Gorillas in the Mist, part 93672

No, the Tea Party is not going to abandon the GOP, sorry to disappoint you WaPo readers. They’ve been building GOP officeholders at the state level for several years now.

Hey kids, remember when the WaPo reported the Tea Party could “just as easily” fade away… in 2010? Remember the Coffee Party? Good times, good times.

People who get all their information from the WaPo could be forgiven for thinking the Tea Party burns crosses and science textbooks in between plotting to commit violence and working to outlaw tampons. In truth the Tea Party mainly exists to reduce government spending from its current historic heights and rein in the exponentiating regulatory burden, which seems to add a million pages a year in contradictory and often unconstitutional requirements.


Posted

in

by

Tags:

Comments

5 responses to “Gorillas in the Mist, part 93672”

  1. captain*arizona Avatar
    captain*arizona

    lets hope it doesn’t go away :but continues to destroy the republican party! the core tea party attracts the crazes and the wacko rape candidates the way crap attracts flies! everyday we get stronger you get weaker! keep on attacking jeb bush he is the only gopper who worrys mrs clinton in 2016

  2. TheAJ Avatar
    TheAJ

    Hey Kids!

    Romney Heading For Election Win?

    http://classicalvalues.com/2012/10/romney-heading-for-election-win/

    The lesson is the Washington Post loses crediblility for a nonprediction, but a libertarians who predicted a Romney win (UNSKEWED POLLS) . . . this is someone we should listen to. Good times, good times!

    BTW, it seems that the Tea Party primarily exists as a business to enrich lobbyists, strategy consultants, “grass roots leaders” and DC types.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/tea-party-pacs-reap-money-for-midterms-but-spend-little-on-candidates/2014/04/26/0e52919a-cbd6-11e3-a75e-463587891b57_story.html

    Not that the same issue doesn’t plague left-wing causes, but its funny to see right-wingers who rail against government waste show absolutely no control over financial management (or is the money going exactly where they planned for it to go?). Dave, this is a perfect opportunity for you to join the racket and actually earn big bucks saying the same stuff you are saying now and continue to show nothing for it. While earning six figures! Do it man! Liberty!

    Now why do I think this opportunity at self-examination will only prompt a tribal defensive response?

  3. Dave Avatar
    Dave

    At the risk of feeding your nonsensical trolling threadjackery, I’ll just point out that piece does not predict Romney will win the election, it just mentions some favorable early voting totals. And no, I’m not outraged that the Tea Party may have decorated an office. And that’s way too much time wasted on you.

  4. TheAJ Avatar
    TheAJ

    I’ll just point out the WaPo piece does not predict the tea party will fade away, just that it could fade away.

    You have a credibility issue.

    Hey kids, remember when the WaPo reported the Tea Party could “just as easily” fade away… in 2010? Remember the Coffee Party? Good times, good times.

    Hey kids, remember when the Dave reported that “2012 polls are clearly off-kilter in a fairly deliberate way.” Good times, good times!

    Hey kids, remember when the Dave reported that “the polls are essentially worthless”

    Hey kids, remember when the Dave reported “that turnout is going to look a lot more like 2010 than 2012.”

  5. Dave Avatar
    Dave

    Your obsession with my 2012 election posts is flattering, but your reading comprehension is poor. In fact, Romney did win independents decisively — the first candidate to lose while doing so. Of course, if we had known at the time the IRS was systematically and illegally suppressing the Tea Party we might have used different turnout models. But Gallup was saying turnout would look like 2010. Shrug. At any rate if missing one close election outcome created a “credibility problem” we’d have no political analysts.

    Giving equal odds a movement that is still going strong in 2014 will die in 2010, while promoting its alternative, is just a bit different, especially from ostensibly straight reportage.

    My time is limited so I’m not bothering to read any more of your efforts in this vein, sorry. Try to stay on topic.