What's the Problem With the Democratic Party?

The Democratic Party in the United States has a problem: no central ideology around which citizens can unite. "Liberal," the word that used to define Democrats, is now in disrepute.¹ It's equated by many with "soft." It connotes for many fiscal irresponsibility (as in "we will spend liberally"), social irresponsibility (as in "we have liberal values, i.e., we're libertines"), and intellectual irresponsibility (as in "we think liberally" meaning with an unwillingness to be sober, think rigorously, and get things right). Yet most people, including many conservatives it seems to me, actually live their own lives fairly "liberally" by the above terms. They'd just rather not make "liberalism" our political or social philosophy.

Yet, in the absence of "liberalism" as an organizing tenet, Democrats seem to lack any organizing tenet. Help the poor? That's said to be fiscally irresponsible and a product of soft thinking. Oppose war on principle? Weak and soft and not realistic. Favor human rights? Soft, soft, soft. Be not antithetical to government? A hard view to hold if you view government as antithetical to human rights and freedom.² Government, we are told, is the enemy of liberty, of business and of people and a refuge for the weak and bureaucratic.

And it doesn't help that some Democrats, while espousing liberalism, view those who don't agree with their views as evil, malicious, and stupid. For many Democrats there is a moralism they would impose on others even while decrying the moral pieties of those with whom they disagree.

As for myself, for what little it's worth, the label is irrelevant. I'm policy driven.³ I feel no particular allegiance to the Democrats; that someone with my views does not feel allegiance to the Democrats suggests a fundamental problem with the party.
________________________

1 Efforts have been made to reclaim the word "liberal," and for many it is not a disreputable word. Yet, there can be no doubt that its use is quickly bandied by Republicans and conservatives as a sort of slander, one that plays with many outside of their camp. The Conservapedia definition of liberal is particularly ludicrous, and alone makes the lie out of any claim by Conservapedia that it is unbiased, but  is a good example of the redefining conservatives have tried to engage in with the word "liberal."
2 Government is necessary to protect freedom and human rights. Not all government does that, of course; a governmental system has to be so intended (which is perhaps why freedom and human rights have gotten such short shrift in human history). It's a great fortune that the United States's partially was, though it surely could be improved. 
3 "Policy driven" should not be interpreted to mean lacking core beliefs -- those policies do not come from nowhere. If one wonders what those core beliefs are, the best answer is, read this blog.