Michael Reagan: Shut Up Tea Party, Your Candidates Are Kooks

[truth_seeker]

Michael Reagan: Shut Up Tea Party, Your Candidates Are Kooks

What does the Tea Party want this fall?

http://www.westernjournalism.com/talk-radio-party-tea-party/

Michael Reagan — April 10, 2014

So what does the Tea Party want this fall?

A repeat of 2010, or a repeat of 2012?

The Tea Party succeeded spectacularly in 2010.

Its principled enthusiasm put Republicans back in charge of the House of Representatives; and, if the Tea Party hadn’t been so stupid in several races, it should have given the GOP control of the Senate.

In 2010, Tea Party favorites Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, and Mike Lee won primaries and went on to win senate seats in Florida, Kentucky, and Utah.

But the Tea Party also won several other Republican primaries with candidates who turned out to be total embarrassments.

Remember Christine O’Donnell in Delaware?

She defeated U.S. Rep. Michael Castle in the GOP primary for an open Senate seat. Then she had to spend all fall explaining to voters why she was not a witch.

Castle would have won that seat in a walk. But O’Donnell was almost laughed out of the state, losing 56-40 and handing Democrats a Senate spot they should never have had.

In 2010, two other shaky Tea Party-backed primary victors, Sharron Angle in Nevada and Ken Buck in Colorado, suffered similar fates in the general election.
 
In 2012, it was the same dumb story — rousing Tea Party primary victories that thrilled conservative talk-show hosts in May but guaranteed GOP losses in the fall.

Yes, Ted Cruz won big in Texas. But only four of the 16 Senate candidates backed by the Tea Party won in the fall.

It wasn’t pretty in 2012.

After the Tea Party primaried GOP incumbent Sen. Dick Lugar of Indiana, its candidate Richard Mourdock went on to say some really stupid things about abortion and got his butt whipped in the fall, 50-44.

And of course, who can forget the great Todd Akin, the Republican House member from Missouri who was going to defeat Sen. Claire McCaskill — until he started blathering about “legitimate rape” and his campaign tanked.

Now we’re getting ready for 2014, and the Tea Party still hasn’t learned how not to shoot itself in both feet. It’s still putting up primary candidates who clearly are not ready for primetime — or any time.

In Texas, the Tea Party ran Rep. Steve Stockman in the March primary against sitting Senator John Cornyn.

Stockman, who gave up his House seat and barely campaigned, will be remembered most for giving away barf bags for every $10 contribution.

A few people may have thought that was cute or funny stuff, but all it did was make the Tea Party — and the GOP — look incompetent and foolish. Especially when Cronyn won by 58-19 percent.

Then there’s Kentucky, where Matt Bevin is the Tea Party candidate challenging incumbent Senator Mitch McConnell in the May 20 primary.

Last week, after he was “caught” speaking at a rally meant to build support for legal cockfighting in the state, Bevin defended himself by saying he was there because it was a state rights rally and he didn’t know it was a cockfighting rally.

OK, so he’s either lying or really stupid. In either case, he’s a lousy candidate, and the Tea Party should ask him to do the Free World a favor and quit.

The Tea Party zealots who haven’t learned from their mistakes in 2010 and 2012 are trying their best to screw up the GOP’s chances to win the Senate this fall.

Where does the Tea Party find these people to run in primaries? Most important, why do they offer them up as legitimate Republican candidates?

The Tea Party bosses have been listening to too much talk radio. They seem to think that what makes a good Republican candidate is someone who sounds like a talk radio host.

But talk radio is all about bombast and attracting callers, not about winning elections.

If Republicans are going to win general elections in 2014 and beyond, we’ve got to put up principled conservative candidates who sound like senators, congressmen, and governors — not kooks.

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I HIGH FIVE Michael Reagan, for writing this wise, insightful advice.

A lot of what is said and implied about talk radio, could also be said about discussion forums.

[mountaineer]

Who are the tea party bosses of whom he writes? And why does he believe he can read their minds (whoever they are)?

[alicewonders]

Would the tea partiers still vote for Rubio and Rand if they had to do it all over again?

I voted for Rand Paul before and I wouldn't hesitate to vote for him again.  And your point is...

[MBB1984]

It would be very interesting if the Tea Party supporters stayed home or voted third party.  I wonder how the GOP would fare? 

[evadR]

Would the tea partiers still vote for Rubio and Rand if they had to do it all over again?

I voted for Rand Paul before and I wouldn't hesitate to vote for him again.  And your point is...

As a resident of the state of Maryland and considering the sad state of politics here, I would be estatic to vote for Rand Paul.  I dunno about Rubio.

[truth_seeker]

Would the tea partiers still vote for Rubio and Rand if they had to do it all over again?

I voted for Rand Paul before and I wouldn't hesitate to vote for him again.  And your point is...

As a resident of the state of Maryland and considering the sad state of politics here, I would be estatic to vote for Rand Paul.  I dunno about Rubio.

I would think a Maryland  Republican (or conservative or center-right) voter would be thrilled to get a Rubio type candidate to vote for.

[evadR]

I would think a Maryland  Republican (or conservative or center-right) voter would be thrilled to get a Rubio type candidate to vote for.

Actually, I agree. I would take him over anything we now have in any position ...but I wouldn't be estatic.
:)

[RedForemanRules]

   Originally the Tea Party was largely libertarian in origin, then it got co-opted by a whole ton of people with varied interests and ideologies.   There's still a lot of good people involved with it, intelligent, strong-willed people who don't like the way the Republican Party at large is heading so its unfair for Reagan to paint them with such a broad brush but they did acquire their fair share of kooks along the way, no more than other political movements necessarily but the notion seemed to be in vogue was that having absolutely no background or in some cases, public speaking was a virtue and in the rush for ideological purity you ended up with some pretty lousy candidates.  The Sharron Angle's, Ken Buck's, Richard Mourdock's, they were heralded as outstanding victories by the Tea Party in the primaries.....and then promptly collapsed in the general election because they were basically unfit to serve office.   

        I'm not suggesting you push an ideologically flawed candidate just to win an election, especially if that candidate tends to be about as consistent as weather patterns in New England.   There's no way I can bring myself to voting for John McCain again, ever.    But being a complete wild-eyed outsider with little of a resume isn't necessarily a merit either, in some cases you had candidates like Christine O'Donnell running that had no real educational background at all.   


    I want to see more intellectual conservatives, people who are strong in their beliefs, who can express them eloquently and intellectually and have the mental fortitude to hold up against a series of withering blows from the left-wing media.   I don't want to see another Todd Akin spouting off about "fake rape" or other nonsense like that.   If you're a man, and you are a Republican and you say anything more about abortion other than you respect the life of the child as well as the mother, the media is going to gore you and absolutely obliterate you, no matter how well intentioned your comments may have been.   It's better to just completely avoid that minefield as a whole, especially with the red meat of Obamacare, the economy, education, government overreach, all accessible hot button issues. 

[Formerly Once-Ler]

     I want to see more intellectual conservatives, people who are strong in their beliefs, who can express them eloquently and intellectually and have the mental fortitude to hold up against a series of withering blows from the left-wing media.   I don't want to see another Todd Akin spouting off about "fake rape" or other nonsense like that.   If you're a man, and you are a Republican and you say anything more about abortion other than you respect the life of the child as well as the mother, the media is going to gore you and absolutely obliterate you, no matter how well intentioned your comments may have been.   It's better to just completely avoid that minefield as a whole, especially with the red meat of Obamacare, the economy, education, government overreach, all accessible hot button issues.

I agree completely.  Conservatism can be promoted with the right message from an erudite, and classy messenger.  Just as it was when Reagan was President and Buckley ran National Review.  Even though liberals ran the MSM they respected the abilities of both men to reach an audience.  Andrew Breitbart often talked about the need for conservatives and conservatism to counteract the liberal sensibilities of Hollywood  and the MSM.  You can't do that while promoting cock fighting.  The GOP needs a new breed of media savvy candidates.  We need spokesmen and spokeswomen who can stand their ground confidently on MSNBC and Bill Maher.

[olde north church]

   
...
    But being a complete wild-eyed outsider with little of a res I don't want to see another Todd Akin spouting off about "fake rape" or other nonsense like that.   If you're a man, and you are a Republican and you say anything more about abortion other than you respect the life of the child as well as the mother, the media is going to gore you and absolutely obliterate you, no matter how well intentioned your comments may have been.   It's better to just completely avoid that minefield as a whole, especially with the red meat of Obamacare, the economy, education, government overreach, all accessible hot button issues.

One more time for the factually challenged:  Akin was NOT the Tea Party candidate, he was a SO-CON candidate.  That should prove the example to cleave the two forever more.

[RedForemanRules]

One more time for the factually challenged:  Akin was NOT the Tea Party candidate, he was a SO-CON candidate.  That should prove the example to cleave the two forever more.

                I wasn't referring to Akin necessarily as a Tea Party candidate, just as a goofball at large  McCaskill clearly recognized a guy with diarrhea of the mouth and decided to throw her lot behind him.    Then a bunch of conservatives jumped on his bandwagon on the basis of him being a "good God fearing man" that had a great "conservative track record." 

     Even after he made those remarks you still had a lot of people on the bandwagon who started to blame the Republican Party for basically dumping their support and were convinced that he still would have won had it not been for Karl Rove.    The guy was a terrible candidate all around, representing a small ultra conservative district in Congress is one thing, running for a Senate seat and spouting off stuff that will send moderates and independents alike running for the hills is a surefire way to lose an election.

       McCaskill should have been toast, just as Harry Reid should have been toast, the GOP keeps shooting themselves in the foot with these off-kilter candidates that the media happily uses a broad brush to apply their miscues to all other Republicans.

[olde north church]

                I wasn't referring to Akin necessarily as a Tea Party candidate, just as a goofball at large  McCaskill clearly recognized a guy with diarrhea of the mouth and decided to throw her lot behind him.    Then a bunch of conservatives jumped on his bandwagon on the basis of him being a "good God fearing man" that had a great "conservative track record." 

     Even after he made those remarks you still had a lot of people on the bandwagon who started to blame the Republican Party for basically dumping their support and were convinced that he still would have won had it not been for Karl Rove.    The guy was a terrible candidate all around, representing a small ultra conservative district in Congress is one thing, running for a Senate seat and spouting off stuff that will send moderates and independents alike running for the hills is a surefire way to lose an election.

       McCaskill should have been toast, just as Harry Reid should have been toast, the GOP keeps shooting themselves in the foot with these off-kilter candidates that the media happily uses a broad brush to apply their miscues to all other Republicans.

Which is why the Conservative movement should walk away, as fast and far as possible, from "the God-fearing".  They should be put on notice there are issues beyond abortion and homosexual marriage.  If things keep going the way they are, carrying babies to full term might happen just for the nutritional aspect.

[Poser]

So, By Michael Reagan's logic, we, here in New Hampshire, should vote for Scott Brown because he's not a Tea Party candidate? Sorry, but I'm not voting for a liberal just because he has an R after his name. It's bad enough that Kelly Ayotte is a squish and probable winner Frank Guinta is moderate. I'll take a bombastic conservative over a RINO any day.

[xyno]

It is going to be a long election season.  I am weary of it already.

[mountaineer]

Also for the factually challenged, Bevin does not support cockfighting.

[sinkspur]

Also for the factually challenged, Bevin does not support cockfighting.

Doesn't matter.  You go to a cockfighting rally, you support cockfighting.

That's like saying if someone goes to a NAMBLA rally, they don't support NAMBLA.  Doesn't work.

[RedForemanRules]

Also for the factually challenged, Bevin does not support cockfighting.

   Perception is reality.     I had an old NCO in the Army that used to say "95% of the Army is eyewash."    If you look well put together, that is what people will believe, if you look like a dirtbag, people will think you are one. 


      People believe what they see.   You go to a pro cock-fighting rally, you support cock-fighting, unless you're a Democrat, in which case you don't even have to pay your taxes and you can still be Secretary of the Treasury.

    Bevin basically buried himself with that misstep, all it requires is one.   I actually had strong hopes for Bevin because I can't stand McConnell even slightly and figured that if he were to be knocked out, it would send a message to the rest of the Republicans but no, Bevin stumbled over his own two feet.  Total unforced error.

[RedForemanRules]

Which is why the Conservative movement should walk away, as fast and far as possible, from "the God-fearing".  They should be put on notice there are issues beyond abortion and homosexual marriage.  If things keep going the way they are, carrying babies to full term might happen just for the nutritional aspect.

                  I think candidates should have more to offer than proclaiming their orthodox religiosity every chance they get.   I'm not voting for a Bishop or a Cardinal, I want a good, intelligent representative in government, someone who will stand up for what they believe, who can eloquently express their beliefs and make a provocative and strong case for conservative philosophy.    Akin turned out to be a guy who was pro-life but more than happy to feed at the pork trough and happy to fund all sorts of spending programs, things I didn't see as being very conservative. 


 

[truth_seeker]

One more time for the factually challenged:  Akin was NOT the Tea Party candidate, he was a SO-CON candidate.  That should prove the example to cleave the two forever more.

And one MORE time, Akin WAS a member of the House Tea Party Caucus.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_Party_Caucus#Members.2C_112th_and_113th_Congresses

[truth_seeker]

                  I think candidates should have more to offer than proclaiming their orthodox religiosity every chance they get.   I'm not voting for a Bishop or a Cardinal, I want a good, intelligent representative in government, someone who will stand up for what they believe, who can eloquently express their beliefs and make a provocative and strong case for conservative philosophy.    Akin turned out to be a guy who was pro-life but more than happy to feed at the pork trough and happy to fund all sorts of spending programs, things I didn't see as being very conservative. 


 

Yet every four years, the Republican hopefuls start duly trotting themselves before Dr. James Dobson, to see if he will "bless" them with his holy waters.

To show the thinking world his skill in picking people, he had once tapped the Rev. Ted Haggard, as his protégée.

But the irony of that entire episode escapes the high and mighty religionists.

[alicewonders]

On the cockfighting issue, although it is something I despise - you are talking about Kentucky - particularly Eastern Kentucky.  I was born and raised here, have lived here all my life. There are pockets of people who don't see anything wrong with it.  A drive in the country will take you past many homes where fighting cocks are being raised - not that far out in the country, actually. 

It brings to my mind a recollection of a funny story.  Several lifetimes ago, when I worked in the local HUD offices as a Housing Rehabilitation Specialist in conjunction with the Section 8 and Community Development Block Grant Program - I was sent to inspect a home IN THE CITY LIMITS.  I was amazed to find the homeowner was raising fighting cocks in his basement! 

The cockfighting issue with Matt Bevin is unfortunate, but I don't think it will hurt him as bad here in Kentucky as much as some on the outside might think.  I'm against cockfighting as a sport, but I still plan to vote for Mr. Bevin in the primary.  He is right, it is a States rights issue - not a Federal issue. 

[jmyrlefuller]

And one MORE time, Akin WAS a member of the House Tea Party Caucus.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_Party_Caucus#Members.2C_112th_and_113th_Congresses

What Tea Party organization endorsed him?

It seems Steelman actually had Tea Party support. Akin was backed by the Huckabee wing, and Brunner the big-business candidate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Missouri,_2012#Endorsements

[raml]

I live in Missouri and Akin was NOT a tea party candidate. Our primary is open to democrats too so they put Akin in as a candidate he was not a favorite here at all by conservative republicans. In the end I had to hold my nose and vote for him I hated doing that but anymore we conservatives have to do a lot of that. I now have declared I won't do that again no more voting for bad candidates. I will do a write in or not vote at all before I vote for one of these clowns that republican leaders put up as candidates.

[RedForemanRules]

On the cockfighting issue, although it is something I despise - you are talking about Kentucky - particularly Eastern Kentucky.  I was born and raised here, have lived here all my life. There are pockets of people who don't see anything wrong with it.  A drive in the country will take you past many homes where fighting cocks are being raised - not that far out in the country, actually. 

It brings to my mind a recollection of a funny story.  Several lifetimes ago, when I worked in the local HUD offices as a Housing Rehabilitation Specialist in conjunction with the Section 8 and Community Development Block Grant Program - I was sent to inspect a home IN THE CITY LIMITS.  I was amazed to find the homeowner was raising fighting cocks in his basement! 

The cockfighting issue with Matt Bevin is unfortunate, but I don't think it will hurt him as bad here in Kentucky as much as some on the outside might think.  I'm against cockfighting as a sport, but I still plan to vote for Mr. Bevin in the primary.  He is right, it is a States rights issue - not a Federal issue.

               The problem is that he's running to represent all of Kentucky, not just a part of it and the Democrats actually have a formidable candidate in Grimes who is saying/doing all the right things much as how Heidi Heitkamp was in North Dakota.   The Democrats and their allies in the media will pounce on any perceived weakness and by the time they are done with him, Bevin will have been partying with Michael Vick, betting on dog-fights, drowning small kittens and attempting to run over small animals with his car. 


              If Bevin is the nominee, I hope that people would support him as a more independent voice for Kentucky but he can't afford any more missteps or miscues throughout the rest of this election cycle. 

[truth_seeker]

Continuing an argument, of was or wasn't Akin "technically the TP's official, endorsed" candidate doesn't matter.

It does matter that HE self-identified as one, the House TP didn't disavow his right to be a caucus member, and the voting public doesn't have time or interest to make such fine distictions.

And he turned out to be just one of several Tea Party candidates who do the conservative cause a lot more harm than good.

And as Reagan states, they seem to have a proclivity of foisting whackos and then losing elections, and along the way losing credibility for conservatism.

And the overall result was he lost the election, and that is how I measure things.

Apparently there aren't enough of just the right type of Republicans in Missouri, to control the situation there, what with them being victims of democrats, who tricked the system, found a willing candidate in Akins, got him to say incredibily stupid things.

I don't think the "Tea Party" movement is capable of doing much better than they have, which means more embarassing candidates, and no meaningful advancement of the conservative movement, which is NOT SOLELY comprised of the TP.

The idea that if you aren't a TP member, you are not a conservative  "worthy" is ridiculous, but it is part of the low information game on forums.

My congressman has and continues to be a very strong conservative, and he has chosen to not be labeled Tea Party.

TP support has declined, and for that reason it is NOT necessarily a positive label to wear. I know it is hard for many to grasp that idea.