Really interesting (and hopeful!) take from Dan Pfeiffer on the recent primary to fill Mikie Sherrill’s seat.

Premise

I want to start by saying this plainly: the New Jersey special Democratic primary to replace Mikie Sherrill is going to send shockwaves through the Democratic establishment. This is the most consequential Democratic primary result since Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez defeated Joe Crowley in 2018.

About the NJ-11 Race and Primary Candidates

Seriously.

Eleven Democrats ran in the special election to complete Sherrill’s term. (There will still be a regular primary in June, and the winner of that race will be on the ballot in November for the full term beginning next year.)

The major contenders were former congressman Tom Malinowski, progressive organizer Analilia Mejia, former lieutenant governor Tahesha Way, and longtime New Jersey political operative Brendan Gill.

Malinowski was widely viewed as the early frontrunner. The long-entrenched New Jersey political machine lined up behind Gill. AIPAC backed Way. Mejia, meanwhile, was endorsed by Bernie Sanders, AOC, and a number of prominent progressive leaders.

As of this writing, not all votes have been counted, and most outlets have not formally called the race. But Mejia is leading by roughly 600 votes. Almost no one expected her to finish first. Most observers assumed she would place fourth.

Even if Malinowski ultimately ekes out a narrow win, the underlying signal remains unchanged. This election represents a fundamental shift in the Democratic political landscape.

Three Takeways

First, Democratic voters remain deeply angry at the Democratic establishment.

People describing this as a “Democratic Tea Party” miss what the Tea Party actually was. But one thing is now unmistakable: being the establishment candidate—with establishment money and endorsements—is a liability in a Democratic primary.

Mejia ran on the slogan, “Same old blue won’t do.” That message landed. And it should make a number of sitting Democrats very nervous. The vulnerability for incumbents is not that they are insufficiently moderate—it is that they are seen as part of a political establishment that voters no longer trust.

Second, Democratic voters want fighters who push bold, progressive ideas—especially on affordability.

This is what powered Zohran Mamdani in New York City last year, and it is what powered Mejia this week.

Mejia called for a $25 minimum wage. Most primary voters understand that Congress is not going to more than triple the federal minimum wage tomorrow. But the point of the proposal is not legislative realism—it is signaling. It tells voters she is willing to fight for them and is not calibrating her positions around donor comfort. The endorsements from Sanders and AOC reinforced that signal.

Third, ICE has become politically radioactive.

In a deeply misguided attempt to help their preferred candidate, AIPAC spent more than $2 million attacking Malinowski for voting to fund ICE in 2019.

The attack itself is misleading—it implies Malinowski supports what ICE is doing today. But politically, it worked. Any perception that a Democrat is anything less than a full-throated opponent of Trump’s masked ICE operations is now a major vulnerability in a primary.

So what does this mean?

In the short term, it makes a Department of Homeland Security shutdown significantly more likely. After what just happened in New Jersey, Democrats will be far more reluctant to agree to any funding deal that does not include meaningful and enforceable guardrails on ICE.

There is always a risk of over-interpreting a multi-candidate special election shaped by unique local dynamics. But the longer-term implications are real. We are watching the erosion of the old political order in real time. The advantages of incumbency, institutional backing, and large fundraising networks are being eclipsed by a more grassroots, attention-driven politics that rewards candidates who challenge elites and generate genuine excitement.

This does not mean the furthest-left candidate will always win. But in this moment, candidates who are clearly outside the establishment—and who are bold, interesting, and focused on affordability—have a powerful advantage.

The consulting playbook Democrats have relied on for a generation no longer fits the political environment.

The only real question is whether the party’s professional class figures that out before more of its candidates do.

I think we’ve heard more about NJ this year than ever before, probably because their being elections are in the off year, and we are most definitely paying attention.

Anyway, Dan’s take on this leaves me hopeful.  What do you guys think?

Dan Pfeiffer on the Recent NJ Primary to Replace Mikie SherrillPost + Comments (121)