Denver is not San Francisco, or even New York. So when the Denver Democratic Party starts sounding like socialists then something is up.

In a remarkable display of grassroots power, the Denver chapter of Democratic Socialists of America, or DSA, successfully convinced the Denver Democratic Party to endorse a key tenet of democratic socialism in their party platform. The party’s official platform now includes the following plank:

We believe the economy should be democratically owned and controlled in order to serve the needs of the many, not to make profits for the few.

The construction used here is similar to “for the many not the few,” the slogan used by the U.K.’s Labour Party

Pity the Democratic establishment. It must be hard to publicly justify the indefensible.
Which is why Democrats are sounding a lot more leftist these days.

Of course sounding leftist and being leftist are two different things, but even there progressives are making progress.

Even though only two states have actually voted so far this primary election season—Texas, a red-state redoubt, and Illinois, a blue-state stronghold—the battle for supremacy this primary season is all but complete. In state after state, the left is proving to be the animating force in Democratic primaries, producing a surge of candidates who are forcefully driving the party toward a more liberal orientation on nearly every issue.

...According to data compiled by the Brookings Institution’s Primaries Project, the number of self-identified, nonincumbent progressive candidates in Texas spiked compared with the previous two election years. This year, there were nearly four times as many progressive candidates as in 2016. Meanwhile, the number of moderate and establishment candidates remained flat for the past three elections in Texas.
Even in Illinois, where the Democratic Party holds most of the levers of power, the data tell a similar story: There were more progressive candidates this year, the Primaries Project reports, than moderate and establishment candidates, by a count of 25 to 21.

Progressive candidates are everywhere these days, and sometimes they are even winning.

In Texas, a greater percentage of the progressive candidates either won or advanced to a runoff than the percentage of moderate and establishment candidates who did. In Illinois, the success rate between the wings was about equal. Five moderate or establishment candidates won their primaries, compared with three progressives.

In Ohio, long-time progressive Dennis Kucinich is tied in the polls with Richard Cordray, despite (or because of) Cordray having nearly all of the endorsements.

The results indicate Cordray may be struggling to catch on after a strong start both in fundraising and endorsements from figures around the state, while the upstart Kucinich's aggressive campaign schedule and progressive views may be clicking with Democratic voters.

It's the same story in Michigan, where the progressive candidate for governor leads the establishment candidate.
Like Republican voters, Democratic voters are turning against moderate establishment candidates. Nowhere is that more true than in Texas.

The committee has also been plagued by the perception of putting its thumb on the scale in primaries across the country, especially in Texas.
In the Houston-area 7th District, the DCCC dropped opposition research on Democrat Laura Moser before the primary, which didn’t stop her from advancing to the runoff (and might have even helped). In the 23rd District, located in the southern part of the state, the DCCC recently endorsed Gina Ortiz Jones, which has her opponent giddy because of the committee’s poor track record and bad reputation.

Meanwhile, back in the establishment's bubble at Vanity Fair, this is the headline: Can Obama Rescue the Democrats?