Democrats Are in No Position to Lecture Anyone About Candidates
By David Harsanyi
Monday, June 01 2026
[P]erhaps, the new reality is that pro-Islamist Marxists are now an influential part of the contemporary Democratic Party. How popular such a party will be nationally moving forward is yet to be seen.
Democrats are again acting like they occupy the high moral ground of American politics. But if 2026 has proven anything, it's that there's virtually nothing a left-wing candidate could say or do that would elicit condemnation from Democrats if doing so threatened their power.
Democrats, for example, demand credit for their opposition to Maureen Galindo, the Texas congressional candidate who proposed putting American "Zionists" (wink, wink) into concentration camps and castrating them, lost her Texas primary last week, winning 36% of the vote – not a bad showing for a politician championing mass imprisonment of her political enemies.
The question, though, is whether House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, or Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, or anyone at Pod Save America or the Bulwark had uttered a word in protest, had Galindo already won her primary before making those comments? All the evidence strongly suggests no.
And by evidence, I mean their explicit support for slightly less offensive cranks, extremists, bigots and terrorism apologists such as new party power broker Hasan Piker or the socialist Hezbollah fan Abdul el Sayed in Michigan or the Hamas apologist Chris Rabb in Pennsylvania, a guy who suggested the massacre of Jews at Bondi Beach was a "false flag" operation by "Zionists."
https://cfif.org/v/index.php/commentary/54-state-of-affairs/7679-democrats-are-in-no-position-to-lecture-anyone-about-candidates
