Thread: Where does the Tea Party go post-election?

It doesnt look like the GOP leadership (Boehner, McDonnell, Rove, etc) is willing to work with any of the tea partiers that manage to get elected, and have said as much publicly. Tax's for the rich might go down, but with no one willing to take the political hit of cutting social security, medicare/medicaid, or our military budget the deficit will only go up higher.

With some election victories will the partisanship get sharper or will people start looking at bipartisanship as a positive thing again? Will the corporate funding behind it dry up? Will people become disillusioned with the tea party agenda going nowhere? Or will the "movement" continue and start going after the GOP leadership?

Originally Posted by Mathematics

With some election victories will the partisanship get sharper or will people start looking at bipartisanship as a positive thing again?

Ha Ha, Here we go already. Suddenly bi partisanship will be the new buzz word again. NO WAY buddy.

If any republican starts talking about true Bipartisanship, that's a Republican who's a dead man walking two years from now.

This is only the begining for the Tea Party. Know why? Because very few Repubs even now, talk about core Tea Party goals. Has the 10th amendment been an issue in a campaign anywhere? Repealing the 17th amendment?

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof...

If the repubs are smart (which they probably aren't) they will talk about bipartisanship and comprimise EVERY DAY but ONLY within the frame work of Tea Party issues.

For example,

We are going to balance the budget without raising taxes. There is plenty of room for compromise to accomplish this goal...

Guess who will suddenly become the party of "No"...

Originally Posted by Downbound Train

Ha Ha, Here we go already. Suddenly bi partisanship will be the new buzz word again. NO WAY buddy.

If any republican starts talking about true Bipartisanship, that's a Republican who's a dead man walking two years from now.

The tea party might have something to do with it, but if the GOP continues with 2 more years of stall tactics I think the electorate will be looking for change more to the middle or left than to the Bachmann types to the extreme right.

Originally Posted by Downbound Train

This is only the begining for the Tea Party. Know why? Because very few Repubs even now, talk about core Tea Party goals. Has the 10th amendment been an issue in a campaign anywhere? Repealing the 17th amendment?

Many Tea Party candidates dont talk about these goals. They're jumping on a bandwagon to get elected, heavy on rhetoric now but light on solutions. This is where I see the disillusionment coming in. Example:

Originally Posted by Downbound Train

Guess who will suddenly become the party of "No"...

The party that holds the White House & the Senate is going to focus solely on obstructionism of whats coming out of the House?

I think its all going to come down to funding. If Koch & Co decide to stop bankrolling this "grassroots" movement it'll lose steam quick.

You are right. Candidates are bandwagoning the Tea Party without knowing the core of it. The Tea thing is very new. They didn't really have much time to attract serious candidates. They got behind a bunch of rag-tag newbies (which is great) with little experience. Career politicians didn't see the need or power of the Tea Party at first.

Next election cycle, more candidates will be more polished at delivering the message. American's don't have a handle on what the Tea Party agenda really means. The Tea Party has a lot of work to do to convince candidates that they can talk about cutting social programs and the size and cost of government for the greater good as long as they know how to sell it.

Look at Chris Christy. Hard core budget slasher in a VERY blue state. And he's still very popular. He has the winning message. It can be done. But Christine O'donnell types aren't going to be able to carry that message with authority.

The Tea Party's future hinges on finding more Chris Christie's and Marco Rubio's who can deliver the message and win.

Make no mistake.....The Tea Party message is attractive to most people. It's a WINNING platform.

I doubt hes popular in NJ after ending that tunnel mid-project. He was in charge and directed the fuck up over education grants.

Maybe popular in the mid-west or south, where ever republicans are holed up these days. I heard rumors that whole show was about this presidential asperations, not about NJ.

Nobody's going to repeal the 17th ammendment. Are you aware that changes to the constitution require a 2/3's majority in both houses as well as approval by the electorate? No probably not I never expect DBT to be aware of much. Except his delusional paranoia about the "far left" that doesn't even exist.

The Tea party, long term, will be ineffective. They have no concept of actual history and they believe Glenn Beck and his ilk. Therefore they are fickle and easily led not the foundations of a sustainable movement.

This country was founded on Enlightenment values of education and liberalism. Now you and the tea party want to build a society on ignorance and screaming loudly. The tea party after the election will go back to where they came from the ignorant pale white underbelly of the GOP.

As usual, DBT=dumbest poster in thread.

Originally Posted by Chugachjed

Nobody's going to repeal the 17th ammendment. Are you aware that changes to the constitution require a 2/3's majority in both houses as well as approval by the electorate? No probably not I never expect DBT to be aware of much.

no, they dont. if you are going to call someone else ignorant, you should probably have full knowledge of the subject first

Originally Posted by ilikecandy

no, they dont. if you are going to call someone else ignorant, you should probably have full knowledge of the subject first

How long did it take you to Wikipedia and refute his opinion?

Originally Posted by Hugh Conway

How long did it take you to Wikipedia and refute his opinion?

only a couple of minutes, but i only needed google. the constitution is available in full other places online

see, i knew he was wrong, so i confirmed using google. it(and wiki) are very useful that way, or for providing summarization. you should try it sometime, if you can get over your superiority complex. or maybe you already have used these resources? nah, that'd make you a hypocrite, and i rarely run into self-important delusional hypocrites on message boards

Originally Posted by ilikecandy

no, they dont. if you are going to call someone else ignorant, you should probably have full knowledge of the subject first

Originally Posted by ilikecandy

only a couple of minutes, but i only needed google. the constitution is available in full other places online

see, i knew he was wrong, so i confirmed using google. it(and wiki) are very useful that way, or for providing summarization. you should try it sometime, if you can get over your superiority complex. or maybe you already have used these resources? nah, that'd make you a hypocrite, and i rarely run into self-important delusional hypocrites on message boards

Originally Posted by Hugh Conway

not sure what the problem is. did i not make sure i had full knowledge BEFORE i called him ignorant?

i know you wont respond to this because its not as much fun to argue when youre wrong, so until next time, its been fun

Originally Posted by ilikecandy

not sure what the problem is. did i not make sure i had full knowledge BEFORE i called him ignorant?

Is this sarcasm? Or do you consider a couple minutes of googling full knowledge? I'm guessing the latter based on your usually insightful posts on other matters.

Originally Posted by Hugh Conway

Is this sarcasm? Or do you consider a couple minutes of googling full knowledge? I'm guessing the latter based on your usually insightful posts on other matters.

feel free to point out where i am being ignorant then

^^^Give it up Hugh kitty boy. No where to go on this one. Run away and fight another day.

Originally Posted by OSECS

^^^Give it up Hugh kitty boy. No where to go on this one. Run away and fight another day.

Wave that tea party stupid flag proudly!

Originally Posted by OSECS

^^^Give it up Hugh kitty boy. No where to go on this one. Run away and fight another day.

while fail and bail does seem to be his style, it really shortchanges our ability to learn when one side of an argument doesnt have the balls to defend his stance, right or wrong

Originally Posted by Hugh Conway

Wave that tea party stupid flag proudly!

Not a member of the tea party, or any party for that matter. You on the other hand are quite a "member" sometimes.

Where do they go? Let's review, slash spending, reduce taxes and gut/repeal regulation. Cakewalk. Should be an awesome spectacle when the debt averse and strongly principled Rand Paul single handedly filibusters raising the debt ceiling and shuts down the US gov't in about 4 months time, defaults US debt, destroys the US credit rating and currency, and makes his goldbug dad and himself extremely rich. Is that a conflict of interest??? ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!! Should be quite the shitshow.

Slash spending on what? You can bet your mom's walker that they're not going to touch Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and the Defense department.

We will see A billion saved here and there by cutting education, research, and other discretionary spending but it will simply reduce our deficit spending to $1.1T instead of $1.3T - OMG WE SAVED $200BILLION DOLLARS!!!!!

That isn't saving anything, it's just digging the hole a tad slower... you know, like the Kyoto Protocol for Carbon emissions.

The problem isn't that we can't afford the things we are demanding from our government, it's that we are not willing to pay for them.

Originally Posted by Moeghoul

Where do they go? Let's review, slash spending, reduce taxes and gut/repeal regulation. Cakewalk. Should be an awesome spectacle when the debt averse and strongly principled freaking nutjob Rand Paul single handedly filibusters raising the debt ceiling and shuts down the US gov't in about 4 months time, defaults US debt, destroys the US credit rating and currency, and makes his goldbug dad and himself extremely rich. Is that a conflict of interest??? ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!! Should be quite the shitshow.

You were very close. I fixed it for you...

Originally Posted by Mathematics

It doesnt look like the GOP leadership (Boehner, McDonnell, Rove, etc) is willing to work with any of the tea partiers that manage to get elected, and have said as much publicly. Tax's for the rich might go down, but with no one willing to take the political hit of cutting social security, medicare/medicaid, or our military budget the deficit will only go up higher.

With some election victories will the partisanship get sharper or will people start looking at bipartisanship as a positive thing again? Will the corporate funding behind it dry up? Will people become disillusioned with the tea party agenda going nowhere? Or will the "movement" continue and start going after the GOP leadership?

It'll be business as usual -- partisan gridlock.

There are so few of them in Congress that any legislative agenda they may have will get trashed by the usual Washington politicking.

Best of luck to them.

Originally Posted by rideit

As usual, DBT=dumbest poster in thread.

How clueless does someone have to be to post that?^^^^

You did notice the election results on Tuesday right?

Get on board or get run over you bunch of social utopian morons. The real world is coming down the tracks. Chooooo Choooooo.

Originally Posted by Chugachjed

Nobody's going to repeal the 17th ammendment. Are you aware that changes to the constitution require a 2/3's majority in both houses as well as approval by the electorate? No probably not I never expect DBT to be aware of much. Except his delusional paranoia about the "far left" that doesn't even exist.

One day after you get crushed in an election and you obviously learned nothing. Still in denial...Still setting up strawmen.

Nobody is going to repeal the 17th amendment because nobody is even talking about it. If they were, like they should be, anyone with common sense would see the wisdom of it.

Does it make you feel smarter to pretend that I don't know how to amend the constitution? I think it probably does. You feel good about yourself when you type things that prove you are an idiot.

OK, I was wrongish I'm big enough to admit it. To repeal a constitutional amendment you have to pass a new constitutional amendment for which the common process requires a 2/3's majority in both houses of congress and then ratification by 3/4's of the states, not approval of the electorate. So I was less specific operating from memory than ideal but that hardly makes me an idiot more imprecise. There is another method that involves 2/3's of state legislatures and a constitutional convention.