It was a Bloodbath!

[Nathan Poe]

You really are extraordinarlity short-sighted, or deliberately blind, if you think the Tea Party got nothing. Majority control of the House and enough members to prevent any legislation we dislike in the Senate is enough to stop Obama dead in his tracks.

I would have thought you more astute than that.

Is that all the Tea Party is about? Stopping Obama dead in his tracks?

The GOP was doing a pretty decent job of that as it was.

And legislation "we" dislike? Will the Tea Party be consulting you or I before voting? Doubtful.

Maybe it's not that I'm not astute, just that I expected them to actually do stuff.

And speaking of astute, perhaps you'll notice that the TP doesn't have the majority -- the Republicans do. Big difference, considering that most of them are establishment GOP veterans who you'd probably write off as "Rinos" anyway.

If all they've done is turn the GOP from the party of "no" to the party of "NO!" I'm not impressed. I want to know what the Tea Party is going to do to separate them from the GOP RINOS we all know they secretly are.

 

[laconicstudent]

Is that all the Tea Party is about? Stopping Obama dead in his tracks?

The GOP was doing a pretty decent job of that as it was.

Maybe it's not that I'm not astute, just that I expected them to actually do stuff.

And speaking of astute, perhaps you'll notice that the TP doesn't have the majority -- the Republicans do. Big difference, considering that most of them are establishment GOP veterans who you'd probably write off as "Rinos" anyway.

If all they've done is turn the GOP from the party of "no" to the party of "NO!" I'm not impressed. I want to know what the Tea Party is going to do to separate them from the GOP RINOS we all know they secretly are.

Of course the Tea Part is about doing things. Apparently Rand Paul feels parts of the Civil Rights Act are unconstitutional, some of them want to abolish the Department of Education and others want to eliminate Social Security.

 

[brindisi]

I want to know what the Tea Party is going to do to separate them from the GOP RINOS we all know they secretly are.

ALL RINOS?

Maybe you're right.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Of course the Tea Part is about doing things. Apparently Rand Paul feels parts of the Civil Rights Act are unconstitutional, some of them want to abolish the Department of Education and others want to eliminate Social Security.

Oh, let's not forget that pesky 14th Amendment.

You know, a lot of us were disappointed when we realized that no, Obama wasn't bringing as much "change" as we would've liked (at least I was, at first).

I wonder how the Tea Party will react when their own representatives fail? "Second Amendment Solutions," perhaps?

 

[Nathan Poe]

ALL RINOS?

Maybe you're right.

They're all RINOs as long as they're just talking the talk -- now let's see them walk the walk.

Surely you can agree with that.

 

[Gawron]

Abolishing the DOE would not necessarily be a bad thing, as this is not the same as abolishing public education.

 

[Staccato]

Show me the poll saying that the GOP would retake the Senate. I know how desperately you need to be right but nobody I know of thought the GOP would take the Senate except Dick Morris, but then, he thought Condi Rice would run against Hillary for president in 2008.

Huh...I just did? There is no single poll saying that the "GOP would retake the Senate", nor a single poll saying that they would retake the House. A summation of many polls from multiple seats leads, or doesn't lead, you to this conclusion. If the GOP had taken the three Senate seats I linked you, they would have had control of the Senate. The polls show that they should have taken those three seats (in the case of Delaware, if they'd run Castle).

I don't get what's so difficult to understand

And FYI, I don't "need" to be right. Whether the GOP had taken the Senate or not, nothing is going to be done, so it doesn't matter that much. The Republicans will obstruct Democratic legislation, and the Republicans will never overcome Presidential veto. So it's a stonewall either way. What does irritate me is people portraying this as the GOP ultimate victory when it quite clearly wasn't.

 

[JoshuaW]

The Tea Party has been like a heckler at a prize fight, yelling "You're a bum" from the safety of the bleachers. Now they have to climb in the ring and face the champ. Let's see how that goes.

 

[DaisyDay]

I know how desperately you need to be right

Lols.

 

[brindisi]

I don't get what's so difficult to understand

What is it you don't understand? It is not a victory to take control of the Senate with socialist-lite candidates with an R behind their names who many conservaives feel obligated to support even while the country is being destroyed.

The number of Republican members elected to the Senate gives us the ability to stop any legislation we want while resisting with all our resources those Democrats you say should not be there. Since we now have the ability to stop Obama's agenda and preventing bad legislation, having a majority in the Senate is not nearly as important as having members with the right committment to constitutional principles. In 2012 the Democrats will be ddfend several more Senate seats than Republicans and will lose control of the Senate then.

Your's is the mentalitly of someone who cannot even imagine what movemnent conservative is, and who is incapable of understanding the long term need to get rid of RINOS even at the expense of a few short terms losses. Is politics simply a matter of numbers for you, and not a matter of principle?

 

[Nathan Poe]

Abolishing the DOE would not necessarily be a bad thing, as this is not the same as abolishing public education.

True, and as an educator, I actually see no problem with abolishing the DOE -- education has always been a state matter anyway, the DOE has no Constitutional right to exist in the first place, and it would eliminate an unnecessary level of bureaucracy.

We could probably do away with a lot of similar federal money pits -- the FCC comes to mind, for many of the same reasons.

 

[Nathan Poe]

What is it you don't understand? It is not a victory to take control of the Senate with socialist-lite candidates with an R behind their names who many conservaives feel obligated to support even while the country is being destroyed.

Ok, let's see how long you believe this...


Not very.

The number of Republican members elected to the Senate gives us the ability to stop any legislation we want while resisting with all our resources those Democrats you say should not be there. Since we now have the ability to stop Obama's agenda and preventing bad legislation, having a majority in the Senate is not nearly as important as having members with the right committment to constitutional principles.

First of all, not to nit pick, but you meant the House. Second, do "you" really have enough members in the House to stop Obama's legislation? How many of those incumbant Republicans are just more of the same "socialist-like candidates with an R behind their names who many conservatives feel obligated to support even while the country is being destroyed."

Fact is, you've got a relative handful of Tea Party thinkers (who still have yet to prove themselves), and a whole flock of the very kind of Republicans you wanted them to replace. Many of them might vote along Tea Party lines from time to time if it suits their interests, but if they were reliable, they wouldn't be Rinos, now would they?

In 2012 the Democrats will be ddfend several more Senate seats than Republicans and will lose control of the Senate then.

Depends on what happens between now and 2012 -- the Republicans and their Tea Party faction now have their feet to the fire. If they accomplish nothing, the Senate's hardly a guarantee. If they screw up, they lose it all again.

Your's is the mentalitly of someone who cannot even imagine what movemnent conservative is, and who is incapable of understanding the long term need to get rid of RINOS even at the expense of a few short terms losses. Is politics simply a matter of numbers for you, and not a matter of principle?

Numbers -- just as it's always been.

Every politician enters with priinciples -- they don't last long in the face of reality.

 

[questftbest]

Have you heard the latest? Pelosi is running for minority leader. Would the dems be that dense to give the GOP such a gift? She is the most unpopular leader in Congress. Will Pelosi and Ried be the face of the dem party? What a gift that would be as the 2012 presidential race begins.

 

[Gawron]

Posted by Nathan Poe:

"Depends on what happens between now and 2012."

Much of the reporting on Tuesday is already along the lines that the election was a failure for the Republican party and the Tea Party specifically. What do you suppose the reporting will be in 2012, regardless of what is or is not acomplished?

 

[SOAD]

Have you heard the latest? Pelosi is running for minority leader. Would the dems be that dense to give the GOP such a gift? She is the most unpopular leader in Congress. Will Pelosi and Ried be the face of the dem party? What a gift that would be as the 2012 presidential race begins.

If you have such a low view of democrats, then why are you looking this gift horse in the mouth?

 

[Pommer]

In 2012 the Democrats will be defend several more Senate seats than Republicans and will lose control of the Senate then.

Your's is the mentality of someone who cannot even imagine what movement conservative is, and who is incapable of understanding the long term need to get rid of RINOS even at the expense of a few short terms losses. Is politics simply a matter of numbers for you, and not a matter of principle?

Fact is, you've got a relative handful of Tea Party thinkers (who still have yet to prove themselves), and a whole flock of the very kind of Republicans you wanted them to replace. Many of them might vote along Tea Party lines from time to time if it suits their interests, but if they were reliable, they wouldn't be Rinos, now would they?



Depends on what happens between now and 2012 -- the Republicans and their Tea Party faction now have their feet to the fire. If they accomplish nothing, the Senate's hardly a guarantee. If they screw up, they lose it all again.

What the American public sees are the 232 R's and the 203 D's, but there are factions within the parties as well.

Eric Cantor, assuming he remains the Republican whip, (who is a very different guy than Tom "The Hammer" DeLay), will have the task of making sure the R's will line up on the items the party bosses decide are "must win".
There will be things that don't rise to that level but can do some good for the individual R's constituents...these the whip will use to bargain, "for your vote YEA on HB xxxx, we'll sling some pork your way on HB xxnx". Other times will be calls to party unity or outright threats.

As TP R's become more adept at the politicking they will align themselves to get the most for their constituents (thus ensuring re-election) and become part of the institution.

TPers with principles will have a nice two-year "career" and be moved out since their constituents will notice that no bridges have been repaired, they have to turn the streetlights out @ midnight, etc.

Maybe we should have a caucus thread on who is where in each party?



Pommer

 

[Nathan Poe]

Have you heard the latest? Pelosi is running for minority leader. Would the dems be that dense to give the GOP such a gift? She is the most unpopular leader in Congress. Will Pelosi and Ried be the face of the dem party? What a gift that would be as the 2012 presidential race begins.

So it really isn't about principles after all -- I was just looking for something to make my point for me; thanks.

 

[Nathan Poe]

What the American public sees are the 232 R's and the 203 D's, but there are factions within the parties as well.

Eric Cantor, assuming he remains the Republican whip, (who is a very different guy than Tom "The Hammer" DeLay), will have the task of making sure the R's will line up on the items the party bosses decide are "must win".

So it's going to be his job to make sure the Tea Partiers stay in line with th mainstream republicans.

There will be things that don't rise to that level but can do some good for the individual R's constituents...these the whip will use to bargain, "for your vote YEA on HB xxxx, we'll sling some pork your way on HB xxnx". Other times will be calls to party unity or outright threats.

So those Tea Party Candidates are going to be eating some pork? Not surprising.

As TP R's become more adept at the politicking they will align themselves to get the most for their constituents (thus ensuring re-election) and become part of the institution.

TPers with principles will have a nice two-year "career" and be moved out since their constituents will notice that no bridges have been repaired, they have to turn the streetlights out @ midnight, etc.

TPers with principles? We'll just have to wait and see how many of those we find.

 

[brindisi]

First of all, not to nit pick, but you meant the House. Second, do "you" really have enough members in the House to stop Obama's legislation?

No, I didn't mean the House, where Republicans now have a majority. I mean the Senate, where Republicans have enough votes to prevent cloture. 47 Republican Senators is enough to stop all legislation.

As for principle over the lure of power? We'll see. I don't think you appreciate the level of anger at Washington politics as usual right now.

 

[HerbieHeadley]

So it's going to be his job to make sure the Tea Partiers stay in line with th mainstream republicans.

We have just witnessed a massive election of overwhelming rejection of the liberal utopian mindset. You "betcha" the new "republican" party is going to listen. If they don't, they will be gone!

So those Tea Party Candidates are going to be eating some pork? Not surprising.

John Boeiner never ever had a so called "Pork" project. Does that bother you?

TPers with principles? We'll just have to wait and see how many of those we find.

Well we wont wait for principles from the likes of this mindset.