The Tea Party Is Falling Fast in Its Battle with the GOP Establishment

[KingOrfeo]

From The Nation:

The Tea Party Is Falling Fast in Its Battle with the GOP Establishment

Bob and Barbara Dreyfuss on May 13, 2014 - 2:00 PM ET

The Tea Party—the collective name for a wide range of right-wing activist groups, well-funded Washington-based organizations and local radicals—is not doing well in 2014, and that portends ill for would-be 2016 presidential candidates in the Republican Party who intend to rely on Tea Party support against more establishment-backed candidates. Still, in the GOP’s base, the Tea Party is the most passionate, fired-up (Benghazi! IRS! Obamacare!) part of the party, giving it an outsized influence—especially in Republican primary contests.

But it’s precisely in those contests where, in 2014, the Tea Party is losing big.

Figuring out how strong is the amorphous entity called “the Tea Party” is not easy. One can’t join it officially, for the most part, and paradoxically (for pollsters) some people who support the Tea Party ideologically and in their voting patterns may not consider themselves members or supporters when asked by a pollster. According to a recent Gallup poll, 41 percent of Republicans consider themselves “supporters” of the Tea Party—but that’s down sharply from 61 percent in 2010. (Nationally, among all voters, support for the Tea Party stands at 22 percent, down from a high of 32 percent in 2010.) And, according to Gallup, Tea Party types are far more focused on the traditionally low turnout primary elections in 2014 and on the general election later this year, with 52 percent of Tea Partiers saying that they are “enthusiastic” about 2014, compared to just 35 percent of “all other Republicans.” So, in theory at least, the Tea Party is poised to have a big influence on this year’s GOP vote.

So far, however, anti-establishment Tea Party candidates haven’t won a single major statewide race in GOP primaries, including their big loss in North Carolina to a more traditionally minded, establishment-backed right-winger last week.

Various other polls, including NBC News/Marist, New York Times Upshot/Kaiser Family Foundation and The Atlanta Journal-Constitution have all shown evidence of Tea Party weakness and the strength of the Chamber of Commerce–oriented, Karl Rove–backed, Wall Street–linked GOP establishment. The AJC poll showed, in particular, that the Tea Party isn’t likely to win in Georgia, where the Democrats might have a shot at picking up a Senate seat, especially in the Republican candidate is a Tea Partier. The Washington Post, reporting on the polls, says that they “confirm an emerging trend of the 2014 primary season: the Republican establishment has the upper hand over the tea party.” And the Post adds that where the Tea Party has strength, it’s in states that don’t really matter in a presidential contest: Mississippi, Oklahoma, Kansas and Nebraska.

Perhaps as a result of its frustration, the Tea Party is bitterly attacking the Republican establishment and even its own erstwhile allies, such as FreedomWorks, which has traditionally been considered one of the Washington-based focal points of the Tea Party itself. As The New York Times reports today, when FreedomWorks shifted its support from one candidate to another in Nebraska’s Senate primary—held today—a group of fifty-two Tea Party activists lambasted Freedom Works:

We are not million-dollar Washington, DC special interest groups with strong ties to Capitol Hill. We are simply Nebraskans who are fed up. … We were not consulted, polled or contacted by these Washington, DC groups.

The Times provides a series of missteps and hilarious errors by far-right conservatives in race after race, contributing to the alienation of local activists.

And The Washington Post reported this week on the Tea Party’s conflict with Representative Eric Cantor, the Republican House majority leader. “Just a few miles from his family home, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) felt the wrath of the tea party Saturday, when activists in his congressional district booed and heckled the second-most powerful House Republican.”

In today’s vote, the Tea Party is counting on Nebraska to hand them their first significant win in 2014, where their candidate, Ben Sasse, president of Midland University, has a lead in the polls. Reports Fox News:

Sasse enjoys support from the Club for Growth, Tea Party Patriots and other major conservative organizations, as well as former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, Texas GOP Sen. Ted Cruz, and Utah GOP Sen. Mike Lee, who have recently joined him on the campaign trail.

But there are two other candidates in the Nebraska race, including Sid Dinsdale, a dark-horse banker who’s making a late push.

The Christian Science Monitor provides a list of the potential top ten Tea Party candidates who’ve competed in 2014. The places where the Tea Partiers have the best shot, though often as underdogs, include Mississippi, where a Tea Party type is challenging long-time Republican Senator Thad Cochran in a June 3 vote. In states like Kentucky, where the Tea Party candidate is pitted against Mitch McConnell, the challenge is more quixotic.

But even in Nebraska, where the Tea Party might pull off a victory, it is in disarray, according to U.S. News and World Report. One local Tea Party activist told the reporter, “The Tea Party is unraveling.” Adds the magazine:

The five-way Republican Senate primary has revealed an unusual test case for the conservative wing of the Republican party. What happens when the top candidates in the race are all conservative enough to win a fraction of support from the tea party, but one is anointed the choice of outside groups from the Beltway?

In Nebraska, the traditional labels of “establishment” and “tea party” are blurring so much that some Nebraska GOP voters are dubious as to why the national conservative groups felt the need to get involved in the race at all. Some voters in the state say the race is a perfect example of how the national tea party has lost touch with the grass roots supporters who helped them rise to power. In recent months, media reports have shown many groups are spending more money on their infrastructure than on candidate who can further their causes in Congress.

As a result of all the confusion, it isn’t clear whether or not a Sasse win* in Nebraska will be seen as a Tea Party win, since Tea Party factions (including FreedomWorks) are on all sides.


* He did win.

 

[unregistered]

 

[KingOrfeo]

Also regarding Sasse:

What Ben Sasse's Win in the Nebraska Republican Primary Means

Rather than yet another Tea Party-versus-establishment battle, the contest elevated a conservative candidate, Ben Sasse, who convinced insiders and outsiders alike.

Molly Ball

May 14 2014, 9:13 AM ET

he Dynamic. If you have read anything about politics in the past year, you're familiar with The Dynamic—the overriding national theme that explains what's going on in all the Republican primaries currently being held across the country. The Dynamic pits the embattled GOP establishment against those troublemakers in the Tea Party trying to take them out. It's the convenient frame for every state-level contest, with each individual race, regardless of particulars, becoming an encapsulation of where the battle stands.

But not every election can be boiled down in quite this way. On Tuesday, a Senate primary was held in Nebraska, and it wasn't clear how The Dynamic applied. There were two leading candidates: Shane Osborn, the state treasurer, and Ben Sasse (pronounced "sass," not "sassy"), a former Bush administration official—he served as assistant secretary in the Health and Human Services Department—Harvard grad, and university president.

Pundits spent months trying to determine which was the "Tea Party" candidate and which the "establishment" pick. FreedomWorks, the Glenn Beck-backed libertarian organ, first backed Osborn and attacked Sasse for being soft on Obamacare, then suddenly switched to favor Sasse. As Sasse's momentum built, he earned endorsements from Sarah Palin and Ted Cruz, the Club for Growth and the Senate Conservatives Fund. Doubts were raised about the military record of Osborn, who came under fire for forging a memo defending his service as a Navy pilot. Sasse went on an "Obamacare tour" across the state, lecturing on the healthcare law's failings in detail for hours at a time.

On Tuesday night, Sasse ran away with the primary, taking 49 percent of the GOP vote and more than doubling his nearest competitor. This makes him the likely next senator from Nebraska, a red state where Sasse is not expected to face serious Democratic opposition in November. Statements immediately poured forth declaring his win a victory for the Tea Party, which has seemed benighted in recent months. "For the past week the mainstream media has been pushing the recycled ‘Tea Party is Dead’ headlines, but tonight’s results show how again they’ve got it wrong," Taylor Budowich, executive director of the Tea Party Express, said after the race was called for Sasse late Tuesday.

But Sasse actually represents less the Tea Party's anti-incumbent rage than the sort of fusion candidate who can unite the party establishment and base—a well-credentialed insider who can convince the right wing he's on their side. As Dave Weigel put it in Slate, "Sasse is a veteran of the establishment who masterfully ingratiated himself with the conservative movement." Particularly in red states, he could represent the harmonizing future of the GOP in a post-GOP-civil-war world. Last week, Thom Tillis won the North Carolina Republican primary more by straddling the establishment and Tea Party than by taking sides; Sasse did so even more effectively.

Sasse's campaign argues that his win illustrates a larger point about the past few years' intraparty conflict: The best candidates—Tea Party and establishment alike—have generally won, while the rank incompetents have lost. In a memo on Sasse's victory, his campaign advisers John Yob and Jordan Gehrke wrote:

In the last two cycles, we saw what happened when anti-establishment candidates with questionable backgrounds or poor campaign skills were nominated in several states. In 2012, other states showed what happened when the establishment worked to manipulate the system to put forward equally flawed candidates who also fared poorly in General Elections in 2012.

It's not fair to blame the Tea Party for costing Republicans the Senate, according to this argument, when "electable" establishment candidates have also blown plenty of Senate races in the past couple of election cycles. The GOP civil-war narrative, Yob and Gehrke write, was "relevant yet overplayed" in Nebraska.

Now that he's virtually guaranteed to be a senator, what kind of senator will Sasse be? Despite his support from the likes of Palin and Cruz, he's sending signals he doesn't plan to be a bomb-thrower in Washington. On Tuesday, in an interview with MSNBC's Chuck Todd, Sasse called himself a "team player" who would seek consensus around the best conservative ideas through persuasion. During the campaign, an aide to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell was behind an anti-Sasse advertising effort—apparently a part of McConnell's war on the Senate Conservatives Fund, which is supporting the leader's own long-shot primary challenger. But Sasse now says that's water under the bridge and he looks forward to working with McConnell.

In his speech accepting the nomination Tuesday night, Sasse cited as his role model Jack Kemp, the late congressman and onetime vice-presidential nominee revered in conservative circles for his free-market wonkishness. Paraphrasing Kemp, he declared, "The only way to oppose bad ideas is to replace them with good ideas.” In their memo, Gehrke and Yob elaborate on this theme:

Jack Kemp provided real ideas and real solutions to real problems. Ben Sasse is one of the few leaders who has proposed a detailed alternative to ObamaCare, and will likely propose additional detailed policy proposals over the course of the General Election and as a United States Senator .... In addition to proposing real policy solutions, Ben will also be in the Kemp mold of working to inspire the Republican Party and constitutional conservatives to better articulate our message of empowerment and opportunity for all Americans.

This all sounds good in theory. The question is whether the Tea Party will let Sasse get away with it in practice. There's another Republican in Washington who came to fame as a Jack Kemp-worshipping GOP wonk. Like Kemp, he sought to put substantive policy behind his party's economic slogans. Like Kemp, he's trying to take the party's message to nontraditional audiences. Like Kemp, he strongly believes in immigration reform. His name is Paul Ryan—onetime Mitt Romney running mate, striker of bipartisan budget deals—and he's now viewed as a card-carrying member of the Republican establishment. Another former standard-bearer for the conservative insurgents, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, is currently fending off a challenge on his right flank.

At some point, Sasse will have to make choices about whether to side with the McConnell or the Cruz wing in the Senate, which have been at odds over issues from trying to defund Obamacare to the debt ceiling. He'll have to cast votes on things like the farm bill, which the Club for Growth opposes but another of Sasse's powerful endorsers, the Nebraska Farm Bureau, supports. It will not be possible to please all the people all the time. The Republican civil war may be cooling, but it will only truly end when both sides lay down their arms.

 

[Amberchgo]

The only label that counts is GOP. If there are 51 after the election, things change in DC.

 

[Sean Renaud]

The only label that counts is GOP. If there are 51 after the election, things change in DC.

Only because Democrats don't have the balls to say that 50<60, fuck you let the country burn. I mean you are right here but because your side has men and suicide bombers and mine wusses and compromisers.

 

[Adre]

The only label that counts is GOP. If there are 51 after the election, things change in DC.

Quoting for later reference. Things change, huh?

 

[Amberchgo]

Quoting for later reference. Things change, huh?

Yes. Perhaps the Senate will do its job. How many budgets did they miss? 4 or 5 years? How many times did the House approve a bill that Reid refused to even bring up for a vote?

The Senate is a true "do nothing " institution. Maybe things will change if the Senate actually does its job.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Yes. Perhaps the Senate will do its job. How many budgets did they miss? 4 or 5 years? How many times did the House approve a bill that Reid refused to even bring up for a vote?

The Senate is a true "do nothing " institution. Maybe things will change if the Senate actually does its job.

Give 75 or so Democrats and we'll get something done. Or 51 Republicans. The ability to bully the otherside into doing what you want will be about equal either way.

 

[bronzeage]

The GOP establishment knows one thing for certain about the Tea Party.
http://weknowmemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/if-you-stick-your-dick-in-crazy-youre-gonna-have-a-bad-time.jpg

But, they need a ride to the Prom. It's not really a date, just a ride. Tea Party doesn't actually understand that, but it's okay. GOP establishment is pretty sure Tea Party is either going to get into a fight in the parking lot before they go inside, or get so drunk they throw his ass out.

Either way, GOP establishment gets to go home with the one they really like.

 

[renard_ruse]

Yes, the entire right"wing" in America is going to disappear and we will become another Canada. Enjoy your wet dream.

And, no we aren't "bitterly attacking" anything. We don't do that, we are nice people. On the other hand, many of us just don't give a flying frig about American politics anymore. The country is lost, we're out having fun on the deck of the Titanic now and don't really care anymore.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Yes, the entire right"wing" in America is going to disappear and we will become another Canada. Enjoy your wet dream.

Depends on which "right wing" you mean. The religious/social-conservative right is going to be gone in 20 years just because of generational (not ethnic) demographics, but the bizcons will be with us much longer.

 

[Amberchgo]

Give 75 or so Democrats and we'll get something done. Or 51 Republicans. The ability to bully the otherside into doing what you want will be about equal either way.

You could have 100 Dems in the Senate and Reid still isn't going to take up House bills.

 

[Sean Renaud]

You could have 100 Dems in the Senate and Reid still isn't going to take up House bills.

Of course he would. The House Bills that aren't being brought up are jokes and are designed to be jokes. Besides 100 Senate would more than likely see a majority Democrat House that would in turn not pass joke bills they know don't have a prayer of getting passed or signed into law. It's frightening that anybody is stupid enough to believe the House is doing their job.

 

[Amberchgo]

Of course he would. The House Bills that aren't being brought up are jokes and are designed to be jokes. Besides 100 Senate would more than likely see a majority Democrat House that would in turn not pass joke bills they know don't have a prayer of getting passed or signed into law. It's frightening that anybody is stupid enough to believe the House is doing their job.

It's frightening that anybody is stupid enough to believe the Senate is doing their job.

http://kelly.house.gov/sites/kelly.house.gov/files/documents/Jobs.PDF


Joke laws like employment, energy and debt.

Silly things.

 

[Amberchgo]

Of course he would. The House Bills that aren't being brought up are jokes and are designed to be jokes. Besides 100 Senate would more than likely see a majority Democrat House that would in turn not pass joke bills they know don't have a prayer of getting passed or signed into law. It's frightening that anybody is stupid enough to believe the House is doing their job.

The Regulatory Accountability Act (H.R. 3010) and Regulatory Flexibility Improvements Act (H.R. 527) minimize costly red tape and excessive federal restrictions that hurt small businesses.

NPR says the Entrepreneur Access to Capital Act (H.R. 2930), bipartisan “crowdfunding” jobs bill passed by the House in November, “removes barriers to doing business” for job creators.



Silly things like minimizing red tape or helping small business create jobs.

You know ... Joke stuff.

 

[Sean Renaud]

It's frightening that anybody is stupid enough to believe the Senate is doing their job.

http://kelly.house.gov/sites/kelly.house.gov/files/documents/Jobs.PDF


Joke laws like employment, energy and debt.

Silly things.

Yep. Silly things with silly solutions they know won't get through.

The Regulatory Accountability Act (H.R. 3010) and Regulatory Flexibility Improvements Act (H.R. 527) minimize costly red tape and excessive federal restrictions that hurt small businesses.

NPR says the Entrepreneur Access to Capital Act (H.R. 2930), bipartisan “crowdfunding” jobs bill passed by the House in November, “removes barriers to doing business” for job creators.



Silly things like minimizing red tape or helping small business create jobs.

You know ... Joke stuff.

What EXACTLY is the red tape hurting small business here?

That's quite possibly worse than a joke, sounds potentially toxic. But I haven't read those bills so whats an example of this red tape?

 

[renard_ruse]

Depends on which "right wing" you mean. The religious/social-conservative right is going to be gone in 20 years just because of generational (not ethnic) demographics...

Um, absolutely and utterly not. Not even close.

I've detailed the absurdity of this on this site several times. The ONLY reason social liberals are winning is because they are riding the coat tails of ethnic politics. Non-whites vote for liberals due to ethnic voting patterns. Its a windfall for moral liberals, it does NOT mean they are doing any better with them on non-racial social issues. In fact, there are indications to the contrary.

Capitalist "conservatives" are more likely to disappear, as more and more people move down the economic ladder.

 

[renard_ruse]

Depends on which "right wing" you mean. The religious/social-conservative right is going to be gone in 20 years just because of generational (not ethnic) demographics, but the bizcons will be with us much longer.

What exactly are you basing this on, besides your own wet dreams and the propaganda you read on sites like The Nation and Huffington Post?

I've done a lot of numbers crunching and looks at various polls, and with the exception of the Gay Question, social values haven't much changed generationally in decades. The Gay Question is mostly perceived as a "civil rights" issue rather than a moral issue, which is one of the main reasons why Generation Y supports it. Its also an anomaly. On abortion there is a slight trend away from the absolutist pro-abortion position among youth. On guns and on other issues too, attitudes aren't much different than they were 40 years ago.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Um, absolutely and utterly not. Not even close.

I've detailed the absurdity of this on this site several times. The ONLY reason social liberals are winning is because they are riding the coat tails of ethnic politics. Non-whites vote for liberals due to ethnic voting patterns. Its a windfall for moral liberals, it does NOT mean they are doing any better with them on non-racial social issues. In fact, there are indications to the contrary.

I'm not talking about now, I'm talking about the near future. See the Pew Political Typology 2011, particularly the "Staunch Conservative" grouping:

Staunch Conservatives

9% OF ADULT POPULATION /11% OF REGISTERED VOTERS

Basic Description: This extremely partisan Republican group is strongly conservative on economic and social policy and favors an assertive foreign policy. They are highly engaged in politics, most (72%) agree with the Tea Party, 54% regularly watch Fox News, and nearly half (47%) believe that President Obama was born outside the U.S.

Defining values: Extremely critical of the federal government and supportive of sharply limited government. Pro-business and strongly opposed to environmental regulation. Believe that military strength is the best way to ensure peace. Highly religious; most say homosexuality should be discouraged by society.

Who they are: More than nine-in-ten (92%) non-Hispanic white and 56% male. The oldest of the groups (61% ages 50 and older). Married (79%), Protestant (72%, including 43% white evangelical), and financially comfortable (70% say paying the bills is not a problem).

Lifestyle notes: Many are gun owners (57%) and regular churchgoers (57% attend weekly or more often), and fully 81% are homeowners. More watch Glenn Beck (23%) and listen to Rush Limbaugh (21%) than any other group.

Now, these are not "The oldest of the groups" because people grow more conservative as they age -- they don't. They are the oldest because they are of generations who grew up in and were shaped by a different America that will never again exist. When they die off they will not be replaced in commensurate numbers -- their children and grandchildren might be conservative, but not conservative the way they are.

What exactly are you basing this on, besides your own wet dreams and the propaganda you read on sites like The Nation and Huffington Post?

I've done a lot of numbers crunching and looks at various polls, and with the exception of the Gay Question, social values haven't much changed generationally in decades. The Gay Question is mostly perceived as a "civil rights" issue rather than a moral issue, which is one of the main reasons why Generation Y supports it. Its also an anomaly. On abortion there is a slight trend away from the absolutist pro-abortion position among youth. On guns and on other issues too, attitudes aren't much different than they were 40 years ago.

Michael Lind writes:

The Coming Realignment

Cities, Class, and Ideology After Social Conservatism

God, gays, and guns. The era in which controversies over so-called social issues like these defined the Right and the Left in American politics is rapidly coming to an end, thanks to the pronounced liberalism of the youngest cohort of Americans—the Millennial generation, whose members were born in 1981 or later.

God? Millennials are the least religious of Americans. A quarter are “nones” or unaffiliated, according to a Gospel Coalition poll, and fewer than one in ten say that religion is important in their lives.1

Guns? According to a Gallup poll, fewer Americans between the ages of 18 and 29 own guns (20 percent) than the national average (30 percent).2 And a majority of Millennials support gun control: 56 percent, according to a National Journal poll,3 and 59 percent, according to Pew.4

Gays? According to a Pew poll, the Millennials are the only cohort in which a majority (70 percent) support gay marriage.5

Millennials are also more likely than members of older generations to describe themselves as liberal, according to a 2009 Pew poll: 29 percent, compared to 40 percent moderate and 28 percent conservative.6 Only 20 percent of members of Generation X, 18 percent of Baby Boomers, and 15 percent of members of the Silent Generation describe themselves as liberal.7 While individuals often become somewhat more conservative as they grow older, it seems likely that the Millennial generation will permanently shift American attitudes to the left—on social issues, if not necessarily on economics.

Thanks to generational shifts in values like these, it is likely that in the decades ahead there will be a dramatic realignment in American politics. Although it is likely to reshape the two major parties, it will not be a mere “partisan realignment” of the kind studied by political scientists. Rather, it will be a realignment of American public philosophies or political worldviews. This worldview realignment will be accentuated by a number of long-term demographic and cultural changes. But the chief catalyst of the realignment will be the near-universal victory of social liberalism. In a nation in which both parties are socially liberal, existing coalitions are likely to break up and reform in striking ways.

 

[garbage can]

Give 75 or so Democrats and we'll get something done. Or 51 Republicans. The ability to bully the otherside into doing what you want will be about equal either way.

Getting rid of whore house Harry will be a win for everybody

 

[KingOrfeo]

Getting rid of whore house Harry will be a win for everybody

You know Turtle Man McConnell is much more vulnerable this year -- not in his leadership, but in his actual seat.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Next week you'll have a huge c&p ranting abut how the Tea Party is controlling the Republican Party and making it too radical for the pragmatic centrists to support...




But at least LeTrouve will be reading it with nodding heath and frothing lips.

 

[Liar]

You could have 100 Dems in the Senate and Reid still isn't going to take up House bills.

How many bills originating in the Senate has Boehner refused to take up for a vote?

B-b-b-but... those are BAD bills, it's not the same!

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

The crux of the problem for Democrats and Republicans is the Tea Party. Its big enough to fuck GOP Rinos outta office, and the Democrats don't want any Rino refugees joining them.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Why can't Liberals (, Blue Dogs and Republican moderates) stomach the Tea Party?
Because it requires a strong Constitution!
A_J, the Stupid