Support for Tea Party (and GOP) falling even in TP "strongholds"

[KingOrfeo]

New Pew Research Center poll, reported in the NYT:

Support for the Tea Party — and with it, the Republican Party — has fallen sharply even in places considered Tea Party strongholds, according to an analysis of new polls.

In Congressional districts represented by Tea Party lawmakers, the number of people saying they disagree with the movement has risen significantly since it powered a Republican sweep in midterm elections; almost as many people disagree with it as agree with it, according to the analysis by the Pew Research Center.

Support for the Republican Party has fallen even further in those places than it has in the country as a whole. In the 60 districts represented in Congress by a member of the House Tea Party Caucus, Republicans are now viewed about as negatively as Democrats.

The analysis suggests that the Tea Party may be dragging down the Republican Party heading into a presidential election year, even as it ushered in a new Republican majority in the House of Representatives just a year ago.

Other polls have shown a decline in support for the Tea Party and its positions, particularly because its hard line during the debate over the debt ceiling and deficit reduction made it less an abstraction than it was a year ago. In earlier polls, most Americans did not know enough about the Tea Party to offer an opinion.

“We know that the image of the G.O.P. has slipped, but to see it slip so dramatically in Tea Party districts is pretty surprising,” said Andrew Kohut, president of the Pew Center. “You think of those as bedrock Republican districts. They are the base.”

The number of people who disagree with the Tea Party has also risen among the general public, according to the most recent of the polls in the Pew analysis, taken this month. Among the public, 27 percent said they disagreed with the Tea Party and 20 percent said they agreed — a reversal from a year ago, when 27 percent agreed and 22 percent disagreed.

In Tea Party districts, 23 percent of people now disagree with the Tea Party, while 25 percent agree. A year ago, 18 percent of people in those districts disagreed with the Tea Party, and 33 percent agreed.

In another poll in the Pew analysis, conducted in October, 48 percent of people in Tea Party districts said they had a negative view of the Republican Party, while 41 percent said they had a favorable view. The favorable rating had dropped 14 percentage points since March.

That drop was steeper than it was among the general public, where the percentage of people with a favorable opinion of the Republican Party had fallen to 36 percent, from 42 percent in March.

Opinions about the Democratic Party have shifted less, nationally and in Tea Party districts. Among the general public, favorable ratings for the Democratic Party fell to 46 percent in October from 50 percent in August. In Tea Party districts, favorable ratings for the Democrats stayed about the same — at 39 percent in October and 37 percent in August.

There was even some evidence that Tea Party Republicans were viewing Democrats a little less harshly. The share of people in Tea Party districts who viewed the Democrats unfavorably had fallen to 50 percent in October, from 57 percent in August.

How much this affects Republican chances in the presidential contest next year, Mr. Kohut said, probably depends on which candidate wins the nomination.

“If the candidate is of a more conservative bent, he or she will have to deal with this complaint about the Tea Party among the general public, of being too extreme and not willing to compromise,” he said.

“The focus has been very much on the candidate and not on the party, but going into this election, the party has problems,” he said. “Which isn’t to say that people are wildly enthusiastic about the Democratic Party, but it hasn’t lost the kind of favor the G.O.P. has.”

The analysis is based on polls conducted by the Pew Research Center from March 2010 through November.

 

[RobDownSouth]

I believe the bloom is off the Tea Party rose for two reasons...

After the 2010 elections, many Tea Party types truly believed the newcomers they were sending to Congress would actually work to reduce federal spending.

What they got instead was virtually no spending reduction legislation proposals, but over 200 pieces of legislation designed to curtail abortion.

I think even the chuckleheads in the Tea Party now realize that their movement was co-opted by the big gummint social conservatives, who ran as false flag campaigns as "fiscal conservatives" only to reveal their true colors once they were safely in office.

What we're seeing is "buyer's remorse", plain and simple.

Secondly, Fox News traditionally lies low the year before an election, allowing their aging, geriatric white male base to catch their wheezing collective breath before overstimulating them for 11 solid months prior to the election (don't believe me? Look at Ishmael's posting history. It rises and falls cyclically with election cycles.)

 

[Powertone]

I believe the bloom is off the Tea Party rose for two reasons...

After the 2010 elections, many Tea Party types truly believed the newcomers they were sending to Congress would actually work to reduce federal spending.

What they got instead was virtually no spending reduction legislation proposals, but over 200 pieces of legislation designed to curtail abortion.

I think even the chuckleheads in the Tea Party now realize that their movement was co-opted by the big gummint social conservatives, who ran as false flag campaigns as "fiscal conservatives" only to reveal their true colors once they were safely in office.

What we're seeing is "buyer's remorse", plain and simple.

Secondly, Fox News traditionally lies low the year before an election, allowing their aging, geriatric white male base to catch their wheezing collective breath before overstimulating them for 11 solid months prior to the election (don't believe me? Look at Ishmael's posting history. It rises and falls cyclically with election cycles.)

John Wayne rolls in his grave

 

[richard_daily]

John Wayne rolls in his grave

Were you hoping to butt fuck him?

 

[Wok]

Were you hoping to butt fuck him?

No, to get him fired, but he bought the farm instead.

 

[RobDownSouth]

No, to get him fired, but he bought the farm instead.

Wait....whitepowertone has the power to get someone FIRED?

 

[richard_daily]

Wait....whitepowertone has the power to get someone FIRED?

Watch out, he MIGHT use it!

 

[Powertone]

Were you hoping to butt fuck him?

you're photographing his dick in the coffin aren't you ?

 

[IrezumiKiss]

Watch out, he MIGHT use it!

http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/comment/39/2010/10/d9b77ed2efb0853166c7b99fb945686c/original.gif

 

[KingOrfeo]

Looks like the OWS movement, if it ever endorses any candidates, can have a bigger impact than the Tea Party on the 2012 elections, without even trying.

 

[JoeRockStar]

Looks like the OWS movement, if it ever endorses any candidates, can have a bigger impact than the Tea Party on the 2012 elections, without even trying.

Lol thanks for the laugh Most of those dirty fleabaggers will be back home in their mommies' basements tweeting about the evils of capitalism on their iPads long before the election.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Lol thanks for the laugh Most of those dirty fleabaggers will be back home in their mommies' basements tweeting about the evils of capitalism on their iPads long before the election.

"All right, dear, but try not to wake up your grandmother. She's still resting up from the Tea Party rally. That one in 2010, I mean."

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

We'll know next November which way the cat jumped. In 30 days or so we'll learn if the Tea Baggers have teeth like they had in 2010. If so the Democrats'll blame their stars.

 

[miles]

Looks like the OWS movement, if it ever endorses any candidates, can have a bigger impact than the Tea Party on the 2012 elections, without even trying.

You're delusional. Put down the crack pipe.

 

[unregistered]

 

[miles]

One big hallucination after another with that clown.

Wouldn't you love to see a candidate endorsed by OWS?

Too bad Jerry Garcia is taking a dirt nap.

 

[unregistered]

 

[miles]

They could run Ed Shultz.

Schultz was recently named as One of the Least Influential People Alive.

He'd be a perfect spokesman for the OWS weasels.

 

[unregistered]

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

OWS dreams of Kucinich and Michael Moore.

 

[NeverEndingMe]

if you weren't such a flaming idiot, what you say about the tea party might matter


face the truth, obama has killed the economy and is the worse president in history

New Pew Research Center poll, reported in the NYT:

 

[miles]

The real 1%.

Exactly.

 

[Powertone]

Looks like the OWS movement, if it ever endorses any candidates, can have a bigger impact than the Tea Party on the 2012 elections, without even trying.

bwafuckingha

OWS has just 1 candidate to endorse and he's the current POTUS . I would love for OWS to announce their support for Obama...that'd seal the election of the R candidate to occupy ( no pun intended ) the Oval *Orifice





*props to R . Limbaugh

 

[cjh]

More than three-quarters of Americans say the country’s economic structure is out of balance and “favors a very small proportion of the rich over the rest of the country,” taking up the calls of Occupy Wall Street protesters to reduce the power of major banks and end tax breaks for the affluent and for corporations, a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll shows.

At the same time, 53% of adults believe – 33% strongly believe – the national debt and the size of government must be cut significantly, regulations on business should be pared back, and taxes should not be raised on anybody.

The findings create a split screen of American activism with more than half the country identifying either with Occupy Wall Street or the tea party movement – and a small group siding with both.

According to the poll, 60% of those surveyed strongly agreed with the statement, “The current economic structure of the country is out of balance and favors a very small proportion of the rich over the rest of the country. America needs to reduce the power of major banks and corporations and demand greater accountability and transparency. The government should not provide financial aid to corporations and should not provide tax breaks to the rich.” An additional 16% said they mildly agree with that statement.

Among white working class voters, who have been reluctant to back President Barack Obama, 84% agree with the statement. Nearly nine of 10 Democrats agreed, and so did 62% of Republicans. Even 53% of tea party supporters agreed.

But for policymakers, signals are mixed. Americans were also asked their feelings about another statement: “The national debt must be cut significantly by reducing spending and the size of government, including eliminating some federal agencies and programs. Regulations on business by the federal government should be reduced and instead, the private sector and individuals should have greater control. The government should not raise taxes on anyone.”

This time, 33% strongly agreed and 20% mildly agreed while 32% disagreed. But the party breakdown was clearer. Nearly 80% of Republicans agreed with the small government statement, while only 22% of Democrats agreed. Among tea party supporters, 91% agreed, while 63% of liberal Democrats disagreed.

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2011/...u-s-economy-favors-small-portion-of-the-rich/

i'd say OWS's message has not been lost on america.

 

[Peregrinator]

This thread was an awesome tripwire. Scroll through it to see the partisan hackery, the kneejerk responses. Perfect.