The Tea Party vs. the GOP thread

[Mr. Perfect]

The distant mills are called the public good, citizen involvement and citizen understanding of the political process.

Wouldn't you have to understand that stuff first?

Plus the abolition of political parties.

There is your windmill. Please spend lots and lots of time, energy and money on it, I beg you. You should have liked the TP then, a lot them said they wanted to be independent of political parties.

It doesn't matter if the conservative wing exists if it's not allowed to get its ideas out. The MSM shone a spotlight on a group of people and made them much more famous than they would've gotten on their own. It gave them visibility, notoriety and access to the public. It declared the Tea Party to be a hot item for a while. Once the movement was past its due date, the spotlight was turned off and the Tea Party was declared old news.

So your fixation is.... on old news? We all have to spend our lives doing something I guess. I told you this was old news from the beginning.

I thought it was his deficit spending that the banksters liked.

His deficit spending was a drop in the bucket compared to obama. Reagan seems to be popular on just about every aspect of his Presidency by the American people. Currently Reagan is considered the greates President of all time. A Tea Party champion.

They are a strange and somewhat interesting group.

Only to those insular on US politics. They are everyday Americans you interact with daily over here. That your media products pretend don't exist.

So... nothing?

No. This thread is evidence of your ulterior motives. Just about every political movement has power struggles, divisions, and contentious contests for control, yet you pick on the TP and nobody else. Your complaint is not the power struggles, divisions, and contests for control, it is something else you will not reveal. If it was about power struggles, divisions, contentious co hen you would be posting about almost every political party in existence. And you post on only one. Betraying your deep unadmitted biases.

Boring.

You said it. The nature of what ifs that will never happen.

Tsk, tsk.

ymix, I PROMISE you that if you ever bring something to the table that actually threatens conservatism then I will not avoid that thread.

Then why are you even complaining?

I can't say I'm complaining, I'm just using this thread to expose your deep unadmitted biases. Exposing an opponent's unadmitted biases is tremendously valuable and worth the work. The actual content of the thread isn't of any matter whatsoever, and as you can see I haven't commented on it. Nobody cares about it but a small group of slate.com readers who don't know much about politics.

Ditching the Tea Party already? You must be a Champion of Freedom, too.

The Tea Party was a means to and end. As a conservative anytime you put up a target like that the MSM will do everything they can to mow it down, and we lasted much longer than anyone expected. The TP served it's purpose and I salute them.

Oh, don't worry. I'll enjoy the rise to power of another batch of establishment Republicans. I'm sure they will bring change to the USA.

The certainly won't legislate like obama. All that STPN horse$#!t has come to an end. And that was a thing that was not assured, it had to be gone out and gotten. Working together, although rough at times, the GOP and the TP accomplished that mission, and have earned rest in the halls of the great champions of liberty.

[YMix]

And yet there doesn't seem to be any threat of a Democratic majority in 2014. The Champions of Freedom will bumble their way to a gerrymandered victory yet again.

Enki,

Maybe a Democratic majority will be the champion of freedom.

Alex.

Highly unlikely.

[Parodite]

The debilitating two-party strangle hold of demopublicans and republicats will survive because it serves best the legalized bribery that operates the oligarchy. Money buys legislation and protects the oligarchy against legislation that wants to change it.

The good news for the oligarchy is that no-one is interested in making such legislation the core issue of any political program. Too many useful distractions available and juicy blame games filling the ether.

[manolo]

His deficit spending was a drop in the bucket compared to obama. Reagan seems to be popular on just about every aspect of his Presidency by the American people. Currently Reagan is considered the greates President of all time. A Tea Party champion.

Mr P,

Under Reagan, public debt rose from 26% GDP to 41%GDP. That's quite a "drop".

Alex.

[Mr. Perfect]

Mr P,

Under Reagan, public debt rose from 26% GDP to 41%GDP. That's quite a "drop".

Alex.

In comparison to obama, nothing to complain about. If you dislike Reagan based on his debt you're really going to hate obama.

Debt under Reagan : 1.8 trillion
Debt under obama: 10 trillion plus several trillion in loose fed money

Remember obama said Bush's 4 trillion was unpatriotic.

[Mr. Perfect]

The debilitating two-party strangle hold of demopublicans and republicats will survive because it serves best the legalized bribery that operates the oligarchy. Money buys legislation and protects the oligarchy against legislation that wants to change it.

The good news for the oligarchy is that no-one is interested in making such legislation the core issue of any political program. Too many useful distractions available and juicy blame games filling the ether.

All of your country's operate as 2 party systems.

[Parodite]

The debilitating two-party strangle hold of demopublicans and republicats will survive because it serves best the legalized bribery that operates the oligarchy. Money buys legislation and protects the oligarchy against legislation that wants to change it.

The good news for the oligarchy is that no-one is interested in making such legislation the core issue of any political program. Too many useful distractions available and juicy blame games filling the ether.

All of your country's operate as 2 party systems.

No.

[Mr. Perfect]

Yes. You can only vote no or yes on legislation. As a result in all these multiparty nations the parties form governing coalitions and operate just like 2 parties. Also, in our 2 party system each party has factions within it that divide and can fail to produce a majority vote. So the 2 parties in America are almost 4 in effect. We already a 4 party system in effect.

You can only vote 2 ways. So a duopoly in some form is the inevitable result. You may as well fight against gravity.

[YMix]

Wouldn't you have to understand that stuff first?

That's what I'm doing

There is your windmill. Please spend lots and lots of time, energy and money on it, I beg you. You should have liked the TP then, a lot them said they wanted to be independent of political parties.

Then they shouldn't vote Republican or join the Republican party.

So your fixation is.... on old news? We all have to spend our lives doing something I guess. I told you this was old news from the beginning.

At least we now agree on what the Tea Party is and what happened to it. It's a start.

His deficit spending was a drop in the bucket compared to Obama.

So what? Deficit spending is deficit spending. Reagan is clearly a leftist.

Reagan seems to be popular on just about every aspect of his Presidency by the American people. Currently Reagan is considered the greates President of all time. A Tea Party champion.

Again: so what? The presidency is not a popularity contest. It says more about the people who like him and not in a good way.

Only to those insular on US politics. They are everyday Americans you interact with daily over here. That your media products pretend don't exist.

My media products? I wasn't aware of my media holdings.

No. This thread is evidence of your ulterior motives. Just about every political movement has power struggles, divisions, and contentious contests for control, yet you pick on the TP and nobody else. Your complaint is not the power struggles, divisions, and contests for control, it is something else you will not reveal. If it was about power struggles, divisions, contentious co hen you would be posting about almost every political party in existence. And you post on only one. Betraying your deep unadmitted biases.

Or of your own unadmitted biases.

You said it. The nature of what ifs that will never happen.

I was going to say that I hope they won't, but then... maybe your people should secede and get their theocracy. Seeing it up close may teach them what a bad idea it is.

ymix, I PROMISE you that if you ever bring something to the table that actually threatens conservatism then I will not avoid that thread.

Why would I want to threaten conservatism? And if I did, that wouldn't happen on an obscure forum.

The actual content of the thread isn't of any matter whatsoever, and as you can see I haven't commented on it. Nobody cares about it but a small group of slate.com readers who don't know much about politics.

And that's one of the reasons I made this thread.

The Tea Party was a means to and end. As a conservative anytime you put up a target like that the MSM will do everything they can to mow it down, and we lasted much longer than anyone expected. The TP served it's purpose and I salute them.

The end being the return to power of establishment Republicans. Good job.

The certainly won't legislate like Obama.

That remains to be seen.

Working together, although rough at times, the GOP and the TP accomplished that mission, and have earned rest in the halls of the great champions of liberty.

This is all kinds of dumb.

[Parodite]

Yes. You can only vote no or yes on legislation. As a result in all these multiparty nations the parties form governing coalitions and operate just like 2 parties. Also, in our 2 party system each party has factions within it that divide and can fail to produce a majority vote. So the 2 parties in America are almost 4 in effect. We already a 4 party system in effect.

You can only vote 2 ways. So a duopoly in some form is the inevitable result. You may as well fight against gravity.

You create a false binary. Of course any new legislation needs a yes/no majority vote ultimately.. but producing new legislation is something very different. It would amount to saying that buying a car is always a two-party process since there is a yes/no decision to buy it or not. Now explain why there are so many car producers and different models to choose from?

[Mr. Perfect]

That's what I'm doing

It doesn't seem like it.

Then they shouldn't vote Republican or join the Republican party.

Arguably.

At least we now agree on what the Tea Party is and what happened to it. It's a start.

My view of the Tea Party has not changed one iota since it was founded.

So what? Deficit spending is deficit spending. Reagan is clearly a leftist.

Why do leftists all hate him then.

Again: so what? The presidency is not a popularity contest. It says more about the people who like him and not in a good way.

So what? The what is that you have a lot of work cut out for you. To convince the Dumbericans of how totally like dumb they are. You have a lot of work ahead of you. I imagine we won't be seeing much of you anymore.

And the Presidency is a popularity contest ymix. I think we need to keep working on your understanding of civics. You must be able to do yourself before you can teach.

My media products? I wasn't aware of my media holdings.

The products you consume that others profit from, not you so much.

Or of your own unadmitted biases.

I'm upfront with my biases. I am a libertarian Conservative Tea Party Ronald Reagan Jack Kemp establishment Republican who is intent on destroying leftism, liberalism, Progressivism and the Democrat Party. I have no free will and cannot help myself, it is genetically programmed into my being, I am a product of evolution, genetically programmed to destroy leftism. And business is good.

Now, without any interviews, give us 3-4 sentences on your biases. Not vague, but like who are some political parties you dig. Who have you voted for. Where are you on the left-right spectrum.

I was going to say that I hope they won't, but then... maybe your people should secede and get their theocracy. Seeing it up close may teach them what a bad idea it is.

I'm thinking you should dwell a lot on this. It seems to really weigh on you. Cause you some distress. And some worry. You seem worry so much. Maybe there is something to it. Maybe the South is about to create a theocracy.

Why would I want to threaten conservatism? And if I did, that wouldn't happen on an obscure forum.

Looks like a lot of posts and threads will be continued to be ignored in the future.

And that's one of the reasons I made this thread.

To show how much you don't know about politics? In that case the thread has been a smashing success.

The end being the return to power of establishment Republicans. Good job.

As an establishment Republican I have been very happy for some time. In 2010 we stopped single payer and won back the house, against all odds. In 2014 we will be majority in every category once again, something no human being predicted in 2009, not even me. It's almost like it's Providence.

That remains to be seen.

I'm betting no single payer. Everything else is gravy.

This is all kinds of dumb.

Ymix, you can win all of our arguments as long as I get to win all the elections. That seems like a fair trade.

[Mr. Perfect]

Yes. You can only vote no or yes on legislation. As a result in all these multiparty nations the parties form governing coalitions and operate just like 2 parties. Also, in our 2 party system each party has factions within it that divide and can fail to produce a majority vote. So the 2 parties in America are almost 4 in effect. We already a 4 party system in effect.

You can only vote 2 ways. So a duopoly in some form is the inevitable result. You may as well fight against gravity.

You create a false binary. Of course any new legislation needs a yes/no majority vote ultimately.. but producing new legislation is something very different. It would amount to saying that buying a car is always a two-party process since there is a yes/no decision to buy it or not. Now explain why there are so many car producers and different models to choose from?

I think the easiest way to deal with this is for you to explain why two party systems in effect always manifest themselves in government, if it's like car manufacturers.

[YMix]

It doesn't seem like it.

It wouldn't to you.

Arguably.

Definitely.

My view of the Tea Party has not changed one iota since it was founded.

Then your must have been lying all along. That's not nice.

Why do leftists all hate him then.

Ask them.

So what? The what is that you have a lot of work cut out for you. To convince the Dumbericans of how totally like dumb they are. You have a lot of work ahead of you. I imagine we won't be seeing much of you anymore.

If only they could be convinced.

And the Presidency is a popularity contest ymix. I think we need to keep working on your understanding of civics. You must be able to do yourself before you can teach.

Not 30 years later. What difference does it make now? How is Reagan's popularity even relevant?

The products you consume that others profit from, not you so much.

You don't even know what I read.

I'm upfront with my biases. I am a libertarian Conservative Tea Party Ronald Reagan Jack Kemp establishment Republican who is intent on destroying leftism, liberalism, Progressivism and the Democrat Party. I have no free will and cannot help myself, it is genetically programmed into my being, I am a product of evolution, genetically programmed to destroy leftism. And business is good.

You forgot to mention that you are an individual who refuses to discuss topics that make him uncomfortable and won't confront dishonest or immoral behavior within his camp.

Now, without any interviews, give us 3-4 sentences on your biases. Not vague, but like who are some political parties you dig. Who have you voted for. Where are you on the left-right spectrum.

I don't dig political parties. I haven't voted in many years. Which left-right spectrum? US? Western European? Eastern European?

I'm thinking you should dwell a lot on this. It seems to really weigh on you. Cause you some distress. And some worry. You seem worry so much. Maybe there is something to it. Maybe the South is about to create a theocracy.

It's always a possibility.

Looks like a lot of posts and threads will be continued to be ignored in the future.

Can't say I'm surprised.

To show how much you don't know about politics? In that case the thread has been a smashing success.

To make it obvious how you dance around the issue.

As an establishment Republican I have been very happy for some time. In 2010 we stopped single payer and won back the house, against all odds. In 2014 we will be majority in every category once again, something no human being predicted in 2009, not even me. It's almost like it's Providence.

Ah, so you're a RINO pretending to be a conservative.

I'm betting no single payer. Everything else is gravy.

Setting low standards that may or may not be reached.

Ymix, you can win all of our arguments as long as I get to win all the elections. That seems like a fair trade.

I saw that in 2012.

[YMix]

Representative Tim Huelskamp, a member of the hard-line conservative Freedom Caucus, lost to a political newcomer on Tuesday in the Republican primary for his Kansas district.

Mr. Huelskamp, who was elected to Congress in 2010 and quickly earned a reputation for frustrating Republican leaders, was defeated by Roger Marshall, an obstetrician from Great Bend, in the primary for the First Congressional District, which covers western Kansas and much of the state’s center.

Mr. Marshall won with the support of business groups and the agriculture lobby, which had turned its back on Mr. Huelskamp after Speaker John A. Boehner had him removed from the Agriculture Committee in 2012, a crucial position for a legislator from a farm state. Mr. Huelskamp was a frequent critic of Mr. Boehner, who resigned last year amid strife with the Republican Party’s right wing.

“Getting kicked off the Agriculture Committee is a crime that can’t be forgiven,” Brian Scheideman, a 52-year-old driver’s education instructor, said after voting for Mr. Marshall in Wamego, The Associated Press reported. “I don’t mind the independent voice, but you’ve got to figure out how to work with people.”

Mr. Marshall had the support of the Kansas Farm Bureau, the Kansas Livestock Association, the National Association of Wheat Growers and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, according to The A.P. Mr. Huelskamp had the backing of the billionaire Koch brothers’ political network, the Club for Growth and conservative colleagues who visited the state to campaign for him.

Mr. Huelskamp, who is also a Tea Party Caucus leader, quickly earned a national reputation after his election for frustrating Republican leaders.

Born and raised on his family farm in Fowler, Kan., Mr. Huelskamp went on to attend a seminary in Santa Fe, N.M., where he earned his bachelor’s degree, according to his official biography. He then attended American University in Washington, where he received a Ph.D. in political science with a specialty in agriculture policy. He returned home and became a state legislator.

While the campaigns of both men raised more than $700,000, interest groups spent over $2.7 million on the race, much of that benefiting Mr. Marshall, according to The A.P. There is no Democratic challenger for the seat, though Alan LaPolice, a farmer and educator who challenged Mr. Huelskamp for the 2014 Republican nomination, is poised to run as an independent.

Another one bites the dust.

The House Freedom Caucus has its knives out for Speaker Paul Ryan and his leadership team after one of the group’s most prominent members lost his seat Tuesday to an establishment-backed rival in a GOP primary.

The bloc of hard-line conservatives is laying the blame for Rep. Tim Huelskamp’s landslide loss squarely at House leadership’s feet. They’re furious that Ryan did not do more to help the Kansas Republican, who lost to obstetrician and political novice Roger Marshall after the challenger pilloried Huelskamp for losing his prized spot on the Agriculture Committee.

Ryan refused before the election to promise publicly that Huelskamp would be reinstalled on the panel next year, saying he alone did not have the power to make such an assurance. That left Huelskamp unable to effectively counter the attacks.

Tsk, tsk.

[YMix]

How We Killed the Tea Party

Greedy super PACs drained the movement with endless pleas for money to support “conservative” candidates—while instead using the money to enrich themselves. I should know. I worked for one of them.

[...]

One active solicitor is the Tea Party Leadership Fund, which received $6.7 million from 2013 to mid-2015, overwhelmingly from small donors. A typical solicitation from the TPLF read: “Your immediate contribution could be the most important financial investment you will make to help return America to greatness.” But, according to an investigation by POLITICO, 87 percent of that “investment” went to overhead; only $910,000 of the $6.7 million raised was used to support political candidates.

[...]

In 2014, the Tea Party Patriots group spent just 10 percent of the $14.4 million it collected actually supporting candidates, with the rest going to consultants and vendors and Martin’s hefty salary of $15,000 per month; in all, she makes an estimated $450,000 a year from her Tea Party-related ventures.

[...]

POLITICO last year reviewed the activity of 33 conservative PACs for the 2014 cycle. Combined, they raked in $43 million dollars, according to the POLITICO report. Of that, $39.5 million went to overhead including $6 million to entities owned by PAC operators; candidates got $3 million. Another report analyzed 17 conservative PACs from the 2014 midterm. It came up with different numbers than POLITICO, finding that the bottom 10 PACs in terms of the ratio of spending to actual candidate support received $54,318,498 and spent only $3,621,896 supporting candidates.

[...]

Ooops.

[Typhoon]

^^^

hu0Bm_HfX-s

_____

Anyways,

Reason | The Tea Party Is Officially Dead.

But this time is different. Republicans, now controlling both the legislative and executive branches, jammed through a "CRomnibus" spending bill that strips any last vestiges of spending restraint from the budget process.

Gone are the Tea Party's biggest and most hard-fought policy victory—mandatory caps in domestic and defense spending. The budget deal replaces them with $300 billion in new spending over the next two years, and, in all likelihood, sets a precedent for greater spending in the decade to come.

It's 2009 all over again, with trillion dollar deficits, and red ink as far as the eye—or at least CBO projections—can see. As budget deals go, it's a total fiasco.

[Simple Minded]

^^^

hu0Bm_HfX-s

_____

Anyways,

Reason | The Tea Party Is Officially Dead.

But this time is different. Republicans, now controlling both the legislative and executive branches, jammed through a "CRomnibus" spending bill that strips any last vestiges of spending restraint from the budget process.

Gone are the Tea Party's biggest and most hard-fought policy victory—mandatory caps in domestic and defense spending. The budget deal replaces them with $300 billion in new spending over the next two years, and, in all likelihood, sets a precedent for greater spending in the decade to come.

It's 2009 all over again, with trillion dollar deficits, and red ink as far as the eye—or at least CBO projections—can see. As budget deals go, it's a total fiasco.

Damn shame. Every time one of my highly partisan friends tells me how much better they are than the others, or about the yuge difference between the two parties, I just think "uh huh, yea, sure."

Both parties view Trump, Bernie, the Tea Party, OWS, or any other competition political organization as an existential threat.

I don't expect that viewpoint to change anytime soon.....

[Typhoon]

When a true change appears possible, you can know it by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against it.

After Jonathan Swift

[Doc]

^^^

hu0Bm_HfX-s

_____

Anyways,

Reason | The Tea Party Is Officially Dead.

But this time is different. Republicans, now controlling both the legislative and executive branches, jammed through a "CRomnibus" spending bill that strips any last vestiges of spending restraint from the budget process.

Gone are the Tea Party's biggest and most hard-fought policy victory—mandatory caps in domestic and defense spending. The budget deal replaces them with $300 billion in new spending over the next two years, and, in all likelihood, sets a precedent for greater spending in the decade to come.

It's 2009 all over again, with trillion dollar deficits, and red ink as far as the eye—or at least CBO projections—can see. As budget deals go, it's a total fiasco.

Damn shame. Every time one of my highly partisan friends tells me how much better they are than the others, or about the yuge difference between the two parties, I just think "uh huh, yea, sure."

Both parties view Trump, Bernie, the Tea Party, OWS, or any other competition political organization as an existential threat.

I don't expect that viewpoint to change anytime soon.....

Corrupt politicians make the other 10% look bad.

~ Henry Kissinger

[Mr. Perfect]

This assumes the Tea Party is a single issue movement. It never was.

Spending reduction will likely be the highest priority in the coming year, driven by Trump.

[Doc]

How We Killed the Tea Party

Greedy super PACs drained the movement with endless pleas for money to support “conservative” candidates—while instead using the money to enrich themselves. I should know. I worked for one of them.

[...]

One active solicitor is the Tea Party Leadership Fund, which received $6.7 million from 2013 to mid-2015, overwhelmingly from small donors. A typical solicitation from the TPLF read: “Your immediate contribution could be the most important financial investment you will make to help return America to greatness.” But, according to an investigation by POLITICO, 87 percent of that “investment” went to overhead; only $910,000 of the $6.7 million raised was used to support political candidates.

[...]

In 2014, the Tea Party Patriots group spent just 10 percent of the $14.4 million it collected actually supporting candidates, with the rest going to consultants and vendors and Martin’s hefty salary of $15,000 per month; in all, she makes an estimated $450,000 a year from her Tea Party-related ventures.

[...]

POLITICO last year reviewed the activity of 33 conservative PACs for the 2014 cycle. Combined, they raked in $43 million dollars, according to the POLITICO report. Of that, $39.5 million went to overhead including $6 million to entities owned by PAC operators; candidates got $3 million. Another report analyzed 17 conservative PACs from the 2014 midterm. It came up with different numbers than POLITICO, finding that the bottom 10 PACs in terms of the ratio of spending to actual candidate support received $54,318,498 and spent only $3,621,896 supporting candidates.

[...]

Ooops.

This brings up an interesting point. Obama ordered the IRS to prevent Tea party groups from getting Tax freee status which meant they were unable to actually raise money. Yet Pacs were given such status..... I wonder what Obama got out of that?

[Nonc Hilaire]

This assumes the Tea Party is a single issue movement. It never was

Tea party was never a movement. It was a reaction; like Occupy.

[Typhoon]

This assumes the Tea Party is a single issue movement. It never was.

Spending reduction will likely be the highest priority in the coming year, driven by Trump.

Any day now. He's off with an impressive start.

A trillion here, a trillion there an soon you're talking real money.

[Doc]

This assumes the Tea Party is a single issue movement. It never was.

Spending reduction will likely be the highest priority in the coming year, driven by Trump.

Any day now. He's off with an impressive start.

A trillion here, a trillion there an soon you're talking real money.

$49 billion surplus thus far

https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/fsrepor ... ts0118.pdf

[Mr. Perfect]

Lol. What happened to this thread. And the misguided person who started it.