Indivisible, the progressive network behind the nationwide No Kings protests, is moving from street demonstrations to electoral warfare, opening its war chest to punish Senate Democrats who voted to reopen the government. According to reporting by Fox News Digital’s Emma Colton, the group is launching its largest primary effort yet against what it calls a weak and cowardly Democratic establishment that surrendered to Republicans and President Donald Trump during the historic shutdown fight.
At the center of this new push is a simple message from Indivisible’s leaders: if Democrats will not stand up to what they see as authoritarianism, then the grassroots will replace them with people who will.
Indivisible’s immediate targets are the Senate Democrats who joined Republicans to pass the bill that reopened the government and sent it to Trump’s desk. Fox News reports that Indivisible’s new primary program is specifically designed to go after incumbents who backed that deal and, in their view, handed Trump a political win just as the anti shutdown movement was gaining strength.
The group’s leaders are especially focused on Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer. In a memo and public statements, Indivisible and allied progressives have called Schumer’s approach weak, passive, and out of touch with the network’s activist base. Other progressive voices have echoed that anger.
Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders described the outcome as a “very bad night.” California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s official press office blasted the agreement as “pathetic,” while Newsom personally wrote, “America deserves better,” and followed up with a second message that simply read “pathetic.” Illinois Lt. Governor and Senate candidate Juliana Stratton said that “for Democrats to cave now would be a complete betrayal of the American people.”
Indivisible has joined California Rep. Ro Khanna and others in calling for Schumer to be replaced as Senate minority leader over his handling of the shutdown. Their goal is not just to pressure him, but to build an organized campaign that can actually remove and replace senators they see as part of the problem.
How Much Money Is in Indivisible’s War Chest
Behind this aggressive posture is serious money. According to public records summarized in the material you provided, Indivisible’s main entities have received more than 7.6 million dollars from George Soros’s Open Society Foundations since 2017. One two year grant alone, delivered in 2023, was worth 3 million dollars “to support the grantee’s social welfare activities.”
These grants are not labeled specifically for the No Kings protests, but they dramatically expand Indivisible’s capacity to organize, campaign, and now to wage primary fights. The structure of the organization includes different arms, such as Indivisible Project, Indivisible Civics, and Indivisible Action, including a political action committee that can directly engage in elections.
In practical terms, that means Indivisible can fund staff, digital outreach, polling, and targeted support for challengers in key Senate races. The group also emphasizes that it has a large volunteer base ready to provide “sweat equity” on top of the dollars. In a recent survey of its supporters, Indivisible says that 98.67 percent of its base wanted Senate Democrats to keep fighting rather than compromise, which the group is now treating as a mandate to spend heavily in primaries.
It’s Primary Plan
Indivisible has framed its new effort as the largest primary program in its history. In its announcement, the group said it will be “activating (its) network to support progressive fighters who are challenging feckless, status quo loving incumbents.” The focus will be on Senate candidates who show a “clear commitment to abandon the status quo of feckless leadership, and use every tool available to fight MAGA attacks on our communities, our health, and our democracy.”
Co founder and co executive director Ezra Levin made the stakes clear in a blistering statement. He said, “This is no longer about them – it’s about us. We’re done waiting for Democrats to find their spine. We can’t afford a weak and cowardly Democratic Party while the authoritarians invade our cities, terrorize our communities, and threaten our democracy. We get the party we demand, and we intend to demand a Democratic Party that fights.”
Levin argued that Democrats surrendered just as they were winning the public battle over the shutdown. He noted that “in these six weeks of the shutdown, Democrats had their best election night in over a decade, polls showed Republicans were losing this shutdown fight, and their base turned out for the largest protest in modern U.S. history with a resounding rejection of Trump and Republicans.” Instead of standing firm, he said, “Senate Democrats surrendered – yet again.”
Co founder and co executive director Leah Greenberg drove home the idea that this is a fight for the soul of the party. “Our democracy is facing an existential threat. We need leaders with backbone and conviction – not timidity and excuses,” she said. “Democrats can’t defeat authoritarianism by running from the fight. It’s in our hands to make sure those who can’t fight make space for the leaders who can. Indivisible is ready to clean house and build a party that actually has the energy to act like an opposition.”
The group promises that more details, endorsements, and campaign plans will follow as the 2026 primaries approach, but the message is already clear: no Democrat who supported reopening the government should assume they are safe from a primary challenge backed by Indivisible’s money and grassroots network.
Who Indivisible Is and How It Got Here
Indivisible began in 2016 and 2017, as Trump’s first term started and a group of former congressional staffers put out a guide explaining how local activists could adapt Tea Party tactics to resist his agenda. The organization describes its mission as saving American democracy, defending against authoritarianism, and building “a humane America that is more like social democracy than corporate plutocracy.”
Indivisible is structured as a network of local grassroots groups, often organized by congressional district or town, that coordinate protests, town halls, and pressure campaigns on elected officials. Local chapters are given tools, training, and sometimes grant support, but many are also self funded.
In places like Danville, Kentucky, organizers emphasize how small scale and personal their work can be. One local spokesperson, Kevin Maples of Indivisible Danville, said the group has no bank account and “no designated leader.” When money is needed, “we get out our wallets and purses and throw cash in.” He said that for his chapter, “we’re not raising money. We’re not asking for money. When money is needed it’s literally mamaws opening up their purses and getting out cash.”
Local organizers insist they are not professional operatives, but neighbors standing up for democracy. Maples said, “We’re not lunatics. We’re retired teachers, retired social workers, librarians, small business owners. We have deep roots in Kentucky and our community. We want to preserve what our ancestors built together.”
The Soros Connection
The financial relationship with the Open Society Foundations is real and substantial. According to the material you provided, The Hill reported that since 2017 Indivisible Project had received more than 7.6 million dollars from OSF. An ABC6 report noted that one 3 million dollar grant was issued through a fund to support Indivisible’s social welfare activities over two years.
Supporters of Indivisible describe this funding as part of a broader pro democracy mission. OSF is a large foundation that funds democratic engagement, human rights, and civic participation all over the world. Critics on the right, including Trump allies, use the Soros connection to suggest that the protests and primary efforts are directed from above and not truly grassroots.
Indivisible and its local leaders push back hard on that framing. Organizers interviewed in Kentucky laughed at the idea that they are “paid protesters.” They described themselves as uncompensated volunteers, many of whom pay for signs, supplies, and travel themselves.
The No Kings protests are the backdrop for Indivisible’s new primary war. These demonstrations, organized by Indivisible and allied groups such as the 50501 movement and the No Kings Organization, were designed to protest what they saw as Trump’s authoritarian style and use of power.
According to the information you provided, the June 14, 2025 protests involved more than 4 million participants in over 2,100 cities and towns. The October 18, 2025 wave covered around 2,700 locations with an estimated 5 to 7 million participants. One Fox News caption noted that “over 100,000 people” marched in Manhattan for the No Kings protest on October 18.
In Washington, D.C., protesters rallied against Trump’s military parade and immigration policies, arguing that he behaved more like a monarch than a president. In Kentucky and other so called deep red states, dozens of local protests showed the breadth of the movement.
Organizers framed their message in patriotic terms. Dr. Nancy Henly, a pediatrician and grandmother in Morehead, Kentucky, said, “We’re Americans who want to protect our country from authoritarianism. We want to return to democracy. We’re the real patriots. We’re not scary people.” She added that “sometimes you have to stand up in the street and say that what’s going on is wrong.”
In Madisonville, Michael Howard, a longtime Republican and Army veteran, said he was motivated by his oath to the Constitution. “I took an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. I took that seriously and still do,” he said. He called Trump’s direction “a fascist, authoritarian pathway,” and said, “that is not American to me.”
In Central City, 83 year old Karen Willis, a retired church organist, felt compelled to join the protests despite chronic back pain. She wrote to a friend that she “MUST do something” and promised, “I can stand on Broad Street and carry a sign – and I WILL.” She summed up her philosophy this way: “Start where you are. Wherever you are, that’s your realm of influence. That’s your first step.”
In Northern Kentucky, organizer Ann Dickerson contrasted the No Kings movement with the earlier Tea Party. She noted that conservatives did not accuse the Tea Party of being paid, but now “because it doesn’t fit your agenda, because it’s happening by people who are capitalizing on the method that you used, now all of a sudden they’re getting paid to do it. Please.” She said of the movement, “We’re not losing anyone. We’re gaining people every single time we’re out on the streets.”
Reactions
Reactions to Indivisible’s plan to punish Democrats who helped reopen the government reveal deep divisions. On the left, many activists see the strategy as necessary. They argue that Democrats squandered leverage and demoralized an energized base that had just produced some of the largest protests in modern American history. For them, the shutdown fight is proof that the party’s current leadership will always flinch at the critical moment.
On the other hand, some Democrats worry that such intraparty warfare could weaken the party in the general election. They fear that primary challenges might topple incumbents in swing states, making it easier for Republicans to gain or hold seats. Those who supported reopening the government argue that the shutdown was hurting veterans, families dependent on food assistance, and basic services, and that it therefore had to end.
Republicans are using the conflict for their own purposes. Fox News reports that Trump told Laura Ingraham that Schumer “made a mistake in going too far” and said, “He thought he could break the Republicans, and the Republicans broke him.” The White House, responding to questions about Democratic infighting, insisted that Trump wanted the government reopened from the start, with one official saying, “President Trump has wanted the government reopened since the first day Democrats shut it down.”
A Test of Power Inside the Democratic Party
By opening its war chest and mobilizing millions of supporters, Indivisible is forcing a reckoning inside the Democratic Party. The group sees itself as defending democracy against authoritarianism and believes that compromise on issues like health care and executive power is not just bad politics, but morally unacceptable.
Their strategy is clear: use Soros backed funding, national organizing infrastructure, and the energy of the No Kings protests to replace Democratic senators who, in their view, bent the knee. Whether this leads to a stronger, more confrontational Democratic Party or to deeper internal fractures will depend on how voters respond when the 2026 primaries arrive.
If you would like, I can now tighten this into a shorter op ed version, or shape it for a specific audience such as donors, activists, or general readers.
