Is the Tea Party the seed of a new third party?

[96Qowner]

One could just as well ask what the "Democratic" plan is for North Korea, or what the "Republican" plan is for the Pakistan floods. Do such specific platforms exist? Will ALL Democrats and Republicans agree with those Party plans? Nope.

There's now a cohesive voting bloc of 20% of the population that gather together in the hundreds of thousands to listen to the same speakers and to support the same candidates. They must have Something in common. They're not a Party - they're a very large voting block in support of individual candidates. They want to elect people who will leash this runaway government of ours. If there's a political Party in their future, it will emerge in the legislature as these smaller issues are argued amongst the new electees. But they'll be working together on one principle - no more runaway government.

Update:
The Associated Press did a poll from Sep 8-13. It shows 29% favorable to the Tea Party, 34% agree with its "positions" and 28% are "supporters". (About halfway down the page). Also check out the relative support for either Party.

http://www.ap-gfkpoll.com/pdf/AP-GfK%20 ... 1510_1.pdf

[stebo0728]

One could just as well ask what the "Democratic" plan is for North Korea, or what the "Republican" plan is for the Pakistan floods. Do such specific platforms exist? Will ALL Democrats and Republicans agree with those Party plans? Nope.

There's now a cohesive voting bloc of 20% of the population that gather together in the hundreds of thousands to listen to the same speakers and to support the same candidates. They must have Something in common. They're not a Party - they're a very large voting block in support of individual candidates. They want to elect people who will leash this runaway government of ours. If there's a political Party in their future, it will emerge in the legislature as these smaller issues are argued amongst the new electees. But they'll be working together on one principle - no more runaway government.

Ill also add that they are a large block of people that aren't put-out by those pesky primary and run-off elections. People who actually care enough to cast a vote, even when you might miss out on something else you could be doing.

[96Qowner]

Another link:

Look at the astonishing numbers in the Rasmussen poll released last week. Nearly seven in 10 respondents (68%) want a smaller government, lower taxes and fewer services. The party breakdown: GOP, 88%; Democrats, 44%; and Other, 74%. In short, the independent voters who decide national elections have moved into the anti-spending column. I don't think they'll leave any time soon.

In a note on last week's poll, Rasmussen points out that the only time it recorded a higher shrink-the-government number, at 70%, was in August 2006. That was just ahead of the famous off-year election in which Republican voters withheld support for their party's free-spending members in Congress.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... on_LEADTop

When 44% of Democrats want smaller government, ya gotta wonder about the future political climate for the two Parties.

[IBCoupe]

None of that, 96Q, is really convincing evidence that the Tea Party is anything more than an overall shift in public opinion. I stand by: the emergence of a real third party out of a moment of economic anger is highly unlikely, because they're a one-issue group of people. So there are a few issues that two major parties don't have a general stance on - I'm pretty sure they have stances on way more than one issue.

[stebo0728]

Havent most new major parties orginated on one issue? Then expanded from there?

[IBCoupe]

How many "new major parties" have we had? I don't consider the Green, Constitution, or Libertarian parties (the latter two, admittedly aren't just "one issue") to be major parties.

[96Qowner]

Actually, what I'm suggesting is that the Republican Party could remake itself - it would essentially be a new Party.

I sense that you take strong partisan stances. Are you with the 25% that strongly support Obama and the Dems, one of the 44% who want smaller gov't, or in the other 31%? There really isn't a ton of support for the course we're presently on. After this election, Republicans are going to have to have a sober conversation about courage and principle. I don't see Democrats capturing many of the Tea Party folks, but a voting bloc of that size could remake the Republican Party into a fundamentally Lbertarian party, which I think would capture most of the Independents, leaving Democrats with their hardcore 25% and a smattering of other fractured special interest blocs.

[IBCoupe]

I'm a contrarian. As an intellectual pursuit, I try to take a strong stand against whatever it is that's popularly argued. It's a little selfish to use other people, but, then again, what isn't?

I think what you've just said is a lot more likely than what was supposed in the link that was posted. The Tea Party is, in all reality, a subset of Republicans that were always there that finally found themselves a voice. We already see the Republicans shifting (with some internal disagreement) to accomodate that, but I'm not yet convinced that this is going to be a long-term thing.

[96Qowner]

LOL, I can relate. I'm a natural debater and annoy most of the people around me with my f'n Devil's advocacy.

[audtatious]

the magic carpet i rode to come to this country did infact have a dictionary.

a lack of evidence does not a point make.

You want evidence. You don't state of what. I respond with definition. You respond that it's lacking.

So, what evidence are you looking for? Violence? You are correct, Dem violence isn't at all their rallies....but they do like to spread it around GOP rallies....like the SEIU guys who attacked Kenneth Gladney at an event, the Kerry-Edwards staffers who slashed tires of GOP rented vehicles, the anti-GOP protests at RNC's which end with stores front vandalized, etc etc etc. Sure, it's a stretch...usually it's agitators and the fringe but when you compare typical GOP rallies against DEM rallies which side is getting violent? Hell, since this thread is about the Tea Party has there been any Tea party initiated violence at all? Other than members supposedly spitting on someone (not proven, even with a 100k reward for proof) any problem can be directly attributed to those on the left.

I guess Dems are just more passionate. The only nutty-passionate I can think of on the right are those far right nut jobs that protest abortion clinics.

Then again, I'm just some nutty old right wing nut job.

[audtatious]

The difference between those "Dem groups" and the Tea Party is that nobody's supposing that those Dem Groups will be a third party in two years. The Democratic Party had more than one specific plan to meet that goal.

I have seen no initiative of the Tea Party to become a third party group. What I see is an initiative to get the progressive GOP party members to leave. The general consensus is why should the current GOP be voted back in power when they were FAIL under Bush?

And it wasn't even specifically about having a plan to shrink the government upon which I based all of my criticism. Suppose they have a plan and they institute it in the first month. Congratulations, you've just shrunk the size of government and saved the US economy! What are you gonna do next? The problem I see with supposing that the Tea Party will become a real third party is that the response "We're gonna go to Disneyworld" seems like it would fit just as well as anything - as others have pointed out, they don't have any other coherent platform.

Do you really think they would have the power after Nov to do anything? There will still be a Dem President for 2 more years and there won't be a super-majority. So why all the fuss when nothing will happen but positioning?

What about stem cell research? What about North Korea's upcoming new leader? What about the Pakistani floods? So, maybe you don't have a step-by-step plan. That's forgivable. But not even having a coherent message about the principles upon which you want to stand? That's not. You can't have a real third party without a whole worldview.

If the Tea Party doesn't come up with a cohesive platform that extends beyond a single issue, they'll never become any more prominent than the Green Party.

THIRD PARTY NOT FOUND

Why would the Tea party want to turn into a third party when third parties are always a failure and their main goal is to take back the GOP?

[srellim234]

Do you even realize that the GOP was a third party?

[IBCoupe]

I have seen no initiative of the Tea Party to become a third party group. What I see is an initiative to get the progressive GOP party members to leave. The general consensus is why should the current GOP be voted back in power when they were FAIL under Bush?

There's some supposition out there that it could happen. I agree with you that there's no initiative, and that a third party is unlikely, but the issue has been raised.

Do you really think they would have the power after Nov to do anything? There will still be a Dem President for 2 more years and there won't be a super-majority. So why all the fuss when nothing will happen but positioning?

The article linked to the thread supposed that a Tea Party candidate for President could run and win in 2012. I apologize if I wasn't clear about that premise.

THIRD PARTY NOT FOUND

Why would the Tea party want to turn into a third party when third parties are always a failure and their main goal is to take back the GOP?

See my above responses? Again, I'm of the opinion that they won't become a third party, but it's been argued that they could. That's the context within which I'm making these arguments.

[IBCoupe]

Do you even realize that the GOP was a third party?

Yes. But I don't see the Whigs around anymore, do you? It's not really a third party if it simply replaces one of the two major parties, now is it?

And, maybe you're aware, but I am definitely: there's a "New Whig Party" but they're hardly a major party.

[stebo0728]

Im much more comfortable with the Tea Party the way it is now, people concerned with issues. So what if their sparse issues? So what if they arent as completely coherent as "were cramming this healthcare down your throat whether you like it or not" I abhor political parties, and would much rather we didnt have any, that people could simply present themselves and their issues and positions and let them stand as they are, and stop giving lip service to a "convention" or "mandate" or "manifesto" or whatever you like to call it. Everyone has their own opinion and positions, and regardless of what they claim at election time, they act solely on these opinions and positions. The party system aids in masking these opinions and positions, and replacing them with party rhetoric for 3 months until the election is decided, then the electorate resumes their original intent as if the "party convention" and the words spoken there never happened. Movements like the tea party excite me because it shows people becoming more independently motivated about things rather than just towing the old party line. These people dont like the people currently carrying their banner, so they are finding new people, and not caving into fears of "electability" If we had put independence from GB up for a vote, it would have never passed, it would have been labeled unpassable, but dammit we still did it.

[IBCoupe]

I'm okay with it, too, Stebo; I'm just saying it's really a stretch to try and predict that they'll become a major third party.

[stebo0728]

I'm okay with it, too, Stebo; I'm just saying it's really a stretch to try and predict that they'll become a major third party.

I agree with you there, and honestly I hope that they dont, I feel that they dont want to, and I pray that people are finally waking up to the nasty nature of partisan politics. If we can just tackle lobbyists next ...

[srellim234]

Do you even realize that the GOP was a third party?

Yes. But I don't see the Whigs around anymore, do you? It's not really a third party if it simply replaces one of the two major parties, now is it?

And, maybe you're aware, but I am definitely: there's a "New Whig Party" but they're hardly a major party.

IB- I was actually referring to aud's comment that third parties are always failures. You can argue that the GOP has become a dismal failure for American citizens today but as a third party spinoff it's been pretty successful at getting some people elected to office and becoming one of the two majors.

As for the Modern Whig Party, I'm the one that first brought it up on these forums. They're definitely not major and may very well never become one. A more likely scenario is the Libertarian Party or a moderate party taking the middle ground route to becoming a major.

[AZhitman]

As for the Modern Whig Party, I'm the one that first brought it up on these forums. They're definitely not major and may very well never become one. A more likely scenario is the Libertarian Party or a moderate party taking the middle ground route to becoming a major.

I remember this.

And I agree that the likely progression will be a wholesale rejection of this colossally-idiotic "progressive" movement and a return to a more centrist position.

The lefty defections we're seeing over tax increases, healthcare and immigration reform? Yep. They'll be the vanguards, joined by socially liberal / fiscally conservative small govt-type people such as myself (and many of you).

[IBCoupe]

Those aren't lefties. Those are Democrats. Democrat =/= Lefty. Democrats =/= A cohesive group.

[audtatious]

There's some supposition out there that it could happen. I agree with you that there's no initiative, and that a third party is unlikely, but the issue has been raised.

Was it raised by someone high in the "Tea Party" or as some comment via a news caster? Would be curious because I see no way in hell they would be successful in creating a third party.

The article linked to the thread supposed that a Tea Party candidate for President could run and win in 2012. I apologize if I wasn't clear about that premise.

Ah...OK. I think it's a moot point as they would be running under the Republican ticket. "Tea Party Candidate" is still someone within the GOP going for a GOP "job" (as seen by GOP support of TP candidates who have kicked out typical GOPers). We all know that having the Tea Party turn 3rd party would make the Dems quite happy as the split of the Republican vote would ensure a long-term Dem majority in the Gov.

[IBCoupe]

Was it raised by someone high in the "Tea Party" or as some comment via a news caster? Would be curious because I see no way in hell they would be successful in creating a third party.

Look at the title of this thread. Look at the link Srellim posted earlier in this thread. If nothing else, it's the topic of this discussion.

And I agree with you, I think the answer to the question posed in the title of the thread is a resounding "No."

Ah...OK. I think it's a moot point as they would be running under the Republican ticket. "Tea Party Candidate" is still someone within the GOP going for a GOP "job" (as seen by GOP support of TP candidates who have kicked out typical GOPers). We all know that having the Tea Party turn 3rd party would make the Dems quite happy as the split of the Republican vote would ensure a long-term Dem majority in the Gov.

I agree 100%.

[audtatious]

Look at the title of this thread. Look at the link Srellim posted earlier in this thread. If nothing else, it's the topic of this discussion.

And I agree with you, I think the answer to the question posed in the title of the thread is a resounding "No."

I re-read what Srellim posted as he was questioning it.....but I've heard the same question posed elsewhere on CNN or via some news report as well and was referring to that, I should have been more clear.

[IBCoupe]

I'm not surprised that it's coming up other places. I'm still with you on what the answer to the question is.

And with that, the conversation puttered out. Quick! Do something!

DEATH PANELS!!!!!!!!

[audtatious]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/200 ... t-already/

lolz

[IBCoupe]

Moonies!

[audtatious]

[heliochrome85]

they bestow great honor on all of our famries

[stebo0728]

The one on the left drive a Cadirac Devire

[smockers83]

If anyone wants to see the real Tea Party, watch CNBC. I know it's a financial news channel, but watch it anyway, particularly Larry Kudlow. Don't watch the BS that's spewed over the other channels (FNC, msnbc, CNN alike). If you want politics, watch some of the op ed shows on CNBC. All politics is tied to financial and economic discussion and CNBC is where all of it's at. Every other news channel will try to spin things their way. CNBC does a relatively good job at bringing out the facts and applying economic and financial principles to tell you what's good and bad.