tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post7928829423902678783..comments2023-10-16T07:13:12.123-05:00Comments on A plain blog about politics: A Party Networks Perspective on Tea Parties and RepublicansJonathan Bernsteinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15931039630306253241noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-64945472817893250712010-09-28T13:32:52.451-05:002010-09-28T13:32:52.451-05:00tea party suckstea party sucksAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-87423846577518287962010-09-21T23:53:18.505-05:002010-09-21T23:53:18.505-05:00When they started, the Tea Parties might have been...When they started, the Tea Parties might have been concerned mostly with fiscal conservativism. However, it's hard to sustain that argument in September 2010. Joe Miller. Christie O'Donnell. Sharron Angle. Marco Rubio. This is not a list of people who are agnostic on social issues. <br /><br />Jon's larger point is that calling things "insider/outsider" or "establishment/tea party" or whatever is a choice of terminology that carries with it some baggage: namely, the assumption that American parties are organizations only. Rather, the perspective that Jon is pushing is that parties are really a forum through which factions can compete for their views of an ideal world. So, the Tea Parties (whether we want to call them patriots, fiscal conservatives, or clinically insane, it doesn't matter) represent an attempt to influence public policy mostly by influencing the types of candidates and policies put forth by one of the two major parties. Note that this doesn't preclude simultaneously attempting to influence public policy outside the 2-party system, but they learned their lessons from NY-23: it's a two-party system.<br /><br />All this said, I really disagree with any characterization of the folks in Tea Parties as being outside the existing Republican party orbit. I simply cannot accept that as being true. That statement, to my ears, is just preposterous. It just can't fly. Democrats aren't offering policies that are all that different from what they've been offering for 20 years now. Where were the Tea Parties in the 1990s, or even harassing candidates in 2000-2008? Similarly, Tea Parties simply didn't exist in any kind of number until the day after Obama won. Now, of course, Bush is attacked for not reigning in spending, but the objections were EXCEEDINGLY muted from those who ostensibly hold this perspective from 2000-2006, and really for 2007 and 2008 as well.Matt Jarvisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-5708494068860720592010-09-21T23:51:34.720-05:002010-09-21T23:51:34.720-05:00I think if you combine Anon's comment and Rob&...I think if you combine Anon's comment and Rob's 2nd comment(7:11) you get about what I suspect is going on. It's not just the same old Taft/Dewey split, or even just the Club for Growth/non-Club split in different clothes. But those fights are in the mix, as are new versions of those fights...some of the players are the same, but surely there are new people -- which is no surprise; the parties are always bringing in new people. And the "Tea Party movement", to the extent it's really one movement, is all over the map...there are clearly some libertarian-leaning folks, some less libertarian inclined who want a GOP focused just on economics, but also some strong social conservatives driven by the same issues that drive the Values Voters crowd. It's not monolithic, and it's not primarily, and certainly not completely, an outsiders/establishment thing.Jonathan Bernsteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15931039630306253241noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-91303403431243050522010-09-21T21:25:59.573-05:002010-09-21T21:25:59.573-05:00The real battle is between the rank and file of th...The real battle is between the rank and file of the conservative movement, including the culture warriors, the bigots, and the free market ideologues, and the Republican blue bloods who think they have a hereditary right to run the party. The Club for Growth has been doing the same thing as the Tea Party for years.William Ockhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13795149116565627671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-42625688606130478032010-09-21T20:42:20.449-05:002010-09-21T20:42:20.449-05:00I don't see that the Tea Party comes mainly fr...I don't see that the Tea Party comes mainly from inside the Republican party. I think most are independents or borderline/uninvolved Republican leaners. They are similar to the Perot voters, who were most concerned with fiscal issues. If this is right, that spells big trouble for the Democrats because it means a large number of Independents, plus some disaffected Republicans, and some conservative Democrats are all uniting with the Republicans.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-5005645293640321262010-09-21T19:11:27.023-05:002010-09-21T19:11:27.023-05:00Anonymous, I'm with you until you say these ar...Anonymous, I'm with you until you say these are the same Republican groups that fought for influence over the direction of the party for decades. I don't read that as being Jonathan's point, and I don't agree with it. The Moral Majority's issues were not congruent with the tea partiers' issues. Similarly, though to a lesser extent, the McGovern Democrats' issues were not the same as the issues that drive those on the left today; there's a bigger difference between both those leftward pushes and the issues on the left in 1948. And note carefully that it's not just that the issues differ, it's the people and interest groups who are advancing those issues.<br /><br />Certainly there's some overlap, but to imagine a single rightward or leftward faction in the parties waging a decades-long struggle for influence is simplistic and misses the fact that different issues attract different adherents. Country club Republicans, strong defense Republicans, social issues Republicans, tea party Republicans, libertarian Republicans may all fit within the general category of those pulling the party to the right, but each is pulling it to a somewhat different place on the right and depending on which is in the ascendancy at any given time, attracting different independents.Robhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11386165669907559416noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-85840364716375857222010-09-21T18:12:50.157-05:002010-09-21T18:12:50.157-05:00Rob, I think you miss Jonathan's point: there ...Rob, I think you miss Jonathan's point: there is no real, organized Tea Party Movement but rather a network of groups of activists that identify themselves with the Tea Party movement and will tend to emphasize the issues that they want to, but on the whole, these are the same Republican groups that have fought for influence over the direction of the party for decades. Jon Stewart's bit on the Tea Party's "effect" last night was particularly spot on.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-59474410455004997812010-09-21T13:07:17.336-05:002010-09-21T13:07:17.336-05:00The tea parties represent an interesting counterpo...The tea parties represent an interesting counterpoint to the religious right/Moral Majority movement of the 1980's. Whereas the Moral Majority focussed on socially conservative issues rather than economic issues, the tea party movement is almost entirely concerned with issues of economics, fiscal policy and the proper role of government. You'd think that many of those in the media and on the left who objected to the social issues activism of the Moral Majority would welcome the different concentration of the tea party movement--but that turns out not to be the case.Robhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11386165669907559416noreply@blogger.com