The Establishment’s Hold on the Democratic Party

The results of the New Hampshire Democratic primary were not unexpected: Congressman Chris Pappas emerged victorious over progressive challenger Karishma Manzur. What is noteworthy, however, is the context in which this occurred – a contest that highlights the ongoing struggle for the soul of the Democratic Party.

Pappas’ centrist politics and endorsements from establishment Democrats like Kamala Harris gave him an edge in securing the nomination. His willingness to compromise on key issues, including crossing the aisle in the House, has been seen as a virtue by some but also raises questions about his progressive credentials. Despite Manzur’s Medicare for All proposals, Pappas’ support from pro-Israel donors and AIPAC weighed heavily against her.

The primary campaign was marked by a familiar dynamic: Israel played a significant role, with many Democratic candidates facing pressure to toe the party line on US aid to the country. While Pappas has expressed reservations about Benjamin Netanyahu’s leadership, his own record on Israel remains unclear – a fact that has not escaped Manzur’s notice.

Pappas’ win sets him up for what is expected to be a closely watched general election against former senator John E Sununu. This contest will have implications far beyond New Hampshire itself: if Republicans can flip the seat, it would deal a significant blow to Democratic hopes of regaining control of the Senate in the fall.

For some Democrats, Pappas’ victory has raised concerns about the party’s ability to connect with its progressive base. The worry is that candidates like Pappas are too beholden to corporate interests and too willing to compromise on key issues. This concern has been simmering for years as the party struggles to balance its centrist instincts with the demands of its progressive wing.

The Democratic Party’s internal divisions have been evident in recent contests, from the Iowa caucuses to the New York primary. But what sets this election apart is not just Pappas’ win itself but the context in which it occurred – a contest that underscores the ongoing struggle for the soul of the party.

The Pappas family name carries significant weight in New Hampshire, where they own the Puritan Backroom restaurant. This legacy raises questions about the influence of money and politics on the state’s electoral landscape. Manzur noted during her campaign, “I was tired of choosing between the lesser of two evils and still seeing so much pain and suffering right here in my state.” Her words resonate deeply with many Democrats who are increasingly frustrated with the party’s ability to deliver real change.

The role of Israel in this election is a complex one. While Pappas has expressed reservations about Netanyahu, his own record on US aid to the country remains unclear. This ambivalence has been a hallmark of the Democratic Party’s approach to Israel for years – an approach that has been criticized by some as too deferential to AIPAC and other pro-Israel groups.

The Pappas-Sununu matchup will be closely watched in the coming months, with implications far beyond New Hampshire itself. If Republicans can flip the seat, it would deal a significant blow to Democratic hopes of regaining control of the Senate in the fall. For Democrats who are increasingly frustrated with the party’s inability to connect with its progressive base, Pappas’ win raises fundamental questions about the party’s direction and values.

In the end, the New Hampshire primary is just one data point in a much larger story – one that speaks to the ongoing struggle for the soul of the Democratic Party. As November approaches, it remains to be seen whether Democrats will continue down the path of centrism or take a more progressive turn. The party’s future hangs precariously in the balance.