Where does the tea party come from? Activist Republicans, study shows.

[MarcATL]

Marc, do you really believe this??

Here's my take on the TEA Party.............some of these folks have been around a long time, they saw the writing on the wall long ago. The government has been spending out of control for many years. When every person that applied for a mortgage (black, white, yellow, brown, pink and purple) qualified, it was the beginning of the end.

I don't like debt at all, however as a reasonable person I realize it's sometimes necessary. Unfortunately most people don't realize what a $200-$300,000.00 mortgage will do their bottom line if someone loses their job.

Our government in DC today doesn't understand that concept either. The TEA Party is a group of people that is tired of the pork, special deals, the sweet congressional and government pay packages and the out of control spending.

What this report tells me is that some folks are beginning to take these people a little more seriously and they are getting scared......their free ride is being threatened and they don't like it. It only sends me the message that someone is ruffling the right feathers.

Were the pre-Obama TPers concerned about social issues at all? Yes

Are the post-Obama TPers concerned about social issues now? Yes

Were the pre-Obama TPers concerned about the MASSIVE spending on the wars at all? Yes

Are the post-Obama TPers concerned about the MASSIVE spending on the wars today?Yes

Do you recognize and/or acknowledge any change in the TPers before Obama vs. after Obama? Yes


Expound on all of the above if you will.

Thanks.

The Bail out and TARP program was a huge mistake, you cannot spend your way out of debt. These two things began the birth of the TEA Party. After several years of just complaining, with no one listening, they'd had enough...........they decided it was time to come together, there is strength in numbers. It's a movement, not a political party.

You're welcome.

I'm sorry, but I don't see any serious backlash against the war spending from the TPers.

They seem to be concerned with almost every other type of spending EXCEPT the wars.

Can you produce any evidence of serious movements to cut Defense? If so, please post them, as I haven't been able to find evidence of that.

BTW, defense spending dwarfs every other type of spending in the budget.

 

[Sallow]

This is nothing we didn't already know.

The Tea Party aren't political newbies, they are almost always white conservative males, mostly with moderate to good education, are cool to blacks and don't much care for minorities.

In a word. Republicans.

Really does depend on your definition of the word 'know'.

As in the "Party of NO!"

As in Republicans.

As in Are you going to accept the will of the voters and Obama as President?

Republicans: HELL NO!

As in Are you going to help get the economy back on track?

Republicans: HELL NO!

As in Do you care that people are suffering?

Republicans: HELL NO!

Yeppers.

HELL NO!

 

[Two Thumbs]

Seems that, unlike what especially many on the right like to say, which is that the Tea Party consists of many Independents and Democrats, that it is in fact, a spin-off of disgruntled Republicans. Which many, espeically on the Left have been saying for the last 3 years.





Read it and weep: Where Does the Tea Party Come From? | Politeia | Big Think

Political scientists David Campbell and Robert Putnam published an op-ed in The New York Times this week arguing that the common idea about where the Tea Party comes from and who they are is wrong.



an opionon piece is proof?

In my opinoin you are a left wing radical hack job.

All I need is one person to concur and it's an undeniable fact.

What part(s) of their argument do you have a problem with?

Which part(s) of their argument is unfactual?

Campbell and Putnam interviewed a sample of 3,000 people in 2006 Who were these people?as part of a project studying political attitudes in America. Five years later they returned to their sample to see what people who supported the Tea Party said before the Tea Party even existed. Campbell and Putnam found Tea Party is not for the most part composed of non-partisan political newcomers who were radicalized by the poor economy and the expansion of government. In fact, Tea Party supporters were for the most part activist Republicans well before both the financial crisis and before Obama’s election. that was never denied, ever. It was pissed off reps that started it "for the most part".

Campbell and Putnam also found that concerns in 2006 about the economy and the size of government are not strongly correlated with Tea Party affiliation today. In 2006 the country wasn't about to go tits up. Today’s Tea Party supporters are disproportionately white social conservatives, who, Campbell and Putnam say, “had a low regard for immigrants and blacks long before Barack Obama was president, and still do.” Liberals count illegals immagrants as immagrants, so this is a blantant lie.
Campbell and Putnam found that the cause that really unites rank-and-file Tea Partiers is a desire for more religion in government. That, I think is true. Social conservatives glom onto anything they can and fuck it up for the rest of us.

These are not mainstream views. Most Americans don’t want a more openly religious government. strictly an opinion.

In spite of its increasing unpopularity, the Tea Party has more influence over Congress and the Republican Party than ever. If they are falling in popularity, then thier influence would also wan.
So which is the lie?



and again, this is an opion piece, not proof. So many people from so many walks of life claim TP membership. The main theme for each person they have supported has been the economy, THAT is undeniable fact.

 

[Sallow]

The Bail out and TARP program was a huge mistake, you cannot spend your way out of debt. These two things began the birth of the TEA Party. After several years of just complaining, with no one listening, they'd had enough...........they decided it was time to come together, there is strength in numbers. It's a movement, not a political party.

You're welcome.

TARP and the GM bailout were authored by Republicans.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4ja9q386ek]RINO Alert: John Boehner Voted for the TARP Bailout - YouTube[/ame]

Interestingly enough..who does the Tea Party vote for?

Republicans.

 

[California Girl]

This is nothing we didn't already know.

The Tea Party aren't political newbies, they are almost always white conservative males, mostly with moderate to good education, are cool to blacks and don't much care for minorities.

In a word. Republicans.

Really does depend on your definition of the word 'know'.

As in the "Party of NO!"

As in Republicans.

As in Are you going to accept the will of the voters and Obama as President?

Republicans: HELL NO!

As in Are you going to help get the economy back on track?

Republicans: HELL NO!

As in Do you care that people are suffering?

Republicans: HELL NO!

Yeppers.

HELL NO!

See, that's where the problem lies. (and I mean 'lies' as in untruth).... you can't tell the difference between a lie and a truth, a 'no' and a 'know'.... and so you repeat whatever partisan bullshit you are fed.

Shame, cuz you did used to be quite a reasonably thoughtful poster. I feel sorry for you.

 

[Dot Com]

This is nothing we didn't already know.

The Tea Party aren't political newbies, they are almost always white conservative males, mostly with moderate to good education, are cool to blacks and don't much care for minorities.

In a word. Republicans.

Really does depend on your definition of the word 'know'.

As in the "Party of NO!"

As in Republicans.

As in Are you going to accept the will of the voters and Obama as President?

Republicans: HELL NO!

As in Are you going to help get the economy back on track?

Republicans: HELL NO!

As in Do you care that people are suffering?

Republicans: HELL NO!

Yeppers.

HELL NO!

All they care about is the next election. Extreme Righties= party before country

 

[naturegirl]

Were the pre-Obama TPers concerned about social issues at all? Yes

Are the post-Obama TPers concerned about social issues now? Yes

Were the pre-Obama TPers concerned about the MASSIVE spending on the wars at all? Yes

Are the post-Obama TPers concerned about the MASSIVE spending on the wars today?Yes

Do you recognize and/or acknowledge any change in the TPers before Obama vs. after Obama? Yes


Expound on all of the above if you will.

Thanks.

The Bail out and TARP program was a huge mistake, you cannot spend your way out of debt. These two things began the birth of the TEA Party. After several years of just complaining, with no one listening, they'd had enough...........they decided it was time to come together, there is strength in numbers. It's a movement, not a political party.

You're welcome.

I'm sorry, but I don't see any serious backlash against the war spending from the TPers.

They seem to be concerned with almost every other type of spending EXCEPT the wars.

Can you produce any evidence of serious movements to cut Defense? If so, please post them, as I haven't been able to find evidence of that.

BTW, defense spending dwarfs every other type of spending in the budget.

Because you think defense spending should be cut, I need to provide that evidence?? What about the war in Lybia, I don't see any progressives crying to cut that spending.

Can you tell me what other spending besides defense spending is necessary to provide for the common defense of the United States?

At least you admit they are concerned about every type of spending.

 

[whitehall]

Seems that, unlike what especially many on the right like to say, which is that the Tea Party consists of many Independents and Democrats, that it is in fact, a spin-off of disgruntled Republicans. Which many, espeically on the Left have been saying for the last 3 years.

In fact, Tea Party supporters were for the most part activist Republicans well before both the financial crisis and before Obama’s election. Campbell and Putnam found that Republican affiliation was actually the single strongest predictor of Tea Party support, and that Tea Party supporters were more likely than other people to have lobbied their public officials before.

Today’s Tea Party supporters are disproportionately white social conservatives, who, Campbell and Putnam say, “had a low regard for immigrants and blacks long before Barack Obama was president, and still do.” And while Tea Party leaders say their main concern is limiting the size of government, Campbell and Putnam found that the cause that really unites rank-and-file Tea Partiers is a desire for more religion in government. Campbell and Putnam argue that their public devotion—not their ideas about taxes—explains the appeal of figures like Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) and Texas governor Rick Perry to the Tea Party.

Read it and weep: Where Does the Tea Party Come From? | Politeia | Big Think

Even the left has to admit that the phrase "study shows" is an overly used excuse to quote one person's (usually a left winger) biased opinion. What do we care about the opinion of a second rate professor in a second rate university in San Francisco? Plenty I guess if we were desperate bigoted lefties looking to smear innocent people who peacefully engage in the political process.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Were the pre-Obama TPers concerned about social issues at all? Yes

Are the post-Obama TPers concerned about social issues now? Yes

Were the pre-Obama TPers concerned about the MASSIVE spending on the wars at all? Yes

Are the post-Obama TPers concerned about the MASSIVE spending on the wars today?Yes

Do you recognize and/or acknowledge any change in the TPers before Obama vs. after Obama? Yes


Expound on all of the above if you will.

Thanks.

The Bail out and TARP program was a huge mistake, you cannot spend your way out of debt. These two things began the birth of the TEA Party. After several years of just complaining, with no one listening, they'd had enough...........they decided it was time to come together, there is strength in numbers. It's a movement, not a political party.

You're welcome.

I'm sorry, but I don't see any serious backlash against the war spending from the TPers.

They seem to be concerned with almost every other type of spending EXCEPT the wars.

Can you produce any evidence of serious movements to cut Defense? If so, please post them, as I haven't been able to find evidence of that.

BTW, defense spending dwarfs every other type of spending in the budget.

No it does not.

 

[Full-Auto]

The Bail out and TARP program was a huge mistake, you cannot spend your way out of debt. These two things began the birth of the TEA Party. After several years of just complaining, with no one listening, they'd had enough...........they decided it was time to come together, there is strength in numbers. It's a movement, not a political party.

You're welcome.

I'm sorry, but I don't see any serious backlash against the war spending from the TPers.

They seem to be concerned with almost every other type of spending EXCEPT the wars.

Can you produce any evidence of serious movements to cut Defense? If so, please post them, as I haven't been able to find evidence of that.

BTW, defense spending dwarfs every other type of spending in the budget.

Because you think defense spending should be cut, I need to provide that evidence?? What about the war in Lybia, I don't see anyone crying to cut that spending.

Can you tell me what other spending besides defense spending is necessary to provide for the common defense of the United States?

At least you admit they are concerned about every type of spending.

Youre talking to a group of people that can not differentiate the words promote and provide. Good luck though!

 

[Dot Com]

The Bail out and TARP program was a huge mistake, you cannot spend your way out of debt. These two things began the birth of the TEA Party. After several years of just complaining, with no one listening, they'd had enough...........they decided it was time to come together, there is strength in numbers. It's a movement, not a political party.

You're welcome.

I'm sorry, but I don't see any serious backlash against the war spending from the TPers.

They seem to be concerned with almost every other type of spending EXCEPT the wars.

Can you produce any evidence of serious movements to cut Defense? If so, please post them, as I haven't been able to find evidence of that.

BTW, defense spending dwarfs every other type of spending in the budget.

Because you think defense spending should be cut, I need to provide that evidence?? What about the war in Lybia, I don't see anyone crying to cut that spending.

Can you tell me what other spending besides defense spending is necessary to provide for the common defense of the United States?

At least you admit they are concerned about every type of spending.

Do you know how much has been spent on the Libya operation? It wouldn't = 1 week worth of spending in Iraq in 2007. Add to that the fact that the U.S has frozen $30 billion + of Gaddafi's assets.

 

[Full-Auto]

I'm sorry, but I don't see any serious backlash against the war spending from the TPers.

They seem to be concerned with almost every other type of spending EXCEPT the wars.

Can you produce any evidence of serious movements to cut Defense? If so, please post them, as I haven't been able to find evidence of that.

BTW, defense spending dwarfs every other type of spending in the budget.

Because you think defense spending should be cut, I need to provide that evidence?? What about the war in Lybia, I don't see anyone crying to cut that spending.

Can you tell me what other spending besides defense spending is necessary to provide for the common defense of the United States?

At least you admit they are concerned about every type of spending.

Do you know how much has been spent on the Libya operation? It wouldn't = 1 week worth of spending in Iraq in 2007. Add to that the fact that the U.S has frozen $30 billion + of Gaddafi's assets.

Directly from the US according to the pentagon about 1 billion. That does not include nato related funds.

 

[Sallow]

Because you think defense spending should be cut, I need to provide that evidence?? What about the war in Lybia, I don't see anyone crying to cut that spending.

Can you tell me what other spending besides defense spending is necessary to provide for the common defense of the United States?

At least you admit they are concerned about every type of spending.

Do you know how much has been spent on the Libya operation? It wouldn't = 1 week worth of spending in Iraq in 2007. Add to that the fact that the U.S has frozen $30 billion + of Gaddafi's assets.

Directly from the US according to the pentagon about 1 billion. That does not include nato related funds.

 

[naturegirl]

I'm sorry, but I don't see any serious backlash against the war spending from the TPers.

They seem to be concerned with almost every other type of spending EXCEPT the wars.

Can you produce any evidence of serious movements to cut Defense? If so, please post them, as I haven't been able to find evidence of that.

BTW, defense spending dwarfs every other type of spending in the budget.

Because you think defense spending should be cut, I need to provide that evidence?? What about the war in Lybia, I don't see anyone crying to cut that spending.

Can you tell me what other spending besides defense spending is necessary to provide for the common defense of the United States?

At least you admit they are concerned about every type of spending.

Do you know how much has been spent on the Libya operation? It wouldn't = 1 week worth of spending in Iraq in 2007. Add to that the fact that the U.S has frozen $30 billion + of Gaddafi's assets.

So it's OK because it cost less?? Where do you suppose we're supposed to get the $ to pay that little bit?? 2 billion dollars a day in Lybia is a lot of money to me. The Real Cost Of U.S. In Libya? Two Billion Dollars Per Day. - Forbes

Do you ever think we'll see any of Gaddafi's money??

 

[Full-Auto]

Do you know how much has been spent on the Libya operation? It wouldn't = 1 week worth of spending in Iraq in 2007. Add to that the fact that the U.S has frozen $30 billion + of Gaddafi's assets.

Directly from the US according to the pentagon about 1 billion. That does not include nato related funds.

Government - Interest Expense on the Debt Outstanding

Was that laughter an exercise in stupidity?

 

[Avorysuds]

LOL!

Look at who comes to back up the "Tea Party is racist." TM, Swallow, Marc, .com... Soon RW/Zona/Chris/Shaman will be here to agree that in fact, the Tea Party is racist lol.

And you noobs wonder why no one gives a shit about the crap you post? Obama goes to a KNOWN RACIST CHURCH for like 20 + years and have any of you ever even started a thread about it? You're just mad because after 3 years of attacking the TP you lost, they are huge, get people elected and have many supporters that are not, how do the bigots put it, "white old Republicans?" hahaha.


So go ahead, sit around nodding yes to each other to help ensure you’re not full of shit… Too bad fact is near the rest of the country does not agree with you and prolly has family that are in the TP.

 

[Dot Com]

Because you think defense spending should be cut, I need to provide that evidence?? What about the war in Lybia, I don't see anyone crying to cut that spending.

Can you tell me what other spending besides defense spending is necessary to provide for the common defense of the United States?

At least you admit they are concerned about every type of spending.

Do you know how much has been spent on the Libya operation? It wouldn't = 1 week worth of spending in Iraq in 2007. Add to that the fact that the U.S has frozen $30 billion + of Gaddafi's assets.

Directly from the US according to the pentagon about 1 billion. That does not include nato related funds.

Yeah. I was thinking $1- 1.5 billion was my guestimate from sources I've seen over the past couple of weeks. Iraq was $2 billion/week in 2007. Add to this the fact that there has not been one soldier on the ground to get shot at either.

BTW- you realize that your helping my position?

 

[Sallow]

Really does depend on your definition of the word 'know'.

As in the "Party of NO!"

As in Republicans.

As in Are you going to accept the will of the voters and Obama as President?

Republicans: HELL NO!

As in Are you going to help get the economy back on track?

Republicans: HELL NO!

As in Do you care that people are suffering?

Republicans: HELL NO!

Yeppers.

HELL NO!

See, that's where the problem lies. (and I mean 'lies' as in untruth).... you can't tell the difference between a lie and a truth, a 'no' and a 'know'.... and so you repeat whatever partisan bullshit you are fed.

Shame, cuz you did used to be quite a reasonably thoughtful poster. I feel sorry for you.

Well over the last couple of decades or so..I've watched the party of Dwight Eisenhower/Bob Dole/Jack Kemp meltdown to a collection of fruit loops that are not only disfunctional, but they are dangeously disfunctional. And lately..that meltdown is on overdrive. They are picking up on memes that use to be thought absurd by everyone, Democrats and Republicans alike.

And you applaud that.

It's not me you should be feeling sorry for..

 

[Full-Auto]

Do you know how much has been spent on the Libya operation? It wouldn't = 1 week worth of spending in Iraq in 2007. Add to that the fact that the U.S has frozen $30 billion + of Gaddafi's assets.

Directly from the US according to the pentagon about 1 billion. That does not include nato related funds.

Yeah. I was thinking $1- 1.5 billion was my guestimate from sources I've seen over the past couple of weeks. Iraq was $2 billion/week in 2007. Add to this the fact that there has not been one soldier on the ground to get shot at either.

BTW- you realize that your helping my position?

I didnt mind going in and kicking his tail. It was the hanging around NATION BUILDING THAT BOTHERED ME.

 

[Dot Com]

Because you think defense spending should be cut, I need to provide that evidence?? What about the war in Lybia, I don't see anyone crying to cut that spending.

Can you tell me what other spending besides defense spending is necessary to provide for the common defense of the United States?

At least you admit they are concerned about every type of spending.

Do you know how much has been spent on the Libya operation? It wouldn't = 1 week worth of spending in Iraq in 2007. Add to that the fact that the U.S has frozen $30 billion + of Gaddafi's assets.

So it's OK because it cost less?? Where do you suppose we're supposed to get the $ to pay that little bit?? 2 billion dollars a day in Lybia is a lot of money to me. The Real Cost Of U.S. In Libya? Two Billion Dollars Per Day. - Forbes

Do you ever think we'll see any of Gaddafi's money??

Your argument pointed out budgetary matters. I pointed out that the entire 5-6 month operation in Libya, so far, has cost less than 1 week in Iraq.