Why do you want to run as a Democrat? Start your own movement.
In the aftermath of a democratic socialist's primary victory in New York's 13th Congressional District, veteran strategist James Carville has raised a question as old as political coalitions themselves: who belongs inside the tent, and who merely borrows its name? Carville's call to deny Darializa Avila Chevalier a seat in the Democratic caucus reflects a deeper tension between a party's institutional identity and the ideological currents that flow through it. The dispute is not simply about one candidate — it is about whether a political label can hold together people who hold fundamentally incompatible visions of society.
- Darializa Avila Chevalier's primary win in New York sent a jolt through Democratic circles, arriving with a political history that included founding a college group calling for the 'total eradication of Western civilization' and positions calling for abolishing ICE and the police.
- James Carville responded not with caution but with a direct verdict: she is not a Democrat, her views contradict the party's core commitments, and she should not be seated in the Democratic caucus.
- The sharpest edge of Carville's argument was not ideological but institutional — his complaint was that far-left candidates were using the Democratic label as a vehicle for a movement he believes is actively harming the country.
- Carville drew a parallel line on antisemitism, distinguishing sharp criticism of Israeli government policy — which he called legitimate — from denying Israel's right to exist or hostility toward Jewish people, which he said had no place at his table.
- The question of whether Avila Chevalier and candidates like her will be seated in the Democratic caucus, granted committee assignments, or effectively sidelined remains open and unresolved.
James Carville appeared on NewsNation Thursday with a message that cut against the usual post-primary congratulations: some candidates winning under the Democratic banner, he argued, should not be welcomed into it.
The occasion was Darializa Avila Chevalier's primary victory in New York's 13th Congressional District. A democratic socialist backed by NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani, she had built her campaign on community organizing — but her record carried heavier freight. In college she had founded a group calling for the 'total eradication of Western civilization.' As a candidate she called for abolishing ICE and the police, halting all deportations, and labeled veterans war criminals.
Carville was direct. He framed the far-left wins in New York as three seats, not a wave, but then sharpened his focus on Avila Chevalier specifically. 'Her views are totally against anything that any Democrats have,' he said, citing her opposition to interracial dating as evidence of a rejection of pluralism. His prescription was blunt: don't seat her in the caucus, deny her committee assignments, and if she wants to lead a movement, let her do it under her own banner. 'Form your own party,' he said.
The conversation widened to antisemitism within Democratic circles. Carville made a careful distinction — criticizing Israeli government policy, including the settlements and its response to October 7, was not only acceptable but necessary. What crossed a line, he said, was denying Israel's right to exist or harboring hostility toward Jewish people as a group. 'You've got no place at my table,' he said of those who held such views.
Carville acknowledged he holds no institutional power — 'just an old washed-up consultant,' he said — but his argument was less about authority than about identity. The Democratic name, he insisted, should not be borrowed to advance ideologies he believes are damaging to the country. Asked to characterize those calling to abolish everything and demanding 'free Palestine,' he was brief: 'Insane. I've got no time for these people.' Avila Chevalier's office did not respond to a request for comment.
James Carville sat down with NewsNation on Thursday with a blunt message about the Democratic Party's future: some of the people winning elections under its banner should not be allowed to stay.
Darializa Avila Chevalier had just won a stunning primary victory in New York's 13th Congressional District on Tuesday night. She ran as a democratic socialist, backed by New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, and built her campaign on community organizing work. But her political history carried weight. In college, she had founded a group that called for the "total eradication of Western civilization." As a candidate, she had called for abolishing ICE and the police, stopping all deportations, and labeled veterans war criminals.
Carville, the veteran Democratic strategist, was not interested in celebrating. When host Elizabeth Vargas asked him to respond to multiple far-left candidates winning in New York, he framed the scope carefully—three seats, he said, not a wholesale takeover. But then he pivoted to something sharper: Avila Chevalier should not be seated in the Democratic caucus at all. "Her views are totally against anything that any Democrats have," he said. "We believe in pluralism, she doesn't believe in interracial dating." He pressed the point with directness. "I don't think there's a place in the party. I'm not sure she wants to be a Democrat. Go do something else! Form your own party!"
When Vargas pressed him on the specifics of Avila Chevalier's positions, Carville doubled down. "She is not a Democrat, okay?" he said. "That is pretty clear, and frankly, I think a lot of Democrats feel like I do." He acknowledged his own lack of institutional power—"just an old washed-up consultant," he said—but made clear what he would do if he had it: deny her committee assignments, even if she took her seat in Congress. The core complaint was not about her right to run or even to win. It was about the use of the Democratic label itself. "Why do you want to run as a Democrat?" he asked. "If it's such a powerful, sweeping movement that's got more momentum everywhere, then go ahead, be at the head of it, don't use the Democratic Party to advance it."
The conversation then shifted to antisemitism and anti-Israel sentiment within Democratic circles, a concern Vargas raised by citing Rep. Dan Goldman's warnings about threats to democracy. Carville made a careful distinction. He described himself as deeply critical of Israeli government policies, the settlements, and Israel's strategic responses to October 7. That criticism, he said, was not only acceptable but necessary. "You can be hugely 'anti-' the policies of the government of Israel," he explained. But he drew a hard line at something else: the position that Israel should not exist as a state, or hostility toward Jewish people as a group. "You've got no place at my table, I can tell you that," he said of such people. "But I think the smart political move is not to seat these people."
When pressed on whether the modern Democratic Party had become defined by its far-left wing, Carville returned to his central argument. These people had the right to speak their minds, he said, but they should not claim the Democratic name while doing so. "Just don't invoke the name of the Democratic Party in doing that, because you're really hurting the United States in the end," he said. Asked to characterize the worldview of those calling to "abolish everything" and demanding "free Palestine," Carville was terse: "Insane. I've got no time for these people."
Fox News reached out to Avila Chevalier's office for comment but received no immediate response. The question of whether newly elected far-left members would be seated in the Democratic caucus, and under what conditions, remained unresolved.
Citações Notáveis
Her views are totally against anything that any Democrats have. We believe in pluralism, she doesn't believe in interracial dating.— James Carville
Why do you want to run as a Democrat? Start your own movement! If it's such a powerful, sweeping movement that's got more momentum everywhere, then go ahead, be at the head of it, don't use the Democratic Party to advance it.— James Carville
A Conversa do Hearth Outra perspectiva sobre a história
Why does Carville think Avila Chevalier shouldn't even be called a Democrat?
Because he sees a fundamental incompatibility. It's not just policy disagreement—he's saying her worldview contradicts what he understands as core Democratic values, like pluralism. He thinks she's using the party label as a vehicle for something else entirely.
But she won the primary. Doesn't that mean Democratic voters in that district chose her?
It does. And Carville isn't arguing she shouldn't have won or shouldn't take her seat. He's saying she should take the seat but not be part of the Democratic caucus structure—no committees, no institutional power. It's a way of saying: you won, but you're not one of us.
What's the distinction he's making about Israel and antisemitism?
He's separating criticism of Israeli government from denial of Israel's right to exist, and from hostility toward Jewish people. The first is legitimate political speech. The second crosses into something he won't tolerate. It's a line he thinks the party needs to hold.
Does he think the Democratic Party is being taken over by these far-left figures?
Not exactly. He downplays it—three seats in New York, he says. But he's worried about the trend, about the party's brand being damaged by association with people he sees as ideologically hostile to what Democrats stand for.
What's his actual solution?
Start your own party. If your movement is as powerful as you believe, don't hide under the Democratic label. Build something independent. That way, he seems to be saying, everyone knows what they're getting.
Is he speaking for the broader party, or just himself?
He says he's just an old consultant with no power. But he also says "a lot of Democrats feel like I do." He's testing whether his view has resonance, whether others in the party share his discomfort.