Are moderate Democrats losing momentum to the left?

moderate Democrats – A year after “abundance” became the Democratic center’s governing rallying cry, far-left candidates are winning more attention and primaries—especially in high-profile New York contests. Centrist reformers say their organizing hasn’t matched the left’s ability

One thing shifted in Democratic politics over the past year: the energy that once clustered around centrist ideas about governing now seems to have drifted elsewhere—toward candidates and causes on the left.

That shift is showing up most sharply in primary races that have become conversation-makers far beyond the districts where they’re decided. Last week’s victories for socialist candidates against the establishment in New York’s Democratic primaries have centrists moving between alarm and despair.

The question now isn’t whether every leftist win in a deep-blue urban district signals the start of a national takeover. It’s that the same faces and the same messaging keep capturing attention—and shaping what Democrats argue about. Zohran Mamdani. the New York mayoral figure who has emerged as a high-profile socialist contender. has been especially successful at both winning attention and steering the public discourse. The opening for more momentum is still there, including Tuesday’s primaries in Colorado.

And with each headline, the old organizing center—moderates rallying around “abundance”—looks less like a movement and more like an afterthought.

A year ago, “abundance” was the hot idea

A year ago, the hottest idea in Democratic circles was “abundance,” described as a growth-friendly agenda with centrist appeal. The promise was that Democrats could prove they were capable of shoving aside special interests and governing again.

The idea was inspired by the bestselling book by journalists Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson. Their argument was that Democrats could cut through red tape. be less beholden to “the groups. ” and help unleash the private sector—so voters could actually feel improvements: abundant housing. clean energy. and new infrastructure.

Klein and Yglesias are Vox co-founders, and they departed this publication in 2020.

“Abundance” didn’t stay confined to the book. It became a factional rallying cry among Democratic commentators. advocates. and operatives who were dissatisfied with the party’s establishment but skeptical of far-left solutions. That skepticism put them in direct conflict with the left’s economic populists. who argued that abundance wasn’t focused enough on taking on wealth and corporate power.

By June of last year, the fight over what Democratic politics should be—left versus establishment versus those on the center-left who had flocked to Abundance—had become a three-way contest.

Now, that has narrowed. The framing that’s taking hold appears to be left versus establishment, with centrists increasingly unmoored.

The Israel-Gaza debate and culture fights left moderates without a home base

After former Vice President Kamala Harris’s defeat in 2024, Democrats dug into what went wrong, with vigorous hand-wringing and finger-pointing.

One critique gained steam: that Harris, and the party generally, had gone too far left. On issues like immigration and trans rights. the argument was that Democrats had become too beholden to progressive advocate nonprofits known colloquially as “the groups. ” had lost touch with the median voter. and needed to change course.

Yet the center never fully erupted into a pitched battle over how to moderate. An “unstated consensus” emerged that Democrats should quietly back away from some “peak woke” positions while shifting attention to other issues.

The factional fight that did break out turned out to be about Abundance itself—released in March 2025.

The book was presented as a sunny manifesto about how Democrats needed to learn to get big, positive things done again. It also criticized the Biden administration and blue-state Democrats for failing to deliver that promise.

Because Klein and Thompson’s critique included “the groups,” and because Abundance treated economic growth as a goal rather than an enemy—various funders, nonprofits, and advocates coalesced around it. It became essentially the moderates’ cause célèbre, discussed at conferences and in many podcasts.

Even leaders who disagreed on ideology moved into orbit around at least parts of it. Former President Barack Obama praised “the quote-unquote abundance agenda,” and California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed related housing reforms into law last summer.

Mamdani also said he liked it. In a statement to Thompson last June. Mamdani said. “One of the most compelling things that I think abundance has brought into the larger conversation is how we can make government more effective. how we can actually deliver on the very ideas that we are so passionate about.”.

Nathan J. Robinson, a socialist commentator, responded by writing, “Mamdani was deft.” Robinson continued: “He co-opted the centrist phrase ‘abundance’ and used it to refer to his affordability agenda.”

But while abundance ideas continued to circulate, the public conversation began to shift. Attention moved toward other issues—such as Israel-Gaza—and centrists found themselves with less to rally around.

A repeatable formula for the left

There is another reason moderates appear to be falling short: organizing.

Liam Kerr, co-founder of the centrist group WelcomePAC, said, “I would say Matt Yglesias’s Substack is the only place where 10,000 centrist Democrats are paying dues every month,” referring to Matt Yglesias, whose advocacy urged the party to moderate.

Kerr contrasted that with what he said the left has been doing better—building contact, persuasion, and turnout. He pointed to superior left organization, saying it has enabled insurgent candidates to turn voters out in major races.

Kerr also described WelcomePAC’s own strategy: “Our organization has been focused 100 percent on districts that Trump won. We’ve been entirely about expanding the map,” he said. He added, “I think it’s fair to go back and say, is that the way to build a stronger and more enduring Democratic Party?”

It wasn’t only about winning attention. Kerr’s question pointed to the bigger problem centrists face: turning ideas into sustained, election-changing momentum.

Why Abundance didn’t translate into a centrist wave

The book Abundance sold well and drove elite Democratic discourse—both for and against it—for months. But centrists who coalesced around it hadn’t taken the next step into primary-season power.

Klein and Thompson are journalists, not factional political leaders. They never claimed to offer a message that could best win elections or mobilize the public around them. Their focus was governance, aimed at persuading Democratic elites.

Because their prescriptions were largely practical policy ideas, they could be adopted by leaders from different ideological camps, making it harder for centrists to use “abundance” as a distinguishing shorthand for candidates.

That left centrists without a clean way to create an “us versus them” contest.

Left-aligned members of Congress like Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) were early backers, and so were centrists like Rep. Jake Auchincloss (D-MA). At the grassroots level, state and local YIMBY groups—favoring Abundance-oriented ideas—found themselves considering DSA and centrist candidates alike.

As primaries approached. there wasn’t a wave of centrist primary challengers who could shake up the establishment. deliver wins for the movement. and mint new charismatic stars. The closest likeness to an “Abundance-coded” candidate in a major race was San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan. who ran for governor of California and finished with 3.5 percent in the primary.

One sentence about what changed in voters’ priorities tells much of the story

As Democratic primary voters focused more on stopping what they saw as Trump’s outrageous and authoritarian actions. cautious centrists had less to offer. The base increasingly reacted with horror to Trump’s aggressive deployments of ICE in US cities. which debates described as leading to the killings of two US citizens in Minneapolis.

At the same time, opposition to Israel proved to be an intensely motivating primary issue. For centrists, it also complicated their organizing. The left appeared more in touch with increasingly anti-Israel voters. and Israel debates made it easier for activists and voters to sort into clearer factions.

Candidates who were early and strident critics of Israel tended to be further left and far removed from party leadership. Opponents backed by pro-Israel super PACs tended to be more moderate.

The result is a contest to shape the party’s future between the left and the establishment—while reformist centrists, for now, have fallen out of the fight.

Housing and energy remain, but the organizing project didn’t land

Even if abundance didn’t become the political force centrists needed, its policy ideas didn’t vanish.

Housing remains a major issue in Congress and especially in state and local politics. The need for abundant energy has also only grown, with AI described as “sucking up gigawatts.” The next Democratic president could refer to the abundance playbook.

But as an organizing project for centrist attempts to remake the party politically from within, it hasn’t done the trick.

Democratic primaries moderate Democrats far left socialists Zohran Mamdani abundance agenda Kamala Harris 2024 Israel-Gaza ICE WelcomePAC Matt Yglesias Ezra Klein Derek Thompson Gavin Newsom Ro Khanna Jake Auchincloss YIMBY