Because the Republican Party will nominate the one candidate who, at least at the outset of the contest, Tea Partiers seemed to have the least affinity for, many political observers have concluded that the movement’s time has come and gone. But as the results from a number of Senate races testify, reports of the Tea Party’s demise are, at best, premature. In Utah, longtime incumbent Senator Orrin Hatch is being forced into a Republican primary to hold on to his seat. But an even better argument for the group as a force that should be reckoned with came in Pennsylvania, where the state GOP establishment’s choice was humiliated in a primary yesterday to determine the party’s nominee to oppose Senator Bob Casey.
While the Pennsylvania GOP Senate race received minimal attention even in the Keystone state, the collapse of Governor Tom Corbett’s attempt to handpick an unknown for the nomination is noteworthy. Corbett and the state party wanted Steve Welch, a 35-year-old entrepreneur who was a registered Democrat as recently as 2009. But Tea Party activists embraced Tom Smith, a coal millionaire from the Western region of the state. Though Smith, 64, was a lifelong Democrat, he was able to harness the anger of the party’s grass roots and won by a huge margin over Welch, and Sam Rohrer, a state representative who also sought to appeal to Tea Partiers.
Though Casey is closely identified with President Obama and might be vulnerable if the Democratic ticket faces a strong challenge from Mitt Romney, he is probably not in much danger of being defeated. Casey, who remains popular despite a lackluster record in the Senate, has enough resources to match Smith’s wealth, and the GOP candidate is not likely to gain much traction outside of western Pennsylvania.
But no matter what happens in November in this race, the idea that the Tea Party is a spent force in the GOP is not realistic. We may get even more evidence of this when Indiana Senator Richard Lugar faces off in a May 8 primary with State Treasurer Richard Mourdock. Unlike a marginal figure like Smith or Tea Party favorites who crashed and burned in the general election in 2010 such as Utah’s Sharon Angle or Delaware’s Christine O’Donnell, Mourdock has a good chance of holding the seat for the GOP if he beats Lugar. If Tea Partiers can topple a Senate institution like Lugar, it will be more proof of the staying power of the movement. As Pennsylvania Governor Corbett and his cronies can tell Lugar, underestimating the Tea Party is a mistake experienced politicians should try to avoid.
So why isn't Mitt Romney doing more to win – not just assume – Tea Party support? To win the election, Romney requires enthusiastic Tea Party support. The votes to defeat Barak Obama aren't there otherwise. n nThe reason is that Romney and his apologists don't want to win the election. n nWinning would require having to accept the responsibilities and risks of governance. Romney isn't up to the job, and his apologists don't have what it takes to advocate and support an agenda that the well-being of the country requires. n nI'm 63 years old and a life-long conservative who has always voted Republican. I don't trust Mitt Romney. I think he lacks the character to lead. To be honest, there are days when I think that four more years of Barak Obama would be better than four years of Mitt Romney.
You are a Democratic progressive hack. No respectable conservative would ever think Obama is as good or better than Romney. The dead giveaway is the old "I have been a lifelong Conservative/GOP but I would never trust __________". No one with any sense would believe you, it's the oldest routine on the internet. n nRomney wasn't my first choice either. But anyone with half a brain is better than Obama. Four more years of Obama is unacceptable. If I haven to hold my nose and vote for Romney, so be it. Obama must go back to the private sector.
Are insults and name-calling the best you can do? n nIf I'm wrong, prove it. Otherwise, don't clutter the Contentions blog with your childish opinions. n nBTW, why don't you use your real name?
The only childish opinion is the one where you claim: "To be honest, there are days when I think that four more years of Barak Obama would be better than four years of Mitt Romney." n nSo either you are a Democrat hack, an evangelical who thinks he is electing a pastor, or someone who is upset that they didn't get their way. I didn't get my way, but I will be damned if I take my ball and go home over it. I want Obama to lose more than I want my way, because he is going to destroy this country if he gets another 4 years.
To each his own. I wish you joy of it. n nBTW, I'm a Christian. As such, I'm an "evangelical", as are all baptized, confirmed Christians. I'm not a Democrat, nor am I a Republican. I'm a declared Independent, but my time, energy, and money support the Tea Party. Moreover, I'm a so-called social conservative. n nWhat are you?