PDA

View Full Version : Gringrich and Palin Tea Party Cnasdidates?




Working Poor
07-17-2010, 10:31 AM
I saw this article while @ newsvine this morning thought I would let you see it.



I have had a theory for a little while now at what the impact of the Tea Party is going to have on the Right wing, that is to say all those that consider themselves right of center, and America as a whole. Ever since they emerged there has been no doubt that the Tea Party has been a fringe element. Some wish to dispute this claim but when the numbers of those in the actual Tea Party are counted up and their views polled they show that they are on the far right of the political spectrum. Over the past year and a half the media has had an intense infatuation with the Tea Party expressing their views on TV more so than that of the average mainstream conservative. This has only increased with time and more and more the right wing of the American public has become polarized.

This leaves the moderate conservative without a voice, without representation if you will. It has created a vacuum for that political view within the country. No one has yet to fill that void but within the next year or so it will begin to materialize. The GOP itself has catered to the Tea Party, embracing the 9/12 movement, jeering on the crowds at the town hall meetings, holding up the Gadsden Flag, Don't Tread on Me, and calling our President a socialist, a tyrant, etc. They have been trying to rile up the base in order to take back their country, as they say.

Yet, some GOPers are standing back. One such is Lindsey Graham of SC. When confronted by the Tea Partiers screaming we want our country back, he responded saying, "and what are you going to do with it, once you take your country back?" Apparently, there was a dead silence. This party is based on emotional frustration of the government. They feel they have lost their voice, their representation. In truth they have, just not to whom they think. Special interests have taken over Washington D.C. en mass. You can see evidence of this in the health care reform debates, and in financial reform. The amount of lobbyists sent to our nation's capitol was the largest seen in history this year. That is usually a good sign of change, however this year it got watered down due to the immense influence by the special interests.

With the looming 2010 mid-term elections, the right wing has a very active base. The Tea Party is gaining speed all the time while the moderate GOP is trying to catch it's footing. Once they catch an issue, they will be off running. The problem is, they are running two different races. The Tea Party's platform is ambiguous at best. They mainly have talking points that can be dashed with one or two fact checks or a few successive civil debates. This is apparent from their hypocrisy in the health care debate. Many elderly (60+) in the Tea Party would hold signs that stated No Socialist Health Care. Right next to it on the same sign would be Hands Off My Medicare. This has been exploited time and time again by the political left and is easy pickings. Yet it shows what the Tea Party really stands for, discontent with their government. The moderate GOP does have discontent with their government, but not in the same emotional manner that the Tea Party exhibits.

With the special election in New York, the Tea Party ran it's own candidate pulling in groups from around the country and national figures. Some of these were Freedom Works, Americans For Prosperity, Dick Armey, and Sarah Palin. These individuals and groups propelled Doug Hoffman over the GOP candidate, Dede Scozzafava causing her to quit not a week or two before the primary. In doing so she put her weight behind the democrat in the race, Bill Owens. This action caused the election to swing in Owens' favor putting him in the house of representatives, and a member of the U.S. Congress.

This is just a microcosm of what things are to come. The Tea Party represents a brand of conservatism that is solely based on emotional discontent with the government. It thrives on the passions of the people but does not have one clear unique vision. When asked about party platforms all they give are platitudes. They have a strong base however in the discontented with the lack of government action for the people and for the special interests. This has caused the Tea Party to form over the past 20-30 years and finally spring up when the situation is ripe, President Barack Obama's election.

The NY-23 special election is a window in to what the possible outcome may be for the Tea Party. With as it stands now the Tea Party and GOP are one united entity. However, why then are there Tea Party candidates running against the GOP in primaries? There is a clear crevice that is forming between the two entities that have been embraced by both. The issue is taking back their country and bringing the power back to the GOP, and the people. The Tea Party views many in congress as corrupt, and they are. They want to throw the bums out. What the GOP is hoping is that means the democratic majority, not them. What they are finding is a different story.

Come this November the ballots across the US will be a little different than what they have been in the past. There may be a few Tea Party candidates in the race instead of the GOP. These are polarized figures, such as Sharon Angle, who can make it on a small time local or state government level. When they come out into the full view of the complete American public however, that is a different story. Sharon Angle has been seen literally running away from reports when being asked questions. Using phrases such as "God's calling" in referencing her political campaign against Harry Reid. She has made some outlandish remarks about abortion rights, and in the case of rape or incest calling that pregnancy, "God's plan". To the minority on the far right, this is fine. But to the majority of American's this is Clarrence Darrow being questioned on the witness stand by William Jennings Bryan in the Scopes Monkey Trial. Instead of Bible literalism, Jonah actually being eaten by a whale, we have a politically religious ideology in which flies in the face of most Americans.

The Tea Party candidates will be hammered by the political machine of the democrats, exposing every radical view such as they did with Rand Paul. The small time politics that they have been accustomed to playing will be immediately clear, when they get hammered by the "big boys". Except in extremely right leaning districts, most of these candidates will lose. I would put at most them winning 33% of the time. They will be viewed as unelectable. Meanwhile the GOP will run its moderate or conservative candidate that appeals to the base and the middle ground. The GOP machine will fight tooth and nail and probably end up winning at least half if not up to 66% of these races depending on the make up of the district.

In the end the GOP and Tea Party combined will not take back the Senate and doubtfully take back the House of Representatives. This will create a divide between the two parties that they have never had to encounter before. The Tea Party will view the GOP as insiders and Big Washington Government. They will begin to vocally show their displeasure and the media war will begin. Meanwhile the GOP will view the Tea Party as unelectable and begin to cast them out as much as possible. The national icons sch as Sarah Palin, Fred Thompson, Mitt Romney, will all have to pick sides. The Tea Party may even change it's name to lose the noteriety that it gained with it's racist comments as well as some of it's less intelligent placards (misspelled, improper english, socialism and nazism and marxism called the same, etc etc). All of this will be an image job and to dispel the GOP from their ranks. The GOP will redefine itself as the moderate middle ground party opposed to the fringes on both sides of the political spectrum. This will happen at one of two points, within the first three months after the mid-term elections. Or at the 2011 GOP convention in Tampa, FL. There could be some violence down there so please be careful.

This sounds all too familiar to me, and hopefully to American's with a little historical knowledge. The only real difference is this time the incumbent's party would split not the minority power. The GOP back in 1910 began to unravel a little bit. A formidably business minded party William Taft was beginning to align himself with the big corporations of the day. While he was busting them up at an unprecedented rate, he also choose which ones he did or did not in order to embolden certain industries while crippling others. When Teddy Roosevelt got back from Safari he saw this connection and began to run for a third time. He did so on a progressive platform when the GOP picked Taft at the GOP national convention. He created the Bull-Moose party.

This party had a large proportion of the GOP electorate and crippled any chances that the GOP had winning that Presidential election. Taft and Roosevelt split the GOP votes and Wilson, who probably would have not won on his own merit, took the Presidency with open arms. It is a stark resemblance to what we see today with the Tea Party and the GOP. Ironically the election that propelled Wilson into the white house due to the split of the GOP was 1912; 100 years on the dot from our next Presidential election.

The Tea Party will run it's candidates (my prediction Gingrich and Palin), and the GOP theirs (Romney and Bob McDonnell) and they will split the GOP right down the middle. President Barack Obama wins his second term without much of a fight. He moves on to his second term with an overwhelming majority in the senate and house once again. History repeats itself, or so they say. I have never been a believer in this. Napoleon cannot come back and invade Russia again, it is physically impossible. However the stunning similarities between that of the 1912 election and the possibility of the 2012 make up is one that can hardly be ignored











http://onevoiceamongmany.newsvine.com/_news/2010/07/16/4691657-the-tea-party-and-the-gops-divorce-the-century-cycle-?last=1279364000&threadId=1016056&sp=0&pc=25#last_1

brandon
07-17-2010, 11:01 AM
cnasdidates

NewFederalist
07-17-2010, 01:50 PM
cnasdidates

Whatupwitdat?

Isaac Bickerstaff
07-17-2010, 02:06 PM
That piece is less than meaningless. It contains all of the discredited hit tactics that we have seen in the past and conspicuously ignores the reasons for the rise of the Tea Party. It appears to have been submitted (basically anonymously) to try to discourage the recently awakened into returning to the couch. The scenario outlined is bullshit and reflects the neocon wishful thinking more than any careful analysis of current trends.

Learn to recognize enemy chatter.

Edit:
Actually, I read it again and it looks the neocons are desperate. It's pretty obvious. Keep up the good work everyone!

thomas-in-ky
07-17-2010, 02:34 PM
As Rand Paul says, main elements of the Tea Party Platform include:

1. term limits
2. balance the budget
3. read the bills

What's extreme about these positions?
These three elements poll 70+% with Democrats!

Working Poor
07-17-2010, 10:32 PM
cnasdidates

you fix it I cannot

Working Poor
07-17-2010, 10:35 PM
That piece is less than meaningless. It contains all of the discredited hit tactics that we have seen in the past and conspicuously ignores the reasons for the rise of the Tea Party. It appears to have been submitted (basically anonymously) to try to discourage the recently awakened into returning to the couch. The scenario outlined is bullshit and reflects the neocon wishful thinking more than any careful analysis of current trends.

Learn to recognize enemy chatter.

Edit:
Actually, I read it again and it looks the neocons are desperate. It's pretty obvious. Keep up the good work everyone!

What I see is that the sheeple are being programed to vote for Gingrich I shudder to think about gingrich making repub nomination or palin or romulan:eek:.

libertybrewcity
07-17-2010, 10:39 PM
I think the beauty of the tea party is that it is not a full on party. It really can not be defined because it is decentralized. It is truly each individual coming out in anger of both parties and their disastrous policies.

As for the article, it is just a lot of bs trying to give some hope to dems. However, recent polling of tea party candidates shows them mostly tied with their dem opponents, which is kind of worrisome.

james1906
07-17-2010, 10:39 PM
cnasdidates

My favorite Greek dish.

Working Poor
07-17-2010, 11:31 PM
My favorite Greek dish.

I guess that's why I am married to a greek I love him for his cooking...:cool:

angelatc
07-17-2010, 11:45 PM
The Tea Party will run it's candidates (my prediction Gingrich and Palin), and the GOP theirs (Romney and Bob McDonnell) and they will split the GOP right down the middle.

Heh. Does anybody think that Gingrich would walk away from the GOP?

specsaregood
07-17-2010, 11:54 PM
Heh. Does anybody think that Gingrich would walk away from the GOP?

The person doesn't know squat. That rasmussen polled showed the "tea party" was 1/2palin, 1/2paul, not gingrich. The paul people aren't gonna go for gingrich and I don't think the palin people will either. If gingrich runs as a "tea party" person, it will be a completely made-up superficial corporation designed tea party candidacy.

Fredom101
07-18-2010, 12:05 AM
I think they will float Newt and see how the GOP voting public respond...if unfavorable, they will resurrect Romney, and we'll be looking at a Romney/Palin ticket. Huckabee is just in there for shits and giggles, but he's a last ditch scenario right now if Paul gains any traction.

It's all disgusting and planned out. There are likely so many contingency plans it's ridiculous. Amazing that people still believe in voting and elections!

Austrian Econ Disciple
07-18-2010, 12:11 AM
As Rand Paul says, main elements of the Tea Party Platform include:

1. term limits
2. balance the budget
3. read the bills

What's extreme about these positions?
These three elements poll 70+% with Democrats!

And that fixes what exactly? Nothing. The Tea Party main elements should have been:

1. End the Fed / restore sound money
2. End the Income Tax
3. End the Wars / Empire


Don't even need to list the other things like abolishing ABC departments, etc. This would go a long way in turning the Statist tide...but, no. You list off 3 meaningless things that will change nothing. Hooo-ray Tea Party!!!! /sarc

specsaregood
07-18-2010, 12:15 AM
And that fixes what exactly? Nothing. The Tea Party main elements should have been:

1. End the Fed / restore sound money
2. End the Income Tax
3. End the Wars / Empire


Don't even need to list the other things like abolishing ABC departments, etc. This would go a long way in turning the Statist tide...but, no. You list off 3 meaningless things that will change nothing. Hooo-ray Tea Party!!!! /sarc

So tell me, how many tea party events and groups have you attended and promoted your suggestions to the participants?
I only ask because the 3 Rand listed are already accepted and liked by a majority of the populace, your ideas (which I agree with) will require a lot more education to "sell". So unless people are actively promoting those ideas, it won't ever happen.

Fredom101
07-18-2010, 12:16 AM
Those are totally meaningless. The tea party is just basically the anti-Obama party. They have no principles. Of course all politicians will promise to "read the bills" and "balance the budget". Term limits? Won't happen, but even if it did, what does it change? We just get one douchebag politician in there to replace another with slightly more frequency.

specsaregood
07-18-2010, 12:20 AM
3. End the Wars / Empire


Also, worth noting. John McManus (JBS President) was invited out by a local 9/12 group to talk about immigration. During his speech of which a large part focused on the constitution I was quite surprised when he declared that we need to bring our troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan and he got a loud round of applause in response -- one of his biggest applause lines of the evening. And this was not a "Ron Paul crowd" this was a "tea party" crowd.

Austrian Econ Disciple
07-18-2010, 12:25 AM
So tell me, how many tea party events and groups have you attended and promoted your suggestions to the participants?
I only ask because the 3 Rand listed are already accepted and liked by a majority of the populace, your ideas (which I agree with) will require a lot more education to "sell". So unless people are actively promoting those ideas, it won't ever happen.

Two, and I stopped going after the second, because I was either handing out and talking to people that all ready agreed with me (the very small minority), or the large majority (read: the rest) scoffed at me whenever I brought up that we should end the wars, end the income tax, and return to a hard currency. Besides, the two I went to felt more like a Christian revival than a political gathering, while nothing really wrong with that, the whole point of the Tea Party becomes a joke when infested with that.

The people I talked to looked like zombies whenever I brought up the CHRISTIAN Just War Theory. I didn't dare mention that drugs should be legal..that was even a more taboo no-no than ending the wars. They didn't care how much it cost, either. I'd say it was a good 80/20. Very few that didn't all ready agree with me listened.

Seems to me you just want to get elected at any cost. It's too dangerous to advocate the correct ideas, because they aren't accepted...boooo-hoooh. If no one talks about it of course it won't ever be accepted!!! Such a self-defeating attitude.

Tea Party are confused Neo-Con partisans for the most part. Most are merely anti-Obama, and are not pro-liberty. There are of course a few pockets in the country where the opposite is true, but if we are talking in the totality here...it ain't looking good.

I do my share to advocate my positions between participating in a local activist group, to supporting both to everyone I know, and monetarily to libertarian orgs like Mises, FEE, FFF, etc. & doing local outreach / etc. with people willing to listen. Right now though I've mostly been busy with work since we are so short-handed.

So, what have YOU been doing?

TNforPaul45
07-18-2010, 12:29 AM
Whoever wrote that has a vivid imagination and truly does not read more than the headlines of political news stories.

Bob McConnell? Who the flabbity is that?

The only truthful thing said was that the GOP and tea party are one and the same.

GOP moderates? Is there even such a thing?

specsaregood
07-18-2010, 12:30 AM
The people I talked to looked like zombies whenever I brought up the CHRISTIAN Just War Theory. I didn't dare mention that drugs should be legal..that was even a more taboo no-no than ending the wars. They didn't care how much it cost, either. I'd say it was a good 80/20. Very few that didn't all ready agree with me listened.

So you keep going, you keep drilling it into their heads. More will wake up.



Seems to me you just want to get elected at any cost. It's too dangerous to advocate the correct ideas, because they aren't accepted...boooo-hoooh. If no one talks about it of course it won't ever be accepted!!! Such a self-defeating attitude.

Sounds to me like you are the one with the self-defeating attitude. I'm more than happy to have our candidates run on simpler platforms that I agree with even if they are just bandaids. If it means they can push the more meaningful stuff in office.



So, what have YOU been doing?
Exactly what I suggested. Our local 9/12 group has been completely infiltrated and taken over by true liberty minded individuals who now lead the discussions, topics and activism. I can't take near the majority of the credit but I'd tried to do my part. You get out when you can and talk to people even when they don't want to listen.

Austrian Econ Disciple
07-18-2010, 12:39 AM
So you keep going, you keep drilling it into their heads. More will wake up.


Sounds to me like you are the one with the self-defeating attitude. I'm more than happy to have our candidates run on simpler platforms that I agree with even if they are just bandaids. If it means they can push the more meaningful stuff in office.

Exactly what I suggested. Our local 9/12 group has been completely infiltrated and taken over by true liberty minded individuals who now lead the discussions, topics and activism. I can't take near the majority of the credit but I'd tried to do my part. You get out when you can and talk to people even when they don't want to listen.

This is just wild speculation. Congratulations. I don't even think there is a 9/12 group here, and the biggest libertarian group here I am a part of, and in fact have convinced over half to Voluntaryism...so I'd say I'm doing my part (group probably totals around...70 or so).

I also take offense that --

Ending the Wars
End the Fed
End the Income Tax

Is not a simple platform...How much easier can it get? If the population can't even understand End the Wars, well....why even try educating the majority? Just take the minority and move together to one geographic area.

I suppose this is the fundamental difference between some of us here -- Half seem to be reactionaries, and the other half visionaries. Meh. I don't see Rand trying to end the Drug War, Military Wars, Income Tax, Federal Reserve, or any other institution that destroys our liberty.

How is a balanced budget simple? What is he going to do? Keep spending the same and raise taxes? Is he going to cut spending? What is he going to cut? What is he going to lower taxes to? Etc. etc. This isn't any simpler than explaining how wars destroy liberty, ramp inflation, and cost trillions. It isn't any harder than explaining ABCT.

specsaregood
07-18-2010, 12:46 AM
I also take offense that --
Ending the Wars
End the Fed
End the Income Tax

Is not a simple platform...How much easier can it get?

Easy to say, much harder to get people to understand how it is possible and really hard to explain the Fed to them. we have made great inroads there.



I suppose this is the fundamental difference between some of us here -- Half seem to be reactionaries, and the other half visionaries. Meh. I don't see Rand trying to end the Drug War, Military Wars, Income Tax, Federal Reserve, or any other institution that destroys our liberty.

I see it differently. Half are people who think the best way to get things do is incrementally, the other half think you can somehow convince society that destroying everything they depend upon and have been trained to believe in at once.



How is a balanced budget simple? What is he going to do? Keep spending the same and raise taxes? Is he going to cut spending? What is he going to cut?
It is simpler to promote and get accepted, not necessarily simpler in practice.

Austrian Econ Disciple
07-18-2010, 12:55 AM
Easy to say, much harder to get people to understand how it is possible and really hard to explain the Fed to them. we have made great inroads there.


I see it differently. Half are people who think the best way to get things do is incrementally, the other half think you can somehow convince society that destroying everything they depend upon and have been trained to believe in at once.


It is simpler to promote and get accepted, not necessarily simpler in practice.

How did the USSR crumble then? The amount of people that had access to pro-liberty, pro-market books were relegated to Academia and only then could they have such access. How were the people convinced in a relatively short time span to destroy what they were dependent on? It's obviously happened before. It can happen again. Then again though....I'm perfectly fine with convincing at least a majority in one geographical area in the US. This I think will ultimately be more successful in the "long run".

I really don't see how a balanced budget necessarily advances liberty. It could easily do the complete opposite. As far as reading bills...lol. If that isn't a complete joke well...Politicos that aren't mushy Statists don't need to read a whole bill, and even if you forced the mushy Statists to read it they wouldn't vote against it.

I don't see how any of those top 3 "main elements" advances liberty one bit.

thomas-in-ky
07-18-2010, 05:51 AM
I really don't see how a balanced budget necessarily advances liberty. It could easily do the complete opposite. As far as reading bills...lol. If that isn't a complete joke well...Politicos that aren't mushy Statists don't need to read a whole bill, and even if you forced the mushy Statists to read it they wouldn't vote against it.

I don't see how any of those top 3 "main elements" advances liberty one bit.

Well, Rand always promotes shrinking the size of government in order to balance the budget. Smaller gov't = pro-liberty. Rand's "read the bill" proposal is basically a waiting period (20 pages = 1 day) that would improve transparency in Congress. (no more 1,000 page bills introduced and passed in 12 hours). Transparency = pro liberty. Sometimes, he substitutes "point to the constitutional basis in the bills" for "read the bills" in his big 3 tea party issues that he agrees with. Constitutionally based bills = pro-liberty.

Although it is a matter of opinion, I have come to believe that term limits would be more pro-liberty than perpetuating the pork-and-cronies-get-me-re-elected process that we have now.

End the wars, end the fed, end the income tax is a good platform too. It didn't get Ron Paul a plurality of votes in the KY presidential primary, but it got him my vote. His son is very much like his father, and very pro-liberty.

and to the OP's thread title... Gingrich would be a horrible (liberty/ Tea Party) candidate. When I heard him a couple of years ago say that candidates should endorse the global warming premise, not based on facts, but on the premise that constituents endorse it and it's popular, I wanted to regurgitate. Tea Partiers will see right through him.

Working Poor
07-18-2010, 07:02 AM
and to the OP's thread title... Gingrich would be a horrible (liberty/ Tea Party) candidate. When I heard him a couple of years ago say that candidates should endorse the global warming premise, not based on facts, but on the premise that constituents endorse it and it's popular, I wanted to regurgitate. Tea Partiers will see right through him.
I hope you are right about the tea party seeing right thru. I guess I am under the influence of the libs reading that the tea party is a bunch of stupid embecels all the time influences my thinking. The written word is powerful even when you don't agree with it.

Also about the title I am sorry about it all I can say is that I am dyslexic and I do not always catch my spelling errors I feel blessed and fortunate that I am able to type at all.

Imaginos
07-18-2010, 08:34 AM
Gringrich and Palin Tea Party Candidates?
No, they are whorehouse candidates.
Both of them stand for nothing but do the biddings of the highest bidder.
And at this point, it should be clear for us who are the highest bidders for these people.