# GOP TP wing seems to be doubling down on being even more extreme - Successful long term strategy? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [February 1, 2014, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-tp-wing-seems-to-be-doubling-down-on-being-even-more-extreme-successful-long-term-strategy/680302 "2014-02-01T21:14:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 11
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 12:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-tp-wing-seems-to-be-doubling-down-on-being-even-more-extreme-successful-long-term-strategy/680302/201 "2014-02-11T00:08:56Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > When talking about what is or isn’t extreme, I find that there are many things that enjoy less than 31% that wouldn’t be considered furthest from the center or outermost. The power to impose that minority view on others was also mentioned as a factor, do not ignore it. > [@Bone](#): > > My point is, there are actual extreme positions, flat earthers for example, NAMBLA, Quakers, etc. All of these enjoy very small minority support. Grouping positions that enjoy \> 30% support with the others above that are really fringe positions renders the term “extreme” meaningless. And of course I see that that is where your effort is going, it is not really effective as none of those minority groups have any powerful allies in government. The moment any of those groups gets the ears of a powerful group is when we will have to deal with them. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-tp-wing-seems-to-be-doubling-down-on-being-even-more-extreme-successful-long-term-strategy/680302/202 "2014-02-11T00:25:05Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > And of course I see that that is where your effort is going, it is not really effective as none of those minority groups have any powerful allies in government. The moment any of those groups gets the ears of a powerful group is when we will have to deal with them. By **bones’** standards, it seems, there cannot be such thing as extremist **politics,** because anything non-marginal enough to show politically is not extremist. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 12:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-tp-wing-seems-to-be-doubling-down-on-being-even-more-extreme-successful-long-term-strategy/680302/203 "2014-02-11T00:26:09Z")
The fact that these groups have many elected representatives who support their positions necessarily means those positions are not extreme. They are mainstream among their constituents. When the Tea Party gets 80 representatives elected, their positions and their supporters are no longer extreme. They are definitely a minority faction, but they enjoy more support than say, the Libertarian, Green or Independent parties (I think). By definition a position can’t enjoy wide spread support and simultaneously be extreme. The only way that is possible is if you redefine the word “extreme”. You’re perfectly able to do that, but then conversations quickly become nonsense since you can just make up whatever you want at that point. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 12:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-tp-wing-seems-to-be-doubling-down-on-being-even-more-extreme-successful-long-term-strategy/680302/204 "2014-02-11T00:28:45Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > By **bones’** standards, it seems, there cannot be such thing as extremist **politics,** because anything non-marginal enough to show politically is not extremist. I stated my definition in [post #185](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=17092456&postcount=185). You’ve avoided sharing your definition in lieu of further posturing. Why is that? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 12:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-tp-wing-seems-to-be-doubling-down-on-being-even-more-extreme-successful-long-term-strategy/680302/205 "2014-02-11T00:36:54Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > The fact that these groups have many elected representatives who support their positions necessarily means those positions are not extreme. They are mainstream among their constituents. When the Tea Party gets 80 representatives elected, their positions and their supporters are no longer extreme. They are definitely a minority faction, but they enjoy more support than say, the Libertarian, Green or Independent parties (I think). > > By definition a position can’t enjoy wide spread support and simultaneously be extreme. I already showed evidence coming from polls, the point stands, many moderate republicans (and would say many independents and democrats) are not even aware of how extreme their representatives are compared with what most of the people they represent think. > [@Bone](#): > > The only way that is possible is if you redefine the word “extreme”. Not so, you only showed that you missed the point, when one looks at what the majority of the people think there are even Republicans in that majority that see that not doing anything about controlling our emissions at the federal level is foolish, but that is what most Republicans in congress are doing now. > [@Bone](#): > > You’re perfectly able to do that, but then conversations quickly become nonsense since you can just make up whatever you want at that point. Uh, no, that is what you are doing, for example, many of the items you mentioned like the flat earthers \*\*are \*\*extremists, it is just that they do not ping in the radar as they do not have any support to speak of. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-tp-wing-seems-to-be-doubling-down-on-being-even-more-extreme-successful-long-term-strategy/680302/206 "2014-02-11T00:47:26Z")
And as for having plenty of support, the reality is that many of those tea partiers that got elected in 2010 got help from astroturf groups. > **[Climate of Doubt | FRONTLINE](https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/documentary/climate-of-doubt/transcript/?)** > > FRONTLINE explores the massive shift in public opinion on climate change. > [@](#): > > Sen. JOHN KERRY (D), Massachusetts: Well, American politics is being completely defined by huge sums of money. We had really a very broad coalition of people who believed that we ought to move forward and do something. But as the campaign and the fear built up, people began to retreat. > > They spent huge sums of money in a campaign of major disinformation that had an impact, had a profound impact. And it has now made many people in public life very gunshy because they’re afraid of having those amounts of money spent against them. > > JOHN HOCKENBERRY: [voice-over] This is what they fear, what happened in 2010 to six-term South Carolina congressman Bob Inglis, a Republican who once thought he was a safe incumbent in his solidly red state. > > BOB INGLIS (R), Fmr. Congressman, South Carolina: You know, I’m pretty conservative fellow. I got a 93 American Conservative Union rating, 100 percent Christian Coalition, 100 percent National Right to Life, A with the NRA, zero with the ADA, Americans for Democratic Action, a liberal group, and 23 by some mistake with the AFL-CIO. I demand a recount. I wanted a zero. > > JOHN HOCKENBERRY: But Inglis does accept the scientific consensus on global warming and favors legislation to curb the effects of CO2 in the atmosphere. He faced a tea party rebellion in his primary. > > BOB INGLIS: I had a big tent gathering in Spartanberg County, a bunch of Republicans underneath a great big tent. Comes a question to me, “Yes or no, do you believe in human causation on climate change?” Well, I had a bad habit of answering questions, so I said yes. Boo, hiss, comes the crowd. I was blasted out from underneath the tent. And so— I mean, there were a couple of hundred, 300 people there. I mean, it was intense. > > JOHN HOCKENBERRY: He was pounded in commercials and on talk radio. > > BOB INGLIS: It became an oft-repeated theme on talk radio, and that is a major source of information, of course, for Republican primary voters. They were hearing, “Inglis has left the reservation. He’s over there somewhere with Al Gore.” > > So how are things around here? > > STORE OWNER: Slow. The economy’s way off and— > > BOB INGLIS: When you get the financial collapse going, that’s what made it possible for some well-spent money to blow doubt into the science because, you know, the bankers failed us, the federal government is failing us, it’s spending too much money, and these scientists who are funded by that federal government, they’re probably in it, too. And besides, they’re godless liberals. > > JOHN HOCKENBERRY: Inglis was defeated. ---
**Author:** ![Zakalwe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zakalwe/32/270_2.png) [@Zakalwe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zakalwe)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 12:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-tp-wing-seems-to-be-doubling-down-on-being-even-more-extreme-successful-long-term-strategy/680302/207 "2014-02-11T00:49:25Z")
Jesus, what a boring fucking discussion. You folks are letting Bone define the discussion and are therefore losing the war. Stop it. He (she?) is trying to distract you and is, so far, succeeding. Ignore him (her). ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-tp-wing-seems-to-be-doubling-down-on-being-even-more-extreme-successful-long-term-strategy/680302/208 "2014-02-11T00:55:28Z")
> [@Zakalwe](#): > > Jesus, what a boring fucking discussion. You folks are letting Bone define the discussion and are therefore losing the war. Stop it. He (she?) is trying to distract you and is, so far, succeeding. Ignore him (her). What an extremist thing to say. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-tp-wing-seems-to-be-doubling-down-on-being-even-more-extreme-successful-long-term-strategy/680302/209 "2014-02-11T00:57:54Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > I admit I’m having trouble following your message. Grammatically it’s difficult to parse what you are trying to say. This is why I asked for a definition of the term in the way you are using it. Perhaps you could assist by completing the sentence: > > _An extreme position is one that \_\_\_\__ > > For example, I would do so as follows: _An extreme position is one that has less than 5% support in a given population at a given point in time._ [9/11 Trutherism might have got one-in-four support at one time](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mystery_of_the_Urinal_Deuce) but extreme it always was and remains. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-tp-wing-seems-to-be-doubling-down-on-being-even-more-extreme-successful-long-term-strategy/680302/210 "2014-02-11T01:04:01Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > [9/11 Trutherism might have got one-in-four support at one time](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mystery_of_the_Urinal_Deuce) but extreme it always was and remains. Still no definition? What an odd way to discuss something to refuse to define or explain how you’re using a term. Complete now with [unrelated random links](https://www.google.com/search?q=unrelated+random+links&oq=unrelated+random+links&aqs=chrome..69i57.2571j0j4&sourceid=chrome&espv=210&es_sm=93&ie=UTF-8)too. I suppose that’s better than haphazard **bolding**. Why the avoidance? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-tp-wing-seems-to-be-doubling-down-on-being-even-more-extreme-successful-long-term-strategy/680302/211 "2014-02-11T01:21:26Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > What an extremist thing to say. Well, he is right I think, I only post to inform others about how wrong you are. BTW a definition was posted already, so I have to say that what you are doing was seen also coming from climate change deniers. A definition is not enough. And then it is just to the JAQs races. ---
**Author:** ![Enter\_the\_Flagon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b9bd4f/32.png) [@Enter\_the\_Flagon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enter_the_Flagon)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 2:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-tp-wing-seems-to-be-doubling-down-on-being-even-more-extreme-successful-long-term-strategy/680302/212 "2014-02-11T02:17:08Z")
I’d like to suggest that the word “extreme” be dropped in order to be replaced by something less relative and more aptly descriptive. How about “insane”? Does that fit the bill? 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 3:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-tp-wing-seems-to-be-doubling-down-on-being-even-more-extreme-successful-long-term-strategy/680302/213 "2014-02-11T03:00:43Z")
> [@Enter\_the\_Flagon](#): > > I’d like to suggest that the word “extreme” be dropped in order to be replaced by something less relative and more aptly descriptive. > > How about “insane”? Does that fit the bill? 🙂 I prefer “full-blown whackaloon.” ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 3:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-tp-wing-seems-to-be-doubling-down-on-being-even-more-extreme-successful-long-term-strategy/680302/214 "2014-02-11T03:57:07Z")
Can we at least agree that, regardless of poll numbers, a thing can be extremist just because it is preposterous? Both Trutherism and Birtherism meet that standard. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 4:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-tp-wing-seems-to-be-doubling-down-on-being-even-more-extreme-successful-long-term-strategy/680302/215 "2014-02-11T04:15:56Z")
The extremism isn’t in the positions, it’s in the unwillingness to compromise. But they are learning, and the most obstinate are losing their jobs. Notice that a budget got passed and even many of the Tea Partiers are saying to just raise the debt limit. The Tea Party is starting to grow up. ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 4:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-tp-wing-seems-to-be-doubling-down-on-being-even-more-extreme-successful-long-term-strategy/680302/216 "2014-02-11T04:40:47Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > I repeat, **again.** Basically, yeah the Tea Party is financed and backed by these local notables, but their voting base is the salt of the Earth folk, which explains why they rely on a lot of this religious rhetoric. Religious rhetoric in the South screams populist to me. I can understand why certain people would disagree though. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 4:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-tp-wing-seems-to-be-doubling-down-on-being-even-more-extreme-successful-long-term-strategy/680302/217 "2014-02-11T04:47:39Z")
Folks like Gigo contradict themselves. Supposedly the astroturf groups run things, yet when the Tea Party acts up, it’s because of the rubes. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 4:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-tp-wing-seems-to-be-doubling-down-on-being-even-more-extreme-successful-long-term-strategy/680302/218 "2014-02-11T04:55:55Z")
> [@WillFarnaby](#): > > Basically, yeah the Tea Party is financed and backed by these local notables, but their voting base is the salt of the Earth folk, which explains why they rely on a lot of this religious rhetoric. Religious rhetoric in the South screams populist to me. I can understand why certain people would disagree though. > [@adaher](#): > > Folks like Gigo contradict themselves. Supposedly the astroturf groups run things, yet when the Tea Party acts up, it’s because of the rubes. No, it depends on \*\*what \*\*rubes we talk about, I can not help to read that “salt of the earth folk” line and not think about Gene Wilder on Blazing Saddles describing what that bigoted kind of people. As I pointed before many of the elected rubes like Inhof are useful because powerful groups know that they can depend on the anti-scientific nature of those elected rubes to not see anything wrong, so the bottom line of the fossil fuel companies will benefit a lot. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-tp-wing-seems-to-be-doubling-down-on-being-even-more-extreme-successful-long-term-strategy/680302/219 "2014-02-11T04:56:12Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Can we at least agree that, regardless of poll numbers, a thing can be extremist just because it is preposterous? Both Trutherism and Birtherism meet that standard. Of course not. That would mean you would be able to determine what is and what isn’t extreme any way you like. You have still failed to define how you are using the term - unless your definition is that something is extreme if it is preposterous. Extreme positions must be viewed with respect to what is mainstream. A position can be both factually incorrect and held by a majority which would make that position mainstream. The idea that you can label something extreme simply because you don’t like it independent of its relative popularity tortures the English language and is laughable. Newspeak at its finest really. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2014, 4:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-tp-wing-seems-to-be-doubling-down-on-being-even-more-extreme-successful-long-term-strategy/680302/220 "2014-02-11T04:58:02Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > Of course not. That would mean you would be able to determine what is and what isn’t extreme any way you like. You have still failed to define how you are using the term - unless your definition is that something is extreme if it is preposterous. Extreme positions must be viewed with respect to what is mainstream. A position can be both factually incorrect and held by a majority which would make that position mainstream. > > The idea that you can label something extreme simply because you don’t like it independent of its relative popularity tortures the English language and is laughable. Newspeak at its finest really. And that is why I add conditionals like what science says about those extremist positions. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-tp-wing-seems-to-be-doubling-down-on-being-even-more-extreme-successful-long-term-strategy/680302.md?page=10) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-tp-wing-seems-to-be-doubling-down-on-being-even-more-extreme-successful-long-term-strategy/680302.md?page=12)