Okay, so, the races are close, it's probably impossible to unpack what made the difference.

HOWEVER: in almost every respect, the campaigns that Warnock and Ossoff ran were closer to what progressives counseled than what moderates have counseled.

1. They very aggressively attacked their opponents' corruption and scandalous misbehavior at every available opportunity.
2. They campaigned heavily on bold promises of direct financial aid - literally just thousands of dollars coming as a check in the mail.

3. Trump loomed large in the race. Of course, this was his own doing, rather than a strategic choice, but notable given that they underperformed Trump in November.
4. They did NOT engage in the kind of Clintonite triangulation that political wise men always advise for red states.

5. As a result of all of this, when they won (with turnout that exceeded many presidential races), they won on the back of a huge base surge, rather than by persuading the center. Of course, you need both - but the base enthusiasm didn't seem to cost votes in the center!

Basically, the conventional centrist wisdom about swing state campaigns tells us that we have to trade away anything with obvious persuasive appeal (attacks, bold promises, clear policy stands) in order to win a tiny number of centrist voters. This suggests... otherwise.

Maybe, at the end of the day, a good, exciting campaign against a bad, crooked opponent kinda just appeals to everyone! Maybe that kind of campaign can win the less-engaged, less-ideological voters in the center AS WELL AS the highly-engaged partisan base on the left.

I guess as one last note, it's really this change to tone and posture - more aggressive rhetoric, stronger stands, less triangulation, less defense and more offense - that many progressives want from the Democratic Party.

I think most smart progressives understand that Dems in red states can't go around demanding, e.g., police abolition. But stuff like "Attacking corruption" or "Making a strong case for specific policies" aren't far-left ideological positions, it's just sound political rhetoric.