Who is....

tea party candidate varies but romney has their support in general ... as most of them are anyone but obama ...

the occupy candidate would probably be ron paul ..

tea party candidate was donald trump, then michelle bachmann, then rick perry, then herman cain, then newt.....now it is a tossup between santorum and romney and it depends on whomever is polling higher that day....

ows is not a party and it is not a sub group of just the dems, so it is hard to know who they are even supporting. some of those guys are anti government, so some of them might even support paul, or no candidate at all....

I support OWS, and I don't see them as supporting a specific candidate. They are really more focused on calling out the corruption, fraud, and cronyism that is rampant in big business in general, and in the banking/financial sector in particular. The very people who are in large part responsible for the recession via the crash of the housing market are the same people who have made the most money off of the suffering of those effected - the common citizen, and OWS really started as a result of this injustice. Now it includes such issues as unnecessary offshoring and companies laying off workers and hiring hoards of contract workers at the same time to avoid paying for health insurance for workers and many other issues.

Basically, OWS is about pointing out how big business is destroying the middle class via it current predatory practices with regard to homeowners/mortgages and it's 'employment' (or lack thereof) practices with regard to honest, hardworking American workers.

OWS has not endorsed a particular candidate, and I think that is a good thing - they are not a political party, but a movement against corruption, fraud and predatory business practices toward workers, homeowners, and former homeowners who have been defrauded and otherwise screwed over.

Realistically, neither.

Hypothetically:

Tea Party: Ted Nugent (Whom I fondly refer to as "Nougat" or "No-gent")

OWS: Micah M. White

I know this is probably moot and unarguable at this point in history, given that "The Tea Party" has been so disastrously and deliberately co-opted by the establishment -- in an attempt to disarm and render it a non-threat ...

however, i will give this one more go:

THE "TEA PARTY" EVOLVED OUT OF A MOVEMENT AROUND ***RON PAUL***

PERIOD.

There was no "Tea Party" lingo in modern American lexicon until December 16th, 2007, when 30,000 people DONATED OVER SIX MILLION DOLLARS TO RON PAUL IN ONE DAY, ON THE ANNIVERSARY OF THE BOSTON TEA PARTY!

From ***THIS*** groundswell and original feel-good moment of "OMG we've got so much grassroots support for OUR candidate" did the "TEA PARTY" start to evolve.

http://evangrogers.hubpages.com/hub/Tea-Party-Origins
http://www.dailypaul.com/143634/dont-th ... ty-origins
http://www.teaparty911.com/tea_party_movement.htm
http://www.mediaite.com/online/rush-lim ... tea-party/

From last source:
"Plenty of reporting from 2007 shows that the “Tea Party” in its most primitive form was a way for Paul supporters to gather. "

There was NO PARTY and NO PLATFORM outside of "Fed up with this bullshit" and "CONSTITUTION CONSTITUTION CONSTITUTION" and also "DON'T TREAD ON ME" ... there was no official candidate as there was no official party ... and as everyone was FOR RON PAUL anyhow ... lol ...

ok.
partial rant over.

81 wrote:

sooo....

neither of these movements have put forth their own canidate?

the tea party definitely has ... they've endorsed several candidates ... none of which have fared well against the GOP establishment ...

OWS is a different kind of movement in that there has been no visible leader representing them ... the movement is against the system rather than particular individuals or parties ... OWS is opposed to system that has been created by both democrats and republicans ...

SweetChildofMine wrote:

lol

Im sorry this is how f'd up it is. Ooops. Now T-party is trying to co-opt OWS hilariously... when they were all saying at the beginning we were Acorn members! hahahahahahahaha Now seeing its success and support they want that too. F U

btw in its early days I told them all not to support a candidate. reguardless what they felt ....to keep things clear and let things play out we all agreed and thought it was a good idea... I told them (GA) remain neutral its going to out every fucking crazy .... so FU Ron Paul.

how quickly people would want to take credit for anonymous after their nutbag circus show by tbaggers collapsed...besides its not a movement led by one person... its helping the masses to shape their world and wanting change and wanting the world to work in a better manner and armed with truth and peace.


you think if I was driving a Love Revolution Id f'ing want Ron Paul at the helm? nasty asshole world we live in...

I am wondering how they are trying to co-opt OWS? I don't see that too many places. I must be honest, when a news story or report starts with OWS or the Tea Party I usually tune out the non-sense that follows.. This is an honest question. the Original Tea Party that Drifting describes and OWS have some goals in common, just talk about different solutions...

Yeah...FU Ron Paul....what an asshole...trying to hold the government to the rules it is supposed to govern by...crazy jerk...

How exactly has OWS helped the masses to shape their world? what are their accomplishments, other than a few protests...In my eyes they have accomplished slightly less than the co-opted tea party...that isn't saying much...

To answer the OP

tea party candidate isn't one person exactly...but it is more along the lines of anyone but President Obama...which makes it no different than any other Republican sect.

OWS doesn't have one specifically either...I thought I remembered reading that many didn't support Obama any more than other politicians...but most who actually vote will probably still vote for him...thus putting someone in power that isn't going to do anything to change the actual root cause of the problems they are protesting against.

Ron Paul is the logical choice based on the Tea Party tenants. Newt is the polar opposite. Romney is just Obama spelled a different way. Rick Santorum focuses on social issues which are not part of the Tea Party equation.

So ... the answer should be Ron Paul.

shadowcast wrote:

I think Santorum is the tea-party canidate more so because of his social issues.

That is exactly why he cannot be the tea party candidate.

shadowcast wrote:

Jason P wrote:

shadowcast wrote:

I think Santorum is the tea-party canidate more so because of his social issues.

That is exactly why he cannot be the tea party candidate.

In a nationwide poll taken last Wednesday through Sunday, Pew found that among Republican and GOP-leaning voters, 42 percent of tea party backers preferred Santorum. Rival Mitt Romney was far behind at 23 percent.

Read more here: http://www.bnd.com/2012/02/14/2058497/w ... rylink=cpy

Nothing but proof of what a "great" job the establishment did of "co-opting" the "tea party".

No Ron Paul supporter or real libertarian would EVER consider supporting Santorum.
His popularity with "the tea party" is just proof of how far it has fallen, nothing more.