Diversity in the party. Or who does the big tent house

[cali]

And to be clear, we're going to be talking about diversity of ideas and beliefs in this thread. It should be a given that we accept all people of every ethnicity and religion, gay straight , bi, transgender, etc.

But my idea of a big tent is that the center pole of that tent is composed of certain tenets: Civil and voting rights. Reproductive rights, environmental protection, climate change, a commitment to preserve and rebuild our safety net, are some. We may have different ideas about how to achieve common goals, but don't fucking pisses on us and tell us you're just trying to save social security if you haven't done your damndest to explore solutions that don't hurt and kill the most vulnerable.

As I see it, for years conservadems have bludgeoned us with a concept of the big tent that shoved out progressives, made lots more room for centrist and traditionally republican ideas and philosophies. They used creative language to obscure the damage they incurred. The DLC may no longer exist, but the third way certainly has a lot of power. Think DSW.

The republican tent is shrinking because of racism, sexism, xenophobia, far more than anything else, so the "look what happened to the republican party. Hiss, hiss you purists" meme isn't very well thought out.

A big tent and a strong center pole.

[mac56]

1. K & R

[Suprk]

2. K&R

[rateyes]

3. Isn't it funny that when it comes to Wall Street,

DWS says we are a "big tent" party. But, when it comes to open primaries, she is opposed to more voters coming in under that tent?

[zeemike]

4. There are many independents that would be in our party if there was room for them.

But it seems the leaders don't really care about a bigger party.
And it probably has to do with "Who else are you going to vote for?"

Let's face it, the party lost the house and the senate under the leadership we now have, and they are still on the job.

[cali]

5. Kick

[DLevine]

6. K&R. nt