[quote=pri_dk][quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Where the Tea Party put forth realistic, credible candidates, they won. Where they didn’t (think O’Donnell), they didn’t. [/quote]
And how is that interesting?
Fiorina was a tea party candidate. Realistic and credible. And she was running against the poster-child of what the TP is supposedly against.
Allan, you are picking and choosing your facts, mixing in a big dose of rationalization, and trying to make a story about it. You are now fully qualified to be a media pundit.
Now that the TP has candidates in office, they have lost their strongest asset: the lack of a track record. Is Rand and Co. really going to make a difference in the next two years? Nope. He’ll get bogged down gridlock just like everyone else in office. The novelty of the TP will be long gone in two years.
Sorry dude, “we’ll get ’em next time” is not a victory.[/quote]
Pri: Did you happen to notice my remark about the GOP “harnessing and controlling” the Tea Party? I could care less about the results, its the strategy I enjoy. Karl Rove and Dick Armey are now set to fully co-opt the Tea Party movement and use it is a “grass roots” revolution. One thing Pelosi was right about, was the “Astro-turf” aspect of this movement. She was not only right about it, IT put her out of business.
As far as the “get ’em next time” aspect, look at the statistics. It was very much about voter mobilization and on both sides of the ball. Obama had a golden opportunity in ’08 to carry the support of young and minority voters forward. He had a complete, well-funded and well-organized infrastructure in place and essentially abandoned it once he’d secured the presidency. This strategic error has been commented on by The Nation, Mother Jones and The New Republic. Those key swing votes, exemplified by Independents, swung like a metronome last night and the exit polls bear this out.
