For decades, an evergreen media storyline has been that the next election will resolve the civil war between the center and far-left factions of the Democratic Party. The thumb-sucking chatter continues even as the victor of the current round is obvious.

Before all midterm votes are cast and counted, we have a clear winner — it’s the far left, because once again the center didn’t hold.

As is their habit, relatively moderate Dems folded without much of a fight, and so the radicals did not need to seize every slot to win the internal struggle.

All they had to do was have a relative few fresh-faced hard-liners stake out positions beyond the pale, make a lot of noise and enjoy the ride as the media dubbed them the table setters of the future. Some of the old guard leadership briefly resisted, but to little avail.

Their capitulation illustrates why moderate Dems are getting dumped into the dustbins of history as the radicals gobble up more ground each election cycle.

They all hate Israel, want exorbitant taxes, favor coddling criminals, opening the borders and swelling the size and reach of government while imposing restrictions on individual liberty. ‘Party consensus’As New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani summed up the Socialist vision in his January inaugural address, “We will replace the frigidity of rugged individualism with the warmth of collectivism.”Shortly after that, 20 homeless New Yorkers froze to death on Gotham’s streets during a harsh winter.

A related lesson comes from former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who is voluntarily leaving Congress after 20 terms and 40 years.

Widely admired for her ruthless ability to herd cats on key legislation, she heads back to California with hopes Dems win both chambers this week. But on a podcast, she added a wrinkle.

As The New York Times reported her comments, she insisted that those on the far left who are attacking Israel “don’t represent the consensus of the party” as it seeks congressional control.

She cited Mamdani and Michigan Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed and said those who do not support Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state are not just “concerning — it’s wrong.”I certainly agree with her on that, but she then veered deep into the partisan mindset by saying the virulent positions on Israel do not stop her from wanting the radicals to win.

“This new person in Michigan, we’ll see if he gets elected to the Congress,” she said about El-Sayed.

“But the mayor, bless his heart, I hope he succeeds as mayor. But I don’t agree with some of the things he has said.”She justified her support by hiding behind the fig leaf claim that neither man represents the majority of the party.

In effect, she’s willing to swallow their antisemitism because their victories would give Dems more power.

“We have to win big, so that doesn’t really matter,” she added about their positions on Israel.

Got it. Antisemitism and a history of supporting Islamist terrorists are no big deal when you have an election to win and a government to control.

Pelosi first crossed that bridge during her last years as speaker when radical Reps. Ilhan Omar, Rashida Talib, Jamaal Bowman and Cori Bush openly espoused their hate for Israel, police and anyone who dared to vote for Donald Trump. ‘Big tentism’Pelosi didn’t ex-communicate them or even publicly draw a line. Instead, she welcomed them and eagerly sought their support on other issues. Chuck Schumer, the Dem Senate leader, is similarly malleable.

El-Sayed criticized him relentlessly and, as The Post reports, spoke and campaigned at Michigan mosques where speakers called for the end of the Zionist state and the death of Jews.

Although Schumer had endorsed El-Sayed’s primary opponent, he quickly joined the parade when El-Sayed captured the nomination.

Despite the fact that Schumer, the highest elected Jewish official in American history, long portrayed himself as the guardian of Israel, he glibly justified his support for El-Sayed.

Asked about his conversion, he said Dems must be “a big tent party,” and advocated “big tentism” because “it’s how you build a majority.”That attitude apparently extends to Hasan Piker, El-Sayed’s America-hating buddy and Twitch streamer.

He doesn’t even like his friend’s campaign workers trying to drum up support in heavily Jewish Michigan neighborhoods. “This has got to be the wildest door-knocking operation of all time,” Piker said.

“Trying to get perhaps the most Zionist district in the country, well, not the most, but one of the more Zionist wealthy districts in the country to vote for a Muslim anti-Zionist. Brave soldiers, all of them.”

He also called it the “equivalent of going to that Klan KKK neighborhood for a black candidate who’s running to abolish anti-miscegenation laws.”How charming. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul illustrates another example of the corrupting influence of ambition.

Years ago, Hochul was a conservative-leaning upstate official as her party swung left.

Those credentials led Gov. Andrew Cuomo to make her his running mate in 2014 and 2018, when he wanted a boost from the right.

She succeeded him when he was forced to resign in 2021, and won her own term in 2022.

Her victory was a nail-biter, and she seemingly concluded there was no future in moderation as most of the party followed the left-ward anti-Trump lurch.

Opportunistic Capturing the spirit of Tammany Hall boss George Washington Plunkitt, who said a century ago that “I seen my opportunities and I took ’em,” Hochul saw which way the wind was blowing and joined the parade. Her ambition spiked at an opportunistic time.

Last year, Mamdani’s social media skills propelled him to victory as the Pied Piper of a new generation of leftist voters. Many Dem officials shunned him, but Hochul endorsed him. When he took office, she took on the role of his Big Sister and powerful collaborator.

She funded his crackpot spending and taxing ideas, and he is responding by becoming her sidekick in the closing days of her campaign.

If the polls are right that she will defeat GOP challenger Bruce Blakeman on Tuesday, it will mark another example of the party moving left because establishment Dems lack the stomach to resist the radicals.

Any objection Hochul had to raising taxes and spending collapsed in exchange for Mamdani’s support. She bought his backing with billions of taxpayer money and by surrendering her beliefs. She’s not much different from Schumer or Pelosi. They all sold out their supposed principles to make deals with the devil.

Hochul, lacking their backroom skills, just did it more openly and with a clear and immediate price tag. That special place in hell is getting crowded.