Why are Democrats struggling to close out what should be straightforward victories?
Between the gubernatorial races in New Jersey and Virginia, Democrats are expected to spend well over $100 million to hold back Republicans. This level of spending is extraordinary for races that should be easy wins because, historically, off-year gubernatorial races favor the party out of power. If Winsome Earle-Sears wins in Virginia, she would be only the second candidate to buck this trend in over 50 years.
The answer lies in their embrace of extremist positions on parental rights in education, their support for policies allowing biological men in girls’ private spaces, and their backing of taxpayer-funded medical interventions for gender-confused minors—all to appease their progressive base.
Past Is Prologue
The 2021 Virginia gubernatorial race should have been a wake-up call for Democrats. Terry McAuliffe was coasting to victory until he made a fatal mistake during a debate. “I don’t think parents should be telling schools what to teach!” he declared. These words resonated—and not in a good way—particularly with suburban women in Northern Virginia who typically vote Democrat.
CNN focus groups revealed that these remarks made traditional Democrat voters feel excluded from decisions about their own children’s education. McAuliffe’s statement suggested parents didn’t even deserve a seat at the table. It cost him the race.
But instead of learning from this disaster, Democrats in Virginia and New Jersey have staked out positions that are even more extreme.
2025 Democrats Are Even More Extreme
While McAuliffe didn’t think parents should tell schools what to teach, the current Democrat nominees—Abigail Spanberger in Virginia and Mikie Sherrill in New Jersey—don’t believe parents should even know what schools are teaching their children.
Both candidates voted against the Parental Bill of Rights, a straightforward education transparency measure that would simply inform parents about curriculum content in taxpayer-funded public schools. This isn’t about parental control over curriculum—it’s about basic transparency and the right to know what your tax dollars are funding and what your children are being taught.
How could anyone vote against transparency? The answer becomes clear when you recognize that these candidates answer primarily to teachers union leadership like Randi Weingarten and the American Federation of Teachers, rather than to parents themselves.
Democrats’ positions on biological males in women’s private spaces have created another significant vulnerability. Consider the case of Richard Cox, a convicted sex offender in Arlington County, Virginia. Cox, who identifies as a woman, has repeatedly been found in women’s showers and locker rooms, including incidents involving exposure to young girls. Under policies passed by Democrats in Arlington—policies that both Spanberger and Sherrill support, not just locally but nationally—Cox has been granted access to these spaces.
This isn’t a theoretical debate. It’s happening in communities right now. And if parents object to these policies, they risk being labeled as bigots who oppose civil rights.
But perhaps most concerning is both candidates’ support for providing gender-transition medical procedures to minors, including puberty blockers and surgeries, funded by taxpayer dollars.
Polling consistently shows that voters across the political spectrum oppose these interventions for children. After all, minors cannot legally get tattoos, sign contracts, or make other permanent decisions about their bodies. The idea that children should receive sterilizing medical procedures before they’re old enough to understand the lifelong consequences strikes most Americans as reckless.
Moreover, voters overwhelmingly oppose using tax dollars to fund transition procedures for anyone—adults included. The position that sex-change procedures should be banned for minors and not taxpayer-funded for individuals of any age represents the mainstream American view. Yet Sherrill and Spanberger have chosen to align themselves with the fringe minority position.
Democrat Extremism Hurts Their Election Chances
At American Principles Project PAC, we’ve spent over $2.4 million in these races ensuring voters understand where these candidates stand. Our investment is based on solid data showing these issues significantly impact voter behavior.
Our randomized control trials reveal an 8.7-point shift toward Republicans when voters learn Sherrill supports taxpayer-funded sex changes for minors. There’s a 5.7-point shift in Virginia when they discover the Democrat supports biological men in women’s private spaces. Even learning about opposition to parental rights in education produces a 2.7-point Republican shift in Virginia.
In an era when elections are often decided by razor-thin margins, it’s political malpractice for Democrats to maintain these unpopular positions.
Republicans aren’t alone in warning Democrats about the political costs of these stances. Shortly after the 2024 election, Blueprint, a Democrat messaging firm, released a report finding that Kamala Harris’ support for transgender issues was the top reason swing voters chose Trump. A more recent analysis by Welcome, another Democrat strategy group, reached similar conclusions.
The data is clear: These positions are electoral poison. Yet Democrat candidates continue embracing them, prioritizing the demands of progressive activists and teachers’ unions over the concerns of parents and the common sense of voters.
The Stakes: Democrats Will Declare Victory in Culture War
If Tuesday’s results favor Democrats despite their extreme positions on these issues, expect the party’s progressive wing to claim vindication and push even harder on gender ideology. They’ll argue that concerns about parental rights and protecting children are overblown.
But if Republicans succeed or keep the races closer than expected—against all historical trends—it will be because Democrats chose to alienate parents, dismiss commonsense concerns about child safety, and place ideology above the interests of families.
At its core, this extremism reflects a profound disdain for families and for parents who have been entrusted with protecting their children. And that disdain is proving to be a decisive political liability.
As someone committed to electing more Republicans, I certainly hope Democrats continue down this path. But for the sake of children and families, I hope parents continue making their voices heard at the ballot box.
We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal.
