Socialist calculation problem: Remember the libertarian moment? Well, this feels like the socialist moment.
Young insurgent candidates on the left, many of whom have current or former ties to the Democratic Socialists of America, are winning in the Democratic Party. It’s basically the “socialism” rap from the 1998 Warren Beattie movie, Bulworth, played out in real life. And rather than fight back, the party’s leadership seems to be mostly embracing those left-of-center wins.
Yes, as Shane Goldmacher reports in The New York Times, some avowedly moderate Democratic activist groups like Third Way want to fend off the takeover of what the group calls “radical, far-left candidates.”
The Reason Roundup Newsletter by Liz Wolfe Liz and Reason help you make sense of the day’s news every morning.
But the same article also notes that after progressive insurgent Abdul El-Sayed won yesterday’s big Senate primary in Michigan on a campaign that harshly critiqued the party’s center, “most party leaders—from Gov. Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan to Senator Chuck Schumer of New York to former Vice President Kamala Harris—quickly embraced Dr. El-Sayed’s Senate candidacy, given the stakes of the Michigan seat at the play.”
There are real questions, however, about whether El-Sayed can actually win that seat in November.
A separate Times story frames the upcoming midterm as a test of a long-running argument inside the party: “Since Senator Bernie Sanders exploded onto the national stage in 2016, progressives have argued that their party’s path to victory runs through a populist economic agenda that can attract a broad coalition of working-class voters. Centrists have pushed back, saying such proposals alienate the moderate voters the party must sway to win back areas where it has lost ground in recent years.” The centrists may have a point.
In the days leading up to the vote, El-Sayed’s radical campaign looked like it would coast to victory. Some polls had him up by double digits. But in the end, he only won the primary by a narrow margin.
His problem, it turns out, is that like so many of the party’s new radical-left up-and-comers, he doesn’t perform well with the party’s key voting blocks. Democrats know this. Puck reports that “Democratic lawmakers repeatedly pushed the D.S.C.C. [Democratic Senate Campaign Committee] to fund attack ads against El-Sayed,” focusing on his dicey associations with controversial characters like Hasan Piker.
One question going into the primary was whether a loudly left-leaning candidate would play outside of deep blue, highly educated coastal metro areas—places like New York’s so-called commie corridor.
So who is the constituency for El-Sayed’s brand of fiery populism? Turns out that even in Michigan, it’s basically the same demographic that lives in New York’s commie corridor.
As The Wall Street Journal notes: “El-Sayed topped [moderate rival Haley] Stevens in counties where bachelor’s degrees are plentiful, including those that are home to the University of Michigan and Michigan State. But he lagged behind in counties with lower educational attainment, a sign that working-class voters might be skeptical of candidates modeling themselves as champions of the working-class.” El-Sayed is not an outlier in this respect. The new working-class populism, it turns out, is not very popular with the working class. But with El-Sayed’s win, and others, Democratic leaders are standing behind it.
Burrito Wars. Socialism is dividing the left. So what’s dividing the right? Burritos. Specifically, burritos that supposedly cost $20.
— The Drunk Republican (@DrunkRepub) August 5, 2026
As is often the case with social media arguments, this one takes some twists and turns and doesn’t exactly proceed in an easy-to-follow, linear fashion.
But Matt Yglesias had a terse, reasonably useful summary of how things went.
Matt Walsh says high grocery prices are a key vulnerability for Trump.
Andrew Kolvet says expensive Chipotle doesn’t hurt either.
Thiessen defends Trump.
Vance calls Thiessen fat. pic.twitter.com/tpuaNktpuN
— Matthew Yglesias (@mattyglesias) August 5, 2026
In many ways, this is a debate about inflation.
Burritos don’t quite cost $20, unless you have them delivered (or you’re eating really fancy burritos).
And there are ways to economize on food, though they require some advance planning and responsibility.
“A burrito shouldn’t cost $20.” But that’s what it costs.
This is why I pack a lunch every single day, no exceptions! I almost forgot this morning, so I went back to the kitchen even though I was running late.
Note that when I was a financially irresponsible young person, I… https://t.co/kgeHP1Gvvc
— Robby Soave (@robbysoave) August 5, 2026
But food prices really have gone up since COVID-19, thanks first to inflation resulting from former President Joe Biden’s overspending, and then to price increases stemming from President Donald Trump’s tariffs, war in Iran, and labor crackdowns.
But look deeper, and it’s really an argument between the right’s domestic populists and more internationally focused conservative hawks.
The intra-right burrito debate basically has two camps: On the one hand, there are folks like Ben Shapiro, who are more supportive of the war in Iran (at least in theory, if not necessarily the precise way it has been executed), but who would also like to see an end to Trump’s tariffs and a revitalized focus on market-friendly domestic economic policy.
Current “common good conservative” inflation messaging: $20 burritos are a human right but also every serious methodology for making them cheaper (i.e. kill the tariffs, break the unions, and deregulate the food supply chain) isn’t America First, so we need to complain a lot… https://t.co/GKST1az6jf
— Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) August 5, 2026
On the other side are right-wing war skeptics, some of whom have supported populist domestic economic policies, like tariffs.
So which is the more important conservative priority: Trump’s unpopular tariffs or Trump’s unpopular war?
Under Trump, it turns out, we get both.
Scenes from the greater Boston area: Boston’s restaurants are in deep, deep trouble, reports The Boston Globe. I recently visited The Baldwin Bar, a fantastic Chinese bar/tiki bar hybrid in Woburn, Massachusetts, about half an hour from Boston proper. I’ve been several times before, and the food and drinks remain excellent. But even on a weekend night, it felt half empty. It’s a shame; Boston could use a great food scene. But regulations, taxes, and overall food-price inflation have made it tougher than ever to operate a restaurant.
- University of Cambridge professor Jason Arday, once vaunted as the youngest black professor in the university’s history, has resigned after mounting questions about plagiarism and fabrication in his academic work and personal history. Arday has denied academic malfeasance. But it has been pretty obvious that there were multiple serious problems with his work and his biographical claims; what’s notable is how long Cambridge and others stood by him. Arday has a book scheduled to come out next week. When The New York Times asked about the book in light of the scandal, the publisher “had no comment beyond the statement about Arday it released last week, citing ‘the professionalism and integrity he has brought to every stage of the publication.'” We’ll see how long that position can hold.
- A Senate panel has obtained a copy of the iPhone Anthony Fauci used during COVID-19, reports The Wall Street Journal.
- The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), the government savings effort headed by Elon Musk, got a lot of details wrong, including touting some spending cuts that never actually happened, according to a new report from the Government Accountability Office.
- James Cameron, the blockbuster director behind Aliens, the first two Terminator films, True Lies, and Titanic, might finally be moving on from the Avatar films. I hope he makes some non-Avatar movies!
