Skip to comments.Is the Tea Party Losing Its Grip on the GOP?
Posted on 01/30/2012 6:38:36 PM PST by neverdem
JACKSONVILLE, Fla. -- Newt Gingrich's fast Florida fade is the latest indication that the Tea Party is losing its grip on the GOP, with the establishment poised to triumph once again.
An official endorsement Saturday night from last year's Tea Party standout, Herman Cain; an all-but-official backing from longtime Tea Party darling Sarah Palin; and the support of an increasing number of Tea Party officials around the country have not lifted Gingrich back over Mitt Romney in the Florida polls. That weakened clout has been accompanied by the Republican establishment's full-throttle charge at Gingrich's past -- to great effect with the primary here just one day away.
Its a stunning twist of fate for the GOP, which just 18 months ago was mired in intraparty battles that gave rise to the grass-roots movement, and which had been desperately seeking anyone but Mitt Romney in the presidential race to satisfy its hard-right turn. Still, if Romney wins here on Tuesday and goes on to clinch the nomination in the coming weeks or months, it may not settle the question of whether he has quieted the Tea Party faithful heading toward the general election.
Its various favorites have failed to take hold. Michele Bachmann was ultimately not seen as credible, Cain was forced out of the race over charges of sexual harassment, and Rick Perry couldnt pass muster through the debates.
Though Gingrich has embraced the Tea Party -- and many of its leaders have hugged him back -- he doesnt fit the movements mold. The Romney campaign knows this and has had no qualms about highlighting that fact.
From former Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole, the GOP presidential nominee in 1996, to Sen. John McCain, the standard bearer in 2008, a growing number of Republican insiders have blasted...
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
The GOP is losing its grip on the Tea Party.
At some point, there won’t be room for both in one party.
No sense waiting.
I agree. I am hoping to see more Tea Party backed winners in Congress. Change from the bottom up. Would have liked to see a Tea Party candidate emerge from Congress or from a governorship to be a real “Tea Party” candidate for president. Someone who got there with the backing of the Tea Party, and then has an actual voting record to show they walk the walk. But we just won congressional seats in 2010—we’ve only begun to fight.
If Newt is denied the nomination by the establishment, and they force Mittens on us, Newt should run as the Tea Party candidate third party.
What is there to lose? There is virtually no difference in the policies of Mittens or Obozo.
Well said and very true.
Personally, I don't give much thought to moderates. They aren't worth a pail of piss.
My FRiend if Romney gets the nom, that is the day I officially go independent. Snake is the kindest word I can use to describe him.
I was at the rally in MN when McStain said 0bama was a good man. Thought the secret service was going to drag me out of the high school I was yelling at him so loud. I was in the majority though so I guess they gave me a pass.
This really is a turning point for this Nation. I will not go quietly. I will not conform and to h@ll with the GOPe!
McCain won the primary with 58% Add Hayworth's 30% and Deakin's 11.5% and it seems like people just didn't like Hayworth that much. Perhaps some conservative were turned off by Hayworth's big spending record in congress and infomercials showing how we can all suckle at the teat of the federal government for just 3 easy payments of $19.99
Then I suspect I won't read anything of value when you post.
Probably not. We are on different wavelengths.
Dang. Another backwards headline.
Some (many?) Freepers are surprisingly gullible when it comes to assessing potency of actions or movements. They have their blind spots and come to believe their own assertions. For instance, some hold that pollsters are always wrong, even when they are right, even when it shows our guy (Newt) expanding his lead, pulling away and eventually winning as he did in SC. The polls charted that trajectory, but some Freepers take that as evidence that the polls were wrong.
Freepers can be just as delusional and in denial as our ideological opposites. It is just that the Freeper blind spots are different than those of, say, the Media or the illiberal elite.
Thanx for your reply. I like your homepage picture of Dubya
See what I mean? An inability to make a business decision and get rid of McCain.
It’s the source, stupid. Not you neverdem. I would never shoot the messenger. But the source of this diabolic hit piece, is extremely biased. And, the only thing clear about their politics, is that they lean far left, almighty. IMO
Bottom line is Christie and Brown were better than the alternatives. The Tea Party shows wisdom by voting for the most conservative candidate who can win. The missteps were Christine O’Donnell and Sharon Angle (less so her conservatism then her lack of charisma). If there is one thing wrong with the Tea Party, it’s the lack of money/fundraising. If they had enough money on their side to fund Newt to be better competitive with Romney, Newt would win. What this election is proving is that ideology cannot trump money, unless perhaps the Tea Party had spent more time campaigning with boots on the ground in the last couple years to win moderates over to conservatism. Time is money, so the Tea Party can counter a lack of money with volunteering and time.
Does the Tea Party ever do fundraisers? Maybe it’s time they took the money issue more seriously. First you get the money, then you get the power, then you get the conservative... If the Tea Party showed up at the GOP-E’s door with a dumptruck full of money, then you’d see some major changes in their attitude. We need to rely on someone more than Sheldon Adelson.
That's not the case. Romney is not getting 60% of the vote, which means those 40% may be voting for other candidates. I know the polls say some Tea Party votes are going to Romney, but I think they're asking people if they sympathize with the Tea Party for that number, not necessarily if they're actively engaged with it. Bottom line is if the Tea Party doesn't have money to donate to candidates or run their own ads, then they aren't going to be able to compete with someone like Romney with all of Wall Street behind him. All I can think is you need to spend more time with boots on the ground on a daily basis non-stop trying to educate people on what a true conservative is, or getting them signed up on a mailing list or something.
But as someone indicated above, the key for the Tea Party is to push the limits of how conservative our candidates can be by controlling the primary process. We have a long way to go to convince people to vote conservative as opposed to just voting to throw out the bums of one party and put the other party in. But as long as we constantly have conservatives up in the primaries then we will get them in when the tide turns the way of our party instead of getting the “safe, electable” RINOs in. More fundamental change might involve actually changing voters’ minds, which is something that probably takes marketing and money.
I’d like to see Newt as a third party candidate, but what are his chances if he can’t even defeat Mitt in a Republican primary? I guess it’d be worth it just to see him debate Obama.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.