From the Huffington Post:
WASHINGTON – A top goal of the nation’s most influential national Tea Party group is to stop Mitt Romney from winning the Republican nomination for president.
Interviews with top officials at FreedomWorks, a Washington-based organizing hub for Tea Party activists around the country, revealed that much of their thinking about the 2012 election revolves around derailing the former Massachusetts governor.
“Romney has a record and we don’t really like it that much,” said Adam Brandon, the group’s communications director
So if Romney is the front runner, then who does the Tea Party want to put in there? Does Palin’s hour long video have anything to do with this plan?
If the Republicans want to hold on to their party, it seems to me that they need to tell the Tea Party who runs things.
I am just not sure I understand all this. Does someone want to enlighten us all?
HuffPost continues but the issues still seem clouded.
FreedomWorks is led by former House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-Texas) and Matt Kibbe, an economist and former Capitol Hill aide. More than 30 employees, as well as a fresh class of several interns, work out of spacious seventh floor offices near the U.S. Capitol. The group knows they cannot impose their will on the fiercely independent conservative organizers fueling the Tea Party. But they say the activist base is just as anti-Romney as they are.
Kibbe said in an interview that FreedomWorks has no plans at the moment to endorse an opponent of Romney’s in the primary. But others in the organization made clear they will devote considerable resources toward helping whoever emerges as the most viable Republican in the primary other than the putative front runner.
Brendan Steinhauser, who travels around the country meeting with activists as FreedomWorks’ top liaison to the grassroots, said most people he talks to are “definitely trying to stop Romney.”
So is Dick Army a king makers? It seems that when we look at the list of Tea Party candidates, there aren’t really very many winners. Are these candidates unelectable? It would seem so. Will the Tea Party denounce Freedom Works? Will the Republicans denounce the Tea Party?
If we look at the current and previous Democrat winner of Presidential elections, you wouldn’t have seen a winner 18 months out either. Clinton and Obama were both dark horses.
Why should the Tea Party or the GOP denounce either? This is called primary politics. Romney is flawed with his record in Massachusetts. He will not get the conservative support, thus, Freedom Works is working against him.
No one “runs things” in a party. Its all about influence. And the “old guard” are upset at the new comers. They are losing influence to the Tea Party and the TP is forcing them out of their comfort zone. The TP actually expects the GOP to live up to their speeches and platforms. The last time one of the party organizations tried to pick and choose winners in a primary, it lost donors and the TP candidates got millions directly. GOP PAC money, in some cases, has yet to recover since donors are giving directly to candidates now. The rank and file don’t trust the “leadership” to support those candidates popular with the grassroots.
So, Dick Armey is not a “kingmaker.” He’s just doing what he said he would with Freedom Works. He’s supporting conservative candidates, not necessarily the GOP front runner.
Cain 2012!!!
@Cargo
You sure about that?
Thanks for your input. I wanted to hear the local ‘read’ on all this.
“Will the Tea Party denounce FreedomWorks?” What Tea Party would that be? Can anyone show me an organizational chart and leadership roster of an organized national Tea Party with the standing, primacy, and clout to undertake this sort of denunciation?
Ward had a key sentence in his article which I suggest should be reworded as follows: “The group knows they cannot impose their will on the fiercely independent conservative VOTERS fueling the Tea Party SPIRIT.”
Yes, there are certain individuals who have organized their own groups under the Tea Party rubric. There are even those who have run for office as a self-proclaimed “Tea Party candidate.” But, as far as I can see, they are not branches or parts of some established national organization, even though they may try to make it look that way by adopting the label. Some of them do not understand that a lot of “Tea Party” people like myself are in rebellion against the old style politics and the old style governance. We are no longer inclined to play the role of “doggies” in a typical political roundup. Unfortunately, some of these self-proclaimed Tea Party leaders do not understand this and appear to be going back to the old style politics. I do not think that this will work.
I cannot speak for others beyond my own family of “Tea Party” people; but our intention is not to form a political bloc. It is, rather, to engage all politicians in a debate over national issues and try to persuade them that our views are worthy of consideration and adoption. It is also to remind them that there are a lot of voters out there with similar views and a lot of votes to be had if a politician plays square with us both on the campaign trail and in office. Their choice. Us or the other guys.
As for the Republicans denouncing the Tea Party? Well, there is not really a Tea Party to denounce. If the Republican “establishment” is ever foolish enough to try something like that, they would not be denouncing an established political entity but “fiercely independent” conservatives like myself. They DO NOT want to do that. Alienation of such a likely constituency would be utter folly. That in and of itself could be an impetus for the actual establishment of a third party — something which is not in the current cards by a long shot.
FreedomWorks? They are an “idea broker” with a conservative viewpoint, operating like similar brokers all across the political spectrum. I have no problem with that. I will listen. I may or may not buy into some or all of it. I would, however, caution about getting too deeply into the advocacy of one potential nominee over another. That smacks too much of the old style politics for someone like myself. I support their right in the great American tradition to lobby me in the field of ideas; but they had better realize that, when it comes to MY application of MY views to a particular candidate, you are entering MY personal territory. I admit no intruders into that territory. Give me your views on the issues to consider, and I will make the final choice as to where to place my support. No “doggies” in this “Tea Party” family.
@Wolverine, and that’s my problem with the Tea Party. There is no one place the buck stops. That makes me uncomfortable because of accountability. Every organization should have a spot or person where the responsibility rests. Right now, the Tea Party concept is like a whirling dervish. They can always point to the other guy.
If there isn’t a tea party to renounce, then it doesn’t exist.
@Moon-howler
Yeah, I’m sure of it….kinda. Depends upon what you mean by “run” things. If you mean, vetting a candidate or putting them on the ballot…..or deciding where money goes…yeah, there are people that run things. That’s why there’s a movement to put conservatives into place as party committee men.
But if you mean by an overall leader…well, how much actual power does a party leader have over grassroots members. Other than demanding a closed system….none. They have to beg for money; beg for votes; beg candidates to follow whatever party line there is.
Let’s see…how’s that working out for them?
It appears that the Tea Party hasn’t the guts to start a party independent of the Republican party. It’s much easier to sponge off an in-place establishment and its money.
Oh, come now, Censored. Sponged? Tea Party money flowed into the campaigns of conservative Republicans, even into the campaigns of the not-so-conservative like Scott Brown. That money was followed by votes in November 2010. Makes sense. You never divide your forces in the face of the enemy when collaboration holds out the promise of victory.