In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Tea Party mid-term effects in Texas
casper1947
Member Posts: 1,147 ✭✭✭✭✭
This is NOT scientific, only personal observations.
This is based on midterms only looking for the effect of the Tea Party on election results.
Using data from the 2006, 2010 and 2014 primary and general election results in Texas. 2010 being credited to Tea Party effect.
Participation in the Republican primary increased from 2006 by 126% in 2010 and 103% in 2014. Changes are based on 2006.
But the general election only indicated a 3% increase in republican votes in 2010 (Tea Party revolution) over 2006.
On the other hand the Democrat primary had an increase of 36% and 9% over the same time period.
But the general election indicated a 35% increase in Democrat votes in 2010 over 2006.
The only conclusions I can draw from this is that the Tea Party were already general election voters and have very little effect on the general. I do believe the field of candidates is improving.
On the other hand, the Democrats increased 35% in the general election. This increase I cannot attribute to Tea Party candidates. I see this increase as a direct result of the phenomenal growth of the Welfare State. It's not about the quality of a candidate but the quantity of money the voters may receive.
This is based on midterms only looking for the effect of the Tea Party on election results.
Using data from the 2006, 2010 and 2014 primary and general election results in Texas. 2010 being credited to Tea Party effect.
Participation in the Republican primary increased from 2006 by 126% in 2010 and 103% in 2014. Changes are based on 2006.
But the general election only indicated a 3% increase in republican votes in 2010 (Tea Party revolution) over 2006.
On the other hand the Democrat primary had an increase of 36% and 9% over the same time period.
But the general election indicated a 35% increase in Democrat votes in 2010 over 2006.
The only conclusions I can draw from this is that the Tea Party were already general election voters and have very little effect on the general. I do believe the field of candidates is improving.
On the other hand, the Democrats increased 35% in the general election. This increase I cannot attribute to Tea Party candidates. I see this increase as a direct result of the phenomenal growth of the Welfare State. It's not about the quality of a candidate but the quantity of money the voters may receive.
Comments
It's not about the quality of a candidate but the quantity of money the voters may receive.
Correct and sadly, nothing will change that fact.
This is NOT scientific, only personal observations.
This is based on midterms only looking for the effect of the Tea Party on election results.
Using data from the 2006, 2010 and 2014 primary and general election results in Texas. 2010 being credited to Tea Party effect.
Participation in the Republican primary increased from 2006 by 126% in 2010 and 103% in 2014. Changes are based on 2006.
But the general election only indicated a 3% increase in republican votes in 2010 (Tea Party revolution) over 2006.
On the other hand the Democrat primary had an increase of 36% and 9% over the same time period.
But the general election indicated a 35% increase in Democrat votes in 2010 over 2006.
The only conclusions I can draw from this is that the Tea Party were already general election voters and have very little effect on the general. I do believe the field of candidates is improving.
On the other hand, the Democrats increased 35% in the general election. This increase I cannot attribute to Tea Party candidates. I see this increase as a direct result of the phenomenal growth of the Welfare State. It's not about the quality of a candidate but the quantity of money the voters may receive.
Texas is a huge state, Arlington thinking is completely different than Houston, by adding 3rd and 5th ward that gives Houston slightly less population than Chicago;
What do you feel is radically different about the Tea Party platform? I will be willing to accept the Tea Party when the polls reach 35% which will be a winning percentage, if the Tea Party can resist being hijacked by one of the two dictatorship parties re: Dumcrats and Republicrats.
quote:Originally posted by casper1947
This is NOT scientific, only personal observations.
This is based on midterms only looking for the effect of the Tea Party on election results.
Using data from the 2006, 2010 and 2014 primary and general election results in Texas. 2010 being credited to Tea Party effect.
Participation in the Republican primary increased from 2006 by 126% in 2010 and 103% in 2014. Changes are based on 2006.
But the general election only indicated a 3% increase in republican votes in 2010 (Tea Party revolution) over 2006.
On the other hand the Democrat primary had an increase of 36% and 9% over the same time period.
But the general election indicated a 35% increase in Democrat votes in 2010 over 2006.
The only conclusions I can draw from this is that the Tea Party were already general election voters and have very little effect on the general. I do believe the field of candidates is improving.
On the other hand, the Democrats increased 35% in the general election. This increase I cannot attribute to Tea Party candidates. I see this increase as a direct result of the phenomenal growth of the Welfare State. It's not about the quality of a candidate but the quantity of money the voters may receive.
Texas is a huge state, Arlington thinking is completely different than Houston, by adding 3rd and 5th ward that gives Houston slightly less population than Chicago;
What do you feel is radically different about the Tea Party platform? I will be willing to accept the Tea Party when the polls reach 35% which will be a winning percentage, if the Tea Party can resist being hijacked by one of the two dictatorship parties re: Dumcrats and Republicrats.
As a Tea Party member, I will vote my conscience, and I will never support A Gop or Dem national candidate lock step.It really means no more money to be wasted like the last eight years...
Texas is a huge state, Arlington thinking is completely different than Houston, by adding 3rd and 5th ward that gives Houston slightly less population than Chicago;
What do you feel is radically different about the Tea Party platform? I will be willing to accept the Tea Party when the polls reach 35% which will be a winning percentage, if the Tea Party can resist being hijacked by one of the two dictatorship parties re: Dumcrats and Republicrats.
Arlington is definitely different than Houston. The DFW area is pretty populace as well.
I haven't seen very much of what you might call radically different in an endorsed position (platform).
Smaller government, less spending, tax reform, immigration, etc. What I have seen is the endorsements of candidates that actually believe in them and will (hopefully) do what they say not just roll over once elected.
This is the civil war within the GOP. I see too many establishment GOP that would rather have the campaign issue of repealing ObamaCare (I prefer the term DemocratCare) than actually DOING IT.
Has the Tea Party been running candidates outside the major parties?
As a Tea Party member, I will vote my conscience, and I will never support A Gop or Dem national candidate lock step.It really means no more money to be wasted like the last eight years...
[/quote]
I understand the vote of conscience. I also understand the consequences.
By national candidate and the last 8 years are you referring to the McCain and Romney campaigns?
Would a POTUS McCain have signed the health care bill?
Would he sign it with NO GOP support in the House or Senate?
The reality is we will never know. He lost. We can speculate, but will never know.
I am curious who you supported in the 2008 and 2012 primaries?
quote:Originally posted by pwillie
As a Tea Party member, I will vote my conscience, and I will never support A Gop or Dem national candidate lock step.It really means no more money to be wasted like the last eight years...
I understand the vote of conscience. I also understand the consequences.
By national candidate and the last 8 years are you referring to the McCain and Romney campaigns?
Would a POTUS McCain have signed the health care bill?
Would he sign it with NO GOP support in the House or Senate?
The reality is we will never know. He lost. We can speculate, but will never know.
I am curious who you supported in the 2008 and 2012 primaries?
[/quote]
In my area there are at least four meeting of Tea Party groups with different names preceding re: Tea Party, I attended one group, the area I live in has a small county with around 200,000 and a city population of around 100,000. I saw some people I recognized who were drawing SSI which in my opinion a combination of SS and welfare benefits, not SSID which is different. I never tried to talk I just listened, most of the speakers just parroted what I could have heard if I turned on talk radio, or some TV talking mouth. I am going to try and find another group that has some reliable ideas for scaling back government, doing away with farm subsides, welfare elimination, and, government land grabbing re: Monuments, at the present time our U.S. government owns more land than the old USSR.
Sorry I was wrong I did not vote for any Federal office holder, McCain was a bad pilot, who failed to campaign on principals that previously had, caving into to W and I just never believed in Romney, not withstanding that Mormons are not Christians, that part never bothered me, but he just never had me believing he would be a reliable as POTUS, I was discussed and was wrong..
The inscription on the Statue of Liberty should read; give me your poor huddled masses yearning for something free. I can't take credit for that I got it used.
The rise in dummycrat voters is all about the gimme pigs. What will I get for free from them. People on the public dole should NOT be allowed to vote! The old USSR had a policy that stated if you don't work you don't eat. Have you ever been behind a sweaty 500 pounder in the grocery who was insanely pizzed at the cashier because they couldn't remember a simple 4 digit number on their own food stamp card?
The inscription on the Statue of Liberty should read; give me your poor huddled masses yearning for something free. I can't take credit for that I got it used.
"Arbeit macht frei"
"Arbeit macht frei"
Work is good, freeloading off others, buying what the workers can't afford with money confiscated by force is bad; don't you agree?
quote:Originally posted by jones0430
"Arbeit macht frei"
Work is good, freeloading off others, buying what the workers can't afford with money confiscated by force is bad; don't you agree?
I shop at Grocery Outlet, at times 3 cans is offered for $1.00, I have seen people paying with stamps just grabbing items off of the shelves without regard to price, and at the end of the month I have witnessed those person with beggar signs, I will support some one saying they are willing to work, but begging degrades those who receive it and hardens them who give it. Especially when these scums are ripping off the system.
I have friends that visit me from the U.K. they cannot believe authorities will allow this, well I tell them remember I have spent many months at a time in the U.K. and Ireland, and my remark is that if the U.S. had a Parliamentary system, our last 4 Presidents would have been ousted with a voice vote.
Anything can happen. Rand Paul got a standing ovation at UC Berkely.
Beserkley is the birth place of some good people, Billy Martin Yanks baseball manager who took no crap from millionaire pitchers, he just kicked there *,
U.C. Berkley is over run by the mega rich students of the Chinese main land, they have mega money, the West Oakland gangs no this and routinely kidnap them for ransom, students parents then fly to Alameda County to cry wailing and howling on T.V. to black [I could care less] elected official's.
I say, "sorry" Chinese parents if you do not like this two party dictatorship keep your children safe at home in China.
If Texas policies don't up-date fast, Texas will be a BLUE Staten a few years.
Already headed that direction.
I guess that is possible.But the blue areas are the large urban areas and Rural boarder counties.
I am curious as to what policies you think need to "up-date"?
This coming November will be real interesting. It will all be about turnout.
I do think we have slowed the BLUEing down,we now have voter ID.[:D]
This type action is what I was talking about.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/22/politics/van-de-putte-texas/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
Trying to get their foot into the door.
This is an amazing article, even for CNN. I hardly know where to start.
I am impressed by her 2 accomplishments
1 "In 2003, she led the dramatic 45-day walkout that Senate Democrats staged over the Republican redistricting plan. The lawmakers bolted to New Mexico, delaying a vote on the plan, although Republicans were eventually able to pass it."
2 "Davis grabbed national headlines last June when she staged an 11-hour filibuster in the Texas Senate that blocked restrictive abortion legislation from being passed." ( and a big ME TOO for Van de Putte). The bill did pass but required a special session mainly due the disruptions from the gallery.
That's 2 failures BUT CNN being objective journalist are pitting her against
" she was going to jump into the race against a cadre of Republican candidates who Van de Putte adamantly disagreed with. During the campaign, her Republican opponents have touted the expansion of school vouchers, teaching creationism in schools and demonizing illegal immigrants."
" Patrick is running to the far right, making immigration and his self-described "illegal invasion" a central tenet of his campaign." (and he is right)
On the issues and her campaign they go straight to the point. " She promises to run a business-friendly campaign focused on education, water and transportation." The only thing i can deduce from this article is she is against everything the Republicans are for, and for everything they are against.
OH yea they did mention she is Latino many, many times.
" But Latino turnout in Texas is already suppressed." RIGHT, and why claim this? " But in Texas, where more than one-third of people are Hispanic, 61% of those eligible did not vote. Contrast that with the statistic that shows that 61% of eligible whites did, according to the group Latino Decisions." They were not prevented from voting, but chose NOT TO. And the obvious 1/3 Hispanic does not by any stretch of the imagination mean they are legal or citizens.
The election is 6 months away. The only people that will have a problem with voter ID are the ones that want it to be a problem.
If in 6 Mo. you can't register/verify your voter registration is accurate I don't want you to vote (MY opinion ) .
I'll go out on a limb here, Davis/Van de Putte will lose by 20+%
I still don't see any policy changes.[:)]