You haven't proven anything. Heck, you haven't even successfully disputed anything that writer said. All you've done is trotted out a poll or two.
The fact is, if the primary had been as originally scheduled, Cruz wouldn't have won...not even in a run off. But thanks to Obama Cruz got a lot more time to campaign...and the results are as we see.
He's an ideologue and a radical. "Self-restraint" really isn't their thing.
The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected.
It's GREAT to be me. --- "45% liberal/55% conservative"
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'nice doggy" until you can find a gun.
A careful and considerate analysis of the status quo is required, not a kneejerk response such as is the tea party's. If perhaps you are able to acknowledge that then I think you are thinking a lot deeper than most of it's supporters. I know what they are! Their base is in libertarianism which in my opinion has been coopted away from that persuasion into serving the interests of the Koch brothers and their political ilk. An ilk that is totally concerned with lower taxation for them, not lower taxation for the ordinary guy. That's an impossibility, which incidentally you appear to understand quite well. And along with that there is the racist element. If you can't concede that then indeed we have nothing much to talk about. Only the degree to which it infests the tea parties is debatable.
But let me return to my reference to 'kneejerk' reactions. I believe that a large part of the tea party is involving themselves in just that, even though I think that it's also race motivated. Taxes has become a buzzword that is harangued over with no real understanding of what it means to far too many of them. In fact, they're not mostly compalaining about their own tax base as they are complaining about the unequal tax base. Hence they scream of a fair tax and equal taxation without even giving an honest thought as to what the consequences would be.
Aside from that, I'm very well versed in the libertarian agenda and the supplyside agenda as I took part on the supplyside forum and Jude Wanniski's talkshop for over ten years. Don't feel you need to talk in elementary terms with me on those topics. I know all about the 'pie in the sky' ideas of both. Or in truth 'that' because in an honest analysis, they're one and the same.
I would suggest that America's problem isn't one of spending. That's my opening bid. The problem is one of not enough taxation and too many exemptions, tax dodges, earmarks to serve the wealthy, and so on. Simply put, I'm not afraid to suggest that it's not a case of the middle class and the poor trying to steal the money of the rich, it's a case of the middle class and poor trying to take back enough of what has been stolen from them in order to live a satisfactory lifestyle.
And of course, I'm talking from a position of relative success as a Canadian. I think you would serve yourself well to give some consideration to what does work and what is obviously not working. Patriotism and pride needs to be placed on the back burner for a while. Not only is it destructive to your cause, it's being used by the wealthy to destroy your cause.
The difference is you want more taxes for more spending cuz, thats how you roll. I want more taxes to pay down the debt and a radically gutted federal government with social services and spending placed back where they belong...at the individual state levels.
17 trillion in debt and climbing. Unemployment still a scourge and new jobs are 'part time' jobs. We are not on a positive path and WONT be until people no longer view ever increasing debt as a viable option for spending. Period. Whats pathetic is that you and people you would marginalize and villainize the few people in this country that are actually trying to create a fiscally responsible future. But then...**** the future...its not like you have to pay for it.
I consider your argument of putting it back at the state level as opposed to federal spending to be a dishonest argument. That is simply because it's an argument for less social spending in states of the rightist persuasion. Or in other words, the dismal socially irresponsible hell that is now Texas would become even more so.
If you want a rational discussion then act rational. Telling me that I want more spending is because that's the way I roll is nothing but meaningless drivel. I've made the attempt to refrain from the derogatory labelling of the tea party now, show that you can rise above yours too.
If you are able to do that then I will start by telling you that Obama, through force or otherwise, has embarked on a mission to lower your country's debt. If you are honest you will admit that he has been successful in doing just that. His ACA would accomplish just that and so any adversity to it is totally irrational and political hate based.
Another issue that needs discussing is the notion I've heard lately of the divide between the north and the south has something to do with all your country's problems. It's the idea that the south never did accept defeat and is still trying to fight the civil war all over again. Considering the mentality of lowlife trash in your country's south, I think the idea has some merit.
A black president is just totally out of the question. That's your country's biggest problem by far.