...
By Newsweek Editors
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
On Tuesday night in Denver, a 29-year-old democratic socialist named Melat Kiros toppled a 15-term incumbent, ending Diana DeGette’s three-decade career and adding Colorado to a lengthening map of leftist primary upsets.
It came a week after three candidates endorsed by New York's Democratic Socialist Mayor Zohran Mamdani swept their House primaries, unseating Representatives Dan Goldman and Adriano Espaillat and taking an open Brooklyn-and-Queens seat.
The insurgent left is no longer an activist pressure group lobbing demands at the party from outside. It is producing likely members of Congress to join the squad of progressives already there.
Read More on Analysis
But a primary win in a deep-blue district is an audition, not a mandate. Beating an incumbent proves there is a market for insurgency, but still begs the question: What is the model for power?
The progressives who want to win and, vitally, to last should study Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the most prominent figure who has turned a viral upset into durable national standing.
It’s the ABC of AOC: authenticity, believability and competence.
Winning Primaries or Winning Politics
The leftist wave is genuine, and it is well organized.
Kiros, Espaillat’s conqueror Darializa Avila Chevalier and open-seat winner Claire Valdez were all backed by the Democratic Socialists of America and Justice Democrats.
They all ran hard against corporate money and the party establishment, beating opponents whom House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries had personally worked to save.
Notice, though, where the left won and where it did not.
Every one of those victories came in a safe Democratic seat, where the November election is likely a formality.
The one genuinely competitive race on the board—Colorado’s 8th, the state’s only toss-up—went to Manny Rutinel, a more conventional Democrat backed by Latino-outreach groups and tech donors.
That seat has flipped in each of its two elections; a Democrat won it by around 1,600 votes in 2022, and Republican Gabe Evans took it by fewer than 2,500 in 2024.
It is exactly the kind of district that decides House majorities, and it did not reward a factional candidate.
The progressive left has proved it can beat Democratic incumbents. The open question is whether it can produce politicians who become national figures, their reach and reputation growing beyond the districts that elected them.
A is for Authenticity
AOC entered Congress as the ultimate insurgent.
A 28-year-old who beat Joe Crowley, the fourth-ranking House Democrat, on a shoestring, drawing a higher share of small donors than any other member of the incoming Congress.
What made the story stick was that it was true.
She was born in Parkchester in the Bronx; her mother was raised in Puerto Rico and worked as a domestic worker; her father, a second-generation Bronxite, ran a small business.
After his death, medical bills threatened the family home and she waited tables and tended bars to keep it.
Her 2018 campaign made the argument in a single line: “Women like me aren’t supposed to run for office.”
Biography is not mere branding when it actually explains the politics behind the candidate.
AOC’s leftism sounds less like a seminar reading list and more like a life lived, with real and painful experience of foreclosure, low wages, high rent, health care bills, and struggling public schools.
Voters can disagree with her prescriptions and still understand why she truly cares about the issues. Progressives who sound like they are reciting a campus briefing note never clear that bar. You can’t really fake it.
B is for Believability
Authenticity is where the politics comes from, but believability is whether voters think you mean what you say.
AOC’s advantage here is coherence, not moderation. She doesn’t triangulate or shapeshift to survive.
She has not drifted to the center—Medicare for All, the Green New Deal, antitrust and labor power are all still there—but she frames them in moral and material terms rather than as loyalty tests for an in-group.
“I’m an educator, an organizer, a working-class New Yorker,” she said in that first campaign, and the self-description has held up since.
There have been messy political battles on her way up, especially with Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic leadership. But AOC has learned the political art of compromise without surrender.
She backed Pelosi for Speaker when the caucus math demanded it, helped shape Joe Biden’s climate platform after campaigning for Bernie Sanders, voted for the imperfect Inflation Reduction Act and then pushed to strip out its fossil-fuel concessions.
And she has even worked with Republicans on ethics legislation when the target was congressional stock trading.
The pattern is discipline. Take the win on the table, keep the original principle alive, and know which fights require a vote rather than a viral clip.
Voters can forgive an ideology more easily than they forgive a phony. Even her critics generally know what she believes and why. That is rarer, and more valuable, than it sounds.
C is for Competence
This is where the model separates from the slogans.
Early in her congressional career, during Michael Cohen’s testimony to the House Oversight Committee in February 2019—a hearing most members used to grandstand—the freshman from the Bronx used her five minutes to build a case.
“To your knowledge, did the president ever provide inflated assets to an insurance company?” she asked.
Cohen said yes, and named the Trump Organization executives who could corroborate it. She asked where the committee would find proof, and drew out the answer: the financial statements and the tax returns.
That line of questioning helped open the attorney general’s investigation into the Trump Organization’s finances—a case in which a court found the company liable for fraud.
The outcome was messier. In August 2025 a New York appeals court threw out the penalty, the roughly half-billion-dollar disgorgement award, as an unconstitutionally excessive fine—though it upheld the fraud finding, and the attorney general is appealing to the state’s highest court.
But the point about AOC’s method survives the appeal intact. She did not merely denounce corruption. She asked the next question, named the next witness and pointed investigators toward the next document.
The Cohen hearing was not a one-off. In April 2026, AOC used an Energy and Commerce hearing with EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin to press him on glyphosate, Bayer and the administration’s posture toward Roundup litigation.
She did not simply accuse the agency of being too close to industry. She had receipts.
AOC cited visitor logs and internal EPA emails, then walked Zeldin through the timing: Bayer’s interest in Supreme Court action, the EPA’s review of glyphosate and the agency’s withdrawal of support for California’s cancer warning.
Related Story
The AI Primary Came for a Latino Swing District
The exchange showed the same method as Cohen, updated for a policy fight rather than a presidential scandal. Know the regulatory record, bring the documents, ask the official to commit, then read the paper trail back to them.
In June 2026, she took the same method into Medicare Advantage.
Questioning a health-policy witness, she drilled into the broker system that steers seniors into private plans: who pays the agents, what perks they receive, whether they owe a fiduciary duty to patients, and how much insurer compensation has grown.
The issue was technical, but the political point was clear. A progressive who can explain broker incentives, reimbursement formulas, and patient risk has moved beyond slogans and into politics proper.
Then there’s the legislative proof. In June, the House passed her geothermal permitting bill as part of a bipartisan energy package.
It was not a Green New Deal poster; it was a technical change to help the Interior Department process geothermal leases.
That—the discipline to turn a moral position into an evidentiary one and perhaps even the law itself—is competence.
Popularity Contest
The reward for practicing all three is a politician who outgrew her caricature.
A YouGov survey last year put AOC at +61 net favorability among Democrats—tied with Tim Walz and behind only Barack Obama, Kamala Harris, Bernie Sanders, and Joe Biden, and the only figure in the party’s top 10 who has never run for president or vice president.
Nationally she is underwater at −6, but that is the survey’s average, and it is a good deal less negative than Joe Biden (−19), Hillary Clinton (−20), Nancy Pelosi (−24) or Chuck Schumer (−31).
She raised a personal record $9.6 million in a single quarter without a dollar from corporate PACs, and today she sits fourth in RealClearPolling’s 2028 Democratic primary average at 11 percent, behind Harris, Gavin Newsom and Pete Buttigieg.
She is a plausible contender, not the favorite. But that a democratic socialist who arrived in Washington as a ready-made Republican attack ad now appears on that list at all is the whole point.
It didn’t happen by chance; she put herself there.
Tlaib and Omar
Set that trajectory against the likes of her progressive House allies like Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib, two other members of the “Squad”.
The key difference is that their national brands are easier for opponents to collapse into a single controversy.
In November 2023 the House voted 234–188 to censure Tlaib over her rhetoric on the Israel-Hamas war, with 22 Democrats joining Republicans; she said her words had been distorted.
But the Israel issue, and her response to it, which her critics said was sympathetic to the militant group Hamas, came to define Tlaib in the eyes of many.
Omar’s vulnerability is different. She is not only a progressive lawmaker with controversial positions, she is also a Somali-born former refugee whose defense of immigrants and Somali Americans has become inseparable from how opponents attack her.
The $250 million Feeding Our Future fraud case in her home state of Minnesota has deepened that problem, giving critics a local scandal they can fuse with arguments about refugee resettlement, welfare abuse and assimilation.
Republicans have also sought financial records from companies linked to her husband, Timothy Mynett, after Omar’s disclosures showed those business interests rising sharply in reported value.
Whatever one makes of either episode, the same survey that put AOC at −6 nationally put Tlaib at −10 and Omar at −14.
None of this means that progressives must become bland, traditional politicians. But AOC shows they can be polarizing without becoming politically small.
It perhaps helps that, as AOC says herself, she has her sights set on goals that are, as she put it, “bigger” than even the presidency.
"My ambition is to change this country,” AOC told Democratic strategist David Axelrod at a Chicago event in May, when asked about her 2028 ambitions.
“Presidents come and go, Senate, House seats, elected officials come and go, but single payer healthcare is forever. A living wage is forever. Worker's rights are forever. Women's rights.”
She continued: "I don't want to make decisions from a place of what's in it for me. I want to make decisions from a place of how are we going to change the country?"
Nontransferable Talent
A strong objection is that the ABC describes talent, not a transferable method.
AOC is an unusually gifted communicator who arrived at an unusually good moment; telling the next cohort to be authentic and competent is a little like telling a tennis rookie to be Serena.
There is also a real hazard in the electability frame itself.
For a decade, “you’re not credible” has been the establishment’s way of telling the left to sit down and be quiet. A movement that internalizes that too deeply can talk itself out of fights worth having.
And a fair skeptic will note the model is unproven at the top: AOC has never won a general election outside a safe seat, and −6 nationally is not yet a coalition of voters who can deliver something more meaningful.
But here is what would prove the thesis wrong.
If a candidate who leans into factional identity—closer to the Tlaib profile than the AOC one—wins a competitive statewide race in 2026, or carries a national primary lane in 2028 without broadening, then breadth was never the binding constraint and the ABC was overfit to one career.
And if AOC herself stalls the moment she faces a general electorate, then the competence she is admired for was really just a talent for friendly rooms.
Both are testable. Neither has happened yet.
Progressive primary wins are not the finish line. They are auditions. Authenticity gets voters to listen. Believability gets them to trust. Competence gives them a reason to keep listening after the slogan fades.
The left has learned how to win a primary. AOC is the one who learned the harder thing, and she left them the notes.
In a polarized era, the center is dismissed as bland. At Newsweek, ours is different: The Courageous Center—it's not "both sides," it's sharp, challenging and alive with ideas. We follow facts, not factions. If that sounds like the kind of journalism you want to see thrive, we need you.
When you become a Newsweek Member, you support a mission to keep the center strong and vibrant. Members enjoy: Ad-free browsing, exclusive content and editor conversations. Help keep the center courageous. Join today.
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines