I want to introduce my own concept of political space time curvature to help us better understand the Politics of Contrast (or Definition, as Texeira and Halpin call it) and the need for a Big Tent Democratic Party. Earlier, I wrote:

Texeira and Halpin are not writing a specific proposal for the 2006 election -- they have properly idenitfied one of the key long term problems of the Democratic Party, the ability to shape its image and brand has been hijacked by the Republican Party and Democrats have allowed Republicans to completely control the branding of their own party with no resistance from the Democratic Party.

Texeira and Halpin have identified the problem and, in my opinion, provided very good and workable proposals for attacking the problem. Full disclosure, much of what Texeira and Halpin talk about are ideas I have endorsed for 18 months. Those who know my work from daily kos will no doubt find some of these ideas familiar - The Politics of Contrast, Lincoln 1860, The Party of Dobson, Extremist Republicans. Those themes have been central to much of my writing on Democratic Party politics.

I would like to expand on this idea, incorporating "political space-time curvature." Let's recall T&H's 5 postulates:

(1) The starting point for all political organizing and campaigns should be: "What are my core beliefs and principles and how do I best explain them to supporters and skeptics alike?"
        (2) Every political battle, both proactive and defensive, should represent a basic statement of progressive character and present a clear, concise contrast with conservatives. Do not blur lines.
        (3) All issue campaigns and agenda items are not equal. Progressives should focus their efforts on issues that can simultaneously strengthen the base and appeal to centrist voters. Progressives must be willing to make sacrifices and tradeoffs -- in terms of coalition building and budgetary concerns -- to achieve their most important agenda items.
        (4) Escalate battles that expose the extremism of the right or splinter their coalition. [Follow-up: When confronted with the right's social, cultural, or national security agenda, the absolute worst response is to fail to combat these caricatures or to explain one's position directly to voters, regardless of the popularity of the position.]
        (5) Every political action should highlight three essential progressive attributes: a clear stand on the side of those who lack power, wealth or influence; a deep commitment to the common good; and a strong belief in fairness and opportunity for all.

As general themes and principles, these postulates can be applied in every region of the nation. But they will not lead to uniform specific issue positions for Democrats everywhere.  The political gravity or, "political space time curvature" in Nebraska or Mississippi is different from that in say, Rhode Island. But the progressive or Democratic position in each of these locations can clearly be discerned and is the position for Democrats to follow in each of them.

So how do we determine what the political gravity is in the locales and how do we determine the "progressive position?" How do we determine how far progressives can push? What is the velocity of progressivism and where does it stand across the Nation? . . .

<blockquotes>The Democratic coalition groups don't fight for the Bill of Rights unless their own favorite amendment is threatened.</blockquotes>