Don't let the tea party go Perot

The emergence of official tea party candidates would be very welcome news in the Obama White House. All at once, a powerful and energetic counterweight to the Democratic establishment would become a splinter group, destroying the unified opposition it has helped to create. A potential electoral majority on the threshold of victory would become two minority factions almost certain to share in defeat, and a movement inspired to stop the big-government agenda ... Full Story »

Posted by Kelly Garrett - via Dan Kennedy, Google News (Republican Party), Opinion Source, Memeorandum, Donica Mensing (t), Matthew Nadler (t)
Tags Help
Editorial Help
Posted by: Posted by Kelly Garrett - Apr 1, 2010 - 2:15 PM PDT
Content Type: Article
Edit Lock: This story can be edited
Edited by: Glenn LaBauve - Apr 3, 2010 - 7:27 PM PDT

Reviews

Show All | Notes | Comments | Quotes | Links
Dan Kennedy
2.3
by Dan Kennedy - Apr. 5, 2010

This is a blatantly partisan appeal by Dan Quayle to bring tea-partiers into the Republican Party. He asserts several falsehoods as facts, the most blatant of which is that Democrats have presided over "federal control over health care."

See Full Review » (9 answers)
Kelly Garrett
3.2
by Kelly Garrett - Apr. 3, 2010

Dan Quayle expresses concerns for that the Tea Party may split the GOP vote in the upcoming elections. He's not the first person to express this concern, but the argument is sound and the comparison to Perot in 1994 seems reasonable. Criticism of the Obama administrations reaction to the Tea Party movement appears to be an attempt to encourage solidarity among conservatives. Dismissing the more radical and/or violent aspects of the Tea Party movement as just politics as usual ignores some evidence to the contrary.

See Full Review » (15 answers)
Glenn LaBauve
2.2
by Glenn LaBauve - Apr. 3, 2010

Dan Quayle is more than happy to make up his own facts to try to make the teapartiers seem more mainstream and lest extreme. The teaparty movement was funded by Fox, promoted by Fox and attracts the same low information voters as did theReformt party, the American Party the Dixiecrats, the know nothings and so on. They are least dangerous to the Democrats and most dangerous to the Republicans, so I can see why Quayle doesn't want them running candidates since it will hurt any chance he has at the nomination.

See Full Review » (7 answers)
Elizabeth White-Nadler
3.3
by Elizabeth White-Nadler - Apr. 3, 2010

I feel compelled to give a favorable review to this opinion piece, simply because it should be effective in achieving its desired results--to build on the "conventional wisdom" of conservatives (however misguided, misinformed or deceitful that may be) and convince tea-partiers that they should avoid sabotaging their own interests by splitting the Republican party. This represents precisely the sort of measured, "voice of experience" the Republican party needs to promote right now and pandering to tea partiers makes perfect sense. Quayle deserves credit for this piece.

Please excuse me, I'm feeling a little queasy....

See Full Review » (12 answers)

Comments on this story Help (BETA)

NT Rating | My Rating

Ratings

2.7

Average
from 4 reviews (60% confidence)
Quality
2.6
Facts
2.0
Fairness
2.0
Information
2.2
Insight
2.4
Style
3.0
Balance
1.0
Context
3.0
Depth
3.0
Expertise
2.7
Originality
2.3
Relevance
4.0
Responsibility
2.0
Popularity
3.3
Recommendation
2.2
Credibility
4.2
# Reviews
2.0
# Views
5.0
# Likes
1.0
# Emails
1.0
More
How our ratings work »
(See these related stories.)

Links Help

No links yet. Please review this story to add some!