Ah... poor Tea Party, we hardly knew ye

[eflatminor]

All Tea Party members I personally know were devout Bush supporters.

Well allow me to introduce myself. I support the idea of the TP yet not only did I NOT vote for President Bush, I protested in the streets against him on the eve of the invasion of Iraq. There, now you need never repeat the above statement. NOT a fan of Bush, never was.

 

[bripat9643]

Which means the GOP can safely disregard the Tea Party and their aims once they're past primary season.

That's why the Tea Party was ultimately doomed. Unless they had enough resolve to go Third Party they were always going to end up as nothing more than a GOP PAC like the Log Cabin Republicans.

It's a good thing the TEA party isn't taking the advice of people like you who are so concerned about its success.

Who do you think you're fooling?

Going the third party route has always been the plan for electoral debacles.

 

[tigerbob]

All Tea Party members I personally know were devout Bush supporters.

Well allow me to introduce myself. I support the idea of the TP yet not only did I NOT vote for President Bush, I protested in the streets against him on the eve of the invasion of Iraq. There, now you need never repeat the above statement. NOT a fan of Bush, never was.

And (just to add to the sense of broad cross-section among tea party supporters), I support the original stated aims of the tea party, and supported the invasion of Iraq, but otherwise thought Bush was a lousy POTUS.

 

[Anachronism]

That's a fair comment. I would say that the scrutiny takes place during the primaries. There I will vote my heart. BUT, I can't imagine anyone getting the nomination that I wouldn't vote for against President Obama.

However, you still imply that you would vote for that individual as a means of voting AGAINST Obama rather than FOR that candidate. I find that type of thinking to be among the most damaging concepts in our political system. By doing so, you empower the Republican party to ignore your ideas because they know you'll simply vote for whomever they put on the ballot.

If history has taught us anything, it is the fact that it is possible to apply the lessons of the past to help avoid similar problems in future.

If an ideology has been shown to be flawed by application in the real world, it seems somewhat foolish to cleave to it simply because to compromise would imply inconsistency.

Or not.

Of course one would have to be a believer in a failed ideology for that to be an issue. For those of us who are followers of an ideology that worked quite well for a couple thousand years only to be discarded by the revolutionaries of the late 19th and 20th Centuries in favor of this ridiculous system that's not a problem.

 

[eflatminor]

All Tea Party members I personally know were devout Bush supporters.

Well allow me to introduce myself. I support the idea of the TP yet not only did I NOT vote for President Bush, I protested in the streets against him on the eve of the invasion of Iraq. There, now you need never repeat the above statement. NOT a fan of Bush, never was.

And (just to add to the sense of broad cross-section among tea party supporters), I support the original stated aims of the tea party, and supported the invasion of Iraq, but otherwise thought Bush was a lousy POTUS.

And to add further to that cross section, I can state that I've been to several TP gatherings with two people I know that live here in my building. One is my girlfriend, a life long Democrat that felt both parties have spent us into oblivion and the other is a Black man who calls himself a fiscal conservative. While he may have indeed supported President Bush, the three of us don't exactly support US Citizen's broad brush generalization of the TP.

 

[eflatminor]

However, you still imply that you would vote for that individual as a means of voting AGAINST Obama rather than FOR that candidate. I find that type of thinking to be among the most damaging concepts in our political system. By doing so, you empower the Republican party to ignore your ideas because they know you'll simply vote for whomever they put on the ballot

I understand your point but I have to say we did some real damage to the establishment Republicans in the 2010 primaries and they now know that they better support fiscally responsible candidates in 2012 or we'll keep upsetting their primaries and voting the old guard big spending Republicans out of office. I think this is an approach more likely to bring about the change I'm looking for than to throw away my vote on the Libertarian candidate. Anyway, I get your point and it's a fair one.

 

[Wacky Quacky]

There's a reason we'll support OBA (Anybody but Obama) and that is because nobody that uses logic and reason in their contemplative process can imagine a worse President the your dear leader. Of course, if you stick purely to emotional thinking, he's your guy.

The problem with an ABO philosophy is that you end up failing to properly scrutinize who it is that you are voting for in order to vote against a particular individual. You could very easily end up with a candidate who is nearly as bad as Obama (think McCain, Romney, Palin, etc....) simply because you were willing to assume that nobody can be as bad as Obama.

Personally, I have no interest in voting for ANY candidate for ANY office if I do not believe they are very close to my own philosophical viewpoints. That's why I end up checking boxes in so few of the individual election races.... because I can't support either candidate.

That's a fair comment. I would say that the scrutiny takes place during the primaries. There I will vote my heart. BUT, I can't imagine anyone getting the nomination that I wouldn't vote for against President Obama.

Even in the primaries people only care about choosing who will win, not who the best person for the country is.

If this country is ever going to change directions people have got to stop caring so much about just beating the other party. Simply stopping Obama WILL NOT help the country (And the same goes for Democrats who were obsessing with "Bush's 3rd term"). Even with Obama gone and a Republican in office I could almost guarantee that the country will continue its downward spiral.

Party politics, winning, throwing out the incumbent, all of these things mean NOTHING compared to simply voting for who will be best for the country. And please take note that I said "best", not "best between the two major parties".

 

[eflatminor]

Even in the primaries people only care about choosing who will win, not who the best person for the country is.

That is not true in my case but you are free to vote for whomever you like.

 

[uscitizen]

All Tea Party members I personally know were devout Bush supporters.
Well at least until his last year and then embaressement took over.

No one believes you know any TEA Party members.

So you DO believe I know Tea Party members.

 

[uscitizen]

Death knell? The "tea party" always was an attempt by the hardest edge of the Republican base to claim they carried about something other than abortion bans.

Not always. And not all of them even now. Plenty of them don't support abortion bans and are opposed to imperialist foreign policy and corporate welfare. You might find worthy allies there if you focused on the ideals and issues rather than partisan politics.

Fair enough. I shouldn't have said always. The "Ron Paul revolution" segment could definitely form working alliances with liberals on certain issues (I'd add privacy issues and some elements of drug policy to your list). However, the "tea party movement" as a mass phenomena is Moral Majority 2.0.

Yep saw Palin today on TV saying her job was to bring the US back to it's core moral values. Same was the theme of the Beck/Palin Rally.

 

[Truthmatters]

Even in the primaries people only care about choosing who will win, not who the best person for the country is.

That is not true in my case but you are free to vote for whomever you like.

How do you vote when you dont even know the definition of democracy and republic?

 

[boedicca]

Even in the primaries people only care about choosing who will win, not who the best person for the country is.

That is not true in my case but you are free to vote for whomever you like.

How do you vote when you dont even know the definition of democracy and republic?

You some how manage to do it, much to the dismay of all rational people.

 

[Anachronism]

I understand your point but I have to say we did some real damage to the establishment Republicans in the 2010 primaries and they now know that they better support fiscally responsible candidates in 2012 or we'll keep upsetting their primaries and voting the old guard big spending Republicans out of office. I think this is an approach more likely to bring about the change I'm looking for than to throw away my vote on the Libertarian candidate. Anyway, I get your point and it's a fair one.

No you didn't do any damage to them. Show me the candidate the Tea Party got elected who has maintained a CONSERVATIVE voting record over the last half year. I don't believe there is one. They've all turned into the same sort of mind-numbed robots that their predecessors were.

Until you folks are willing to walk away from the party entirely, you will have no significant effect on the party at all.

 

[Anachronism]

Yep saw Palin today on TV saying her job was to bring the US back to it's core moral values.

That's laughable from someone whose very existance in politics is antithetical to the core morals and values of this country.

 

[jillian]

the "tea party" was ALWAYS the rabid extreme right wing "base" of the repubs... the bush deadenders, the 28% of the country who still supported bush at the end of his term.

Hmm... I'm not in the "Tea Party", and I can't say I've been following the movement's progression much in the last year or two - but you couldn't really be more off-base in regards to its origin. Pretty much the opposite of what you're saying here.

in your opinion. and that's fine. but we're talking exactly the same numbers and exactly the same part of the repub party. as far as i can see, it isn't that complicated.

 

[Truthmatters]

That is not true in my case but you are free to vote for whomever you like.

How do you vote when you dont even know the definition of democracy and republic?

You some how manage to do it, much to the dismay of all rational people.

Is the US a democracy?

 

[Political Junky]

Amy Kramer representing the Tea Party has said the Tea Party will support any GOP candidate running against Obama. They will support Cain, Romney, or any other GOP candidate just as long as Obama doesn't win the re-election. As reported this morning on FOX news.

This is the death knell of the Tea Party, the GOP like the Borg on Star Trek, will assimilate the Tea Party into itself becoming one party. Resistance is futile. I kind of like that analogy, never realized it until now but the GOP is really like the Borg.

the "tea party" was ALWAYS the rabid extreme right wing "base" of the repubs... the bush deadenders, the 28% of the country who still supported bush at the end of his term. the sore losers who ranted about "taking their country back" from whom? a president elected with 365 electoral votes and more than 50% of the population? saying they were anything else was a media slight of hand b/c they were "newsworthy". they never should have been given that kind of credence.

they still shouldn't.

they should have been and still should be marginalized like any other extremist group.

The Tea Party is the 21st Century John Birch Society. The more sane republicans of the day brought them down.

 

[bripat9643]

No one believes you know any TEA Party members.

So you DO believe I know Tea Party members.

Huh?

Do you speak English?

 

[jillian]

How do you vote when you dont even know the definition of democracy and republic?

You some how manage to do it, much to the dismay of all rational people.

Is the US a democracy?

are you hijacking yet another thread with this BS argument?

 

[uscitizen]

I understand your point but I have to say we did some real damage to the establishment Republicans in the 2010 primaries and they now know that they better support fiscally responsible candidates in 2012 or we'll keep upsetting their primaries and voting the old guard big spending Republicans out of office. I think this is an approach more likely to bring about the change I'm looking for than to throw away my vote on the Libertarian candidate. Anyway, I get your point and it's a fair one.

No you didn't do any damage to them. Show me the candidate the Tea Party got elected who has maintained a CONSERVATIVE voting record over the last half year. I don't believe there is one. They've all turned into the same sort of mind-numbed robots that their predecessors were.

Until you folks are willing to walk away from the party entirely, you will have no significant effect on the party at all.

Reality has little bearing in a faith based organization.
A hopey changey bunch.