"If Democrats are going to earn the confidence of ... Americans this November and beyond, the answer will not be found in the Democratic Socialists of America’s (DSA) platform."
Don’t take my word for it. Those are the words of Democrat Tom Suozzi, who represents New York’s 3rd Congressional District, in an op-ed for The Free Press. And he’s offering a warning for his own party, given the DSA’s precipitous rise in the last year.
Yesterday, the House passed H.Res.1490, which “condemns and denounces socialism in all its forms, including the Democratic Socialists of America and opposes the implementation of socialist policies in the United States.” Just eight Democrats voted for it. Suozzi, however, voted against it, claiming his opposition was really to a SAVE Act promotion attached to the resolution, which his campaign called a “poison pill.” He and other Democrat “no” voters do have a point, and Republicans clearly added the SAVE portion just to tweak Democrats and stoke their opposition.
But if socialism is such a dire threat to America — and it is — then why not vote for the resolution anyway? Well, Suozzi and three other Democrats offered an alternate anti-socialism resolution stripped of the SAVE language. It’s quite the history lesson on the murderous horrors of socialism and communism, and every Democrat should at least read and reflect on it.
Most Democrats, however, opposed the GOP version because they embrace socialism, either openly or as closet fans, and they do so despite — or perhaps because — it’s an ideology completely at odds with American Liberty.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries even promised “a serious response” for Jared Golden and Gluesenkamp Perez, the two Democrats who broke ranks to “blindside the entire House Democratic Caucus” and ensure the resolution made it to the floor in the first place.
Suozzi is one of only a handful of Democrats who seem to genuinely reject what he calls the DSA’s “ideological takeover” of the Democrat Party. He warns, “Although relatively small in number — the organization counts 120,000 members in a country of some 330 million people — the DSA is aggressive and disciplined.” Maybe the number of people literally paying DSA dues is low, but at least Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez made sure to renew her DSA dues last week. Regardless, the vast majority of Democrats feel obliged to bow in deference to the DSA mob.
Suozzi also offers an insight that says more than perhaps he meant to say: “The lesson is not that parties should silence ideological movements. It is that intensity is not the same as broad public support, and success in a primary is not the same as electability in November.”
In other words, while he expresses real dismay at the Fidel Castro-like platform planks of the DSA, that does not make Suozzi or any other “moderate” Democrat actually moderate. The Leftmedia happily throws around the term “moderate” to apply to anyone to the right of Karl Marx, while describing conservatives as “far right.” Not every “moderate” is a socialist, but neither are they centrists.
To illustrate my case, let’s look at yesterday’s primary race in Massachusetts, where Senator Edward Markey whooped Representative Seth Moulton in a contest defined by the phony “moderate” terminology. Markey won 65-35.
Moulton was supposedly the “moderate” candidate, I suppose because he once ventured tepid opposition to boys playing in girls' sports. “I have two little girls,” he said in 2024. “I don’t want them getting run over on a playing field by a male or formerly male athlete, but as a Democrat I’m supposed to be afraid to say that.”
But he has spent the last two years walking back that assertion, now insisting that it’s desirable as long as we have a “discussion about ... safety and fairness.” If he can’t even moderate on the gender cult, the word no longer has any meaning.
Markey went all-in on “transgender” athletes, saying, “Trans athletes should be able to play.” That's a straw man. No one says athletes can’t compete. Normal Americans just don’t believe that men should compete with women.
Meanwhile, Moulton insisted in one ad, “Senator Markey and I want the same things.” How does that make him the moderate? He ran his entire campaign essentially on the theme that Markey is too old and it’s time for “generational change.” Is that now the moderate position?
Moulton, 47, wasn't even born when Markey came to Congress in the year of America's bicentennial — that would be 50 years ago. Markey is 80 now and will be 86 at the end of his next term. Aren’t Democrats supposed to be the party of young people? So why do they run their side of Congress (and the White House with Joe Biden) like a senior living facility?
Perhaps age is a state of mind, and Markey does a better job keeping up with the kids these days on the DSA ideas permeating the party. He is, after all, Green New Deal pals with AOC.
“I frankly don’t care how old a politician is,” said a university student interviewed by The Washington Post. “I care if their ideas match those of the next generation.”
So, what does Markey believe?
Well, all he has done over his career is careen to the Left. For example, when he came to Congress in 1976, he opposed abortion, even supporting a constitutional amendment to ban it. Now, he wants to trans the kids, which he calls “life-saving,” “medically necessary,” “evidence-based,” and “essential.”
Early in his career, Markey also supported school prayer, the death penalty, and immigration enforcement. He now opposes all three and even calls for the DSA position of abolishing ICE. His current priorities? “We need to slash the Pentagon budget, and we need to impeach Donald Trump!”
It certainly seems that Suozzi and other socialism skeptics have their work cut out for them because, at the moment, the DSA is commandeering the bad ship Democrat.
