As an active member of the local Tea Party organization, and I use that "organization" term loosely, a recent article by Richard Reeves caught my attention. He expressed the opinion that Republican candidates must know that they are playing with fire by trying to "co-opt or assimilate the tea partiers".
The "fire" he was referring to was the 1992 Presidential election when Bill Clinton won the White House by defeating George Bush. This victory was, according to Reeves, the result of Ross Perot being a strong 3rd party candidate. Clinton received 43% of the vote compared to Bush's 37% and a 19% showing by Perot. The point being made by Reeves was that if there had been no Perot then Bush would have won and that in 2012 a Tea Party candidate could become the vote getter that puts Obama back into White House.
Reeves is absolutely wrong.
Some degree of credit has been given the Tea Party for the recent election wins in New Jersey, Massachusetts and Virginia but these victories were the result of many conservative and right of center voters having had enough of liberals, socialists and Obama backers. There is no "political party" known as the Tea Party but rather this term is a label for a nation wide conservative grouping of concerned citizens who are politically vocal and active.
There is no question that liberals, be they Democrats or worse, look at the Tea Party as a real obstacle to the furtherance of programs that the current White House desires to impose on the United States. This "real obstacle" has been recognized by Republican office seekers who, according to the LA Times, want to "tap what they see as public fury over the failures of government by heavily courting the Tea Party".
Obama and his supporters have become well aware of the fact that the majority of American voters are more in favor of the ideals that are urged by conservative groups, like the Tea Party, rather than the liberal, socialist goals being promoted by Washington. These same worried Democrats viewed Newt Gingrich's recent comment "not to consider any Democrat seat as being safe" as a reality.
The Tea Party is not a national political party. It is, however, a group of people who champion the traditional American way and this group will work to elect more candidates that have rejected the policies of the Obama White House and of the Democrat controlled House and Senate.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think one thing to keep in mind is that to moderate Republicans, those who describe themselves as being fiscally conservative and socially tolerant, are concerned about the Tea Party. It may be the media's portrayal of the Tea Party or it may be legitimate, but to some it represents the "uneducated, racist, yahoo Bible thumping/creationist" faction of the party. I understand why the liberals paint that portrayal of the Tea Party, it is a smart tactic. In order for the Republican's to be successful come November and 2012 they need to avoid falling prey to the sort of bible thumping hate speech that the Tea Party may take part in. Instead focusing on winning those American's that are not pleased with the socialist agenda of the White House while still sticking to the real Republican agenda: small government, state's rights, open markets, fiscal responsibility and individual accountability for choices.
ReplyDelete