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

Further down the ballot, Oregon voters also selected their party nominees for secretary of state and attorney general. Just a few minutes after polls closed (shoutout vote-by-mail!), ABC News reported that state Treasurer Tobias Read is projected to win the Democratic primary for secretary of state, the state's second-highest office. Read, who currently leads with 71 percent of the vote, had the establishment support and fundraising lead over state Sen. James Manning, who is in second place with 20 percent.

In April, Bolts Magazine wrote about this race as a test for different views on democracy and voting rights: Manning campaigned on a more progressive vision, including allowing incarcerated people to vote, while Read said he would prioritize fine-tuning the state's existing systems, including universal mail voting.

Oregon tends to elect Democrats statewide, so Read is probably the favorite to win in November over state Sen. Dennis Linthicum, the far-right Republican nominee who campaigned on ending vote-by-mail and was barred from running for reelection in the state Senate after he and other Republican lawmakers participated in a six-week quorum-denying protest over issues abortion, gun control and transgender health care.

ABC News also reports that state Rep. Dan Rayfield, who was state House Speaker for two years, is projected to be the Democratic nominee for attorney general. He'll face former prosecutor Will Lathrop in November in a race to succeed outgoing Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum, who is stepping down after 12 years in office.

—Irena Li, 538