In our last post, we debated a little about whether the Tea Party was really a 3rd party or just a passing fad. I found this map at Patchwork Nation. The map is interactive. So go to the site and take a look.
What jumps out at me is that there are varying degrees of support for the Tea Party, but that this support is widespread, even if the numbers are relatively small in individual counties. It remains to be seen how this will play out in the next elections.
Thursday, August 04, 2011
What's the deal with the Tea Party?
Posted by USWest at 2:23 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
I wouldn't say that the Tea Party is a "passing fad" but I would say that it is a fashionable label for a more stable part of the electorate. Right wing populism has gone by many names in this country. Tea Party is the label of the times but their views and their hatred of "the other" and the federal governments is not novel.
I couldn't get the interactive map to work. In any case, I'd be more interested in seeing the percentage of people in each county or district that support or sympathize with the tea party rather than the 0-15 individuals who are card carrying members of some organization declared to be officially affiliated with the amorphous movement we call "the Tea Party" now.
I tested the link, and it works. But unfortunately, it only takes you to their main site. To get to the Tea Party Map, you have to select "elections" from their menu and you will see "Tea Party" there.
It's an interesting site to explore. I agree that it would be more interesting to see the support rather than the car carriers. But I think it is interesting just the same. The numbers are rather low in most places, only a couple of people out of eery 10K in most of the country. This tells me that they have a disproportionate influence on things. This leads me to wonder which money interests are feeding them.
You know, it only takes a couple of rich brothers in some small state to fund a movement. It took one rich Californian with loads of money to burn to start a recall against Grey Davis. And it succeeded. Marketing works. this should worry us.
The answer to your question of who is funding the Tea Party movement, that is relatively easy to answer. Fox News/News Corp and the Koch brothers are behind this version of right wing populism.
Thank you. I knew that, but was alluding to it to make the bigger point that deep pockets have a lot of power. While we all know that because lobby groups, the creation of a movement out of money is a bit different, even if not new.
In the 2008 election, the "hope and change" groundswell behind the Obama campaign had no real answer from the right wing. In the 2010, the anger at the bailouts and the bad economy that drove the Tea Party had no real answer from the left. I believe in 2012 we will see those two movements hit head-on. Then we shall see if the light side or dark side prevails :-)
I hope you are right Dr. S. I'd love to see a genuine and honest political contest between pro-growth/pro-good government vs anti-government approaches.
Oh, RbR... I like *your* version. I was expecting a yellfest. It's hard for me to see what candidate the Republicans could pick--except maybe Huntsman--who would actually engage in any kind of honest discourse. But yes, an "genuine and honest contest" between those two approaches would be great.
In fact, yesterday I had exactly this debate with my better half, who (unlike me) feels that toll roads are a good answer to the traffic congestion around Los Angeles. He wanted the option to pay more to get to work faster, and thought it was only fair that those who use the roads should pay for them. I feel roads should be common property, like beaches and national parks--and I don't like letting the rich avoid traffic because then it will never get fixed. But both views are reasonable and have merit.
At the end of our talk, G. suggested what I said was a good version of a "grand bargain" -- he said to put in toll roads, but then use the fees to build and subsidize public transportation options. Not a bad compromise, really.
If the fees from the toll roads go to subsidizes public transit what will pay for the toll roads?
The debate really is about how resources should be allocated. But it is also about the role of government in people's lives. I have always believed that government's main responsibility was to protect, defend, and ensure the life, liberty, and happiness of its people. That's a tall order.
My sense is that others feel the role of government is simply to maintain order and stay out of the way otherwise. And that is a debate that is as old as our republic.
Oh, and in protecting happiness, I do mean providing for the common good, not just the few deemed "worthy".
I heard an interesting story on NPR this morning about the Chilean coal miners who were trapped underground for like 60 days or more. When they were down there on their own, they maintained a little social order. They had roles and jobs. And this kept them sane and alive. But once the rescue workers managed to get them TV and ipods, then the order started to break down. Rather than doing their jobs, some of them just wanted to watch TV all day. Others kept sending their ipods back up to the surface because they didn't like the music selection that was on it.
Now take this lesson and apply it to Congress. Once you put C-Span in the chambers all day and all night, the order breaks down. People mug for cameras rather than staying humble enough to get real work done.
As we say, DC is 16 square miles surrounded by reality.
RbR: I did not mean to imply that *all* of the money from the tolls would go to subsidize public transit.
Dr S. I guess my question was based on an assumption that there would not be very much excess in the tolls collected.
Post a Comment