Election 2010: Teabaggin' the Ds & Rs

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sgtclub

Where's the evidence that they haven't? (did I just get sandbagged?)

I suspect that the Tea Party is 10% DEM, 30% GOP, and 60% Indy.

If it's 10% Dem, those are self-identified Dems who mostly didn't vote for Obama and often don't vote Dem. If it's only 30% GOP, the others are people who consistently vote GOP but don't self-identify with the party. Which is to say, they're conservatives.

[sgtclub]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

If it's 10% Dem, those are self-identified Dems who mostly didn't vote for Obama and often don't vote Dem. If it's only 30% GOP, the others are people who consistently vote GOP but don't self-identify with the party. Which is to say, they're conservatives.

If that helps you sleep better at night.

[Cletus Miller]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

If it's 10% Dem, those are self-identified Dems who mostly didn't vote for Obama and often don't vote Dem. If it's only 30% GOP, the others are people who consistently vote GOP but don't self-identify with the party. Which is to say, they're conservatives.

Originally Posted by sgtclub

If that helps you sleep better at night.

Around here, the repub county committees have substantial (junior) leadership overlap with the county tea party committees. So the organization, at least, is predominantly regular Rs tacking away from the regular social conservatives (w/o *necessarily* disagreeing with them).

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sgtclub

Question, why was Dan Quayle an idiot and Biden is not?

That's a serious question? The answer is they are both idiots. But Quayle is correctly perceived as a bigger idiot because he had next to zero accomplishments to offset his history of malaprops.

ETA: Your world view continues to make me think you live in opposite-land.

[sgtclub]

Originally Posted by Adder

That's a serious question? The answer is they are both idiots. But Quayle is correctly perceived as a bigger idiot because he had next to zero accomplishments to offset his history of malaprops.

ETA: Your world view continues to make me think you live in opposite-land.

What do you think Quayle did before becoming VP?

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sgtclub

What do you think Quayle did before becoming VP?

Seriously? Almost nothing. Two terms in Congress and one and a half in the Senate, with a quite slim legislative record, to my recollection (which is admittedly less than fulsome as I was 13 when he was elected VP).

ETA: To be fair, he was a locally popular Senator from a swing state.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Adder

That's a serious question? The answer is they are both idiots. But Quayle is correctly perceived as a bigger idiot because he had next to zero accomplishments to offset his history of malaprops.

ETA: Your world view continues to make me think you live in opposite-land.

What do you give Biden create for? Are you sure he was the one who did that?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sgtclub

If that helps you sleep better at night.

Here's the first article I came to when I Googled, from Reuters. I don't think I'd seen it before, but it is consistent with what I recall seeing.

WASHINGTON — Many supporters of the conservative Tea Party movement that has shaken up politics share the same views as the Christian right on social issues like abortion and the role of religion in public life, according to a poll released Tuesday.

While the loosely organized Tea Party movement has focused largely on shrinking the size of government and other fiscal issues, its backers are more likely to support government restrictions on gay marriage and other social issues, the Public Religion Research Institute found in its American Values Survey.

The survey found significant overlap between the Tea Party, made up mostly of Republicans, and the religious right, which has played a significant political role for decades.

"Members of the Tea Party are certainly potential supporters of a Christian conservative agenda," said Robert Jones, an author of the study.

But Tea Party supporters report a stronger opposition to government than Republicans or Christian conservatives as a whole, Jones said.

Nearly half of those who identify with the Tea Party believe that the Bible is the literal word of God, and a similar proportion thinks that public officials do not pay enough attention to religion, the survey found. They are more likely than the population as a whole to view America as a Christian nation.

Tea Party members are less likely than the general public to support same-sex marriage, abortion rights or a compromise on immigration reform that would allow people who are in the United States illegally to become citizens.

Changing focus
Michael Lindsay, a leading expert on the religious right, said the Tea Party has broadened in recent months to address religious concerns, which could help unify Republicans before the Nov. 2 congressional elections.

"The focus of the movement has changed to one that is much more in line with the full spectrum of conservative political issues," said Lindsay, a political sociologist at Rice University in Houston.

The movement has taken aim at officeholders from both parties and several incumbent Republicans have been unseated by Tea Party-backed candidates in primary elections.

But 82 percent of those who identify with the Tea Party plan to vote for Republicans in the November elections, the survey found. Nearly three-quarters said they usually vote Republican.

Americans as a whole are divided on the merits of the Tea Party. While 24 percent say they would be more likely to support a candidate who was affiliated with Tea Party groups, 31 percent said they would be less likely to do so.

Tea Party-backed candidates have advocated positions including cutting government spending, lowering taxes, curbing government regulation of private business, phasing out the Social Security retirement program, dismantling the Education Department and repealing President Barack Obama's healthcare reform law.

The Tea Party gets its name from the 1773 Boston Tea Party anti-tax protest in which a band of Bostonians tossed crates of tea into the city's harbor to denounce a British tea tax.

The Public Religion Research Institute surveyed 3,013 U.S. adults by telephone between Sept. 1 and Sept. 14. It has a margin of error of 2 percentage points for the survey as a whole, and 5.5 percentage points for questions dealing with the Tea Party.

OK, now where's your evidence that the Tea Partiers are disaffected Democrats and independents who used to love redistribution and changed their ways after reading Ayn Rand on the way home from Obama's inauguration?

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

What do you give Biden create for? Are you sure he was the one who did that?

I'm not saying that Biden is great shakes, but he was a long standing Senator who has been influential on foreign policy (at least to the extent that a senator can be) for a long time.

Aside from "Senator" none of the words in the second clause of that last sentence can be applied to Quayle.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

The average Tea Partier is a conservative who consistently votes Republican but who may have issues with the party insiders. Nonetheless, if you think it's a new political movement, you're fooling yourself. It's a bunch of conservatives with conservative ideas, often funded by conservative interests, who are going to vote for conservatives. It is what the conservative movement has become.

Yes and no. It's fiscally conservative on the surface, no doubt. But look at little deeper and you'll see it's full of shit on that issue. Most of its adherents talk a good game, but bring up Medicare, SS and defense cuts and all they can answer with is some vague horseshit about "taking the country back."

I've a close family member who works for the GOP and her take on the tea parties is its a collection of all the angry cranks and losers who've been hectoring the party on purist issues at town halls, debates and party conferences for years. They saw weakness among the party elites this cycle and exploited it.

Real conservatives can't articulate our policies, which basically come down to, shrink the entitlements, shrink the defense budget and get the govt out of 60% of the shit in which it has its fingers. Nobody can say that out loud because the first two prongs are unacceptable to a nation of idiots who think everybody deserves to be taken care of and if we stop wasting hundreds of billions in profligate defense spending, The Chinese will Invade! So in the absence of an honest debate, we have the tea parties... And really, given the loathsome, blissful stupidity of the average American, aren't they the perfect party for the moment?

From Imbecile Fortunate Son (2000/2004) to Incompetent Darling of Clueless College Students Everywhere (2008) to Congressional Revolution of the Great Unlearned Asses (2010)... It's a natural progression, no? As Carlin said long ago in regard to our Democracy, "garbage in, garbage out." I can't wait for 2012. Shame Dick Gregory isn't around to run a pig.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

OK, now where's your evidence that the Tea Partiers are disaffected Democrats and independents who used to love redistribution and changed their ways after reading Ayn Rand on the way home from Obama's inauguration?

WTF? Is Club really arguing tea partiers are disaffected Dems? Or is that your paraphrasing?

Because that's asinine. No offence to either of you, but the obvious and irrefutable is, well... obvious and irrefutable. And the conclusion tea partiers are near exclusively Republican and Independent is both.

[LessinSF]

Originally Posted by Adder

Aside from "Senator" none of the words in the second clause of that last sentence can be applied to Quayle.

Then again, the word "plagiarist" has never been applied to Quayle, although I doubt he could spell it.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Yes and no. It's fiscally conservative on the surface, no doubt. But look at little deeper and you'll see it's full of shit on that issue.

Conservatives are completely full of shit on fiscal conservatism. The only reason some people are confused about it is that "fiscal conservatism" has the word "conservatism" in it.

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Real conservatives can't articulate our policies, which basically come down to, shrink the entitlements, shrink the defense budget and get the govt out of 60% of the shit in which it has its fingers. Nobody can say that out loud because the first two prongs are unacceptable to a nation of idiots who think everybody deserves to be taken care of and if we stop wasting hundreds of billions in profligate defense spending, The Chinese will Invade! So in the absence of an honest debate, we have the tea parties... And really, given the loathsome, blissful stupidity of the average American, aren't they the perfect party for the moment?

Conservatives have a choice between their professed beliefs and getting elected, and most of them choose getting elected every time.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

WTF? Is Club really arguing tea partiers are disaffected Dems? Or is that your paraphrasing?

Because that's asinine. No offence to either of you, but the obvious and irrefutable is, well... obvious and irrefutable. And the conclusion tea partiers are near exclusively Republican and Independent is both.

I believe it was Barry Goldwater who said, hyperbole in the defense of your political views is no vice.

eta: The question we are debating is whether the Tea Parties reflect a realignment within the electorate (hence my reference to disaffected Dems) -- i.e., a new force that changes the landscape -- or whether they are just a bunch of conservatives under a new banner. I think it's pretty obvious that it's the latter.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

It's not like Feinstein or Boxer is all that. Were I going to vote there next week, I would seriously consider voting against Boxer if it didn't mean voting for Fiorina, who is loathsome.

I'm putting my social positions in a bag and voting for Toomey. Joe Sestak is a classic tax and spend Dem who never met a spending program he didn't like. He's also dumb as a goddamned stump. I saw him debate Toomey and was thoroughly underwhelmed. We already have one dumb senator embarrassing Pennsylvania (watch video of Casey speaking... he makes W look eloquent, and unlike W, his tied tongue derives not from whisky-damage, lack of speaking experience and native dislike of extended conversation, but from pure lack of brains).