Will the Tea Party help or hurt the Republican Party in November?

kev9100

Even though the Tea Party has attracted a lot of attention recently, I'm not sure if they will help or hurt the GOP when it comes to election time. Sure, they may help solidify GOP support in some places, but in toss-up states like Nevada I think they may do more harm than good.

MCMLXXXIII

It'll be a toss-up, and probably depend on the state. In really conservative places like Oaklahoma or Utah it may help by either electing the Tea-Partier themselves, or making Republicans seem more level-headed, which will get them elected. But in more even states, it will probably hurt if the Republican agrees with anything the Tea Party has to say.

I guess we will see in about 4 months...

kev9100

MCMLXXXIII wrote: »

It'll be a toss-up, and probably depend on the state. In really conservative places like Oaklahoma or Utah it may help by either electing the Tea-Partier themselves, or making Republicans seem more level-headed, which will get them elected. But in more even states, it will probably hurt if the Republican agrees with anything the Tea Party has to say.

I guess we will see in about 4 months...

I don't think it really matters if the Tea Party helps in places like Utah. The GOP is always going to dominate there. But if the GOP want to take back the House or even the Senate, they need to win a lot of toss-up races and the Tea Party won't help them with that.

BluePlanet

the Tea Party IS the GOP.
What i mean is the usual GOP is really Tea Party Lite.

Overheal

Some sects of the party are the white black panthers, tbh. granted, without the marxism. voter intimidation though? yessir. The tea party is a livid beast in places.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGjnV2iJQCI

I have little doubt there will be more intimidation at the polls, and it will not be from the left.

Denerick

Its hard to know. But there is a considerable enthusiasm gap between the parties. If the Democrats can energise their base they may maintain their congressional majority. Either way they are destined to lose some seats.

What the tea party has done has been to move the party further to the right. In Nevada, they had a great chance to unseat Harry Reid, but instead they put up an absolute crank who is destined to lose.

The Tea Parties also tend to look ridiculous and embarass the Republicans in many ways. Rand Paul might win in Kentucky, but a Republican was always likely to win Kentucky anyway.

Either way, Democrats will play down the tea party influence after November and Republicans will hype up the tea party influence after November. Of that I'm sure of...

Amerika

Sometimes it will help candidates, other times it will hurt.

I’m confident Democrats and their confidants in the mainstream media are collaborating on ways to discredit and derail the Tea Parties in advance of the November election.

I am a member of the Tea Party Nation, but was notified in late May that the TPN withdrew their membership from the National Tea Party Federation. I will have to look at the ramifications of this before deciding if I want to continue with the TPN. Regardless of any formal “Tea Party”, many people are much more concerned about fiscal responsibility (taxes, spending, regulation and government mandates) and stopping a liberal agenda, than any official affiliation. The momentum for those points will not fade, and will have an impact on the next election in certain elections.

My wife (who is far more right wing than me) is trying to get me to take the family to Washington, DC on 8/28 for the “Restoring Honor Rally.” Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin, amongst others, will be there. I’ve already seen both in person and met Beck, so it’s no big deal to me. Sounds kinda interesting, but I usually just don’t care standing in a crowd of hundreds-of-thousands of people, unless the WHO was playing. But I would like to see the Smithsonian, the National Mall and some of the memorials again. Not much interested in seeing the Karl Marx headquarters at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue this time around.

Overheal

Amerika wrote: »

Regardless of any formal “Tea Party”, many people are much more concerned about fiscal responsibility (taxes, spending, regulation and government mandates) and stopping a liberal agenda, than any official affiliation. The momentum for those points will not fade, and will have an impact on the next election in certain elections.

So again I should ask, why the Tea Party did not form during the Bush Years? Minus the non-liberal agenda, he did nothing in the name of Fiscal Responsibility.

But I guess the TPM was more interested in their low tax bracket and could care less about the National Deficit that was accruing.

kev9100

Overheal wrote: »

So again I should ask, why the Tea Party did not form during the Bush Years? Minus the non-liberal agenda, he did nothing in the name of Fiscal Responsibility.

That is the main reason I have zero respect for the Tea Party. If they had been formed during the Bush years, I still wouldn't support them, but at least I would know their intentions were genuine.

By the way, has the Tea Party had any success in primaries, special elections or the like? I can't think of any off the top of my head.

Amerika

Overheal wrote: »

So again I should ask, why the Tea Party did not form during the Bush Years? Minus the non-liberal agenda, he did nothing in the name of Fiscal Responsibility.

But I guess the TPM was more interested in their low tax bracket and could care less about the National Deficit that was accruing.

The subprime meltdown and Bush’s bailout of the banks WAS the catalyst to the start of the Tea Party Movement. But that has nothing to do with the TPM effects on the upcoming November election. What... You trying to get me in trouble again?

Overheal

Im not sure I recall when I got you into trouble in the first place?

My point being however I have never seen one placcard depicting Bush as a pinko Commie Fascist. I have however seen an untold number of Obama characatures of him as Castro, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, etc. etc. And I deeply suspect the party will dissolve once there is a White Republican President back in Karl Marx HQ.

Amerika

Overheal wrote: »

And I deeply suspect the party will dissolve once there is a White Republican President back in Karl Marx HQ.

As a member of the TPM, I know we would be estatic if Condoleezza Rice were our next President. But don't let that stop you from your delusions.

Overheal

Amerika wrote: »

As a member of the TPM, I know we would be estatic if Condoleezza Rice were our next President. But don't let that stop you from your delusions.

Rice is a quiet girl when it comes to Fiscal issues. You would elect an unknown element?

Amerika

Overheal wrote: »

Rice is a quiet girl when it comes to Fiscal issues. You would elect an unknown element?

She is not an unknown element. And she would probably be better than what we currently got.

On the Economy (from the website you provided)

"Question: We watch our economy grow at just about 1% while China grows 12% and India grows 10%. The suggestion that America is less competitive or, worse, less important on the global world stage keeps coming up. Has America lost its edge versus competitors around the world?

Answer: I can count many, many times that people have said that America had lost its competitive edge. We had lost our competitive edge vis-a-vis Japan. We were a power that was over-stretched in the ‘80s. We were going to converge with the Soviet Union, by the way, in the 1970s. So there have been many premature sentences for America losing its competitive edge. We’re going through a difficult time in the economy; adjustments to a number of circumstances, including in the housing markets and in the financial markets, that will work their way out."

Sounds pretty good to me.

Overheal

It sounds like Waffle, actually. Grant you its not Palinesque waffle, and Rice may actually understand the basic principles and history of the economy; but it does nothing to suggest what her fiscal policies would be.

I was thinking something more declarative, oh like:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CP9_kkzfN-w

jank

Yea the classic Bush no more taxes! What does he do? Have more taxes! At least the dems say they are sheep while the gop act like wolves in sheep clothing.

On the tea party front. Interesting article on time about this. Pretty much spot on. The revolution they expect will not be there in November. They will win some seats but cause the GOP to lose other winnable seats.

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,2003079,00.html

Denerick

People overlook the fact that in 2006 and 2008 Dems took over traditionally Republican seats and many of the new Democrats are conservative democrats and were elected as fiscal hawks.

Republicans shouldn't have too many problems in winning back the seats that naturally belonged to them.

Add in the massive enthusiasm gap, and the fact that minorities and young people won't vote in the same numbers as they did in 2008, and you have a major problem.

Amerika

jank wrote: »

On the tea party front. Interesting article on time about this. Pretty much spot on. The revolution they expect will not be there in November. They will win some seats but cause the GOP to lose other winnable seats.

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,2003079,00.html

Win some, Lose some... Stop The Presses!

Remember Time Magazine’s prediction a few short 14 months ago about the demise of the Republican Party. Were they spot on then?
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1896588,00.html

Apparently no one told White House press secretary Robert Gibbs.
http://www.slashcontrol.com/free-tv-shows/nbc-meet-the-press/2244014008-gibbs-enough-seats-in-play-for-gop-to-win-house

Black Swan

If the Tea Party finances more billboards like these, they will appear like the political nut fringe and lose many Independent voters:



Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_iowa_obama_billboard

Denerick

The Tea Party will alienate practically most urban or intelligent voters, but for every Ivy League educated, New York Times reading, Latte Sipping Liberal, there are two grass chewing, Nascar racing, God Fearing beer guzzling meatheads. If anything appealing to the basest nature of Americans will see them with a net gain.

Amerika

Blue_Lagoon wrote: »

If the Tea Party finances more billboards like these, they will appear like the political nut fringe and lose many Independent voters:

There are always small fringe elements to any movement that fall outside the generally accepted norm. That poster is no more indicative of the general Tea Party Movement then the following is of the general Progressive movement.

Amerika

Denerick wrote: »

The Tea Party will alienate practically most urban or intelligent voters, but for every Ivy League educated, New York Times reading, Latte Sipping Liberal, there are two grass chewing, Nascar racing, God Fearing beer guzzling meatheads. If anything appealing to the basest nature of Americans will see them with a net gain.

Hmmmm, would that be bigot with a small "b" or a big "B"?

You know, I think there might be some intelligent voters who live in urban settings.

Denerick

Amerika wrote: »

Hmmmm, would that be bigot with a small "b" or a big "B"?

You know, I think there might be some intelligent voters who live in urban settings.

I'm a playful bigot. I don't think conservatives are ethnically inferior. I just like bitching about them. Don't you do the same with Liberals?

Black Swan

Amerika wrote: »

There are always small fringe elements to any movement that fall outside the generally accepted norm. That poster is no more indicative of the general Tea Party Movement then the following is of the general Progressive movement.

This is a very large billboard financed by the North Iowa Tea Party, not some makeshift poster, etc., made just before a demonstration given in your examples. Granted, they are a small group, but the message it sends does not improve the image of the Tea Party before Independents.

Further, it appears as if the Tea Party is just as splintered as the larger Republican Party after their sweeping defeat in 2008?

Overheal

Amerika wrote: »

Remember Time Magazine’s prediction a few short 14 months ago about the demise of the Republican Party. Were they spot on then?
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1896588,00.html

Considering the party has splintered into a semi-coherent union of tea party activists that have no clear leadership aside from FOX News punditry, yes, the party collapsed.

Amerika

Blue_Lagoon wrote: »

This is a very large billboard financed by the North Iowa Tea Party, not some makeshift poster, etc., made just before a demonstration given in your examples.

Fair enough... will this do then?




















.

Overheal

Chap makes a fair point about free speech. But Blue, that Billboard was actually sponsored by the Tea Party Movement?

Thats kind of different. It's not as though the Democratic Party funded a billboard depicting the President snorting coke.

On a side note it never seems to get old, equating the President you didn't vote for to Hitler:





It really makes it impossible to take that kind of nonsense seriously. Or these whacks that think the current President is a Marxist/Fascist etc.

Black Swan

Overheal wrote: »

But Blue, that Billboard was actually sponsored by the Tea Party Movement?

Depends upon whom you consider is the leadership for the "Tea Party Movement?" According to an April 2010 New York Times survey, they normally vote Republican and against Democrats. The North Iowa Tea Party funded the billboard.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_iowa_obama_billboard

It appears that the North Iowa Tea Party had second thoughts about how their message was being received and now removed the billboard sign. They agreed with my original point about the political nutjob image it conveyed (or yielded to pressure from others)?

Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/14/AR2010071402748.html

Amerika

Overheal wrote: »

It really makes it impossible to take that kind of nonsense seriously. Or these whacks that think the current President is a Marxist/Fascist etc.

But I remember seeing reports that Barack Obama was an acknowledged member of the Chicago "New Party".

The "'New Party" was a political party established by the Democratic Socialists of America (the DSA) to push forth the socialist principles of the DSA by focusing on winnable elections at a local level and spreading the Socialist movement upwards.

I guess the MSM forgot to report on it.

Do a little internet search on the following paragraph if you don't believe me:
"New Party members and supported candidates won 16 of 23 races, including an at-large race for the Little Rock, Ark., City Council, a seat on the county board for Little Rock and the school board for Prince George's County, Md. Chicago is sending the first New Party member to Congress, as Danny Davis, who ran as a Democrat, won an overwhelming 85% victory. New Party member Barack Obama was uncontested for a State Senate seat from Chicago. "

Overheal

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Party_%28United_States%29

Where was the connection to Nazism, a far-right ideology? Or Fascism, yet another Far-Right-wing ideology?

Black Swan

Amerika wrote: »

Do a little internet search on the following paragraph if you don't believe me:
"New Party members and supported candidates won 16 of 23 races, including an at-large race for the Little Rock, Ark., City Council, a seat on the county board for Little Rock and the school board for Prince George's County, Md. Chicago is sending the first New Party member to Congress, as Danny Davis, who ran as a Democrat, won an overwhelming 85% victory. New Party member Barack Obama was uncontested for a State Senate seat from Chicago. "

A quote without a source? Link?

Amerika

Blue_Lagoon wrote: »

A quote without a source? Link?

I gave you the tools, but if you want me to do the work, then okay... no problem. Also, if you don't like my link, you will find numerous sources in addition to the ones I listed if you do the search as indicated.
http://politicallydrunk.blogspot.com/2008/10/web-archives-confirm-barack-obama-was.html
http://web.archive.org/web/20010306031216/www.newparty.org/up9610.html

Overheal

Heh,

Electoral Fusion, Wikipedia wrote:

One Republican Minnesota state legislator was clear about what his party was trying to do: "We don't propose to allow the Democrats to make allies of the Populists, Prohibitionists, or any other party, and get up combination tickets against us. We can whip them single-handed, but don't intend to fight all creation."

How democratic of the Republicans of the day :rolleyes: "We cant find enough people that will agree with us so we're stopping you from getting people to agree with you" - lol

Shall I just go ahead and now attribute the bastardized creation of the two-party system to the Republicans?

Amerika

Overheal wrote: »

Originally Posted by Electoral Fusion, Wikipedia
One Republican Minnesota state legislator was clear about what his party was trying to do: "We don't propose to allow the Democrats to make allies of the Populists, Prohibitionists, or any other party, and get up combination tickets against us. We can whip them single-handed, but don't intend to fight all creation."

A quote without a source? Link?

(will I get a little "Thanks" also )

Overheal

Amerika wrote: »

A quote without a source? Link?

(will I get a little "Thanks" also )

Source: Electoral Fusion, Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Amerika

One Republican Minnesota state legislator was clear about what his party was trying to do...

Looks like Minnesota republicans just can’t win, especially when democrats such as Al Franken get their wins by hook or crook. Wait, scratch the hook and just go with the crook. Seems funnyman Al won the US Senate seat with the votes of at least 341 convicted felons in the largely Democratic Minneapolis-St. Paul area. And Al won by a mere 312 votes. You do the math. Let justice be unnerved!
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/12/felons-voting-illegally-franken-minnesota-study-finds/

Denerick

Amerika wrote: »

Looks like Minnesota republicans just can’t win, especially when democrats such as Al Franken get their wins by hook or crook. Wait, scratch the hook and just go with the crook. Seems funnyman Al won the US Senate seat with the votes of at least 341 convicted felons in the largely Democratic Minneapolis-St. Paul area. And Al won by a mere 312 votes. You do the math. Let justice be unnerved!
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/12/felons-voting-illegally-franken-minnesota-study-finds/

Ahh... Fox News...

Overheal

The six-month election recount that turned former "Saturday Night Live" comedian Al Franken into a U.S. senator may have been decided by convicted felons who voted illegally in Minnesota's Twin Cities.

I do love the spin that FOX wraps around the hyperbole. You'd swear Franken coherced the convicted felons into voting for him :rolleyes:

It's almost as convenient as laying blame at the feet of a Florida Community of Jewish Voters... oh wait.

rovert

Amerika wrote: »

She is not an unknown element. And she would probably be better than what we currently got.

On the Economy (from the website you provided)

"Question: We watch our economy grow at just about 1% while China grows 12% and India grows 10%. The suggestion that America is less competitive or, worse, less important on the global world stage keeps coming up. Has America lost its edge versus competitors around the world?

Answer: I can count many, many times that people have said that America had lost its competitive edge. We had lost our competitive edge vis-a-vis Japan. We were a power that was over-stretched in the ‘80s. We were going to converge with the Soviet Union, by the way, in the 1970s. So there have been many premature sentences for America losing its competitive edge. We’re going through a difficult time in the economy; adjustments to a number of circumstances, including in the housing markets and in the financial markets, that will work their way out."

Sounds pretty good to me.

This isnt a diss on you Amerika or Rice for that matter but that is the standard answer by every American CEO in every interview or profile piece in every business magazine ever.

Overheal

^ Thats what I meant. The answer she gave was pure Rhetoric.

rovert

Overheal wrote: »

^ Thats what I meant. The answer she gave was pure Rhetoric.

Hardly original alright even if it is right nor does have any real actionable elements to it. Aint sold, sorry.

jank

Amerika wrote: »

Win some, Lose some... Stop The Presses!

Remember Time Magazine’s prediction a few short 14 months ago about the demise of the Republican Party. Were they spot on then?
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1896588,00.html

Hold on there mate, so you are saying that the tea party movement is a fringe group of the GOP because all along you were saying that is was ordinary people that were pi$$ed of at all parties.

Aha knew it!

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=65481428&postcount=2

It’s just a loose movement for the most part, as has been my observation

Loose as in you are pi$$ed off but still more or less GOP supporters??

Overheal

they are against big government and excessive government spending.

So where were they when the PAtriot Act and 2 foreign wars happened?

Killer Wench

I actually don't see the Tea Party as being the biggest organized threat for this November; instead, I think the biggest threat that will need to be fought against by liberals and/or Democrats is the threat of apathy seen in the voters that came out in 2008. Many Americans tend not to show up for elections that do not involve voting for the President; the Tea Party strikes me as being organized and composed of individuals who probably vote all the way from the President down to the county coroner. If anything can hurt the Republican Party, it would be massive organization of voters who represent liberal views.

Ping Chow Chi

Amerika wrote: »

Looks like Minnesota republicans just can’t win, especially when democrats such as Al Franken get their wins by hook or crook. Wait, scratch the hook and just go with the crook. Seems funnyman Al won the US Senate seat with the votes of at least 341 convicted felons in the largely Democratic Minneapolis-St. Paul area. And Al won by a mere 312 votes. You do the math. Let justice be unnerved!
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/12/felons-voting-illegally-franken-minnesota-study-finds/

Is there any proof that all, or indeed any of the fellons voted for the Democrates, or is this just wishy-washy double speak?

Overheal

I didnt even catch that! good spot!

Amerika

Well if you doubt the sun will rise tomorrow morning, then you surely can call it wishy-washy double speak. (I can't empirically prove the sun will rise tomorrow or that pigs can't fly.)

But a national study indicates Felons overwhelmingly vote Democratic. IMO the Democratic party attracts those who act irresponsibility, destroy property, ignores laws, and do not place an emphasis on living in a civil society. Most felons share this type of mindset and lifestyle. And Minneapolis-St. Paul is a highly Democratic area to boot. I guess most people just assume 1+1=2, and felons won't vote for the party that wants tougher criminal laws.

kev9100

Amerika wrote: »

But a national study indicates Felons overwhelmingly vote Democratic. IMO the Democratic party attracts those who act irresponsibility, destroy property, ignores laws, and do not place an emphasis on living in a civil society. Most felons share this type of mindset and lifestyle. And Minneapolis-St. Paul is a highly Democratic area to boot. I guess most people just assume 1+1=2, and felons won't vote for the party that wants tougher criminal laws.

Bloody hell. Generalise much?

Overheal

Amerika wrote: »

But a national study indicates Felons overwhelmingly vote Democratic.

Wheres that now.

Amerika

Overheal wrote: »

Wheres that now.

Here is the link, but I think the DNC "enforcers" got to the News Tribune and made them an offer they couldn’t refuse, in order to get rid of it.
http://dwb.thenewstribune.com/news/local/story/4850294p-4452879c.html
But I was able to find it using secret DNC surveillance-proof methods.


Tacoma, WA - May 11, 2005
Felons vote Democratic, national study says
KENNETH P. VOGEL; The News Tribune
Originally published: May 10th, 2005 12:01 AM

If disenfranchised felons had been allowed to vote, they would have swung the 2000 presidential race to Al Gore, according to a national study Republicans are touting in their fight to overturn Christine Gregoire’s victory in last fall’s governor’s race.

The study posits that since racial minorities and the poor – groups that tend to vote for Democrats– make up a disproportionate number of felons, a hypothetical felon voting bloc would be so overwhelmingly Democratic it could swing national and statewide elections.

On average, 74 percent of felons would have voted Democratic in presidential and U.S. Senate elections dating back to 1972, according to the study’s analysis of demographic and voting data.

Of Democratic presidential candidates, the study predicts that Bill Clinton’s successful 1996 re-election campaign would have gotten the highest percentage of felon votes, at 85.4 percent. Jimmy Carter’s failed 1980 re-election would have gotten the lowest, at 66.5 percent.

A state GOP-funded study by Jonathan Katz, a political science professor at the California Institute of Technology, estimates that Gregoire received 66.3 percent of the illegal felon votes.

And a study by Tony Gill, an associate political science professor at the University of Washington, estimates that Gregoire received 60.1 percent of felon votes in King County, Gregoire’s base and home to by far the largest number of illegal felon votes the GOP says were cast.

Compared with the national study, published in 2002 in the American Sociological Review, Gill writes that his study’s estimate "is too conservative, giving Ms. Gregoire the benefit of the doubt. In other words, the rate at which felons vote for a Democratic candidate is likely to be higher than the estimates provided by the precinct-level of analysis here."

Katz did not return a phone call.

Overheal

A GOP-funded funded study used to make a partisan attack! well shut-me-up and call me a rack of lamb :eek::rolleyes:

Sounds like a Hypothesis more than an empirical study of facts.