The problem with this assessment is that the "Tea Party" won't be on the ballot come general election time.
Where did I suggest otherwise? My statement was in regards to support from the movement for particular candidates first during the Primary season and later during the regular election.
Due to the disparate differences in views regarding non-tea party issues held amongst members of the movement there is going to be two effects. First, during the primaries, there's not going to be a singular candidate able to galvinize a strong majority of Tea Party support across the entire nation (unless it gets down to like 2 candidates). Second, during the general, there's a chance that the full support of the movement won't come out for a candidate due to disagreements with their stance on some issues or on campaign style could cause members of the movement to vote 3rd party or stay home.
The Tea Party MOVEMENT, IE the movements ideology, is a rather singular entity of fiscal and governmental conservatism. The one common denominator amongst all Tea Partiers is generally some sort of firm to strong support on those things. The issue of course comes in that fiscal and governmental issues don't make up the whole of what our Government does, and as such its unlikely that Tea Partiers will have ONLY views that are part of the movement. Instead, as you said, they will have a wide range of secondary (or perhaps primary, with the tea party views being secondary) views that make up their political identity.
That’s actually my point. People expecting the “perfect Tea Party candidate” or expecting the Tea Party to have a similar effect on the presidential election as the movement has in 2010 are going to be disappointed. Presidential elections reduced the localized focus of fitting a candidate to constituents and require a person to perhaps reach for broader appeal at the sake of losing appeal from other groups. As such, I think the Tea Party movement is going to have a significantly smaller impact on the Presidential election this year then some may’ve expected after 2010 as the other positions a candidate may or may not take is likely not to sit well with a fair portion of tea partiers causing voter apathy or defection.
The problem with this assessment is that the "Tea Party" won't be on the ballot come general election time.
Where did I suggest otherwise? My statement was in regards to support from the movement for particular candidates first during the Primary season and later during the regular election.
Due to the disparate differences in views regarding non-tea party issues held amongst members of the movement there is going to be two effects. First, during the primaries, there's not going to be a singular candidate able to galvinize a strong majority of Tea Party support across the entire nation (unless it gets down to like 2 candidates). Second, during the general, there's a chance that the full support of the movement won't come out for a candidate due to disagreements with their stance on some issues or on campaign style could cause members of the movement to vote 3rd party or stay home.
The Tea Party MOVEMENT, IE the movements ideology, is a rather singular entity of fiscal and governmental conservatism. The one common denominator amongst all Tea Partiers is generally some sort of firm to strong support on those things. The issue of course comes in that fiscal and governmental issues don't make up the whole of what our Government does, and as such its unlikely that Tea Partiers will have ONLY views that are part of the movement. Instead, as you said, they will have a wide range of secondary (or perhaps primary, with the tea party views being secondary) views that make up their political identity.
The Tea Party is merely a movement within a party (much like the Green Party is merely a wing of the Democratic party). It's vastly overstated as a single entity of voters because it's actually a very eclectic crowd of folks with varying views. It's not like there's a secret handshake.
Union workers are quite a bit different than the environmental folks in Oregonor the inner-city folks in Philly. Yet they are in the same party.
The key is to keep from fielding a candidate that could slice off a critical 3 percent portion of votes, a la Ross Perot or Ralph Nader. The GOP will win so long as Ron Paul stays on the sideline come November.[/QUOTE]