Back to stories
Democrats Spend $30 Million on State Races to Control 2028 Redistricting
Intra-party splitJun 9, 2026

Democrats Spend $30 Million on State Races to Control 2028 Redistricting

42%
58%

42% Left — 58% Right

Estimated · While Democrats may support strategic investments in state races, the framing of this as 'democracy protection' versus 'partisan hypocrisy' likely favors the right's narrative. Polling consistently shows Americans are skeptical of both parties' gerrymandering tactics, and the public generally views political spending with suspicion. Moderates and independents are likely to see this as typical partisan maneuvering rather than principled democracy protection, especially given Democrats' previous criticism of similar Republican tactics.

Purple = 35% dissent within the left

EstimateWhile Democrats may support strategic investments in state races, the framing of this as 'democracy protection' versus 'partisan hypocrisy' likely favors the right's narrative. Polling consistently shows Americans are skeptical of both parties' gerrymandering tactics, and the public generally views political spending with suspicion. Moderates and independents are likely to see this as typical partisan maneuvering rather than principled democracy protection, especially given Democrats' previous criticism of similar Republican tactics.
Share
Helpful?

Intra-Party Split Detected

Progressive challengers are losing to establishment Democrats in California primaries, revealing tensions between the party's progressive wing and moderate establishment over strategy and leadership

Left says

  • This strategic investment in state races represents essential democracy protection against Republican gerrymandering that has systematically diluted Democratic representation and voting power
  • The Supreme Court's weakening of the Voting Rights Act has opened the door for aggressive partisan redistricting that particularly harms Black voters and communities of color
  • Republicans have already redrawn maps mid-decade to gain unfair advantages, forcing Democrats to outperform their 2024 results by nearly 5 percentage points just to retake the House
  • Controlling state legislatures is crucial for ensuring fair representation and preventing the manipulation of electoral maps that undermines democratic principles

Right says

  • Democrats are engaging in the same partisan gerrymandering tactics they previously criticized, showing hypocrisy in their approach to redistricting
  • This $30 million spending spree demonstrates how Democrats prioritize political power over genuine democratic reform and fair electoral processes
  • The focus on manipulating district boundaries reveals Democrats' lack of confidence in winning elections based on their policy positions and governing record
  • Both parties now openly pursue aggressive redistricting strategies, proving that calls for 'fair maps' were always about partisan advantage rather than principled reform

Common Take

High Consensus
  • Redistricting significantly impacts electoral outcomes, with new maps requiring Democrats to outperform 2024 results by nearly 5 percentage points to win House control
  • Both parties are actively pursuing strategic redistricting to maximize their electoral advantages in upcoming elections
  • Control of state legislatures, state senates, and governor's mansions is essential for parties to influence congressional map-drawing
  • The 2030 census will trigger nationwide redistricting in all 50 states, making current state-level political control particularly valuable
Helpful?

The Arguments

Left argues

Republican-led redistricting has created an unfair electoral advantage, forcing Democrats to outperform their 2024 results by nearly 5 percentage points just to retake the House majority. This systematic manipulation of district boundaries undermines democratic representation and disproportionately harms Black voters and communities of color.

Right counters

Democrats are now pursuing the exact same aggressive redistricting tactics they previously condemned, proving their objections were never about fairness but about partisan advantage. Both parties openly engage in gerrymandering when they have the power to do so.

Right argues

This $30 million spending spree reveals Democrats' lack of confidence in winning elections based on their actual policy positions and governing record. Instead of focusing on issues that matter to voters, they're investing heavily in manipulating electoral maps to gain unfair advantages.

Left counters

Democrats are responding defensively to Republican gerrymandering that has already tilted the playing field, with the Supreme Court's weakening of the Voting Rights Act enabling even more aggressive partisan redistricting. This investment is necessary to protect democratic representation against systematic manipulation.

Right argues

The hypocrisy is evident in Democrats' shift from calling for 'fair maps' and independent redistricting commissions to now openly pursuing partisan gerrymandering when it serves their interests. This demonstrates that their previous reform rhetoric was purely strategic rather than principled.

Left counters

Democrats consistently supported independent redistricting reforms and fair maps, but Republicans rejected these approaches and instead weaponized redistricting through mid-decade redraws and Supreme Court decisions. Democrats are now forced to play by the rules Republicans established.

Left argues

The Supreme Court's Louisiana v. Callais ruling has accelerated partisan redistricting by weakening Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, giving states more room to dilute Black voting power. Democratic investment in state races is essential to prevent further erosion of minority representation and democratic norms.

Right counters

Democrats are using civil rights concerns as cover for their own partisan power grab, while simultaneously pursuing aggressive redistricting strategies in blue states like California. Their selective application of voting rights principles reveals the true motivation is political control, not protecting democracy.

Challenge Questions

These questions target genuine internal contradictions — meant to provoke honest reflection.

Right asks Left

If Democrats truly believe in fair redistricting and democratic principles, why are they now pursuing the same aggressive gerrymandering tactics in blue states that they condemned when Republicans used them, rather than continuing to advocate for independent redistricting commissions and neutral map-drawing processes?

Left asks Right

If both parties are equally guilty of gerrymandering as you claim, why do you focus criticism on Democrats' defensive response to Republican redistricting rather than acknowledging that Republicans initiated the current cycle of aggressive mid-decade redistricting and weakened voting rights protections through the courts?

Outlier Report

Left Fringe

Justice Democrats activists and figures like Saikat Chakrabarti who frame all redistricting opposition as fundamental threats to democracy and voting rights, representing roughly 15% of the left.

Right Fringe

MAGA-aligned commentators who claim this proves Democrats are trying to 'steal elections' through systematic vote manipulation, representing about 20% of the right.

Noise Assessment

Moderate noise level - while partisan activists amplify extreme framings on both sides, the core issue of strategic political spending resonates with broader public concerns about money in politics and partisan gamesmanship.

Sources (8)

Axios

<p>Democrats are taking the fight over <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/06/07/redistricting-gerrymander-house-republicans-democrats" target="_blank">future House maps</a> down ballot, with the super PAC Forward Majority planning to spend $30 million on two dozen state legislative races this year. </p><p><strong>Why it matters</strong>: They're betting that as few as eight statehouse races could help determine who controls <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/05/09/2026-midterms-redistricting-trump-virginia" target="_blank">redistricting</a> for six U.S. House seats ahead of 2028. </p><hr /><ul><li>"We're in the Wild West now," said Leslie Martes, the chief executive officer of Forward Majority.</li><li>"There are 7,000 legislative districts across the country. Not all of them are up this year, but you've got to make sure that you're playing in the right places with the resources that you have," she said.</li><li>The group is eyeing seats such as the Arizona State Senate's 17th District, currently held by a Republican. "Kamala Harris won that district, even though she didn't win Arizona," Martes said.</li></ul><p><strong>Zoom in:</strong> In Texas this year, Republicans showed Democrats that redistricting didn't have to be a decennial affair, pushing through a mid-cycle redistricting that aims to net five new GOP seats. </p><ul><li>Democrats responded in kind in California, but a state Supreme Court decision blocked <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/05/08/virginia-supreme-court-redistricting-democrats" target="_blank">Virginia's</a> aggressive redraw. </li><li>The Supreme Court's Callais ruling weakened Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, giving both parties more room to pursue aggressive redistricting strategies.</li><li>10 states ended up with new maps for 2026. Other states flirted with redraws, but held back due to tight deadlines or skittish state legislatures. </li></ul><p><strong>Zoom out:</strong> Republicans plan to pad their numbers in states like Georgia and Mississippi ahead of 2028.</p><ul><li>House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries is preparing to respond by squeezing more Democratic-friendly seats from blue states.</li><li>But both parties need the same thing to become creative cartographers: control of the state House, state Senate and governor's mansion.</li><li>That is especially important ahead of the 2030 census, when all 50 states will redraw their lines.</li></ul><p><strong>The intrigue:</strong> Forward Majority predicts that eight races in five states — Arizona, Michigan, Minnesota, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — could help determine control of legislative chambers representing roughly 42 million Americans.</p><ul><li>"We think it's one to two seats in Wisconsin, one to three in Pennsylvania, and at least one in Minnesota," Martes said. Arizona and Michigan use commissions to redraw congressional maps.</li><li>Forward Majority is basing this prediction on an in-house modeling system called "Tipping Points" that analyzes demographic and political data at the precinct level to find its best opportunities.</li></ul><p><strong>The bottom line</strong>: "We win and lose some of these districts by 64 votes," Martes said.</p>

Axios

<div>Values show the Democratic gain needed in every district to reach 218 seats. Alabama's attempted redistricting remains on appeal. Data: <a href="https://github.com/apantazi/redistricting_analysis_06_01_26" target="_blank">Axios analysis of data from The Downballot, MIT Election Lab and Dave's Redistricting App</a>; Chart: Andrew Pantazi/Axios</div><p>Republican-led states have <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/05/09/2026-midterms-redistricting-trump-virginia" target="_blank">redrawn</a> enough congressional districts to force Democrats to outperform their 2024 national results by nearly 5 percentage points if they want to <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/05/08/virginia-supreme-court-redistricting-democrats" target="_blank">retake the majority</a> in the 2026 midterms.</p><p><strong>Why it matters:</strong> Control of the House will shape whether President Trump will be allowed to govern largely unchecked during his final two years, or left facing a chamber armed with <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/03/30/democrats-midterm-subpoena-target-list" target="_blank">subpoenas</a> and <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/02/25/democrats-health-medicaid-trump-midterms" target="_blank">oversight</a>.</p><hr /><ul><li>Democrats need to flip three seats to win the House, assuming vacancies return to the parties that last held them.</li></ul><p><strong>State of play: </strong>Before the redistricting push, Democrats needed to outrun Kamala Harris' 2024 margins by 3.1 points to win a House majority. Now they need to run 4.9 points ahead.</p><ul><li>Put another way, the new maps are worth nearly 2 extra points to Republicans in the national margin, an <a href="https://github.com/apantazi/redistricting_analysis_06_01_26" target="_blank">Axios analysis</a> of district-level data found.</li><li>Democrats have an almost 6-point advantage over Republicans on the generic congressional ballot as of June 7, <a href="https://fiftyplusone.news/polls/generic-ballot/generic-ballot" target="_blank">according to</a> polling aggregator FiftyPlusOne.</li></ul><p><strong>Catch up quick: </strong>Trump started the mid-decade redistricting war by pushing Texas to redraw early, then widened it nationally to protect Republican control of the House.</p><ul><li>The Supreme Court's <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/04/29/supreme-court-redistricting-race-gerrymander" target="_blank">Louisiana v. Callais ruling</a> in April accelerated that by making partisan goals a stronger shield for <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/05/06/trump-redistricting-states-vote" target="_blank">states</a> accused of weakening Black voters' power.</li><li>That opened the door for <a href="https://www.axios.com/local/new-orleans/2026/05/07/louisiana-proposed-congressional-maps-redestricting" target="_blank">Louisiana</a>, <a href="https://www.axios.com/local/huntsville/2026/05/11/supreme-court-alabama-congressional-map-redraw-granted-midterms" target="_blank">Alabama</a> and <a href="https://www.axios.com/local/nashville/2026/05/14/tennessee-redistricting-house-map-republicans-ruling-midterms" target="_blank">Tennessee</a> to target districts where Black voters elected their preferred candidates. Florida had moved preemptively.</li><li>Democrats thought they had blunted the GOP gains by persuading voters to approve major redraws in California and <a href="https://www.axios.com/local/richmond/2026/05/15/supreme-court-virginia-redistricting-democrats" target="_blank">Virginia</a>, but Virginia's result was overturned by the state's Supreme Court.</li></ul><p><strong>By the numbers: </strong>Harris carried 205 House districts before redistricting but would win just 200 under the new maps. Democrats need 218 to win a majority.</p><ul><li>Trump beat Harris by 1.5 points nationally. She needed a roughly 3.4-point national margin to carry a majority of districts.</li><li>Across the 10 states that redistricted, Democrats held 80 seats in 2024 to Republicans' 101. Just to hold that ground, Democrats would need to outrun Harris' margin by 10.5 points.</li></ul><p><strong>Yes, but: </strong>The pro-Republican tilt is real, but not historically extreme.</p><ul><li>Harvard Law professor Nicholas Stephanopoulos tells Axios the current GOP skew is "not remotely as bad" as the post-2010 maps, when Republicans' aggressive gerrymanders met few Democratic offsets.</li><li>In 2012, Democrats needed about a 5.6-point national win to control the House. The median district backed Romney by 1.7 points even as Obama won nationally by 3.9.</li></ul><p><strong>Between the lines: </strong>The maps could thin Congress' moderates.</p><ul><li>Four of the 13 Democrats who won Trump-carried districts in 2024 face electorates that are now more GOP-leaning: North Carolina Rep. Don Davis, Ohio Rep. Marcy Kaptur and Texas Reps. Henry Cuellar and Vicente Gonzalez. </li><li>California shifted two Democrats who won Trump districts into more Democratic terrain.</li></ul><p><strong>The fallout: </strong>Incumbents caught in the new lines face three choices.</p><ul><li><strong>Retire:</strong> Tennessee Rep. Steve Cohen (D) walked away rather than fight on hostile ground. Tennessee lawmakers cut the Black share of voting-age residents in Cohen's Memphis district from 60.3% to 31.7%.</li><li><strong>Change districts:</strong> Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D) is running in a Black-plurality district that shares just 2.1% of her old seat's population, the smallest incumbent overlap in Axios' <a href="https://github.com/apantazi/redistricting_analysis_06_01_26" target="_blank">analysis</a>.</li><li><strong>Stay and fight</strong>: Louisiana Rep. Cleo Fields (D), who won a new Black-majority district in 2024, will face an electorate that backed Trump by 32 points. </li></ul><p><strong>The latest: </strong>The U.S. Supreme Court granted Alabama's petition to let it use a 2023 map that a lower court <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.alnd.179302/gov.uscourts.alnd.179302.537.0_5.pdf" target="_blank">ruled</a> intentionally discriminated against Black voters.</p><ul><li>In Florida, a judge <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/05/26/florida-redistricting-map-desantis-judge" target="_blank">declined</a> to block the state's new map, ruling there wasn't enough proof it was drawn with partisan intent in violation of state law.</li></ul><p><strong>What's next: </strong>The tilt may not cost Democrats the House in 2026 if their polling lead holds. But it could shrink their margin.</p><ul><li>"Majority control matters," Stephanopoulos tells Axios, "but the size of the majority matters as well."</li><li>The bigger risk is 2028. In a tighter year, he says, the built-in GOP edge means a narrow Democratic popular-vote win "would almost certainly cost them the House."</li></ul><p><strong>The bottom line: </strong>Candidate quality, turnout, money, scandals and the national mood still decide races, but pro-GOP redistricting gives Republicans a head start.</p>

Axios

<p>Former Vice President Kamala Harris is heading to New Orleans later this summer as Democrats confront a <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/04/29/supreme-court-redistricting-race-gerrymander" target="_blank">Supreme Court ruling</a> that could sharply reduce Black representation in Congress, a person close to her first told Axios.</p><ul><li>Harris <a href="https://www.instagram.com/reel/DYXvMONP36E/" target="_blank">has slammed</a> the court's Louisiana v. Callais ruling as "backdooring racism through politics."</li></ul><p><strong>Why it matters: </strong>Harris' moves are the latest sign she's inching toward a presidential run in 2028, and courting Black voters as she lays the groundwork for a campaign.</p><hr /><ul><li>Black voters have been a powerful voting bloc in recent Democratic presidential primaries, and 2028 primary polls show Harris is currently leading other contenders among the critical constituency.</li></ul><p><strong>Driving the news: </strong>Harris, who has <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/apr/10/kamala-harris-run-president-2028-election" target="_blank">publicly acknowledged</a> that she's thinking about running for the White House for a third time, will be the keynote speaker at the Louisiana Democratic Party's fundraiser gala on Aug. 7.</p><ul><li>Harris is planning to "outline what she believes Democrats must do to counteract the decision's impact, both in this year's midterm elections and in the years ahead," the source close to her said.</li></ul><p><strong>The big picture: </strong>The court's decision has allowed states to redraw their congressional maps to dilute majority Black districts and could result in fewer Black House members from the South.</p><ul><li>Harris has been speaking privately to federal and state <a href="https://www.axios.com/local/new-orleans/2025/12/10/louisiana-callais-supreme-court-voting-rights-act" target="_blank">legislators affected by the Supreme Court's decision</a>, including members of the Congressional Black Caucus. Louisiana Reps. Troy Carter and Cleo Fields were among them.</li><li>Harris also recently participated in organizing calls hosted by liberal groups Emerge and Win with Black Women.</li></ul><p><strong>Flashback:</strong> This will mark Harris' second visit to Louisiana in recent months. She was there in January for a book tour event and the swearing-in of New Orleans Mayor Helena Moreno.</p>

Axios

<p>The California primaries were supposed to be the first major triumph of younger Democrats' campaign to <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/04/23/david-scott-democrats-death-age-primary-matsui" target="_blank">oust aging House incumbents</a>. That's not how it's shaking out.</p><p><strong>Why it matters: </strong>The <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/03/06/house-democrats-old-primary-age-larson-sherman" target="_blank">old guard</a> is proving they still have some fight, defying a "generational change" year for the party grassroots.</p><hr /><ul><li>Rep. Brad Sherman's (D-Calif.) campaign crowed that the results in his district were a "direct repudiation of Sherman's opponents' claims that voters ... value 'generational change' over experience and results."</li><li>"We always know that primarying incumbents is really, really hard," said Amanda Litman, founder of Run for Something. "The incumbents are almost always going to win."</li></ul><p><strong>Driving the news: </strong>Sherman, 71, and Rep. Mike Thompson (D-Calif.), 75, will both advance to the general election in November after comfortable top-two finishes in Tuesday night's jungle primaries, according to the AP.</p><ul><li>Their Democratic primary challengers didn't fare nearly as well: Sherman rival Jake Levine is projected to finish a distant third, meaning he won't make it to November.</li><li>Thompson's Democratic challenger Eric Jones is in a close fight for second with Republican Ray Riehle, trailing by roughly three percentage points with half the votes counted.</li><li>Both districts are solidly blue, meaning Sherman and Thompson are virtually guaranteed reelection if Republicans advance to the general election.</li></ul><p><strong>Zoom in: </strong>Rep. Doris Matsui's (D-Calif.) fate is more uncertain. The 81-year-old stood at just under 31% of the vote with a little less than half of the vote tallied as of Wednesday morning, according to the AP.</p><ul><li>Her progressive challenger Mai Vang was at 25%, with Republican Zachariah Wooden — a college undergraduate whose candidacy was boosted by Matsui's allies — close behind at 24%.</li><li>Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-Calif.), a perennial target of the left, finished ahead in his primary but may be forced to face progressive challenger Angela Gonzales-Torres in November.</li></ul><p><strong>Between the lines: </strong>While Levine and Jones <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/06/01/california-election-matsui-thompson-sherman" target="_blank">centered their pitches to voters</a> around generational change, Vang and Gonzales-Torres ran more as progressive alternatives to their establishment-backed incumbents.</p><ul><li>Age wasn't a huge a factor in the race between Gomez, 51, and Gonzales-Torres, 31.</li><li>"It's important that change is presented as both generational and policy-wise," said Litman. "And if you can't paint that picture for how things will be different, you run into some problems."</li></ul><p><strong>Zoom out: </strong>Elsewhere in the state and across the country, progressives notched some major victories.</p><ul><li><a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/03/16/hakeem-jeffries-speaker-house-democratic-primaries" target="_blank">Adam Hamawy</a>, a vocally pro-Palestinian former combat surgeon best known for <a href="https://www.nj.com/politics/2026/01/a-nj-doctor-saved-a-us-senator-in-iraq-now-hes-running-for-congress.html" target="_blank">saving Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) in Iraq</a>, won the primary to replace retiring Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-N.J.).</li><li>Smoke jumper Sam Forstag, backed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and the Congressional Progressive Caucus, is ahead in the Democratic primary in Montana's 1st district.</li><li>Progressive Randy Villegas led Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee-backed Jasmeet Bains by four points as of Wednesday morning in the fight to take on Rep. David Valadao (R-Calif.).</li></ul><p><strong>The bottom line: </strong>The generational change faction isn't losing hope of ousting older incumbents just yet.</p><ul><li>Said Litman: "The fact that these races are happening at all is indicative of how little control the establishment has to box people out or clear the field."</li></ul>

Axios

<p>The battle for the soul of the <a href="https://www.axios.com/2025/11/05/democrats-blue-wave-progressives-moderates" target="_blank">Democratic Party</a> is on the ballot Tuesday, with at least a half-dozen primaries across the country testing which wing of the party has the most juice heading into the 2026 midterms.</p><p><strong>Why it matters: </strong>Progressive and moderate<strong> </strong>Democrats have been locked in a fierce debate over how to rebuild the party's brand since its candidates lost to Donald Trump for a second time in 2024.</p><hr /><ul><li>Progressives argue that Americans are hungry for a populist, tax-the-rich agenda, while moderate and establishment-aligned Dems believe the party needs to tack to the center to win back swing voters.</li><li>This week's contests — and several others in the coming months — will help determine which of these paths Democratic voters want this year. </li><li>They'll also help lay the groundwork for the party's strategy in the run-up to the 2028 presidential election — when Trump won't be on the ballot.</li></ul><p><strong>These are the key races to watch Tuesday:</strong></p><ol><li><strong>Iowa's Senate primary: </strong>Democrats think the political environment is favorable enough that they have a chance to flip a Senate seat in this deep-red state.<strong> </strong>Josh Turek, a moderate Democratic state lawmaker and Paralympic gold medalist, is seen as the favorite in their primary against progressive Zach Wahls. A Turek victory would be a win for Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), who's <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/05/07/chuck-schumer-democratic-primaries-midterms" target="_blank">quietly indicated</a> he thinks Turek's the more electable candidate. Wahls has made attacking Schumer a key part of his campaign. The primary winner will likely face GOP Rep. Ashley Hinson this fall.</li><li><strong>California's open primary for governor: </strong>In this state's "jungle primary," the top two candidates, regardless of party, will advance to the Nov. 3 election. A leading Democrat is Tom Steyer, a billionaire philanthropist who's being advised by left-wing consultants who helped run New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani's campaign. Another is former Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, a more traditional Democrat. A Trump-endorsed Republican, Steve Hilton, is also in the mix.</li><li><strong>New Jersey's 12th Congressional District: </strong>New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders are backing progressive Adam Hamawy in the crowded Democratic primary to succeed retiring Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman in this blue seat. Hamawy, a U.S. Army veteran who's viewed as the frontrunner, also is backed by a pro-Palestinian super PAC. He's attracted <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/30/nyregion/adam-hamawy-election-nj.html" target="_blank">negative headlines</a> for his former ties to an infamous Islamist cleric. Other Democratic candidates in this central Jersey district include progressive activist Sue Altman, as well as state Assemblywoman Verlina Reynolds-Jackson and East Brunswick Mayor Brad Cohen, who are viewed as more establishment-oriented or moderate.</li><li><strong>California's 22nd Congressional District: </strong>The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has thrown its weight behind state Assembly Member Jasmeet Bains in the primary for a battleground seat in the Central Valley. Progressives have lined up behind community college professor Randy Villegas. They're both vying to take on GOP Rep. David Valadao in the fall.</li><li><strong>California's 11th Congressional District: </strong>Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi has endorsed Connie Chan, a member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, to fill the seat Pelosi's vacating.<strong> </strong>Leftist Saikat Chakrabarti, a former chief of staff to AOC who notably lacks her endorsement, is proudly anti-establishment. Another contender is state Sen. Scott Wiener, who's seen as more moderate than Chakrabarti and Chan.</li></ol><p><strong>Other races we're watching:</strong> There are several other progressive-vs.-moderate primaries in California on Tuesday, along with others testing voters' appetite for generational change, Axios' Andrew Solender <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/06/01/california-election-matsui-thompson-sherman" target="_blank">reports</a>.</p><p><strong>What's next: </strong>More ideological showdowns between Democrats are coming soon in New York, Minnesota and Michigan. </p>

Axios

<p>House Democrats are looking to Tuesday's primaries in California as a major test of the <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/03/06/house-democrats-old-primary-age-larson-sherman" target="_blank">anti-incumbency sentiment</a> among their voters.</p><p><strong>Why it matters: </strong>This will be the first time in the 2026 election when multiple House Democrats in their 70s and 80s face off against primary insurgents who have hammered them for their lengthy tenures.</p><hr /><ul><li>California Democratic Reps. Mike Thompson, Doris Matsui and Brad Sherman — all 70 or older — are among those facing tough primary fights with younger Democratic challengers.</li><li>Their Democratic colleagues are watching "all of them closely," one senior House Democrat said, as well as the LA mayor's race and the state's gubernatorial election.</li><li>"Just to see the anti-incumbent sentiment," another senior House Democrat told Axios.</li></ul><p><strong>State of play: </strong>June 2 is California's jungle primary, in which all candidates for a given office run in one contest and the top two vote-getters — regardless of party — advance to a runoff in November.</p><ul><li>Often, that dynamic matches up the top-performing Democrat and Republican. However, in several deeply blue House districts, the incumbent is more likely to face another Democrat in the fall.</li><li>This year, an unusually large number of incumbents are facing well-funded challengers who are going after their lengthy tenures and arguing that it is time for a new generation of Democratic leaders.</li></ul><p><strong>These are the House races </strong>that Democrats have their eyes on:</p><p><strong>California's 4th District: </strong>Thompson, a 75-year-old member of the centrist Blue Dog Coalition first elected in 1998, is trying to fend off 35-year-old venture capitalist Eric Jones.</p><ul><li>Both Democrats have raised huge sums, with Thompson bringing in just under $3 million as of March 31 and Jones raising over $3.2 million over the same period, including a $364,000 personal loan.</li><li>Jones has tried to harness anti-incumbency sentiment, with ads declaring that "too many Democrats have <a href="https://platform.adimpact.com/viewer/3e3b22da-b372-41c4-91a6-7fd95ca2d71d" target="_blank">been in Washington so long,</a> they're not up to the fight," and hitting Thompson as <a href="https://platform.adimpact.com/viewer/acfd9fee-adc4-48aa-9705-7bb2923d7fad" target="_blank">"corrupt" and "ineffective</a>."</li><li>Thompson, for his part, has <a href="https://platform.adimpact.com/viewer/05d276c0-3a18-41e4-8cb0-c97ba0289b7c" target="_blank">played up his anti-Trump bona fides</a> and hit Jones on his corporate background by depicting him as a "<a href="https://platform.adimpact.com/viewer/87f4d823-2ee5-418d-af48-32a8d9d72606" target="_blank">lapdog for big corporations</a>."</li></ul><p><strong>California's 7th District: </strong>81-year-old Rep. Doris Matsui, who took office in 2005, is facing a stiff challenge from progressive former Sacramento City Council member Mai Vang, 41, who has been <a href="https://t.co/1cUURtzZub" target="_blank">endorsed by the Sacramento Bee</a>.</p><ul><li>Matsui has raised eyebrows with a <a href="https://x.com/AndrewSolender/status/2055464916203524271?s=20" target="_blank">red box on her website</a> (a method campaigns use to signal super PACs) touting GOP candidate Zachariah Wooden, in what progressives say is a tactic to box Vang out of the runoff.</li><li>Inclusion PAC — an outside group whose only listed donor, a local union, also donated to Matsui's campaign — has <a href="https://docquery.fec.gov/cgi-bin/forms/C00889220/1980184/se" target="_blank">filed with the FEC</a> to spend over $100,000 on ads promoting Wooden.</li><li>This is another race defined by negative campaigning, with <a href="https://x.com/AndrewSolender/status/2056792490124951753?s=20" target="_blank">Vang's red box</a> advocating "purely negative messaging against the incumbent."</li></ul><p><strong>California's 32nd District: </strong>Rep. Brad Sherman, a 71-year-old who has been in office since 1997, is being challenged by Jake Levine, a 42-year-old former Biden administration official.</p><ul><li>Levine's campaign has, perhaps more than any other primary insurgent's, made Sherman's length of service a central issue in its messaging, running <a href="https://x.com/AndrewSolender/status/2060722509272490099?s=20" target="_blank">multiple ads</a> targeting the incumbent's 30-year tenure.</li><li>Sherman's campaign has largely ignored Levine — <a href="https://x.com/AndrewSolender/status/2055659007847596257?s=20" target="_blank">his red box</a> encourages PACs not to mention him — and has focused on portraying him as a hard-charging, anti-Trump crusader who delivers for his district.</li></ul><p><strong>Zoom out: </strong>Several incumbents below retirement age are also facing credible progressive primary challengers, including Reps. Ami Bera in the state's 3rd District and Jimmy Gomez in the 34th District.</p><ul><li>There are a slew of hotly contested open primaries as well, including to replace former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) in the 11th District.</li><li>In the 22nd District, State Assembly member Jasmeet Bains has the <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/05/26/democrats-house-races-2026-galindo-villegas-bains" target="_blank">backing of House Democrats' campaign arm </a>to take on GOP Rep. David Valadao, but first she has to defeat progressive Randy Villegas.</li></ul>

Axios

<p>Democrats <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/03/08/dnc-ken-martin-crisis" target="_blank">fighting</a> over their strategy and leadership for 2028 are locked in on savaging <strong>— </strong>or saving <strong>— </strong>the one man with a title and power: DNC chair Ken Martin.</p><p><strong>Why it matters: </strong>Martin is facing a growing crisis of confidence over the Democratic National Committee's <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/05/21/democrats-2024-autopsy-released" target="_blank">bungled autopsy</a> of the 2024 election and its <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/03/08/dnc-ken-martin-crisis" target="_blank">financial struggles</a>. This is the biggest, earliest test of the party's top brass heading into '28.</p><hr /><ul><li>So far, Martin has staved off a revolt among DNC members at a time when they're setting the calendar for the 2028 presidential primary — a key factor in determining the party's next nominee. </li><li>In fact, as some members of Congress and Democratic strategists are calling for Martin to resign, key DNC members are rallying to his defense.</li></ul><p><strong>Zoom in: </strong>The DNC's powerful rules and bylaws committee met at a D.C. hotel this week to hear the pitches of a dozen states that want to go early in the upcoming primary.</p><ul><li>The delicacy of Martin's position was apparent: He skipped the committee's public meeting, though he did quietly visit the hotel for some private conversations.</li></ul><p><strong>Since Martin released — and disavowed</strong> — an incomplete autopsy of the 2024 election this month, some Democratic operatives have argued that he lacks the credibility to manage key parts of the upcoming Democratic presidential contest. </p><ul><li>The DNC sets the primary calendar and debate process, and builds up the party's infrastructure for the eventual nominee to inherit. </li><li>"If people can't trust the DNC, what is going to happen is they're going to think the process is rigged against their candidate," said influential "Pod Save America" co-host <a href="https://x.com/CrookedMedia/status/2060166240421675087" target="_blank">Dan Pfeiffer</a> on a podcast.</li><li>"The way that Ken Martin has handled this, he has made it very hard for people to trust the DNC."</li></ul><p><strong>DNC members gathering this week </strong>struck a very different tone: They told Axios they're sticking with Martin.</p><ul><li>"There is huge support, huge support, at this committee and the party as a whole for Ken Martin," said Stuart Appelbaum, a member of the rules and bylaws committee.</li><li>Ray Buckley, leader of the New Hampshire Democratic Party, slammed Martin's critics on social media: "What some of the folks that are online might not understand is that the chair works for the DNC members, and the DNC membership to this day still overwhelmingly supports Ken."</li></ul><p><strong>Even a DNC member</strong> <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/04/12/democrats-dnc-2024-election-autopsy" target="_blank">who had publicly pushed Martin to release the autopsy earlier</a>, Vinod Thomas, said he still backs him.</p><ul><li>"Ken is a reform-minded, progressive leader. If he is forced out, he is likely to be replaced by someone who is far more aligned with insiders, consultants and donor networks," he told us in an email.</li></ul><p><strong>Between the lines: </strong>It's not surprising that DNC members, including those involved in state parties, are coming to Martin's defense.</p><ul><li>Martin previously led the Association of State Democratic Committees, and since becoming DNC chair, he's boosted funding for state parties.</li></ul><p><strong>Reality check:</strong> But some Democrats think Martin isn't out of the woods yet. If the party's congressional leaders signal they want him out — or the financial picture for the DNC significantly worsens — they believe he could be pressured to leave.</p><ul><li>Removing Martin would require at least "a majority vote" of the DNC's 400-some members, according to <a href="https://democrats.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/DNC-Charter-Bylaws-12.12.2025.pdf" target="_blank">the party's bylaws</a>.</li></ul><p><strong>Zoom out: </strong>Beyond the drama over Martin, this week's meetings offered a glimpse of the competing visions that could shape the Democratic Party's future.</p><ul><li>The arguments that state parties made in hopes of voting first in the 2028 primary reflected the party's larger debates over race, class, and which voters Democrats should prioritize in the next presidential election.</li></ul><p><strong>States such as Nevada and New Mexico</strong> highlighted their significant Latino populations to stress the need for Democrats to recapture more of a constituency that drifted to the right in 2024.</p><ul><li>Others, such as South Carolina, emphasized their large Black populations that have long been Democrats' most loyal voters.</li><li>Meanwhile, states such as Tennessee stressed being part of Appalachia, where the Democratic Party was once strong — and, they argued, could be again.</li></ul><p><strong>State officials did their own lobbying </strong>to host early primaries. </p><ul><li>Nevada Democrats held a private reception for those on the DNC's rules and bylaws panel, with Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto and Nevada Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar. New Hampshire and Michigan Democrats gave them goodie bags. </li></ul><p><strong>Donna Brazile, a longtime DNC member,</strong> told us that when it came to the state party presentations, "seven out of 12 did exceedingly well."</p><ul><li>She also signaled an openness to elevating battleground states: "I think about one thing, and that is: How do you get to 270 electoral votes?"</li></ul>

The Intercept

<p>State Sen. Scott Wiener and Rep. Jimmy Gomez easily advanced ahead of insurgent candidates who called out their positions on Israel.</p> <p>The post <a href="https://theintercept.com/2026/06/03/california-house-results-chakrabarti-wiener-gomez-gonzales-torres/">Establishment Dems Stave Off the Left in Key California Congressional Primaries</a> appeared first on <a href="https://theintercept.com">The Intercept</a>.</p>

This summary was generated by artificial intelligence and may contain errors or mischaracterizations. Always refer to the original sources for authoritative reporting.

Democrats Spend $30 Million on State Races to Control 2028 Redistricting | TwoTakes