https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2026/09/12/democrats-dsa-midterm-elections-socialism-capitalism/91676903007/

«DSA’s successes have also been concentrated in deep-blue, urban areas, where winning the Democratic nomination is winning the seat. Most Democratic politicians and voters don’t come from those places, and they’re far less likely to fall for DSA’s pitch – as Francesca Hong’s defeat in Wisconsin’s Democratic gubernatorial primary suggests.

A better way to think about DSA isn’t as a hostile takeover, but as the vanguard of a radicalized professional class. It’s a continuation of a trend already reshaping the Democratic Party: professionals increasingly run it, and those same professionals have grown more radical, especially in the Trump era.

So when 66% of Democrats say they view socialism favorably, versus just 42% for capitalism, that doesn’t mean two-thirds of Democrats are about to join DSA, or that they even agree on what “socialism” means. It means professionals, radicalized by their opposition to President Donald Trump, are picking the brand that signals maximum opposition. That radicalization is fertile ground for DSA recruiting, even if most people professing a liking for socialism just mean something vague, like “be kind” or “government should do more.”

But Democrats warming to socialism isn’t shared by the country as a whole, especially the working class. Only 39% of Americans views socialism positively, according to Gallup. YouGov has the share at just 31%. In a June Economist/YouGov poll, just 29% of Americans said they’d ever consider voting for a self-identified democratic socialist. Among those without a college degree, just 23% said they’d ever consider voting for a democratic socialist; among the college-educated, 40% would consider it.

A July Washington Post/Ipsos poll found similar results: Americans rejected the idea of a democratic socialist presidential candidate by 16 percentage points. Among those with just a high school degree, the rejection widened to 28 percentage points. Once again, the college-educated were far more receptive, splitting roughly down the middle.»