WASHINGTON — Capitalist or (democratic) socialist? That’s the question starting to drive a wedge between the moderate and progressive wings of the Democratic PartyWASHINGTON — Capitalist or (democratic) socialist? That’s the question starting to drive a wedge between the moderate and progressive wings of the Democratic Party

A five word pledge is splitting Democrats

2026/06/27 20:42
11 min read
For feedback or concerns regarding this content, please contact us at crypto.news@mexc.com

WASHINGTON — Capitalist or (democratic) socialist? That’s the question starting to drive a wedge between the moderate and progressive wings of the Democratic Party.

Democratic Party leaders say there’s nothing to see here, even after the three progressives New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani endorsed won their primaries earlier this week, which has the party’s leftward flank all but dancing in the streets.

“What we are seeing is a shift into a new era of American governance that for the first time is starting to not be governed by that baby boomer generation,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) told congressional reporters Thursday. “I do think that we're starting to see a new time.”

On the other side of the political coin, Republican pundits and members of Congress alike are now giddy going into the midterms as they prepare to paint the entire Democratic Party as far-left whackos.

“It’s indicative of where the Democrats are going,” Rep. Byron Donalds (R-FL) told Raw Story. “Their party's more radical.”

The pledge dividing Democrats

Democratic leaders are trying to downplay their party’s differences, but it’s undeniable that there’s a debate raging amongst Democrats over whether (democratic) socialism is the proper response to two terms of President Donald Trump and the broader MAGA movement.

Even before this week’s New York City primary returns, moderate Democratic Reps. Tom Suozzi (D-NY) and Adam Gray (D-CA) signed onto a new Promise to America pledge that declares: “we are capitalist, not socialist.”

The pledge itself is dividing Democrats.

“I don't even know what that is. I think it's a made-up thing,” Rep. Mark Pocan (D-WI) told Raw Story. “I honestly have heard zero about this. I have heard zero about it. I do not take it as a serious anything.”

Pocan, a chair emeritus of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, dismisses this latest effort by moderate Democrats.

“If someone is actually coming up with an idea like that, they have so much extra time that they need to either learn how to knit or something else constructive,” Pocan said.

The idea’s real, alright. At last check, there are now 15 signatories to that Promise to America pledge.

Screengrab of Promise to America pledge

Ten signatories are current Democratic members of the House, while the others are candidates running in battleground districts in Arizona, Colorado, Texas and two in North Carolina.

Democratic Party leaders may not want to admit the growing divide in their ranks, but they’re also doing all they can to avoid the “socialist” labels being lobbed from the right.

“I'm a capitalist,” Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-CA), who chairs the House Democratic Caucus, told Raw Story at the Capitol.

“So you're not worried about these wins in New York?” Raw Story pressed.

“I'm not,” Aguilar said before he explained Democrats’ strategy to regain control of the House by capturing 218 seats nationwide this fall. “Look, our path to 218 didn't have anything to do with, like, those races, so our ability to get the majority is, you know, the same today as it was before New York and so we just got to go win. My assumption is they're going to be members who support the Democratic agenda here.”

“Socialists sliding right into communists”

Because the three progressives won primaries in solidly blue districts, this week’s New York returns aren’t changing Democratic leaders’ math ahead of November, but it’s a different story on the other side of the aisle.

“A wake-up call. We're at the precipice of a movement that has never worked in the history of this country or the world,” Rep. Ralph Norman (R-SC) told Raw Story. “People need to realize votes have consequences. They're going to destroy New York as California's been destroyed.”

While Democratic leaders deny a far-left shift for the party, Republicans argue that having more progressives in Congress will surely impact the party’s agenda should they win this fall.

“Socialists sliding right into communists, depending on your political worldview,” Donalds said. “People are saying how this town doesn't work. Well, with people like that coming here, it's going to work even less.”

Donalds is running for Florida governor, but he’s still been following the redistricting battles nationwide and says the GOP is well situated going into this fall’s midterms.

“I'm feeling good about November,” Donalds said.

“Why?” Raw Story asked.

“Well, I mean, are Democrats motivated? Yeah, they are,” Donalds said. “But I also think that, you know, for Republican voters, you know, we largely accomplished a good chunk of what the president set out to do when he ran two years ago.”

Like most card-carrying Republicans, Donalds is banking on his party being buoyed at the polls by Trump’s migration crackdown and economic growth. But he’s smiling.

“I think voters want to have common sense in their government,” Donalds said. “We'll be fine.”

More moderate Republicans who are perennial targets of Democrats aren’t so bullish, though.

“Your thoughts on the Democratic Socialists who won up in New York?” Raw Story asked. “Does that help you and other more moderate Republicans out?”

“That's between the voters and the candidates. I mean, they made their choice,” Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA) told Raw Story. “Certainly not an ideology I subscribe to, that's for sure, but I respect the democratic process and that's who was selected.”

“We're starting to see a new time”

With seven incumbents having now been ousted by primary voters on both sides of the aisle, this year’s midterms are “already above the postwar historical average” for incumbent losses, according to the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics.

Sensing voter anger with the Washington establishment, a record-breaking 76 incumbents are leaving Congress at the end of the year.

In more than 20 states and a handful of U.S. territories, primary voters have yet to weigh in this cycle, but change is surely in the air coast to coast.

“I do think that we're starting to see a new time,” Ocasio-Cortez told reporters on the Capitol steps. “It's normal to see these developments happen. I think this is part of that process. And again, I think this is about ideas.”

To Ocasio-Cortez and her progressive “Squad,” this electoral upheaval is long overdue.

“This is about fighting for not just any change, but actual substantive change that people are going to feel in their lives,” Ocasio-Cortez said. “And so I think what people want to see is, you know, while there may be personalities, I think what they want to see is policy.”

The laundry list of demands from progressive voters is long, which is why AOC says the Democratic Party can’t take the energy and enthusiasm from their party’s far-left base for granted.

“Are we fighting to guarantee health care for every American? Are we trying to raise wages? Are we tackling corporations that are, you know, price gouging us, building out AI data centers and poisoning people's water wells? Are they going to see us actually take these people on?” Ocasio-Cortez asked. “Or are they going to see us take their money and look the other way?”

To Ocasio-Cortez and her fellow progressives, no matter the label, their mandate is clear.

“What we are seeing is people want us to take a vigorous approach in taking on big money,” Ocasio-Cortez said.

Mary L. Trump, the niece of President Donald Trump and daughter of Mr. Trump’s late brother, Fred Trump Jr., revealed this week what she argued had shaped her uncle into “a destroyed human being.”

Trump’s father, Fred Trump, a successful real estate developer, gave his son and current U.S. president “at least $413 million in today’s dollars,” and “much of it through tax dodges in the 1990s,” The New York Times reported in 2018. That enormous sum of money, Mary Trump told former MSNBC host Joy Reid in an interview published this week, played an outsized role in shaping “the controversial president’s upbringing and future outlook,” The Mirror reported Saturday.

“I think the greatest indictment of my grandparents is that they had five children, and in very different ways, every single one of them was a destroyed human being,” Mary Trump told Reid, according to The Mirror. “Now, my grandmother is a separate issue, but my grandfather was the one with all of the power in the family. He was a sociopath. So that's a real big disadvantage to start your life at.”

Mary Trump also argued that Fred Trump's apparent favoritism toward Donald Trump over his siblings only deepened what she characterized as the president's obsession with money.

“And the only thing literally that he...that mattered to him was money. And he taught his other children that lesson, too,” Mary Trump said.

“Thankfully, my dad wasn't like that, but Donald certainly was. And he turned my entire family into a zero-sum game. There could only be one person. And my grandfather, for reasons that I still don't completely understand, picked Donald. And over the course of my grandfather's life, he threw $410 million at Donald, all of which he squandered."

CONTINUE READINGShow less

The release of a Donald Trump “commemorative” US passport, featuring an incomprehensible message from the president, baffled a conservative pundit on Saturday morning, which led to gales of laughter on MS NOW.

Before moving on to more serious topics, “The Weekend” co-host Jackie Alemany told the panel, “Let's talk about Donald Trump's new commemorative passport. This features a picture of the President leaning over scowling with his signature scowl, but it also has a new catchphrase on it. His message: ‘Welcome, but be good.’”

That led to an initial outburst of laughter and all five panelists talking over each other before conservative journalist David Drucker attempted, “I mean sure, we should all be good, whether you're coming here or not.”

“I don't — I mean, what do you do with that?” he asked before pausing, which led to another outburst of laughter.

Boston Globe columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr interjected, “Does he understand what a passport does? A passport allows you to travel —.”

”To leave the country!” co-host Eugene Daniels interrupted.

“We’re all immigrants until he says we're not, so maybe that's what that it means,” Drucker joked.

“I can't imagine traveling abroad and presenting that, you know, proudly and just wondering what the — the impression that I'd be making,” Atkins Stohr added to more laughing.

- YouTube youtu.be

CONTINUE READINGShow less

President Donald Trump’s Board of Peace – the international body established to oversee Gaza’s reconstruction, on which the president serves as its lifelong chairman – created a draft resolution designed to grant its members broad legal immunity in the case of Palestinian deaths, The Guardian reported Saturday.

“It looks like an attempt to exempt the board, and all of its personnel, from accountability for potential legal violations,” said Emily Schaeffer Omer-Man, a professor at American University in Washington, D.C., speaking with The Guardian.

The Board of Peace was announced by Trump in late 2025, officially established in January and endorsed by the United Nations to carry out its stated goal of overseeing Gaza’s reconstruction. However, according to a draft resolution obtained by The Guardian, its members are apparently considering pursuing a plan to shield them from legal accountability, with Trump exclusively granted the power under the draft to "waive someone's legal immunity,” the outlet reported.

“Several lawyers pointed to the specific risks associated with section 7 of the draft resolution, entitled ‘Third Party Liability/Claims,’ which lays out a system for the Board of Peace to consider and adjudicate any claims for ‘property loss or damage and for personal injury, illness or death’ arising from its work in Gaza,” The Guardian’s report reads.

In effect, the resolution was “basically saying there’s no external oversight, including applicable international law regarding occupation,” according to Noura Erakat, a professor at Rutgers New Brunswick, speaking with The Guardian.

The resolution would also serve as a tool for the Board of Peace to engage in “illegal confiscation of Palestinian property,” The Guardian reported, citing the final section of the draft agreement that states that the board “shall be provided, free of charge, public premises and facilities needed for the accomplishment of the missions in Gaza.”

The White House directed questions to the Board of Peace, which ultimately refuted The Guardian's characterization of the draft resolution.

"There is no operative resolution or immunity framework of the kind described in your questions… Any suggestion that this process is designed to create lawlessness or impunity is wrong, misleading and gets the issue entirely backwards," an official with the Board of Peace told The Guardian.

CONTINUE READINGShow less
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact crypto.news@mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

Newbies:Deposit $100, Get $1,000

Newbies:Deposit $100, Get $1,000Newbies:Deposit $100, Get $1,000

Plus Up to a $50 Referral Bonus