Originally posted by sdcigarpig
I would say that at this time frame, the Tea party is not a political party per say as of yet. The movement is growing and gaining more and more
support from both the Republicans and the Democrats.
Really? By the Democrats?
Examples?
Both of them are starting to recognize that this movement, these people could, if they are not careful, actually become a political force and
threat to their power base and establishment. Right now it is the Republicans that are courting the Tea Party and in order to keep that support the
Republicans are going to have to work hard and ensure that the canidates are actually toeing the line along with actually listening to what the Tea
party movement is saying.
And what, specifically are they saying? And how, specifically, is it different the the standard GOP Platform for the past 20 + years?
Politics is a fickle item and the voters can and will turn on a canidate if they are not satisfied with what they are seeing. If the
republicans, with the backing of the Tea party movement actually do pull off a take over of the congress, making the rest of Obama's time in office to
be a lame duck session, you can bet that the Democrats are either going to try to get their own movement going, or will try to gain the support of the
Tea party movement.
So, you are suggesting that the Republicans can pull a take over of Congress with the 'backing' of the Tea Party? That sure sounds like a political
party to me.
Also, why would the Democrats need to heed the Tea Party? The 'Tea Party' seems to be disaffected Conservatives, for the most part. If anything, they
need to heed their base, the ones who elected their President with a very impressive turnout.
Now if in 2 years the Tea Party movement gets more of the canidates, that they support into office, then I would say it stops being a movement
and then becomes a political party and a political force that both the Republicans and the Democrats will have to worry about.
I'm not sure how you can keep referring to it as a 'movement', with specific platform ideas, and not think its a 'party'.
You seem confused by the term 'Party". A political "Party" is an organized group with a platform. Whether they have political power is irrelevant. The
Greens are a 'party'. They have relatively no power. The Libertarians are a Party. They have relatively little power.
As the tea party movement is showing, it is no longer how much money a canidate has to spend, but how well they can actually represent their
voters.
How are they showing that? Last I checked, most Tea Party candidates seem supportive of the recent Supreme Court ruling allowing unlimited corporate
financial influence in elections. That's hardly a refutation of big business as usual.
Face it, the "Tea Party" is nothing but former disgruntled Republicans, who are leaving the party name by droves, but not abandoning any of the empty
slogans and contradictory ideas of 'little government'.
In all of the defenses of the Tea Party in this thread, i have yet to see ONE example of a specific Tea Party candidate who has a platform that is ANY
different than the Republicans they are running against.
Being AGAINST is easy. These people have no idea what they are actually FOR beyond empty slogans.
Also, not to be too petty, but the word is '
candidate".
edit on 17-9-2010 by justadood because: me grammar and spelling not so goods