Let's Keep the Tent Big and the Door Open

By ALLAN J. BASSLER

Publisher

I had two calls last week that got me thinking. One person was upset that the Herald is publishing articles in Spanish. She didn’t accept my explanation that the Herald is publishing information about the coronavirus to help the Cove community stay safe. She couldn’t provide a coherent reason why publishing articles in Spanish is a bad thing, only saying that “This is the Cove.”

While that’s indisputable, the caller didn’t seem to understand that providing information to people in the language they understand best helps ensure that they learn how to avoid spreading the virus.

She hung up on me in the midst of my explanation. I don’t understand that reaction. I guess she didn’t really want to hear an explanation, she just wanted to complain. This is an unfortunate but not uncommon happening in the newspaper business – people who want to talk to the editor but who have made up their minds and don’t want to hear additional facts, logic or reason.

The other guy

The second caller properly identified that the Herald had made a mistake in reporting the previous week's number of people who tested positive for the coronavirus. (Thank you, sir!)

However, he thought that there was more to it than a simple mistake. He thought that the mistake was somehow an attempt to make the spread of the coronavirus in Blair and Bedford counties look worse than it is – I think he suspected a conspiracy of some sort.

When I asked him why in the world the Herald would want to do make the spread of the coronavirus look worse than it was, he said, “Because I think you're a liberal.” I had to chuckle at that. I haven't been politically liberal since my childhood. I’ve been a registered Republican and a conservative for decades, starting with voting for Ronald Reagan in his second term.

The caller couldn’t provide evidence to back up his assertion of my liberalism, but said it was indicated by “some things I’ve written” in the past. He couldn’t provide a specific example of this writing, however.

If someone can find something I've written in the Herald that indicates that I'm a capital-L Liberal, please let me know what edition you found it in. I am very interested in reading it.

I’ll set aside my concerns about dragging partisan politics into a national health care crisis. I’d like to address a bigger problem.

Reagan got it right

Those calls in combination got me thinking.

I mentioned above that I voted for Ronald Reagan in the mid-1980s. He remains one of my political heroes. I was drawn into the Republican Party because of Reagan’s conservative logic, his ability to communicate conservative ideas and his sense of humor. Several of Reagan’s big ideas have stuck with me and I think that they remain valid today, three decades after his time leading the party and our nation.

One of Reagan’s ideas that I believe remains valid is that the Republican Party, holder of the nation's conservative values, has to be a “big tent.” By that, Reagan meant that the party has to make room for a lot of different kinds of people who share conservative values. He knew that it was politically dangerous to create a purity test to exclude some conservative and right-of-center people. Making the party small means fewer members. Fewer members means elections are lost.

Reagan stated the importance of a big Republican tent in 1967, when he described the changes his party had been through in the 1950s and 60s. Gov. Reagan said this at the United Republicans of California Convention:

“Fortunately for those millions of concerned citizens [of the USA], we too had paused to take inventory. We discovered we could no longer afford the luxury of internal fighting, backbiting and throat-cutting,” “We discovered our philosophical difference with those presently in power was greater than any grudge or split within our own ranks. We’re ready and in position to offer an alternative for those concerned citizens who wanted to join with others, not to win a contest, but to preserve a way of life.”

How to win elections

Wikipedia’s entry on the “big tent” idea states that when the Republican Party was a “big tent” party, it “encompassed a wide range of right-wing and center-right causes, including a wide range of politicians who were fiscally conservative and socially moderate or liberal and vice versa.”

The “big tent” years of the 1970s and 1980s allowed the Republican party to attract support from wealthy suburban voters in the South and Midwest, Northeastern moderates, Western libertarians, and rural conservatives across the country.”

Wikipedia goes on to point out the wisdom of Reagan’s stance: From 1968 to 1988, Republicans won five out of six presidential elections, with the only exception being a narrow loss to Democrat Jimmy Carter in 1976.

What’s going on?

I think that the Republican Party is losing contact with the big tent idea that brought it so much success at the ballot box.

When someone reads what I’ve written in the Herald about politics and somehow decides I’m a big-L Liberal, something has gone wrong. Like Reagan, I think that the Republican Party should welcome a broad range of conservatives.

Republicans shouldn’t have checklists in which a certain number of boxes have to be checked or you’re rejected as “insufficiently Republican.” That’s self-defeating.

Republicans should allow the Democrats to administer the purity tests and then watch them deal with the ensuing headaches.

I’m confident about conservative ideas. I believe that if conservatives present their ideas properly, the logic and reason of them will bring people into the party. I don’t think that we need to resort to lies, trickery or deception to bring people to the party. And bringing people in is what wins elections.

Republicans,

consider Dave

Consider this example, which I made up to illustrate my point.

Let's talk about Dave. Dave is an American male on the young side of middle age. He’s married with two kids, two car payments, a mortgage and a fishing boat.

He works construction. His main financial concerns are making enough to pay his bills, being able to take his family on a nice vacation every year and put some aside for retirement.

His other main concerns are the Steelers defense, when he can next go fishing and that whine coming from the transmission of his F-150.

Dave thinks very little about politics. He thinks that political parties are just noise machines built to raise money for candidates. He usually votes only in the presidential elections, which means every four years. He usually makes up his mind about who he's going to vote for as he’s standing in the voting booth. Dave’s voting decision is based on whichever candidate he thinks will do the best job at keeping him working and keeping the nation and his family safe.

Here is Dave's presidential voting record: Bush I, Perot, Clinton, Bush II, Bush II, McCain, Obama, Trump.

On November 3, 2020, Dave gets up early to go vote before going to work. He thinks of it as a patriotic chore that he’d like to get out of the way.

Dave opens his front door Election Day morning and sees two people standing on his front porch. On the right is the Republican Party in a dark suit and red tie. On the left is the Democratic Party in a dark suit and blue tie.

“Hello, Dave," says the Republican Party. “Dave, we’ve been taking a look at you. Before you go vote, we'd like to ask you a few questions.”

“Sure, go ahead,” Dave says.

The Republican Party pulls out a clipboard and a pen.

“Dave, is it true that you voted for Ross Perot, an independent, in 1992?”

“Yes, I did,” Dave says. “He got me worried about financial stuff. Plus, he wasn’t one of the usual politicians.”

The Republican Party nods and makes a check mark on its clipboard.

“And, Dave, is it true that in 1996, you voted for Bill Clinton, a Democrat?”

“Yes,” Dave says. “When Clinton talked, I felt like he understood me.” Dave shrugs. “I was young.”

The Republican Party makes another check mark.

“And is it true that in 2012, you voted for Barack Obama, also a Democrat?” the Republican Party asks.

“I did,” Dave says. “It was his second term. I thought it was important to keep some continuity going. You know, don’t change horses in the middle of the river.”

The Republican party makes a third check mark.

“You know,” Dave says, “I voted for both Bushes and Trump. And McCain.”

“Moving on,” the Republican Party says. “Dave, is it true that in 2011, you said to a friend, ‘Boy, I’m glad for Obamacare, since my employer quit paying for my health care insurance’?”

“I did say that,” Dave says. “I had lost my health care insurance at work and I needed my family to be covered.”

The Republican Party makes another check mark.

“Last question,” says the Republican Party. “Is it true that in January of this year, you said to a friend, ‘I kinda wish Trump would do a little less tweeting’?”

“Yes, that's true,” Dave says. “I still think he should tone down the tweeting.”

“Well,” the Republican Party says, “We’ve added it all up and the Republican Party doesn't need you, Dave. You only passed 9 of 12 items on our test. You’re basically a Liberal.”

The Republican Party puts its clipboard away, turns, walks down the sidewalk, gets into its car and drives away.

Dave turns to the Democratic Party, which is still standing on his porch.

“Hello, Dave,” says the Democratic Party with a big Bill-Clinton style grin, extending a hand. “We're the Democratic Party. Nice to meet you.”

Guess who Dave votes for?

• • •

End of my story. I hope you get my point.

Reagan said it best, so I’ll let him close out this column:

“The Republican Party, both in this state and nationally, is a broad party. There is room in our tent for many views; indeed, the divergence of views is one of our strengths. Let no one, however, interpret this to mean compromise of basic philosophy or that we will be all things to all people for political expediency.”

Thanks for reading.