Log In | Register
Could the tea party's greatest triumph mark the biggest Republican loss this election cycle? Throughout the primary campaign season, the movement's tussles with the GOP have resulted in the rise of Sharron Angle, Rand Paul, and Joe Miller—all tea party-backed candidates who upset the establishment Republican favorites in their respective Senate GOP primaries. And despite this internal squabble, the GOP seemed to be increasing its chances of taking over the Senate, as all had a good shot at winning in the general election. That was until tea partier Christine O'Donnell suddenly surged in the Delaware Republican primary against Rep. Mike Castle.
Castle, one of the few remaining moderate Republicans in Congress, has long been a favorite target of the grassroots right, but the going assumption was that he had a clear path to the Senate. Having developed a reputation for breaking from his party, the long-time Congressman was well liked in the small, Democratic-leaning state, making him the early favorite in the race for Vice-President Biden's old seat. But last month, Miller's surprise upset of Lisa Murkowski in Alaska created in a massive boost of support for O'Donnell—including endorsements from Sarah Palin, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC), the National Rifle Association, and the major national tea party groups. And this right-wing campaign seems to have paid off, with the latest poll from Public Policy Polling showing O'Donnell with a three points lead over Castle, 47-44, in Tuesday's primary.
The GOP's Greatest 2010 Defeat... Courtesy of the Tea Party? | Mother Jones
Article Source: MotherJones.com- Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.
- Public Discussion (20)
In some ways I'm happy for the Republicans' excitement about their prospects in 2010. Partially because I can't help but think that if they win they lose and if they lose they lose.
It's clear that the old-line GOP understands what's at stake here -- not the 2010 elections but the future of the party. In moderate areas like Delaware (and where the head of the Republican Party received a death threat for supporting the non-Tea-Party candidate) having a Tea Partyist on the ballot will probably send independents to the Dems. In conservative areas, if the Tea Party wins, the GOP could pay the price in future elections when the country gets a full view of what happens when the Tea Party meets real-world politics.
Most Tea Partyists I end up having discussions with on the 'Vine are sure that they reflect the politics of the nation. What I think they fail to realize is that they are hollering about how they "Want Our Country Back" because politics left them behind a decade or more ago.
- 8 votes
#1 - Tue Sep 14, 2010 10:02 AM EDTI can't help but think that if they win they lose and if they lose they lose.
Yeah, but if they win, we all lose. Some may think they paint themselves into a corner if they win and extremists gain control, but most of the public has shown time and again that it can't remember anything that happened over two years ago, which means in the long run, there are no consequences.
- 6 votes
Yeah, but if they win, we all lose
Things will be messed up and weird, but still subject to a veto stamp. At least it won't be 2001 all over again.
There are times I still wonder if "Obama the chess player" didn't intend this all along just to ensure a long-term D majority.
- 4 votes
Things will be messed up and weird, but still subject to a veto stamp.
I'm as worried about the government being shut down and nothing getting done as I am about the wrong things getting done—especially in such a bad economy.
There are times I still wonder if "Obama the chess player" didn't intend this all along just to ensure a long-term D majority.
If Obama was that good a strategist, he would've been able to pass single payer.
- 4 votes
If Obama was that good a strategist, he would've been able to pass single payer.
If he'd been able to at least get a public option, there would be a lot more enthusiasm from progressives for the midterm elections.
- 4 votes
If the lack of a public option is going to sway any progressives' votes, they haven't been listening to the idiocy the republicans plan to propose. The repubs are hopeful of defunding the whole health care bill. And keep the richest 1% sucking up ever more gluttonous amounts of resources so they can cut medicare and social security. 97% of us are going to be hurt if the democrats lose the house, but fortunately there is one chance in three that such an eventuality will not happen.
- 3 votes
If Obama was that good a strategist, he would've been able to pass single payer
I'm wondering if the only way to get that done would have been on day one. "I have this little thing in my back pocket. Let's see if we can get this out the door in two weeks." Might have been possible if it wasn't for the economy.
- 4 votes
97% of us are going to be hurt if the democrats lose the house...
Absolutely! Don't get me wrong--there's no way I'm voting for any Republicans during this election cycle...I'm just not motivated to do more than vote.
- 5 votes
Lord of the Flies?
The Tea Party will sink the Republican Party ...
SYNOPSIS OF LORD OF THE FLIES ...
As the children get the feel of the island, the group separates into two different camps: Ralph (Balthazar Getty) and his followers prefer to act civilized and want to expand their efforts toward finding a way off the island; on the other hand, Jack (Chris Furrh) and his band revert to painting their faces, carrying spears and exploiting the island for survival. When the chances for rescue become less and less likely, the two factions go to war with each other, with tragic results.
Not a dead-ringer but close enough.
- 3 votes
Proglib:
.I'm just not motivated to do more than vote.
I understand. There have been a lot of disappointments since 2008. I'm getting a bit more motivated watching who the GOP is nominating this year. I don't have much room to be active but I may send $5 here and there.
A-Mac:
I think that's a pretty reasonable comparison.
I was thinking of one myself, and all I could come up with was The Visitors from Monty Python. Don't know if you're familiar with it. A couple is having a romantic evening home. But they're interrupted by a series of more and more bizarre visitors. Here's a link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZgOqcH1Ywzs
Couple=GOP == Visitors=Tea Party
- 4 votes
I still keep in contact with my representatives (who, other than the mayor of my town, are all Democrats) and will probably get POed enough by the corporatist political ads to become more active in my state's Senate race now that the primaries are over.
- 3 votes
Greetings, all. I'm watching returns and seeing progressives going after blue dog dems and tea baggers going after moderate repubs. Does this mean we are going to be more entrenched than ever and, consequently, less likely to get anything of substance accomplished for a really beleaguered nation?
Given the half-measures we've seen, for example, with health care and financial reform, is that a good thing or a bad thing? Is it better to lose a good bill on principle to fight another day, or get modest gains in painfully long-in-between increments?
I'm no fan of the middle, but I'm wondering where the middle and/or independents will stand when faced with the choice of more progressive candidates or more conservative candidates.
I certainly hope MoJo's analysis is correct, but voters seem to be in a really weird, unpredictable mood, and, right now, the attention and the motivation seems to be on the side of the fringey right.
- 1 vote
#2 - Tue Sep 14, 2010 11:45 PM EDTI'm watching returns and seeing progressives going after blue dogs and and tea baggers going after moderate repubs. Does this mean we are going to be more entrenched than ever and, consequently, less likely to get anything of substance accomplished for a really beleaguered nation?.
Interesting point, and something I've thought myself once in a while. I think it is something that's frequently seen during the primaries. Primaries are all about getting the base going and then carrying that momentum to the general election. The odd part this year is that the Tea Party got mad enough to make changes in their own party. Dems got mad and stayed home. Now probably what you'll see (since there's no presidential race to draw people to the polls) is scaring the Dems to the polls. Just watching what's been happening was enough to turn me. I'm betting that will be the main content of most TV ads you see between now and November.
- 2 votes
spun.... I did some work years ago w/polling general public on various issues identified by the then reforming Labor Party (US). When people were asked what they thought of various objectives, such as universal health care, right to freely join unions, etc., they were by far in favor. What we didn't do was say they were objectives of the new Labor Party. So, progressive goals, I guess, as long as they aren't labeled as such, can be popular.
On the other hand, I can't imagine how truly "popular" some these extreme ideas of the teabaggers are. Maybe people just like the idea of upstarts?
- 1 vote
I don't know where we got the meme that "America is a center-right nation". I think whoever manages the message best is the winner. There are some intrinsic fears many people share. By-and-large, when the HC reform was described to people most people liked it. When it gets into the hands of those talking about "death panels" and "socialized medicine" people turned on it.
Lakoff and many others have said that this is the weakness of the left, forming a cogent message that resonates with voters. Or, as I heard a caller on Thom Hartmann put it: People will always prefer a simple lie to a complicated truth.
- 2 votes
spun...love the Hartmann quote. He's the smartest guy on radio talk these days.
What I don't get is why people would buy into such obvious BS. I tend to believe, though I really can't say for sure, that when it comes to accepting really incredible claims at face value, it says a lot about the individual's personal worldview. I came to this after interviewing a lot of teabaggers at several very contentious health care town halls last year, and I just KNEW that THEY KNEW they were full of XXXX, but it didn't matter because it put them on a side they wanted to be on regardless. Does that make sense? Anyway, it was a real eye opener.
I may not be very coherent, kinda jet lagged, but I've read a couple of posts on Newsvine related to this type of thinking. Fascinating and grim.
- 1 vote
#3 - Wed Sep 15, 2010 12:23 AM EDTWhat I don't get is why people would buy into such obvious BS.
I try to be careful and not get stuck in an opinion bubble, but it's hard. And when the TV is on Fox and the car radio is on Rush I don't expect people to see the world very clearly. Especially when they're being taught to mistrust the "lame stream media" so any kernel of truth is seen as some type of commie distortion.
- 2 votes
#4 - Wed Sep 15, 2010 12:28 AM EDTI had a lawyer friend once who said, "The truth is what the jury believes." Guess the same goes for public opinion.
- 2 votes
#5 - Wed Sep 15, 2010 12:34 AM EDT"The truth is what the jury believes."
Which, even though we have more per capita in prison than almost any other country is still what people fear about our justice system. :-)
Eyes getting bleary from election-night tab-hopping. Have a good night!
- 2 votes
#6 - Wed Sep 15, 2010 12:41 AM EDTYou're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |
