An honest question regarding the Tea Party and voting

FiveB247xFiveB247x Posts: 2,330
edited April 2010 in A Moving Train
I have a question regarding the Tea Bag Party. Please note this is not a thread to argue their beliefs or some generalizations some may have for them, but merely an honest question. In the next election, who will they be voting for and why? It's unlikely they'd vote for any Democrat. Will they simply vote Republican or will they vote 3rd party? At the heart of their commentary, which they do make some valid points (even if they backed the same policies years back), how will they use the vote and election to change things? If they vote Republican, will they merely change by holding them to higher standards and continue this movement or will they merely check out once "their side" got back power? Will they vote 3rd party as a sign of disgust for what the two major parties have done and where they've led us? How will this play itself out?
CONservative governMENt

Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • cajunkiwicajunkiwi Posts: 984
    Theoretically, they shouldn't vote Republican, because at the core their message seems to be that they're against Big Government and overspending in Washington... and since Reagan, the Republicans have been the most fiscally irresponsible of the two parties (see: Reagan turning Carter's $80 billion deficit into a $221 billion deficit, Bush turning Reagan's $221 billion deficit into a $290 billion deficit, Clinton turning Bush's $290 billion deficit into a $236 billion surplus, and then GBW turning the $236 billion surplus into a $304 billion deficit). On top of that, a Republican president was the one who passed the Patriot Act, which is the biggest piece of "Big Brother" legislation I've seen since moving here.

    That being said, since their protests are aimed at a Democratic president & party, it stands to reason that they're not going to be voting Democrat either. Maybe this means third parties are about to get a ton of votes.
    And I listen for the voice inside my head... nothing. I'll do this one myself.
  • FiveB247xFiveB247x Posts: 2,330
    I tend to agree - but in practice, I think it may simply may turn into them voting Republican and if they stay with the message they're currently saying, they will advocate and continue on top of getting smaller government and fiscal responsibility. But if they merely vote Republican and tail off, then you can simply write of the entire thing as merely the same thing with a different name.
    cajunkiwi wrote:
    Theoretically, they shouldn't vote Republican, because at the core their message seems to be that they're against Big Government and overspending in Washington... and since Reagan, the Republicans have been the most fiscally irresponsible of the two parties (see: Reagan turning Carter's $80 billion deficit into a $221 billion deficit, Bush turning Reagan's $221 billion deficit into a $290 billion deficit, Clinton turning Bush's $290 billion deficit into a $236 billion surplus, and then GBW turning the $236 billion surplus into a $304 billion deficit). On top of that, a Republican president was the one who passed the Patriot Act, which is the biggest piece of "Big Brother" legislation I've seen since moving here.

    That being said, since their protests are aimed at a Democratic president & party, it stands to reason that they're not going to be voting Democrat either. Maybe this means third parties are about to get a ton of votes.
    CONservative governMENt

    Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
  • At first I wasn't going to reply to this simply because you and others continue to use the phrase tea baggers. I find that very insulting,and immature on your part. You,I, and everyone else on here knows exactly what the phrase Tea bagger means. So I suggest if you want any of us to reply you should start with maybe showing us a little respect.


    But since you asked, These are a few candidates that I support.

    Marco Rubio( Fla.)
    J.D. Hayworth (Arizona)
    Sharon Angle (Nevada )
    Pat Toomey (Penn.)
    Marlin Stutzman (Indiana)
    Mike lee( Utah)
    Chuck Devore (Cali)

    IMHO These are the most solid conservative and constitutionalist. No more Rhino's

    The reason why I wouldn't support a 3rd party cadidate as of right now is because they always ends up splitting up the conservatives vote just like Ross perot did.

    The TEA PARTY MOVEMENT Is here to stay. I find it verry funny that so many on here thought that we wouldn't amount to anything and that our first protest would be our last.
  • FiveB247xFiveB247x Posts: 2,330
    I wasn't trying to "insult" anyone and was very clear about moving away from name calling or silly arguments in a very respectful and detailed manner, so perhaps if you don't like the terminology (which is used in just about every media now), complain to them - not me.

    Secondly, there's no guarantee this political group is here to stay. Fringe groups and 3rd party groups come and go, that doesn't mean this one can't stay long term, but it also doesn't guarantee it will be long term either.

    Lastly and this brings us full circle, many if not most of the major problems in government is not solely who's in power, but it's thing that have zero to do with the constitution. Things like lobbying, pork barreling, gerrymandering, campaign financing and the long list of similar. These are systematic problems enabled by both parties and now a main-stay in our system. Even at best case scenario and the tea party movement got power and control, how would that be any different from what we see now - mere watered down policy as a result of industry's influence for their own benefit? Mind you, this is not a partisan discussion as both sides have to deal with the same exact problems.
    prfctlefts wrote:
    At first I wasn't going to reply to this simply because you and others continue to use the phrase tea baggers. I find that very insulting,and immature on your part. You,I, and everyone else on here knows exactly what the phrase Tea bagger means. So I suggest if you want any of us to reply you should start with maybe showing us a little respect.


    But since you asked, These are a few candidates that I support.

    Marco Rubio( Fla.)
    J.D. Hayworth (Arizona)
    Sharon Angle (Nevada )
    Pat Toomey (Penn.)
    Marlin Stutzman (Indiana)
    Mike lee( Utah)
    Chuck Devore (Cali)

    IMHO These are the most solid conservative and constitutionalist. No more Rhino's

    The reason why I wouldn't support a 3rd party cadidate as of right now is because they always ends up splitting up the conservatives vote just like Ross perot did.

    The TEA PARTY MOVEMENT Is here to stay. I find it verry funny that so many on here thought that we wouldn't amount to anything and that our first protest would be our last.
    CONservative governMENt

    Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
  • aerialaerial Posts: 2,319
    The Tea Party endorses no one . . . research new candidates ( no matter what party) . . . and
    re-elect NO ONE! :idea:

    Hopefully that will bring the Change the people are looking for....
    “We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Abraham Lincoln
  • __ Posts: 6,651
    aerial wrote:
    The Tea Party endorses no one . . . research new candidates ( no matter what party) . . . and
    re-elect NO ONE! :idea:

    Hopefully that will bring the Change the people are looking for....

    But to re-elect no one, you must elect someone in their place. Who will the Tea Party folks vote for if their only options are more of the same?
  • aerialaerial Posts: 2,319
    FiveB247x wrote:
    I wasn't trying to "insult" anyone and was very clear about moving away from name calling or silly arguments in a very respectful and detailed manner, so perhaps if you don't like the terminology (which is used in just about every media now), complain to them - not me.

    Secondly, there's no guarantee this political group is here to stay. Fringe groups and 3rd party groups come and go, that doesn't mean this one can't stay long term, but it also doesn't guarantee it will be long term either.

    Lastly and this brings us full circle, many if not most of the major problems in government is not solely who's in power, but it's thing that have zero to do with the constitution. Things like lobbying, pork barreling, gerrymandering, campaign financing and the long list of similar. These are systematic problems enabled by both parties and now a main-stay in our system. Even at best case scenario and the tea party movement got power and control, how would that be any different from what we see now - mere watered down policy as a result of industry's influence for their own benefit? Mind you, this is not a partisan discussion as both sides have to deal with the same exact problems.
    prfctlefts wrote:
    At first I wasn't going to reply to this simply because you and others continue to use the phrase tea baggers. I find that very insulting,and immature on your part. You,I, and everyone else on here knows exactly what the phrase Tea bagger means. So I suggest if you want any of us to reply you should start with maybe showing us a little respect.


    But since you asked, These are a few candidates that I support.

    Marco Rubio( Fla.)
    J.D. Hayworth (Arizona)
    Sharon Angle (Nevada )
    Pat Toomey (Penn.)
    Marlin Stutzman (Indiana)
    Mike lee( Utah)
    Chuck Devore (Cali)

    IMHO These are the most solid conservative and constitutionalist. No more Rhino's

    The reason why I wouldn't support a 3rd party cadidate as of right now is because they always ends up splitting up the conservatives vote just like Ross perot did.

    The TEA PARTY MOVEMENT Is here to stay. I find it verry funny that so many on here thought that we wouldn't amount to anything and that our first protest would be our last.


    What a great excuse “the media say’s it”
    ....Hopefully you can stop the name calling.......
    “We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Abraham Lincoln
  • FiveB247xFiveB247x Posts: 2,330
    I find it rather funny, I am talking in specifics and in tons of detail and you are harping on a passing ill-intended comment. If you don't like the term, ignore it - it was not meant in a negative manner. It may actually behoove you or others to talk in detail about this movement you support rather than just stroke the canvas with a wide reaching brush? I ask honest and detailed questions in a reasonable and forthcoming manner with no bias.. waiting on answers...
    aerial wrote:
    FiveB247x wrote:
    I wasn't trying to "insult" anyone and was very clear about moving away from name calling or silly arguments in a very respectful and detailed manner, so perhaps if you don't like the terminology (which is used in just about every media now), complain to them - not me.

    Secondly, there's no guarantee this political group is here to stay. Fringe groups and 3rd party groups come and go, that doesn't mean this one can't stay long term, but it also doesn't guarantee it will be long term either.

    Lastly and this brings us full circle, many if not most of the major problems in government is not solely who's in power, but it's thing that have zero to do with the constitution. Things like lobbying, pork barreling, gerrymandering, campaign financing and the long list of similar. These are systematic problems enabled by both parties and now a main-stay in our system. Even at best case scenario and the tea party movement got power and control, how would that be any different from what we see now - mere watered down policy as a result of industry's influence for their own benefit? Mind you, this is not a partisan discussion as both sides have to deal with the same exact problems.
    prfctlefts wrote:
    At first I wasn't going to reply to this simply because you and others continue to use the phrase tea baggers. I find that very insulting,and immature on your part. You,I, and everyone else on here knows exactly what the phrase Tea bagger means. So I suggest if you want any of us to reply you should start with maybe showing us a little respect.


    But since you asked, These are a few candidates that I support.

    Marco Rubio( Fla.)
    J.D. Hayworth (Arizona)
    Sharon Angle (Nevada )
    Pat Toomey (Penn.)
    Marlin Stutzman (Indiana)
    Mike lee( Utah)
    Chuck Devore (Cali)

    IMHO These are the most solid conservative and constitutionalist. No more Rhino's

    The reason why I wouldn't support a 3rd party cadidate as of right now is because they always ends up splitting up the conservatives vote just like Ross perot did.

    The TEA PARTY MOVEMENT Is here to stay. I find it verry funny that so many on here thought that we wouldn't amount to anything and that our first protest would be our last.


    What a great excuse “the media say’s it”
    ....Hopefully you can stop the name calling.......
    CONservative governMENt

    Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
  • cajunkiwicajunkiwi Posts: 984
    prfctlefts wrote:
    At first I wasn't going to reply to this simply because you and others continue to use the phrase tea baggers. I find that very insulting,and immature on your part. You,I, and everyone else on here knows exactly what the phrase Tea bagger means. So I suggest if you want any of us to reply you should start with maybe showing us a little respect.


    But since you asked, These are a few candidates that I support.

    Marco Rubio( Fla.)
    J.D. Hayworth (Arizona)
    Sharon Angle (Nevada )
    Pat Toomey (Penn.)
    Marlin Stutzman (Indiana)
    Mike lee( Utah)
    Chuck Devore (Cali)

    IMHO These are the most solid conservative and constitutionalist. No more Rhino's

    The reason why I wouldn't support a 3rd party cadidate as of right now is because they always ends up splitting up the conservatives vote just like Ross perot did.

    The TEA PARTY MOVEMENT Is here to stay. I find it verry funny that so many on here thought that we wouldn't amount to anything and that our first protest would be our last.

    I agree that the term "Teabagger" is fairly insulting, but it's also worth pointing out that the saying originated with the Tea Party protesters themselves:

    http://community.tasteofhome.com/forums/t/777281.aspx

    "Olbermann said, “It is as useful to remind them anew of how the term originated and with whom. A TV news report aired last March 14 in which a correspondent described the original protest act, ‘take a teabag, put it in an envelope, and mail it to the White House.’ He added, ‘reteaparty.com has a headline Teabag the Fools in D.C. on tax day.’ Thus the verb to teabag was invented by the teabaggers themselves, and the correspondent who put it on TV was a Griff Jenkins of Fox News. Send your complaints to him.”

    Also, the photo that "doesn't link" now links, though if you don't want to click on it, it's of a Tea Party supporter holding up a button that says "Proud to be a Teabagger." Not included: the bizarre photo of the elderly woman standing on the side of the road holding up a sign saying "I'm teabagging for Jesus" that does the rounds in the emails that get sent around highlighting the more "interesting" signs you'll see at a Tea Party protest.

    If a movement picks an embarrassing name for itself, then supporters of the movement are on shaky ground when they get offended at people using their own name to make fun of them. They may prefer "Tea Party" now, but "Tea Party supporter" and "Teabagger" were used interchangably at the start.
    And I listen for the voice inside my head... nothing. I'll do this one myself.
  • aerialaerial Posts: 2,319
    edited April 2010
    scb wrote:
    aerial wrote:
    The Tea Party endorses no one . . . research new candidates ( no matter what party) . . . and
    re-elect NO ONE! :idea:

    Hopefully that will bring the Change the people are looking for....

    But to re-elect no one, you must elect someone in their place. Who will the Tea Party folks vote for if their only options are more of the same?
    Who knows....I don’t think people understand that the Tea Party is not going to say “vote for this candidate”.....They are just bringing attention to the fact that people need to stop complaining as they sit on there couch watching the News.....because the media is not to be trusted to bring us ALL information.........people have to do there own research.......Everyone needs to be an informed voter...
    Post edited by aerial on
    “We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Abraham Lincoln
  • FiveB247xFiveB247x Posts: 2,330
    So in practice, voting patterns would remain the same with merely further emphasis on information, and responsibility/accountability of elected officials? Is this the hidden gist of the movement without them coming out and saying as such?
    aerial wrote:
    Who knows....I don’t think people understand that the Tea Party is not going to say “vote for this candidate”.....They are just bring attention to the fact that people need to stop complaining as they sit on there couch watching the News.....because the media is not to be trusted to bring us ALL information.........people have to do there own research.......Everyone needs to be an informed voter...
    CONservative governMENt

    Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
  • aerialaerial Posts: 2,319
    FiveB247x wrote:
    So in practice, voting patterns would remain the same with merely further emphasis on information, and responsibility/accountability of elected officials? Is this the hidden gist of the movement without them coming out and saying as such?
    aerial wrote:
    Who knows....I don’t think people understand that the Tea Party is not going to say “vote for this candidate”.....They are just bring attention to the fact that people need to stop complaining as they sit on there couch watching the News.....because the media is not to be trusted to bring us ALL information.........people have to do there own research.......Everyone needs to be an informed voter...
    I think votting patterns will change.......I am not sure what you mean by hidden....but yes "responsibility/accountability of elected officials" I think is what everyone wants...
    “We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Abraham Lincoln
  • FiveB247xFiveB247x Posts: 2,330
    But how will voting patterns change - more 3rd party votes and if so to whom? Also, my point about "hidden" was that if this is truly the main point and gripe of this movement, they do not do the best job via public relations, media or similar getting that message out there. And yes, the media does focus on the nuts, but besides that, those in the movement do not do a good job of getting this main focal message to the public... it's merely lost in the partisan ranting and complaints.
    aerial wrote:
    I think votting patterns will change.......I am not sure what you mean by hidden....but yes "responsibility/accountability of elected officials" I think is what everyone wants...
    CONservative governMENt

    Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
  • aerialaerial Posts: 2,319
    cajunkiwi wrote:
    prfctlefts wrote:
    At first I wasn't going to reply to this simply because you and others continue to use the phrase tea baggers. I find that very insulting,and immature on your part. You,I, and everyone else on here knows exactly what the phrase Tea bagger means. So I suggest if you want any of us to reply you should start with maybe showing us a little respect.


    But since you asked, These are a few candidates that I support.

    Marco Rubio( Fla.)
    J.D. Hayworth (Arizona)
    Sharon Angle (Nevada )
    Pat Toomey (Penn.)
    Marlin Stutzman (Indiana)
    Mike lee( Utah)
    Chuck Devore (Cali)

    IMHO These are the most solid conservative and constitutionalist. No more Rhino's

    The reason why I wouldn't support a 3rd party cadidate as of right now is because they always ends up splitting up the conservatives vote just like Ross perot did.

    The TEA PARTY MOVEMENT Is here to stay. I find it verry funny that so many on here thought that we wouldn't amount to anything and that our first protest would be our last.

    I agree that the term "Teabagger" is fairly insulting, but it's also worth pointing out that the saying originated with the Tea Party protesters themselves:

    http://community.tasteofhome.com/forums/t/777281.aspx

    "Olbermann said, “It is as useful to remind them anew of how the term originated and with whom. A TV news report aired last March 14 in which a correspondent described the original protest act, ‘take a teabag, put it in an envelope, and mail it to the White House.’ He added, ‘reteaparty.com has a headline Teabag the Fools in D.C. on tax day.’ Thus the verb to teabag was invented by the teabaggers themselves, and the correspondent who put it on TV was a Griff Jenkins of Fox News. Send your complaints to him.”

    Also, the photo that "doesn't link" now links, though if you don't want to click on it, it's of a Tea Party supporter holding up a button that says "Proud to be a Teabagger." Not included: the bizarre photo of the elderly woman standing on the side of the road holding up a sign saying "I'm teabagging for Jesus" that does the rounds in the emails that get sent around highlighting the more "interesting" signs you'll see at a Tea Party protest.

    If a movement picks an embarrassing name for itself, then supporters of the movement are on shaky ground when they get offended at people using their own name to make fun of them. They may prefer "Tea Party" now, but "Tea Party supporter" and "Teabagger" were used interchangably at the start.
    The older people did not know the definition of “teabagger” ...including myself.....when the teabagger generation caught wind of this it was just an easy way to insult someone who is not up on the new slang....and they go on and on and on with it...
    “We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Abraham Lincoln
  • FiveB247xFiveB247x Posts: 2,330
    There - I changed it on the title.. it now says "tea party". Does make a difference in how you talk in specifics about the issues and topics? :roll:
    aerial wrote:
    The older people did not know the definition of “teabagger” ...including myself.....when the teabagger generation caught wind of this it was just an easy way to insult someone who is not up on the new slang....and they go on and on and on with it...
    CONservative governMENt

    Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
  • flywallyflyflywallyfly Posts: 1,453
    I'm guessing most teabagging voters (not all, but most in my opinion) will vote Republican because those in charge are Republicans and have been steering this "movement" that way since the inception.
    Here is a start for anyone wanting to learn the true inception and direction of this in your face bagging movement :

    http://thinkprogress.org/2009/04/09/lob ... eaparties/

    http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/ ... ick-armey/

    http://www.alternet.org/economy/136688/ ... ca/?page=1

    http://debatebothsides.com/showthread.p ... oratocracy
  • aerialaerial Posts: 2,319
    FiveB247x wrote:
    But how will voting patterns change - more 3rd party votes and if so to whom? Also, my point about "hidden" was that if this is truly the main point and gripe of this movement, they do not do the best job via public relations, media or similar getting that message out there. And yes, the media does focus on the nuts, but besides that, those in the movement do not do a good job of getting this main focal message to the public... it's merely lost in the partisan ranting and complaints.
    aerial wrote:
    I think votting patterns will change.......I am not sure what you mean by hidden....but yes "responsibility/accountability of elected officials" I think is what everyone wants...

    The Tea Party is not as organized as the media seems to portray....which is what makes it so fascinating....The Tea Party has many members...All in all we are a large group of people that felt our elected officials were not listening to anyone other than lobbyist or special interest....we wanted to be heard .... we are a new and inExperienced at politics.......... without using a lawyer, an agent, and with out a publicist, all there is, is the media to give you the information that they WANT you to believe..... we are all parties, all races, all ethnicity and all Americans that want to Defending Liberty, Private Property, The Constitution, and Limited Government...to do that they feel it can be done by voting...
    I challenge people to go to the Tea Party sites and inform there selves about the Tea Party.....then form an opinion........
    “We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Abraham Lincoln
  • aerialaerial Posts: 2,319
    FiveB247x wrote:
    There - I changed it on the title.. it now says "tea party". Does make a difference in how you talk in specifics about the issues and topics? :roll:
    aerial wrote:
    The older people did not know the definition of “teabagger” ...including myself.....when the teabagger generation caught wind of this it was just an easy way to insult someone who is not up on the new slang....and they go on and on and on with it...
    :thumbup: I was looking for a BIG HUG smiley...because you deserve one...
    “We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Abraham Lincoln
  • aerialaerial Posts: 2,319
    Republican Are just trying to jump on the Tea Party Train.......Personally I wish Sarah Palin would get off...and I like the women (or used to) she seems to be turning into just your run of the mill politician
    “We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Abraham Lincoln
  • FiveB247xFiveB247x Posts: 2,330
    I can't speak for others, but I have read several people have posted on here (from members themselves) and albeit, some of the notions are things we could all get behind, there's no real translation into how participating will lead to change. Obviously these things don't happen over night, but simply saying you want x, doesn't make x happen. And no offense to you or other members of this group, simply saying things like "defending liberty, private property, the constitution and limited government" is a bit vague to say the least if you don't have a plan to actually enact on it.
    aerial wrote:
    The Tea Party is not as organized as the media seems to portray....which is what makes it so fascinating....The Tea Party has many members...All in all we are a large group of people that felt our elected officials were not listening to anyone other than lobbyist or special interest....we wanted to be heard .... we are a new and inExperienced at politics.......... without using a lawyer, an agent, and with out a publicist, all there is, is the media to give you the information that they WANT you to believe..... we are all parties, all races, all ethnicity and all Americans that want to Defending Liberty, Private Property, The Constitution, and Limited Government...to do that they feel it can be done by voting...
    I challenge people to go to the Tea Party sites and inform there selves about the Tea Party.....then form an opinion........
    CONservative governMENt

    Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
  • FiveB247xFiveB247x Posts: 2,330
    Perhaps slightly, but many invite it because many of the complaints are aimed and centered around Obama, Dems, the left, etc directly instead of focusing on some of the issues mentioned in this thread. Which could potentially get more backing if it weren't partisan and slanted.
    aerial wrote:
    Republican Are just trying to jump on the Tea Party Train.......Personally I wish Sarah Palin would get off...and I like the women (or used to) she seems to be turning into just your run of the mill politician
    CONservative governMENt

    Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
  • aerialaerial Posts: 2,319
    FiveB247x wrote:
    I can't speak for others, but I have read several people have posted on here (from members themselves) and albeit, some of the notions are things we could all get behind, there's no real translation into how participating will lead to change. Obviously these things don't happen over night, but simply saying you want x, doesn't make x happen. And no offense to you or other members of this group, simply saying things like "defending liberty, private property, the constitution and limited government" is a bit vague to say the least if you don't have a plan to actually enact on it.
    aerial wrote:
    The Tea Party is not as organized as the media seems to portray....which is what makes it so fascinating....The Tea Party has many members...All in all we are a large group of people that felt our elected officials were not listening to anyone other than lobbyist or special interest....we wanted to be heard .... we are a new and inExperienced at politics.......... without using a lawyer, an agent, and with out a publicist, all there is, is the media to give you the information that they WANT you to believe..... we are all parties, all races, all ethnicity and all Americans that want to Defending Liberty, Private Property, The Constitution, and Limited Government...to do that they feel it can be done by voting...
    I challenge people to go to the Tea Party sites and inform there selves about the Tea Party.....then form an opinion........
    I agree with you......it is vague...and there needs to be a plan.....but once that starts it's politics as usual.......any suggestions?
    Maybe it started so simple as to think that if Washington saw Americans in numbers gather being peaceful not breaking laws but not happy with the way they were running the country they would say to themselves “my voters are not happy with what we are doing (or some would say “shit I’m busted I better stop lining my pockets with special interest or cooperate money) they are now paying attention I better listening to them...
    “We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Abraham Lincoln
  • pandorapandora Posts: 21,855
    FiveB247x wrote:
    I have a question regarding the Tea Bag Party. Please note this is not a thread to argue their beliefs or some generalizations some may have for them, but merely an honest question. In the next election, who will they be voting for and why? It's unlikely they'd vote for any Democrat. Will they simply vote Republican or will they vote 3rd party? At the heart of their commentary, which they do make some valid points (even if they backed the same policies years back), how will they use the vote and election to change things? If they vote Republican, will they merely change by holding them to higher standards and continue this movement or will they merely check out once "their side" got back power? Will they vote 3rd party as a sign of disgust for what the two major parties have done and where they've led us? How will this play itself out?
    Ron Paul
  • FiveB247xFiveB247x Posts: 2,330
    Well I think one of the first orders of business if your intent is merely clean up DC in some fashion, is to get rid of any political partisan overtones in the movement completely. When this is the visible front in any fashion, it detracts from the meaning in an absolute manner and keeps people away. Once enough people take notice of a unbiased group gaining momentum, it will merely snowball from there.
    aerial wrote:
    I agree with you......it is vague...and there needs to be a plan.....but once that starts it's politics as usual.......any suggestions?
    Maybe it started so simple as to think that if Washington saw Americans in numbers gather being peaceful not breaking laws but not happy with the way they were running the country they would say to themselves “my voters are not happy with what we are doing (or some would say “shit I’m busted I better stop lining my pockets with special interest or cooperate money) they are now paying attention I better listening to them...
    CONservative governMENt

    Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
  • aerialaerial Posts: 2,319
    FiveB247x wrote:
    Well I think one of the first orders of business if your intent is merely clean up DC in some fashion, is to get rid of any political partisan overtones in the movement completely. When this is the visible front in any fashion, it detracts from the meaning in an absolute manner and keeps people away. Once enough people take notice of a unbiased group gaining momentum, it will merely snowball from there.
    aerial wrote:
    I agree with you......it is vague...and there needs to be a plan.....but once that starts it's politics as usual.......any suggestions?
    Maybe it started so simple as to think that if Washington saw Americans in numbers gather being peaceful not breaking laws but not happy with the way they were running the country they would say to themselves “my voters are not happy with what we are doing (or some would say “shit I’m busted I better stop lining my pockets with special interest or cooperate money) they are now paying attention I better listening to them...

    The people in the Tea Party know the movement does not support any party and anyone can join....I think that is one of the reasons it is snowballing now .....but the problem starts with the media spinning it to look like there are political partisan overtones in the movement . One side wants to ridicule the Tea Party and the other side wants to jump on the train.....Maybe it’s the media that needs cleaning up...boycott the Media?
    “We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Abraham Lincoln
  • FiveB247xFiveB247x Posts: 2,330
    Yes while I agree with you that perhaps a good deal is media driven, but the people should make a conscience and concerted effort to make that part clear so there is no "spinning" so to speak. And albeit some of it isn't "partisan" but lots of it does have strong undertones which do distinguish right from left or vice-versa. If the unconditional goal is to gain support to get rid of private interests and similar, then there's tons of people on both sides that would be for it... but if you begin throwing in too many other issues which separate political lines.. it creates division and mitigates the aims.
    aerial wrote:
    The people in the Tea Party know the movement does not support any party and anyone can join....I think that is one of the reasons it is snowballing now .....but the problem starts with the media spinning it to look like there are political partisan overtones in the movement . One side wants to ridicule the Tea Party and the other side wants to jump on the train.....Maybe it’s the media that needs cleaning up...boycott the Media?
    CONservative governMENt

    Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
  • Jason PJason P Posts: 19,158
    I would hope that people that associate themselves with the Tea Party’s principles will show up in full force at the primaries and make a difference there by knocking down any incumbents of the party they are usually alligned with. If that fails, then vote again against any incumbents in the general election.

    The biggest issue and that either a Democrat or Republican will still find themselves in office after the dust settles. But maybe some new blood will help lead to overall political reform.
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • StarfallStarfall Posts: 548
    edited April 2010
    OK, let's get a few things in perspective:

    The term "teabagger", while unintendedly hilarious, is a self inflicted wound:

    2009-03-18-tea_bag_dems.jpg

    Now, as to how the so called Tea Party movement will vote - this group is fundamentally indistinguishable from the Republican base. When push comes to shove, they will decidedly support the right wing fringe in DC - the same ones that gave us Sarah Palin, Jim DeMint, Michele Bachmann, and Joe Wilson. And given the current Republican party's push to purge "moderates" (see Charlie Crist) and "heretics" (see Ron Paul) from their ranks, I don't see how the so called Tea Party will support any other candidates. Plus, their biggest supporters are part of the same gang of right wing financiers that supported Republican candidates and causes.
    Furthermore, while Ron Paul is often credited as the father of the modern Tea Party movement, these are not even the same people that supported Ron Paul back in 2006 - else why would Paul rate so low with them?
    And speaking of Paul, if he's such a revered figure among the insurgent right,why is he facing challengers from the tea party ranks? Is it because he's been critical of the right wing fringe in the GOP?
    Post edited by Starfall on
    "It's not hard to own something. Or everything. You just have to know that it's yours, and then be willing to let it go." - Neil Gaiman, "Stardust"
  • aerialaerial Posts: 2,319
    Starfall wrote:
    OK, let's get a few things in perspective:

    The term "teabagger", while unintendedly hilarious, is a self inflicted wound:
    2009-03-18-tea_bag_dems.jpg

    Now, as to how the so called Tea Party movement will vote - this group is fundamentally indistinguishable from the Republican base. When push comes to shove, they will decidedly support the right wing fringe in DC - the same ones that gave us Sarah Palin, Jim DeMint, Michele Bachmann, and Joe Wilson. And given the current Republican party's push to purge "moderates" (see Charlie Crist) and "heretics" (see Ron Paul) from their ranks, I don't see how the so called Tea Party will support any other candidates. Plus, their biggest supporters are part of the same gang of right wing financiers that supported Republican candidates and causes.
    Furthermore, while Ron Paul is often credited as the father of the modern Tea Party movement, these are not even the same people that supported Ron Paul back in 2006 - else why would Paul rate so low with them?
    And speaking of Paul, if he's such a revered figure among the insurgent right,why is he facing challengers from the tea party ranks? Is it because he's been critical of the right wing fringe in the GOP?
    more media bullshit...White and wealthy :roll:
    Go to the Tea Party site and read
    “We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Abraham Lincoln
  • StarfallStarfall Posts: 548
    aerial wrote:
    more media bullshit...White and wealthy :roll:
    Go to the Tea Party site and read

    Why don't you refute the polls instead of just slamming it as bullshit?
    Besides, there's several so called "Tea Party" groups - which one are you talking about?
    "It's not hard to own something. Or everything. You just have to know that it's yours, and then be willing to let it go." - Neil Gaiman, "Stardust"
Sign In or Register to comment.