The Only Tea Party Stat You Need to Know
There is a huge CBS/NYT poll and article (Poll Finds Tea Party Backers Wealthier and More Educated) about the tea party members.
I was not surprised to read they skew older, white, Republican, better educated and higher income than the average American. I was surprised to read they favor Social Security and Medicare.
Towards the end of the article, I read a shocking data point. In the orgy of coverage of this poll and article generated, no one seemed to mention this:
The percentage holding a favorable opinion of former President George W. Bush = 57%
A substantial majority of Tea Party members hold a favorable opinion of the man that history will very likely deem the worst president in American History (Presidential Historians disagree as to whether he is in the bottom 3 or 5 as of today).
Its all you need to know about the Tea Party.
Tweet
Facebook
Reddit
Digg this!
April 15th, 2010 at 8:35 pm
And if a number of Tea Parties end up canceling their Big Picture RSS feeds, so be it.
That is how I see it.
April 15th, 2010 at 8:43 pm
If you find something that shocks you it is because you are not centered.
April 15th, 2010 at 8:52 pm
even worse it’s because they think they empathize with him. a good man, misunderstood by the liberal media. (vomiting in my mouth).
April 15th, 2010 at 8:53 pm
I couldn’t care less about any Tea Parties, but I’m curious to know what % of say, registered Democrats, hold a favorable opinion of Jimmy Carter.? What % of this group believes each and every point made in “An Inconvenient Truth”
Whatever these Tea Partiers are, its safe to say that their ranks are mostly filled by Republicans. Of course, a majority will have a favorable view of a Republican ex-President.
Most folks tend to have a favorable view towards Presidents from their own party. Whatever W was, he kept Gore and Kerry away from the WH and made a couple of key Supreme Court appointments, and that is good enough for most. No need to make a big deal about it. Just typical politics.
April 15th, 2010 at 9:00 pm
As long as people asked:
-Carter was a terrible President (I hated the tone of the 1970s, and a lot of it was because of the Carter Malaise)
-Reagan was over rated — mostly because from an economic standpoint, he got all the credit for Volcker’s work.
-Nixon was under rated. You cant ignore Watergate, but the rest of his tenure wasn’t as bad as remembered (he was way too slow in getting out of Viet Nam)
-Bush I Under rated
-Clinton Over rated
And it is way too early to judge Obama barely one year on. I am not happy with what I have seen, but its only year one !
April 15th, 2010 at 9:01 pm
Based on my limited exposure to Tea Party leaders or initiators (I knew one in Washington state), they are something of a spin-off of CA proposition 13 thinking.
They rail more at local progressives that pump property taxes and other state and local taxes than anything else.
But they don’t mind using the “BSO is a socialist” approach to build national strength.
IMHO, they’re probably people that used to feel pretty secure and wealthy, that are starting to feel a little insecure about their futures.
But they are also enlisting the hard core anti-government thinkers.
But the irony is a 57% favorable for Bush ignores the fact that he was one of the most profligate deficit spending presidents.
@BR: Your site load and reload times are starting to bog down. Badly. Haven’t fingered the cause, but I sense it’s a result of success. Your loads link out to lots of sites for the advertising content. And they seem to be below the power curve.
April 15th, 2010 at 9:02 pm
CBS/NYT
now those are two objective and unbiased media organizations
April 15th, 2010 at 9:08 pm
I guess for that 57%, hindsight is a bit less than 20/20.
April 15th, 2010 at 9:08 pm
George W. Bush will certainly be ranked near the bottom of US Presidents. But based on what I’ve seen so far, Barack Hussein Obama should be ranked as the worst ever. Although this blog focuses on the economy, Obama’s foreign policy disses democracies (e.g. Honduras, Colombia, Israel) and is overly solicitous of totalitarian regimes (e.g. BO couldn’t bother to give encouragement to the brave Iranians in the streets). Not to mention his apology tour and bonhomie with Ortega and Chavez. I could go on, but it’s not quite on this blog’s topic. I’m getting tired of the Bush bashing that presumes that Obama the disaster is an improvement. They’re both terrible, but at least Bush loved his country and was proud of it.
April 15th, 2010 at 9:14 pm
Gallup (that fly by night polling organization) weighed in on the demographics of the Tea Party and had some interesting observations (albeit unreliable).
April 5, 2010
“PRINCETON, NJ — Tea Party supporters skew right politically; but demographically, they are generally representative of the public at large. That’s the finding of a USA Today/Gallup poll conducted March 26-28, in which 28% of U.S. adults call themselves supporters of the Tea Party movement….”
http://www.gallup.com/poll/127181/Tea-Partiers-Fairly-Mainstream-Demographics.aspx
April 15th, 2010 at 9:19 pm
I am slowly beginning to suspect that this blog leans democrat…
April 15th, 2010 at 9:23 pm
Oh I love that this faux political group pretends they are anti-tax, anti-entitlement, anti-anit—unless it affects them. Speaks volumes.
You see, as part of the younger generation that already knows their future entitlements are screwed by those boomer and older for a variety of reason (you run things, you make selfish, short-sighted decisions, you clasp to your entitlements while denying them for future generations, oh, and many of you screw ups did nothing to prepare for your own future by saving….the list goes on), It make my Republican bones want to vote for more Obama just to fu*% with you and re-destribute that wealth just to spite ya!
Freakin’ knuckleheads are like a bunch of spoiled brats throwing a tantrum. Well, you were dealt a sweet hand in life, but you played it wrong! Nobody likes whiners.
April 15th, 2010 at 9:26 pm
I was sick at how absolutely liberal Bush was when it came to spending, especially towards the end of his presidency. But he had principles and loved America and did everything in his power to protect it. Including calling Saddam’s bluff in his never ending quest to snub his nose at the UN’s mandates. Please don’t forget that Saddam was offered the chance to avert war and just submit to UN mandated inspections without any conditions. He chose the wrong path and there was only one world leader that had the balls to call his bluff. Also remember that every major national intelligence organization including those of muslim countries like Pakistan and Jordan, said that Saddam had WMDs. So, it wasn’t out of the question to make sure he wasn’t thumbing his nose at the UN mandates for a good reason.
Anyway, I digress…
I just got back from a tea party rally and I all I saw was a bunch of regular citizens who equate over taxation and burdensome debt to the seizing of liberties. Every dollar that is removed from our wallets is one more increment of lost liberty. We consent to a minimum of taxation so that we can live in a society that protects us from invaders and administers laws and contracts. But there is a tipping point with the consent of the governed when it comes to taxation. We have gotten to that point and the tea party is the natural outcome of that point in history.
The question was asked at the party I was at, how many folks are protesting for the first time in their lives. A full 75% or more, raised their hand (including me). That tells you something. It’s what Nixon called the silent majority. It’s just that, things have gotten so bad that we’re no longer silent. And we will take back this country from the socialist leaning minority. You can be assured of that.
April 15th, 2010 at 9:30 pm
Everyone has a right to their own opinions but no one has a right to their own facts: The stats are the stats and what anyone thinks of Carter or Gore is a non sequitur; utterly irrelevant.
Tea party supporters (not necessarily all tea party participants) are overwhelmingly white, well off, college educated, conservative and in general approval of those whose policies helped us get where we are now (unless those who did were Democrats it appears).
We get enough ad hominem, tu quoque and general asshat elsewhere: BR supplied data and offered his interpretation; deal with the data or go away.
I am slowly beginning to suspect this blog leans reality …
April 15th, 2010 at 9:30 pm
scharfy…. Ha! You think? :-)
April 15th, 2010 at 9:36 pm
BR passes judgement on an entire group of people based on a single stat, in a single poll from a liberal polling organization which was designed from the outset to put that same group in a negative light.
Its all you need to know about BR. (Using his reasoning, not mine.)
April 15th, 2010 at 9:37 pm
Touché !
April 15th, 2010 at 9:38 pm
I’m waiting for someone, anyone, to mention Peter Oliver’s Origin and Progress of the American Rebellion: A Tory View in relation to these tea partiers. Oliver’s story is spirited and revealing in that it revealed some unpopular facts, like how the patriots disguised themselves as Indians. Oh, and that basically the original tea party was another part of the false populism campaign, aided by propaganda and sensationalism. So, in a way, these new tp’s really are like their namesakes.
April 15th, 2010 at 9:49 pm
I’m tired of hearing about old white people who are angry because a man who is only half-white is President. If you want to be angry about Barack Obama, be angry because he is making Bush’s Imperial Presidency “bipartisan.”
April 15th, 2010 at 9:58 pm
I’m impressed at the level of reader retention this blog manages! They all hate the author, but return daily.
Everyone knows the old saw: “A fool and his money are quickly parted”;
Fewer know that “he who bets his ideology is a fool”.
Even fewer act in the interest of their country, no matter their professed allegiances.
April 15th, 2010 at 9:59 pm
God – I can’t wait to hear what Franklin, Vendatta, DeDude, etc all think.
April 15th, 2010 at 10:04 pm
Truman left office with the lowest approval rating ever: 23%. It’s far too soon to judge. For what little it’s worth, my worst modern Prez is Nixon. By far. Carter next -but he is viewed as marvelous by the media, so the public rates him uber-highly. Go figure.
April 15th, 2010 at 10:11 pm
I don’t think Carter is viewed marvelously by the media because they believe he was a good president. It is because of what he has done since he left office. Say what you will about his failed presidency, he has been extremely busy and involved since. Whether you agree with Carter today or not, you cannot argue that he has been a great humanitarian.
April 15th, 2010 at 10:21 pm
Considering that the Tea Party is certainly rightward leaning………..this particular stat also shows that Tea Party folks are probably more “open minded” than other politically active organizations.
I’d love to see a poll on Jimmy Carter from an ANSWER or WTO protest……….
April 15th, 2010 at 10:23 pm
Or SEIU members for that matter………
April 15th, 2010 at 10:23 pm
Read up on Carter and his recent books about Israel and his recent back-aways to pave the road for his namesake’s run for congress. Even his buddies at Emory University here in Atlanta have had to back away from him.
Carter’s support of Israel’s enemies do not make him a humanitarian at all.
Well I come here for finance fun facts, don’t need to read BR or anybody else’s political opinions on this blog. If I want good solid political information I’ll check with my favorite musicians or movie stars.
April 15th, 2010 at 10:28 pm
An Incredibly Ignorant, Arrogant Statement … so ditto to the first guy’s response …
” And if a number of Tea Parties end up canceling their Big Picture RSS feeds, so be it.
That is how I see it. ”
If you want to survive as an online viable online entity … stick to the FACTS !
April 15th, 2010 at 10:29 pm
@ Postman
“I could go on…”
Thanks for resisting the urge.
On another note, the “worst president” ranking is a great idea. Almost as useful as those CNBC multiple choice viewer polls.
April 15th, 2010 at 10:32 pm
I thought “W” was a good man, but an awful, awful president. So I guess I have a favorable opinion of him, but you have to understand the context. I lean Tea and I think your hatred / disgust with the man sometimes clouds what you put on the blog when his name is mentioned.
I have a general unfavorable opinion of you as a man (your comment about having Tea folks CNXing their RSS feeds made me laugh – such petulance), but I still “like” your blog and find your insights interesting and informative. So what? Let’s move on and continue to tell me how to protect my assets in this economy, this administration, & this mess we got ourselves into. If you like baiting the conservative readers, go ahead, enjoy your cheap shot generalizations, but please don’t let that be the norm because it’s a net detractor and makes you look like a partisan hack.
Oh, and please don’t berate me again about trying to get you to “censor” yourself, that’s not the point of this comment.
RW – You say no one has a right to their own facts… You said, “in general approval of those whose policies helped us get where we are now”. I must have missed that question on the pol, can you point it out to me?
April 15th, 2010 at 10:34 pm
Thor: Perhaps you must be reminded of the the Iran hostages and the sad hunkering down to accept the national malaise that Carter created and then lectured about to put his memory into some context. As for his great humanitarian work: he has wielded a hammer a bit (Christ was more of a carpenter and look what respect he gets from the Left for his humanitarian work) and then Carter acted as a voting observer. Get it? He is lauded for watching something happen. Sounds like “Being There” …I like to watch. Oops. “Being There” is the play book for Obama.
April 15th, 2010 at 10:37 pm
This Democrat knows Jimmy Carter was a terrible president. I’ll rank him as 3rd worst ever. Nixon for obvious reasons is 2nd worst. Hands down as worst ever is George W. Bush. All you need to know about Bush is that it was on his watch that we had a once in 100 years economic meltdown. That’s not even including using the cherry-picked manipulated intelligence to start an unnecessary war, putting the country on the road to bankruptcy, shredding the US Constitution, Hurricane Katrina, Harriet Meiers, illegal renditions, etc etc etc ad nauseam.
Anyone who gives high marks to a president who presides over an economic meltdown on his watch is blind to reality.
April 15th, 2010 at 10:39 pm
So you’re saying 47% of tea party members hold a negative view of GW? Is that so ridiculous. What was their view on 9/12/09? They aren’t totally brainwashed. While they may be right leaning, they aren’t from Mars.
April 15th, 2010 at 10:41 pm
VennData asks: I’d like to meet some of the 43% of Tea Partiers who disapprove of Bush.
A: ‘Missing Link’ Between Man And Apes ‘Found’
http://www.indiajournal.com/pages/event.php?id=10641
VennData politely replies: Oh… OK thanks.
April 15th, 2010 at 10:51 pm
I was not surprised to read they skew older, white, Republican, better educated and higher income than the average American. I was surprised to read they favor Social Security and Medicare.
Your quote, Barry. Now try this one on for size…
I was not surprised to read they skew younger, black/hispanic, Democrat, poorly educated and lower income than the average American. I was surprised to read they favor welfare and food stamps.
One of these groups pays taxes, the other doesn’t. Just maybe the one that pays taxes has a reason to be pissed off at a Federal government that they feel is bankrupting them and their country in the name of staying in power and sucking up to special interests that often have no respect for their country/taxpayers themselves. Unfortunately, both of these groups can vote. Guess which group contains the most “voters”?
April 15th, 2010 at 10:55 pm
Thor, you think you need to hear from F411 or VennData to hear some invectives about the Tea Partiers? You gotta be kidding me!
I was just saying to my wife right before coming home (and seeing this BR poll) how the Tea Partiers are “the worst the Republicans have to offer” and are the “dumbest people in the country”. These poll numbers confirm what I’ve been seeing/hearing from this group. I suspect intellectuals started this group. But, it’s long been hijacked. Since then, it’s managed to attract an astonishingly high concentration of stupid people. Not surprising they hired Sarah Palin to speak at their convention.
…
The SEIU gets nowhere near the press as the “Tea Party” and isn’t billed as a political party.
…
Like Obama, Jimmy Carter inherited a crapload of problems from Nixon. Did he create new problems? No, we muddled through. You Carter-bashers need to think to differentiate between (a) starting problems or exacerbating them and (b) dealing with fallout. It’s the difference between (a) encouraging or doing nothing to prevent fraudulent lending vs (b) coming into office after the bust and trying to keep the ship together.
April 15th, 2010 at 10:57 pm
The worst president ever was a little farther back than most of you young people remember. His name was James Buchanan (Democrat) and he did absolutely nothing to prevent this country from fragmenting and starting a Civil War. And he was partially responsible for the deaths of more Americans (in total and as a percentage of population) than any other president.
April 15th, 2010 at 10:58 pm
Terry – So I take it that you’re against welfare and food stamps for the poorer, less educated dark folk. Do you also have a problem with welfare to the largely conservative corn farmers in this country? Have you ever actually looked farther than your straw man argument at the raw numbers? Look it up – take a guess who gets far more of a share of our tax dollars. So let’s end the subsidies to both poor people and American farmers shall we?
April 15th, 2010 at 11:00 pm
Let’s look at Bush’s record of accomplishment.
(1) Saved the US economy from the consequences of the bursting of the dotcom bubble.
(2) Saved the US economy from a collapse of the financial infrastructure after 9/11.
(3) Saved the US airline industry from collapse after 9/11.
(4) Rationalized Medicare by including a prescription drug benefit.
(5) Liberated Afghanistan from the Taliban.
(6) Liberated Iraq from Saddam Hussein.
(7) Defeated Al Qaeda in Iraq.
(8) Guaranteed the independence of Kosovo strenghtening the stability of the Balkans.
(9) Fast tracked the expansion of NATO strengthening the future stability of Europe.
(10) Made two of the best appointments to the Supreme Court in recent history.
(11) Created a vast program for addressing the problem of HIV/AIDs in Africa.
(12) Introduced the first measures of national accountability in US Public Education.
(13) Paved the way for the election of an African American as President by having, successively, two African Americans in the highest profile cabinet position.
(14) Laid the legal foundation for the prosecution of the war on terror.
(15) Strengthened the integrity of the nation by respecting the wishes of a Democratic governor of Southern state to not immediately send in Federal troops after a natural disaster.
April 15th, 2010 at 11:01 pm
How come none of you guys blame Bush for 9/11 ?
He was in office for nearly a year, received warning Al-Queda attack imminent — went to the Crawford ranch for a month in August, and came back a week before the attack to give a speech — about Stem Cell research.
He should be held responsible as President.
If it happened to Clinton or Gore 9 months into his term,t he right wing would be calling for his head. Why do you give him a free pass on this issue?
April 15th, 2010 at 11:02 pm
Sorry, Barry, but I’ve got to call shenanigans — 57% isn’t a “substantial” majority. 50% would imply “don’t care either way.”
April 15th, 2010 at 11:02 pm
Dems hate Repubs, Repubs hate Dems. That’s just the way it is these days. The only good guys are Libertarians. hehehaha.
April 15th, 2010 at 11:04 pm
@TerryC
You’re easily omitting the fact that in both parties, the education and income are actually bimodal.
Democrats have a lot of support at the lower educated minority groups with low income but also have a lot of support at the higher end educated ranks. A very substantial % of college and postgraduate people are democratic.
The same with republicans, they have a lot of support at the lower educated poor rural people but also a lot of support at the high end businessmen.
BR supplied facts, that is it. And its no wonder that as these guys skew old, why they would favor social security & medicare, they’re the ones that are using it.
Its damned hypocritical to say you want smaller government, less handouts, less benefits…for only for other people.
April 15th, 2010 at 11:06 pm
I’ve been lurking here about 2 yrs trying to decide if BR is intelligent or just making a few bucks blogging.
No problem with earning a living BTW. But to quote “history” as to GWB’s legacy shows elementery school level intelligence, ie BIAS, ie BS. No one will know the true context of the GWB era for at least 30 yrs. Anything else is propaganda
~~~
BR: Blogging is for fun. I manage assets for a living . . .
April 15th, 2010 at 11:20 pm
Sorry, Barry, but I’ve got tu upgrade my “shenanigans” to “bullshit”:
Here’s the actual survey results:
http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/poll_tea_party_041410.pdf
The survey has 94 questions. Who is going to sit through 94 questions?
Here’s one:
q34 Which political figure in the United States living TODAY do you admire most?
** TOTAL RESPONDENTS **
Tea Party
Total Supporter
% %
Barack Obama 16 2
Hillary Clinton 3 0
Bill Clinton 9 2
Jimmy Carter 3 2
Newt Gingrich 3 10
Sarah Palin 3 9
George W. Bush 2 5
George H.W. Bush 2 3
John McCain 2 3
Mike Huckabee 1 3
Ron Paul 1 3
Rick Perry 1 0
Mitt Romney 1 5
No one 4 5
Other 13 24
DK/NA 36 24
April 15th, 2010 at 11:23 pm
Anyway, before WordPress did me in, I was going to suggest that there are WAY MORE scary results in the poll than whether 502.17 out of 811 people surveyed had a favorable opinion of Bush.
If you believe their (unsubstantiated) numbers, 15% of those sampled never even HEARD of Bush.
April 15th, 2010 at 11:28 pm
Finally, ask yourselves WHY this survey was taken. Perhaps it’s a tool to gauge the effectiveness of mass media propaganda?
April 15th, 2010 at 11:30 pm
Understand the difference between bias and opinion.
If you respond to a question from the gut, without thinking, analysis, observation — thats bias.
If you evaluate the facts, run the data, crunch the numbers, analyze the facts and draw a conclusion — that’s a well founded opinion.
April 15th, 2010 at 11:31 pm
You really need to implement thumbs up/thumbs down here. And not just for commenter’s. Also for the main article.
April 15th, 2010 at 11:35 pm
@VD 10:41 it was more like 27% disapproved.
April 15th, 2010 at 11:40 pm
One more, than I’m outa here…
How did they IDENTIFY the Tea Baggerss?
Question 1 is: “q1 Do you approve or disapprove of the way Barack Obama is handling his job as President?”, not “Are you a Tea Bagger”?
April 15th, 2010 at 11:52 pm
Thor and Changja-
I was merely playing Devil’s Advocate in putting up the mirror image quote to Barry’s quote. Looks like even you liberal/big spending/commie Democrats are thin skinned. Perhaps 307 million Americans are slightly more complex and hard to put in a neat little box than the news media and our politicians think they are. After all, even I admit it’s slightly possible (put not probable) that one or two people who watch CNN aren’t commies, and that one or two people who watch Fox aren’t fascists (well, maybe one, anyway).
The CBS/NYT poll and article are just more conquer and divide, keep everyone at each other’s throats, and hope nobody notices what’s going on. Since every poll of ALL VOTERS shows approval of Congress in the low 20% range, It doesn’t look like any of the electorate is happy with ANYONE in Congress, all 535 of em (the 535 who get to vote, anyway). P.S. I’m SURE people who watch MSNBC are commies.
April 15th, 2010 at 11:53 pm
Entertaining blog, but the man isn’t a political scientist or even particularly knowledgeable on the subject. Cut him some slack; he’s out of his depth. One wishes he realized as much.
April 15th, 2010 at 11:53 pm
So, I lied. Tea Baggers self-identified out at question 82. At least, those who stuck it out that long…
q82 Do you consider yourself to be a supporter of the Tea Party movement, or not?
April 15th, 2010 at 11:57 pm
bergsten,
those are, mere, ‘details’, don’t let them bog you down..
past that, see the Post as the Rorshach-”Ink Blot” it is..
Note: How many are, still, Trapped in the psuedo-*Reality that is “Left-Right”/ “(D)-(R)”..
G-d knows Engineering and Science, holds, little sway, these days, maybe we can take a page from our Design friends and, still, realize that 2-d tells nothing–of any Picture worth Framing..
April 15th, 2010 at 11:58 pm
TerryC Says: April 15th, 2010 at 11:52 pm
Terry,
nice point ~
April 15th, 2010 at 11:59 pm
I second Bergsten’s upgrade of “shenanigans” to “bullshit”:
Also, my best guess is that Clinton, Bush and Obama will be among the Top 5 Worst Presidents in US history in Polls taken around 2020. And among the top 100 worst leaders in world history.
April 16th, 2010 at 12:01 am
Terry – Oooooh, you were playing the other side. I apologize.
April 16th, 2010 at 12:09 am
Barry, looks like you hit a nerve there. Lots of names here I don’t recognize.
I read today they were cheering for Newt in Austin. Cheering a guy who would divorce his wife while she’s revovering from cancer surgery and leading the charge against Clinton while having an adulterous affair himself says enough for me about the morals of this group.
April 16th, 2010 at 12:26 am
Here is a CBS poll taken that shows Obama’s ratings, all very low.
http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/popQuestion/questionResults.html?url=http://poll.cbs.com/poll?event_id=7798&q1=5&q2=4&q3=5&q4=4&q5=3&q6=4&q7=5&q8=5&q9=5&q10=4&&obama_grades_year_one$
April 16th, 2010 at 12:34 am
I was surprised to read they favor Social Security and Medicare.
Teabaggers know that Social Security and Medicare aren’t evil socialism paid for by taxes, but come from American Money Jesus, just like the Pentagon budget and war spending.
April 16th, 2010 at 12:38 am
Gee Barry …..looks like you got some of Glen Becks army pissed off. They don’t like to hear anything but lies from faux and Lush the draft dodging drug addict…it confuses them. Keep up the good work and lets make some money in this Obama rally.
April 16th, 2010 at 12:47 am
If you think GW Bush is a president “that history will very likely deem the worst president in American History,” then you obviously were not paying attention in history class when James Buchanan and Woodrow Wilson were discussed. For not knowing that Buchanan is, without any doubt or peer, the worst POTUS in the nation’s entire history, you should have to repeat all of high school history over again or hand back your high school diploma and go get a GED.
It is nonsensical twaddle like this that gives lie to your assertions that you’re skeptical of both parties.
The United States has survived far worse, in multiple administrations, before GW Bush was even a gleam in his daddy’s eye.
~~~
BR: Thats why some historians put him in the top (bottom) 3
April 16th, 2010 at 1:09 am
IMO this post is way out of character from the normally insightful entries posted on this blog.
The Tea Party has been successful in bringing issues of taxation, deficit spending, debt and government power to the forefront. I’m worried about my kids future given all of these questions. These are legitimate issues for debate regardless of who caused the problems.
If you want to discredit the Tea Party, tell us what you don’t like about their policies. A fair and healthy debate is can bring people together. OTOH, discrediting those with different opinions serves only to divide.
April 16th, 2010 at 1:14 am
Let’s try and be Bayesians here. Before this stat we could assume with almost 100% certainty that TEA partiers did not support Obama or they would not be protesting against Obama. We also know that most Bush supporters for the most part do not support Obama. I’ll gratuitously give that a 100% just for arguments sake. Given new information that 57% of TEA partiers approved of Bush and that 35% of Americans approved of Bush in his final term
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/political_updates/president_bush_job_approval
we only can say that
1. Those that approved of Bush W, are more likely to approve of the TEA party movement which opposes Obama. 57% of TEA partiers vs. 35% the American population at the end of Bush’s term.
2. Not all TEA partiers approved of Bush because 43% of TEA partiers did not approve of Bush so there is a large contingent that opposes both Bush and Obama.
Barry did not stay unbiased in this case. He summarally associated 100% of the TEA party movement to 57% of TEA partiers that supported Bush without considering that in a random sample, it’s only a 22% spread over a normal population and that can fully be explained by the slightly higher tendancy of Bush supporters to oppose Obama. He also discounted the 43% that diapproved of Bush and still support the TEA party movement. I think Barry loved the confirmation this story provided him and consequently did not do a Bayesian analysis of the new info. Instead, he just held on to his bias like a perma bear holding on to his short.
April 16th, 2010 at 1:37 am
These days everyone self-selects their news sources. So most people end up thinking that the other half is criminally insane. It’s a scary path we’re being led down — a mass delusion. People are being incited. I hope it finds an outlet.
Apparently Millard Fillmore, Franklin Pierce, and James Buchanan are nearly universally at or near the bottom. Woodrow Wilson actually rates fairly high. Mr. Teapot Dome, Warren G. Harding, is also very low.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States
April 16th, 2010 at 1:46 am
I guess I’m not all that surprised by this, because while the Tea Party movement may not have been entirely Republican to start with, it is in the process of being rapidly co-opted by them. And as pointed out above, Republican partisans are likely to hold a favorable opinion of Bush II, no matter what the evidence shows regarding his legacy.
What I’d like to know is why, if they are so concerned about deficit spending, the Tea Party activists weren’t making this kind of noise while Bush was busy doubling the national debt by way of his idiotic combination of an unnecessary war and tax cuts. The fact that they weren’t suggests that there is not a significant difference between a Tea Partier and a Republican.
April 16th, 2010 at 1:51 am
Barry, its ok to pretend to be unbiased and make the arguments that get you invited or quoted at the better cocktail parties. Sounds to me that the tea party crowd might actually take some personal and financial responsibilty in their lives. How un American!! But could it be the Emporer truly has no clothes?
April 16th, 2010 at 2:10 am
I have left a few stupid comments before; I might have reached the pinnacle of irrelevant inane comments with the 1:51 am post. My apologies.
April 16th, 2010 at 2:15 am
I live in CO and the GOP is toying with the idea of legal pot to get young voters. It’s already legal here so if that is their last straw then they are desparate. The head’s been cut off. Let’s become whigs again.
April 16th, 2010 at 2:18 am
“Anyone who gives high marks to a president who presides over an economic meltdown on his watch is blind to reality.”
So let me get this straight, you are criticizing the Bush administration for the failed policies of: Alan Greenspan, Robert Rubin, Phil Gramm, Larry Summers, the GSE’s, the congressionally-underfunded SEC, and the list goes on and on…
Sorry, toddie.g, that’s a pretty moronic viewpoint….
April 16th, 2010 at 2:19 am
Ignim Brites Says:
“Made two of the best appointments to the Supreme Court in recent history.”
Dude! I must have the contact info of whomever provide you what you smoke. Must be great stuff man..the real deal!
April 16th, 2010 at 2:38 am
One other thing… I’m always amused at all the poor saps who can’t seem to think for themselves and therefore adopt the latest partisan “party line”. Capital Hill is laughing their collective asses off at you people…
The two-party political system is nothing more than an illusion to fool the populace and divide it through partisan bickering, thereby deflecting attention from the fact that both parties and all branches of government are corrupt to the core. While the Tea Party movement in its current form may not be ideal, we should all be welcoming the continued efforts towards the creation of a true independent third party option.
April 16th, 2010 at 4:55 am
Zombies have taken over and before they get control of the airways i hope someone creates a political ” Night of the Living Dead ” movie so the Martains understand what happened here
April 16th, 2010 at 5:01 am
why bring up politics and insult probably more than half your audience?
April 16th, 2010 at 5:20 am
I’m baffled by this poll. How did the pollsters identify “Tea Party Supporters”?
At first read, I don’t think this poll has any validity in determining the views of the “Tea Partiers”. They give a N of 881 for “Tea Party Supporters”, about half of the total, but I didn’t see their explicit definition of how they selected the “Tea Party Supporters”.
It seems that they may have asked the question “Do you consider yourself a supporter of the the Tea Party movement, or not?”, such as question 82 in this poll. But, this is a generic question, not a specific question.
A far better way of determining who is a “Tea Partier” would be question 84: “Have you supported the Tea Party movement by donating money, or attending a rally or meeting, have you done both, or have you done neither?”
But, in this poll, only 20% of their 881 “Tea Party Supporters” have donated money, attended a rally/meeting, or done both. This 20% that has actively supported the Tea Party movement should be the ones polled as “Tea Partiers”, not ones who answer a generic question. If fact, in question 85 of this poll, only 31% of their “Tea Party Supporters” have even visited a Tea Party website.
I don”t believe the conclusions being drawn by the media and others that this poll represents the views and characteristics of the “Tea Partiers” are valid. They need to take a poll of the people who have actively donated to the “Tea Party” movement, or attended a “Tea Party” rally/meeting, to determine the characteristics and views of the “Tea Partiers”.
There’s a saying that 72% of statistics are faked. This poll falls in that 72%. It’s just not valid for the conclusions being drawn from it.
April 16th, 2010 at 5:50 am
(1) Saved the US economy from the consequences of the bursting of the dotcom bubble.
By creating a new one.
(2) Saved the US economy from a collapse of the financial infrastructure after 9/11.
Eh…I remember that, it didn’t do much damage to our financial infrastructure.
(3) Saved the US airline industry from collapse after 9/11.
Yeah, I might give him that.
(4) Rationalized Medicare by including a prescription drug benefit.
A horribly designed, unfunded half-wit plan. Doughnut hole? Does ANYBODY on the goddamn planet think that doughnut hole made any sense?
(5) Liberated Afghanistan from the Taliban.
Would have been nice if he’d been paying attention while the Taliban returned.
(6) Liberated Iraq from Saddam Hussein.
Would have been nice if he’d used the resources needed for that.
(7) Defeated Al Qaeda in Iraq.
Dumb. Al Qaeda wasn’t even IN IRAQ until we created a near anarchic state for them to enter. Al Qaeda was based in Afghanistan/Pakistan
(8) Guaranteed the independence of Kosovo strenghtening the stability of the Balkans.
(9) Fast tracked the expansion of NATO strengthening the future stability of Europe.
Europe is already pretty stable, but that would be a gimme. I could do that blindfolded and standing on my head.
(10) Made two of the best appointments to the Supreme Court in recent history.
Harriet Miers. Least qualified appointment since Abe Fortas, or before.
(11) Created a vast program for addressing the problem of HIV/AIDs in Africa.
One of the few ACTUAL good things on the list.
(12) Introduced the first measures of national accountability in US Public Education.
While I agree with the general idea, it was designed and implemented with the typical Bush ability.
(13) Paved the way for the election of an African American as President by having, successively, two African Americans in the highest profile cabinet position.
Err…how is nominating qualified people to positions they’re qualified such a revolutionary event?
(14) Laid the legal foundation for the prosecution of the war on terror.
Yeah, “They’re illegal combatants cuz I say they are and we can use “enhanced interrogation tactics on them”…if Clinton did that to oh…Tim McVeigh, the right would likely go into seizures screaming “fascism! camps to hold political opponents” (well…actually, they did without Clinton doing that…)
(15) Strengthened the integrity of the nation by respecting the wishes of a Democratic governor of Southern state to not immediately send in Federal troops after a natural disaster.
OK, given the robust fantasy life you’ve shown by saying that George Bush’s SCOTUS appointments are the best in recent history, I’m going to ask for confirmation on this one (from somewhere reliable, NewsMax and their highbrow spinoff Fox are not reliable)
April 16th, 2010 at 5:56 am
It’s odd on a number of levels that a guy with an Econ. background takes time out to bash a group that has “reckless government spending” as one of its main concerns. Cherry picking a single question out of a huge survey is reckless statistical thinking. You need to hang out with your buddy, Kedrosky more – he’s got a much better handle on Stats.
For all of GWB’s many faults – why is it that so many of his policies (e.g. Drone strikes, Guantanamo, Surveillance, etc) were soundly criticized, then embraced and retained by the current administration?
April 16th, 2010 at 6:00 am
At Tea Party Rallies, a Fox News Presence
More than any other major news outlet, the Fox News Channel has aligned itself with the Tea Party movement.
On Thursday, the movement was back in the news as rallies that coincided with the April 15 deadline for filing income tax forms took place across the country. Other cable news channels have reporters at the rallies, but only Fox has sent two of its biggest stars to be the hosts of hour-long programs from the event sites.
Neil Cavuto, the 4 p.m. host on Fox News and an executive at the sister network Fox Business, is in Atlanta for a rally there, and Sean Hannity, the 9 p.m. host on Fox News, is in Cincinnati for a rally and a signing of his best-selling book.
In both cases, local organizers are promoting the Fox’s presence at the rallies. In Cincinnati, seats beside Mr. Hannity’s stage were sold for $20 to $100. The money is to go to a group called the Cincinnati Tea Party.
For more than a year Fox has faced accusations that it is promoting the Tea Party movement. On April 15 last year, four of Fox’s programs were broadcast from protest sites, and the Fox host Glenn Beck said that viewers could “celebrate with Fox News” by attending or tuning in. That month the liberal media watchdog Media Matters published a number of examples of what it called promotion of the Tea Party by Fox.
Asked by Media Matters about the programming, the News Corporation chairman and chief executive Rupert Murdoch said earlier this month: “I don’t think we should be supporting the Tea Party or any other party. But I’d like to investigate what you are saying before I condemn anyone.”
The network often differentiates between its opinion shows, which feature people like Mr. Cavuto and Mr. Hannity, and its daytime news shows. Opinion shows make up the majority of Fox’s weekday schedule.
In its commercials for Mr. Cavuto’s program this week, Fox said he would be “covering” the Atlanta rally. Notably, Mr. Beck, who attended an April 15 rally in Texas last year, is not taking his show on the road this year.
Fox is clearly the favored network among supporters of the Tea Party. A New York Times-CBS News poll found that 63 percent of self-described Tea Party supporters gain most of their television news from Fox, compared to 23 percent of all Americans.
April 16th, 2010 at 6:10 am
Hey guys — haven’t you figured out yet that when BR does one of these provocative posts late at night, he is trying to get you to react?
The comment stream has just given him another night of laughs . . .
April 16th, 2010 at 6:28 am
Sometimes I get bored and like to rile up the natives.
April 16th, 2010 at 6:30 am
Well this is first and foremost a financial blog and, regardless of the politics, there is one thing I can say I learned and will always remember from one of BR’s earlier posts. That is to NOT LET ONE’S POLITICAL VIEWS CLOUD ONES INVESTMENT DECISIONS. I think we did see this between 2004-2007 (when Democrats sat out the rally), and I personally had 2M in cash after BO was elected (and in March 2009) that I could not bring myself to invest because I was so disgusted with the political environment. It caused me to be too negative (even at Dow 6600!), and some of this is still going on today. I hope to not repeat the same mistake. The sentiment cycle charts posted yesterday are also unbelievably informative and will be printed and included in my ‘best ideas’ folder.
April 16th, 2010 at 6:54 am
Summa summarum, they are a kinky bunch.
April 16th, 2010 at 8:01 am
The Tea Party reminds me of an inflatable object which is used for various purposes.
April 16th, 2010 at 8:19 am
Which goes to prove that the educated middle class in the US has liitle or no judgement? This is perhaps why the balance of the civilised world is so sceptical regarding the competence of the US as a civilised people?
April 16th, 2010 at 8:21 am
Everyone has a right to their own opinions but no one has a right to their own facts:
I don’t trust any “facts” put out by the MSM, corporations or government.
April 16th, 2010 at 8:28 am
Event_horizon Says:
The two-party political system is nothing more than an illusion to fool the populace and divide it through partisan bickering, thereby deflecting attention from the fact that both parties and all branches of government are corrupt to the core. While the Tea Party movement in its current form may not be ideal, we should all be welcoming the continued efforts towards the creation of a true independent third party option.
I agree with Event, but I’m not sure what to make of the TEA party yet. I suspect the same logic behind the Dems running Hillary and Obama in hopes of mindlessly attracting previously disenfranchised demographics is a play with the TEA party. I also agree that it is the “silent majority”. What better time to capture and abuse a mass of people!
April 16th, 2010 at 8:39 am
Any movement credited to have been started by Santelli and/or CNBC must be questionable? The sad thing is that the Tea-baggers do have SOME merit in a totally corrupt and disfunctional US political system. How do intelligent people in the US return some sort of sanity to Washington and US democracy? Without “Do you miss me yet “W”?”
April 16th, 2010 at 8:59 am
It’s time to drop the term teabagger. It really is hate speech.
April 16th, 2010 at 9:05 am
Rule #1 of the face-time punditry and poll-dancer gig is throw incendiaries early, throw incendiaries often.
Rule #2 is refer to #1. See: the crocodilian Coulter.
Expropriating the property of the haves
for showering on the have nots and antisocial engineering
programs tends to evaporate in the altitudes before
moistening the ground at the Animal Farm. When one
hears ‘teabagger’ fondly uttered for its undertones of
cutesie-tootsie perverted sexual act innuendo, in all
feminization fairness, the Golden Showerers are saying it.
April 16th, 2010 at 9:13 am
For almost as long as Fox has been blabbering about the Tea Party, I recognized them as a “new home” for neocons embarrassed by their drubbing in the last election. They haven’t changed their ideas. This stat showing their support for Dubya supports my early interpretation.
…
Did you notice how the “Tea Party” membership was limited until Fox started hyping it and basically *promoted* it? So, in a way, you can think of the Tea Party now as a kind of “Murdoch Customer Loyalty Program” or PBS-like “viewer sponsorship” / perpetual fund-raiser.
- Our own Fox host, Sarah Palin, spoke at the first Tea Party convention.
- With your pledge of $50, you’ll receive this decorative tea bag.
- Your favorite Fox anchors will be covering today’s events.
- You, too, can feel like you’re part of the solution. Come down and join the party!
- Remember: keep watching Fox News!
April 16th, 2010 at 9:21 am
BR You are acting like the man behind the curtain.
First you make a blatantly biased comment. Then you opine a broad conclusion.
You get feedback that points out the flaws in your thinking and suddenly it was just all “fun and games”.
Please admit (to yourself first) that you are more liberal & less objective than you think yourself to be.
April 16th, 2010 at 9:27 am
‘Wealthier and Educated’ [jury still out on that]
April 16th, 2010 at 9:37 am
The reason that the Tea Party movement is gaining steam is because there are so many people that are disaffected by both main parties. Republicans used to be known as the fiscally conservative party. They still talk about smaller government, but yet they expand it at every turn.
I used to avoid voting for third parties for fear of wasting my vote. I now realize that voting for either a Democrat or a Republican would be a waste of a vote. Both parties are spending us to ruination and creating a huge government to take our liberties.
The Libertarian Party most closely matches my ideology of smaller government, more freedom, and lower taxes. If you are not familiar with what this party stands for please check them out at www. LP.org.
April 16th, 2010 at 9:48 am
I just can’t believe no one has asked my opinion on this topic :D.
If this economy takes a double dip and we resend back into the depths, Bush is my vote for worst President ever. My justification is that his party and his appointees made decisions that impacted this country not only at the time they were in office, but for years afterward. Another double dip is a result of the previous recession, so the two are linked. This recession that we are, hopefully, coming to the tail end of, is the direct result of Bush and Greenspan’s inattentiveness at the helm. With all the knowledge Greeny has, you’d think he’d have had the foresight to see credit bubbles blowing up huge. You’d think Bush would have been an economic leader enough to question long-standing policies, and do things that would prop up the economy after 9/11, but would pull the plug on those initiatives once things got too hot.
No one did their job. Asleep at the wheel, waging war on everyone in the middle east after 9/11, and generally leading like a 14 year old kid on the board game RISK.
Worst President ever. And I voted for him twice. I voted for John McCain on the last election. And I don’t call myself a Republican. I don’t claim that party as far as I can throw it, and the same goes for the Dems. I am aggressively in favor of Independence, and candidates not tied to money or politics as usual, who don’t make promises just to get into office. Good luck finding one of those.
Ron Paul will likely be my selection in 2012, if he runs.
April 16th, 2010 at 10:10 am
Bush LOVED America. Bush was PROUD of America . Give a shit.
April 16th, 2010 at 10:18 am
What is despicable about the Tea Party (and their previous incarnation, “movement conservatives”), is the legitimization of the view that we owe nothing to Americans who are far less fortunate than ourselves.
They stir up bitter emotions about having to pay taxes to help out people in poverty. Meanwhile they completely ignore the vastly larger subsidies that our government gives to banks, agribusiness, and war profiteers like Halliburton.
When did it become legit to call yourself a Conservative Christian, and then turn around and bitch about helping out the poor, as Jesus taught us to do?
April 16th, 2010 at 10:32 am
Having initially read BR’s mindless posting and then all the comments (yup, all of them), and while the comments contain some rather insightful observations blessed with common sense, this particular TBP thread nevertheless qualifies as the biggest pile of bu!!sh*t ever to appear at TBP.
It fully confirms the underlying reason my grandfather gave me 55 years ago when he advised: “Don’t ever discuss religion and politics with others because all you’ll do is reveal yourself as a fool.”
Now, howzabout getting back to tha fine ol’ American tradition … turning a buck in the markets.
April 16th, 2010 at 10:33 am
Once upon a time right and left was defined by views that supported larger and smaller federal government. These days both parties have moved that view out to the strained edges of political thought.
‘It is just not possible right now, right?’
The blog that gave us a very critical view of bailouts might be the perfect blog to give us a credible perspective on just how it is that this traditional thinking has been pushed out of the mainstream…
Special interests and military interests only get hurt by “smaller” thinking, so they covet the legislative process. Then, this winter the courts tell us ‘money talks, period’.
Now we get this: if you want a smaller government you must’ve loved GWB even though he grew spending more than most Presidents? Dance around the ins and outs as you wish but how many of your headline readers made it down a thread this long to feel the fine points of your thinking?
April 16th, 2010 at 10:41 am
this is not a valid poll. why didn’t CBS/NYT ask if Tea Partiers worship Ayn Rand? and if they plan to go Galt http://bit.ly/9w2yPq
April 16th, 2010 at 10:54 am
It’s disappointing to see this blog posting. I always consider the “Big Picture” as a place for rational, long-term economic analysis. All of today’s political discourse about whether Bush or Obama is the “worst president” ever really smacks of myopia, given many of our country’s problems have been generations in the making. Also, it’s like blaming the star quarterback everytime a team loses. Presidents only have a certain degree of influence over our political and economic environment. Hopefully this post is an anomoly and BR will refocus on analysis and less on petty political name calling.
April 16th, 2010 at 10:54 am
I’ve been reading your blog just about everyday for over a year now and read your book. I am surprised that you would accept the survey from the NYT as fact! The many posts here point out the flawed questions. You know you have to consider political bias in whatever media you read. I am an independent voter all of my life and have voted for both parties in the past. I went to a tea party yesterday and I saw a broad mix of ages, classes and political parties. The message I got I agree with:
1. constitutionally limited government
2. fiscal responsibility
3. free market economics
I personally went because I think it is unjust to vote in big expensive benefits and expect our grandchildren to pay for it. I am worried about my grandchildren’s future opportunities in this country and even if we will still have a country that is not bankrupted.
April 16th, 2010 at 11:04 am
The poll confirms what I have witnessed in news reports and interviews with Partiers: they are misinformed to the point of delusion. I guess that should not be a surprise since one television network, all Republican office holders (local, state and federal,) and right wing think-tanks have spent the past two years in an all out campaign to frighten and mislead them. What is really scary is how poorly informed the total sample appears to be. No wonder the newspapers are going broke.
This is for me the most frightening aspect of the “information age:” we will lose consensus on the facts.
April 16th, 2010 at 11:37 am
The commentary amuses me. Thanks for the laughs.
As for my POV on the topic of Dubya, I thank Jason Crowell @ 5:50 for summing it up quite well for me…. saves me lots of typing time. The only point from Ignim Brites’ list I’ll add commentary to is #15 — there are so many, many things to say about the response to Hurricane Katrina, and blame for the governmental cluster-you know what goes to all levels: mayor, governor, POTUS. I’ll simply point out that 40% of Louisiana’s National Guard were deployed to Iraq during Hurricane Katrina.
How Ignim Brites considers any part of the Katrina response as strengthening “the integrity of the nation” is beyond my comprehension.
April 16th, 2010 at 11:45 am
BR,
These posts of yours are like flypaper.
You trapped all of those who buzz around the pile of horseshit that is the W legacy and the Teabag movement.
April 16th, 2010 at 12:01 pm
Barry – cmon…wake up – if you think GW Bush will go down as the worst POTUS – have you been uder a rock the last 15 months? Good grief! It is pretty sad when the left wing MSM continues to bash the Tea Party when all they are doing is practicing their freedom of speech and are calling on government to become SMALLER, LEss Taxes and to FOLLOW THE US CONSTITUTION!!!
April 16th, 2010 at 12:08 pm
“The message I got I agree with:
1. constitutionally limited government
2. fiscal responsibility
3. free market economics”
As do most people,
*chuckle* the problem is with the definition of each of your terms
Jack
April 16th, 2010 at 12:26 pm
Barry,
Although certain individuals have tried to change it, the original intent of the Tea Party movement has nothing to do with any president and is neither conservative nor liberal.
As others in the comments have stated, their platform is simple:
– Less Taxes
– Smaller Government
– More Respect to Federal/State/Individual Rights Granted (and Restricted) by the Constitution
April 16th, 2010 at 12:32 pm
c’mon Barry…saying all you need to know about tea partyers is that 57% like GB is like saying all you need to know about the stock market is the p/e ratio. it’s relevant but not the sole criteria.
get over yourself.
April 16th, 2010 at 12:47 pm
one other thing,
a movement that encourages Sarah Palin to be their spokes person………………………..
April 16th, 2010 at 1:34 pm
Barry Ritholtz once again has shown himself not only to be a screaming liberal blogger who at times cannot resist the urge to attack conservatism, but has shown an immaturity level of an 16 yr old. His blog , which i read for financial analysis , has lost so much credibility as we now know he will always avoid posting data and analysis that demonstrate conservative, free market viewpoints which benefit the economy overall. BR is a liberal b4 he is anything else. Liberalism trumps all with Barry. He can no longer pretend to be unbiased. He bleeds liberalism.
April 16th, 2010 at 1:35 pm
As others in the comments have stated, their platform is simple:
– Less Taxes
– Smaller Government
Platform = cognitive dissonance!
social security, medicare, defense and int on the debt are more than 80% of the budget but ARE VERY POPULAR w/ the dunces!
“smaller government” that does not involve cutting these is a FANTASY!
April 16th, 2010 at 1:48 pm
End the wars…end spending for anybody over 80…NOW WE CAN AFFORD TAX CUTS!
April 16th, 2010 at 1:54 pm
This is NOT from the Onion…
Stranded leader runs country by iPad
http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/ptech/04/16/volcano.ash.norway.ipad/index.html?eref=igoogle_cnn
April 16th, 2010 at 2:51 pm
Wow, Barry you’re bias is really showing through on this one…..just like Goldman getting blamed for today’s selloff in a very overbought market.
No, 57% isn’t the number to look at with the tea partiers.
There are really three numbers to look at: 61, 39 and 47
61: out of every dollar the US spends, only 61% is covered by taxes
39: 39% is borrowed
47: 47% of the US population doesn’t pay a cent in federal income taxes
These numbers are the backbone of the tea party movement, not the profligate George Bush.
April 16th, 2010 at 3:56 pm
Some people would do well to read Ken Vogel’s excellent piece on Politico about how the GOP consulting firm of Russo, Marsh & Rogers dreamed up the “Tea Party Express” and are making a lot of money on the “grass roots/non-partisan” movement. They are using the same PAC, “Our Country Deserves Better” to promote the “Tea Party Express” as they used to oppose Obama in the general election. In short, these are savvy, sophisticated political operatives and the PAC that Russo essentially runs has paid almost $2 million to Russo’s firm, along with King Media Group. There’s nothing illegal about his as far as I can tell, but it’s a long way from a “grass roots” movement of the “little people” rising up to oppose a “gangster government” as Michele Bachman labeled the current government. Last time I checked, Obama won by 9.5 million votes, the largest margin in history for a non-incumbent and I must have missed the coup by which the Ds won a majority in Congress. That may well change in November, but to applaud someone who calls a democratically elected government a “gangster government” suggests a combination of sour grapes, demagoguery and, well, I can’t put it any other way….ignorance
Here’s the link to Vogel’s piece if any anyone is interested.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0410/35785.html
April 16th, 2010 at 5:14 pm
I think it is no big surprise. Tea partiers are basically cut from the right end of the GOP spectrum. Out there facts do not matter much, so if you need to believe that Bush II was good then you believe that. They are from the lalaland where Fox is “fair and balanced” so a disconnect from reality is not only expected its almost mandatory. Interesting that there is a lower % teabaggers (40) than GOPsters (48) who say Palin would be an effective president.
@West: “If you want to discredit the Tea Party, tell us what you don’t like about their policies”.
What policies, so far they have just presented a bunch of “have my cake and eat it too” opinions. A policy is something that hangs together and can be implemented.
April 16th, 2010 at 9:38 pm
BR, not the best subject to blog about when you are headed to Texas next month to drum up business.
April 16th, 2010 at 9:52 pm
Barry, you must be joking, and said Bush was no good, so you could sit back and watch a lot of silly people make silly remarks. You are too smart to know that history will judge, not you nor I, how good of a president Bush was. Like Hoover, he is likely to be blamed for a lot of the financial mess, but, to do so, is unfair. The Democrats controlled Congress the last two years of his final term, just like they did Hoover’s, and they made sure Congress did nothing to make Bush look good. What the Democrats didn’t do isnot his fault. He tried to put Social Security and Medicare on the table at the beginning of his second term, and Democrats acted like he was a paedophile. With the help of the Media, the fanatical left said some of the meanest things anyone could ever say about someone, as if Bush ran Congress, the FRB, the CIA, and personally approved every drone attack in Pakistan. What he did that was important was to raise public awareness about the Muslim threat to all the things we like in America. The rise of Muslim numbers in Europe and the growing numbers of Muslim states with Nuclear weapons has rendered Europe unable to assert and defend itself. But that is Europe, not the US. When he used the word “crusade” he was attacked by a bunch of ignoramuses who thought the Crusades was Christians attacking Muslims, when, in fact, they were only trying to regain territory the Muslims, as aggressors, had taken before. (The Roman Empire was Christian, not Muslim, and the Crusades were all about that). We can go on and on, but why? It is not for you or I.
April 16th, 2010 at 10:59 pm
# Jason Crowell Says:
April 16th, 2010 at 5:50 am
(1) Saved the US economy from the consequences of the bursting of the dotcom bubble.
By creating a new one.
IB> Well from Mar 2000 to Oct 2002 the Nasdaq was down nearly 80%. I don’t think anyone
will argue that overall housing prices are down 80% or even the total value of home
equity is down 80% or the value of mortgage loans. Maybe that’s comming. But it is
not here yet. Bottom line is the economy recovered from the Clinton/Rubin bubble.
Score 1 for truth and reason.
(2) Saved the US economy from a collapse of the financial infrastructure after 9/11.
Eh…I remember that, it didn’t do much damage to our financial infrastructure.
IB> NYSE was down for four days. Pretty sure the big money through out the world noticed that
and was prepared to move if the response was inadequate. That’ll be two.
(3) Saved the US airline industry from collapse after 9/11.
Yeah, I might give him that.
IB> 3-0.
(4) Rationalized Medicare by including a prescription drug benefit.
A horribly designed, unfunded half-wit plan. Doughnut hole? Does ANYBODY on the goddamn planet think that doughnut hole made any sense?
IB> Point is that it was even less rational to fail to provide a drug benefit if you are going to have Medicare. 4-0.
(5) Liberated Afghanistan from the Taliban.
Would have been nice if he’d been paying attention while the Taliban returned.
IB> True Taliban is fighting back but they haven’t won. If they do it is on Obama. 5-0.
(6) Liberated Iraq from Saddam Hussein.
Would have been nice if he’d used the resources needed for that.
IB> The Baathist regime fell in a matter of days. The rough aftermath doesn’t negate the main point. 6-0.
(7) Defeated Al Qaeda in Iraq.
Dumb. Al Qaeda wasn’t even IN IRAQ until we created a near anarchic state for them to enter. Al Qaeda was based in Afghanistan/Pakistan
IB> The Nazis didn’t take charge in Italy until we invaded. Bottom line: Bush led our forces to victory. 7-0.
(8) Guaranteed the independence of Kosovo strenghtening the stability of the Balkans.
(9) Fast tracked the expansion of NATO strengthening the future stability of Europe.
Europe is already pretty stable, but that would be a gimme. I could do that blindfolded and standing on my head.
IB> Maybe you could do it blindfolded but what about Al Gore? At any rate, these are uncontested. 9-0.
(10) Made two of the best appointments to the Supreme Court in recent history.
Harriet Miers. Least qualified appointment since Abe Fortas, or before.
IB> OK. But once withdrawn, two brillant picks, bristling with brains. Even liberals lament the Sotomayor is
not competitive, 10-0.
(11) Created a vast program for addressing the problem of HIV/AIDs in Africa.
One of the few ACTUAL good things on the list.
IB> 11-0.
(12) Introduced the first measures of national accountability in US Public Education.
While I agree with the general idea, it was designed and implemented with the typical Bush ability.
IB> Seems like we are hearing alot these days about failing public schools being closed. 12-0.
(13) Paved the way for the election of an African American as President by having, successively, two African Americans in the highest profile cabinet position.
Err…how is nominating qualified people to positions they’re qualified such a revolutionary event?
IB> It’s not revolutionary. That’s the point. Granted it wasn’t the basis for Obama’s victory. But it certainly
didn’t hurt. So “paved” is tendentious, I accept. Call it a draw. 12-0-1.
(14) Laid the legal foundation for the prosecution of the war on terror.
Yeah, “They’re illegal combatants cuz I say they are and we can use “enhanced interrogation tactics on them”…if Clinton did that to oh…Tim McVeigh, the right would likely go into seizures screaming “fascism! camps to hold political opponents” (well…actually, they did without Clinton doing that…)
IB> Maybe the right would scream. Certainly however Obama has not dismantled any of the core legal institutions
for the war on terror. Maybe the right will scream (Start a revolution, Ron Paul). Uncontested. 13-0-1.
(15) Strengthened the integrity of the nation by respecting the wishes of a Democratic governor of Southern state to not immediately send in Federal troops after a natural disaster.
OK, given the robust fantasy life you’ve shown by saying that George Bush’s SCOTUS appointments are the best in recent history, I’m going to ask for confirmation on this one (from somewhere reliable, NewsMax and their highbrow spinoff Fox are not reliable)
IB> http://www.armytimes.com/legacy/new/1-292925-1108645.php
http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/09/26/050926ta_talk_lemann
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9287434/print/1/displaymode/1098/
But this is mis-stated. Blanco resisted federalizing the national guard not sending federal troops.
13-1-1.
April 17th, 2010 at 12:53 am
I’ve been drinking tea for a long time and I HOPE the liberals like BR (is there really any doubt?) will wake up soon and quit drinking the Kool-aid and CHANGE to tea also.
April 17th, 2010 at 2:26 am
>> Fred C Dobbs Says:
>> April 16th, 2010 at 9:52 pm
>> The Democrats controlled Congress the last two years of his final term, just like they did Hoover’s, and they made sure Congress did nothing to make Bush look good.
Housing peaked was in 2005-2006. Democrats winning seats in the 2006 election didn’t take their seats until 2007. What can you do post-peak, *after* all the malinvestment? Busts follow bubbles/fraud-epidemics as surely as day follows night. The time to do anything productive about the problem was during the ramp-up/bubble-building period. So, your point is very weak.
>> You are too smart to know that history will judge, not you nor I, how good of a president Bush was.
In 50 years, perhaps some school boards near your house will consider buying books selling creationism, “Bush was a good President”, and other fantasies. But, what will that prove or who will that persuade? … (Since you’re so slow to judge, consider not voting for anyone until 50 years after you’ve seen them govern.)
…
Dubya/Palin appeal to the left-side of the bell curve. That demographic doesn’t just “disappear”. Dubya/Palin will always have supporters. Some of the posts on this thread are proof. They’d be comical if there weren’t a risk of some of these dopes getting elected.
April 17th, 2010 at 2:04 pm
“all you need to know about the Tea Party”? Talk about narrow, biased thinking. Usually BR provides more logic than that.
If thinking that the federal government has a strong tendency to spend too much money and assume too much debt is an absurd thought, I’d hate to know what rational thought is.
April 17th, 2010 at 4:39 pm
BR is a liberal b4 he is anything else. Liberalism trumps all with Barry. He can no longer pretend to be unbiased. He bleeds liberalism.
Geez, project much?
The incoherence of these comments is hilarious. First the poll can’t be trusted because the media is out to make the Tea Party look bad, and then it turns out that Bush was a great President after all. The Tea Party are just concerned citizens with deep principles who think that government deficits run up under Democratic Presidents are horrible, but somehow they aren’t even aware of the deficits accumulated under Reagan and the Bushes. What a joke.
April 17th, 2010 at 5:00 pm
Tea Party ‘revolt’ looks like a pity party to me
http://www.suntimes.com/news/steinberg/2168642,CST-NWS-stein18.article
“No, I do not!” he said, fleeing. A common reaction. They want media attention, so long as it is not on themselves personally. I drifted over to a counter-protester, a young man in an aluminum foil hat.
“I’ve used tinfoil hats as metaphor,” I said. “But I’ve never seen anyone actually wearing one . . . “
April 18th, 2010 at 10:32 pm
Congrats, Barry, on, at least, definitively identifying the right wingers here. ;-)
The more I hear about this poll from other media, the more I can’t believe that no one has called BS on this poll.
This isn’t a poll of “Tea Party Supporters”, as CBS/NYT claims. It’s a poll of people who, answered the question, “Do you consider yourself a supporter of the the Tea Party movement, or not?” in the affirmative. This is a very generic question, not a specific question. People could just say “yes, somewhat”, and be counted and then polled as a “Tea Party Supporter”. No wonder the answers from the “Tea Party Supporters” to the other questions are all over the map.
The question used to identify “Tea Party Supporters” should be question 84 of this poll “Have you supported the Tea Party movement by donating money, or attending a rally or meeting, have you done both, or have you done neither?” Which in fact, only had a 20% “Yes” answer among the NYT’s supposed “Tea Party Supporters”.
There’s a saying that 72% of statistics are faked. This poll falls in that 72%. It’s just not valid for the conclusions that the media and others are drawing from it. I hope others, or CBS/NYT, re-do this poll with a sampling of actual “Tea Party Supporters”. Thanks.