This discussion has been going on and expanded for a few years now. Is it possible that by applying labels (liberal/conservative) to ideas based upon their source, that we're missing opportunities to make constructive change? There are many links to this approach. Google "Ron Paul and Ralph Nader" for more
information.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/ralph-naders-grand-alliance/ (http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/ralph-naders-grand-alliance/)
Let me be blunt, only a lib at heart with fall for this bull shit!
Quote from: Solar on December 18, 2014, 07:19:06 AM
Let me be blunt, only a lib at heart with fall for this bull shit!
So Ron Paul is a liberal at heart? I don't understand your point. If liberals and conservatives have the same view on an issue why shouldn't they work together to make a change? Please explain what you mean by "bull shit".
This is an old broadcast, but maybe it will help to illustrate the point.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTCr3dtDv1o (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTCr3dtDv1o)
Quote from: AlfredDrake on December 18, 2014, 07:33:27 AM
So Ron Paul is a liberal at heart? I don't understand your point. If liberals and conservatives have the same view on an issue why shouldn't they work together to make a change? Please explain what you mean by "bull shit".
Of course it went over your ignorant head.
Your gullibility keeps you from seeing the big picture here. What Nader and the author are attempting to do is draw the young libs away from the TEA movement shared by the Libertarian movement and direct them towards LIBertarianism, an ideology they are attempting to subvert in an attempt to make the movement part of the Marxist campaign to destroy Capitalism.
Only a true Conservative would see the connection, one that obviously you would never see.
I wrote and warned about this move long before Nader ever broached the idea.
Quote from: Solar on December 18, 2014, 08:07:35 AM
Of course it went over your ignorant head.
Your gullibility keeps you from seeing the big picture here. What Nader and the author are attempting to do is draw the young libs away from the TEA movement shared by the Libertarian movement and direct them towards LIBertarianism, an ideology they are attempting to subvert in an attempt to make the movement part of the Marxist campaign to destroy Capitalism.
Only a true Conservative would see the connection, one that obviously you would never see.
I wrote and warned about this move long before Nader ever broached the idea.
Please see my last post.
Quote from: AlfredDrake on December 18, 2014, 06:32:58 AM
This discussion has been going on and expanded for a few years now. Is it possible that by applying labels (liberal/conservative) to ideas based upon their source, that we're missing opportunities to make constructive change? There are many links to this approach. Google "Ron Paul and Ralph Nader" for more
information.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/ralph-naders-grand-alliance/ (http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/ralph-naders-grand-alliance/)
Liberal and Conservatives are really misleading labels. The fight isn't between Liberals and Conservatives, it is between
Statists - those who believe in a strong and massive central government and
non-statists - people who believe that the government should only do those things that individuals can't do for themselves.
The real question is, are we subjects or are we citizens?
Darth
Quote from: Darth Fife on December 18, 2014, 08:31:01 AM
Liberal and Conservatives are really misleading labels. The fight isn't between Liberals and Conservatives, it is between Statists - those who believe in a strong and massive central government and non-statists - people who believe that the government should only do those things that individuals can't do for themselves.
The real question is, are we subjects or are we citizens?
Darth
That's a good observation. Statist / Non-statist are definitely more meaningful.
Quote from: AlfredDrake on December 18, 2014, 08:15:44 AM
Please see my last post.
Can't watch videos.
But you see Conservative as a party, when it is nothing of the sort. Its way of life.
Quote from: Solar on December 18, 2014, 12:59:19 PM
Can't watch videos.
But you see Conservative as a party, when it is nothing of the sort. Its way of life.
Too bad you can't see it, because it's an interview with Ron Paul and Ralph Nader where they talk about how much they have in common on the issues. I think that the whole point of my post is that I don't see parties as much as I see issues and that if we can get past the labels and the parties, then we can do something about the issues.
Quote from: AlfredDrake on December 18, 2014, 01:48:33 PM
Too bad you can't see it, because it's an interview with Ron Paul and Ralph Nader where they talk about how much they have in common on the issues. I think that the whole point of my post is that I don't see parties as much as I see issues and that if we can get past the labels and the parties, then we can do something about the issues.
Nader is an old school liberal, a la JFK, MLK, Zell Miller, etc. They embraced the 60's version of liberalism, that the govt = the man = keeping you down. Today's liberals (communists) are just about flip-flopped 180 degrees in their absolute love for never-big-enough govt.
So given traditional JFK (Nader) liberalism, Paul's libertarianism isn't too far removed from that.
Today Tea Partiers are somewhat close to libertarianism, halfways related to 60's liberalism, and a million miles away from today's dems / libs / left and RINO's.
Quote from: AndyJackson on December 18, 2014, 01:57:28 PM
Nader is an old school liberal, a la JFK, MLK, Zell Miller, etc. They embraced the 60's version of liberalism, that the govt = the man = keeping you down. Today's liberals (communists) are just about flip-flopped 180 degrees in their absolute love for never-big-enough govt.
So given traditional JFK (Nader) liberalism, Paul's libertarianism isn't too far removed from that.
Today Tea Partiers are somewhat close to libertarianism, halfways related to 60's liberalism, and a million miles away from today's dems / libs / left and RINO's.
TEA is proof that common sense isn't dead yet.
Quote from: TboneAgain on December 18, 2014, 02:15:21 PM
TEA is proof that common sense isn't dead yet.
or honesty, truth, logic, or reason. But it's all gasping for breath. 2010 & 2014 were a good dose of CPR, but if we go under one more time, we may not make it.
Quote from: AndyJackson on December 18, 2014, 03:02:59 PM
or honesty, truth, logic, or reason. But it's all gasping for breath. 2010 & 2014 were a good dose of CPR, but if we go under one more time, we may not make it.
We just took a gigantic breath... It's time to swim for the gold.
Quote from: AlfredDrake on December 18, 2014, 06:32:58 AM
This discussion has been going on and expanded for a few years now. Is it possible that by applying labels (liberal/conservative) to ideas based upon their source, that we're missing opportunities to make constructive change? There are many links to this approach. Google "Ron Paul and Ralph Nader" for more
information.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/ralph-naders-grand-alliance/ (http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/ralph-naders-grand-alliance/)
Better yet google Jesse Ventura and all the whacked out nut job stuff that guy says and does....that's your celebrated convergence of Liberal/conservative idealogies whipped up in a blender and poured out as modern day LIBERAL tarianism
Quote from: Billy's bayonet on December 18, 2014, 05:46:13 PM
Better yet google Jesse Ventura and all the whacked out nut job stuff that guy says and does....that's your celebrated convergence of Liberal/conservative idealogies whipped up in a blender and poured out as modern day LIBERAL tarianism
They're not my ideologies. I didn't think of them. Why don't you ask Ron Paul. Maybe he has a pipeline to Jesse Ventura. Did you support Ron or did you think him a whacked out nut job?
Quote from: AlfredDrake on December 18, 2014, 06:08:39 PM
They're not my ideologies. I didn't think of them. Why don't you ask Ron Paul. Maybe he has a pipeline to Jesse Ventura. Did you support Ron or did you think him a whacked out nut job?
I actually like Dr Paul, reminds me of a kindly country Doctor I once knew, I sense he is a real humanitarian, I agree with him 100% WHEN IT COMES TO FISCAL MATTERS Getting rid of the Fed, gold standard, balanced budget etc.....I cannot vote for anyone who I have my doubts re national security and our dealings with the shark tank that is the rest of the world....
I also cannot vote for anyone who wants to leagalize dangerous drugs.
Quote from: Billy's bayonet on December 18, 2014, 06:23:03 PM
I actually like Dr Paul, reminds me of a kindly country Doctor I once knew, I sense he is a real humanitarian, I agree with him 100% WHEN IT COMES TO FISCAL MATTERS Getting rid of the Fed, gold standard, balanced budget etc.....I cannot vote for anyone who I have my doubts re national security and our dealings with the shark tank that is the rest of the world....
I also cannot vote for anyone who wants to leagalize dangerous drugs.
Fair enough. I don't agree with everything Ron Paul or Ralph Nader say, even if they do agree on somethings. But that doesn't mean that some of the positions they hold in common are invalid.
Quote from: AlfredDrake on December 18, 2014, 06:31:57 PM
Fair enough. I don't agree with everything Ron Paul or Ralph Nader say, even if they do agree on somethings. But that doesn't mean that some of the positions they hold in common are invalid.
But it does mean that all the "liberal" values or solutions the LIBertarians always demands conservatives to surrender too are completely invalid.
Answer me this, if these "liberal semi libertarians" or whatstheirname are so sincere about allying with the conservatives, why do they always want the social liberal laws passed first? Why do they want to legalize drugs and basically everything before cutting welfare or eliminating welfare?
Quote from: Mountainshield on December 19, 2014, 01:39:04 AM
But it does mean that all the "liberal" values or solutions the LIBertarians always demands conservatives to surrender too are completely invalid.
Answer me this, if these "liberal semi libertarians" or whatstheirname are so sincere about allying with the conservatives, why do they always want the social liberal laws passed first? Why do they want to legalize drugs and basically everything before cutting welfare or eliminating welfare?
Paul and Nader have agreed to disagree on many things. They only want convergence on issues where there's common ground.
Quote from: AlfredDrake on December 19, 2014, 06:30:17 AM
Paul and Nader have agreed to disagree on many things. They only want convergence on issues where there's common ground.
Tell me, how would you find common ground with the Marxist in the WH?
Just because these two can find common ground is of no importance to anyone except their supporters.
Both are using the other as a way of getting out their own propaganda, that's all this is.
Quote from: Solar on December 19, 2014, 06:50:18 AM
Tell me, how would you find common ground with the Marxist in the WH?
Just because these two can find common ground is of no importance to anyone except their supporters.
Both are using the other as a way of getting out their own propaganda, that's all this is.
One of the things they want to do is get rid of the Fed. Would you object to help from the left if it accomplished that goal?
Quote from: AlfredDrake on December 19, 2014, 08:46:39 AM
One of the things they want to do is get rid of the Fed. Would you object to help from the left if it accomplished that goal?
When your enemy wants what you want, don't stand in their way, but don't expect me to help them when their goal is not the same as mine.
Quote from: Solar on December 19, 2014, 10:24:43 AM
When your enemy wants what you want, don't stand in their way, but don't expect me to help them when their goal is not the same as mine.
Definitely not. Agreed.
The only place I've even known the Extreme Right and the Left to share common ground is in their hatred of the Jews...
:rolleyes:
Darth
Quote from: Darth Fife on December 19, 2014, 10:48:55 AM
The only place I've even known the Extreme Right and the Left to share common ground is in their hatred of the Jews...
:rolleyes:
Darth
Really, more bigotry? I'm about as extreme Right as one can get, and I view Joos as human beings, and carry absolutely no prejudice.
Are you inferring that Nazi were extreme right?
Quote from: Solar on December 19, 2014, 10:52:43 AM
Really, more bigotry? I'm about as extreme Right as one can get, and I view Joos as human beings, and carry absolutely no prejudice.
Are you inferring that Nazi were extreme right?
Yes. I know it is inaccurate, but it is commonly accepted that the Neo-NAZI are the "Extreme Right". And my target audience for that remark - the Left (notice I didn't say "extreme" Left) think that way.
You, my friend, as are nearly all of the Tea Party Types, are more mainstream Conservative. Which makes sense as America is a Center Right Country and the Tea Party typifies the Center Right.
The Conservative Elites - RINOs are definitely Center LEFT.
Now, my definitions might not be in sync with popular usage of those terms, but I feel mine are more accurate.
Darth
Quote from: Solar on December 19, 2014, 10:52:43 AM
Really, more bigotry? I'm about as extreme Right as one can get, and I view Joos as human beings, and carry absolutely no prejudice.
Are you inferring that Nazi were extreme right?
lol, the left probably hates them because they're likely the most successful capitalists over time......and the one-world-economy RINO's probably hate them for successfully using communism in kibbutzes.
Quote from: Darth Fife on December 19, 2014, 10:48:55 AM
The only place I've even known the Extreme Right and the Left to share common ground is in their hatred of the Jews...
:rolleyes:
Darth
That's a tough one, since a lot of far leftists are Jews.
Quote from: AlfredDrake on December 19, 2014, 11:01:02 AM
That's a tough one, since a lot of far leftists are Jews.
Self loathing Jews.
Plus, there are Jews and then there are Jews.
Few Leftist Jews are "observant", most are JINOs (Jews In Name Only).
Darth
Quote from: AlfredDrake on December 19, 2014, 08:46:39 AM
One of the things they want to do is get rid of the Fed. Would you object to help from the left if it accomplished that goal?
Who wants to get rid of the Fed?
Quote from: Darth Fife on December 19, 2014, 10:59:42 AM
Yes. I know it is inaccurate, but it is commonly accepted that the Neo-NAZI are the "Extreme Right". And my target audience for that remark - the Left (notice I didn't say "extreme" Left) think that way.
You, my friend, as are nearly all of the Tea Party Types, are more mainstream Conservative. Which makes sense as America is a Center Right Country and the Tea Party typifies the Center Right.
The Conservative Elites - RINOs are definitely Center LEFT.
Now, my definitions might not be in sync with popular usage of those terms, but I feel mine are more accurate.
Darth
WOW, you really need a crash course in Conservatism.
What you claim to be far right are nothing more than fascists just like Hitlers Nazi party, without the socialists tag.
Quote from: Darth Fife on December 19, 2014, 10:48:55 AM
The only place I've even known the Extreme Right and the Left to share common ground is in their hatred of the Jews...
:rolleyes:
Darth
The right is very supportive of the state of Israel. What do you base your observation on?
Quote from: AlfredDrake on December 19, 2014, 08:46:39 AM
One of the things they want to do is get rid of the Fed. Would you object to help from the left if it accomplished that goal?
Don't you mean 'audit the Fed' ?
That was strictly a Ron Paul vs. Ben Bernanke
12-rounder from years ago.
Quote from: AlfredDrake on December 18, 2014, 01:48:33 PM
Too bad you can't see it, because it's an interview with Ron Paul and Ralph Nader where they talk about how much they have in common on the issues. I think that the whole point of my post is that I don't see parties as much as I see issues and that if we can get past the labels and the parties, then we can do something about the issues.
Agreeing on the issues is only part of the solution. We also have to agree on the means to get there. As an example, both sides are for "affordable health care". I guess I can stop here, I believe everyone else can finish this sentence.
Quote from: s3779m on December 20, 2014, 03:44:32 AM
Agreeing on the issues is only part of the solution. We also have to agree on the means to get there. As an example, both sides are for "affordable health care". I guess I can stop here, I believe everyone else can finish this sentence.
:thumbsup: :thumbsup:
Great analogy!
Quote from: taxed on December 19, 2014, 11:13:00 AM
Who wants to get rid of the Fed?
Ron Paul for one. http://www.the-free-foundation.org/tst12-16-2013.html (http://www.the-free-foundation.org/tst12-16-2013.html)
Quote from: kit saginaw on December 19, 2014, 03:15:39 PM
Don't you mean 'audit the Fed' ?
That was strictly a Ron Paul vs. Ben Bernanke 12-rounder from years ago.
http://www.the-free-foundation.org/tst12-16-2013.html (http://www.the-free-foundation.org/tst12-16-2013.html)
No, I meant end the Fed.
Quote from: AlfredDrake on December 20, 2014, 06:55:47 AM
http://www.the-free-foundation.org/tst12-16-2013.html (http://www.the-free-foundation.org/tst12-16-2013.html)
No, I meant end the Fed.
Impossible. The Fed represents
what the rest of the World believes we have in-reserve. We could have a simple gold ring in Fort Knox, but if the World thinks it's worth 22-trillion dollars then that's the number that influences currency-value, gold-prices, interest-rates, and monetary-policies for doing business with us.
Quote from: Solar on December 19, 2014, 11:20:28 AM
WOW, you really need a crash course in Conservatism.
What you claim to be far right are nothing more than fascists just like Hitlers Nazi party, without the socialists tag.
QuoteFar-right politics commonly include authoritarianism, anti-communism, and nativism. Often, the term "far right" is applied to fascists and neo-Nazis, and major elements of fascism have been deemed clearly far-right, such as its belief that supposedly superior people have the right to dominate society while purging allegedly inferior elements, and—in the case of Nazism—genocide of people deemed to be inferior.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far-right_politics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far-right_politics)
Darth
Quote from: Darth Fife on December 20, 2014, 09:30:15 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far-right_politics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far-right_politics)
Darth
Seriously....WIKI? Why didn't you just use crayons and make your own illustration? At least it would have been entertaining.
And no, I didn't waste my time clicking someone elses opinion piece.
Quote from: Solar on December 21, 2014, 07:01:58 AM
Seriously....WIKI? Why didn't you just use crayons and make your own illustration? At least it would have been entertaining.
And no, I didn't waste my time clicking someone elses opinion piece.
It is the way the term
is commonly used. That is the only point I'm making.
I think you are falling for Liberal and RINO propaganda when you think of the Tea Party movement is "Right Wing". The ideals and beliefs of Tea Party folks - hard work, personal responsibility, living within your means, family - are
American Core Values! Most Americans believe in them and live their lives that way.
And that scares the shit out of the Liberals and the RINO because they know that only a small percentage of the population think the way they do.
The so-called Centrists are not really Centrists at all - they are Progressives. America is a Center Right Country and the Tea Party reflects that. It is only the Liberals and the RINOs who wish to portray the Tea Party as Right Wing Extremists. There is nothing Right Wing or Extreme about us at all!
What is "extreme" about living within your means?
What is "Right Wing" about personal accountability?
What is "Right Wing or Extreme" about hold the Government and our elected officials to the same standards we each must meet in our daily lives?
The minute the Tea Party and its members stop tacitly accepting the label that the Leftists and RINOs put on us and realize we
are mainstream America, it will be all over for the Progressives - and not just for the next election, but for the next century at least!
Darth
Quote from: AlfredDrake on December 18, 2014, 06:32:58 AM
This discussion has been going on and expanded for a few years now. Is it possible that by applying labels (liberal/conservative) to ideas based upon their source, that we're missing opportunities to make constructive change? There are many links to this approach.
I think it is important that Americans have an understanding of the differences. Until that happens, each side risks following along agendas that have been defined by the media, even contrived by the media, the advertising media, that is, radio, TV, and Newspapers.
The time of the writing of the U. S. Constitution was a great debate between Jefferson and
Hamilton. The ideas, the differences in ideas, even played out politically under different
Presidencies. The public understood the differences. The topics took on a national scale.
We are between a rock and a hard place, at this stage, with many in the conservative camp working hard to define one position. We cannot give up, but it is disheartening to see, for example, honorable associations such as The American Enterprise Institute, Americans for Prosperity,
and the various Tea Party groups, invest time, thought, talent, and money to educate the public on the whys and wherefores of the conservative position, then, that night see some asshole like Jon Stewart reaching millions in a minute and tearing down all that good work with some juvenile slander you know half the country falls for. Like I say, we cannot give up.
Quote from: Darth Fife on December 21, 2014, 09:01:10 AM
It is the way the term is commonly used. That is the only point I'm making.
I think you are falling for Liberal and RINO propaganda when you think of the Tea Party movement is "Right Wing". The ideals and beliefs of Tea Party folks - hard work, personal responsibility, living within your means, family - are American Core Values! Most Americans believe in them and live their lives that way.
And that scares the shit out of the Liberals and the RINO because they know that only a small percentage of the population think the way they do.
The so-called Centrists are not really Centrists at all - they are Progressives. America is a Center Right Country and the Tea Party reflects that. It is only the Liberals and the RINOs who wish to portray the Tea Party as Right Wing Extremists. There is nothing Right Wing or Extreme about us at all!
What is "extreme" about living within your means?
What is "Right Wing" about personal accountability?
What is "Right Wing or Extreme" about hold the Government and our elected officials to the same standards we each must meet in our daily lives?
The minute the Tea Party and its members stop tacitly accepting the label that the Leftists and RINOs put on us and realize we are mainstream America, it will be all over for the Progressives - and not just for the next election, but for the next century at least!
Darth
I don't we think we accept it, but we just ignore it if it comes from libs and RINO's. We are not going to change them so why waste time arguing with them about how they label TEA. It is more productive to continue to espouse our values to those who might listen.
Quote from: Darth Fife on December 21, 2014, 09:01:10 AM
It is the way the term is commonly used. That is the only point I'm making.
I think you are falling for Liberal and RINO propaganda when you think of the Tea Party movement is "Right Wing". The ideals and beliefs of Tea Party folks - hard work, personal responsibility, living within your means, family - are American Core Values! Most Americans believe in them and live their lives that way.
And that scares the shit out of the Liberals and the RINO because they know that only a small percentage of the population think the way they do.
The so-called Centrists are not really Centrists at all - they are Progressives. America is a Center Right Country and the Tea Party reflects that. It is only the Liberals and the RINOs who wish to portray the Tea Party as Right Wing Extremists. There is nothing Right Wing or Extreme about us at all!
What is "extreme" about living within your means?
What is "Right Wing" about personal accountability?
What is "Right Wing or Extreme" about hold the Government and our elected officials to the same standards we each must meet in our daily lives?
The minute the Tea Party and its members stop tacitly accepting the label that the Leftists and RINOs put on us and realize we are mainstream America, it will be all over for the Progressives - and not just for the next election, but for the next century at least!
Darth
The point is, at one time the nation was considered simply normal relatively speaking of the populace, the more the country moved left, the further the Conservative values move to the Right of the spectrum, to the point that holding the values the Founders set forth for us became the far Right.
Anything right of Conservatism becomes anarchism, which leads to fascism followed by Communism and the circle is complete.
Point is, fascism and anarchism are cousins of communism, not Conservatismm.
Quote from: Solar on December 21, 2014, 11:24:38 AM
The point is, at one time the nation was considered simply normal relatively speaking of the populace, the more the country moved left, the further the Conservative values move to the Right of the spectrum, to the point that holding the values the Founders set forth for us became the far Right.
Anything right of Conservatism becomes anarchism, which leads to fascism followed by Communism and the circle is complete.
Point is, fascism and anarchism are cousins of communism, not Conservatismm.
Not to mention all fascists were prominent socialists, Mussolini was a hardcore socialist, his only problem was the communists were not violent enough.
Leftists call fascist right wing because they were social conservative in ideals, I guess that makes Putin a right-wing fascist rather than a communist :rolleyes:
European view on far right a little differs from American view. In Europe nazi party was far right party and communist party was far left party.
For you far left means total gvt control and right or far right means less gvt or even anarchy.
Quote from: european101 on December 23, 2014, 12:50:08 AM
European view on far right a little differs from American view. In Europe nazi party was far right party and communist party was far left party.
For you far left means total gvt control and right or far right means less gvt or even anarchy.
Now I see a lot of your problems.
Quote from: european101 on December 23, 2014, 12:50:08 AM
European view on far right a little differs from American view. In Europe nazi party was far right party and communist party was far left party.
For you far left means total gvt control and right or far right means less gvt or even anarchy.
So National Socialism is far right and International Socialism is far left? Bullshit written by European socialists.
You are playing right into the left hands by using such definitions, remember that for the leftist semantics is just another battlefield which is why George Orwell put so much emphasis on the danger of "newspeak" in the novel 1984.
Quote from: Mountainshield on December 22, 2014, 11:23:14 PM
Not to mention all fascists were prominent socialists, Mussolini was a hardcore socialist, his only problem was the communists were not violent enough.
Leftists call fascist right wing because they were social conservative in ideals, I guess that makes Putin a right-wing fascist rather than a communist :rolleyes:
:biggrin:
You got it, and nailed in just a few short sentences.
Quote from: european101 on December 23, 2014, 12:50:08 AM
European view on far right a little differs from American view. In Europe nazi party was far right party and communist party was far left party.
For you far left means total gvt control and right or far right means less gvt or even anarchy.
And you've been lied to by Marxists.
I've read several times here from some posters that conservativism is not a political movement but rather way of life.
Tell that to American voters and you will not win the elections for the next 100 years. Not in the free elections.
Quote from: european101 on December 23, 2014, 10:13:25 AM
I ve read several times here from some posters that conservativism is not a political movement but rather way of life.
Tell that to American voters and you will not win the elections for the next 100 years. Not in the free elections.
TEA is proof you're wrong.
Quote from: european101 on December 23, 2014, 10:13:25 AM
I ve read several times here from some posters that conservativism is not a political movement but rather way of life.
Tell that to American voters and you will not win the elections for the next 100 years. Not in the free elections.
Can you possibly explain ?
Telling the voters that we want to help them -
-Be self sufficient
-Take care of their families
-Have goals, Be successful
-Be part of the community in positive ways, of your own doing
AND........
-Not let the govt sieze everyone's wages to deny all of the above
THIS is what will lose elections for 100 years ? Give us an explanation. I haven't had a good belly laugh yet today.
Tea is a very small movement and you'll remain small. No one will vote for conservativism as way of life. :popcorn:
People want jobs, good living standard and as you say ˝moral decay˝. Conservativism as way of life is the matter of the past. But this is just my opinion. :popcorn:
Quote from: european101 on December 23, 2014, 10:24:03 AM
Tea is a very small movement and you'll remain small. No one will vote for conservativism as way of life. :popcorn:
Clean up on aisle 6, guys!!!!!!
I'm afraid you took too long getting away Euro 101. First off, I'm at least glad that you refer to TEA as a movement and not a political party. My gratitude stops there. In the short time that TEA has become well known, doesn't that fact alone tell you that it is more than just a movement? People are speaking out about the injustices of life in America as it has become a land that is hardly recognizable from the visions that our founders had in mind for it. Oh, the injustices go further back than some might suppose but drastically more so in the last 50 years. TEA supporters now see a country that is moving further away from independant ideals to a place not so easily forgotten that was totally dependant on its handlers. TEA is conservative and seeks freedom from oppression of any sort for it's supporters. Hopefully TEA will keep growing and educating the masses that would otherwise perish under the yoke of bondage from tyrannical rulers.
Quote from: keyboarder on December 23, 2014, 10:52:18 AM
Clean up on aisle 6, guys!!!!!!
I'm afraid you took too long getting away Euro 101. First off, I'm at least glad that you refer to TEA as a movement and not a political party. My gratitude stops there. In the short time that TEA has become well known, doesn't that fact alone tell you that it is more than just a movement?
No. It's a big difference between being well known and being elected.
Quote from: european101 on December 23, 2014, 10:24:03 AM
Tea is a very small movement and you'll remain small. No one will vote for conservativism as way of life. :popcorn:
Uhh, no it's not, that's a leftist/rino lie!
TEA is an ideology, not a party. Every election rino ran on TEA principles, then once seated went about doing the exact opposite.
Thanks to our Marxist POTUS, he exposed the rino for what they are, and TEA as an ideology went about returning the nation to it's core values.
If TEA was as small as you claim, explain the last two midterm election landslides.
Quote from: Solar on December 23, 2014, 11:24:02 AM
Uhh, no it's not, that's a leftist/rino lie!
TEA is an ideology, not a party. Every election rino ran on TEA principles, then once seated went about doing the exact opposite.
Thanks to our Marxist POTUS, he exposed the rino for what they are, and TEA as an ideology went about returning the nation to it's core values.
If TEA was as small as you claim, explain the last two midterm election landslides.
So how successful you are?
Quote from: european101 on December 23, 2014, 11:26:07 AM
So how successful you are?
Huh?
That sounded like a statement with a question mark attached.
Care to expand?
Quote from: european101 on December 23, 2014, 10:59:34 AM
No. It's a big difference between being well known and being elected.
Nope and nope.
Take a civilization on the brink of collapse and they'll just about grab at anything that will keep them afloat. As in any great society, you have the percentage that are well doers and the greater percentage that are just workers. Sadly, there are the underachievers that are mostly dependent on others. What we have in America is a growing number of underachievers who are also low-information voters. This number has grown under the influence of the liberal based handlers who use this to their own advantage. Give out a few trinkets, make them wealthy minded by putting a few of them up in homes they can't afford and will eventually wreck, destroy, lose or all three, give the non workers a disabilty allowance(ck), smart cards(loosen the req. to get one of these) free healthcare because they are stupid(not actually physically sick) and you've got them voting for you. That is what is continually supported by our LSM and Hollywood and any other liberal venue you can name. This is what makes them well known. Also gets votes by the truly stupid. I don't guess it really matters what the end will look like to these stupid people when their handlers decide that there's just too many of them and starts thinning them out.
Quote from: Solar on December 23, 2014, 11:28:26 AM
Huh?
That sounded like a statement with a question mark attached.
Care to expand?
How successful have you been on elections?
Quote from: keyboarder on December 23, 2014, 11:39:44 AM
Nope and nope.
Take a civilization on the brink of collapse and they'll just about grab at anything that will keep them afloat. As in any great society, you have the percentage that are well doers and the greater percentage that are just workers. Sadly, there are the underachievers that are mostly dependent on others. What we have in America is a growing number of underachievers who are also low-information voters. This number has grown under the influence of the liberal based handlers who use this to their own advantage. Give out a few trinkets, make them wealthy minded by putting a few of them up in homes they can't afford and will eventually wreck, destroy, lose or all three, give the non workers a disabilty allowance(ck), smart cards(loosen the req. to get one of these) free healthcare because they are stupid(not actually physically sick) and you've got them voting for you. That is what is continually supported by our LSM and Hollywood and any other liberal venue you can name. This is what makes them well known. Also gets votes by the truly stupid. I don't guess it really matters what the end will look like to these stupid people when their handlers decide that there's just too many of them and starts thinning them out.
So Mrs. Keyboarder have succesful have you been on elections :)
Quote from: european101 on December 23, 2014, 11:49:25 AM
How successful have you been on elections?
In 2010 we took a historical 700 plus Legislative seats across the nation, and this Nov seized both Houses with historic numbers.
Point is, belief in smaller govt is not a party platform of either political entities/enemies in the US under the monikers of Republican/Democrat, it's an ideology, one TEA promotes.
Quote from: european101 on December 23, 2014, 11:53:12 AM
So Mrs. Keyboarder have succesful have you been on elections :)
Put it this way, 2016 is looking good. See? We were really successful enough in replacing the dregs in our Congress, enough so that the heat has been applied to the rest of the non-achievers. All that remains is time to formulate the rest of the plan to get the liberals out of control.
Now a question for you. How much do you get paid to troll?
Quote from: Solar on December 23, 2014, 11:55:40 AM
In 2010 we took a historical 700 plus Legislative seats across the nation, and this Nov seized both Houses with historic numbers.
Point is, belief in smaller govt is not a party platform of either political entities/enemies in the US under the monikers of Republican/Democrat, it's an ideology, one TEA promotes.
And 700 is how many %?
I saw you've beeen quite successful at the recent elections. But Republicans in general were quite successful.
Quote from: european101 on December 23, 2014, 12:18:01 PM
I saw you've beeen quite successful at the recent elections. But Republicans in general were quite successful.
Being in Italy I can understand why what has happened here in local elections is not fully understood. The GOP has been successful in taking over state legislatures and governorships during the Obama administration. The majority of these gains have been because Conservatives (TEA) have energized the citizenry. My home state of NC changed in 2012 to totally GOP in both houses of the legislature and the governorship for the first time in over 100 years. These changes also occurred in what many would color "blue" states. Without the TEA movement these changes would have never happened.
Quote from: supsalemgr on December 23, 2014, 01:31:31 PM
Being in Italy I can understand why what has happened here in local elections is not fully understood. The GOP has been successful in taking over state legislatures and governorships during the Obama administration. The majority of these gains have been because Conservatives (TEA) have energized the citizenry. My home state of NC changed in 2012 to totally GOP in both houses of the legislature and the governorship for the first time in over 100 years. These changes also occurred in what many would color "blue" states. Without the TEA movement these changes would have never happened.
supsalemgr what do you think? Is conservativism way of life or political movement?
Quote from: european101 on December 23, 2014, 12:18:01 PM
I saw you've beeen quite successful at the recent elections. But Republicans in general were quite successful.
To give you an idea, the most that usually change is around 30 to 50 at best, so 700 is an unheard of amount.
Quote from: european101 on December 23, 2014, 01:35:52 PM
supsalemgr what do you think? Is conservativism way of life or political movement?
A way of life. There was a time when it was social acceptance that everyone lived by Conservative ideals.
Quote from: european101 on December 23, 2014, 01:35:52 PM
supsalemgr what do you think? Is conservativism way of life or political movement?
It is both.
I am conservative in my actions, finances and overall way of life. I sowed my wild oats many years ago.
From a political standpoint I support what out founding fathers wanted this country to be and want government to be constrained. Obama summed it up before the 2008 election. In an interview he said he saw the US Constitution as restraint on government. That is when I knew he was not my man.
Quote from: Solar on December 23, 2014, 11:24:02 AM
Uhh, no it's not, that's a leftist/rino lie!
TEA is an ideology, not a party. Every election rino ran on TEA principles, then once seated went about doing the exact opposite.
Thanks to our Marxist POTUS, he exposed the rino for what they are, and TEA as an ideology went about returning the nation to it's core values.
If TEA was as small as you claim, explain the last two midterm election landslides.
Solar, I have always been very conservative and vote that way whenever possible. Voting conservative is easy in Texas in both local and state elections. The hard part is the national scene, the republicans do not offer real conservatives anymore. When we can run a tea party candidate for president on the republican ticket I will say you are correct, until then I will only say I hope you will be correct.
Quote from: s3779m on December 23, 2014, 07:19:44 PM
Solar, I have always been very conservative and vote that way whenever possible. Voting conservative is easy in Texas in both local and state elections. The hard part is the national scene, the republicans do not offer real conservatives anymore. When we can run a tea party candidate for president on the republican ticket I will say you are correct, until then I will only say I hope you will be correct.
The nation knows the GOP would never back a true Con. Reagan was an anomaly.
This is why TEA has made some huge strides in selecting candidates to add to the pool from which the GOP selects new blood from.
The 700 seats we took in 2010 across the nation was a huge blow to the Establishment machine. For years the GOP has run on Conservative ideals, only to turn around and screw those of us that elected them, as evidenced by McCain running on closing the border, then advocating for amnesty once reelected.
The jig is up on these people and they know it. All that's required from us, is to vet these people, don't fall for the lie that claims they are more likely to win, like they pulled with Dole, McCain and Mitten in 2012, ignore the hype and lies and vote with your core principles in mind, don't let the media and GOP select your only option, stand strong on your convictions and make a difference.
The Establishment hasn't given us one reason to back any of their candidates, so why fold in 2016, when WE can select a principled candidate, one that holds the values of TEA.
Quote from: Solar on December 23, 2014, 07:47:55 PM
The nation knows the GOP would never back a true Con. Reagan was an anomaly.
This is why TEA has made some huge strides in selecting candidates to add to the pool from which the GOP selects new blood from.
The 700 seats we took in 2010 across the nation was a huge blow to the Establishment machine. For years the GOP has run on Conservative ideals, only to turn around and screw those of us that elected them, as evidenced by McCain running on closing the border, then advocating for amnesty once reelected.
The jig is up on these people and they know it. All that's required from us, is to vet these people, don't fall for the lie that claims they are more likely to win, like they pulled with Dole, McCain and Mitten in 2012, ignore the hype and lies and vote with your core principles in mind, don't let the media and GOP select your only option, stand strong on your convictions and make a difference.
The Establishment hasn't given us one reason to back any of their candidates, so why fold in 2016, when WE can select a principled candidate, one that holds the values of TEA.
I am beginning to see and hear pundits talking about the 2016 GOP primaries. I believe it is pretty well settled there will be fewer debates that give leftist moderators the opportunity to subvert candidates. Also, the schedule has not been settled. I would like to see an early super Tuesday in southern states. That would more than likely identify the conservative frontrunner we could get behind. Why the GOP puts so much emphasis on Iowa and New Hampshire amazes me. Well not really, this gives the "establishment" a head start on nominating another RINO.
Quote from: supsalemgr on December 24, 2014, 04:37:17 AM
I am beginning to see and hear pundits talking about the 2016 GOP primaries. I believe it is pretty well settled there will be fewer debates that give leftist moderators the opportunity to subvert candidates. Also, the schedule has not been settled. I would like to see an early super Tuesday in southern states. That would more than likely identify the conservative frontrunner we could get behind. Why the GOP puts so much emphasis on Iowa and New Hampshire amazes me. Well not really, this gives the "establishment" a head start on nominating another RINO.
Yeah, they're doing their best to rig the system to their favor, but the more I watch the movements on the nations gane board, the less it helps them.
It's beginning to appear that no matter what they do, they are bucking a hurricane wind in a sail boat with tide and momentum against them, all the while TEA carries the abused underdog label from all the assaults inflicted upon them by the media, from rino calling us the enemy to the IRS running block for the main Establishment, is all playing in our favor.
It just seems no matter what the establishment scum do, we're Teflon and they wind up looking like a graffiti wall in the Barrio wearing the very thing they tried to paint us with..
The TEA movement is still growing. But as a movement nation wide, we are still fragmented. And unless we start getting more organized on a nation level, we will not get much more accomplished that what we already have. In 2010, we were new, and were not taken very seriously by the establishment political party system until it was too late. (for them, that is...)
Since then, the establishment party system and their pet media has been organizing a propaganda campaign, and it is getting stronger. 2012 showed less than a quarter the overall success in getting our candidates nominated in place of establishment republicans, and we didn't even come close to even minimally affecting the presidential race. 2016, while moderately more successful than 2012, still did not come close to the success of 2010. There are two reasons for the relative lack of continued success we enjoyed in 2010. First, we have not come up with a response that counters the propaganda campaign being waged against us by the establishment party system. Second, we are not talking with each other (on a significant level) between the hundreds of organized TEA cells. In 2012, perusing the many TEA web sites, there were no less than 18 proposed candidates for president the multitude of organizations gathered under the TEA banner. On a national level, we never got those singled down to a name to support. The result out of those who call themselves Republican, we got the (IMO) second worst selection: Romney. (For those wondering, McCain was the absolute worst, but the TEA movement was not even a dream when the republicans shoved that POS down our throats.)
If we want even a micrograin possibility of a chance at regaining this Republic as it was designed - without resorting to armed conflict - we need to gather together at the national level and start speaking with a single voice. AFTER getting organized at the national level (no small feat, and needs to get started NOW), we will have two major projects. First, we need to come up with a national level counter campaign to the anti-TEA propaganda being spewed on a daily basis. That should not be TOO difficult, once we start getting organized at a national level. After all, the truth is simpler to disseminate than a bunch of loosely organized (and often contradictory) lies. Second, we need to find ourselves a darkhorse that will appeal to not only the core TEA movement in all areas, but also have the charisma to appeal to more moderate factions which are tired of the situation, but are wary of what the media on all sides has painted as a bunch of loose cannon idiots. (Us, that is.)
Quote from: zewazir on December 24, 2014, 01:03:22 PM
The TEA movement is still growing. But as a movement nation wide, we are still fragmented. And unless we start getting more organized on a nation level, we will not get much more accomplished that what we already have. In 2010, we were new, and were not taken very seriously by the establishment political party system until it was too late. (for them, that is...)
Since then, the establishment party system and their pet media has been organizing a propaganda campaign, and it is getting stronger. 2012 showed less than a quarter the overall success in getting our candidates nominated in place of establishment republicans, and we didn't even come close to even minimally affecting the presidential race. 2016, while moderately more successful than 2012, still did not come close to the success of 2010. There are two reasons for the relative lack of continued success we enjoyed in 2010. First, we have not come up with a response that counters the propaganda campaign being waged against us by the establishment party system. Second, we are not talking with each other (on a significant level) between the hundreds of organized TEA cells. In 2012, perusing the many TEA web sites, there were no less than 18 proposed candidates for president the multitude of organizations gathered under the TEA banner. On a national level, we never got those singled down to a name to support. The result out of those who call themselves Republican, we got the (IMO) second worst selection: Romney. (For those wondering, McCain was the absolute worst, but the TEA movement was not even a dream when the republicans shoved that POS down our throats.)
If we want even a micrograin possibility of a chance at regaining this Republic as it was designed - without resorting to armed conflict - we need to gather together at the national level and start speaking with a single voice. AFTER getting organized at the national level (no small feat, and needs to get started NOW), we will have two major projects. First, we need to come up with a national level counter campaign to the anti-TEA propaganda being spewed on a daily basis. That should not be TOO difficult, once we start getting organized at a national level. After all, the truth is simpler to disseminate than a bunch of loosely organized (and often contradictory) lies. Second, we need to find ourselves a darkhorse that will appeal to not only the core TEA movement in all areas, but also have the charisma to appeal to more moderate factions which are tired of the situation, but are wary of what the media on all sides has painted as a bunch of loose cannon idiots. (Us, that is.)
"2016, while moderately more successful than 2012, still did not come close to the success of 2010."
I am making the assumption you meant 2014. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with you. I believe the 2014 mid terms were very successful. The GOP increased its majority in the House to the highest level since the 1920's. The GOP won every contested Senate race in red states and took the Senate. The GOP increased governorships in a year that more GOP candidates were at risk. Then there were all the local and state results that was a winner. All this was done because TEA made an impact.
As for your other point that TEA needs a concerted nationwide effort, I also disagree. What makes TEA powerful is there is not an establishment. This makes TEA somewhat stealth to attacks from the liberals and GOP establishment. They don't have a central figure to shoot at and this frustrates them. They cannot shoot at you and me and everyone else who is part of TEA. We will have more impact on 2016 finding a true conservative GOP nominee.
Quote from: supsalemgr on December 24, 2014, 01:19:34 PM
"2016, while moderately more successful than 2012, still did not come close to the success of 2010."
I am making the assumption you meant 2014. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with you. I believe the 2014 mid terms were very successful. The GOP increased its majority in the House to the highest level since the 1920's. The GOP won every contested Senate race in red states and took the Senate. The GOP increased governorships in a year that more GOP candidates were at risk. Then there were all the local and state results that was a winner. All this was done because TEA made an impact.
As for your other point that TEA needs a concerted nationwide effort, I also disagree. What makes TEA powerful is there is not an establishment. This makes TEA somewhat stealth to attacks from the liberals and GOP establishment. They don't have a central figure to shoot at and this frustrates them. They cannot shoot at you and me and everyone else who is part of TEA. We will have more impact on 2016 finding a true conservative GOP nominee.
Beat me to it. Well said.
Quote from: supsalemgr on December 24, 2014, 01:19:34 PM
"2016, while moderately more successful than 2012, still did not come close to the success of 2010."
I am making the assumption you meant 2014. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with you. I believe the 2014 mid terms were very successful. The GOP increased its majority in the House to the highest level since the 1920's. The GOP won every contested Senate race in red states and took the Senate. The GOP increased governorships in a year that more GOP candidates were at risk. Then there were all the local and state results that was a winner. All this was done because TEA made an impact.
As for your other point that TEA needs a concerted nationwide effort, I also disagree. What makes TEA powerful is there is not an establishment. This makes TEA somewhat stealth to attacks from the liberals and GOP establishment. They don't have a central figure to shoot at and this frustrates them. They cannot shoot at you and me and everyone else who is part of TEA. We will have more impact on 2016 finding a true conservative GOP nominee.
First, while republicans have their largest majority since before FDR started us solidly on the road to socialism, I do not consider but 1 in 10 of the current batch of elephants anything close to resembling a true constitutional conservative. In 2010, the TEA movement managed to replace a significant number of GOP favorites during the primaries. Almost every day during the primaries season, we would hear of another "upset" as the GOP establishment candidate lost to a TEA nominee. In addition, we managed to get a large percentage of those candidates elected in the general, showing a success rate that no third party has been able to perform in all history. Compared to 2010, the 2014 midterms were not nearly as successful because, while republicans won the day, I submit that true CONSERVATIVES did not do nearly as well as the republicans did. How many TEA upsets were there in the primaries this time? Not even close to 2010.
As for organizing, we do not need some high-profile single leader for the establishment to point at to be organized at the national level. (Or maybe we do, deliberately picking someone to act as lightening rod, acting as the best possible positive face of the TEA movement, while the real work takes place behind the scenes. Something to consider...) But we DO need to be organized at the national level in some manner, or we'll end up like 2012 in which different TEA Parties in differing regions supported differing candidates across the nation, and no one candidate received enough support to seriously challenge the establishment selection which was thrust on us. Additionally, any of the current batch which do actually support a genuine Constitutional Republic as originally designed (you can count them on one hand with fingers left over) are already under the nanny state propaganda machine, which is why I suggest we need to find a dark horse, one whom all TEA regional groups can agree on. Then we prepare a "last minute" campaign strategy and slam it home just when the establishment GOP thinks they have things in hand. Make it the ultimate upset.
Bottom line, we want to do this without violence, we need to do it smart. Play by their rules, but in a way the rules end up working for us. The American Revolution would have died in the first months if each state had gone it alone. And currently, without any type of national level organization, going it alone is exactly what the TEA movement is doing.
Quote from: supsalemgr on December 24, 2014, 01:19:34 PM
"2016, while moderately more successful than 2012, still did not come close to the success of 2010."
I am making the assumption you meant 2014. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with you. I believe the 2014 mid terms were very successful. The GOP increased its majority in the House to the highest level since the 1920's. The GOP won every contested Senate race in red states and took the Senate. The GOP increased governorships in a year that more GOP candidates were at risk. Then there were all the local and state results that was a winner. All this was done because TEA made an impact.
As for your other point that TEA needs a concerted nationwide effort, I also disagree. What makes TEA powerful is there is not an establishment. This makes TEA somewhat stealth to attacks from the liberals and GOP establishment. They don't have a central figure to shoot at and this frustrates them. They cannot shoot at you and me and everyone else who is part of TEA. We will have more impact on 2016 finding a true conservative GOP nominee.
Why do people think we are a organization. When we are a movement all over the U.S. We don't all think the same but we know what is right and what is wrong with what is going on. Like they say if we wanted Dem's ways, we would vote for a Dem's not a RINO.
Quote from: zewazir on December 24, 2014, 03:22:26 PM
First, while republicans have their largest majority since before FDR started us solidly on the road to socialism, I do not consider but 1 in 10 of the current batch of elephants anything close to resembling a true constitutional conservative. In 2010, the TEA movement managed to replace a significant number of GOP favorites during the primaries. Almost every day during the primaries season, we would hear of another "upset" as the GOP establishment candidate lost to a TEA nominee. In addition, we managed to get a large percentage of those candidates elected in the general, showing a success rate that no third party has been able to perform in all history. Compared to 2010, the 2014 midterms were not nearly as successful because, while republicans won the day, I submit that true CONSERVATIVES did not do nearly as well as the republicans did. How many TEA upsets were there in the primaries this time? Not even close to 2010.
As for organizing, we do not need some high-profile single leader for the establishment to point at to be organized at the national level. (Or maybe we do, deliberately picking someone to act as lightening rod, acting as the best possible positive face of the TEA movement, while the real work takes place behind the scenes. Something to consider...) But we DO need to be organized at the national level in some manner, or we'll end up like 2012 in which different TEA Parties in differing regions supported differing candidates across the nation, and no one candidate received enough support to seriously challenge the establishment selection which was thrust on us. Additionally, any of the current batch which do actually support a genuine Constitutional Republic as originally designed (you can count them on one hand with fingers left over) are already under the nanny state propaganda machine, which is why I suggest we need to find a dark horse, one whom all TEA regional groups can agree on. Then we prepare a "last minute" campaign strategy and slam it home just when the establishment GOP thinks they have things in hand. Make it the ultimate upset.
Bottom line, we want to do this without violence, we need to do it smart. Play by their rules, but in a way the rules end up working for us. The American Revolution would have died in the first months if each state had gone it alone. And currently, without any type of national level organization, going it alone is exactly what the TEA movement is doing.
Short and sweet response. We did not get into this situation overnight and we will not overcome it overnight. It is slow process and we are making significant progress. If you have the silver bullet as to how to do it quicker please share it with us.
Quote from: zewazir on December 24, 2014, 03:22:26 PM
First, while republicans have their largest majority since before FDR started us solidly on the road to socialism, I do not consider but 1 in 10 of the current batch of elephants anything close to resembling a true constitutional conservative. In 2010, the TEA movement managed to replace a significant number of GOP favorites during the primaries. Almost every day during the primaries season, we would hear of another "upset" as the GOP establishment candidate lost to a TEA nominee. In addition, we managed to get a large percentage of those candidates elected in the general, showing a success rate that no third party has been able to perform in all history. Compared to 2010, the 2014 midterms were not nearly as successful because, while republicans won the day, I submit that true CONSERVATIVES did not do nearly as well as the republicans did. How many TEA upsets were there in the primaries this time? Not even close to 2010.
As for organizing, we do not need some high-profile single leader for the establishment to point at to be organized at the national level. (Or maybe we do, deliberately picking someone to act as lightening rod, acting as the best possible positive face of the TEA movement, while the real work takes place behind the scenes. Something to consider...) But we DO need to be organized at the national level in some manner, or we'll end up like 2012 in which different TEA Parties in differing regions supported differing candidates across the nation, and no one candidate received enough support to seriously challenge the establishment selection which was thrust on us. Additionally, any of the current batch which do actually support a genuine Constitutional Republic as originally designed (you can count them on one hand with fingers left over) are already under the nanny state propaganda machine, which is why I suggest we need to find a dark horse, one whom all TEA regional groups can agree on. Then we prepare a "last minute" campaign strategy and slam it home just when the establishment GOP thinks they have things in hand. Make it the ultimate upset.
Bottom line, we want to do this without violence, we need to do it smart. Play by their rules, but in a way the rules end up working for us. The American Revolution would have died in the first months if each state had gone it alone. And currently, without any type of national level organization, going it alone is exactly what the TEA movement is doing.
You can't see this as a party. TEA is an ideology, to try and force it into the mold of a party, would destroy it's force.
At the moment, one can look at the movement and see it at it's best, lower taxes, smaller govt and the individual can interpret that to mean killing off the EPA, to merely slashing it's budget a bit.
But force it to a structure would drive others away
In other words, TEA can be whatever the individual wants it to be, but to make it an actual party would be forcing it into restrictive values.
These very parameters would pigeon hole the movement, some would insist it be more of a social movement, while others insist it stay grounded fiscally.
At this point in time the movement is how one wants to see it, but the moment you put a face to it, you've instantly condensed it down to the restrictive values of that individual.
Let the broad appeal of the movement congeal naturally, and once it finds equilibrium, we can move forward, but to force it in it's infancy is guaranteeing its early demise.
Quote from: zewazir on December 24, 2014, 03:22:26 PM
First, while republicans have their largest majority since before FDR started us solidly on the road to socialism, I do not consider but 1 in 10 of the current batch of elephants anything close to resembling a true constitutional conservative. In 2010, the TEA movement managed to replace a significant number of GOP favorites during the primaries. Almost every day during the primaries season, we would hear of another "upset" as the GOP establishment candidate lost to a TEA nominee. In addition, we managed to get a large percentage of those candidates elected in the general, showing a success rate that no third party has been able to perform in all history. Compared to 2010, the 2014 midterms were not nearly as successful because, while republicans won the day, I submit that true CONSERVATIVES did not do nearly as well as the republicans did. How many TEA upsets were there in the primaries this time? Not even close to 2010.
As for organizing, we do not need some high-profile single leader for the establishment to point at to be organized at the national level. (Or maybe we do, deliberately picking someone to act as lightening rod, acting as the best possible positive face of the TEA movement, while the real work takes place behind the scenes. Something to consider...) But we DO need to be organized at the national level in some manner, or we'll end up like 2012 in which different TEA Parties in differing regions supported differing candidates across the nation, and no one candidate received enough support to seriously challenge the establishment selection which was thrust on us. Additionally, any of the current batch which do actually support a genuine Constitutional Republic as originally designed (you can count them on one hand with fingers left over) are already under the nanny state propaganda machine, which is why I suggest we need to find a dark horse, one whom all TEA regional groups can agree on. Then we prepare a "last minute" campaign strategy and slam it home just when the establishment GOP thinks they have things in hand. Make it the ultimate upset.
Bottom line, we want to do this without violence, we need to do it smart. Play by their rules, but in a way the rules end up working for us. The American Revolution would have died in the first months if each state had gone it alone. And currently, without any type of national level organization, going it alone is exactly what the TEA movement is doing.
Just want to make some quick comments
The TEA party is not a third party
TEA movement doesn't need a national level organization, it already has the GOP. As already pointed out by you, TEA was able to successfully replace rinos rendering the need to become a fully third party uneccessary.
Edit: Basically what Solar said with regards to creating a full fledged party with bureaucracy becoming a legal institution would render TEA inert and as successfull as all the other third parties out there.In 2012 there were no real conservative contenders, now you have Ted Cruz, incidentally he is also your Dark Horse able to go against the rino's at great career risk to himself. And he has already been unsuccessfully smeared by the MSM. Only thing they got is some birther crap argument.
The leftists Democrats never play by the rules, they have already turned to violence by encouraging riots and have previously only won by operating with voter fraud. How can you win by playing goody two shoes if your enemy have chosen violent war?
Quote from: Mountainshield on December 25, 2014, 05:55:14 AM
Just want to make some quick comments
The TEA party is not a third party
TEA movement doesn't need a national level organization, it already has the GOP. As already pointed out by you, TEA was able to successfully replace rinos rendering the need to become a fully third party uneccessary.
Edit: Basically what Solar said with regards to creating a full fledged party with bureaucracy becoming a legal institution would render TEA inert and as successfull as all the other third parties out there.
In 2012 there were no real conservative contenders, now you have Ted Cruz, incidentally he is also your Dark Horse able to go against the rino's at great career risk to himself. And he has already been unsuccessfully smeared by the MSM. Only thing they got is some birther crap argument.
The leftists Democrats never play by the rules, they have already turned to violence by encouraging riots and have previously only won by operating with voter fraud. How can you win by playing goody two shoes if your enemy have chosen violent war?
You are exactly correct MS. Making TEA a 3rd party entity amongst 23 other failed third partyattempts, of which consist of other great Conservative movements killed off by the Establishment, is pure idiocy, and one both party's could only dream of TEA becoming a party.
Your knowledge and keen grasp of American politics continues to astound me.
We could use clear young minds such as yours running for office here in the US.. :cool: :cool:
Perhaps I have not expressed myself well, but I have NOT been suggesting that the TEA movement become a third party. There are quite a few people who identify with the TEA movement, but, being disgusted with the way the Republicans continually betray the principles they are elected on, are calling for the TEA movement to either join a third party, such as the Libertarians, or form a new one. Every time I become involved in such a discussion, I argue as strongly as possible against the idea of forming - or joining - a third party. I am fully aware that the demopulicans have the party system bound up. In fact, I have long argued that the constitutional requirement that the president be elected by a majority of the Electoral College in part actually encourages a system limited to two parties, as three semi-equally strong political parties would simply end up sending every presidential election to the House of Representatives. Therefore, for any third party to actually have anything resembling a noticeable impact on even state politics, let alone national, would have to take over and push one of the current two major parties into third party status. That is what has happened in the past, to the Federalists, the Whigs, etc. However, such will not happen again, because the demopublicans are way too entrenched. They literally control a significant part of the presidential election, in which the PARTY gets together in certain states under the term "caucus", and then TELL THE PEOPLE whom the people are allowed to vote for.
But there is nothing wrong with being ORGANIZED. The demopublicans are VERY WELL ORGANIZED, you can bet your bottom teeth on that fact. The TEA movement has been successful in a way that third parties only dream about after taking too many cold medications with cough syrup. I am personally proud to declare myself part of the TEA movement. I also know full well that the TEA movement's successes so far have been due to the fact that we are not a third party, but rather a movement of similar - but not necessarily like - minded people working within the current two party system to bring about changes. In fact, it is a new strategy which has BOTH parties running for cover. The TEA movement is the only item in current politics that has both parties working together.
But there is nothing wrong with organization. It need not be along traditional lines of establishing some kind of hierarchy, looking to charismatic individuals for leadership, or anything of the like. In my personal political/social philosophy, rigid hierarchies are to be avoided. There are many, many ways of organizing that will result in a stronger voice for the movement, but looks nothing like what people traditionally view as "An Organization". Rather, I am talking about organizing in a manner which unifies us where it is necessary (such as pushing a true conservative candidate for president) while leaving us individualized enough for local "parties" (as the original TEA related events were called) to push their own ideas at their own level(s). Past successes have been due to SOME organization. I just suggest that if we really want to have a real presidential candidate to vote for in November of 2016, some kind of national level organization will be necessary during the primaries. It's not a bad word.
Quote from: zewazir on December 25, 2014, 08:02:24 AM
Perhaps I have not expressed myself well, but I have NOT been suggesting that the TEA movement become a third party. There are quite a few people who identify with the TEA movement, but, being disgusted with the way the Republicans continually betray the principles they are elected on, are calling for the TEA movement to either join a third party, such as the Libertarians, or form a new one. Every time I become involved in such a discussion, I argue as strongly as possible against the idea of forming - or joining - a third party. I am fully aware that the demopulicans have the party system bound up. In fact, I have long argued that the constitutional requirement that the president be elected by a majority of the Electoral College in part actually encourages a system limited to two parties, as three semi-equally strong political parties would simply end up sending every presidential election to the House of Representatives. Therefore, for any third party to actually have anything resembling a noticeable impact on even state politics, let alone national, would have to take over and push one of the current two major parties into third party status. That is what has happened in the past, to the Federalists, the Whigs, etc. However, such will not happen again, because the demopublicans are way too entrenched. They literally control a significant part of the presidential election, in which the PARTY gets together in certain states under the term "caucus", and then TELL THE PEOPLE whom the people are allowed to vote for.
But there is nothing wrong with being ORGANIZED. The demopublicans are VERY WELL ORGANIZED, you can bet your bottom teeth on that fact. The TEA movement has been successful in a way that third parties only dream about after taking too many cold medications with cough syrup. I am personally proud to declare myself part of the TEA movement. I also know full well that the TEA movement's successes so far have been due to the fact that we are not a third party, but rather a movement of similar - but not necessarily like - minded people working within the current two party system to bring about changes. In fact, it is a new strategy which has BOTH parties running for cover. The TEA movement is the only item in current politics that has both parties working together.
But there is nothing wrong with organization. It need not be along traditional lines of establishing some kind of hierarchy, looking to charismatic individuals for leadership, or anything of the like. In my personal political/social philosophy, rigid hierarchies are to be avoided. There are many, many ways of organizing that will result in a stronger voice for the movement, but looks nothing like what people traditionally view as "An Organization". Rather, I am talking about organizing in a manner which unifies us where it is necessary (such as pushing a true conservative candidate for president) while leaving us individualized enough for local "parties" (as the original TEA related events were called) to push their own ideas at their own level(s). Past successes have been due to SOME organization. I just suggest that if we really want to have a real presidential candidate to vote for in November of 2016, some kind of national level organization will be necessary during the primaries. It's not a bad word.
Define "national level organization".
Quote from: Solar on December 25, 2014, 08:39:06 AM
Define "national level organization".
Home town, county or even state but not national.
Quote from: Solar on December 25, 2014, 08:39:06 AM
Define "national level organization".
TEA groups from all over (the more, the merrier!) communicating directly with each other, and establishing a communications and information network for the purpose of formulating comprehensive strategies, one for countering the propaganda campaign being waged against us by both major parties, and second for using the party primary system in order find, thoroughly vet, and put our own presidential candidate in the drivers seat for the general election. Such organizing includes formulating a unified strategy for campaigning for our candidate should we be successful in pulling off an "upset". Also, assist each other in vetting various congressional candidates (not every group knows everything, even about their own situation!), campaign strategies, and any other items in which information from one area can - and undoubtedly will - help TEA groups in other areas.
I am NOT talking about building any kind of formalized infrastructure, leadership hierarchy, or anything that would resemble a single organization (noun) for our opponents to focus on. Rather, I am proposing organizing (verb) our efforts so that we don't end up like 2012 wherein various TEA movements in various areas each had their own plan, some of which were mutually exclusive, with the result that the establishment had absolutely no problem in shoving their preferred throw-away candidate on us (thus getting the Bamster in for another four), as well as subverting a number of our congressional campaigns with their anti-TEA propaganda campaign.
It is my solid opinion that the success of the establishment in 2012, and the inability of TEA groups all over to affect the presidential primary in even the slightest manner, was due to the fact that we simply do not communicate with each other on a meaningful (ie: strategizing and information exchange) level. If we want to take our movement beyond getting a (relatively ineffectual) minority of congress on our side, we need to start planning bigger. And that takes a certain modicum of organization beyond local, or even state groups.
Quote from: walkstall on December 25, 2014, 10:12:49 AM
Home town, county or even state but not national.
Exactly! Even setting boundaries/restrictions on what TEA means would be a certain deathknell.
Quote from: Solar on December 25, 2014, 06:56:03 AM
You are exactly correct MS. Making TEA a 3rd party entity amongst 23 other failed third partyattempts, of which consist of other great Conservative movements killed off by the Establishment, is pure idiocy, and one both party's could only dream of TEA becoming a party.
Your knowledge and keen grasp of American politics continues to astound me.
We could use clear young minds such as yours running for office here in the US.. :cool: :cool:
lol, leave Norway for Washington? Nooo way. I would be happy to emmigrate almost everywhere else though, just need a green card. Guess I can always emmigrate to the US the democrat way if the Law doesn't suit me :tounge:
Quote from: Mountainshield on December 25, 2014, 11:15:43 AM
lol, leave Norway for Washington? Nooo way. I would be happy to emmigrate almost everywhere else though, just need a green card. Guess I can always emmigrate to the US the democrat way if the Law doesn't suit me :tounge:
:biggrin:
Your'e white, forget a green card. :biggrin: :biggrin:
Quote from: Solar on December 25, 2014, 11:20:05 AM
:biggrin:
Your'e white, forget a green card. :biggrin: :biggrin:
My wife is black, so according to liberals she would be choked and then shot to death by the first police officer she meets :tounge: not a good plan
Quote from: Mountainshield on December 25, 2014, 11:28:32 AM
My wife is black, so according to liberals she would be choked and then shot to death by the first police officer she meets :tounge: not a good plan
Tell her just don't sell cigarettes one at a time in NYC. :sneaky:
Quote from: walkstall on December 25, 2014, 11:37:53 AM
Tell her just don't sell cigarettes one at a time in NYC. :sneaky:
But what about her other habits such as buying skittles and melon tea for some sort of drink and beating people to near death for looking at her, not to mention strong arm robbing stores, smoking weed etc will that be okay? :tounge:
Quote from: Mountainshield on December 25, 2014, 11:46:18 AM
But what about her other habits such as buying skittles and melon tea for some sort of drink and beating people to near death for looking at her, not to mention strong arm robbing stores, smoking weed etc will that be okay? :tounge:
Cool! She can claim victim status :biggrin:
Quote from: Mountainshield on December 25, 2014, 11:28:32 AM
My wife is black, so according to liberals she would be choked and then shot to death by the first police officer she meets :tounge: not a good plan
Silly, get her a shirt that say's "I'm Wit Da Honkie"....
OK, I'm going now.....
Quote from: Solar on December 25, 2014, 12:04:27 PM
Cool! She can claim victim status :biggrin:
Then they will have to let us stay! :cool: Liberal Logic is cool
Quote from: Solar on December 25, 2014, 12:10:15 PM
Silly, get her a shirt that say's "I'm Wit Da Honkie".... OK, I'm going now.....
Damn, now thats politically incorrect :laugh: You win,
I think we all better scram :tounge:
Quote from: Mountainshield on December 25, 2014, 12:14:04 PM
Then they will have to let us stay! :cool: Liberal Logic is cool
Damn, now thats politically incorrect :laugh: You win, I think we all better scram :tounge:
:biggrin:
Yeah, I'm in a goofy mood.
Quote from: Mountainshield on December 25, 2014, 11:46:18 AM
But what about her other habits such as buying skittles and melon tea for some sort of drink and beating people to near death for looking at her, not to mention strong arm robbing stores, smoking weed etc will that be okay? :tounge:
I think she would be pushing with the skittles. But then I don't live in NYC. :biggrin:
Quote from: walkstall on December 25, 2014, 11:37:53 AM
Tell her just don't sell cigarettes one at a time in NYC. :sneaky:
Or try to take a cop's gun away from him!
Darth
Quote from: zewazir on December 25, 2014, 10:44:00 AM
TEA groups from all over (the more, the merrier!) communicating directly with each other, and establishing a communications and information network for the purpose of formulating comprehensive strategies, one for countering the propaganda campaign being waged against us by both major parties, and second for using the party primary system in order find, thoroughly vet, and put our own presidential candidate in the drivers seat for the general election. Such organizing includes formulating a unified strategy for campaigning for our candidate should we be successful in pulling off an "upset". Also, assist each other in vetting various congressional candidates (not every group knows everything, even about their own situation!), campaign strategies, and any other items in which information from one area can - and undoubtedly will - help TEA groups in other areas.
I am NOT talking about building any kind of formalized infrastructure, leadership hierarchy, or anything that would resemble a single organization (noun) for our opponents to focus on. Rather, I am proposing organizing (verb) our efforts so that we don't end up like 2012 wherein various TEA movements in various areas each had their own plan, some of which were mutually exclusive, with the result that the establishment had absolutely no problem in shoving their preferred throw-away candidate on us (thus getting the Bamster in for another four), as well as subverting a number of our congressional campaigns with their anti-TEA propaganda campaign.
It is my solid opinion that the success of the establishment in 2012, and the inability of TEA groups all over to affect the presidential primary in even the slightest manner, was due to the fact that we simply do not communicate with each other on a meaningful (ie: strategizing and information exchange) level. If we want to take our movement beyond getting a (relatively ineffectual) minority of congress on our side, we need to start planning bigger. And that takes a certain modicum of organization beyond local, or even state groups.
You make some good points that a united effort could be effective. However, that can become a slippery slope to an organized party. I reiterate the power of TEA is that we are somewhat stealth. The enemies, democrats and establishment GOP, do not have a specific target right now. They are confused and we continue to make gains. Our influence is increasing and eventually we will nominate a GOP candidate who is a true conservative.
Quote from: supsalemgr on December 25, 2014, 01:32:34 PM
You make some good points that a united effort could be effective. However, that can become a slippery slope to an organized party. I reiterate the power of TEA is that we are somewhat stealth. The enemies, democrats and establishment GOP, do not have a specific target right now. They are confused and we continue to make gains. Our influence is increasing and eventually we will nominate a GOP candidate who is a true conservative.
Exactly, tHAT''S THE BEAUTY OF THE MOVEMENT, NO ACTUAL TARGETS.
Damn caps lock! :blushing:
The other issue with forming an actual movement with stated goals, is that not everyone will be pleased.
Right now, the movement is focused on shrinking an over bearing govt, but say we focus to include morality, then we lose a small percentage, and every vote is important.
Or say the plank states we don't include morality, then we piss off the religious.
Granted, these are poor examples, but it proves the point having an all inclusive platform of simple change in focusing on Liberty and lower taxes has worked.
To mess with that now would pigeonhole us and kill the movement.
Quote from: Solar on December 25, 2014, 02:00:53 PM
Exactly, tHAT''S THE BEAUTY OF THE MOVEMENT, NO ACTUAL TARGETS.
Damn caps lock! :blushing:
The other issue with forming an actual movement with stated goals, is that not everyone will be pleased.
Right now, the movement is focused on shrinking an over bearing govt, but say we focus to include morality, then we lose a small percentage, and every vote is important.
Or say the plank states we don't include morality, then we piss off the religious.
Granted, these are poor examples, but it proves the point having an all inclusive platform of simple change in focusing on Liberty and lower taxes has worked.
To mess with that now would pigeonhole us and kill the movement.
Exactly the point. We all have our own personal beliefs about social issues like abortion, etc;. The establishment has used those issues to split the conservative vote which prevented a conservative from being a presidential candidate. TEA has removed those and we are focused on smaller government and other true conservative values. We will not be distracted from our goals.
Quote from: supsalemgr on December 25, 2014, 02:29:15 PM
Exactly the point. We all have our own personal beliefs about social issues like abortion, etc;. The establishment has used those issues to split the conservative vote which prevented a conservative from being a presidential candidate. TEA has removed those and we are focused on smaller government and other true conservative values. We will not be distracted from our goals.
Bingo!
It's sad that rino allowed the left to politicize everything. and I do mean everything!
Again, the type of organizing I am promoting is being misunderstood. For instance, "stated goals"? Who said any goals have to be stated? At least, any stated goal above and beyond that which is already stated: the desire to return to a limited constitutional federal government, and a return of appropriate powers to the States.
If stealth seems to be the better strategy, then we go stealth. 5th column. How ever you want to state it. Organizing so that we end up focused on an agreed candidate to support, instead of the half dozen or so we had in 2012, does not mean we give up the looseness of the overall TEA movement. Being, in reality the Big Tent (instead of mere rhetoric of the liberals) is one of the aspects that keeps me involved with the TEA movement. I do not want to lose that aspect any more than anyone else. But we will have pretty much reach the limit of our effectiveness if we cannot come together and start agreeing on how to approach certain items, one of which is a SINGLE presidential candidate to support in 2016.
Yes, we will need to communicate things such as NOT getting involved looking for a candidate who supports specific issues. Yes, communicating between TEA factions across the US will mean people not being satisfied that their pet issue is not prioritized the way they want. But what will leave TEA participants LESS satisfied: choosing a candidate based on the general principles of a limited constitutional federal government, or having yet another RINO type forced on us because TEA factions cannot agree on a conservative candidate to support?
The PTBs are already succeeding in fractionalizing the People, race divisions, social/religious division, economic division. The last thing we need is to help them out by voluntarily remaining fractionalized ourselves. "United we stand, divided we fall" is not just some old, corny saying. (Though I see nothing wrong with the idea of presenting a PUBLIC image of being fractionalized, while preparing underneath the table a unified push when they least expect it.)
And even if it ends up TEA factions cannot come together, there is still nothing wrong with establishing lines of communication between factions.
Quote from: zewazir on December 25, 2014, 07:15:17 PM
Again, the type of organizing I am promoting is being misunderstood. For instance, "stated goals"? Who said any goals have to be stated? At least, any stated goal above and beyond that which is already stated: the desire to return to a limited constitutional federal government, and a return of appropriate powers to the States.
I believe we're all on the same page.
QuoteIf stealth seems to be the better strategy, then we go stealth. 5th column. How ever you want to state it. Organizing so that we end up focused on an agreed candidate to support, instead of the half dozen or so we had in 2012, does not mean we give up the looseness of the overall TEA movement. Being, in reality the Big Tent (instead of mere rhetoric of the liberals) is one of the aspects that keeps me involved with the TEA movement. I do not want to lose that aspect any more than anyone else. But we will have pretty much reach the limit of our effectiveness if we cannot come together and start agreeing on how to approach certain items, one of which is a SINGLE presidential candidate to support in 2016.
You nailed it defining it as the big tent, because that's what the majority of the nation wants.
As to reaching it's climax, that's a bit premature for the foreseeable future. Coalescing around a certain candidate wil happen, but we have yet to find one, anyway, one that's officially entered the race.
QuoteYes, we will need to communicate things such as NOT getting involved looking for a candidate who supports specific issues. Yes, communicating between TEA factions across the US will mean people not being satisfied that their pet issue is not prioritized the way they want.
TEA groups across the country are in constant communication with the message, so I don't see that becoming an issue.
What we keep an eye out for is the Establishment usurping one of the bigger groups like Fred Thompson tried a few years back and got his ass handed to him .
QuoteBut what will leave TEA participants LESS satisfied: choosing a candidate based on the general principles of a limited constitutional federal government, or having yet another RINO type forced on us because TEA factions cannot agree on a conservative candidate to support?
Yes, this is a challenge, one we will have to face head on come 2016, but the climate has shifted to TEA favor, in that th majority are onto the rino leaving us no other options but to vote for their candidate.
In other words, people aren't afraid of the Dim party, they offer nothing more than more failed Marxist policy, so being forced into believing the rino is a safe bet simply won't fly anymore.
QuoteThe PTBs are already succeeding in fractionalizing the People, race divisions, social/religious division, economic division. The last thing we need is to help them out by voluntarily remaining fractionalized ourselves. "United we stand, divided we fall" is not just some old, corny saying. (Though I see nothing wrong with the idea of presenting a PUBLIC image of being fractionalized, while preparing underneath the table a unified push when they least expect it.)
Again, that's the lefts failed mantra, one the country isn't falling for anymore, despite the efforts of a failed media.
QuoteAnd even if it ends up TEA factions cannot come together, there is still nothing wrong with establishing lines of communication between factions.
Believe me, we already have that.
Quote from: Solar on December 25, 2014, 08:17:49 PM
Coalescing around a certain candidate will happen, but we have yet to find one, anyway, one that's officially entered the race.
Or we could poll the various factions out there and find a person who fits the criteria and convince them to toss their hat in. Major politicians are already in the lime light, and you can bet the U.S. Pravda are more than ready with what they need to scare moderates, and main stream republican voters away. In short, we hit them with an unconsidered newbie, just like they hit us with the Bamster.
Quote from: Solar on December 25, 2014, 08:17:49 PM
Yes, this is a challenge, one we will have to face head on come 2016, but the climate has shifted to TEA favor, in that th majority are onto the rino leaving us no other options but to vote for their candidate.
In other words, people aren't afraid of the Dim party, they offer nothing more than more failed Marxist policy, so being forced into believing the rino is a safe bet simply won't fly anymore.
First of all, if we wait until 2016, we'll be starting out way behind the power curve. If we don't start searching out and vetting candidates now, we will be ill prepared to affect the primaries. It's less than a week from 2015, and primaries start in January of 2016.
Second, from what I have seen, your assessment seems rather optimistic. Yes, the tide is STARTING to turn, and every day people are STARTING to question the inflamatory rhetoric they simply accepted as little as three months ago. But that is a long way from where we need to be. Most republicans and most independent moderates who are sick of the Dim lies will still be more than willing to accept a RINO, not only over a Dim, but also over the "far right extremist" type conservatives (as still being successfully painted by the media) that we really need. And don't forget, the opposition is stepping up their game, too. Their rhetoric will be modified, and other methods changed as soon as they see their current methods being minimized. (They are probably already aware of the changing tide, as while their followers may be brain dead lemmings, you can bet the ones in charge are anything but stupid.)
Quote from: Solar on December 25, 2014, 08:17:49 PMBelieve me, we already have that.
I must say that I have not seen any indication of that happening. There is some interchange going on here and there, but not to any significant degree. And Montana does have a rather significant TEA movement of which I am active. Is there an information clearing house we are not aware?
Quote from: zewazir on December 26, 2014, 01:09:33 PM
Or we could poll the various factions out there and find a person who fits the criteria and convince them to toss their hat in. Major politicians are already in the lime light, and you can bet the U.S. Pravda are more than ready with what they need to scare moderates, and main stream republican voters away. In short, we hit them with an unconsidered newbie, just like they hit us with the Bamster.
First of all, if we wait until 2016, we'll be starting out way behind the power curve. If we don't start searching out and vetting candidates now, we will be ill prepared to affect the primaries. It's less than a week from 2015, and primaries start in January of 2016.
The process has begun. There are 15-20 potential GOP candidates and they will begin staking out positions. Some have already begun. The process will play out. We will see who does the best. One thing we need to watch is who the MSM selects as their "GOP darlin'" for 2016. That will be the dead giveaway of at least one who should be eliminated.
Second, from what I have seen, your assessment seems rather optimistic. Yes, the tide is STARTING to turn, and every day people are STARTING to question the inflamatory rhetoric they simply accepted as little as three months ago. But that is a long way from where we need to be. Most republicans and most independent moderates who are sick of the Dim lies will still be more than willing to accept a RINO, not only over a Dim, but also over the "far right extremist" type conservatives (as still being successfully painted by the media) that we really need. And don't forget, the opposition is stepping up their game, too. Their rhetoric will be modified, and other methods changed as soon as they see their current methods being minimized. (They are probably already aware of the changing tide, as while their followers may be brain dead lemmings, you can bet the ones in charge are anything but stupid.)
We cannot change how democrats and RINO's think. I plan to ignore them and look for the most electable conservative candidate. That is action and expressed in our primaries.
I must say that I have not seen any indication of that happening. There is some interchange going on here and there, but not to any significant degree. And Montana does have a rather significant TEA movement of which I am active. Is there an information clearing house we are not aware?
The process is just beginning. It is a two year process. No need to rush what will unfold. The key is to remain diligent in our vetting process. This forum is a vehicle to identify chamelions and share with other posters.
Quote from: zewazir on December 26, 2014, 01:09:33 PM
Or we could poll the various factions out there and find a person who fits the criteria and convince them to toss their hat in. Major politicians are already in the lime light, and you can bet the U.S. Pravda are more than ready with what they need to scare moderates, and main stream republican voters away. In short, we hit them with an unconsidered newbie, just like they hit us with the Bamster.
First of all, if we wait until 2016, we'll be starting out way behind the power curve. If we don't start searching out and vetting candidates now, we will be ill prepared to affect the primaries. It's less than a week from 2015, and primaries start in January of 2016.
When I say 2016, I'm referring to when we see what the Establishment has put forth, so we know how to fashion our message.
QuoteSecond, from what I have seen, your assessment seems rather optimistic. Yes, the tide is STARTING to turn, and every day people are STARTING to question the inflamatory rhetoric they simply accepted as little as three months ago. But that is a long way from where we need to be.
What you propose takes money, and that we simply don't have, so it's pretty obvious, absent money, we have kicked ass despite the fact.
QuoteMost republicans and most independent moderates who are sick of the Dim lies will still be more than willing to accept a RINO, not only over a Dim, but also over the "far right extremist" type conservatives (as still being successfully painted by the media) that we really need.
Don't assume they'll vote.
And don't forget, the opposition is stepping up their game, too. Their rhetoric will be modified, and other methods changed as soon as they see their current methods being minimized.
Yeah like calling us the enemy? That worked out well. :biggrin:
Quote(They are probably already aware of the changing tide, as while their followers may be brain dead lemmings, you can bet the ones in charge are anything but stupid.)
I have no doubt they have several plans in the works, but it matters not if we stick to our core values and reject anything and everything they offer.
These people are pure scum and the nation is more than aware of it.
The one thing they'll do, which they do ever election, is attempt to eliminate contenders one by one, and at the last minute bring forth their guy as what they claim to be our only option, just ike they pulled with Mitten.
He laid low while all the other contenders battle it out.
They also dug dirt on the biggest threats as leverage, think Cain.
We need to demand answers to issues that concern us, not go on softball talk shows where the questions were prescreened.
QuoteI must say that I have not seen any indication of that happening. There is some interchange going on here and there, but not to any significant degree. And Montana does have a rather significant TEA movement of which I am active. Is there an information clearing house we are not aware?
This forum, as well as other site, such as the ones listed below communicate regularly nationwide in an effort to spread the word and contain the message.
These are only two examples of networkijng
https://groups.google.com/forum/# (https://groups.google.com/forum/#)!topic/jacksonjuly4thteaparty/L4lJyE3A710
https://www.facebook.com/TheTeaParty.net (https://www.facebook.com/TheTeaParty.net)
https://www.facebook.com/teapartyorg?fref=nf (https://www.facebook.com/teapartyorg?fref=nf)
I "liked" this FaceBook page quite a while ago, but have been basically disappointed. They spew a lot of news items, along with "urgent" polls which end up asking for money. Not the normal modus operandi of the real TEA groups I have acquainted myself with.
Unfortunately, its another item the TEA movement (any type of interest group, really) ends up dealing with. Scammers using the TEA moniker, taking money while giving real TEA factions a bad name.
Thanks for the heads up on more legitimate groups.
Quote from: zewazir on December 26, 2014, 03:24:24 PM
https://www.facebook.com/teapartyorg?fref=nf (https://www.facebook.com/teapartyorg?fref=nf)
I "liked" this FaceBook page quite a while ago, but have been basically disappointed. They spew a lot of news items, along with "urgent" polls which end up asking for money. Not the normal modus operandi of the real TEA groups I have acquainted myself with.
Unfortunately, its another item the TEA movement (any type of interest group, really) ends up dealing with. Scammers using the TEA moniker, taking money while giving real TEA factions a bad name.
Thanks for the heads up on more legitimate groups.
Yes, that's a real problem. Taxed and I have some inside info on one of the biggest groups run by Ginny Beth Martin.
I won't go into detail, but yes, there are some real scum out there siphoning off money under the guise of TEA.
Quote from: zewazir on December 26, 2014, 03:24:24 PM
https://www.facebook.com/teapartyorg?fref=nf (https://www.facebook.com/teapartyorg?fref=nf)
I "liked" this FaceBook page quite a while ago, but have been basically disappointed. They spew a lot of news items, along with "urgent" polls which end up asking for money. Not the normal modus operandi of the real TEA groups I have acquainted myself with.
Unfortunately, its another item the TEA movement (any type of interest group, really) ends up dealing with. Scammers using the TEA moniker, taking money while giving real TEA factions a bad name.
Thanks for the heads up on more legitimate groups.
I make it a point to steer clear of any political actions on Facebook.