To: nathanbedford
Thanks for pointing this out, because too many people are attempting to call this a “tea party victory” when in fact it was the victory of one man and his ideas. His views may align with those of the tea party, but coincidence does not equal causation.
This doesn’t prove the “tea party” (whichever or however you define that term) is yet an effective element in influencing election outcomes (as Lindsay Grahams victory proves). Mr. Brat was a good strong candidate who pulled off an incredible upset by making his case with the voters who turned out today. “The Tea Party” should study all the factors surrounding tonight’s victory and learn from this example instead of rushing to take credit for an outcome it had little to do with.
7 posted on
06/10/2014 9:32:24 PM PDT by
bigbob
(The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly. Abraham Lincoln)
To: bigbob; nathanbedford
This doesnt prove the tea party (whichever or however you define that term) is yet an effective element in influencing election outcomes (as Lindsay Grahams victory proves). Mr. Brat was a good strong candidate who pulled off an incredible upset by making his case with the voters who turned out today. The Tea Party should study all the factors surrounding tonights victory and learn from this example instead of rushing to take credit for an outcome it had little to do with.
Sorry, your attempt at trying to equate a national Tea-Party endorsement and support as the litmus test of whether or not a win is a tea-party win is lame and weak.
Brat ran on the tea-party policy platform and was voted into office by Tea-Party conservatives.
That, and that alone makes his win a Tea-Party win!
22 posted on
06/10/2014 9:57:24 PM PDT by
SoConPubbie
(Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson