RE: Party over for the Tea Party?

RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

SilverMark -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/26/2012 10:26:27 AM)
Having just returned from 30 days in Missouri, if McCaskili can't win with all of her ads, and help from Sir Foot in Mouth(at least in Springfield) I don't know who could. She was up between 5 and 7 points each time I looked....well beyond the margin of error in most polls.

kdsub -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/26/2012 10:32:28 AM)
Nah...It would be a boring world if everyone thought alike...still friends even if they are nut cases. Can you truly name one person who thinks logically when it comes to politics? Now be truthful. I sure can't. I think politics are more about emotion than logic…thus the Karl Roves’ of this world. Butch

Hillwilliam -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/26/2012 10:45:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk I think you need to re-examine who your friends are.... Friends with differing viewpoints are a good thing to have. It forces your mind to work and that's healthy. Personally, if someone agrees with everything I say, I get REALLY fucking suspicious.

DomYngBlk -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/26/2012 11:47:02 AM)
There are differing viewpoints and differing viewpoints. Someone tries to toss legitimate rape my way....and I am walking away.

kdsub -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/26/2012 11:57:53 AM)
You must remember some people are looking at his comments from a different point of view. They heard the same words as we did but choose to take a different meaning from them....or choose to believe him when he said it was a slip of the tongue and apologized. Imagine, if you are open minded enough, if Obama were to have made an outlandish statement. Then apologized and explained he had a slip of the tongue and admits his statement was false. Would you vote for Romney because of it or would you forgive him or at least give him the benefit of doubt? Otherwise it does not make you a bad person if you are predisposed to forgive someone who has apologized because you have much in common with them. To me and McCaskill there are plenty of other issues and positions that make him unworthy. Butch

DesideriScuri -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/26/2012 2:35:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk There are differing viewpoints and differing viewpoints. Someone tries to toss legitimate rape my way....and I am walking away. But, where do differing viewpoints fit in on that line?

DomYngBlk -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/26/2012 3:20:11 PM)
kd, that is one helluva fucking slip. And given his voting record not a slip at all. So if I have a friend that is believing that bullshit.....then they better be giving their heads a shake. I mean legitimate rape? How the fuck could that come out of your mouth by accident? And how could anyone parse it to mean or not mean anything but something very very bad? sorry, they'd need to have their asses out my door.

DomYngBlk -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/26/2012 3:21:29 PM)
Differing points are saying you are for abortion or you aren't. This is something altogether different. This is putting a happy face on rape......Its disgusting.

DomYngBlk -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/26/2012 3:23:26 PM)
And you didn't explain from before. What is the Tea Party trying to do within the Republican Party. What is the fight all about? Cause, frankly. I don't get it

DomKen -> RE: Leftist Racism at MSNBC (10/26/2012 3:25:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: ORIGINAL: ElChupa So what's new, right? http://politichicks.tv/column/liberal-hypocrisy-toward-black-conservatives/ For the left, freedom of speech means you can speak in support of keeping minorities fat, dumb, stupid and voting for the donkey. But destroy any who dare question that. I get it. What does that mean? Kira Davis was "banned for life" by MSNBC? I have never seen her (whoever she is) on MSNBC. She was never employed and never a guest. So, where's the beef? A totally BOGUS post, I think. In other words . . . You are making this shit up.[:-] A little digging finds the real story appears to be that she was in their pavilion at the DNC holding a Romney/Ryan sign. So they removed her, it being private property and all.

kdsub -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/26/2012 7:45:08 PM)
quote: kd, that is one helluva fucking slip. And given his voting record not a slip at all. So if I have a friend that is believing that bullshit.....then they better be giving their heads a shake. I mean legitimate rape? How the fuck could that come out of your mouth by accident? And how could anyone parse it to mean or not mean anything but something very very bad? sorry, they'd need to have their asses out my door I agree it is hard to believe... for me too. But remember it has been a Republican position that if the abortion law is overturned and an anti-abortion law is passed with an exception for rape and incest then some women will falsely claim rape to get an abortion...That is what he meant by legitimate rape. Still a dumb assed position but different then what many are trying to make his comments to be. Butch

slvemike4u -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/26/2012 7:47:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle Now that the primaries are distant history, and Mittens is abandoning those "true conservative" positions he adopted to win the primaries faster than the National Debt is growing, has the far Right be sidelined? E J Dionne, writing in the Washington Post certainly thinks so: "The right wing has lost the election of 2012. The evidence for this is overwhelming, yet it is the year's best-kept secret. Mitt Romney would not be throwing virtually all of his past positions overboard if he thought the nation were ready to endorse the full-throated conservatism he embraced to win the Republican nomination." http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/10/25/tea_party_movement_is_dead_115916.html Tea Party favourites - Palin, Bachmann et al - are silent with hardly a pipsqueak out of them these days. Its preferred candidates seem to be hell bent on self destruction - look at Akin or Mourdock. Romney can't dump them and move to the centre fast enough. Does Dionne have a point? Is it time to start digging the Tea Party's grave and buy a wreath or two? Have the Koch Bros thrown all those millions down the drain? Has the US electorate rejected their extremism decisively? Is it the end of the road for the Tea Party? I sure hope so...extremism has no place in the American body politic.

tweakabelle -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/27/2012 1:50:19 AM)
One possibility that no one has canvassed thus far is that the GOP splits into two factions following an election loss next November. It is not difficult to envisage a split between the moderates and the far Right with both sides blaming each other for a loss to Obama. It is much more difficult for me to see the Tea Party ideologues and the more centrist fiscal conservative/social liberals staying together in the longer term. I'd imagine they loathe each other at the moment. Is this on the cards or will we have to wait a few more years for this inevitable split to happen?

SternSkipper -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/27/2012 6:36:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk The problem with the whole notion of the "tea party" was that it constituted a party rather than just the very far right of the Republican Party. It was a cute branding idea.....But end of the day the tea party was simply disgruntled republicans. I don't think something that is contrived needs a grave but I do think they've done great harm to the Republican party.... Are you saying that "disgruntled republicans" shouldn't try to reform a party, or that they should simply fall in line with the party... or what? What are the disgruntled republicans disgruntled about? Not at all... That's a great idea. Be sure to let us know if that ever happens.

vincentML -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/27/2012 9:21:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle One possibility that no one has canvassed thus far is that the GOP splits into two factions following an election loss next November. It is not difficult to envisage a split between the moderates and the far Right with both sides blaming each other for a loss to Obama. It is much more difficult for me to see the Tea Party ideologues and the more centrist fiscal conservative/social liberals staying together in the longer term. I'd imagine they loathe each other at the moment. Is this on the cards or will we have to wait a few more years for this inevitable split to happen? At first glance this would seem to be a good idea. But as you know America is essentially a system of two Major parties except in times of extreme crisis. Two minor parties would compete for votes and leave the Dems to win repeatedly until one of the minor parties could attract centrist votes away from the Dems. I can imagine the diminshed minority becoming violently radicalized. They would be the children and grandchildren of Pat Buchanan's pitchforks brigades. Not a desireable outcome. It is better to have everyone inside the tent pissing out than to have some faction outside the tent pissing in.

Moonhead -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/27/2012 10:15:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk What is the Tea Party trying to do within the Republican Party. What is the fight all about? Cause, frankly. I don't get it I always get the impression that the fight is about there being a mulatto in the white house. But of course, I'm a liberal, so I'm bound to play the race card, aren't I? [;)]

slvemike4u -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/27/2012 12:19:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle One possibility that no one has canvassed thus far is that the GOP splits into two factions following an election loss next November. It is not difficult to envisage a split between the moderates and the far Right with both sides blaming each other for a loss to Obama. It is much more difficult for me to see the Tea Party ideologues and the more centrist fiscal conservative/social liberals staying together in the longer term. I'd imagine they loathe each other at the moment. Is this on the cards or will we have to wait a few more years for this inevitable split to happen? I think we will need to wait.They should lose this year,I have every confidence they will...but the elections are still too close,and that is indeed troubling. Why a candidate who is forced to move to the extreme right in order to emerge victorious from the nominating process,is than allowed to pivot,to perform some "etch-a-sketch" magic and re-center himself positions wise is baffling to me. Is it a weakness in the Democratic party's make-up that allows so many white middle class voters(who do not themselves hold extreme positions)to feel more at home in a party that does not serve their needs ? What is it about the Republican Party that see's so many willing to vote against their own vested interest ? Why is their message of fear and exclusion striking home with so many middle class voters? Again is it a strength of the Republican Party(in pulling the wool over so many eyes) or a weakness in the Democratic Party's message ? Or is it a bigger problem,perhaps a failure of the education system itself that leaves so many of our citizens unable to see thru the smoke and mirrors of the bigotry and exclusion.

LookieNoNookie -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/27/2012 3:42:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk The problem with the whole notion of the "tea party" was that it constituted a party rather than just the very far right of the Republican Party. It was a cute branding idea.....But end of the day the tea party was simply disgruntled republicans. I don't think something that is contrived needs a grave but I do think they've done great harm to the Republican party.... They were in fact, "separatists", the harm that was done, was done too them and by the very co-opting of their premise and intent BY the Republican party. (I wouldn't expect you to understand that, since you don't even know who Lee Iaccoca or Jack Welch were. History is always your friend...judging the future without a firm grasp on the past is always a demented way of forging forward).

LookieNoNookie -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/27/2012 3:56:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk No, they can reform their party all they want. However, I can't see how reforming a party and lowering membership is a great thing for the party. My take on the tea party is that they are older white americans that see the world changing from what they knew and are reacting to those changes. The policies are just manifestations of that personal upset. I know if I were a Republican I would be very worried about throwing out people like Lugar.....and chasing Voinivich out of running again......Olympia Snowe is going away cause of those changes.....You can see in the cautious way that Boehner and McConnell work around the tea party they are fearful of the effect as well. The Tea Party was started because of a fellow on the financial channel, CNBC (Rick Santelli), who rallied the "troops" saying essentially that we should throw "all the bastards out". That it was a rigged game. It shortly thereafter became a rallying cry by anyone (white, black, asian) who said "enough is enough". And then shortly thereafter still, crowds waving banners claiming said title, emerged. It then became co-opted by the Republican Party because they were the only ones who paid attention to them. Unbeknownst to them (the Tea Party), it slowly fell into the lap of Republican viewpoints because, like all groups, someone eventually grabs the reigns and being a completely disparate group, with essentially no leader, the Republican party became their defacto head. Again, history is a fabulous tool. It fills in the gaps between bullshit and fact. And...when enough bullshit is spewed, without enough facts to paper over same....bullshit wins. Hence why history should be (and is....for those who care for facts) your guide. Without facts, "idiots gain control of the asylum". (Which, by the way, is what happens when opinions aren't based in either history or fact).

LookieNoNookie -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/27/2012 4:00:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk I have no links. Just going off of who has had to step away from the platform in favor of "new" blood. Oh the reformation is going to end up in two parties. Its only a matter of time. I don't know if it needed reforming or not. Does it? What is fundamentally wrong with Lugar, Voinivich and Snowe? Did the R party need reforming? Maybe. That depends on your politics. There are two ways for the Tea Party to have their own party. They can either reform the R party from the inside, or they can split and form their own party. At this time, they have chosen to reform the R party from the inside. Is that a good thing? I think so. Is it a smart thing? Again, I think so. quote: I mean the propensity of republicans to "eat their own" is quite amazing. The whole Michael Steele RNC thing never made sense to me. I don't or care about the details but he got replaced with a total buffoon. I thought Michael Steele was a total buffoon. I have no idea who the current head of the RNC is. He/She could be a total buffoon, too. If you say that it is a good thing then ok. I don't have a dog in the fight. Can you say what the Tea Party is trying to reform? What is wrong to Republicans about someone like Richard Lugar. Well, Richard Lugar is a human being, so I can't say what might be wrong with him personally. Was there a question about his politics or his actions in public life?

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625