Progressives and Republicans Agree on the Least Electable Democrats

New data confirm Republicans are working to nominate easily beatable progressives

Last month, new FEC filings confirmed what Democrats had suspected for months. Two pop-up super PACs with progressive-sounding names like Real Change PAC and Lead Left PAC had been spending millions across Democratic congressional primaries to boost the candidates Republicans most wanted to face in November. Both groups received all of their funding from Conservative Americans PAC, a Republican-aligned organization that has also written checks to the Senate Leadership Fund and a host of other GOP groups. The money itself flows from the American Prosperity Alliance, a Virginia-based nonprofit with reported ties to former Speaker Kevin McCarthy. The structure was engineered to avoid pre-election disclosure. It worked.

The Strategy

The strategy is simple: if you can pick your opponent, do it. Republicans identified Democratic primary candidates they viewed as weaker general election nominees (typically those who were too progressive for their district) and spent significant money to put them over the top. They did so because they were scared to face the Democrats who they viewed as harder to beat in November.

The record is mixed. Lead Left spent over $1 million trying to defeat Sheriff’s Deputy Johnny Garcia by boosting Maureen Galindo, a sex therapist who had made antisemitic comments online in Texas’ 35th District. Garcia ended up winning handily anyway.

Real Change burned through $650,000 trying to sink Rebecca Bennett in New Jersey’s 7th, and she advanced convincingly out of a crowded primary.

But in the two districts that matter most to the House majority math, Republicans picked the winners, making it harder for Democrats to win in November.

Maine 2

When Jared Golden announced his retirement, I was in the middle of drafting a piece titled: “A vote for Matt Dunlap is a vote for Paul LePage.” I shelved it, thinking it was no longer necessary and assuming the field would sort itself out. I was wrong.

Maine’s Second was going to be difficult for any Democrat not named Jared Golden. Golden is a former Marine who voted against Biden’s stimulus, built a decade-long brand as the most independent Democrat in the House, and still nearly lost in 2024 in a district Trump carried by 9 points. It takes a special Democrat to be able to compete and win in a district like Maine’s 2nd.

Dunlap is not that. He ran an unabashedly progressive campaign, including supporting Medicare for All, featuring Bernie Sanders in his ads, and rallying alongside embattled Senate nominee Graham Platner. NRCC polling from May showed LePage leading Dunlap by 10 points. Not the type of resume that can win a Trump +9 district. Republicans knew that as well.

Joe Baldacci was viewed as the strongest Democrat in the race and was added to the DCCC’s Red to Blue list. Baldacci is a state senator who served as mayor of Bangor twice. He is a self-described “independent-minded Democrat” who “worked with Republicans or independents to get legislation passed”. He’s the type of Democrat who could keep this tough seat on the board for Democrats. The Republicans sensed an opportunity to pick their candidate, and they pounced. Real Change PAC, another pop-up GOP-backed PAC, spent over $500,000 boosting Dunlap and attacking Baldacci. A senior House Democrat told Axios the seat is “probably lost.”

California 22

In one of the cycle’s most contentious primaries, Republicans were not even trying to hide their meddling. The Congressional Leadership Fund openly spent $250k to boost far-left progressive Randy Villegas over the more moderate candidate, Dr. Jasmeet Bains, in California 22.

Bains is a state assembly member in a district that is almost entirely within CA-22. In 2024, Bains outran Kamala Harris by 15 points, and was clearly the candidate that Republicans were the most scared of. Villegas had the backing of the Working Families Party, Bernie Sanders, David Hogg and CLF (the Super PAC aligned with GOP leadership), all of whom spent serious money to get Villegas over the finish line.

The incumbent Republican, David Valadao, is one of the most vulnerable incumbents this cycle, and Republicans pounced on the opportunity to pick their preferred candidate. They sent text messages to Democratic voters touting AOC’s endorsement of Villegas in an effort to improve his standing with Democrats in the district. Their reasoning makes sense: when given the choice to run against a double-digit overperformer with moderate views or a progressive with views that are out of touch with a purple district, you choose the far-left guy who doesn’t even live in the district 10 times out of 10.

Far Left Teams Up With Republicans

In May, Liam Kerr wrote about this dynamic, warning that “Speaker Mike Johnson can read the Villegas website just as easily as David Hogg can, and both are doing something eerily similar.”

Ironically, the story is unchanged from the original forms of scheming pioneered by Nixon’s aides in the run-up to the 1972 election. Their tactics, pioneered by Nixon aides like Donald Segretti, included stealing stationery from Democratic candidate Edmund Muskie's campaign and forging a letter accusing his opponent "Scoop" Jackson of fathering an illegitimate child with a teenager. All of the Nixon antics were focused on candidates like Muskie, Scoop Jackson and Hubert Humphrey. McGovern was the only Democratic candidate spared because Nixon’s team (correctly) believed his extremely liberal positions would alienate the electorate.

While the Republican Party’s tactics have changed, the goal is the same: nominate candidates too extreme to win a general election. Republicans have shown us who they are scared of. It’s up to Democrats to pick the candidates who can win.

This strategy was slightly different in these districts, but the outcome was the same. In Maine, the dark money did the work and stayed invisible until after the primary. In California, Republicans openly meddled. Either way, the far left and Republicans ended up supporting and electing the same Democratic nominees. In both cases, it was the nominee Republicans most wanted to face in November.

Dunlap and Villegas are not necessarily lost causes for 2026. However, both seats will be harder to win now, and the party and outside groups will need to spend more money than they likely would have had to. If ME-02 flips and CA-22 stays in Republican control, the overall House math becomes much tighter.

Republicans spent money to make this happen. The far left spent money to make this happen. And now Democrats are heading into November in both districts with the candidates their opponents picked for them.