Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You're right. The Republicans needs the Tea Party to win elections (lucky them). That doesn't mean they need to nominate a tried and true Tea Party candidate.
They will lose the Tea Party Grassroots then at that moment, just like 2012. When all speculations were that Mitt Romney was going to win and beat Obama.
Those Constitutional Conservative Ron Paul Tea Partiers stayed home, especially after the Caucus deal.
I think the problem with the Tea Party is that they make it clear they despise anyone who is different from them. They act like the Taliban. That is not an asset to any political party outside a theocracy.
If the Tea Party is too extreme for their ideological bedfellows in the Republican Party how are they supposed to attract the moderate and Dem voters that they need to win a general election?
This is just more of the delusional belief that many on the far right share - that if they only picked a presidential candidate that acted crazier, angrier and even more extreme they could have beat Obama.
The question on whether a hard right Tea Partier could win hinges on belief that there are not only millions of fire breathing conservatives who aren't voting because there isn't a candidate pure enough, but that these voters exist in sufficient numbers in enough battleground states to tip the election. For this strategy to work, these Rip Van Winkle Conservatives must exist in large numbers in states like Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin. I have difficulty believing that a "true" conservative would fare any better than an establishment Republican would in enough of those states to win. Truthfully, I'd be shocked if they didn't do substantially worse in the key states that matter.
Last edited by Bureaucat; 02-24-2015 at 01:36 PM..
But most in the tea party will vote for Republicans as long as they have a input by votes by representatives to write the platform. That the way tis always been on both parties.
The question on whether a hard right Tea Partier could win hinges on belief that there are not only millions of fire breathing conservatives who aren't voting because there isn't a candidate pure enough, but that these voters exist in sufficient numbers in enough battleground states to tip the election. For this strategy to work, these Rip Van Winkle Conservatives must exist in large numbers in states like Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin. I have difficulty believing that a "true" conservative would fare any better than an establishment Republican would in enough of those states to win. Truthfully, I'd be shocked if they didn't do substantially worse in the key states that matter.
WTH is a hard right Teapartier or a hard right anyone? Hard because lefty liberals don't agree with their views? Who appointed them as the judges as to what is "hard" right? WTH is a "pure" candidate? Rip Van Winkle? What are you....a stand up comedian?
I think the problem with the Tea Party is that they make it clear they despise anyone who is different from them. They act like the Taliban. That is not an asset to any political party outside a theocracy.
What utter leftist, liberal BS!!! You people just never stop with the lies and propaganda, do you?
The Teaparty is not one of our political parties. They are mainstream Americans whose vision I posted in here. Oh yeah, like the Democrats are so willing to negotiate or compromise on anything. How about them starting with compromising on the HS bill by not including amnesty funding in it so we can fund real HS which is what it should be about, period!
The Teaparty is not one of our political parties. They are mainstream Americans whose vision I posted in here.
And they have been elected to office, and formed a Congressional caucus. And the group within that caucus have been obdurate and unwilling to compromise, preferring to hold the GOP and the Congress hostage to their demands.
And they have been elected to office, and formed a Congressional caucus. And the group within that caucus have been obdurate and unwilling to compromise, preferring to hold the GOP and the Congress hostage to their demands.
What are they not compromising on that is in the best interests of this country?
WTH is a hard right Teapartier or a hard right anyone? Hard because lefty liberals don't agree with their views? Who appointed them as the judges as to what is "hard" right? WTH is a "pure" candidate? Rip Van Winkle? What are you....a stand up comedian?
Call them whatever you want OG. I just don't think there are vast numbers of voters residing in the key states who are refusing to vote for a McCain or a Romney, but will show up when a more Conservative candidate is nominated. That's an article of faith for those on the Right, but color me skeptical.
Last edited by Bureaucat; 02-24-2015 at 03:00 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How about them starting with compromising on the HS bill by not including amnesty funding in it so we can fund real HS which is what it should be about, period!
