The Democratic Party is a Big Tent

[Summer Hathaway]

37. You're right, jazzimov

The Democratic Party IS a Big Tent. It's members range from fairly conservative-minded centrists to far-left liberals. In truth, it goes beyond that, in that many Dems are closer to center on some issues, while being very far left on other issues. Not only do our political positions vary from one to the other, but often vary within ourselves depending on whether we're opining on the economy, civil liberties, education, LGBT rights, etc.

DU, however, is NOT a Big Tent - nor is it representative of the Party as a whole.

The 'purist' faction here only accept those who lock-step with them on every single issue; there is no room for differing opinions. Their thinking is black-and-white, i.e. if you are not a Snowden supporter, you are an NSA defender who embraces American citizens being "spied on". If you are not a Greenwald fan, you hate all journalists and the idea of a free press. If you support Obama on any issue you are a mindless worshipper incapable of independent thought. And so it goes.

Terms like DLCer and Third Wayer have no meaning here anymore. They have become labels to be affixed to anyone who doesn't agree with the 'purists', and are bandied about with little regard to their true meaning, or appropriate application.

The 'purists' believe themselves to be an elite group whose principles are loftier, whose political goals are above reproach, whose grasp of what is going on in the country - and in the world - is far beyond that of everyone else. No doubt you've seen the leftier-then-thou arguments played out here time and again - and have seen how divergence from what have been deemed to be 'acceptable opinions' is immediately quashed.

The 'purists' often comment about not voting as a means to "send a message" to the Democrats that they are unhappy. They seem to honestly believe that someone, somewhere takes note of the fact that they haven't voted, and will immediately contact them to find out why. They have no concept of the fact that non-votes accomplish nothing - and no Democratic salesman will call.

The 'purists' will tell you that they must "vote their conscience" - in other words, they are more than happy to see a Republican voted into a position over a Democrat, should said Democrat not be in total agreement with their every demand. It matters not that the Republican is in total disagreement with their desires - their "conscience" apparently allows for that possibility, and they see absolutely no negative consequences as a result. On the contrary, they again believe that a Republican takeover of power will serve to "wake the Democrats up" - and eventually one of their True Progressive (TM) Democrats will be swept into power somewhere down the line, and will right all of the wrongs done by the previous GOPers in office.

The 'purists' detest the idea of "winning" elections. They see "winning" as some kind of beauty contest, where the winner gets a parade and a Best-in-Show trophy. They are completely ignorant of the fact that the "winner" goes on to take the office he/she has been elected to, from where they can effect positive change. They will insist that "winning isn't everything" in a political contest - where winning is indeed everything when it comes to pushing progressive ideas forward from an elected position, rather than from the powerless "also ran" seat on the sidelines.

Thankfully, the 'purist' contingent on DU are, in the great scheme of things, merely a handful of people who have convinced themselves (and each other) that they are representative of real-life Democrats. And as surveys/polls have proven over and over, they are not. Obama's approval ratings among Democrats have been consistently high - an inconvenient truth that the 'purists' persist in ignoring, and spend their panties-in-a-wad hours decrying as irrelevant, skewed, or obvious lies.

I realize that your OP was meant as a plea for unity and understanding among those on this board. But the truth is that the 'purists' don't want unity - it goes against their self-perception that they are "special", and not to be lumped-in with the peasants who are not as 'pure' as they are - those peasants who vote for Democrats over Republicans, those peasants who actively participate in getting out the vote for Party members, those peasants who refuse to lock-step behind the self-proclaimed know-it-alls who, ironically enough, display their lack of knowledge on a daily basis.

There may have been a time when DU was fairly representative of the Democratic Party, Those days are gone.