Some people have a very narrow idea of what kind of politics is acceptable to them, and everything else is “right wing”. (Or of course you also have the same phenomenon on the other side, the ultra-right wingers who accuse Mitch McConnell of being a liberal.)
You do realize the irony of this statement, yes? I mean you argue more about U.S. politics than 97% of this board and come across as pretty dogmatic about just what is acceptable to you. From where I’m sitting you don’t seem anymore “broad tent” than ACO, just from the other direction.
It’s a fair point that I do have a specific political vision that I advocate for, although it’s from “ANother direction”, not “THE other direction”. But I don’t inaccurately state that everyone who deviates in any respect from that vision is “[right/left] wing”. If BigT had said s/he strenuously disagrees with Sam Harris on issue X, Y, or Z. fine. No problem. But to describe Harris as “right wing” is just false, absurdly inaccurate.
In the statement I made that you responded to, I made a bit of an inference from this inaccuracy that I think is hardly a stretch. Namely, that BigT is the type of person whose definition of “right wing” is incredibly broad, encompassing anyone who deviates even slightly from doctrinaire leftism, I guess. It makes the “right wing” incredibly vast, which is unjustifiable IMO–and fortunately so, because it would make the right unbeatable.
Almost everyone thinks they’re occupying a large segment of the middle ground. New Zealand Attacks: It's Not JUST Trump - YouTube The other side often cloaking theirs in prizing free speech.
If this woman in the Rebel HQ video were to support a third party or be otherwise progressive enough to not care that much about 2020, I can see where she’s coming from. If she thinks she can be part of building a broad coalition to get behind a Democrat in 2020 talking like this, that is detached from reality, and I’m someone who’s far from uncritical of Harris.