Critics are questioning the Working Families Party's independence as it gains traction in Philly
Philly Inquirer link: https://www.inquirer.com/politics/election/kendra-brooks-nicolas-orourke-philly-city-council-20230920.html
That reality, coupled with the Working Families Party’s close ties to Democrats, has some Republicans questioning if its presence on Council is what the framers of Philadelphia’s government intended.
“The purpose of the non-Democrat seats is to maintain diversity on City Council,” said Drew Murray, a Republican running for one of the at-large seats. “They are not an independent party.”
Republicans — and even a few Democrats — are pushing the issue of ideological diversity ahead of the Nov. 7 general election, when the GOP will battle the Working Families Party for the pair of seats on Council that represent the city at large. It demonstrates how seriously the GOP is taking the threat from progressives, who are explicitly trying to oust them from city government.
- more at link -
Progressives tend to be more vocal on issues that concern minorities and people of color, where the Democratic establishment sometimes falls silent. For this reason, it's a racial movement as well as a political one.
This particular story is about Philadelphia progressives, however we've seen a lot of similar activity in Pittsburgh in the last few years. As far as I know, there's no Working Families Party in Pittsburgh yet. It would be a mistake for Pittsburgh Democrats to ignore this trend.
= new reply since forum marked as read
and by their own definition -- intending, promising to "dismantle," "destroy," "replace" the evil Democratic Party, etcetera. They believe reforms cannot take place under our current political institutions; their agenda requires their overthrow, and spend most of their energy not on the progressive reforms they ardently claim to support but in causing trouble for Democrats and trying to sabotage their progressive actions.
So it sounds like most of the "progressives" who've been doing well in Pitt really ARE "
D) first and foremost" because they've been doing well. That was very encouraging to read.
Reportedly a lot of the illiberal types have flooded into the WFP, in some areas anyway. Reports of dissention within and changes from the WFP's traditional cooperation with Democrats to opposition are strong indicators of where those're making themselves felt. It should not be assumed those'd be like Democrats in office.
to "Pitt." 
referred to are having far more disappointments than successes in getting people to elect their faux-prog candidates into office, whether posing as radical progressive idealists or Democrats. At this rate, in a decade they could end up deep in negative numbers. 