# Public support for the Tea Party: 29% for, 54% against **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 18, 2010, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/public-support-for-the-tea-party-29-for-54-against/557555 "2010-10-18T15:10:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/public-support-for-the-tea-party-29-for-54-against/557555/1 "2010-10-18T15:10:17Z")
[According to a CBS News poll in August.](http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/08/26/nearly-30-percent-support-tea-party-poll-finds/) > [@](#): > > Nearly three in 10 Americans say they are supporters of the Tea Party, according to a new survey, while more than half the respondents say they hold negative opinions of the conservative grassroots movement. > > A CBS News Poll released Thursday found 29 percent of those asked considered themselves Tea Party supporters and 54 percent did not. Fully 17 percent had no opinion either way. > > The results are similar to last month’s but show more support for the Tea Party than in April of this year, CBS said. > > Not surprisingly, a majority – 56 percent – of Tea Party supporters identified as conservative. Of those, 44 percent are Republicans, while 43 percent said they are independents. Not many at all, only 13 percent, called themselves Democrats. [More on the poll.](http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20014854-503544.html) Not so surprising. Consider [the closest thing the TP movement has to a stated agenda:](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_party_movement#Tea_Party_agenda_.22Contract_from_America.22) > [@](#): > > The Contract lists 10 agenda items that it encourages congressional candidates to follow:[69][70] > > 1.Identify constitutionality of every new law: Require each bill to identify the specific provision of the U.S. Constitution that gives Congress the power to do what the bill does. (82.03%) > 2.Reject emissions trading: Stop the “cap and trade” administrative approach used to control carbon dioxide emissions by providing economic incentives for achieving reductions in the emissions of carbon dioxide. (72.20%) > 3.Demand a balanced federal budget: Begin the Constitutional amendment process to require a balanced budget with a two-thirds majority needed for any tax modification. (69.69%) > 4.Simplify the tax system: Adopt a simple and fair single-rate tax system by scrapping the Internal Revenue Code and replacing it with one that is no longer than 4,543 words – the length of the original Constitution. (64.9%) > 5.Audit federal government agencies for constitutionality: Create a Blue Ribbon taskforce that engages in an audit of federal agencies and programs, assessing their Constitutionality, and identifying duplication, waste, ineffectiveness, and agencies and programs better left for the states or local authorities. (63.37%) > 6.Limit annual growth in federal spending: Impose a statutory cap limiting the annual growth in total federal spending to the sum of the inflation rate plus the percentage of population growth. (56.57%) > 7.Repeal the health care legislation passed on March 23, 2010: Defund, repeal and replace the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. (56.39%) > 8.Pass an ‘All-of-the-Above’ Energy Policy: Authorize the exploration of additional energy reserves to reduce American dependence on foreign energy sources and reduce regulatory barriers to all other forms of energy creation. (55.5%) > 9.Reduce Earmarks: Place a moratorium on all earmarks until the budget is balanced, and then require a 2/3 majority to pass any earmark. (55.47%) > 10.Reduce Taxes: Permanently repeal all recent tax increases, and extend current temporary reductions in income tax, capital gains tax and estate taxes, currently scheduled to end in 2011. (53.38%) It’s not hard to see how this is something 29% of Americans could get behind and 54% would dismiss as whackaloonery. So, what does this mean about the Tea Party’s potential? I would say it implies: (1) A third-party bid would have some success, but not much more than the Reform Party had (at least the TP isn’t handicapped by being essentially a presidential-campaign vehicle for one charismatic/megalomaniac leader). (2) Achievement of the movement’s real goal, a Tea Party takeover of the GOP, would electorally marginalize the GOP for years to come. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/public-support-for-the-tea-party-29-for-54-against/557555/2 "2010-10-18T15:23:52Z")
Yeah, the teabaggers are nothing new, they’re just the same wingnut base that’s always been there in the GOP, only now a lot of them are starting to call themselves “independents” because they’re staring to finally figure out that the Republicans always pander to them during elections, but then ignore them when they get in. This is resulting in the baggers doing well in Repblican primaries, andthey will probably win in conservative states, but at a national level the teabagger movement really has no shot. It doesn’t really have a vision, an ideology or a leader todrive it. It’s basically just rooted in anger, and the anger itself isn’t even coherent or focused, it’s a mishmash of mis-aimed economic resentments, religious fanaticism, ignorant paranoias whipped up by the conservative media complex and, without a doubt, no small supply of racism and xenophobia. Political movements can thrive on hatred if everybody agrees on who to hate and focuses on it, but the teabaggers aren’t really in a position to isolate and focus their hatred and anger on a nationally viable scapegoat. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/public-support-for-the-tea-party-29-for-54-against/557555/3 "2010-10-18T15:28:29Z")
I think a third party could work, but it would need a compelling leader – a voice and a face, and it would need some kind of positive message or vision. Inarticulate, scattershot rage is not going to work. Somebody needs to offer at least the pretense of a solution – some kind of mythology or image that people can get behind. Racial purity worked for Hitler, but that’s going to only have some limited, regional success for the teabaggers. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/public-support-for-the-tea-party-29-for-54-against/557555/4 "2010-10-18T16:14:13Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > I think a third party could work, but it would need a compelling leader – a voice and a face, and it would need some kind of positive message or vision. Somehow I doubt Sarah Palin or Newt Gingrich or Rand Paul is up to that role. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/public-support-for-the-tea-party-29-for-54-against/557555/5 "2010-10-18T16:57:26Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > It’s not hard to see how this is something 29% of Americans could get behind and 54% would dismiss as whackaloonery. The poll doesn’t say that. > [@](#): > > So, what does this mean about the Tea Party’s potential? I would say it implies: (1) A third-party bid would have some success, but not much more than the Reform Party had (at least the TP isn’t handicapped by being essentially a presidential-campaign vehicle for one charismatic/megalomaniac leader). (2) Achievement of the movement’s real goal, a Tea Party takeover of the GOP, would electorally marginalize the GOP for years to come. Note that the poll indicates support for the TP is up since the last poll they did in the spring. Also, note that more people support the TP than self identify as “liberal”. So, whatever you can say about the TP and it’s policies, the same or more can be said about the liberal block of the Democratic Party. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/public-support-for-the-tea-party-29-for-54-against/557555/6 "2010-10-18T16:58:19Z")
There isn’t any liberal block of the Democratic Party. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/public-support-for-the-tea-party-29-for-54-against/557555/7 "2010-10-18T17:06:21Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > There isn’t any liberal block of the Democratic Party. Actually, there is, but it’s more [neoliberal](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberal) than [progressive.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=496350) But the important thing is that American progressives, at present, are **not** making a bid to take over the Democrats, nor to run a third party. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/public-support-for-the-tea-party-29-for-54-against/557555/8 "2010-10-18T17:07:29Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Note that the poll indicates support for the TP is up since the last poll they did in the spring. True. So what? Do you expect it to go any higher? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/public-support-for-the-tea-party-29-for-54-against/557555/9 "2010-10-18T17:11:06Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > True. So what? Do you expect it to go any higher? Well, you could say “so what” about the whole thing. But obviously you thought it was important enough to start a thread about. Your OP focused on the negative aspects of the poll, for obvious reasons. I’m just trying to make sure the full picture is painted. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/public-support-for-the-tea-party-29-for-54-against/557555/10 "2010-10-18T17:12:36Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Also, note that more people support the TP than self identify as “liberal”. So, whatever you can say about the TP and it’s policies, the same or more can be said about the liberal block of the Democratic Party. [This particular poll](http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20014854-503544.html) has no figures on respondents who self-ID as “liberal.” On that question, a good recent source is the Center for American Progress’ [“State of American Political Ideology, 2009”](http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/03/political_ideology.html) study. > [@](#): > > For years, traditional public opinion polling has broken down ideology into three distinct groupings: liberal, moderate, and conservative. Based on this categorization, there has been remarkable stability in ideological orientation, with roughly one-fifth of Americans identifying themselves as “liberal” and about four in 10 classifying themselves as “moderate” > or ”conservative,” respectively, according to Gallup polling from 1992 to 2008. > > In this study, however, the electorate is broken down using a more expansive five-point scale of political ideology that reflects the variety of approaches people ascribe to today. Employing this more calibrated measure, 34 percent of the country identifies as “conservative,” 29 percent as “moderate,” 15 percent as “liberal,” 16 percent as “progressive,” and 2 percent as “libertarian.” After moderates are asked which approach they lean toward, the overall ideological breakdown of the country divides into fairly neat left and right groupings, with 47 percent of Americans identifying as progressive or liberal and 48 percent as conservative or libertarian. The rest are unsure or scattered among moderate and other approaches. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 5:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/public-support-for-the-tea-party-29-for-54-against/557555/11 "2010-10-18T17:14:27Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Well, you could say “so what” about the whole thing. But obviously you thought it was important enough to start a thread about. Your OP focused on the negative aspects of the poll, for obvious reasons. I’m just trying to make sure the full picture is painted. Well, my thinking is that support for the TP movement as such is maxed out, because it has already reached nearly the full figure for self-ID’d “conservatives” as distinct from “moderates” (see above), and it has no appeal for the moderates. Do you have a different model? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/public-support-for-the-tea-party-29-for-54-against/557555/12 "2010-10-18T17:18:04Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > [This particular poll](http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20014854-503544.html) has no figures on respondents who self-ID as “liberal.” On that question, a good recent source is the Center for American Progress’ [“State of American Political Ideology, 2009”](http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/03/political_ideology.html) study. You can slice and dice it to get any answer you want by just asking the right questions. The poll we’re comparing things to is a straight yes or no for support for the TP. In that case, the best comparison is a straight yes or no if you’re liberal. If you want to slice and dice things more finely., then slice and dice the TP support more finely, too. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/public-support-for-the-tea-party-29-for-54-against/557555/13 "2010-10-18T17:19:57Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Well, my thinking is that support for the TP movement as such is maxed out, because it has already reached nearly the full figure for self-ID’d “conservatives” as distinct from “moderates” (see above), and it has no appeal for the moderates. Do you have a different model? Frankly, I think the TP will be history in a few years. They will go the way of Perot. I’m not too concerned with whether or not support will grow over time. They’ll have their impact on an election cycle or two, show themselves to be ineffective at doing anything, and interest will fade. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2010, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/public-support-for-the-tea-party-29-for-54-against/557555/14 "2010-10-18T17:22:33Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > If you want to slice and dice things more finely., then slice and dice the TP support more finely, too. That is problematic. It is unclear, still, whether the TP is primarily a religious-conservative movement or a libertarian movement or some strange new alliance of those highly incompatible traditions. The “Contract from America,” quoted in the OP, is strictly economic-libertarian, but [polls show social-conservatives predominate in the movement.](http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/10/05/tea-party-is-much-like-the-religious-right-only-moreso-surve/) ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/public-support-for-the-tea-party-29-for-54-against/557555/15 "2010-10-20T14:27:25Z")
So – does anyone think that 29% figure for TP supporters can get any bigger? Or have they reached total market saturation in their potential base? ---
**Author:** ![MsWhatsit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/eb8c5e/32.png) [@MsWhatsit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MsWhatsit)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 2:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/public-support-for-the-tea-party-29-for-54-against/557555/16 "2010-10-20T14:35:17Z")
I think 29% is about the max. I am basing this on the fact that 27% is the [crazification factor](http://kfmonkey.blogspot.com/2005/10/lunch-discussions-145-crazification.html). ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 2:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/public-support-for-the-tea-party-29-for-54-against/557555/17 "2010-10-20T14:37:08Z")
I’m surprised it is as high as 29% considering that the tea party is just republicans who are too radical and conservative for the official republican party. I think they’ve reached saturation. I think like Palin, they come out strong but once the public see what they stand for they will turn on them. At first Palin was liked by almost everyone. As people found out how uninformed, radical, ideological and unqualified she is everyone except the tea party base turned on her. If they keep putting up candidates who want to force women to give birth to the children of rapists, abolish SS and medicare, promote armed insurection or put up candidates like O’Donnell who talk about the constitution but don’t know what the first amendment is, yes their ratings will go down rather than up. That 29% will probably be 22% in a year. > **[Tea Party Support Slips](https://www.newser.com/story/91815/tea-party-support-slips.html)** > > Poll shows young voters, white Southerners less happy \*\* (Newser) – A new poll from the Washington Post and ABC shows that support for the tea party movement appears to be slipping, reports the Right Now blog: ``` * The percentage who hold an unfavorable view of the movement rose from 39% in March to 50%. * The decline is particularly sharp among 18- to 29-year-olds, whose views shifted from a positive 43%-38% to a negative 27%-60%. * 45% of white Southerners have an unfavorable view, up from 30%. ``` \*\* So it isn’t a national movement. More of a fringe movement that only appeals to the base of the GOP. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/public-support-for-the-tea-party-29-for-54-against/557555/18 "2010-10-20T15:32:08Z")
> [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > I’m surprised it is as high as 29% considering that the tea party is just republicans who are too radical and conservative for the official republican party. That’s about the same as Sarah Palin’s approval rating, which makes sense. Well, it doesn’t make sense in an absolute sense, but it makes sense that the two numbers would be close. 🙂 > [@](#): > > If they keep putting up candidates who want to force women to give birth to the children of rapists, abolish SS and medicare, promote armed insurection or put up candidates like O’Donnell who talk about the constitution but don’t know what the first amendment is, yes their ratings will go down rather than up. That 29% will probably be 22% in a year. As much as I hate to defend CD, she was right about the 1st amendment-- at least the part about SoCaS. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/public-support-for-the-tea-party-29-for-54-against/557555/19 "2010-10-20T15:35:58Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > As much as I hate to defend CD, she was right about the 1st amendment-- at least the part about SoCaS. There has been a RW meme circulating for years now that the 1st Amendment does **not** separate church from state, or that the amendment is intended only to protect church from state and not the reverse, or something like that. See [here.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States#Interpretive_controversies) O’Donnell appears to have imbibed that intellectually dishonest meme without realizing that it refers to construction of an actual part of the Constitution. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2010, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/public-support-for-the-tea-party-29-for-54-against/557555/20 "2010-10-20T16:27:34Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > There has been a RW meme circulating for years now that the 1st Amendment does **not** separate church from state, or that the amendment is intended only to protect church from state and not the reverse, or something like that. See [here.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States#Interpretive_controversies) O’Donnell appears to have imbibed that intellectually dishonest meme without realizing that it refers to construction of an actual part of the Constitution. We don’t have SoCaS. Not in theory or in practice. I wish we did, but we don’t. It was a nice idea that TJ had back in the day, but we never really put it into practice. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/public-support-for-the-tea-party-29-for-54-against/557555.md?page=2)