How does the Democratic party convey what it stands for?

Nathaniel Smith

Feb 21, 2026

Sometimes I’ve heard it said that “We all know what the Democrats think.” Actually, I don’t think so. Each of us knows only what we’d like them to think.

A February 6 New York Times article [public link], “Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Steps Onto a Wider Stage,” shows that the congresswoman from New York “has emerged as an increasingly sought-after leader within the party she set out to disrupt.” She “routinely answers centrist Democrats’ requests for help on communications strategy and fund-raising” and “has been ubiquitous on social media,” amassing about twice as many views last month as Senate Minority Leader Schumer.

I’m all for her views being taken into account. But does that mean the Democratic party needs to turn to her or another possible future presidential candidate to answer that often-asked question: “What does the party stand for?”

That’s actually what the Republicans have done: turning to a figure who gained prominence from the news and social media and then gained the power to determine or authorize party positions.

Or, now the Dem leaders of some cities are conferring to establish policies to limit ICE incursions [public link]. Fine, but are cities now setting national Dem policy?

Wouldn’t it be better for a party to decide what it stands for and then see which leaders and candidates agree?

The parties do have national organizations; what does the Democratic National Committee reveal about the party’s positions? We can check out the party’s 91-page 2024 platform, but at this point that is pretty dated, especially in its reliance on President Biden as a reference point and its assumption that he would be the Democrats’ presidential candidate in November 2024.

The site also tells us that: “Democrats across the country are working hard to build a better America. We’re fighting to build an economy that works for everyone by lowering costs for working families and investing in the middle class. Democrats are dedicated to ensuring a stronger and more just future for every American.”

Wait, isn’t the other party saying that too?

Then DNC offers an outdated snippet on each of 17 issues, such as:

“Inflation Democrats are committed to tackling inflation by lowering the cost of living for American families. They have passed legislation to make prescription drugs more affordable and are working to reduce supply chain bottlenecks and ease inflationary pressures by investing in American manufacturing and infrastructure.”

Let’s suppose we are a reporter assigned to write about inflation as a political issue. We have 24 hours to file our article. Is the above quote going to satisfy us? Not likely. How much of an issue is inflation today for the Dem party? Inflation is now slightly under 3%. The Fed, long-term, wants 2%; the administration wants interest rates as low as possible.

If we search the DNC site we find a July 2024 article “Core Inflation at Lowest Point in 3+ Years Thanks to President Biden,” which shows a decline to 3%. So is 3% good enough? Or has the thinking changed in the last year and a half? What does the party have to say about the high 2021–23 rates?

Why is this so difficult? I think many of us are in confusion about who speaks for the national Democratic Party. Do we turn to current office-holders, to possible future leaders, to voices from the past? The Republicans faced this issue in 2024 by standing by as a self-appointed group, many of them now in the administration, wrote the comprehensive 2025 project.

My view has long been that the Democrats, when out of power in Washington, need to establish an official spokesperson for each issue. The one area where there seems to be some sense that the media can get an opinion from a qualified person who may well speak for the party is in transportation, with Pete Buttigieg.

What the party needs is what is called in Britain a shadow cabinet, with a carefully designated and representative individual speaking to the issues associated with each cabinet position. For congressman Wiley Nickel’s considerations on the idea, see here.

In that way, the party could tell the public swiftly what it would do to counteract all of the outrageous damage being done by the current regime regarding ICE, NATO, foreign affairs, climate change, housing, wealth inequality, tariffs, war, presidential pardons, minimum wage, Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, manufacturing jobs, DEI, national debt, farmer discontent, immigration, Supreme Court, voting rights, democracy….

If Democrats as a party cannot speak to those issues clearly and daily, if the media don’t know where to turn to find immediate answers, then Democrats are not making the essential national effort to get back in touch with the majority of voters.

Circling back to where we started, one prominent Democrat is getting a lot of attention for enunciating an “alternative vision” of a post-Trump foreign policy, a “working-class-centered politics” and resistance to authoritarianism. That would be Alexandria Ocasio Cortez in her Feb. 13 remarks at the panel on populism in Munich.