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..

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.