A new analysis reveals Democratic politicians are increasingly out of touch with the median voter, particularly on issues like transgender rights and immigration. Guest essayist Thomas B. Edsall argues this drift stems from multiple pressures: small donors favoring extremism, activist groups demanding ideological purity, and psychological commitments to protecting marginalized groups.

Crucially, 36 House districts are competitive, but 374 districts are safe, creating a system where incumbents in non-competitive areas face no pressure to moderate. This dynamic forces candidates in safe districts to adopt more extreme positions, knowing primary voters reward ideological purity over strategic centrism. Political scientist Michael Bailey confirms this, stating primary systems strongly encourage extreme behavior, with moderate candidates penalized in non-competitive districts.

The result is a Congress dominated by members who reject moderation and bipartisanship as threats to their political survival.