Last nights Tea Party Debate

[Tom Bombadil]

I knew you'd come around.

That flag should be half mast after Sundays game.

 

[SparrowHawk]

An interesting study just released in August provides a good current snapshot of the Tea Party.

The New York Times - Crashing the Tea Party

Some highlights:

The Tea Party is now viewed unfavorably by 40 percent of the public and favorably by just 20 percent (quoted from the "14 months later" link.)

The Tea Party ranks lower than any of the 23 other groups we asked about — lower than both Republicans and Democrats. It is even less popular than much maligned groups like “atheists” and “Muslims.” Interestingly, one group that approaches it in unpopularity is the Christian Right.

They are overwhelmingly white, but even compared to other white Republicans, they had a low regard for immigrants and blacks long before Barack Obama was president, and they still do.

They seek “deeply religious” elected officials, approve of religious leaders’ engaging in politics and want religion brought into political debates. The Tea Party’s generals may say their overriding concern is a smaller government, but not their rank and file, who are more concerned about putting God in government.

While over the last five years Americans have become slightly more conservative economically, they have swung even further in opposition to mingling religion and politics. It thus makes sense that the Tea Party ranks alongside the Christian Right in unpopularity.

On everything but the size of government, Tea Party supporters are increasingly out of step with most Americans, even many Republicans.

Coming from the NY Times the information has very little if any credibility. The Times was once the paper of record. Now it's the preferred bird cage liner.

 

[Deleted member 17588]

Coming from the NY Times the information has very little if any credibility. The Times was once the paper of record. Now it's the preferred bird cage liner.

Don't shoot the messenger. The New York Times only published information provided by two college professors who collected data from polls, surveys and from their study of the Tea Party: "David E. Campbell, an associate professor of political science at Notre Dame, and Robert D. Putnam, a professor of public policy at Harvard, are the authors of “American Grace: How Religion Divides and Unites Us.”

Just curious, what information can you come up with that contradicts their findings?

 

[Ms Tree]

Google is a real good start......if you know how to use it.

You made the assertion. You have to support it. As far as I am concerned it's BS.

 

[Ms Tree]

I wonder how Bachmann et al are going to explain the cheers. I am sure they were left wing infiltrators.

No chance in hell the progressives had wonks at the debate to cause negative views of the Tea Party and you fell for it hook,line and sinker?

That took lass time than expected.

 

[delldude]

You made the assertion. You have to support it. As far as I am concerned it's BS.

Then stick with BS.

 

[Ms Tree]

Same as the other claim you made? Remember .. oh what was that about ... OH yea, that the S&P would not have lowered the rating had they accepted the proposal by the TP because Mr Beer was quoted as saying that and he after all was in the S&P. OH yea, he never said that. So I'll stick with BS since you have no proof.

Seventy percent of this country could not agree on where to take a piss much less a political policy.

 

[SparrowHawk]

Same as the other claim you made? Remember .. oh what was that about ... OH yea, that the S&P would not have lowered the rating had they accepted the proposal by the TP because Mr Beer was quoted as saying that and he after all was in the S&P. OH yea, he never said that. So I'll stick with BS since you have no proof.

Seventy percent of this country could not agree on where to take a piss much less a political policy.

None the less it is an economic fundamental that you do not spend more than you make. NO ONE can't refute this. Let's lop off a few zero's and apply common sense.

The feds take in 2.2 trillion and spend 3.7 trillion at the current rate of spend. Now I ask you to imagine your personal finances.

You & the Spouse make $227,000 and spend $370,000 or hack another zero off as it works either way. you own your own home, 785 FICO Score. How long could you keep spending at that rate? year? Five Years? Think your credit score will drop as you incur more and more debt to fund your household?

The difference between your personal finances and that of the government is you don't have a printing press in the basement.

 

[delldude]

Same as the other claim you made? Remember .. oh what was that about ... OH yea, that the S&P would not have lowered the rating had they accepted the proposal by the TP because Mr Beer was quoted as saying that and he after all was in the S&P. OH yea, he never said that. So I'll stick with BS since you have no proof.

Seventy percent of this country could not agree on where to take a piss much less a political policy.

Seventy percent of this country could not agree on where to take a piss much less a political policy.

Get back to me in November 2012.


Mr Beers didn't publicly make an official statement as I said before,however, what he said and inferred to 27 GOP Congressmen and how they understood it was the same thing and resulted in a lowering of the rating.......just like it happened.....duh.
And I proved that.

So continue to split hairs......

 

[Ms Tree]

Yes it can be refuted. There are times when you have to spend more than you have in order to try and dig out. I lost my job. The new job did not pay nearly as well. My wife's job paid crap. We took out a loan to send her to nursing school. We had to go deep in the hole to get to a point where we could start to dig our selves out.

What is needed is a tax increase AND a spending decrease. One or the other will not solve the problem.

 

[delldude]

Yes it can be refuted. There are times when you have to spend more than you have in order to try and dig out. I lost my job. The new job did not pay nearly as well. My wife's job paid crap. We took out a loan to send her to nursing school. We had to go deep in the hole to get to a point where we could start to dig our selves out.

What is needed is a tax increase AND a spending decrease. One or the other will not solve the problem.

Tax increase at this time is an economic killer.

 

[SparrowHawk]

Yes it can be refuted. There are times when you have to spend more than you have in order to try and dig out. I lost my job. The new job did not pay nearly as well. My wife's job paid crap. We took out a loan to send her to nursing school. We had to go deep in the hole to get to a point where we could start to dig our selves out.

What is needed is a tax increase AND a spending decrease. One or the other will not solve the problem.

we have incurred debt every year since 1993 that I have access to. So the entire post is bullshit. NO ONE can refute that you can't continually incur debt for 17 years in a row with the last 10 being more than the prior 200+ combined. at the current spend, the back bench junior senator posing as POTUS will if reelected incur more debt in 8 years than ALL prior Presidents combined. Truth is S&P raised the interest on Barack's credit card and he's pissed so naturally he's seeking to shift blame. I have a mirror that he and the Libtards can borrow if they're looking to place blame

The citizens as in we the people have said no more money and I'd remind you that the country belongs to the people not the Empty Suit. So tighten the belt in DC boys because it's not that we don't have money to give, we just don't have any for YOU until you demonstrate you can use it wisely.

 

[Ms Tree]

OH horse crap. There is a difference between the spending that occurred from 93-08 and the bail out money.

The only thing the people have said is no more money for the stuff that I don't like. Thing is, they like a whole lot.

 

[delldude]

OH horse crap. There is a difference between the spending that occurred from 93-08 and the bail out money.

The only thing the people have said is no more money for the stuff that I don't like. Thing is, they like a whole lot.

Yeah, you're right, its all Bush's fault.

 

[Ms Tree]

Why do you say that? I think it goes back much further than that.