Yes, Democrats Can Take Control of the Conversation

To paraphrase Charles Dickens, It was the worst of times, it was the terror of times, it was the age of recklessness, it was the age of disgrace, it was the epoch of humiliation …

Anyone who has been the least bit conscious since January 20, 2025 has witnessed this administration destroy livelihoods, shred our infrastructure, and blow up our international relationships.

Those of us who consistently voted against Trump in 2016, 2020, and 2024 understood that our democracy was on the brink and knew what that meant. After all, during his first administration, Trump test-drove his authoritarian aspirations by pushing the boundaries of cruelty. The Democrats were united in their response and strategy. It was at that time, in 2018, when Minority Leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi did what no other House member in history had done: She spoke continuously for over eight hours and seven minutes on the House floor.

Trump and his Congressional Republicans had moved to end Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), a program that not only benefits its recipients but has shown to strengthen the American economy. In both the House and Senate, Democrats were in the minority, just as they are now. For 487 minutes, Rep. Pelosi stood in four-inch heels, defending DACA and Dreamers, sharing their stories and contributions to America, like this anecdote she recounted, by one such person:

“… [I grew up] in a community of violence—you may not know that … on weekends I helped my dad clean office buildings [in Silicon Valley]. I picked up trash, we filled the trash can in every room. Today, I’m one of those in conference rooms [solving] the toughest problems in big data.”

What Nancy Pelosi delivered was a “Magic Minute,” which is one tool House Democrats have at their disposal. A “Magic Minute” refers to a tradition in the U.S. House of Representatives that allows party leaders, in either the minority or majority, to speak on the House floor without time constraints. It’s not a formal rule. You won’t find it in the Rules of the House of Representatives’ 1,523 pages, but it’s an informal privilege allotted for House Party Leadership. It’s not like the Senate filibuster, which is designed to block or delay legislation until a supermajority is reached. It’s there to give House leaders unlimited speaking time. It’s a place to set the narrative, which is exactly what Democrats need to do, right now.
First, let’s address the elephant, or rather, donkey, in the room. Why do so many high-level Democrats—aside from Rep. Jasmine Crockett, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and former Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg—struggle with authentic and effective messaging?

To answer that, we have to look at who Democrats have been and who they are now.

The Democrats Defined

As I wrote in my last article for DAME, when I am talking about Democratic and Republican parties, I’m speaking about the parties after 1965 when there was an ideological realignment after the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Acts were passed.

At that time, under LBJ, during the 88th and 89th Congress, white men made up an average of 97% in Congress. These bills were passed due to tremendous public pressure from Civil Rights groups, the televised racial violence of the 1965 Selma March (Bloody Sunday), and LBJ stating it was a moral imperative to honor JFK after his assassination. It took literal blood flowing in the streets for some of these white male legislators to finally say, Fine, we’ll stop blocking some of their inalienable rights. White Southern Democrats like segregationists Sen. Strom Thurmond (SC), Sen. Jesse Helms (NC), and Sen. Trent Lott (MS), who had ties to other white supremacists, moved over to the Republican Party. They were welcomed with open arms by other Republicans who praised their commitment to states rights, small government, and conservative values—all coded words for racial hierarchy, no taxes on the rich, and white supremacy—cementing the GOP’s identity.

On the other side of the aisle, Democrats began electing members from their own base—Black women and men, people of color, members of the disability community, raise wages, strengthen labor rights, protections for the LGBTQ community, and regulate big business. Policies that helped their own communities while “raising all boats.”

A significant contingent within the Democratic Party, namely the Congressional Black Caucus, has consistently advocated for the working poor, working class, and middle class through policy, but there has been a pattern of underreporting their legislative initiatives in the media. The underreporting of their targeted policy goals means the GOP have a much easier time falsely painting the Democratic Party as “elites.” Beltway media relentlessly repeats that erroneous narrative that Democrats are “out of touch with the working class,” offering little to no policy-based evidence to support the claim.

This century, Democrats became the party of fundamental rights, institutional governance (formal structure and procedures), and of democratic norms (unwritten rules, traditions, and behaviors). In contrast, the GOP have fully transitioned into the reactionary party, seeking to reverse social, political, and economic progress to maintain power structures benefiting the ultra-wealthy donors.

And those are the foundational differences between the GOP and the Democrats. The GOP are “reactivists” who are not only fine with shredding institutional norms to claw back social progress but they’re fine with destroying our governmental institutions and democracy if it means their donors’ power and wealth remain entrenched.

The vast majority of Democrats in Congress don’t see themselves as activists within the institution, though some come from that background. Many of them aren’t seeking to shake up the institution to bring about systemic change, instead see their role as protectors of the congressional institution to bring about systemic change, over time, through the legislative process. They’re protectors of that institution rather than its disrupter. And for the last decade, they’ve mostly had to do that on their own.

 

The Fundraising and Messaging Divide

Even with some Democratic presidents being friendly to Wall Street, more and more in corporate America began to view congressional Democrats as an unreliable vehicle for their business interests and a threat to free-market ideology, deregulation, and corporate influence over the government. The GOP saw a financial opportunity in opposing social and political progress—not just to appease a conservative base fearful of multiculturalism and social norms changing, but as a deliberate strategy to align with corporations who opposed unionization, fair wages, and progressive policies. The GOP and corporations were aligned in disguising financial battles over taxes, subsidies, and wages as ideological ones (e.g., D.E.I, affirmative action, critical race theory).

The GOP’s base is also ideologically unified, white, and with no objections to their candidates being corporate-backed. The Democratic base is diverse and holds its leaders to stricter ethical standards.

The Republican Party embraces dark money with no shame. There’s no stigma attached to taking money from oil companies or weapons manufacturers, owning stocks in industries they regulate, or aligning policy with donor interests. They have endless financial and media resources to aid them in fundraising. Hell, Republicans let their donors write their policy positions for them.

Some Democrats have also taken dark money, but they are the only party who’ve consistently introduced legislation (DISCLOSE Act, End Dark Money Act, For the People Act, Democracy for All Amendment) to kill it. Fundraising for Democrats means navigating competing policy and ethical demands from leftist, radicals, progressives, liberals, moderates, centrists, and independent swing voters. It’s a narrative balancing act that Democrats don’t always maneuver skillfully.

Republicans can remain siloed in their messaging to fundraise (e.g. anti-woke rhetoric, “Build that Wall!,” “Stop the Steal,” “Government Is the Problem”).

Republicans Embrace Being Awful. Democrats Take A Poll

Republicans also stopped being risk averse after the 1980s when Ronald Reagan said the quiet part out loud: “Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.” Reagan made it clear that he was going to prioritize corporations and the rest of America wasn’t “entitled” to the piece of the pie they paid for.

Democrats, on the other hand, have been frustratingly  risk-averse, worried about breaking up their coalition, backlash from the media, and their confounding commitment to bipartisanship even when it’s at odds with democratic values. For far too long, they’ve listened to D.C. political advisers like James Carville, Mark Penn, Rahm Emanuel, and David Plouffe, who poured over polls before making a move on same-sex marriage, decriminalizing marijuana, and criminal justice reform—and at times, in the wrong directions, away from human rights. These advisers continued to bring a 1992 Clinton playbook to a Project 2025 coked-up-ketamine fight with MAGA Republicans.

Can Democrats Use Republican Narrative Tactics?

No.

MAGA Republicans never build anything— not infrastructure (no, a wall on the border is not infrastructure), nor social safety nets, nor affordable healthcare systems, nor public education. Nothing. The GOP have long viewed government as a business, focusing on profits rather than public service, that should be concentrated in a few hands,  which James Madison sternly warned against in The Federalist Papers:

“The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.”

That’s why Republican narratives center around fear and annihilation: That is at the base of tyranny. It’s why fascism, authoritarianism, and accelerationism have all come home to roost in the Republican Party. Those narratives and ideologies are antithetical to the majority of elected Democrats who are mostly builders. It’s much easier to destroy something than it is to build something.

Congressional Republicans are aided by right-wing think tanks like CATO and Heritage Foundation, who supply them with focus-group-tested talking points, with the intention of manipulation, tapping into emotions with clear repeatable narratives, and shorter propaganda techniques.

These right-wing think tanks also know, from decades of research, that there are psychological differences in message reception. Conservatives respond more strongly to “fear-based” and “loss aversion” messaging. The right-wing media ecosystem repeats these oversimplified messages day in and day out, making narrative discipline look organic and authentic even with it being strategically tested.

Democrats also have think tanks at their disposal, but a bullying and fearful “one message fits all” approach won’t work as effectively as it does for Republicans voters. That doesn’t mean Democrats cannot have a unifying message that appeals to many aspects of the multifaceted and at times fractured coalition.

Resetting the Narrative

We’re in a moment of deep uncertainty. Since House Republicans hold a majority, House Democrats alone cannot block legislation. They would need to flip three seats to them next month, an impossibly high bar, or win an additional three seats in 2026. In the Senate, the 47 Democrats can’t stop budget-related bills, they can only add amendments … that Senate Republicans can reject. For now, regular legislation still needs 60 votes to overcome a filibuster. McConnell has vowed to keep it, for now. With so little legislative power, what can Democrats do?

Democrats must reset the narrative and hold it. It’s time to reimagine what America could be even as Trump dismantles and destabilizes the nation.

To be truly great storytellers, Congressional Democrats must boldly define who they are, stop being so risk averse, firmly establish their values, and make it unmistakably clear who they’re fighting for and what obstacles they’re up against. Democrats should embrace being the party of human rights, both domestically and globally. Democrats must show we are the party of economic dignity: prioritizing living wages, access to health care, housing and basic needs without cycles of unending financial struggle, exploitation, or humiliation.

Democrats must show and tell. Yes Democrats have for decades introduced legislation to aid us, but they need to explain to the public how and why Republicans have halted the progress at every turn. All Democrats should hold multiple in-person local town halls in their district, and stream them for the public. They should occupy space on right-wing radio, podcasts, and television. They should hold a press conference where they read letters from Trump voters who have publicly stated they now regret their vote, and tell those voters about the policies they have to help them and the rest of America. They should write op-eds in local and independent papers, offer more interviews to Substacks writers, move into every media space where there is a reader or listener. Democrats should set up their own version of a “Committee on Public Information” for rapid-response media operations. While public funds cannot be used for partisan messaging they could use private funds, campaign resources, or party infrastructure to set up this operation. They could employ writers, artists, filmmakers, and storytellers from across the country that could help deliver their messaging. After all, artists help defeat Hitler, and we can do it again.

When House Democratic Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries says, “We’re not going to swing at every pitch,” he made us feel he’s incapable of leading let alone hitting a grand slam—and we desperately need both, now.

It’s time for Minority Speaker Hakeem Jeffries to step up to the plate (he started the metaphor so I’ll finish it) and show us why the House Democrats made him the leader of the Party. He can reset his own narrative and the Democrats narrative with the Magic Minute. Rep. Jeffries does have talent, and he needs to remind the public of that. He could do it after the budget resolution makes its way back with amendments to the House before it expires on March 14, 2025. Rep. Jeffries could discuss the immorality of a budget that would let children go hungry and rob people of their health care. He could even set a new record—and set the record straight while he’s at it. He can show the U.S. that Democrats aren’t down and out and the world that American Democracy is worth fighting for.