The "Squad" left suffers complete wipeout in Illinois

[RandySF]

The left suffered a virtually total collapse in the Illinois Democratic congressional primaries on Tuesday night — even in races where the AIPAC-backed candidate lost.

Why it matters: It's a bad sign for the dozens of insurgent Democrats running in congressional races across the country, both in open seats and as primary rivals to older or more establishment-oriented incumbents.

It's great news for House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), who is most popular among the moderate and mainstream liberal wings of his party.

Most of the Democratic House candidates who have refused to commit to supporting Jeffries for leader or speaker are leftist insurgents.





https://www.axios.com/2026/03/18/the-squad-left-suffers-complete-wipeout-in-illinois

[leftstreet]

1. Is the "squad" still relevant?

[LetMyPeopleVote]

12. I never paid attention to the squad

[leftstreet]

30. I did

They got a lot of attention at the time

I just meant they seem kinda early 20s at this point. They ran on climate change, Medicare For All, detention ctr atrocities, etc

Today's crop of progressives are talking heating bills and groceries, ICE murders, and getting AIPAC money out of politics

Completely different environment, so the comparison seems irrelevant

[niyad]

2. "insurgents"?? Could that language be any more loaded, axios?

[MustLoveBeagles]

3. No kidding

[Cha]

4. Thanks Randy... I don't have time to

read who did win in Illinois.

I do know I Respect Hakeem Jeffries.

[Fiendish Thingy]

5. Axios bullshit spin. Nt

[BeyondGeography]

6. Just to round out the picture

AIPAC spent $20 million in IL on ads talking about anything but Israel. And then afterwards gloated that the results, which included two of their four preferred moderate candidates losing, proved that, “Being pro-Israel is good policy and good politics.”

Uh-huh.

A great night for Jeffries and any other business-as-usual Democrat would have been an AIPAC sweep. But you won’t read that in Axios.

[H2O Man]

8. Thank you.

[Celerity]

7. This RW language-loaded spin piece reads like it is a No Labels and/or Third Way and/or Blue Dog press release.

[Prairie Gates]

11. Agreed

But par for the course given the source (er...I mean Axios, of course...).

The celebratory tone is wild given Abugazaleh's remarkable overperformance in IL-9. For the usual Progressive Haters Club not to take that seriously is a laughable mistake. The article has all the hallmarks of whistling past the graveyard.

[TBF]

9. Axios --

"Most of the Democratic House candidates who have refused to commit to supporting Jeffries for leader or speaker are leftist insurgents."

[Takket]

20. I wondered if any of the rethugs that ousted McCarthy were ever called "insurgents"

Using a word that has been used exclusively in Recent years to describe fanatical terrorist ground like ISIS is definitely a choice.

[PatSeg]

54. Seriously?

I don't know any "leftist insurgents". Who writes this ridiculous crap?

[BlueTsunami2018]

10. "Leftist insurgents"

As if any of these people are leftists.

As if there would be anything wrong with siding with the working class over the ruling class.

We’re never going to get where we need to go if punching left is more important than punching right.

[betsuni]

16. Who and how are any of the winning Democrats siding with the ruling class over the working class?

[SocialDemocrat61]

13. Too many have misinterpreted Mamdani's win in NYC

They took it as some sign that certain candidates can win, instead of realizing that a big part of his win was the unpopularity of his chief opponent.

[RandySF]

14. And Mamdani's personal qualities.

Candidates matter.

[Quiet Em]

15. Progressives would be wise to follow Mamdani's blueprint

He spoke about affordability and economics in ways that people could relate and he did so without ignoring or playing down the very real social and civil right issues that so many are facing.

He reached out to Democrats, spoke with them and built a solid coalition. He didn't denigrate the Democratic Party or Democratic leaders.

He addressed the humanitarian crisis in Gaza without discussing AIPAC.

[betsuni]

18. Yes. He's nice! Positive -- didn't run against the Democratic Party as if the myth that the party is wildly unpopular

with Democrats is true. Visited Trump and nobody accused him of caving, being complicit, a Vichy Democrat and so on -- a Mamdani miracle!

Democrats being politicians is seen as bad by the anti-Democrats because it's compromise and cooperation and incrementalism as government is, while their candidates have to try to be seen as uncompromising ideologically pure unpoliticians -- a difficult position!

[lapucelle]

40. 49.2% of the NYC electorate voted for someone other than Mamdani,

casting their ballots primarily for either a sex pest or a right wing loon who wears a red beret and lives in a studio apartment with 16 cats.

The perpetually-on-twitter misread the result as some sort of "overwhelming mandate". Mamdani knows the real score and course-corrected during his transition and after having been sworn in.

[spanone]

19. Did they really print this?

"Most of the Democratic House candidates who have refused to commit to supporting Jeffries for leader or speaker are leftist insurgents"

fuck 'em

[PeaceWave]

21. Some folks' surprise at the use of the term "leftist insurgents" raises an interesting point...

That being...How exactly do the most progressive of progressives think they are viewed by moderate and mainstream liberals? Seriously. You can't express continued disdain for a group of people and not eventually have them view you the same exact way.

[TBF]

22. One can disagree with someone and not refer to them as a terrorist -

despite what Donald Trump and assorted others seem to think.

[PeaceWave]

23. Please tell me the dictionary that defines an "insurgent" as a "terrorist."

[TBF]

24. merriam-webster - any other questions?

I believe you know full well what the word means. But in the interest of combatting "confusion":


https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/insurgent

Is insurgent a new word?

Insurgent is not a particularly novel coinage; it has been in use as both a noun and an adjective for well over 200 years. Appearances of the word began to spike in the early 21st century, however, due to a combination of factors (including the appearance of such combatants in conflicts and the desire among journalists to avoid words that might seem biased, such as terrorist or freedom fighter).

The definition of the noun, which includes the phrase “a rebel not recognized as a belligerent,” refers to a specific sense of belligerent: “belonging to or recognized as an organized military power protected by and subject to the laws of war.”

[lapucelle]

37. Yes, I have a question. Why didn't you post the actual definitions?

From your link:

insurgent

1: a person who revolts against civil authority or an established government especially : a rebel not recognized as a belligerent
2: one who acts contrary to the policies and decisions of one's own political party

I have a second question:
Do you have a link that defines an "insurgent" as a "terrorist"? The words are not synonymous.

[PeaceWave]

39. Thank you. As you say, the words "insurgent" and "terrorist" are NOT synonymous...

Further, it is exactly this kind of striving for hyperbole that creates impediment to honest conversation within our own party. How can you constructively converse with a person who creates their own definitions for words? This is the kind of question you'd think need only be raised with regard to Republicans. But, nope, this kind of nonsense goes on in our own party as well. There is no need for it. Finally, there is absolutely no need to take offense to being called an "insurgent." An insurgent is a rebel, someone who bucks the same old, same old. Good examples would be John Lewis and his anthem of "good trouble" on the left side of the aisle and John McCain and his penchant for being "the maverick" on the right side of the aisle.

[TBF]

48. Back to MW for clarification - there most certainly is a negative connotation

Further, Axios is not a source to be trusted - owned primarily by Cox Enterprises - which has been taken over with republican funding. source: open secrets - https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/cox-enterprises/totals?id=D000000768

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/insurgent

insurgent
1 of 2
noun
in·​sur·​gent in-ˈsər-jənt
Synonyms of insurgent
1
: a person who revolts against civil authority or an established government
especially : a rebel not recognized as a belligerent
2
: one who acts contrary to the policies and decisions of one's own political party
insurgent

2 of 2
adjective
: rising in opposition to civil authority or established leadership : rebellious
insurgently adverb

[PeaceWave]

49. Again, nowhere - even applying your own definition - is an "insurgent" deemed a "terrorist."

Revolting, acting contrary, rising in opposition...all not terrorism. As for the news source, that again does not change the definition of a word. And, as we all know...words matter.

[yardwork]

25. There's too much hysteria. Too many overly emotional words.

Trump started it and now it seems as if everybody is using overly emotional language in politics. It makes everybody sound nuts.

[QueerDuck]

26. Thank you.

[QueerDuck]

27. Also... when these firebrands characterize themselves and their movement as some sort of REVOLUTION...

... well, the comparisons and language will naturally follow their own lead and the tone already set.

[betsuni]

38. "If Democrats can't do the job they should get out of the way." Revolution, transformation.

Taking on and standing up to and fighting an evil Democratic establishment, accusing Democrats of genocide because AIPAC donates five dollars to a campaign (Democrats "take" money -- we imagine cartoon villains greedily rubbing their hands together), threats of primarying because of imaginary corrupt geezers clinging to power (will stop at nothing to thwart nice young candidates), threats not to do as I say or else I won't vote, Democrats the "true roadblock to progress" who must be removed and replaced.

It's an very aggressive message.

[walkingman]

28. Our party has a big problem when it comes to "Unity".

Unless we understand that in order to control Congress we are unable to make the necessary decision that help the American people and hold those accountable who are corrupt. It takes a united front to defeat the GOP because they have very few defectors.

[naftali]

29. The "Squad" left suffers complete wipeout in Illinois

This outcome in Illinois suggests changing voter priorities and could signal a broader shift within the party’s internal landscape.

[QueerDuck]

41. I think it means that primary voters want to win statewide and national elections...not engage in virtue signaling or...

... engage in purity debates. They know that choosing ELECTABLE candidates (who can compete in the General Election) and candidates with experience is more important than angry firebrands who would be eaten alive.

[Walleye]

31. We need people in Congress, who are interested in governing. That requires compromise and dialogue.

[redstatebluegirl]

34. Yes!

I know it is tough to hear, but t he majority of America is in the center. I consider myself center left and quit coming here for a while because it felt like my voice did not matter.

We need people willing to compromise, you never get everything you want in a democracy.

[Walleye]

35. We need your voice here!

[redstatebluegirl]

36. Thank you!

I have been lurking again lately.

[lees1975]

43. Frankly, that's old line, old school politics that appears like weakness and conciliation and doesn't work any more.

I want legislators who have the courage to take risks, not compromise with MAGA. They don't negotiate back, so what's the point?

Even at that, I don't see much compromise and dialogue. What I see is serving self interest, nest-feathering and turf protecting. "Me keeping my job" takes priority over governing. So we might as well vote for someone who is going to do something.

[Walleye]

44. Well, let us know when somebody does. "do something" you approve of.

If we can elect people we trust with good character, they can do the job. Being intransigent, isn’t getting anything done.

[lees1975]

47. Neither is compromise and negotiation.

Take a look around.

We have what's going on now because of that approach. Happy with it?

[SSJVegeta]

32. Paywalled. Can you share the names of the people it is speakkng of?

The only one for me that comes to mind is Abughazelah. But upon looking at Biss' site, he might have been just as left -or to the left of her...

Daniel Biss looks very awesome BTW at first glance at least. I only knew of abughazelah before this but am quickly becoming a fan of Biss based on what Im seeing

[lees1975]

42. Well, let's see.

Most of the incumbents won their seats, no surprise there, hardly any of the "squad" candidates had the kind of money the incumbents did because they didn't take PAC money. No surprise there.

Most of the incumbents who won, especially in the Chicago area, are far left already.

In my congressional district, the far left member of Congress ran unopposed. So did our most liberal member of the Illinois house and the most liberal Senator in Springfield.

In a field of 10 candidates, Juliana Stratton was a clear winner over Raja Krishnamoorthi, and the fact that the Republicans have to reach back and grab Darren Bailey, who already got his rear end handed to him on a platter, to run against Governor Pritzker, is a sign that progressives have control of Illinois' Democrats and are a powerful force to reckon with. So Axios, eat your maga heart out.

[RussBLib]

45. none of the "squad" are even from Illinois

what a dumbass headline, and from this, I won't bother reading the story. It's behind a paywall anyway. Axios is a long way from when they launched back in 2016.

https://russblib.blogspot.com

[ananda]

46. Ermm.. moderate and mainstream is NOT liberal.

Period

[lapucelle]

50. Ermm... that's not what the article (or the OP) actually says.

It's great news for House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), who is most popular among the moderate and mainstream liberal wings of his party.

[ananda]

51. That's exactly what it says.

Moderates and mainstream Dems are in no way liberal.

[pecosbob]

52. Trashed...a bit surprising to see this drivel being pushed by the OP.

More posts like this will likely get one put on ignore, deep posting history or not..

[PeaceWave]

53. I saw it as a wash. Big money didn't get its way, nor did complete lack of experience...

In essence, the Illinois primaries ended up being a compromise - much to the benefit of the people of Illinois.