In Big Cities This Year, Moderation Has Already Won
This year, voters want functional governance in the most practically consequential elections in American life.
Several major cities have already held their mayoral races, with just a few holding theirs on Election Day. Overall, the pattern is that despite left-wing democratic socialism dominating the airwaves as the ascendant ideology for big-city governance, voters in major cities more representative of the median urban American voter are choosing various brands of common sense.
Across the country’s 2025 mayoral races, a clear pattern emerges: pragmatists—candidates promising competence, safety, and functional governance—are quietly consolidating power. While progressives still hold sway in select coastal enclaves, most major cities are signaling fatigue with ideological politics and a turn toward managerial steadiness after years of disruption and drift.
To be clear, dozens of other cities and municipalities also hold elections this year. But this is just a recap of the largest cities.
In Oakland (election already held on April 15), Barbara Lee’s win marked less a triumph of the left than a reset. Though nationally known as a progressive, she ran on restoring order after the recall of Mayor Sheng Thao, promising steadiness amid crime and fiscal strain. Voters favored competence over ideology. In Pittsburgh’s May 20 primary, County Controller Corey O’Connor ousted Mayor Ed Gainey, reflecting similar fatigue with symbolism. O’Connor emphasized growth and service delivery; Gainey leaned on moral appeals. In a city blue since 1934, voters chose management over movement.
In San Antonio (election already held with runoff June 7) became a proxy for generational change. Gina Ortiz Jones defeated Rolando Pablos, pairing national experience with a cost-of-living focus and transparency message. Pablos ran on public safety and pro-business stability. In a city where the mayor holds one council vote, Ortiz Jones’ win suggests an appetite for fresh leadership that still values pragmatism. In St. Louis (election held in April), Alderman Cara Spencer unseated Tishaura Jones after leading the approval-voting primary. Jones touted ARPA-funded improvements; Spencer ran on anti-corruption and safety, a back-to-basics message that resonated with voters tired of rhetoric.
Seattle heads to November with Katie Wilson leading Bruce Harrell out of the primary. Wilson presses for social housing and limits on surveillance; Harrell points to progress on homelessness, housing, and climate, offering steadier hands amid high costs. Labor, tech, and neighborhood blocs will decide the margin. In Detroit, Council President Mary Sheffield enters the general as the institutional favorite over Pastor Solomon Kinloch, whose populism remains mostly symbolic. Voters appear more drawn to continuity on housing, taxes, and services than to another outsider experiment.
Miami’s crowded 13-way race offers one of the few urban openings for the right. With Mayor Francis Suarez term-limited, Republican-aligned figures Joe Carollo and Emilio Gonzalez have fundraising and visibility advantages. Even the Democratic hopefuls emphasize affordability and governance reform rather than bold ideological departure—underscoring the managerial tilt even in competitive terrain.
In Boston, New England progressive figure Mayor Michelle Wu is cruising unopposed after the September primary; her record—housing production, fare-free buses, lower gun violence—outlasted a business-friendly critique of zoning, streets, and stadium financing, validating a policy-heavy incumbency. Out in the Rockies, Helena, Montana, offers a microcosm of the pragmatic ideal: Commissioner Emily Dean and businessman Andy Shirtliff both campaign on infrastructure, housing, and local economic development. Ideology is largely absent; delivery defines the race.
In Minneapolis, Mayor Jacob Frey runs on experience and delivery; State Senator Omar Fateh channels the organized left, backed by progressive councilmembers. Ranked-choice dynamics, union alignments, and post-2020 policing fissures make second-choice math as important as first-ballot enthusiasm.
Finally, New Orleans was so eager for change they settled their race without a runoff. Council leader Helena Moreno won outright (primary concluded Oct. 11), avoiding a runoff. Against a field including Royce Duplessis and Oliver Thomas, Moreno’s majority signaled a mandate for competent autonomy in a notoriously dysfunctional city government.
One could argue convincingly that many of these candidates couldn’t be considered moderates. But moderation is often a consequence of circumstance rather than choice. Progressivism that encounters reality will capitulate to forces that are directly bound to the interests of the people. Taken together, the 2025 mayoral cycle reads as a corrective to the last decade of ideological volatility. The most competitive cities—Oakland, St. Louis, Pittsburgh, Detroit—rewarded candidates who combined reform language with administrative seriousness. Even in left-leaning strongholds, the edge goes to those who can—or at least hopefully can—govern. Progressivism hasn’t vanished; it’s simply being domesticated.
