Yesterday, I heard much talk about the emergence of the Tea Party and the potential “rift” developing in the Republican Party. Will the Tea Party emerge as the elusive third party in American politics that will save us from bipartisanship and help us embrace tri-partisanship? Short Answer, No.
Shorty after the re-election of George W Bush in 2004, I told Keeks that the Democratic Party was finished.
How could it not be? The Republicans controlled The White House, both houses of Congress, and would soon control the supreme court through nominations. On the left, the Libertarian and Green parties where quickly siphoning votes away from the Democrats. With so little power in Washington and waning support from the public, how could the Democatic Party ever recover? I was sure it would not and I basked in the glory of Republican control and Democratic downfall.
Four years later, Keeks told me the Republican Party was finished.
With a Democrat in The White House and a Supermajority in Congress, the Republicans were taken down to the point where they lacked any significant clout on Capitol Hill. As this happens, we now see the Tea Party emerge. While the Left scrambled to label the Tea Party “teabaggers” of an “AstroTurf” movement funded by “big corporations” it was obvious this was a Republican move. Mercy yes, gotta hate those “big corporations” and that “wealthiest 1%.” The loudmouthed liberal puppet at MSNBC, Keith Olberman, certainly didn’t hesitate to say so.
But if you look closely at the Tea Party, you see a slightly different picture. Obviously the Tea Party takes shots at Obama’s drunken sailor fiscal policy. But you’ll also hear them blasting away at the spending habits of George W Bush and lamenting for the days of Bill Clinton’s budget surplus. But if this is a Republican group, why praise Clinton and blast Bush?
Well simply put, the Tea Party is not a GOP wing. It’s an emerging third political party similar to the original Green and Libertarian movements. But Republicans aren’t at all worried. Why? For the same reason that the Democrats were never really worried about the Greens and Libertarians.
Most people vote against rather than for.
Did you vote for Kerry or against Bush? Did you vote for McCain or against Obama? While it’s obvious that Obama inspired a new breed of voters who never took part in the process, the majority of McCain supporters were not necessarily fans of McCain. They just feared Obama. Much the same way Kerry supporters were not impressed with the Senators flip-flopping and Gore-like monotone diatribe. They just hated Dubya. With most people voting against and few people voting for, the two party system will always prevail. People will vote for the guy most likely to beat the guy they hate and not vote for the candidate who most resembles their views. The Democrats simply swallowed the Green and Libertarian parties even if most self-proclaimed “independents” never saw it coming.
Regardless of how popular the Tea Party becomes, the Republicans will surely swallow it. The Tea Party will be more focused on removing Obama and will therefor support the most likely person to beat him, the Republican nominee. Not all Tea Partakers will vote Republican of course. There will be 1-5% of the vote going to the Tea Party Candidate much as Nader and Perot saw a small percentage. But the lion’s share will simply vote against Obama.
What Keeks and I both failed to realize is that neither of us particularly liked the guy we voted for. We just really hated the guy we voted against. As long as people vote against, bipartisanship will dominate American politics.
~Man Overboard
Image Used in this Post
Bipartisan Napkins courtesy of flickr user LaMenta3 under the CC license.
6 Comments
It doesn’t help that the major political parties have so much money and power that they easily drown out any viable third parties. Furthermore, we’ve been conditioned to consider politics on a line and being given the choice of left vs. right, when in fact it isn’t nearly that simple. Plus, people only pay attention to the electoral process once it’s been whittled down to two candidates. If they started paying attention during the primaries (as the founding fathers wanted) alternative parties could emerge because people would realize they have a choice between more than just a douche and a turd sandwich.
I personally have accepted the fact that no political party will ever totally represent me, so I just try to vote for the guy that I feel will best represent me, regardless of his (or her) political affiliation.
P.S. I think you’ve been hanging out in my head because I’ve been pondering this subject for the last couple of weeks
My dream of the Demapublican party will one day be realized!
Would you settle for the Republicrats?
You are certainly correct in your statement that most people vote against, rather than for. This sentiment, in my opinion, is the clear harbinger of a slow erosion of power and dominance. The in fighting must stop or this country will go the way of Rome sooner than later. Try as anyone might, you cannot escape the clutches of history.
Don’t be surprised when the greens become the third party. That party is gaining momentum in many different countries and is maturing into a multi faceted, freedom for citizens (not corporations), conservative of human and environmental resources. Whilst it wont suit the tea party types, it will suit rebelling democrats and some republicans. Tea party is doomed by internal divisions as separate groups struggle for control, the lobbyist puppets, actual conservatives and radical racists. The lobbyists for profit puppets will be the ones to destroy it, if they can’t control they will seek to marginalise it.
So I assume you are of the opinion that Greens will be immune to all of this?
One Trackback
[...] This situation is similar to the one in the U.S.A., as described by Jack Gamble in his post “Why The Third Party Will Never Happen” (emphasis added): Did you vote for Kerry or against Bush? Did you vote for McCain or against Obama? [...]