I’ve often thought that one of the defining characteristics of many Democrats these days, particularly since 2008, is that they often hide their true intentions in order to get elected. I don’t just mean simple things such as keeping their associations with NGOs or lobbyists a secret. I mean their basic intentions regarding policy and their attitudes towards the philosophical pillars of this country.

I first noticed this with Obama, and I wrote about it at the time (for example see this). Bernie Sanders’ problem – aside from the fact that he didn’t have Obama’s smoothness and charisma – was that he was more upfront about his far-leftist goals. That’s why in 2016 and 2020 the Democrat establishment decided he had to go, even though he was doing well in the primaries. Their fear was that he would become the nominee because he appealed to the Democrats’ far-left base, but that he would lose soundly in the general election because he was too extreme for the country as a whole. So they called on the superdelegates in the case of Hillary in 2016, and forced some of the challengers to Biden out in 2020, to try to engineer Sanders’ downfall.

Sanders dropped out of the race against Biden in April of 2020, but he was already significantly behind in the primary voting. Was he promised a loud voice in the Biden administration in return? That is pure speculation on my part. But there is little question that the Obama and Sanders wings did have a say in the Biden administration, perhaps more of a say than the elderly doddering Biden had. Although the Party used Biden’s earlier reputation as a moderate to help him gain victory (let’s leave out for now the question of fraud), he did not govern as a moderate.

How aware was Biden of all of this? I believe he was fairly aware, at least for the first couple of years, and faded more later. I’m not saying he was sharp as a tack at the outset; he clearly was not. But I think he got the drift of things, and was okay with it. Why? One reason is that, when he was of relatively sound mind and body from 2009 to 2017, he served as Obama’s VP and seemed perfectly fine with what Obama was doing. So I think that in his 2020 campaign, Biden was somewhat of a conscious dissembler, although he had a lot of assistance.

I’ll leave out Kamala Harris. Her campaign was so ditsy and so disjointed it’s hard to say what she was presenting as or whether it was authentic. Nothing she did or said seemed authentic.

Now we have a proliferation of far-leftists, and they run the gamut as far as how transparent they’re being about their plans. Mamdani occupies a kind of middle ground; he wasn’t really lying about his far-left affiliation although he may have been silent about his ultimate goals. But he was running in a deep blue city and primary turnout was low and mostly consisted of the more extreme elements. Once Mamdani had won the primary in a deep deep blue place like NYC, it was highly probable he would win the election, because his opponents simply weren’t popular (Cuomo and Sliwa). And so Mamdani didn’t need to be especially mendacious about his leftism in order to win; just a little bit mendacious.

Contrast that to Abigail Spanberger of Virginia in 2025. That state is not as deep blue as NYC, and it was coming off a Republican governor. So Spanberger pretended to be someone utterly different than who she is, in the political sense; she posed as a moderate. Once elected, she pivoted to far-leftism.

This is the template for some of the contenders in 2026 races: pretense. But like a Trojan Horse, once inside the gates they can use their power to destroy.

But there’s a dilemma. Someone like El-Sayed, the Democrat Senate nominee from Michigan, has a history that screams leftist extremism and Islamist tendencies. He is trying to backtrack from that history (something like Platner did with a different history, unsuccessfully), by saying that his views have evolved or by pivoting when asked pointed questions. But for El-Sayed, it may be too late to pull off the switch convincingly.

The failed candidacy of Francesca Hong for the governorship of Wisconsin has alerted other far leftists and told them they must dissemble, and that their past can haunt them. But that’s only in purple-ish states or cities. In far blue ones it won’t matter and they can be somewhat more honest.

The Democrat nominee in Wisconsin, Crowley (who beat Hong only by a hair), has learned the lesson. He’s a leftist, too, although described as a “center-leftist” (whatever that is). He is avoiding any association with Hasan Piker:

Wisconsin Democratic gubernatorial nominee David Crowley said he will not campaign with controversial left-wing streamer Hasan Piker — who previously backed his rival, Francesca Hong, in the primary. …

“I don’t want to lend credibility to platforms, if you will, that I believe further divides us as a community, further divides Democrats,” Crowley told WISN when asked about the prospect of campaigning with Piker.

Whatever he may actually think of Piker, he doesn’t want to be seen with him.

In Michigan, however, El-Sayed won the primary while still associating heavily with Piker. Now that he’s in the general, he’s avoiding having to answer any questions about Piker. For example:

Michigan and Wisconsin are both purple states, so these candidates have to be careful. But once in, all bets are off.