Could Democratic Socialism Claim a Real Political Presence in CT?
On the heels of recent primary wins by avowed DSA candidates in New York City and Denver, and in the lead up to primary elections in must-win states for Democrats like Wisconsin and Michigan, it’s clear that DSA is gaining momentum among voters on the left. So what could this mean for the DSA movement in a coastal blue state like ours?
Before you jump to envisioning a political landscape in the Nutmeg state where large numbers of Connecticut Democrats become card-carrying Democratic Socialists, let’s levelset that DSA is far from a dominant force in our politics. Yes, CT DSA membership is reportedly growing and the organization describes itself as a statewide chapter with an electoral working group focused on electing socialists. But, CT DSA lacks a powerful infrastructure, a defining leader, or a statewide political brand.
The question we’re exploring is whether CT DSA is a proxy for something bigger: frustration with the Democratic establishment and impatience with leaders who speak the language of Democratic values but have not delivered enough on the issues shaping people’s daily lives. So, could DSA-style politics become the vehicle for a broader anti-establishment mood inside the Connecticut Democratic Party?
Obviously Connecticut does not have the same conditions as DSA hot-beds. Our population is older and our political culture is historically more cautious and managerial. But we do have deep affordability pressure, a visible fight over tax fairness, anger over housing costs and availability, frustration with utility costs, concerns about healthcare, and a Democratic Party that often sounds more progressive than it is perceived to govern.
The frustration that gives DSA its opening elsewhere is also present here: anger at the Democratic establishment and a growing appetite for candidates who challenge the status quo. There is space for candidates and voters alike to argue that the party is perhaps not living up to its own stated values.
Taxing the rich, universal healthcare, stronger tenant protections, public services, labor power, and affordability are all connected to values Democrats regularly claim: fairness, dignity, economic security, and a government that works for ordinary people. Many Democratic politicians affirm these values, then retreat, compromise, delay, or explain why delivery is too complicated. Josh Elliott, who has not been endorsed by DSA, is trying to tap into some of that frustration. He’s already keyed into some of these same grievances and the concern that Connecticut’s Democratic values are being affirmed but not delivered.
It’s not that voters are actively seeking socialism, but they’re looking for someone who sounds less caught up in the system that is failing them, and is more willing to challenge it.
Connecticut is clearly not on the verge of becoming a DSA state right now. But that doesn’t necessarily mean the Democratic establishment is secure. Movements grow when existing institutions stop feeling responsive to voters. MAGA did not grow only because of a detailed policy theory about trade, immigration, courts, or executive power; it grew because many Republican voters believed the party establishment had failed them, lost important fights, and become stale. The ideology mattered, but the movement also became a vehicle for anger, disruption, and rejection of party elites.
Democratic socialism may serve a similar function on the left - not because the movements are morally or ideologically equivalent, but because both can become shorthand for “the people running the party are not delivering.” DSA does not need every CT voter to adopt its full ideology; it only needs enough voters to see it as the faction of the party willing to say clearly what other candidates soften.
The ingredients for a DSA presence are here. The unanswerable question is whether anyone in Connecticut can turn them into a durable political movement that challenges the establishment. Preserving the status quo may feel safe to institutions, party insiders, and operatives - but it can alienate future voters. If every anti-establishment critique is viewed as unserious, too ideological, or too risky, we may miss the reason those critiques are gaining traction in the first place.
For now, let’s hope for governance that makes the insurgency less necessary.