American Prospect‘s Wishful Thinking? ‘The Tea Party Movement Is Over’

by Frances Martel | 1:55 pm, February 26th, 2010

» 6 comments

Pack up the picket signs and stop what you’re brewing: the American Prospect has officially declared the Tea Party Movement dead. Correspondent Mark Schmitt has released a shocking piece highlighting the short half-life of right-wing populists movements in America that is sure to put many on the left at ease knowing that the Tea Parties will be done before they know it.
Writes Schmitt:

The most reliable lesson of recent American politics is that movements dependent on that level of heat eventually — or, actually, quite quickly — burn themselves out. The tea-party movement cannot be sustained at the level of anger that’s currently fueling it. It may leave a permanent impact on the Republican Party, giving it some new faces and new language, and most important, allowing the party to divorce itself from the legacy of that squishy moderate, George W. Bush. But regardless of the economic times or the political mood, hot populism of both the left and right varieties has never had a very long run.

Schmitt goes on the explain that, just like the Contract with America movement of 1994 and Cold War-era McCarthyism, so too the Tea Parties will fall out of style. In other words, because similar movements have ended, the Tea Party movement not only will end, but is already in its dying phases. This sort of alternative reality construction isn’t new to liberals (it spawned the television series The West Wing when they could no longer bear the reality of the Clinton era ending), but is horribly misguiding for their cause. The Tea Party movement, for better or worse, is stronger than ever, and, like all movements, of course it will eventually wane. Yet giving as evidence the constant presence of a similar right wing populist movement in America undermines the entire point. Politics is an ebb and flow of power; of course the right has given in on occassion, but so too has the left. It is just as easy to claim that left-wing movements are not sustainable based on the one-term presidency of Jimmy Carter and the monumental congressional triumph that followed for Republicans after Bill Clinton‘s election.

In fact, the right has been more consistent in remaining, if not in power, at least in the spotlight throughout the latter half of the 20th century. Lyndon Johnson’s presidency was followed by Richard Nixon‘s landslide victory and, even after Watergate, the right was able to rebound with a decade of Reagan revolution. The success of Bill Clinton is curbed by the success of Newt Gingrich, and even after eight years of George W. Bush, America has held on to its conservative roots.

While the left accuses radical right-wing publications (often correctly) of hyperbole and fear-mongering, here it has fallen prey to its own wishful thinking. If the Tea Party movement fails, it will be because it falls into incompetent, doodled-on hands– it has not yet reached that point. Try again next time, Prospect.

American Prospect, barack obama, Contract with America, Democrats, George W. Bush, Jimmy Carter, LBJ, newt gingrich, Republicans, Richard Nixon, Sarah Palin, tea parties, Tea Party Movement

http://www.sailrabbits.com Magister

I’ve always tried to be rather judicious with purely political talk in this space, but with that caveat in place, there’s often movements on all sides that push at the political spectrum. I often liken the Tea Party’s goals as being somewhat akin to that of Ross Perot… there was John Anderson and his push from the “center” in 1980; Ralph Nader and the Greens helped shove the Dems toward the left in the aftermath of 2000.

IOW: There’s always been short-lived populist movements. They aren’t limited to any single philosophy and they generally end-up being absorbed by one or the other of the major political parties.
http://www.sailrabbits.com Magister

PS) The hostage crisis didn’t do Carter any favors and it was hard for him to campaign against Reagan’s optimism, but the Carter’s re-election bid was severely damaged by Ted Kennedy’s primary challenge and the fact that Kennedy didn’t concede until the convention.

If anything, I’d characterize Kennedy’s campaign as “the left” with Carter (and Anderson) in the “the center”.
venerability

We’re preparing a story on the Tea Party – which we don’t like! – and will publish it shortly. In the meantime, your Readers might consider joining our new Centrists Group at Linked In and might like to look at our new blog for and about Centrists, The Rest of U.S.

Extremists have become so loud, they’re deafening. And because they shout in perfect sound bites, the media birddog their every rant, however irresponsible or outrageous.

But we believe the political tide’s about to turn with a vengeance. No matter their party affiliation or lack thereof, Americans are disgusted with those who harass to harass, obstruct to obstruct, tear down to tear down. Compromise, consensus, bridge-building, and respect for differing viewpoints have been the hallmarks of American life as long as there’s been an America. We’re certain they will be again.

Please read: The Rest of U.S. – Who We Are and What We Stand For

http://newcentristera.wordpress.com/2010/01/06/the-rest-of-u-s-who-we-are-and-what-we-stand-for/

If you like it, please circulate to your family, friends, and colleagues. Or perhaps to your favorite extremist!

(Dr. Ellen Brandt is founder of the Centrists Group at Linked In and the BoomerNetwork, IvyLeague, and Centrists Twibes at Twitter)
J Baustian

Spontaneous political movements die off when they try to organize into something permanent. The recent conference was the clearest possible sign that the tea party movement was dead.

It started at a moment in time when elected politicians seemed willing to give President Obama a honeymoon, no matter how much damage he was doing to the country. Eventually the opposition politicians found their voices. It’s only natural that politicians want to tap the angry enthusiasm; whether they can depends on how genuine they are. For example, John McCain may lose his reelection bid because of tea-party activism, and maybe most incumbents; while challengers, especially new-comers to politics, have opportunities which they would not have in a normal election cycle.
GeraldFnord

I’m afraid the American Prospect makes the mistake of thinking too highly of our fellow-citizens…not that I blame the latter, they’ve been raised on images for the past fifty years, which inevitably appeals more to the Reptile Brain than any reasoning faculty of our minds.

In any event, they’re optimists—a mistake for anyone bothering to pay attention to reality.

Mr or Ms Baustian: the opposition to Obama did not start at a time when all elected politicians were giving Mr Obama an honeymoon whilst he (according to you) was hurting the country; his opponents were merely not yet competent at opposition to him, perhaps still gob-smacked by their thundering loss to someeone they believed an empty suit. The opposition to the Obama presidency was, in fact, initated the moment a member of one of Sarah Palin’s audience shouted ‘Lynch him!,’ and she did excoriate him out therefor, as would have been fitting, proper, and decent..
GeraldFnord

Slip! ‘did excoriate him’ –> ‘did not excoriate him’; editing mistake in the course of changing more inflammatory language.