"No Democrats Don't Need a Tea Party" (U.S. News and World Report)
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2014/12/24/elizabeth-warren-is-not-ted-cruz-and-democrats-dont-need-a-tea-party?google_editors_picks=true"The tea party has, to date, been a uniquely Republican movement, with would-be progressive analogs fizzling and fading. “Occupy Wall Street” seemed more interested in drum circles than political engagement. And do you remember the Coffee Party? I didn’t think so.
The lack of a tea party left is in part because having the White House helps paper over a lot of intraparty divisions. And it’s also in part a function of the parties’ differing structures, with the GOP’s recent purity pushes abetted by a media-entertainment complex that incentivizes ideological fidelity over electability as well as the conservative movement’s historical certitude that it is both embattled and about to be betrayed by its allies, even when it has been ascendant."
= new reply since forum marked as read
Prior to President Obama's election, they didn't exist and I'm not sure that their sudden appearance was entirely coincidental. I'm struggling to figure out what a left-wing "Tea Party" would even look like (though I imagine they'd be more intelligent and ideologically coherent than the current right-wing "Tea Party"
. The Republican Tea Party seems to exist solely as a reaction to President Obama's election and to keep the Republican "base" perpetually energized against President Obama and Democrats (which has worked well for them in the last two midterms). For instance, they claimed to be horrified at the TARP bailouts at the end of Bush's (P)residency and at Wall Street yet they support candidates and policies that actually roll back new financial protections and restrictions on Wall Street.
