The Tea Party Senators

The New York Times ^ | August 5, 2012 | ALBERT R. HUNT

[mdittmar]

The U.S. House of Representatives last year became the spiritual home of the Tea Party, which helped elect dozens in the 2010 Republican landslide. Success in the Senate was limited.

In 2013, the Senate may become the Tea Party’s cathedral.

In my latest column, I lay out what has become of the Tea Party-backed representatives. This year, Tea Party activists are winning Republican Senate primaries and are favored to win seats in the fall. They include Ted Cruz in Texas, Deb Fischer in Nebraska and Richard Mourdock in Indiana. Primaries over the next 10 days in Missouri and Wisconsin could catapult others.

[GoldenPup]

This year, Tea Party activists are winning Republican Senate primaries and are favored to win seats in the fall.

From your pen to God's eyes.

[nascarnation]

Per FR dogma, Mourdock can't be a conservative OR a Tea Party affiliate because he supports Romney.

[mdittmar]

Well,I would support Bozo the Clown to get rid of obama.

[Trueblackman]

Wait how is this possible, the New York Slimes and the other Marxists Media Outlets told us the Tea Party was all dead a few months ago and the establishment was the real victor as they pushed Mittens on true Conservatives. Both didn’t seem to realize that Romney may get the Presidency, but we would get the WHOLE DAMN HOUSE AND ARE DOING THAT NOW!

[Sybeck1]

Romney has to be kept on a short leash.

[Sybeck1]

Romney has to be kept on a short leash.

[Dysart]

Agreed. A vote for Bozo would make us laugh thru these swelling onerous times which have tried Patriots' souls and will serve to galvanize our zeal for real optimism in helping us recall happier, freer times-- and to coin a phrase, hope.

Obama Must Git!

[Dr. Sivana]

Per FR dogma, Mourdock can't be a conservative OR a Tea Party affiliate because he supports Romney.

This is a thread about Tea Party influence in the Senate, and you have to bring it back to Romney.

As far as JimRob Freepers are concerned, there is no conservative canidate inthe presidential election. For many of us, the Senate races are far more important. Now we have a thread that is not about Romney, and you try to stir up trouble.

I have NO idea what the point of such a post is. It isn't even trying to PERSUADE JimRob Freepers. It does not advance the topic of the thread. If you are a conservative, your energies are best spent elsewhere. Let us work on promoting good Senators and Representatives you work for whomever.

[ExCTCitizen]

We don’t need BOZO since we do have a clown in the WHITE HUT.

[SunkenCiv]

:’) /bingo and thanks!

[SunkenCiv]

:’D

[SunkenCiv]

/bingo

[Brilliant]

I saw Schumer’s recent interview about the election. He stated that the GOP is moving away from the middle and abandoning the middle class. He stated that the party that moves away from the middle is the party that loses in the election. Based on that, I will be interested to see how the GOP actually does. Assuming the Dems lose the election, I wonder how Schumer will spin that.

Schumer also stated that the 5 GOP Senate seats that the Dems have a chance to win are MA, IN, ME, AZ, and NV. He stated that the reason they have that chance is that the GOP has nominated such extreme rightwing candidates in those states.

So I will be interested to see how many of those states the Dems actually win. If the GOP wins 4 out of 5, then it looks like the “extreme right” has taken over the middle.

[chiller]

You're probably correct about Mitt on a short leash, but I'm leaning towards him becoming a conservative monster with support from the T-Party. He is, afterall, a mormon which means conservative by nature. Massachusetts history means nothing to me.

Mitt has a chance to save the country, much like he did with the Olympics. To do so, he must use our conservative ideas. Otherwise, nothing gets fixed, and he becomes an ordinary, failed President. Go Tea and he becomes a hero, which is a role I think he relishes.

[chiller]

btt

[RightOnline]

From your keyboard to God’s ear.

I believe Mitt will be Pres.....he will have a solid majority in the House AND the Senate.

Let’s see what he/they do with it. If we don’t see huge changes: drastic spending cuts, elimination of entire Fed departments, audits of the Fed, MAJOR tax reform, cuts in Fed red tape, etc., etc., etc.....we’ll know. We’ll finally know if it’s time for a true Third Party with big, gnarly teeth.

[SnuffaBolshevik]

"This is a thread about Tea Party influence in the Senate, and you have to bring it back to Romney.'

Don't sweat it. There is a crazy cohort here who shoot down anyone who even acknowledges Romney (poor candidate that he is). They are about 10 true believers blowing smoke up each others behinds.

So much sturm and drang to no avail. Reminiscent of the Perot voters who gave us the cigar wetter. They will be of no consequence in November.

[jdsteel]

Back to the subject at hand, don’t forget Smith in PA. He’s running against brand new incumbent Casey (Dweeb-PA)

[Dr. Sivana]

There is a crazy cohort here who shoot down anyone who even acknowledges Romney [ . . . ] So much sturm and drang to no avail.

I will not be voting for Romney.
I understand those who do.

FR is officially an anti-Romney site.

I would like conservatives to get along on those things on which we are united. I would expect the same courtesy from Romney supporters.

Using a thread about Senate races to bait those of us who do not support a man who would return the Republican Party to the Rockefellers, Elliot Richardsons, Lowell Weickers, Christin Todd-Whitmans is not a way to advance conservative unity.

If anti-Romney voters will be of no consequence, and I never said we would be of any consequence, why do Romney supporters have to pick fights instead of encouraging support of conservatives on the underticket?