Democrats flex their muscles in off-year elections: what November 4 reveals

In its November 4 coverage, The Economist delivered a detailed postmortem of a U.S. election night that marked a significant, if not overwhelming, victory for the Democratic Party. The article charts the results of four key contests—governorships in New Jersey and Virginia, New York City’s mayoral race, and a crucial California ballot initiative—and situates them within the broader national and political context, offering insight into what these outcomes reveal about the state of American politics in 2025.

The analysis begins with New Jersey and Virginia, where centrist Democrats Mikie Sherrill and Abigail Spanberger successfully leveraged pragmatic, risk-averse campaigns to capture governor’s mansions. In both states, Democrats benefited from structural advantages—these are historically “blue-ish” states that trend Democratic in presidential elections—but the significance lies in how these candidates performed relative to the previous year’s benchmark, Kamala Harris’s victories.

Both Sherrill and Spanberger not only won but exceeded Harris’s margins, suggesting that voter enthusiasm for competent, moderate candidates remains strong despite Republican gains elsewhere. Notably, Spanberger flipped Virginia’s governorship, and Sherrill returned New Jersey to a double-digit margin reminiscent of the state’s recent Democratic presidential victories. Their backgrounds in national security—CIA officer and Navy helicopter pilot, respectively—lent credibility to their message of practical governance and law-and-order competence, avoiding divisive culture-war debates.

In contrast, New York City’s mayoral contest delivered a more ideologically bold outcome. Zohran Mamdani, a 34-year-old Democratic Socialist, emerged victorious by focusing on affordability, housing, and social services. Unlike Sherrill and Spanberger, Mamdani’s platform promised radical, expensive interventions—rent freezes, government-run services, and free public transport—making his path to implementation heavily dependent on state cooperation, particularly from Governor Kathy Hochul, who is unlikely to embrace major tax increases. Mamdani’s win, while striking, may reflect New York City’s unique electorate rather than signaling a broader appetite for progressive politics nationwide. It does, however, demonstrate the power of a disciplined, issue-focused campaign, combining high visibility with relentless voter engagement.

The California ballot initiative, Proposition 50, added a structural dimension to the Democrats’ gains. By allowing the party to redraw congressional districts, it partially counteracts Republican gerrymandering advantages and positions Democrats more favourably for the 2026 midterms. This strategic victory underscores the interplay between policy, politics, and electoral mechanics that shapes long-term party prospects.

The Economist situates these results within a national environment favourable to Democrats. Off-year elections traditionally benefit opposition parties, and low approval ratings for President Donald Trump among Democrats and left-leaning independents amplified this trend. Yet the article also tempers the euphoria with a cautionary note: while these victories provide momentum and reassurance after last year’s Republican inroads among minority and working-class voters, the midterm elections will be far more consequential, with Democrats facing a structurally tougher battlefield in both the Senate and House.

In sum, The Economist frames November 4 as an election night of pragmatic validation for Democrats: a mix of safe bets in New Jersey and Virginia, a high-profile progressive experiment in New York City, and a structural boost from California. It paints a nuanced picture—success tempered by caution, ideological experimentation balanced against electoral realities, and momentum weighed against the challenges of the midterms ahead.

By Vugar Khalilov