None of these groups who are supporting Brown are terribly enthusiastic about his record or his positions on issues. Many of them would support Kennedy in a second if he was running as a Republican challenger to Brown and had a chance of getting elected. Some of the more socially conservative groups have no candidate they like in the race at all. Yet all of these Tea Party associated groups have abandoned the candidate with genuine Tea Party credentials to support Brown because it is a better political strategy. They may not like Brown much, but if he can win a Senate seat from Massachusetts that's such a huge blow to the Democrats and would do so much to weaken the efforts to pass Obamacare that they are biting the bullet and promote a candidate who they wouldn't give a second look in another circumstance.
In return, Brown has really embraced the Tea Party label and has borrowed their message and many of their ideas in pushing his candidacy. This raises the hope for those who are reluctantly supporting him that some of that rhetoric will stick with him once he gets in office and he will be a better representative for the people than he would have been without their support, either by being educated from his association with the Tea Party movement or out of a sense that he owes something to them for putting him in office.
All of this seems pretty unfair for Joe Kennedy who really is a good candidate with solid credentials and interesting ideas and a more authentic Tea Party platform. Some of his supporters are taking it personally. There is already a lot of resentment among more libertarian Tea Party activists against some of the more mainstream and often better-funded groups which have become involved. They are seen as corporate shills or interlopers from the Republican party or opportunists trying to cash in on Tea Party momentum. There is fear that they will take over the movement and resentment that they give the left-leaning media a basis to criticize the movement as a whole as illegitimate.
The groups which have stuck with Kennedy are the ones which are most ideologically driven and which put ideals and principles ahead of political pragmatism. But this sort of misses the whole point of the Tea Party movement, which is to actually influence government and implement changes in policy. You can't change anything with candidates who can't get elected, no matter how great they are. It's the old, old argument of whether or not to take the lesser of two evils, and one element of the Tea Party movement has decided that evil is still evil and utterly unacceptable while the rest have taken the position that less evil is better than more evil.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Old Oak Tree
I think Republican politicians now realize they must immediately become fiscal conservatives. We must address our federal debt, our annual deficits, our diminishing manufacturing base, our trade imbalances, and the resulting risks to the U.S. dollar and our ability to protect ourselves. My hope is that all fiscal conservatives can work together to defeat the costly liberal agenda.
I think the voters have realized they must whip Republicans into shape. Republicans must rise to the challenge and govern according to the principles of fiscal conservatism. To the extent they are successful in doing that, pragmatic tea-partiers like myself will support them.
Right now, my focus is on getting Scott Brown elected. His victory on Jan 19 will have immediate effects.
2 - Maia
Brown actually started off with a goal of $500,000, not $750,000; that goal was met shortly after mid-day, and his campaign then moved the goal to $750,000 and finally, sometime during the evening, raised it to $1,000,000. Although the official "money bomb" time frame has passed, I am sure he is still receiving significant contributions as more and more people (nationwide) sense that he really might win. Rasmussen's most recent poll shows him moving within 2 points. That’s from 30 points, then 9, now 2.
I think his desire to reign in the seemingly endless expansion of government that we are witnessing and his strong stance on national security have great mass (could pun be intended?) appeal. Cutting taxes and getting some actual job growth in the private--not government--sector--is of critical importance. He is a sincere and honest guy.
I've put my money where my mouth is. I hope others--from whawtever party--will do the same and give his campaign the tools it needs for a solid final push.
3 - spinnikerca
I think there are a number of groups of people who like the tool of tea parties who have overlapping ideas. None like the health bill, however, and some are saying Brown is best (for them) but a whole bunch of others are saying 'this isn't just voting the lesser of two evils, this is voting against the insurance corporate welfare program being called health reform'. And that makes a huge difference. Even to those who in most elections would vote for the Liberty candidate and consider it a lesson to the two major parties if that 'impacted elections.'
4 - spinnikerca
I also think it is important to note that Kennedy's polling to date is part of this. Rubio is polling well, Rand Paul is polling ahead of his competitors in KY. This issue only arises if the tea party can't get sufficiently behind their candidates, prior to the last push to ballot. In upstate NY, it wasn't the 'tea parties' who were the spoilers, they got 45% of the vote. It was the liberal pretending to be GOP who was the spoiler, taking 5% of the vote which would have put the tea party candidate over the top.
The White House said that principles will get you 45% (essentially), however, not listening to your base will get you 5%.
5 - Dave Nalle
Spinny, I agree with you, but I'll make the Devil's Advocate argument here. I think some people are not confident, based on Brown's record, that he will actually stand firm against the health care bill or against raising taxes and spending more on bailouts, which is also a concern.
Dave
6 - Dave Nalle
Spinny, it wasn't the tea party folks who supported Hoffman in NY-23, it was extreme social conservatives from the religious right. The main Tea Party groups actually stayed out of the fight because all the candidates sucked.
Dave
7 - spinnikerca
Dave, well if he doesn't even have sufficient spine to stand with the entire rest of the GOP against the insurance sell out, I see no use for him. That is a very different issue.
8 - spinnikerca
Dave 6 - some of the tea party are not liberty types, but social conservatives. In some areas those are rare, in others, not so much. That convention being planned so someone can obtain email lists and create a top down structure? What liberty type would consider spontaneous order bad?
9 - biteme
GOP standing against the health bill because it's an insurance sell out... oh my god, i just fell off my chair. That's the biggest joke I've ever heard in my life. If the GOP was in power, they'd be editing the bill that the insurance companies gave them right now. Just like they did with the telecommunications act and energy policy. Not to mention countless others.
10 - Lumpy
I wonder how long it will be before some pinhead bigot shows up on this thread ranting about teabaggers.
11 - zingzing
lumpy, you are your own worst enemy. that was truly hilarious.
12 - The Obnoxious American
Dave,
I think the central point is that this is a two party system. People can support third parties or tea party movements or Ron Paul all they like. Unless the major parties pick up these views and run candidates that capture the essense of these movements, these votes are completely wasted and may even hurt the objectives of these independent voters as has been proven time and again, most notably with Ross Perot voters who ended up with Clinton but probably would have preferred Bush Sr if they couldn't get Perot.
That Chavez loving Joe Kennedy would claim to be a Tea Partyer, is beyond absurd. But about on par for a hack like Joe.
Biteme,
Take responsibility for your party's actions. You got your fillibuster proof majority, control of both houses (which the dems have had for almost three years now) and the executive branch. It's all on the Dems now buddy, don't try to lay this rotten egg at the feet of the GOP
13 - Baritone
I don't pretend to know what is likely to happen in Massachusetts. However, it becomes clear to me in reading Dave's article and others that so called "tea partiers" are no more well defined than either of the major parties. There are a # of groups identifying themselves as tea partiers, but they offer up widely divergent agendas. In essence, they are just disgruntled Republicans who, on the whole, measure out well right of center.
Each of the groups seem to have an "all or nothing" notion about what they stand for, and who they will or will not support. Such splintered groups will find it very difficult to put together any effective coalition that can, of itself, have any significant impact on coming elections unless they can be content playing the role of nothing more than spoilers ala Perot, Nader, etal.
B
14 - Baronius
Baritone, I think they include a lot of disgruntled independents who would have been Republicans if the party had stood on its principles. They're not necessarily on the far right. There are plenty of moderate deficit hawks.
Plus, any fringe is going to attract unclassifiable kooks.
15 - Arch Conservative
"Spinny, it wasn't the tea party folks who supported Hoffman in NY-23, it was extreme social conservatives from the religious right"
I consider myself fairly social conservative but I'm no idiot. Right wrong or indifferent, moneymakes the world go round. The more of it I can keep and the less the government can steal from me the happoer I am. At the end of the day the tax rate is infinitely more important an issue to me than abortion and I'm sure millions more that once were or currently are members of the GOP feel the same way.
Bob McDonnel gets it, why can't the rest of the GOP.....
As far as the MA Senate race goes........Coakley really is a poor excuse for a human being............
16 - roger nowosielski
My goodness, Archie.
You're less of an ideologue than you led everyone to believe.
Good for you.
17 - Eric Dondero
Let's not forget that the longest serving Libertarian Republican legislator in America - Mass Sen. Bob Hedlund is an old friend and colleague of Scott Brown, and was one of thos originally calling on him to run for this seat.
18 - Zedd
Dave,
You being a historian, can you please clear up the disinformation about the original tea party. That the demands of the participants had been met but they wanted to rile people up so they went ahead with the "protest".
19 - STM
Yes, you're right Zedd. The idea that Americans were an oppressed people at the time are a myth.
The revolutionaries, as you quite rightly point out, were more interested in cementing their own money, power and prestige. It took quite a long time to get ordinary American colonists to go along with it all, and even then many didn't.
It was about much more than a tuppeny tax on a pound of tea, which was the drink of the wealthly anyway and not - unlike now - a drop for the masses.
I can deal with the idea of traitors to the Crown, as even the British parliament was split down the middle on American self-government and only George's meddling in Westminster prevented it, but not with them getting into bed with the French.
Anyway, I do love a good tea party ... cucumber sandwiches are a must, though. With the crusts cut off.
20 - Zedd
Most were proud to be subjects of the crown. They identified themselves as Brits. Radicals like Thomas Paine (later) wanted an independent nation and were all to happy to spread propaganda against the King in order to meet that end.
21 - mrdockellis
I put this in the comments section in my article, but I thought I'd put it here too.
There's a rumor going around that certain counties in the Bay State are sending around census forms this week that say if you don't respond in ten days you will be purged from the voter rolls.
Some believe this is aimed at absentee voters who have their mail forwarded. It usually takes at least two weeks for mail to get forwarded. So those folks who may have mailed their absentee ballots, won't get this snap census in time to stay on the rolls. This is why the local officials say it will take weeks to certify the election. They need the time to figure out who didn't send in this last minute census so those votes( presumably for Brown) can be disqualified.
The Fix is in!!
22 - Dr Dreadful
I took a journalism class a couple of years ago in which the teacher pointed out that the Boston Tea Party, far from being a spontaneous act of rebellion, was actually the first manufactured public relations exercise.
And you know what? He was right. Mobs don't go in for symbolism. They would just have set fire to every ship in the harbour. A lot less intellectually challenging, not to mention more fun.
23 - Baritone
As much as has been made of it over the years, the so called "tea party" would hardly be considered even a good fraternity prank by today's standards. It was a lot more "show" than "blow" - much like today's TPs.
B
24 - STM
Zedd: "Spread propaganda against the King in order to meet that end".
Rebellious Yankee scum! Traitots to the Crown ...
It was more a civil war than anything.
I can forgive them all that, but getting into bed with the French was unforgiveable.
Also, many Americans don't realise that it was not any military defeat during the War of Independence that ended the fighting (that aspect of it was always a might close-run thing, as even many American historians will tell you), but the change of government in Westminster to the Whigs, who had supported American self-government from the outset and wanted an end to the war.
George, now stripped of his little meddlesome coterie in the House, asked for more money to keep fighting, but parliament denied him.
In truth, it could have gone on for another 20 years had they not, given Britain's wealth and growing global status at the time.
Ultimately, however, I believe the result would have been the same: self-government in one form or another.
25 - STM
And George didn't go mad until later in his reign ... from porphria, attacks of which were made worse by a medication given to him that contained arsenic, which heightens the condition.
It was the government of Lord North, and the meddling in parliament of those who had fallen under the King's influence, who kept the war going.
Yorktown certainly didn't help and swayed public opinion, but the British never know when they are beaten. Even if they appear to be losing they keep fighting - which is generally how they manage to win, most of the time (look at World Wars I and II).
Which was exactly the strategy of the revolutionaries, who couldn't have hoped to beat the British in any significant, crushing manner in most of the larger, set-piece battles ... not unusual, either, when looked at in this light: most Americans up to the time of the declaration of independence considered themselves Britons. or "Englishmen", and in fact were either immigrants from Britain or the descendants of British migrants.
The French alliance was key at Yorktown, especially the naval input of the French.
Glad Americans have finally seen the light in relation to their one-time allies :)
Now, how do I get invited to a tea party. I love a nice cup of tea.