• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is the Tea Party Actually the Republican Party?

Is the Tea Party Actually the Republican Party?


  • Total voters
    26
John, the 9/12 Movement (as Beck created it) had nothing to do with politics. It was a collection of values and principles .... getting back to the united country we were on 9/12/01.
 
Here's how I can imagine it.
Let's pretend each individual Tea Party org.. (such as the Tea Party Patriots, or Freedom Works) is a State. Each state has a governor (the founder) and maybe a few representatives (organizers) but there is no President that ties all the states together.

Exactly. And I think that Rand Paul running as a Republican really set the whole thing back. They can't continue to exist as their own organization if their idols are playing partisan politics. Which is a big reason that I tend to think November, 2010 will mark the end of the Tea Party. Come December, they'll be as relevant as Joe the Plumber. Their ideology may continue to be increasingly influential, but their organization will not.
 
John, the 9/12 Movement (as Beck created it) had nothing to do with politics. It was a collection of values and principles .... getting back to the united country we were on 9/12/01.

Even though several organizers that identify with the tea party movement regularly attend the 9/12 thing. Also no, 9/12 is Beck's way of trying to make money off of a tragic time in our nation's history. It's the same as anyone else trying to make money off of the tradgedy, and not to long ago Beck was on the "9/11 was perpetrated by the government" boat until that fad died down and just went to the total whackos.
 
Even though several organizers that identify with the tea party movement regularly attend the 9/12 thing. Also no, 9/12 is Beck's way of trying to make money off of a tragic time in our nation's history. It's the same as anyone else trying to make money off of the tradgedy, and not to long ago Beck was on the "9/11 was perpetrated by the government" boat until that fad died down and just went to the total whackos.

Wha? When was Beck a 9/11 Truther?? LOL!
 
He never was exactly on the truther side, he amused the idea though on his site while at CNN.

What do you mean he "amused" the idea? Just post what he said.
 
@The Giant Noodle, I am not 100% but I recall making this point before and you making counterpoints against it? I could be wrong but yes, this thing has been hijacked by Dick Armey, Sarah Palin, and Glenn Beck to make some money and guilt people into thinking what they think or else they aren't American enough. It's like if you took what George W was about and filtered it into pure form, threw it in the microwave and then pissed in it. You have the tea party movement.

Am I saying Bush W was that bad? Hell no not even close. I would say Bush did a lot of really good things, but he also did a lot of really bad things, and a lot of that was because he didn't have the know how, the oversight, and had congress by the balls. The tea party is mostly wrong now, and will continue to be wrong either way. This is the key difference.



Not really considering the Tea Party supporters such as Beck and Palin have turned on a lot of very prominent conservatives, and Palin just last night was talking **** about the Republican seantor from MA Scott Brown for not being "constitutional" enough, and has even turned against the guy that brought her into the limelight, John McCain, so John McCain from 2010, had to run against John McCain from 2007 just to beat his tea party supported opponent.




Bulllllllcraaaaaaap. Seriously has nothing to do with the tea party movement? Ok here let me give you 2 colorful pictures that will help you make the connection:

Here is the 9/12 project:
9_12_Project.jpg


here is the Gadsen flag often used during Tea Party rallies:
festus-albums-festus-stuff-picture2622-800px-gadsden-flag-svg.png


Hmm **** I wonder where Beck got the idea......

The fact of the matter is though, you will see more people going to comicbook conventions than go to these little tea festivals. The media just pays to much attention to them.

This really is an excellent post. I agree on most of waht you said! Alas I firmly believe that the currect Tea Party = Republican.

Glenn Beck doesn't have much to do with tea parties and he's not a Republican.

I support the tea parties, but I'm not a Republican.

How are YOUR views different? And IF you are a member of the Tea Party you should have a list of what politicians have voted for. THAT is what they take pride in. They KNOW who voted for what. Plus democrats are killing the Nation. :roll:
 
I've never been to a tea party, so I don't consider myself a member. How are my views different than Republicans? Um.....I'm for much smaller government and much less spending. I'm also okay with gay marriage and legalizing prostitution and marijuana.
 
Do you feel that the Tea Party grass roots movement started around 2007-2008 (and was originally started by Ron Paul supporters) was hijacked in a genius move by Karl Rove and the Republican strategists?

And people are simply voting in another Republican thinking its "change"?

-Or does Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck really want a change in this Country from the Republican Party to a 3rd Party called the Tea Party?

Pffft, the tea party ain't nothing but a front for oil billionaires who didn't get their way at the ballot box. If you think the tea party was in way, shape, or form, a grassroots movement, you've been duped big time....

...Five hundred people attended the summit, which served, in part, as a training session for Tea Party activists in Texas. An advertisement cast the event as a populist uprising against vested corporate power. “Today, the voices of average Americans are being drowned out by lobbyists and special interests,” it said. “But you can do something about it.” The pitch made no mention of its corporate funders. The White House has expressed frustration that such sponsors have largely eluded public notice. David Axelrod, Obama’s senior adviser, said, “What they don’t say is that, in part, this is a grassroots citizens’ movement brought to you by a bunch of oil billionaires.” .....snip...


Americans for Prosperity has worked closely with the Tea Party since the movement’s inception. In the weeks before the first Tax Day protests, in April, 2009, Americans for Prosperity hosted a Web site offering supporters “Tea Party Talking Points.” The Arizona branch urged people to send tea bags to Obama; the Missouri branch urged members to sign up for “Taxpayer Tea Party Registration” and provided directions to nine protests. The group continues to stoke the rebellion. The North Carolina branch recently launched a “Tea Party Finder” Web site, advertised as “a hub for all the Tea Parties in North Carolina.”...snip....

A Republican campaign consultant who has done research on behalf of Charles and David Koch said of the Tea Party, “The Koch brothers gave the money that founded it. It’s like they put the seeds in the ground. Then the rainstorm comes, and the frogs come out of the mud—and they’re our candidates!” .....

Read more The billionaire Koch brothers’ war against Obama : The New Yorker

And that's exactly what Republicans got, a bunch of frogs for candidates. LOL
 
Last edited:
I don't think the Tea Party is necessarily the Republican Party, or that the Republican Party has hijacked the Tea Party.

Rather, the Tea Party is a populist movement of conservatives that have organized together in order to protest the Democratic Party currently in power and organized against certain Republican candidates in order to maintain a certain amount of "party purity" in the GOP.

That is, the Tea Party isn't the Republican Party but is made up of Republican voters. These include evangelical voters, libertarian voters, and conservative voters.

So in some instances the Tea Party is influenced by Republican strategists. This includes funding for events and so forth. However, in other instances the Tea Party has opposed the GOP. This happened in the recent primary for Senate elections in Alaska. The GOP endorsed Murkowski, but Sarah Palin endorsed Miller, who won the Republican primary for the Senate elections.

So I think the Tea Party movement isn't so much hijacked by the Republican Party as it is a method for Republican voters to organize either with the GOP party machine or to act against it when the voters think the GOP isn't acting on behalf of the best interests of right-wing voters.
 
Do you feel that the Tea Party grass roots movement started around 2007-2008 (and was originally started by Ron Paul supporters) was hijacked in a genius move by Karl Rove and the Republican strategists?

And people are simply voting in another Republican thinking its "change"?

-Or does Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck really want a change in this Country from the Republican Party to a 3rd Party called the Tea Party?

I dont think it was a hijacked movement. I think Republicans are disgusted by those within their ranks but cant see the value in leaving the party for a third party or becoming non-political. Are they mostly republican? Sure...because MOST conservatives value smaller government. SHOULD they be mostly republican? No...and I think thats the tragedy. As we see here daily there are very many ideological leftists that dont think beyind 'democrat'. But anyone with a brain...anyone that uses their head for more than a convenient place to hang their hat can look at our current state...a state arrived at courtesy of BOTH parties...and unless you LIKE the prospect of a bankrupt country then BOTH SIDES should consider alternatives...if not the tea party then SOMETHING. Fiscally conservative liberals maybe (I know...thats an oxymoron)...but SOMETHING.
 
I dont think it was a hijacked movement. I think Republicans are disgusted by those within their ranks but cant see the value in leaving the party for a third party or becoming non-political. Are they mostly republican? Sure...because MOST conservatives value smaller government. SHOULD they be mostly republican? No...and I think thats the tragedy. As we see here daily there are very many ideological leftists that dont think beyind 'democrat'. But anyone with a brain...anyone that uses their head for more than a convenient place to hang their hat can look at our current state...a state arrived at courtesy of BOTH parties...and unless you LIKE the prospect of a bankrupt country then BOTH SIDES should consider alternatives...if not the tea party then SOMETHING. Fiscally conservative liberals maybe (I know...thats an oxymoron)...but SOMETHING.

There ARE fiscally conservative liberals out there. Just because someone believes in Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and other forms of social welfare doesn't mean they want to hand over the keys to the treasury to everyone. There are ways in which such social welfare programs can be made to be fiscally responsible and fiscally efficient. In fact, Single-Payer Health Care is designed with that in mind.

However, when the other side says that those programs should be abolished instead of reformed it makes it very difficult for anything to get done.

I'm not disagreeing with you here. I'm saying that most of the time ideologues get in the way of mutually beneficial compromises. After all, we're all Americans, and all Americans have a voice and a choice. Maybe instead of libertarians trying to have their way despite socialists in the U.S. and maybe instead of socialists trying to have their way despite libertarians in the U.S. both groups, along with all other groups, can work out things that are mutually beneficial to both sides.
 
Last edited:
There ARE fiscally conservative liberals out there. Just because someone believes in Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and other forms of social welfare doesn't mean they want to hand over the keys to the treasury to everyone. There are ways in which such social welfare programs can be made to be fiscally responsible and fiscally efficient. In fact, Single-Payer Health Care is designed with that in mind.

However, when the other side says that those programs should be abolished instead of reformed it makes it very difficult for anything to get done.

I'm not disagreeing with you here. I'm saying that most of the time ideologues get in the way of mutually beneficial compromises. After all, we're all Americans, and all Americans have a voice and a choice. Maybe instead of libertarians trying to have their way despite socialists in the U.S. and maybe instead of socialists trying to have their way despite libertarians in the U.S. both groups, along with all other groups, can work out things that are mutually beneficial to both sides.

For what it is worth...some of us conservative types arent against health care. Ive said it from day 1 that I support health care reform but at the state level. I just have a really hard time trusting people (both parties) that have put us 14 trillion in debt in control of MORE of the budget and resources.
 
For what it is worth...some of us conservative types arent against health care. Ive said it from day 1 that I support health care reform but at the state level. I just have a really hard time trusting people (both parties) that have put us 14 trillion in debt in control of MORE of the budget and resources.

Well, on a federal level, I am for some forms of health care reform. Specifically, I don't think people should be dropped for pre-existing conditions. I mean what's the point of getting health insurance to help pay for your medical needs if a health insurance company can drop your coverage and keep the money you invested in them to help pay for your medical needs?

When it comees to socialized health care, I wouldn't mind if it was done on the state level instead of the federal level. That way it would be less influenced by national political shifts, and be more stable.

As for the $14 trillion debt that both parties has put us under, that's why I'm for double-majority popular initiatives on a federal level. I think that the people should be able to pass federal laws if 1) a majority of the voters nation-wide vote for it and 2) the law passes in a majority of states. So not only would a popular initiative have to pass nationwide, it would also have to pass within 26 states. This way the people can better directly influence the federal government and maintain better accountability from the federal government.
 
Not voting because the poll options are idiotic and obviously biased.

No, the Tea Party is not actually the republican party. Yes, the Tea Party is made up by a large amount of current or former disenchanted Republicans. Yes, the Tea Party is far more likely to vote Republican than Democrat.
 
Same goes for the dems, of course.


That's what happens when one side isn't willing to comprimise.

You mean the way Republicans "compromised" from 2000 to 2006?

This isn't the one-sided problem you pretend it to be.
 
Back
Top Bottom