Tea Party Candidates Shown the Door

Nothing is more delicious than the tears of the left handed....

 

why cry about the GOP finally being accountable?

ill concede being sad about losing Feingold though.

 

This is classic Liberal Spin only on steroids. What is that Liberal mantra? Oh yes. Never admit the truth, and if at first you don't succeed blame President Bush and think up up a new diversion tactic ASAP, or if all else fails lie, lie again.

This thread should either be in a comedy category or renamed. WELCOME TO THE SPIN ZONE.

 

well im just glad we wont be hearing the GOP blaming Obama for their lack of progress on anything over the next 2 years....

right?

 

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owzhYNcd4OM"]YouTube - For Dep[/ame]

 

Clearly, the GOP establishment worked against the rebel rousers, fearing their fat and happy jobs.
Calling those with whom one may disagree isn't very becoming, not from either side really, but at least the voters are getting some credit, although it could easily be lost in all that name calling that is going about.
What is interesting really, is the constant attempt to focus on the negative, and the eagerness to put the 'enemy' on the defensive.
Here is where the real criticism should begin. Why let it happen, why remain on the defensive, instead of focusing on goals?
Constructive criticism of one's own is often more productive, and the "mental cases, extremists, or idiots" are eagerly waiting.

 

Please...pretty please, let all the liberals stay in denial and keep thinking the Tea Party movement is harmless!

Look, last night the Tea Party movement had one major goal...to stop the bloating of government...and here's what we have now: A President that now is limited in his agenda to grow the gov, the Senate that is now forced to work with the other side, and a potential Speaker of the House that is talking about downsizing.

The Tea Party didn't win everything last night, and unfortunately we still have Reid and Boxer...but does one side ever win everything? Of course not.

 

BTW, The Tea Party movement also won big back in the primaries. Some of their candidates were running in districts where the Dem was expected to win.

 

Advice for the incoming TPers

 

I BEG you liberals to keep calling the Tea Party stupid racist hilly billys..

PLEASE DONT STOP...

 

What a ridiculous and totally inaccurate thread title. What country's elections were you watching?

 

In case I haven't said it, I'm not calling Republicans or even all Tea Party candidates "idiots, mental cases or extremists".

Rubio is a very strong candidate, for example. Most of the Republicans who won were decent candidates. Indeed, one reason for the victories is that Republicans spent a couple of years recruiting very good candidates. Many Democratic candidates, by contrast, were lackluster. That's irrespective of ideology.

Couple that with a poor economy and a fired-up base, and it's not hard to see how the GOP won 60+ seats, a majority of governorships, and a lot of state legislatures, including (very unexpectedly) here in Minnesota.

But we're trying to assess the influence of the Tea Party here. And while they helped generate a lot of turnout for Republicans, there's not much evidence that a Tea Party endorsement should have a lot of power. Many Tea Party-backed candidates were the establishment candidate who would have been nominated anyway. Where the Tea Party bucked the establishment, they had very limited success -- Paul and Rubio being the notable examples, or the Senate seat in Utah. But in all three of those cases, the GOP would have won the seat without the Tea Party. In most cases where the Tea Party bucked the establishment, the Tea Party cost the GOP very winnable seats -- and control of the Senate. Heck, in Palin's backyard, a *write-in* candidate is beating the Tea Party choice. In Colorado, the Tea Party candidate is polling around 10%. These are epic failures.

The GOP has to listen to the Tea Party, because it *does* have influence in the GOP primaries. But what 2010 shows is that the Tea Party is a liability in a general election, causing the GOP to lose races it should have won.

 

The TEA Party (of which I am a member) did awesome.

When was the last time any movement that was not Republican or Democrat has had such success. The next move should be into the Democratic Party. The Democrats seriously needs some fiscal responsiblity too.

Many TEA Party members are Democrats. There is no reason this cannot occur.

The TEA Party is only about fiscal responsibilities. If an issue is not about that, the TEA Party is not in play and the politician cannot call upon the TEA Party Caucus whill will be formed shortly. They need to be very resrtictive on what they use the TEA Party name for.

 

how many of those that won had something other than an (R) by their name?

 

Do you have a valid source for the 57 number? Please post a link.

 

Who's fault is that? The TEA Party is open to all fiscally responsible candidates regardless of party. The Demcoratic Party attacked the TEA Party as stupid, evil, racists. The Democratic Party is welcome to come along and join the TEA Party in fiscal responsiblity.

 

I didnt say its anyones fault...

but your claim this is the first time a group other than dems or republicans...blah blah...

is just silly considering every tea party candidate was a member of the republican party.

 

All Tea Party candidates:
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/11/03/5403120-just-32-of-tea-party-candidates-win

On a night when Republicans as a whole scored a big victory, only 32% of Tea Party candidates won.

Sarah Palin's picks:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/pol..._of_the_tea_party_favorites_picks_win_on.html

Of the ones that weren't establishment candidates (i.e., wouldn't have been nominated without Tea Party support) only 32% won. And of the ones that *did* win, 60% won by more than 10 points, indicating they would have won with or without her endorsement.

 

A grand unfalsifiable hypothesis on the scale of 'jobs saved or created'.

W/O the TP the turnout is almost certainly much smaller. Does the House turn? Prolly. 65 seats? never.

Also, the conservative movement is well served with losses for Castle, et al.

 

I am not sure this number is right now because MSNBC has now removed the story and is separating "tea party candidates" from "tea party backed candidates."

They must have realized they were accidentally putting the TEA party in positive light.

 

And how does that compare to all the other unaffiliated candidates? 20x? 50x?

 

they are probably as confused as everyone else as to which of the dozens of tea party groups counts....not to mention how many candidates just claimed they were teaparty backed or inspired

 

everyone of those teaparty candidates was affiliated...why would you compare them to those who arent?

 

Thanks for the info! Not bad for the first time out.

 

If you say so. On a night when Republicans as a whole were winning a ridiculous percentage of races (65% of Senate races, 57% of House seats, 60% of governor races), 32% flat sucks, IMO.