-play schemes to become endemic, as oligarchs leverage political contributions to win hundreds of billions in taxpayer-funded federal subsidies, tax breaks, regulatory rollbacks, and government contracts despite exploiting workers and polluting communities," it continues, specifically pointing to spending by the fossil fuel, tech, and cryptocurrency industries.
"Public funds belong to the people of the United States and should be invested in education, healthcare, housing, clean energy, and infrastructure, not used to enrich the wealthiest individuals and most powerful corporations," the resolution argues. It also expresses concern about a decline in union membership that "has diminished the ability of the labor movement" to continue its "significant historical role in counteracting corporate power, reducing inequality, and ensuring the political system is responsive to the interests of ordinary Americans, not just wealthy elites."
The resolution includes various demands for the president and Congress. It says that Trump "must not reward oligarchs and billionaire-controlled corporations with lucrative, publicly funded contracts, loans, and grants" when they engage in corrupt scheming, fail to fairly compete in open markets, and break federal laws.
It also says that the president and Congress must:
- Act with all deliberate speed to protect election integrity;
- Break up all concentrations of economic and political power;
- Drastically reduce levels of economic inequality and concentrations of inherited wealth;
- Reform the Supreme Court;
- Support the dramatic expansion of unions;
- Explore ways to promote alternative, noncorporate forms of ownership; and
- Use public money to fund programs that raise the standard of living.
"While working families have to choose between paying rent, buying groceries, or keeping the heat on, billionaires are just getting richer," said Jayapal. "We must rein in corporate power by breaking up monopolies and reforming campaign finance laws."
"It's time to make billionaires pay their fair share of taxes and reinvest those funds to provide for our communities—housing, healthcare, and education," she continued. "Our resolution calls for a political and economic system that benefits working families, not one that enriches the ultrawealthy."
The resolution comes just months before the midterm elections and amid pressure on Democrats to prove they can offer a true alternative to Trump's government full of loyalists, weak labor market, persistently high inflation, and tax giveaways to the rich—including Elon Musk, a former presidential adviser and the richest person on the planet.
Some of that pressure has come from the grassroots group Our Revolution, which is backing the resolution alongside organizations including Americans for Tax Fairness, Climate and Community Institute, MoveOn, National Nurses United, Patriotic Millionaires, People's Action, Public Citizen, RootsAction, and Social Security Works.
"Every dollar that gets plundered by billionaires through tax breaks, corporate giveaways, and political favoritism is a dollar that is taken away from healthcare, housing, education, and good jobs. That is not just corruption, it is a betrayal of who government is supposed to serve, and it is why so many people feel that democracy is not working for them," said Our Revolution executive director Joseph Geevarghese.
"The truth is, none of the policies working families are fighting for can ever fully materialize as long as corporate money and billionaire influence are writing the rules," he added. "Lawmakers cannot keep pretending to serve both the corporate class and working families at the same time. If we want real progress on wages, healthcare, housing, and climate, cutting off corporate corruption and reinvesting in our communities has to be part of how we govern, not just something we talk about during elections."
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy