Party over for the Tea Party?

Party over for the Tea Party? (Full Version)

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

Message

tweakabelle -> Party over for the Tea Party? (10/26/2012 1:18:07 AM)
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?

DomYngBlk -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/26/2012 5:06:18 AM)
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....

DesideriScuri -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/26/2012 5:44:41 AM)
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?

DomYngBlk -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/26/2012 5:54:22 AM)
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.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/26/2012 6:05:00 AM)
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. Lowering membership? Any links to that? And, what would happen if they didn't attempt to reform the Republican Party, but instead decided to form their own? Would that increase or decrease party membership?

DomYngBlk -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/26/2012 6:10:29 AM)
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?

vincentML -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/26/2012 6:12:34 AM)
quote: 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? How do you 'reform' a political party without narrowing its focus and interest? How then does a party of narrow interest succeed in a nation of a multitude of diverse interests? Witness the puny achievements of the Libertarian Party and the Green Party. Successful Parties in American history have been coalitions of interests who were willing to compromise in order to have a seat at the table. The Democrat Party of the 21st Century has built a coalition of progressives, environmentalists, LGBT, pro-choice, and nonwhite ethnics. The Dixiecrats long ago joined the Republican tent. You can easily identify the interests in the current Republican Party - the social/religious moralists, the gun enthusiasts, pro-lifers, fiscal conservatives, neo-cons, etc. But the Tea Party? WTF? As DYB opined: a cute branding idea, and I will add: that attracted the remnants of Buchannan's pitch fork crowd.

DomYngBlk -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/26/2012 6:16:56 AM)
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.

Owner59 -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/26/2012 6:49:41 AM)
It don`t matter at this point.... Mitten`s could put Hugo Chavez on his energy advisory board or publicly long for the days when bin-laden was around and the cons would STILL vote for mitt.....

DesideriScuri -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/26/2012 6:52:39 AM)
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.

mnottertail -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/26/2012 8:02:26 AM)
quote: 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. From my vantage point, it didn't look like any sort of choice, they were co-opted by the rabid right. I don't see anything smart going on over there.

ElChupa -> Leftist Racism at MSNBC (10/26/2012 8:13:33 AM)
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.

mnottertail -> More rightist imbecility (10/26/2012 8:17:14 AM)
I guess if a republican wants to throw another republican under the bus, that's fine, and not at all unusual. Although your asswipe site there doesn't have much more substance than that.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/26/2012 8:17:35 AM)
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. Unfortunately, Priebus is another buffoon. It appears that those who pull the strings want a buffoon because they can be controlled more easily than someone with a brain.

ElChupa -> Crazy Uncle Joe at it again! (10/26/2012 8:19:02 AM)
and more from the knuckleheaded VP Crazy Uncle Joe, disrespecting the father of a murdered SEAL. But we've come to expect this from the lunatic left. http://www.ktrh.com/pages/michaelberry.html?article=10526816

vincentML -> RE: Leftist Racism at MSNBC (10/26/2012 8:22:36 AM)
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.[:-]

DomYngBlk -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/26/2012 8:24:48 AM)
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.

PunisherNOLA -> RE: Crazy Uncle Joe at it again! (10/26/2012 8:33:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ElChupa and more from the knuckleheaded VP Crazy Uncle Joe, disrespecting the father of a murdered SEAL. But we've come to expect this from the lunatic left. http://www.ktrh.com/pages/michaelberry.html?article=10526816 Oh dear me, the Vice President made a comment about a slain Navy Seal that alluded to his courage. Or at least that's what I take, "Balls as big as cue balls" to mean. Offcolor? Perhaps, but disrespectful? All one need do is look at the exploits of Westboro Baptist Church if you want to see what is disrespectful to a fallen warrior's family. The "lunatic left" and the far right wingnuts are simply two sides of the same coin. Both want to see this country succeed... Just not on the other guy's watch.

kdsub -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/26/2012 10:08:53 AM)
A good test of the Tea Party’s health will be Missouri. I’m not so sure , as many here believe, that right wing Tea Party extremism has run it’s course. I’ve more than a few Tea Party friends that have told me they will still vote for Akin. Some have told me that even with Akins faults he is better than McCaskill. Others say he was right about rape and they stand behind him 100 percent. I know of no Republican that changed their mind over his snafu. Considering how big of a lead he had in the polls before his cuckoo statements I think there is a very good chance he will be elected. ps... I don't think polls mean much in this particular election. People will say one thing but in private vote another way.... in my opinion anyway. Butch

DomYngBlk -> RE: Party over for the Tea Party? (10/26/2012 10:20:41 AM)
I think you need to re-examine who your friends are....

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875