The left’s narrative that democratic socialist candidates speak for the working class is increasingly at odds with the data. Supporters of these candidates are often affluent and highly educated, a pattern that held in recent primary contests in New York City and Maine.
In Maine, Democratic Senate nominee Graham Platner has built his campaign on fiery rhetoric against the wealthy, declaring in his announcement video that “the enemy is the oligarchy” and that billionaires have made the state “unlivable for working-class people.” Yet New York Times polling shows Platner trailing incumbent Republican Susan Collins by 21 points among non-college-educated voters. His supporters are far more likely to hold college degrees than Collins’s, undercutting the claim that his message resonates with blue-collar Mainers.
This disconnect was also visible in New York City’s recent Democratic House primaries. Darializa Avila Chevalier, a candidate with ties to far-left groups that advocate abolishing borders and private property, won her primary but performed better among higher-income voters. Her opponent, incumbent Rep. Adriano Espaillat, carried lower-income areas by 40 points. Claire Valdez, another socialist-aligned candidate who won her primary, similarly drew support from wealthier precincts.
Conservative commentator Matt Walsh described Chevalier’s victory as a takeover by “third world communists” who hate America. But as Batya Ungar-Sargon noted, Chevalier lost the Bronx portion of her district by 30 points and also lost predominantly Black and Hispanic areas. She won with young, college-educated, and higher-income voters—a demographic profile that aligns more with elite leftism than with immigrant or minority communities.
The contrast with Rep. Ritchie Torres, who represents the South Bronx and is not a democratic socialist, is instructive. Torres, a staunch supporter of Israel, easily won reelection in a district that is disproportionately Black and low-income. Chevalier did slightly better with Black voters than her opponent, but she was crushed among Hispanic voters.
This undermines the idea that democratic socialism is a foreign ideology carried by immigrants. Affluent, native-born whites and Blacks are just as likely—or more likely—to support left-wing policies than many immigrant groups, particularly Hispanic immigrants. Even if immigration were drastically restricted, the core constituency for socialism would remain: the highly educated and well-off.
The pattern suggests that democratic socialism is not a working-class uprising but a movement of what critics call “champagne socialists.” As Robby Soave, co-host of The Hill’s “Rising,” wrote, “It’s wealthy and elite-educated leftists inflicting Platner’s politics on the rest of their party.”
For Maine Democrats, this poses a strategic dilemma. A recent Fox poll shows Collins holding a narrow 3-point lead over Platner, but the campaign’s reliance on elite support may prove a liability in a general election. Meanwhile, the broader trend raises questions about whether the party’s leftward shift reflects genuine popular demand or the influence of a privileged minority.
