Sure, but they had a vision for the country and for their party. Now I know that vision was tempered by practicality, but I think that Is far different than the current state of affairs where there is no vision, no leadership, just a desire to respond to and to reflect polling data. Now of course as soon as I write this down I realize there are a few fringe candidates that want universal income or healthcare or free college to all, even those unable to address the rigors, but for the most part, from my perch, a perch I admit is not necessarily interested in advancing the democratic party, it seems there is no vision just a desire for power. It seems to me that the Dems do best when they have a vision, when they embrace rather aspirational goals, outcomes, and futures, when they inspire. That is what I was trying to convey, though I did it poorly. I was not trying to capture the best label within the party for them, but rather something about inspiring vision to seek to broaden party appeal which is, of course, always good electoral politics. To me it was about leadership, not grasping the reigns of power with no idea what to do once there.
No matter, I have freely and routinely disclosed that the democrats should take anything I say to them or about them with several grains of salt.
BTW, Trump is selling a vision. A hellish nightmare to many, but a comforting controlled, genocidal, white power sort of apocalypse his supporters drink from deeply. I think the dems need to contrast that with a vision, a story of their own, not with programs, disjointed, designed to buy votes and constituencies, but with a vision for who we are and who we are to become.