Yogi Berra, the mid-century New York Yankees Hall of Fame catcher known for his pithy and often humorous life observations, once famously quipped: “When you come to a fork in the road, take it.” It was sound advice, perhaps, for a traveler on the go and in search of a quick meal. The modern Democratic Party now confronts a fork in the road.

On the one hand lies the path of least resistance: doubling down on the status quo — the progressive culture-warring, woke/identity politics-driven agenda that has dominated the party ever since Barack Obama upset Hillary Clinton in the 2008 Democratic presidential primary. On the other hand lies the more difficult but ultimately more promising path: repudiation of that post-2008 legacy and a conscientious return to a politics of the prudential center. Which path Democrats choose from here will go a long way toward determining their relevance as a national political party for the foreseeable future.

Obama’s shocking upset over the madam-president-in-waiting was an inflection point for the institutional trajectory of the Democratic Party. Voters rejected the cultural centrism that was a Clinton-era hallmark in favor of the “hope” and “change” promised by Obama’s “coalition of the ascendant.” Initially, perhaps, that may have looked like a smart bet: Obama trounced John McCain in the 2008 presidential general election. But the one-time “coalition of the ascendant” transmogrified into an identitarian and deeply off-putting “coalition of aggrieved interests.” Culturally militant wokeism eventually reached its pernicious apex during Joe Biden’s presidency — which saw the first explicitly “DEI” Supreme Court justice selection (Ketanji Brown Jackson, after Biden vowed to nominate a Black woman) and a DEI vice presidential running mate (Kamala Harris, after Biden was pressured to choose a Black woman).

This version of the Democratic Party, which featured the progenitor of wokeism, Obama himself, as the leading presidential campaign trail surrogate for Harris, was thoroughly rejected in November by the American people.

Former Clinton strategist James Carville, for instance, has called for Democrats to distance themselves from the excesses of woke civilizational arson. But many others disagree.

Democratic elected officials are also deeply split. California Gov. Gavin Newsom made headlines this past week by repudiating certain facets of wokeism during an interview with Charlie Kirk, but congressional Democrats attending Trump’s joint address to Congress on Tuesday evening took the opposite approach, beyond refusing to applaud: Rep. Al Green (D-Tex.) obnoxiously heckled the president and was kicked out of the House chamber within the speech’s first few minutes.

Newsom seems to be reading the tea leaves — unlike congressional Democrats. There is a similar divide on the issue of illegal immigration and so-called “sanctuary” jurisdictions; consider, for instance, New York City Mayor Eric Adams’ high-profile flip on the issue, which has brought him into line with Trump.

In order to recover their standing and regain lasting relevance as an electorally feasible national political party, Democrats are going to have to repudiate the entirety of their post-2008/post-Obama cultural legacy. That is the simple truth. The American people want a stable pocketbook, a stable border and a stable world stage.

Are Democrats up to such a challenge?