Rand Paul, the “Tea Party Candidate” for the Republican Kentucky Senate primary won by a landslide last night, beating the “Washington Establishment” candidate, Trey Grayson, with a whopping 58.8% of the votes.
The Tea Party supporters were quick to use this victory as proof that they are a force to be reckoned with. I have to politely disagree.
If any of you are on Ron Paul’s mailing lists, be it e-mail or snail mail, his personal list or that of his Campaign for Liberty, you will recall how he rallied his supporters behind his son, Rand, and encouraged them to donate money, and I’m sure many of them did. Rand is not a political clone of his father, but that didn’t matter to many, because, c’mon – he’s Ron Paul’s son. Rand is often called the “less quirky” of the two Pauls, which basically means that he’s more Republican than his libertarian-minded father.
I’m not trying to say that there are an insane amount of Ron Paul supporters in Kentucky, but to diminish his influence in his son’s election wouldn’t be fair. Granted, in the 2008 Republican Presidential primary, Ron Paul placed 3rd in Kentucky, which may not say much to most people given that only he and John McCain were the only two still left in the race for the nomination. However, Ron Paul’s base is very loyal, and, at least from what I’m seeing, it seems that his supporters are growing in numbers and have been growing during the entire 2008 Presidential election, not just after the election of Barack Obama.
Could they be growing because of the Tea Party movement? Of course.
Are Ron Paul’s supporters all a part of the Tea Party movement? Of course not.
In fact, it is my own personal observation that the “older” Ron Paul supporters (those who have been fans of his prior to the aftermath of 2008) shun the Tea Party movement. Some of them are frustrated with the Tea Party, wondering where these “new” liberty-lovers were before Barack Obama became President. Others can’t seem to find any common ground with the Tea Party, especially since a bulk of them are huge supporters of Sarah Palin. And, well, when you have the Tea Party down in Texas challenging Ron Paul, then… well…. you get the picture.
Personally, I can’t understand how a group of people can be as powerful as some claim the Tea Party is, if, at the core of the morality divide, the base is almost split evenly. The two big names that the Tea Party supports are Sarah Palin and Ron Paul, the former a fan of government dictation of moral issues and the latter a fan of a non-intrusive government. If anything, as an outsider, I see the Tea Party as a GOP Redux, giving people too ashamed to admit that they are indeed Republican an easy way out, making it seemingly easy for them to declare themselves “libertarian,” when all they’ve managed to do is rename their Republican idealogy. I can’t blame them, really. I’d not want to admit that I’m ideologically alinged with George W. Bush either. This is a reason why it’s tempting to Republican candidates to say, “Hey, look at me! I’m just like you! I’m disgusted with Washington too!” Not because the Tea Party is a powerful group, but because that’s where the Republican voter base is now.
What makes the Tea Party appear to be so popular is the fact that the Democrats have yet to have a collective group of angry voters who are embarrassed to call themselves Democrats. Is it because the Democrats are holding the power in Washington? Perhaps. Maybe the Democrats in Washington haven’t done anything to embarrass and enrage their base … yet. It will happen. More and more Democrat voters are becoming disenfranchised with their elected officials because they aren’t being liberal enough. The really interesting thing here is that they have grievances with their party about the same issues the other side has with the Democrats, only for different reasons. To an angry Democrat, the Wall Street bailout shows that Washington is only too willing to cater to big business and not worry about the people. To an angry Democrat, the health care bill catered to the insurance companies, since forcing people to buy insurance is only going to line their pockets. And that’s not to even mention the whole lack of a public option.
This is an anti-establishment year in politics, and no incumbent is safe. Does this have to do anything with the Tea Party? They could possibly have influence on some state races, much like they did to Bob Bennett in Utah. But how do you explain the ouster of Arlen Specter? How do you explain the fact that Blanche Lincoln now has to move on to a runoff after her primary? I can’t give the Tea Party credit for those.
Either way, I’m sure that we’ve hit a turning point in America. For a political nerd like myself, things are going to be quite interesting around here for the next few years.
Browse Timeline
- « What can those wacky Muslims possibly infiltrate next?
- » Call me racist if you feel inclined to do so.
