Tea party group to Bachmann: Quit the presidential race

WOW!

I didn't see this one coming!! But it gets crazier! Below are snippets taking from an article from CNN Political Tracker's website:

"The strength of the Tea Party is all individual's opinions are valued but that no single leader speaks for it."

...

I think it's pretty obvious that Michele Bachmann is about Michele Bachmann," American Majority Executive Director Matt Robbins said.

...

"Let's face it: she's a back-bencher and has been a back bencher congressperson for years. This is not a serious presidential campaign."

In explaining his claim that Bachmann isn't running a serious campaign, Robbins dismissed Bachmann's straw poll win. "They're not accurate reads," Robbins said. "That's not the structure, that's not the money, that's not the seriousness, that's not the gravitas, you know, any of the real big league things that one needs in order to mount a truly credible, nationwide presidential campaign."

The executive director also cited Bachmann's recent staffing and fundraising misfortunes.

Click to expand...

But here's the big kicker...Tea Partiers/Conservatives/Bachmann supporters, hold onto your butts!...

The group explains another reason it believes Bachmann should quit the GOP presidential race.

"Bachmann's resulting plunge in the polls is troubling for the tea party, not because 'one of their own' is losing her footing, but because the longer Bachmann stays in the race, the more likely we will see her shift to the right," Ryun wrote in the statement.

Click to expand...

:shock: WHAT? Michelle Bachmann's as far-right as they come, IMO. Is this Tea Party group trying to say they don't want her to shift to the Right at all, but rather become more or less Moderate? I'm alittle confused because of what follows. Again, from the article:

"This rightward shift will come as the campaign works to hold on to its more conservative base of support in advance of the release of Bachmann's new book next month."

Ryun continued: "There is nothing wrong with addressing your base during a campaign. However, I suspect that we will hear more from her about social issues and religion to accomplish that goal. As an evangelical who is deeply pro-life, I can say that while many inside the tea party movement are socially conservative, social issues are not what drive the Tea Party."

Click to expand...

Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot??? (Y'all veterans know what I mean...) But then there's this...

"When you're running for president, you're appealing to more than just tea party people. And you have to answer questions on other issues as well. So I'm not surprised when any of the candidates are talking about the other issues because those are things that come up in presidential campaigns."

Click to expand...

What position is Bachmann suppose to take? Seems there's confusion among some factions of the Tea Party leadership on which way they want Bachmann to go...far right or somewhere in the middle.

Stay tuned...

I think the Tea Party is tired of being embarrassed by her. Maybe part of it also is that they believe that with her in the race, she takes away from Cain??? Dont know, but its definitely interesting.

BamaBrat,

Interesting take. I spoke with my coworkers about this moments ago and they said the exact same thing.

My guess is te TP wants the hard-core Bachmann supporters to get behind Cain now that his popularity is dropping. I won't be surprised to see Perry get a similar request from the TP. The only chance they have of getting a TP candidate for POTUS is to get all their members behind Cain at this point.

I suspect this individual does not speak for all the tea party groups or individuals in those groups or even lone individuals who do not associate with the groups but still sympathize with the cause.

Haymarket,

That may be, but how do you think those voters who still support the movement will react to this? Think of the situation in these terms:

If voters already view House Tea Party members as extreme far-Right conservatives and one facet of their movement is saying that even their most Right-wing political candidate needs to go still further Right, how can this one Tea Party group calling Bachmann either a "selfish" candidate looking out for her own interests or a candidate who speaks in favor of issues that have traditionally been Republican staples benefit their movement? Don't you think this muddies the waters and confuses their followers?

Seems to me one side is saying "Go further Right, Bachmann" while another is saying "she needs to come more towards the middle". And if that's the case, are they then in some way telling Bachmann to forego her own beliefs just to covet votes?

OV

I honestly do not know. So much of the tea party seems to be schizophrenic and takes positions that make no sense to anyone but themselves or fellow true believers. My own brother in law is one of them and spouts terribly contradictory crap that just makes your head spin. He said that tea party means TAXED ENOUGH ALREADY so I asked him about current tax rates and he was woefully ignorant. When I pointed out how 47% - including himself - paid no federal income tax and it would harder to lower their taxes - he just got angry and refused to discuss it.

Here in Michigan they all follow Dick Morris blindly when he was brought in to lead the Prosperity fight against a government international crossing from Detroit to Windsor despite the reality that ALL 100% of the cost is paid for my the Canadians. Morris pockets big lobbying money and they all follow him and drool like zombies. A cool billion dollars would be provided - at no cost to Michigan - to rebuild some roads that are in woeful need of repair - but they reject that despite bitching about roads is the state sport here.

They complain about the middle class but yet support right wing politicians whose very policies help destroy the middle class.

I cannot explain what they will do or why they will do it because they do not follow any logical pattern which makes sense.

haymarket said:

OV

I honestly do not know. So much of the tea party seems to be schizophrenic and takes positions that make no sense to anyone but themselves or fellow true believers. My own brother in law is one of them and spouts terribly contradictory crap that just makes your head spin. He said that tea party means TAXED ENOUGH ALREADY so I asked him about current tax rates and he was woefully ignorant. When I pointed out how 47% - including himself - paid no federal income tax and it would harder to lower their taxes - he just got angry and refused to discuss it.

Here in Michigan they all follow Dick Morris blindly when he was brought in to lead the Prosperity fight against a government international crossing from Detroit to Windsor despite the reality that ALL 100% of the cost is paid for my the Canadians. Morris pockets big lobbying money and they all follow him and drool like zombies. A cool billion dollars would be provided - at no cost to Michigan - to rebuild some roads that are in woeful need of repair - but they reject that despite bitching about roads is the state sport here.

They complain about the middle class but yet support right wing politicians whose very policies help destroy the middle class.

I cannot explain what they will do or why they will do it because they do not follow any logical pattern which makes sense.

Click to expand...

Welcome to the world of propaganda, misinformation and :spin: Isn't it great!?

Objective Voice said:

Ryun continued: "There is nothing wrong with addressing your base during a campaign. However, I suspect that we will hear more from her about social issues and religion to accomplish that goal. As an evangelical who is deeply pro-life, I can say that while many inside the tea party movement are socially conservative, social issues are not what drive the Tea Party."

Click to expand...

Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot??? (Y'all veterans know what I mean...) But then there's this...

Click to expand...

Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot!!!!!

You mean to say that the Tea Party people are actually saying the EXACT SAME ****ING THING Tea Party supporters have been saying for MONTHS now but is the opposite of what Liberals continue to proclaim the Tea Party is "really" about?

OMG! I'm....I'm SHOCKED! How DARE the Tea Party. How DARE they actually state what drives them based on what ACTUALLY drives them which is evident based on the few things put out that are actual unifying views of the movement rather than what Liberals say the movement cares about. Who gave them permission to do that! Don't they know liberals have been saying for months now its just the religious right and social conservative whacko's in a different outfit that is exactly the same thing as it always is? Don't they know they're supposed to be ignoring reality, what they've ACTUALLY put out as a national pledge, what the one particular style of issues that all tea parties agree on in general theory is, what the movement is actually about? They're just supposed to be what the liberals say they are.

I mean seriously.

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot man, Whiskey Tango Foxtrot

Seriously Tea Party representatives, get your **** straight...stop repeating reality and the same things your supporters have been saying all year and start saying what the staple liberal misrepresentation is or you're going to keep making liberals go Whiskey Tango Foxtrot

Yeah, for anyone who actually is a part of the movement or follows it closely or is able to disagree with it but objectively look at it it's been clear...since day one...that its fiscal and governmental issues that push and drive the movement. Are social conservatives attracted to it? Yes, because many social conservatives are ALSO fiscal conservatives. However that no more drives the Tea Parties national agenda as a movement than the fact that a bunch of Pro-Gun Control people also tend to be Anti-War people; yet you don't have people going "Whiskey Tango Foxtrot" if an Anti-War protester states the Anti-War movement isn't pushed by gun control.

I actually think this is amazingly smart and correct move by a Tea Party group to take. Huntsman, Paul, and Cain likely all three are just as much in line with the Tea Party as Bachmann in regards to what drives the Tea Party and all three...yes, Ron Paul included...are more electable than Bachmann. Hopefully more of the various Tea Party organizations around the country begin to take a similar stand. You need a candidate that can both appeal to the Tea Party and OTHER constituents who don't find the Tea Party issues to be the most important things to them.

I read this and it immediately made sense to me and seemed completely logical. It also is no shock why certain people on this thread who have presented a misrepresented, hyperbolic, stereotyped, and horribly hyper partisan and biased incorrect description of the Tea Party for months are shocked and confused and see this as schizophrenic and confusing. So many on the left have done so much bull****ting and so much mental gymnastics over misrepresenting the Tea Party as an entire movement that they've actually bought into their twisted carnival show presentation of them as gospel truth and thus when things happen that makes sense entirely with what their actual views are, and have been, it shocks them because it doesn't match the doppleganger they've created in their mind.

(Sadly this post could've had Zyphlin's Law applied to it as well, but it'd be borderline problematic so I'll just go....Fish Sticks)

Zyphlin said:

(Sadly this post could've had Zyphlin's Law applied to it as well, but it'd be borderline problematic so I'll just go....Fish Sticks)

Click to expand...

What is Zyphlin's law?

A question for the TPs among us: If the TP is all about fiscal and government issues, why are they not promoting Libertarian candidates instead of people like Bachmann & Perry - candidates that are both pretty entrenched in legislating social issues along Biblical lines?

It's all funnier than ****. The GOP is a bigger cluster**** than the Democrats, and I didn't think that was possible. Not that I care for either faction of Corpgov.

A hell of a lot of people here were slobbering and frothing over Bachmann as if she were the second coming. Remember that? Need I name names? All y'all know who you/they are. After a couple of months, everyone crept back toward Palin, the original presidential bimbo. Then they saw lipstick writing on the wall and suddenly discovered how wonderful Perry was...until they discovered that Perry is more full of **** than a Christmas goose. Suddenly it was back to Romney, "everyone's first second choice for president". Even Republicans have a difficult time considering Romney. I can't blame them either. Lately everyone has run to Cain, primarily because he isn't Romney.

This is going to be an interesting race. Most people have seen through Perry and know that he is pretty much another George W. No one wants to repeat buggering again and with good reason. That leaves Romney, because he has scads of money and money is what counts most. It leaves Cain, who is beginning to come apart now that the heat is on. And finally there is Perry. Jesus Christ! Rick Perry. OMG! How did we ever end up with another lightweight from Texas?

Surprise, surprise! Perry is the choice of the powers that be. Somebody right this down. 28 October, Risky names Perry as the GOP best man (gulp!) to beat Obama. Perry against popular demand.

Cold Highway said:

What is Zyphlin's law?

Click to expand...

Any political discussion can somehow, some way be related back to South Park

Objective Voice said:

Welcome to the world of propaganda, misinformation and :spin: Isn't it great!?

Click to expand...

Nice of you to notice it here also.

Frolicking Dinosaurs said:

A question for the TPs among us: If the TP is all about fiscal and government issues, why are they not promoting Libertarian candidates instead of people like Bachmann & Perry - candidates that are both pretty entrenched in legislating social issues along Biblical lines?

Click to expand...

Because some TP groups have become neocon/theocon groups who dont want to get rid of the warfare state which Paul, Johnson and other Libertarians advocate in addition Paul views all human life no matter where they're from as precious.

Texas Right To Life Endorses Perry | Lew Rockwell's Political Theatre

Note: For the record I dont trust either group

Zyphlin said:

Any political discussion can somehow, some way be related back to South Park

Click to expand...

Ah thank you.

Frolicking Dinosaurs said:

A question for the TPs among us: If the TP is all about fiscal and government issues, why are they not promoting Libertarian candidates instead of people like Bachmann & Perry - candidates that are both pretty entrenched in legislating social issues along Biblical lines?

Click to expand...

Supporting? Both came out all gangbusters like they understood the problems and were gave a look. People should simply know what people believe even before they have a chance to state it?

I see where there is a real effort to remove Lugar of Indiana even though he has been a reliable social conservative simply for his vote to pass TARP. Many of us have been noting this for months. It's about things like TARP. I'm sure many will still not get it even though they and the Tea Party would likely agree in a vast majority of cases.

Frolicking Dinosaurs said:

A question for the TPs among us: If the TP is all about fiscal and government issues, why are they not promoting Libertarian candidates instead of people like Bachmann & Perry - candidates that are both pretty entrenched in legislating social issues along Biblical lines?

Click to expand...

Because they actually are interested in having their movement have a legitimate shot at potentially having electoral success.

As big of a long shot as Bachmann is, the difference between her and Mitt Romney is about 1/10th the difference between her and the most likely Libertarian candidate.

Realistically, practically, we have a two party system in this country. It allows for more than that, but in reality going with a third party on a significant national stage is a bit like pissing into the ocean. Rather than take a purely idealistic stance that they know is absolutely futile, the movement prefers to actually work within the system and practice that our countries elections generally run in and that means siding with either the Republicans or the Democrats. Naturally, the Republicans...while not entirely, across the board in line with Tea Party ideas...are closer to it than Democrats in general. As such, it primarily goes with that party (Though it doesn't always).

The Tea Party isn't against social conservative. Its not for social conservative. Its neutral, or essentially politically agnostic, towards social issues by and large as a movement (save for perhaps immigration). While its members, on an individual level, may sway one way or another...the movement as a whole has no real stance on such things. So movement wise, whether or not Bachmann is uber social or not is a bit irrelevant...but again, back comes a bit of reality and pragmatism such as displayed by the person in the OP, who recognizes that Bachmann isn't the only person fiscally in line with the Tea Party that is running but does have more baggage that may damage her electoral chances than those other candidates may have.

Now, as a loosely organized national movement that has individualized groups all across the nation you will find some divergence. For example, a tea party group in say...deep rural texas...may be very focused on Social Issues as well because 100% of its particular group is very social. On the flip side, a Tea Party group in New Hampshire may not even mention social issues, or even may push for candidates that are moderate on social issues but great on everything else, because 100% of their membership is socially moderate. However, the key similarity both groups would have is the one binding thing across all the Tea Party...and that is supporting Fiscal Conservatism.

Which is why when talking about the national movement of the "Tea Party" rather than any individual localized group, trying to push it as some kind of social movement...or even a movement where social issues are just as important...is just horribly incorrect and doesn't get backed up by things such as the Contract From America (one of the few things supported by most of the tea party groups across America) or an honest examination of the commonality amongst the various groups rather than cherry picking a few of the inconsistencies of various smaller portions of it.

Thanks Zyphlin. I can see your point. It was just puzzling that the beliefs would be so similar, but the candidate wasn't considered.

My belief that the TP was social conservative has come from attending rallies in TN & GA. There was a lot of signage that indicated agreement with Biblically-based social policies on topics like abortion, homosexuality, public prayer, etc.

Frolicking Dinosaurs said:

Thanks Zyphlin. I can see your point. It was just puzzling that the beliefs would be so similar, but the candidate wasn't considered.

My belief that the TP was social conservative has come from attending rallies in TN & GA. There was a lot of signage that indicated agreement with Biblically-based social policies on topics like abortion, homosexuality, public prayer, etc.

Click to expand...

Not really surprising based on location, as you're looking at more "social conservative" hot beds in the south. Additionally, you're basing it off signs which...while there are many...generally are held up by a minority of people. What I mean is generally at any rally, anywhere, you generally have multiple people for every one typically holding a sign.

Take Occupy Wall Street just for an example. Based on signs and what I had read, I thought the issue was that 1% of the people had 40% of the wealth, and I pointed that out asking if that's their issue why not also protesting over at say athletic stadiums or actors houses who also make obscene amount of CEO type money. I was then told it was about corporations causing a financial crisis, which is different than the 40% by 1% thing. Then again I look at signs and I can see it protesting Bradley Mannings imprisonment, the Tea Party in general, anti-Obama people, Anti the Fed, and Chris Christie. That's just from one website. Going to a few others Fox News, Police Brutality, Jews, The War on Terror and Military Spending, and others.

I'm not going to say many tea partiers don't care about social issues. They absolutely, absolutely do. I also won't even deny that there may be some individual tea partiers that care more about social issues and came to the movement not because of fiscal reasons but because of social reasons based on them misunderstanding the groups intentions based on the misrepresentation of it that's out there. However, I think when you're talking about a nation wide movement made up of tens of thousands of people looking at it through a micro aspect to determine what the macro vision and purpose of the movement is does not work as anything but a means of wrongfully depicting it.

By the way, I'm not saying you're necessarily one that's intentionally wrongfully depicting it. I think with the way they're presented at times and depending on your location and what you personally see around you, its easy to possibly get a false impression. However, I would suggest that if someone doesn't actually thoroughly look at the movement on a macro, national level and try to objectively judge it then they shouldn't attempt to significantly speak with definite tone about the purpose or intent of what the tea party is. My comments are more towards those who either knowingly misrepresent, or who have repeatedly been shown or pointed to the larger scale state of the movement, and yet routinely revert back to purposefully taking micro incidents to use as macro representations.

Bachman is blaming rick perry for the group coming out against her...

Bachmann blames Perry for tea party trashing - Maggie Haberman - POLITICO.com

Ive watched this primary very closely and its been a carnival...I dont remember any primary campaign being more of a collision of disengenous chameleons in my political lifetime....999 oops 909....20% flat tax for the rich everyone else can use the OLD tax code....I mean wtf....none of these republicans should be president
The two most honest of the entire crew....are Gingrich and Santorum....the two <gasp> rinos....the teaparty is far righting itself into oblivion....like I always said they would

Cold Highway said:

What is Zyphlin's law?

Click to expand...

Hell, I just want to know what Zyplin was trying to say. He no more clarified what Tea Partiers really want than the arguments made in my OP. So, perhaps someone else can dial down the rhetorical rants just alittle bit...dumbie it down for me some...and explain what the Tea Party sees as different political goals that separate a Michelle Bachmann from say a Herman Cain or Ron Paul.

From what I was able to discern, this particular Tea Party group sees Bachmann as "self-indulgent...out for her own self-interest" rather than projecting the interests of the Tea Party. Zyplin says the Tea Party is about "limited government...out of control federal spending" yet hasn't Bachmann made these same claims while out on the campaing trail? Help me to understand where the dividing line is between the Tea Partiers and Bachmann because aside from her constant rants of "I want to create profit," I really don't see any other differences between what she stands for and what the Tea Party stands for. So, help me to better understand the TP Movement and what they view as a divide between their political message and that of Michelle Bachmann because I just don't see it. I'm trying to, but I truly am confused on this issue.

jasonxe said:

Click to expand...

Is it just me or does she look all botoxed to the hilt?

lpast said:

Bachman is blaming rick perry for the group coming out against her...

Bachmann blames Perry for tea party trashing - Maggie Haberman - POLITICO.com

Ive watched this primary very closely and its been a carnival...I dont remember any primary campaign being more of a collision of disengenous chameleons in my political lifetime....999 oops 909....20% flat tax for the rich everyone else can use the OLD tax code....I mean wtf....none of these republicans should be president
The two most honest of the entire crew....are Gingrich and Santorum....the two <gasp> rinos....the teaparty is far righting itself into oblivion....like I always said they would

Click to expand...

That's just it!?! One side of the TP movement says Bachmann's too far Right and will shift [more to the Center] towards a more moderate stance. Okay...and that's a bad thing? While others say she should...what? Embrace views more along the lines of Ron Paul? I don't get it? Ron Paul may have some good views, but ultimately I'm afraid that if he got into the White House he'd make the entire nation poor overnight with his far, over-reaching 1-year plan to solve the nation's economic problems. We're not in the same position as Greece. We don't need to take such austerity measures. But we do need to pay down our national debt and reduce our deficit. And maybe we do need to audit the FedResv. I agree that we do need to get rid of some federal agencies that have overlap where two agencies are doing very similar things; same goes with getting rid of outdated regulations. But Congressional Republicans and Democrats should be working on these things TOGETHER. Besides, hasn't the President also called for Congress to do these very same things?

I just don't understand what the TP group that's upset with Bachmann sees as so different from their cause and what she's been preaching on the campaign trail.