Sen. Bernie Sanders is brushing aside progressive criticism for refusing to endorse Democratic socialist Francesca Hong in Wisconsin's gubernatorial primary, a race she lost by less than a percentage point after leading by double digits in the polls.
Hong, a state lawmaker from Madison and a card-carrying member of the Democratic Socialists of America, fell narrowly to Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley on Tuesday in a result that stunned the progressive left. Crowley won by just 0.41 percentage points, the New York Post reported, turning what polls had projected as a comfortable Hong victory into a razor-thin upset.
Sanders, the Vermont independent who has long styled himself as the progressive movement's standard-bearer, declined to lift a finger for Hong. Asked on Pod Save America before the primary whether he would endorse her, Sanders offered two words: "I don't think so." After she lost, he told Politico he had no regrets.
Pressed on why he sat out a race that pitted a DSA-backed candidate against a moderate Democrat in a critical swing state, Sanders told Politico:
"My response is that we have limited resources and capabilities, and there are a lot of really great candidates who have run for office who we have not endorsed. We can't endorse every single candidate. So, you know, we have to pick and choose and I think that Hong ran a very, very great, and very strong grassroots campaign, got a lot of people involved, and I applaud her for that."
Applause after the fact costs nothing. An endorsement before the vote might have cost Hong's critics something, and Sanders chose not to spend it. The senator who built a national brand on democratic socialism walked away from the most prominent democratic socialist on a primary ballot this cycle.
He was not alone. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez also declined to endorse Hong. When pressed on ABC's *This Week*, Ocasio-Cortez offered only that her "understanding is that... Francesca Hong has made clear her present stances to her electorate" and had "moved away from" her prior comments. That is not an endorsement. It is a carefully worded exit.
The two most recognizable figures in the democratic socialist movement looked at one of their own and decided the political risk was too high. That tells voters more about the viability of the DSA agenda than any policy paper could.
Sanders's refusal to back Hong days before the primary drew immediate attention, and the fallout has only sharpened since Tuesday night.
Why did Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez keep their distance? The answer may lie in a 349-page opposition research file compiled by Republican Tom Tiffany's campaign in anticipation of a general-election matchup with Hong. The file, marked "privileged and confidential," catalogued years of Hong's statements and votes on policing, immigration, race, and transgender issues, material Republicans planned to deploy if she won the nomination.
Among the highlights: a 2020 statement in which Hong described gentrification as "violence" against black residents, and her backing of a resolution the following year declaring systemic racism a "public health crisis" and calling for an "equity-oriented country and society." Hong also faced scrutiny over past calls to defund police and remarks about canceling Thanksgiving and white supremacy.
Former Obama adviser David Axelrod did not hold back. "She is a font of zany liberal, faculty lounge exotica," Axelrod wrote, capturing the Democratic establishment's anxiety about Hong's general-election prospects in a purple state.
Crowley himself framed the race in blunt terms. "She is a self-proclaimed socialist. There are a lot of people worried about not just this party, but this country moving in that direction," he said.
Hong was forced to walk back several of her more radical positions during the campaign, a sign that even her own team recognized the political danger. But the backtracking came too late, or perhaps confirmed what skeptics already suspected: that the positions were genuine and the moderation was tactical.
Sanders has faced bipartisan scrutiny over his endorsement record before. His decision to sit out the Wisconsin race fits a pattern of a senator whose political instincts increasingly lag behind his rhetoric.
Hong's defeat carries weight beyond Wisconsin. The DSA had been on a winning streak in primary elections across several states, and Hong's race was supposed to be the movement's biggest prize yet, a governor's mansion in a battleground state. Instead, it became a cautionary tale.
AP News reported that the loss deepened concerns among Democratic leaders that far-left candidates cannot win in competitive swing states against Republicans. Wisconsin, which has swung between parties in every recent presidential cycle, is exactly the kind of state where a "defund the police" platform and DSA membership become liabilities rather than assets.
Hong conceded gracefully. "This campaign was not about getting one person into office," she said the day after her loss, endorsing Crowley and calling for continued movement-building. In a separate statement, she said, "We have built something that will change politics forever."
That may be true, but what the movement built on Tuesday was a loss, and one that came after its two most prominent champions refused to show up.
The RNC wasted no time. RNC Research circulated material arguing that while Sanders withheld his endorsement, he nonetheless supported Hong's platform in substance. The implication was clear: Sanders agreed with Hong's positions but calculated that associating with them publicly would damage his own brand.
That calculation speaks volumes. If the godfather of democratic socialism in America will not publicly stand behind a democratic socialist running for governor, the movement has a credibility problem that no amount of grassroots energy can solve.
Sanders, now firmly in the twilight of his political career, has all but ruled out a 2028 presidential bid. His influence within the Democratic Party has been narrowing for years, and his recent clashes with fellow Democrats, including a public dispute with Sen. John Fetterman over Israel, have only accelerated his isolation.
Meanwhile, Rep. Ro Khanna stood by his endorsement of Hong even after the loss, making him one of the few progressive voices willing to own the association publicly. The contrast with Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez was not lost on observers.
Perhaps the most telling detail in the entire episode is the Tiffany campaign's 349-page file. Republicans spent months compiling Hong's record, her votes, her statements, her policy positions, expecting to face her in November. They never got the chance. Democratic primary voters did the work for them.
That file covered Hong's positions on policing, immigration, race, and transgender issues. It documented her description of gentrification as "violence" and her push to declare systemic racism a public health crisis. Every page was a potential campaign ad in a state where elections are decided by tens of thousands of votes.
Crowley's narrow win suggests that even within the Democratic primary electorate, a universe far more liberal than the general electorate, Hong's record was a bridge too far for enough voters to tip the outcome. In a general election against a Republican in Wisconsin, the 349 pages would have been devastating.
Sanders knew it. Ocasio-Cortez knew it. And their silence said what their words never would: that the democratic socialist agenda, stated plainly and defended honestly, is a political liability in the states that actually decide elections.
When the movement's own leaders will not vouch for its candidates, the rest of the country is entitled to ask what, exactly, the movement is building, and for whom.
