Interesting, guys. Yeah, the multiple variables at play in Oregon make it hard to say whether Oregon Democrats were consciously pushing back against progressives or if the big spending just overwhelmed everything else.

—Nathaniel Rakich, 538

Ultimately, in congressional primaries, if you are getting absolutely swamped by your opponent with advertising — both negative and positive, unlike in some other recent primaries with spending disparities — you're going to have a hard time. Susheela Jayapal was up against $5.7 million in pro-Dexter spending and could only marshal a few hundred thousand dollars of advertising. McLeod-Skinner faced $5.7 million of outside spending hitting her and boosting Bynum and only aired about $200,000 worth of advertisements. In an expensive media market, that makes it tough to get your message out, let alone respond effectively to attacks.

—Jacob Rubashkin, Inside Elections

That's interesting, Meredith, but I also think that Portland-area voters are a little frustrated with the progressive movement, particularly in the wake of the debacle with decriminalizing drugs that the legislature recently rolled back. There may be some local dynamics that really matter in Oregon, but aren't as influential elsewhere in the country, that are holding progressive candidates back — as you can see in my previous post about polling in the area regarding homelessness and crime. Both the 5th and 3rd districts are in the Portland area, so progressives there may be suffering some blowback from these issues.

—Mary Radcliffe, 538

That's a good question, Nathaniel. It could be that big spending wins primaries. Another takeaway could be that progressive candidates are losing steam. In the 3rd and the 5th, the candidates more aligned with the progressive wing ended up losing (Jayapal and McLeod-Skinner). But I don't think that's the take away. I think it's more so a consequence of progressive's effective movement. Voters had their pick of several progressive candidates in those races, and yes, the candidates who spent more prevailed.

—Meredith Conroy, 538 contributor

Looking ahead to Oregon's results, the Portland-based 3rd District hosts one of the big contests of the night. Longtime Rep. Earl Blumenauer's retirement has left open this solidly blue seat, and three contenders with progressive brands are competing for the Democratic nomination: state Rep. Maxine Dexter, former Multnomah County Commissioner Susheela Jayapal and Gresham City Councilor Eddy Morales. At first blush, Jayapal looked to be the front-runner, as she previously represented close to 30 percent of the 3rd District's overall population — far more than Dexter or Morales. She also sports ties to national progressives via her younger sister, Washington Rep. Pramila Jayapal, who chairs the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

Yet a late campaign cash bonanza may have turned the race on its head, to Dexter's benefit. Pre-primary financial reports through May 1 showed that Dexter had received a massive late boost to bring her campaign total to $919,000, ahead of Jayapal's $773,000 and Morales's $606,000. And from May 2 to May 19, Dexter reported $419,000 in major contributions, far more than her opponents' combined $150,000. Meanwhile, outside groups have spent more than $5 million either supporting Dexter or opposing Jayapal. The 314 Action Fund, a progressive group that supports candidates with science backgrounds, has doled out $2.2 million on ads promoting Dexter and a super PAC with unclear ties, Voters for Responsive Government, has spent $3.2 million on spots attacking Jayapal.

This surge of money has brooked controversy because it appears at least partly connected to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, a bipartisan pro-Israel group opposed to progressive critics of Israel's military action in Gaza. While Dexter supports "a negotiated cease-fire" and Morales has called for aid to Gaza, Jayapal has emphasized her consistent and early calls for a cease-fire — so it would follow that groups like AIPAC would prefer that someone else wins. Tellingly, an analysis by Oregon Public Broadcasting found that a substantial portion of Dexter's last-minute donors have a history of giving to AIPAC, and some recently supported notable Republicans such as House Speaker Mike Johnson.

More controversially, The Intercept published reports in early May alleging that AIPAC funneled money to the 314 Action Fund to spend on Dexter's behalf, presumably because more direct intervention by AIPAC could backfire in a progressive-inclined district. The 314 Action Fund denied the allegations, and in the last pre-primary filing from the group on Monday evening, it turned out that a substantial chunk of the organization's recently raised cash came from billionaire former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and financier Rob Granieri. Either way, the money could prove to be a massive difference-maker for Dexter's campaign.

—Geoffrey Skelley, 538