"Hey, semantics matter.."

Most definitely.

"it's feeling more and more like this populist "fighting for" deal feeds into the caricature of Democrats that the right trades on: passive, looking for help, the infamous "class warfare" accusation."

That's not the caricature the right attacked this year.  Or the caricature they attacked in '00 or '92 or '88.  The caricatures they like to attack are "not resolute / honest", "out of touch culturally", and "weak".

The one comparative question even a weak Democrat will beat a strong Republican on is "Cares about people like me".  

That is the strongest Democratic trump card.  So how do you translate that advantage into votes?  

By saying you'll fight for what you care about.

Not only do you emphasize your partisan trump card with this language, but you also neutralize the right's caricatures that actually resonate.

---

Unless you're proposing a radical departure from my above argument, the verb has to be something close to "fight".  What is the best rhetoric among the following?

• "I will fight for a woman's right to choose."

• "I will defend a woman's right to choose."

• "I will stand for a woman's right to choose."

• "I'm in favor of a woman's right to choose."

The last choice is closest to what you're proposing upthread.  But I to my ear, the first two choices are clearly the best choices.

Of course, feel free to substitute better words than I've supplied.  I'm not trying to straw man your argument.