search
top

Lots of Discussion About Palin & the Tea Party Movement

Instapundit hosts a bit of speculation about the future of Sarah Palin, with some folks hoping she’s going to start an insurgent third party using the Tea Party movement as a base.  I think that’s a lot of wishful thinking.  This country hasn’t had a third party since the mid 19th century, and the issue that drove it was slavery.  No issue out there today so divides the country like the issue of slavery did in the 1850s.  If Sarah Palin tries to start a third party, at best it will divide the GOP for long enough to absolutely ensure we have to live with Hope and Change for the next 7 1/2 years.  No thanks.

If she is planning anything, and I’m not sure she is, I think she really may be done with politics, she’ll drive her agenda from within the Republican Party.  Reform in the Republican Party is really the only way forward.  If she’s looking to take a leadership role in doing that, I’ll be thrilled.  But I suspect she really might just be done with politics, and taking a public role.

UPDATE: SayUncle: “I’m not sure if she’s done with politics but I’d say politics ain’t done with her.”

12 Responses to “Lots of Discussion About Palin & the Tea Party Movement”

  1. RAH says:

    The Tea Party movement b=needs to creat anactually political party with a platform so a politician can decide to join or not. Of course a strong personality politician can do that like Teddy Roosevelt, but Palin does not seem to that PO at the GOp to create a new party.

    In other words the Tea Party has to prove itself fist as a legitimate party.

  2. Chris says:

    If it means 7 more years (which it very well could be anyway with help from the far left media), isn’t it worth it to get the party back on track? Or to split into a viable party we are all happy to stand behind again?

    The problem, as you stated, does lie with getting the right politicians to start it and a clear cut issue to cleave the party in twain.

  3. You don’t think there’s an issue that divides the country like slavery did in the 1850s? Hint: 75% of Americans want restrictions on abortion; 23% do not. And the arguments advanced by both sides are astonishingly similar to those advanced in the 1850s.

  4. teqjack says:

    Gov. Palin thought “my family agreed with stepping down” was sufficient “explanation.” Obviously not.

    But of the various theories, I lean toward two. Health, her own or someone in the immediate family. And money/time.

    Those frivolous “ethics” lawsuits were still coming. And even as the State spent a couple of million disposing of them, the Governor is on the hook for about 500k herself, which may or may not be partially charged off to her fundraisers.

  5. Sebastian says:

    I don’t think people are willing to kill each other in large numbers over Abortion. You might have a tiny minority who are willing, but even in the most pro-life states, I don’t see a movement for secession in order to escape the federal abortion regime.

    Don’t get me wrong, I do think abortion is very divisive, but not like slavery was.

  6. mariner says:

    Abortion divides the country, but I don’t think it drives an election. Popular dissatisfaction with corrupt elitists bankrupting the rest of us? That COULD drive an election.

    Palin could never win as a Republican, because Democrats who might otherwise be receptive to a lower-tax, less-government, anti-corruption message would be repelled by the “R”. OTOH as a third-party candidate she might get those votes, along with those of PUMAs and conservatives tired of life under the Republican bus.

    Not to mention she’d have the best 2A position of any candidate in recent history. If you’ll work for Democrats who support the Second Amendment why not Palin?

  7. I don’t think people are willing to kill each other in large numbers over Abortion.

    And they weren’t willing to do so over slavery in 1850. But slavery became something a proxy for larger sectional differences and disputes.

  8. Sebastian says:

    Well, I mean, we don’t have anything like Bleeding Kansas, with even abortion as a proxy. I’m skeptical even with its use to create a third party, but that’s clouded by the fact that I live in an area with a lot of Catholics, who will tell you they are pro-life, but will consistently vote Democrat because of union loyalties, even if that means voting for a pro-choice candidate.

  9. Arnie says:

    The issue will be financial liberty, economics. It always is. Money and power are always lurking among the motives of the bellicose. Other issues may be trumpetted to stir up passion among the otherwise disinterested, but financial power/financial freedom are the big guns.

  10. Andy says:

    “Reform in the Republican Party is really the only way forward.”

    No. Sorry. I’m through beating my head against that wall. I’d prefer the Libertarian circus to that, at least you know what you’re getting into.

  11. Sebastian says:

    What are you doing other than beating your head against the wall to reform it? Typically that’s not an effective tactic for promoting change from within an organization.

  12. N.U.G.U.N. says:

    Let’s be honest….the Republicans have almost NOTHING to offer.

    We’re getting 7 1/2 yrs of “O”…

    Frankly, I am not sure the Republican Party can be reformed. It’s too much about politics and being elected.

    I think it needs to split. Republicans and a more Libertarian party. I think Tea Party would be the best chance at doing so.

    Do I think we’d have a 3 party system? Nope…I think it’d work back down to two given time. But I think it’d be the Republican party that’s going to whither.

    Truthfully, I think the game has changed and the Republicans don’t get it. The mainstream media has created a new front. It began with GWB who the media could say no good thing about. It carried over and was intensified with Governor Palin and Joe the Plumber.

    It is why I believe the mainstream media to be enemies of the people. I believe the likes of NY Times, CNN, MSNBC should be forced to register as PAC organizations. As I believe they willfully and deliberately campaign for specific candidates, shape information released, and flat out lie.

    And until conservatives and libertarians realize the game that is at hand. Than I think the odds are slim.

    Furthermore, when the Republican Party should have been embracing the libertarian forces at work in the last election and since. They have instead viewed them as opposition. Rather, desiring to be more akin to the Democrat Party.

top