Under the Influence of the Wingers. David Drucker Talks to A&G

Summary

Podcast Summary: Armstrong & Getty On Demand

Episode: Under the Influence of the Wingers. David Drucker Talks to A&G
Date: August 11, 2026
Host: Armstrong & Getty
Guest: David Drucker, Senior Writer at the Dispatch

---

Episode Overview

This episode dives into the shifting dynamics of the American political landscape, focusing on the outsized influence of party “wings”—highly energized, ideological segments—on both major parties' primary and general election strategies. Armstrong & Getty speak with veteran political journalist David Drucker about the consequences of gerrymandering, the internal struggles within the Democratic Party, and the evolving power structures in both parties. The discussion zeroes in on current races (Michigan Senate, Wisconsin governorship), the role of party establishments, and the bigger question of what political parties even represent today.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Influence of Party “Wings” on Primaries

• Armstrong introduces a viral progressive talking points clip (00:34) and frames the discussion on how a small, energized faction can dominate party primaries—even when their stances may seem out of step with broader electorates.
• Drucker explains (02:14) how increased gerrymandering and fewer competitive districts mean party bases have more control than ever, making it harder to argue for pragmatic or broadly appealing candidates.

Quote:
“When the winner in the primary is essentially the winner in the general election, it’s harder to make the argument that we need to nominate someone with broad appeal.”
— David Drucker (02:45)

• He draws parallels between today’s Democratic primary chaos and the Republican “civil war” of the Obama era, when insurgent candidates challenged (and sometimes overran) the establishment.

2. The Democratic Establishment’s Dilemma

• Armstrong notes the Democratic establishment is “very old and very comfortable” (05:11) and asks who is poised to lead the party next.
• Drucker says, “We don’t know”—the establishment is hesitant to publicly challenge insurgents, working mostly behind the scenes with PACs and endorsements (05:33).
• The key question, Drucker says, is when and how the establishment will fight back, determining whether new leaders emerge or the old guard toughens up (05:34–06:46).

Quote:
“The first step is: When does the party itself try to reassert control and actually wage the kind of aggressive warfare the progressive base and these Democratic Socialists of America candidates have been waging?”
— David Drucker (06:18)

3. What Is a Political Party Now?

• Armstrong laments the decline of parties as cohesive institutions (07:00), saying they’ve become “the executive branch of whatever whims of the head guy.”
• Drucker agrees, observing parties are more like “ballot access organizations” than entities with clear agendas (07:31).

Quote:
“They don’t really have anything that they’re willing to fight for beyond whatever their philosophical region of control wants at any given time.”
— David Drucker (07:43)

• Discussion highlights how weakened party structures may actually hurt politics—stronger establishments, Drucker argues, could lead to more stability and better governance (08:45).

4. Spotlight on Michigan & Wisconsin Races

• Drucker cites Michigan’s Senate race (Abdullah El-Sayed) as the most telling political storyline (09:20).
  • If El-Sayed wins, progressives will argue “wingers” can succeed even in key states.
  • If he loses, moderates can claim vindication.
• Armstrong asks about the Wisconsin gubernatorial primary (Francesca Hong). Drucker notes the state’s razor-thin margins: Hong could win the nomination but remain vulnerable in the general election (10:53–11:47).

Quote:
“She may get elected governor in an environment that favors Democrats … but I think she’s also vulnerable in a general election.”
— David Drucker (11:16)

• The outcome of these races will shape party strategy and influence the 2028 Democratic presidential primary and control of the Senate.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Party Transformation:
  “These parties have deteriorated and self-immolated and they’re basically now nothing more than ballot access organizations.”
  — David Drucker (07:33)
• On the Future of Democratic Leadership:
  "We don’t know. First of all, I think the Democratic establishment doesn’t quite know what to do about the insurgents in their midst."
  — David Drucker (05:33)
• On Michigan’s Significance:
  “If El-Sayed wins, the progressive wing’s going to have an argument to make… If he loses to a Republican … the pragmatic wing is going to be able to say ‘we told you so.’”
  — David Drucker (09:44)

---

Timestamps: Key Segments

• 00:34 – Progressive talking points montage
• 00:51 – Armstrong introduces David Drucker and sets up main question
• 02:14 – Drucker explains gerrymandering’s effect on primary dominance
• 05:11 – Discussion on the age and control of the Democratic establishment
• 06:59 – Armstrong poses big-picture question about what political parties are now
• 07:31 – Drucker: Parties as weakened ballot-access organizations
• 09:20 – Drucker highlights Michigan’s key Senate race
• 10:53 – Wisconsin’s competitiveness and prospects for Francesca Hong
• 11:47 – Closing remarks

---

Conclusion

Armstrong & Getty's conversation with David Drucker offers a sharp, nuanced look at the state of American political parties in 2026. The episode contextualizes current election battles as part of broader internal party struggles, where the muscle of the “wingers” can make or break both state and national races. The discussion raises critical questions about the future of party leadership, the consequences of weakened institutions, and what it will take for parties to regain a coherent identity.

Transcript

[David Drucker]

This is an iHeart podcast, Guaranteed Human.

[Ross Store Advertiser]

At Ross, you'll find everything your kids need when they go back to school. From fashion to school supplies to dorm room decor. Ross has it all. Because it isn't just the first day of school for them. It's a new year, a new look and endless possibilities. When they walk back through those school doors, they're a different kid than the one who walked out months ago. Ready for anything Back to school starts at Ross. Find your Nearest [e-mail]

[Progressive Activist]

Abolishing ICE Yes. A one year data center moratorium yes Breaking up Big Ag Yes Public grocery stores yes Right to repair yes Legalizing cannabis yes Overturning Citizens United Yes. A Workers Bill of Rights? Yes A free Palestine?

[Armstrong]

Yes the delightful Hasan Piker Interviewing and quizzing the delightful Francesca Hong, who is involved in a primary for the governorship of Wisconsin actually today as we speak. Be interesting to see how that pans out. We're joined by David Drucker, senior writer for the Dispatch, longtime friend of the Armstrong and Getty Show. And David, I will reserve it to myself to rant that these people are lunatics and their policies will never work. But first of all, welcome. It's good to talk to you.

[David Drucker]

Yeah, good to be back.

[Armstrong]

And the thing I wanted to talk to you about, and I'm so interested in this, the nature of the primary system and the fact that a super energized, fairly small segment of either one of the political parties can win primary after primary after primary. And the conventional wisdom is, yeah, that's true because it's the hardcore that turn out. But then it makes it harder to win the general. But I've observed over and over again, and this is what I really wanted to ask you about, folks who just rant about how horrific these policies are in the primaries, then say, well, of course I'll support her. So is it not true that the super energized, fairly smallish base of the party now runs both parties because the districts are so polarized?

[David Drucker]

Yeah, I mean, there's something to that. I think there's some nuance there. But you know, with the proliferation of gerrymandered districts. Right. We've had gerrymandered districts since the beginning of the republic. But particularly after the mid decade redistricting that we saw over the past year, there are fewer and fewer competitive House districts. And so when you're comparing, for instance, midterm elections in 06 in 2010 and 2018 to what might happen in 2026, you have to take into account. There just isn't as much competitive territory for Democrats to be in a position to flip. And so, you know, then you get to this question of how much influence therefore have the wings of the parties accrued. And they've definitely accrued some more influence than they used to have, because it's harder to make the argument that we need to nominate a pragmatist or somebody with broad appeal when the winner of the primary essentially is the winner of the general election. And then you're looking at these competitive seats and states where progressives and socialist candidates are making inroads. And I think part of that has to do with the fact that the Democratic Party is going through its own anti establishment civil war, much as the Republican Party did during Barack Obama's presidency. And, you know, the Democrats have not gone through something like this in quite some time because they were not unified by Obama. They were. Well, they were first unified by opposition to George W. Bush, which turned into unification around Barack Obama, which turned into unification around opposition to Donald Trump. And now they're finally sort of going through the sort of periodic upheaval that parties go through. I think the question though, in this case is where do they land? Because some of these candidates, unlike Democrats in the past, are rather extreme. When you just go through that checklist there where you play the clip and you know, usually what happens is either these things succeed with voters and therefore they get to declare victory, the wingers do, or they start losing some winnable coveted general elections and it resuscitates the so called establishment wing in a party that is focused on winning. That's what happened in large part with a lot of Republicans, at least in congressional races prior to Donald Trump, where Republican Senate candidates in particular were blowing these winnable races and the party got more aggressive, took more control over these primaries and started nominating broadly acceptable candidates. They started winning again and that kind of put that thing to bed.

[Armstrong]

Right now you're a lot closer to this than we are. I see the Democratic establishment as very old and very comfortable with their own control of the party. And what does the next generation of the Democratic establishment look like?

[David Drucker]

We don't know.

[Armstrong]

Who are they?

[David Drucker]

Good question. First of all, I think the Democratic establishment doesn't quite know what to do about the insurgents in their midst. I think that they're afraid to challenge them very publicly. I think they've been challenging them subtly and quietly and in back, you know, and in back rooms, strategy sessions. And we've seen that with, you know, certain PAC money being spent and endorsements being made. But they still haven't reached the point where they recognize these candidates as a problem. And they haven't reached the point where fear of their own base is superseded by fear of losing and perpetuating Republican control of the White House and of Congress. And so the first step is like, when does the party itself try to reassert control and actually wage the kind of aggressive warfare that the progressive base and these Democratic Socialists of America candidates have been waging? Right. And then that'll tell us a lot about who the next sort of iteration of the Democratic establishment is. Whether it's the same people they just finally got off their butts and started fighting or whether it's somebody new.

[Armstrong]

Right, right. Let's stay on a somewhat philosophical level. I find it more fun than the headlines of the day. So you look across at the Republican Party and Trump' and enormous influence, blah, blah, blah. Everybody knows that.

[David Drucker]

Right.

[Armstrong]

Given the fact that the Republican Party has been dealing with that the Democrats have been dealing with what we've been describing, what is a political party anymore if it is merely the executive branch of whatever whims of the head guy is. I mean, you don't have a platform until you ask your candidate, what do you want our platform to be? Are both parties getting tired of that whipsawing back and forth enough that they'll assert themselves and say, a party is a thing, here's what we are?

[David Drucker]

Yeah, well, that's a big broader question. And I think, you know, for the time being, the answer is no. I mean, I joke all the time, but I'm half serious that these parties have deteriorated and self immolated and they're basically now in many ways nothing more than ballot access organizations. They don't really have anything that they're willing to fight for beyond whatever their philosophical region of control wants at any given time. Right. And we've seen that at the presidential level in particular, you know, whoever the nominee is, that person's in charge of the party, that person determines the party's agenda. And you know, when a candidate comes along, that is unacceptable, the line really has to cross. And we see this from time to time, right? Where the line will be crossed and the parties will say, no, you don't get our support. We still see things like that. But you're right to point this out. Part of the problem, even though everybody hates political parties, is that parties have grown weaker as polarization has increased. And probably our politics in this country, the things that people think they don't like about our politics. Politics would improve if the parties actually strengthened and began to take, you know, reassert control over their platforms and their candidates and things of that nature the way they used to.

[Armstrong]

A little less democracy, maybe, at least at the primary level. David Drucker, senior writer with the Dispatch, is with us. David, what's the most interesting story in politics going on right now that you think people ought to be paying attention to?

[David Drucker]

Well, I mean, I don't know. They're probably already paying attention if you're, you know, political junkie. But I think what's going on in Michigan is probably the most interesting story in politics. And whether Abdullah Said gets elected, gets elected to the Senate in a swing state like Michigan, because it's going to have, it's going to, I think it's going to tell us a lot about where certain voters are. But also I think it's going to if El Sayed wins, the progressive wing of the Democratic Party is going to have an argument to make. I don't necessarily think it would be true anyway, but they're going to be able to say, don't tell us a winger can't win the presidency, can't win the key states in the Electoral College voting. We just won Michigan. And if he loses to a Republican and a Republican hasn't won a US Senate seat in Michigan since the 90s. And of course it's a very bad environment for the gop. If Else Said loses, then you know, the normal way Democratic Party, the pragmatic wing, is going to be able to see we told you so. And I think that could have a huge influence over the course of the 2028 Democratic presidential primary, by the way, may also forestall any possibility Democrats winning control of the Senate if they lose a Senate seat they control in Michigan.

[Armstrong]

Right. Right. Final question, David. How blue is Wisconsin now? Is it possible Francesca Hong gets the nomination?

[David Drucker]

It's not blue. I mean, it's a swing state. It's a narrowly divided state. Right. She can very well get the nomination for all the reasons we just discussed.

[Armstrong]

Right.

[David Drucker]

But then she may get a, she may get elected governor in an environment that favors Republicans, I mean, that favors Democrats in the way that this one, you know, does at the moment. But I think she's also vulnerable in a general election. And, you know, also there are plenty of Democrats still running in competitive seats in states and they're all going to get a lot more between El Sayed winning the Democratic nomination in Michigan and Nepal is the nominee in Wisconsin for governor. And you've got some other DSA candidates that have succeeded in these primaries. It's a. It's much more for Democrats in places that matter to answer for than just. What about Mamdani in New York City?

[Armstrong]

Right, right. David Drucker, senior writer with the Dispatch. David, always stimulating. Thanks so much for the time.

[David Drucker]

Yep. Anytime. Thank you.

[Armstrong]

All right. Thank you, Yale. Stay in touch.

[David Drucker]

Armstrong and Getty.

[Tony Ayo]

This is Tony Ayo from the Real Report with Tony Ayo and Uncle Murder. You ever notice how everything keeps going? Rent, streaming, even extra Sosa at your favorite burrito spot? But with Boost Mobile, you don't have to play the Willis Go up soon game. Boost Mobile offers an unlimited talk, text and data plan at a price that'll never go up. It's the same price you'll pay for Life. Switch now for unlimited wireless at a price that'll never go up. Only at boost mobile. After 30 gigabytes, customers may experience slower speeds. Customers will pay $25 a month as long as they remain active on the Boost Unlimited plan.