In all of the punditry that has accompanied Arlen Specter’s departure from the Republican party, none is more curious — or inaccurate — than the assertion that this housecleaning of liberal Republicans from the party is somehow a departure from Ronald Reagan’s philosophy of having a “big-tent” party, i.e.: a party where many would be made to feel comfortable even if they weren’t always in agreement on every issue.
Reagan had once famously articulated an inclusive philosophy that welcomed all to his party and he was fond of saying things like “somebody who agrees with you 80% of the time is an 80% friend not a 20% enemy.” But his inclusiveness had its limitations. Reagan’s contempt for the Rockefeller wing (what would today be called moderate or liberal Republicans) of the GOP was legendary and the feeling was mutual.
Yes, this is entirely accurate. Reagan detested the Rockefeller wing of the party but still believed it could be used for the greater good of the country. However, he did not allow the minority of the Rockefeller wing to dictate the terms of the larger party (you know, like it has been going in Congress and elections for the last two or three cycles). Reagan did not put up with the type of venomous self castration that the GOP puts up with from the likes of Snowe, McCain, and others. Don't believe me? Here is an example:
When Reagan took over the levers of power at the GOP convention in Detroit one of the first things he did was force his will onto the GOP platform on issues like abortion and the Equal Rights Amendment.
Those GOP forces who today misquote Reagan and have misunderstood Reagan’s idea of a big-tent need look no further than Mary Dent Crisp, once a prominent leader in the Republican party, who in 1977 was appointed its co-chair.
Although Crisp had been a Republican longer than Reagan and had worked her way up the ladder of party leadership, Reagan was now defining what the party stood for and Crisp was outraged at the party’s new values on abortion and the ERA.
“Although our party has presented the outward appearance of vibrant health, I’m afraid we are suffering from serious internal sickness,” she said during platform committee meetings in 1980. “Now we are . . . about to bury the rights of over 100 million American women under a heap of platitudes.”
The next day Reagan showcased his big-tent philosophy, telling reporters that Crisp “should look to herself and see how loyal she’s been to the Republican Party for quite some time.”
Crisp got the message, left the convention and signed on with the third party candidacy of a more moderate/liberal Republican named John Anderson.
So, what can the GOP learn from Reagan, the author asks. Quite a lot:
First, he did indeed have a big tent, especially in 1984, which allowed 59% of the electorate to vote for him, but it was a tent of Reagan’s design in which those who disagreed with him had little say about how the tent was constructed, but were welcome to stay anyway.
This gets back to the 80% rule. If you agree with me 80%, then stay. If you are goin to let your little petty 20% get in the way of doing what we need to do, then you can go elsewhere. But, guys, you say, this can't work. Um, yeah, it did. Look at what Reagan did with these groups who disagreed:
Pro-choice women were welcomed into the tent as voters so long as they didn’t try to change the party’s position on the issue of abortion, one which Reagan held dearly enough to have written a book about while still in office. Union members were courted by Reagan, so long as they didn’t mind Reagan’s tough policies toward organizing which included his firing of striking air traffic controllers and eventually came to be known as “Reagan Democrats.” Those jittery over Reagan’s bellicose statements on foreign policy were also welcomed, provided they could live with his tough posture toward communism. And even Rockefeller Republicans were allowed to stay in the tent so long as they realized that they were joining his party and not the other way around, that while they would be horrified by the new boss’s position on social issues for instance, they’d find something to cheer about in his tax cuts.
See, you don't have to do focus groups. You stay true to a set of principles and you get people to stay with you on the parts they agree on in setting an agenda. Then, once that is complete, you can begin to debate the 20%. However, you don't let the 20% get in the way of the 80% and how the MAJORITY of the party feels.
Bottom line? Here it is:
In Reagan’s big tent, the likes of Arlen Specter would always have been welcomed, so long as they were willing to go along with Reagan, but the moment they stood in the way, as Mary Dent Crisp did, and sought to assert their policies on his vision for the party, they were shown the door. Today, the big tent that Reagan stitched together is in disarray, but if its leaders are to return from political oblivion, they’d do well to remember how Reagan went about constructing the tent and the philosophy that swept him, and two weak Republican successors who rode his political coattails into the White House, and build a tent which stands for key principles, yet never fails to welcome those who disagree, as honored guests.
Basically, we don't just let people in because they can "win" in PA or wherever. We have to have a set of core principles based on shared values, not focus group nonsense or this or that poll. Core principles that people can come together on in spite of 20% differences, and then from there, build that consensus. But, if people get in the way of the basic core principles and philosophy, there is the door. We can't wine and dine them and make deals with them because "they are senior senators and they will be committee chairs, so we should support them because they have an R and seniority" (the idiotic Hugh Hewitt argument). We must establish again our core values as Republicans, hold our elected officials and party leaders accountable, and support only those who will go along with what the party's values are. Those who stand in the way and obstruct on the order of Specter and others need not stick around.
