Democrats don’t like to think about Republicans if they can help it. But for those on the left now contemplating their own “progressive tea party” movement, they’d do well to contemplate one woman in particular: Christine O’Donnell.
In 2010 Republicans had an unusual opportunity to win the deep-blue Delaware Senate seat once held by Joe Biden. The vessel: GOP Rep. Mike Castle, a popular former governor and the front-runner. Enter Ms. O’Donnell. Fueled by tea-party enthusiasm and money, she trashed Mr. Castle as a liberal and beat him in the primary. After a general election that devolved into debates over gay service members, religion, creationism (and even witchcraft), Democrat Chris Coons blew out Ms. O’Donnell by 17 points.
The conservative
…show more content…
It’s doomed at every level—because it is entirely premised on the O’Donnell model.
More By Kimberley Strassel
Consider the recent rallying cry of progressive star Markos Moulitsas. “The Tea Party didn’t really become a force until it started ousting Republicans it didn’t feel represented them,” he told the New York Times. “Democrats either need to feed, nurture and aggressively champion the resistance, or they need to get out of the way in favor of someone who will.”
Message: Get with our agenda, or be purged. The progressives showing up for protests and demanding Supreme Court filibusters are determined to move their party aggressively to the left. Any Democrat who does not sign up for their policies and their resistance will face a primary.
Perhaps we can forgive Mr. Moulitsas—and much of East and West Coast America—for thinking this is what happened on the right. Democrats never bothered to understand the right’s tea-party movement, and it
…show more content…
Activists in the main weren’t demanding the Republican Party become something new, or ultra-right-wing. They were demanding the party—beset at that time by logrolling, earmarks and corruption—simply hold true to its stated and longtime principles of free markets and limited government. It was a quest for a better-quality product, not a different one altogether.
That’s evidenced by where tea-party activists accomplished most of their successes. A few high-profile Senate missteps aside, activists targeted much of their fire on reliably conservative or gettable House districts, inhabited by lazy incumbents who cared mostly about staying in office. They focused on recruitment, and their new crop of reformers resulted in 2010 in one of the greatest incumbent turnovers in congressional history. Over the years, they have only gotten better at fielding and supporting winning candidates (see the 2014 Republican Senate takeover).
The Democrats’ problem is that all their reliably liberal states and districts are already occupied with good liberals, who take orders. Those members will joyfully boycott and filibuster and protest and obstruct. There will be no need for
Many people believe that the Boston Tea Party arose just because of the Tea Act that came into play in 1773, but in-fact, this major statement arose from two issues surrounding the British Empire in 1765. The first of the issues was that the British East India Company was at risk of going under and the Parliament was finding ways to bring it back. The second issue was that there was a continuing dispute about the extent of the Parliament’s authority. Many colonists believe that the Parliament went overboard with their power and the people were concerned about the future. Attempting to resolve these two major issues, the North Ministry only worsened the problem and produced a showdown that would eventually result in revolution.
George Hewes’ account of the Boston Tea party is considered a firsthand account of a historically significant event. The Boston Tea party took place the night of December 16, 1773 on three ships anchored in Boston Harbor. Hewes recounts the events leading up to the Boston Tea Party, the actual attack on the ships and its aftermath. He provides descriptive narration thus contributing to the historical context surround the Tea party. This event and many others leading up to it, provide a colorful backdrop on the eve of the American Revolution.
American politics have long revolved around the Grand Old Party and the Democratic Party. Arguably every conflict can be drawn back to the exacerbation of these two discordant parties. Both entities refuse to approach middle ground because it would hinder the respective party’s prestige or disobey ideals held for the past two centuries. Being a noted Democratic advocate, forty second US president William Clinton speaks at the Democratic National Convention. Because he employs rhetorical strategies, such as antithesis and procatalepsis, the partiality in his speech not only extols the Democrat’s persona but also degrades the Republican’s image.
It appears that political parties can't win per professional commentators and the general public. It is possible that they're in charge of causing divisions in society by being too partisan or they don't stand for anything since they represent too many diverse interests. These contradicting criticisms of parties are not new. Some of the Founders of the United States famously saw political parties as a source of intolerant spirit, which is a view that has continued in contemporary circumstances. At the same time, we frequently criticize parties for lacking any coherent political program. The long list of issue positions delivered by party committees is the outcome supposedly caused by the needs for parties to unite enough interests in order
Public conflict may be triggered by several causes. For one, it may result from the agitation of several groups who believe that what is morally right is violated. Despite the reason behind, agitators seek to challenge the society so that their proposal for social change is accepted. Hence, it is important to understand the reasons why agitators use different strategies to advance their cause and how establishments can control them. For the purposes of this paper, the Boston Tea Party will be analyzed in light of the concept of agitation and establishment. Further, the strategies of the agitators and the establishment will also be provided.
Gonyea, Don. "Texas Democrats See Opportunity in Changing Demographics." 2 July 2013. NPR. Web. 22 March 2014.
Howell, John. "The Regressives: Unraveling the Progressive Movement." Conference Papers -- Southern Political Science Association (2009 Annual Meeting 2009): 1. Political Science Complete, EBSCOhost (accessed January 29, 2014).
The most commonly known, and consequently most watered down, version of the progressive movement argues that this era was simply an effort by the middle class to cure many of the social and political ills of American society that had developed during the rapid industrial growth in the last quarter of the 19th century. This explanation has proven to be a woefully inadequate in the face of the complexities that characterize these times. In Richard Hofstadter’s The Age of Reform, Peter Filene’s “An Obituary for the Progressive Movement,” Richard McCormick’s “The Discovery that Business Corrupts Politics,” and Paula Baker’s “The Domestication of Politics” each author asserts their own unique interpretations of the progressive movement. These distinct examinations each chart and thus manifest the fluidity of knowledge about this particular time period and how it has been shaped reshaped by new analysis.
Most people have heard of The Boston tea party. When American patriots dressed as Mohawk Indians boarded the British ships in the Boston harbor and dumped all of the tea into the ocean. But what most people fail to realize is the great importance behind this protest. To fully understand a topic of history one must first acknowledge the actions behind it. The French and Indian war, the Stamp Act, the Townshend Revenue Act, as well as the Tea Act are all important catalysts of the legendary Boston tea party. Which is why we will discuss these topics before examining the events of the Boston tea party.
All across America the success of the Democratic Party platform can be seen. But we want more. The Democratic Party is determined to giv...
Reform was the goal of the Progressive movement, and with that in mind, the reformers had great success. Progressive reformers were made up primarily of middle class men and women whose two main goals were to limit the trusts and to improve conditions of life and labor. These people were part of both political parties at the time, as well as in all regions of the country, and in all levels of the government. They wanted to remove bribed members of the legislature so that just laws and regulations were made that would benefit the people rather than the power-hungry corporations. This major movement altered all aspects of life, creating a better living and working environment for people.
Dye, Thomas R. , L. Tucker Gibson Jr., and Clay Robinson. Politics In America. Brief Texas Edition ed. New Jersey: Pearson, 2005.
...ence against members of the movement. However, the emphasis on voting rights and not improvement of economic conditions led Anne to believe the movement “had “dreamers” instead of leaders leading us.” (p.337).
Cooper, Barry, Allan Kornberg and William Mishler. The Resurgence of Conservatism in Anglo-American Democracies. Durham: Duke University Press, 1988. Print.
During the late 19th and early 20th century both the Populist Party and Progressive movement wanted to preserve some things, while also addressing the need for reform. Although many of the ideas and goals of these “Third parties” were initially not legislated and considered far-fetched, many of these ideas later became fundamental laws throughout American history.