Progressives face a punishment for defeat that many argue is harsher than the corruption they accuse themselves of. This piece offers a measured look at the recent missteps of a political left that assumes leadership in a faith-driven, productivity-focused party system. It pays tribute to the guild’s efficiency, creativity, and the tendency to be captive to entrenched beliefs as much as to the errors of the progressive movement itself.
1) Fire Podemos. The Socialist Party disagreed with the lone left-wing party within the state to temper it, yet was buoyed by the intention to undermine it. After five years of frustration from 2014 to 2019, when Socialists pursued changes against Pablo Iglesias before several elections forced a reluctant accommodation, the current aim shifts to weakening Podemos from within. With the vice president stepping back, the mission appears complete, and the rising star Yolanda Díaz finds herself facing a decline in polls, slipping from a hopeful signal of a potential Prime Minister to a more modest footing behind rivals Pedro Sánchez and Núñez Feijóo. The reckoning touches both sides in the public imagination and leaves a question mark about how Sánchez will secure the seventy MPs needed for a third term. PSOE likely survives Podemos, though in opposition, a technical detail for the custodians of the party’s core beliefs.
2) Attack Casado. There is no need for a political strategist to see that before sidelining a main opponent in an election, it is wise to ensure the replacement does not backfire. Yet slow and loud rhetoric rather than precise strategy has often defined progressive impulse. The energetic chairman of the PP remains a potent symbol, even if his rallies fail to spark broad excitement. While the PSOE pursues a drastic reshaping of his leadership, Díaz Ayuso becomes a sudden focal point for conservative sentiment, echoing a broader debate about who should steer the country. Progressives misread the moment, inadvertently elevating Núñez Feijóo, who led discussions in La Moncloa amid obvious missteps. A headlong rush to push an opposing bloc aside can backfire when institutions and public opinion refuse to cooperate. A cardinal lesson reemerges: the political stage delivers problems even when one side paints them as enemies to be crushed at all costs.
3) To brag that PP and Vox will never get an absolute majority. Numerical hype often ignores the reality on the bench. It became clear that PSOE had no genuine partners, only loyalists, and that the right would need broader support to form a stable government. Even when Vox strengthens the rightward wing, a combined PP-Vox bloc would still face hurdles, since nationalist coalitions and regional dynamics complicate any simple arithmetic. Progressive observers forget the natural realignment that can occur when governments seek to survive, a pattern that has propelled coalitions into power in the past. The ERC’s stance on anti-crisis measures demonstrates that one side’s persistence can contact the other’s doubts, with every poll showing a broader gap between unity and disruption. The punchline remains that politics can miscalculate a simple addition far more often than one might admit, and a missing majority can destabilize even the most confident forecasts.
4) PP not controlled with Vox (try to read this without smiling). A notable quirk in the current scene is the insistence that the right cannot govern with the far right and the left cannot govern without exceptions. That tension shaped how regional partnerships were viewed after recent elections in Castilla y León, where mixed governance was considered unthinkable by some camps. Yet in practice, coalitions and collaborations surface, sometimes even with unlikely partners, as anti-crisis measures gain traction while vetoes on far-right participation appear politically expedient. The party on the left prides itself on its willingness to accept difficult compromises while maintaining a clear line, and the balance of power remains open to surprise as regional allegiances shift. The enduring truth is that governance involves constant negotiation, not idealistic purity, and the path to stable governance twists through many unexpected corridors.
Observing these moves, stakeholders acknowledge that mistakes accumulate across dimensions, and the consequences are unavoidable. The socialist camp faces pressure to reassess its evaluation and analysis, which have repeatedly unsettled the government. The core danger lies not in passivity but in frenetic energy, with a fixation on the economy and intelligence-style strategies that miss the human and political fundamentals. The administration can learn from the disciplined routines of successful teams and avoid the pitfall of overreaction. The practical aim is to strike at the right moment with measured resolve and to accept that misfires can occur—sometimes tragically—if the decision point is pressed too hard. The journey from misinterpretation to measured governance is a tough, ongoing process that demands patience, humility, and a willingness to adapt to the ever-shifting political weather that shapes policy and public opinion alike.