The victory of the Democratic Party in the legislative elections in the United States has left a new question on the table: which faction of the party is best prepared to broaden its electoral support. Although the so-called "blue wave" enabled Democrats to regain control of Congress, an analysis by The Economist published on November 6 points out that it was the moderate candidates who contributed the most to beating expectations, especially in the territories where Donald Trump had obtained strong results two years earlier.
The study, titled The blue wave was powered by moderate Democrats, compares the electoral behavior of moderate and progressive candidates with the results that were expected in their respective districts. Its main conclusion is that the centrists performed better than expected in a large part of the competitive districts, while many of the progressive victories came in territories where the Democratic Party already had a solid electoral base.
The analysis comes after elections that have dealt a hard blow to the Republicans. The Democrats regained the House of Representatives and the Senate, driven by discontent with the Trump Administration and by voters’ economic concerns.
Featured story
Left turn or victory in the center? This is what Democrats who have won the midterms are like
5 minutes
Moderates outperformed expectations in Republican territories
To make its comparison, The Economist uses as a reference the percentage of the two-party vote obtained by Democrats in the 2024 presidential elections and cross-references it with the performance of its candidates in the 2026 legislative elections.
The result allows distinguishing between victories achieved in traditionally Democratic territories and those in which the party managed to improve the forecast in more hotly contested areas.
In the chart published by the magazine, moderate candidates are shown concentrated in districts where Democrats had received approximately between 40% and 50% of the 2024 presidential vote. In numerous cases, their results exceeded expectations, with differences that reached beyond five percentage points.
Progressives, by contrast, competed more often in territories that had strongly supported the Democratic presidential candidate. Although they also achieved victories, their results in many cases fell below the forecasts used in the study.
The comparison introduces a relevant nuance: winning in a favorable district does not necessarily require attracting voters from other parties, while prevailing in a contested district usually requires a broader electoral coalition.
Victory opens a debate over the Democrats’ direction
The results once again fuel a discussion that has been dividing the Democratic Party for years. On the one hand, moderate factions argue for the need to compete for independent voters and for the electors who have supported the Republicans. On the other, the progressive wing bets on mobilizing new voters with more ambitious proposals on economic and social matters.
The analysis by The Economist provides arguments for the first interpretation, although its data do not allow concluding that a moderate candidate would necessarily have obtained better results than a progressive one in the same district.
The territorial distribution of both currents conditions the comparison. Centrists usually present themselves in competitive districts, while progressives have greater presence in Democratic strongholds. In addition, the study measures differences with respect to certain electoral expectations, not only the percentage of votes obtained by each candidate.
Among the progressives who came out victorious is Abdul El-Sayed, elected senator for Michigan, one of the prominent names of the Democratic left wing. His victory shows that progressive candidates can also secure significant victories, although the general behavior of the groups analyzed by The Economist was different.
The 2028 elections, on the horizon
The discussion takes on special importance in light of the upcoming presidential elections, scheduled for 2028. After regaining the Congress, the Democrats will have to decide what political message and what type of candidacy they want to present against the Republicans.
The result of the legislative elections offers different readings. On the one hand, the party managed to expand its support in territories that had voted for Trump in 2024. On the other, the magnitude of the victory was also related to rejection of the management of the Republican president, especially on economic issues.
According to an analysis by the Financial Times, Democrats improved their results among lower-income households and among voters concerned about the cost of living. They also regained support in Hispanic communities that had backed the Republicans in the previous presidential elections.
All the same, the main lesson from The Economist’s study is that the breadth of the Democratic victory is not explained solely by support from its traditional strongholds. The party managed to improve its prospects in competitive territories, where moderate candidates played an especially prominent role.