Home > Politics > To all the Tea Partying, third party advocates and Glenn Beck fanatics

To all the Tea Partying, third party advocates and Glenn Beck fanatics

I’m not a big poll geek, but here is an interesting question from a WSJ/NBC News poll out yesterday:

(ASKED OF RESPONDENTS WHO HAD HEARD OF THE TEA PARTY MOVEMENT, Q10:1-5)

Q13 From what you know about the so-called Tea Party Movement, would it be a third party that you would be interested in voting for this year for Congress?

3/10+

Yes …………………………………………………………………………………………… 20

No ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 50

Depends (VOL) ……………………………………………………………………….. 5

Not sure …………………………………………………………………………………… 7

Unaware of Tea Party (10:6) ……………………………………………….. 18

+ Results shown reflect responses among registered voters.

Got that?  50% say that they won’t consider voting for a third-party candidate.  So can we stop with the third-party nonsense already?   You want conservatives in Washington?  Then it’s the GOP or bust.

Instead of trashing the GOP, move to reform it.  That’s part of what grassroots organizations are supposed to be doing–keeping the party in check.

If you’re not happy with the direction of the party establishment, then don’t feed the beast.   Hit them where it hurts the most–in the wallet.  Support conservative candidates directly instead of donating to the GOP.

Don’t waste your resources on third parties as you’ll only be helping to elect Democrats.

About these ads
  1. The Center Square
    March 17, 2010 at 11:11 AM

    The Tea Party movement would have about the same degree of public opposition as healthcare reform. Ironic, considering how many right-wing/Tea Party types are using public opposition as a reason to defeat healthcare reform.

    I completely agree with your concluding point as well. Anyone can get agitated. Anyone can rail against “the system.” But until all of that agitation and frustration translates into a governable majority, what’s the point?

    • March 17, 2010 at 12:46 PM

      Thanks for posting…

      And I’ll agree with your last statement. I understand the frustration of the tea partiers. Everyone wants “their party” to behave. But like I said, the third party thing is a dead end.

  2. The Center Square
    March 17, 2010 at 3:01 PM

    Exactly. The easiest thing in the world is to crank up 10% or 20% of the electorate. But just ask Obama how hard it is to put together a governing majority — even with a governing majority *lol*.

    This is why I believe that our salvation lies in the center, not at the margins. We need to figure out a way to coalesce the 60% of the center that spills into center-right and center-left territory. Then again, I have no idea how to accomplish that either.

    Be well, Olliander.

    • March 17, 2010 at 3:28 PM

      Part of the problem is that candidate Obama campaigned as a centrist, and won the election based on that. He’s now grabbing the country by the scruff of the neck and enabling the extremists in the Democrat party to pull us left, which runs contra to what he ran on. But that’s another story.

      Thanks again.

  3. The Center Square
    March 17, 2010 at 8:22 PM

    What? Campaign to the center and govern to the margin? NOOOO! Surely not our elected leaders!!! That has been the only successful political paradigm for the past two decades. Certainly Clinton & Bush did exactly the same thing.

    I think the systemic problem is that there is no well-understood formula by which to govern from the center. No one has figured out that recipe. I believe with all my heart that Bush set out to be a “uniter, not a divider,” and that Obama set out to be “post-partisan.” But the system just prove to be bigger than the leader, over and over and over.

    *very frustrating*

    • March 17, 2010 at 9:35 PM

      We will have to agree to disagree on that. I believed Bush wanted to be a uniter—he was an elected executive for quite a while, he knew how to govern. Obama on the other hand, never intended to be post-partisan—whatever that meant.

  4. The Center Square
    March 18, 2010 at 7:26 AM

    There really isn’t much of an objective reason to believe Bush had good bi-partisan intentions, but Obama did not.

    I will wrap this up with the observation that it is always tempting to believe the best in those with whom we agree, and the worst in those with whom we do not. That is the very essence of our political crisis these days, isn’t it?

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: