Philly is one of the most ethnically diverse cities in the nation. Despite variances, we all seem to co-exist in one way or another. Diversity is what gives us our edge — whether Caribbeans in West Oak Lane, Central Americans in Olney, & East Asians in South Philly, diversity makes this city decent.
Philly is also one of the top 20 most liberal cities in the nation, with The Cook Political Report calling the Third Congressional District the bluest — or the most Democratic — in the nation. Liberalism is a political and moral philosophy centered on the rights of the individual, liberty, consent of the governed, and equality before the law.
While many members of the city’s electorate align with the principles of liberalism, somehow “liberals” or “democrats” are deeply divided, and this is the case in big cities across America. This could make the city look divided as well. But consider that only a small percentage of voters and an even smaller percentage of the population actually vote in primary elections.
Even in recent nonpresidential general elections, most registered voters in Philly have stayed home. Turnout reached 35.73% in the 2025 general election.
Out of 1,080,636 registered voters in Philadelphia, 774,348 are registered as Democrats; there are 174,865 voters registered with another party or no party, and 131,423 registered Republicans. So basically, most political contests in Philadelphia are between Democrats or candidates that share liberal views.
Pennsylvania also has a closed primary system, which means only registered Democratic and Republican voters can legally participate in their parties’ nominating process in May. Other party or no party voters may still vote on ballot questions, constitutional amendments, and special elections.
While everyone gets to vote in the general election, the candidates that the Democrats pick have a strong chance of winning in the general election. This could potentially explain why, out of close to 1.1 million registered Philadelphia voters, 241,186 ballots, or 22.32% of registrants, were cast citywide.
In this past primary election, State Rep. Chris Rabb won with 65,782 votes out of 147,558 ballots cast in the PA-3 Democratic contest. In Pennsylvania’s Second Congressional District, Congressmember Brendan Boyle ran unopposed and won renomination with 53,043 votes, with another 678 write-in votes in the contest.
Philly’s Democratic infighting is often framed as progressives versus centrists, though labels can hide big differences within each camp. Both categories are still considered liberal, but the difference could be in how they go about advancing and achieving their policy goals.
To help break down the parallel, locally elected officials like Rep. Rabb, State Rep. Andre D. Carroll, and State Senator Art Haywood would be considered progressives. On the other hand, State Senator Sharif Street, Councilmember Cindy Bass, and State Rep. Darisha Parker would be considered centrist.
Although many of our elected officials have been associated with labels, sometimes their actions don’t align with the principles of the groups they represent.
Reps. Parker and Carroll endorsed Sharif Street for Congress in the past Democratic Primary.
Outside spending can also further complicate these labels. In the Third District primary, 314 Action Fund spent heavily to support Dr. Ala Stanford, who faced criticism from progressives over the organization’s past connection to an AIPAC-affiliated super PAC.
314 said that it did not support Stanford’s campaign on behalf of AIPAC or to influence her stance on Israel and Palestine, and AIPAC denied involvement in the race. Still, some progressive voters and Rabb supporters viewed both Stanford and Street as aligned with AIPAC and the broader pro-Israel lobby.
The contentious 76ers Arena debate, in which many progressives opposed a proposal to build a 1.1 million square foot sports arena in Market East, near Chinatown, is another example of how political labels can fall short.
Council members Isaiah Thomas and Jeffery Young Jr. were on opposite sides of the debate, with Thomas voting in favor of the main arena legislation, while Young voted against it. Councilmember Thomas, traditionally, leans more progressive, while Councilmember Young doesn’t typically align that way. This reinforces the point: labels do not always predict how elected officials approach a particular issue.
Associating with a political ideology isn’t a bad thing; it gives you direction and principle, but interpretation can vary. I consider myself to be a Baptist Leftist, in which my faith in Jesus Christ drives my policy ideas and political ideology. A Christian Conservative may say that their political ideology is driven by the same, yet we’d likely disagree on policy issues such as abortion or LGBTQ+ Issues.
Even under the same banner of faith, people can diverge.
The ultimate issue at hand is that Philadelphia Democrats spend more time focusing on ideological labels than expanding the electorate and increasing participation. In fact, the strategy for most campaigns is to turn out the voters who are directly aligned with their platform or organization.
From where I stand, the days of persuading voters at the hyperlocal level are long gone; that’s why candidates skip forums or avoid knocking on doors in certain neighborhoods. It’s considered a waste of time, and those voices ultimately go unheard and become unengaged in politics. This phenomenon stifles ideas, creates distrust, and leaves people behind. Instead of focusing on labels, we should be focusing on people and turning people out to vote.
Expanding democratic participation and not winning the next intra-party purity test might be the most progressive thing we can do in Philadelphia.
However you align, show up and vote on Nov. 3.
Mike Cogbill is an Organizer and Activist living in Germantown. He is the founder of Represent Progress; the organization develops and pilots innovative democracy programs to test and scale new models of civic participation, representation, and government responsiveness.