How are the Republicans not a big tent Party?
- Are you talking about now, or 10-20 years ago? Then, they clearly were. Now, the tent sure is shrinking. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 21:22, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
- I agree. The article lists the Democratic Party because it has many wings. So what? So does the Republican Party. Ron Paul, John McCain, James Inhofe, and Olympia Snow represent very different philosophies and very different wings. --22.214.171.124 (talk) 14:10, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Yes, indeed this thing needs a lot of citations. I take particular issue with this sentence: "The Republican Liberty Caucus and similar groups aim to shift the US Republican Party's "center of the tent" towards Goldwater-Reagan ideals." That's a bogus statement and it has no citation to back it up. Reading through, I see plenty more. In the end, whether or not a party is a big tent party is a matter of opinion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 13:55, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
breaking it up
There used to be a lot more to this article. What happened?
This article didn't used to be a stub. I used to link to the previous, longer version often for its in depth explanation with examples. It was a great article imho and it's a shame it's all gone now. I'm trying hard to understand why, but to me it defies explanation.
- Check the article history. There have been no substantial reductions in the article. There have been some substantial expansions, some of which have been rapidly deleted because they lacked citations and expressed personal opinions. Skinsmoke (talk) 12:22, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
This article should be ideally titled Catch-all party rather than Big tent - Big tent is a term more exclusive to American politics, while Catch-all party is a more general 'world' title suitable for a global Wikipedia project.--Autospark (talk) 15:06, 25 September 2015 (UTC)