So, I heard Bernie Sanders on the radio talking about trying to work with the Tea Party base.

[Comrade Grumpy]

It was Thursday, I think, on the Tom Hartmann show.

He suggested that some of the Tea Party shared criticisms of the center with some on the Democratic left. He mentioned anti-interventionism in foreign policy and disdain for "crony capitalism." I would also add the war on drugs.

He seemed to be saying that there is room to bring some of those people on board a more progressive agenda. I tend to agree with him. I see a lot of the Tea Party as what I call "curdled populism" or right-wing populism. Those people are justly pissed off at getting screwed over, but their analysis is faulty--they blame it on the wrong people (blacks, immigrants, uppity women).

What does DU think? Is there any way to make common ground with these people or not?

[FarPoint]

1. The Tea Party is funded by the Koch brothers...

Progressive is not in their vocabulary. I say the thought of such partnership is delusional.

[MADem]

6. Plus a million. Exactly. nt

[ZombieHorde]

2. "Is there any way to make common ground with these people or not?"

I really hope so.

[morningfog]

3. There is more liberal cross-over issues with libertarians than with conservatives.

There is essentially a fundamental contradiction of ideology on almost all issues between true liberals and true conservatives.

Liberals and libertarians have significant shared ideology on most social issues. When it comes to economics and market theory, there is a great divergence.

It is much more logical to suggest alliances on certain issues could come with libertarians than it is to suggest liberals can work with conservatives.

[Comrade Grumpy]

11. Maybe we have a definitional problem here.

To me, it seems like the Tea Party base (as distinct from its funders and ideologues) contains different strands of conservative thought.

There's a libertarian strand.

There's an economic conservative strand.

There a religious/social conservative strand.

There's a right populist strand.

I think maybe some of these people can be pulled over on some issues.

Libertarians on foreign policy and drugs and crony capitalism.

Right populists on crony capitalism.

The economic and social conservatives, not so much.

I think there is tremendous discontent with centrist politics and a political system that seems to care mostly about enriching the rich. You see it on the left here on this board. You see it on the right with all their screaming protests.

I think someone like Rand Paul can make headway with this, if Democrats leave an open field for him. It looks like he's already positioning himself to do just that. I used to think a Rand Paul candidacy would ensure a Democratic victory, but now he's got me a little bit worried.

[pnwmom]

18. Not really. The libertarian economic philosophy, which is at the heart of everything,

is completely opposed to progressive ideals.

All the rest -- the pro-pot, pro-choice, etc. -- is just window dressing for the economics. The window dressing's the first thing libertarians are willing to throw out when they get into politics.

[morningfog]

28. I don't disagree with that. However, if we did not live in a duopoly, it would

make a significant difference. If the Democratic and Republican parties permitted others to enter into the national debate, there could be coalitions around issues.

There is still more common ground between liberals and libertarians than between liberals and conservatives. And I think that is the ultimate point. I think that most of the tea party are just ulta-right and anti-govt. But, I think there are some who are libertarians or even just individualists. I think the dems could win over some of the wanderers with greater attention to the individual rights planks of liberalism.

[pnwmom]

42. That's true only if you don't believe that the economics is THE fundamental issue.

I don't. Even though there might be "more" issues that seem to link progressives to libertarians, the economic difference is insurmountable.

You're right that if we had more of a parliamentary system, we could have coalitions around different issues. But we had this under our own system of government not that long ago, when the parties weren't divided along strict ideological lines --- when there were creatures called "liberal Republicans" and "dixiecrats."

[MADem]

4. Uhhh!!!! OHHHHH!!!!

What do I think? This won't end well. Kiss your social security goodbye! Kiss your minimum wage goodbye? Unions? Sayonara! Medicare, medicaid? Those things don't marry well with "personal responsibility!" Put the kids in one bedroom, because Gramma and Gramps are moving in! Returning responsibility to the states? That's code for Let's Discriminate Against Gays and Minorities!!!

Yeah, the Tea Party...great allies, if you're a craven hypocrite. Right to Work, yee haw! No taxes, yippee! That means no decent roads, no schools, no public utilities...whoopee!

Those people don't LIKE progressives. They're selfish "I GOT MINE" types. Progressives care about the community as a whole....the concept of "personal responsibility" which is a cornerstone of the Tea Party movement is a huge EFF Yew to the concept of caring about the least of our brethren.

http://www.theteaparty.net/about-the-tea-party/

Does Bernie believe that VT is "that different" that people there will continue to care about others if these clowns are legitimized? He'll see that whole social safety net that state has crafted crumble as wealthy Tea Partiers flee the shitholes they've created for more pristine parts, like VT, and bring their uglyass ideas with them.

Of course, by the time it gets real bad, he'll be gone--he won't have to reap the harvest of allowing those jerks to plant and grow their lousy ideas.

[winter is coming]

5. Depends on what you mean by "Tea Party".

The politicians? Hell, no. They know they're selling bullshit but they don't care as long as they get their cut of the action.

Some of the schmucks who've been suckered by the Tea Party rhetoric? Possible, but difficult. If analysis were something these folks were good at, they wouldn't be Tea Partiers in the first place, but some of them might be reached.

[m-lekktor]

7. isn't that what Nader is calling for as well? nt

[Comrade Grumpy]

9. I think so. I think he's on tour flogging a new book.

[Avalux]

8. Maybe, if goals remain general - like being against corp welfare.

There's commonality there. But when it comes to specifics, to details, to social issues, that's when things get wacky. But those are the things that the powerful use to keep us separated. The realization of this is actually the biggest hurdle to overcome.

I think it's possible but not sure how.

[JaneyVee]

10. Nah, not the Tea Party. They love crony capitalism.

[Dragonfli]

16. Do they not? Tell me, what do you know about it, really.

I mean, both parties appear to be greatly influenced by the like of Goldman-Sachs. But with the 'baggers they manage to love them while starving granny with their libertarian Idea that all money spent on the citizens is a waste.

Compounding evil with even more evil means they are the greater evil.

[NRaleighLiberal]

23. Co-opted? How about seeded and formed with Koch money and Dick Armey - pure astroturf

and its members are suckers

[Dragonfli]

26. Ron Paul is a granny starver too you know. /nt

[Dragonfli]

25. That's just it, in my experience part of the tea party motto is

government help is bad except for MY check (because I deserve it and those "others" are just lazy mooches.)

I have very little faith in the kabuki theater that is congress, but I also have little faith in teabaggers as I know a few as well, all of whom collect SS checks in one form or another while complaining about the welfare state and the moochers.

Who was it again that co-opted OWS? I have never even heard that one.

[Dragonfli]

29. ???

I don't get it. please elaborate so that I can

[herding cats]

32. I think they may misunderstand what "co-opted" means.

It doesn't apply to their example at any rate.

[Dragonfli]

33. That might explain it. /nt

[herding cats]

34. I just figured out who they are.

I'm not that swift at times.

[Dragonfli]

30. I have never been distracted by the team BS, and I don't understand the Homeland security post

They were I think infiltrated by HS, but to spy on them, not use them.

[mercuryblues]

12. when you

sleep with dogs; don't be surprised when you wake up with fleas.

Working with them gives them an air of legitimacy. Teabaggers are loons through and through. There is nothing redeemable about a party that touts the assassination of our President, shut down the government for political purposes, filibusters everything, believes Sandy Hook never happened. Encouraged the stand-off in Nevada. and a ton more despicable stuff.

Their analysis is faulty because it feeds into their racist, misogynist, hateful views. You can show them the truth and they will shut it out and still believe what they believe for the reason they believe it. They still believe Obama was born in Kenya, they still believe Obama is going to come after their guns, they still believe any piece of fucking nonsense they want to because of their racism.

[brooklynite]

13. That should rally DU to his Presidential Campaign...

[TransitJohn]

17. I don't think Bernie would care about a predominantly center to right site like DU

Just sayin'.

[GeorgeGist]

15. I don't think they're smart enough.

[Puzzledtraveller]

19. I think so

but the people who can strike a balance on either side are probably too few to accomplish very much.

[Enrique]

20. I totally agree

why let the Kochs benefit from the people's anger? Especially when it's the Kochs they should be mad at.

[graegoyle]

22. No, because RACISM!

Where was the Tea Party before 2008? Did these issues appear for the first time in 2008? I know what did become apparent in 2008.

[abelenkpe]

35. My VA and FL relatives are tea party fans

There is no way in hell they would ever, ever even considering voting for Bernie Sanders. They are team players. Their team calls themselves many things: republican, conservative, libertarian (the ron paul type) and tea party. They always vote against their own best interests. Even though many have begun to resent money in politics, offshoring and powerful corporations they would never vote for a candidate that didn't come from their team.

Wish it were different.

[canoeist52]

36. You can't change the hard-liners, but the libertarian bystanders - I'm workin' on 'em!

My conservative friends on FB want :

Healthy food with no pesticides

Clean air and water

Corruption out of government

Actually support the Market Basket boycott!

Want us out of wars and meddling with other countries' government

to support local business and boycott Walmart

I'm slowly bring some of them around to understanding their best interests. Some of the are too far gone to understand who's screwing them.

Can anyone else add to these?

[AlinPA]

44. Every libertarian I know does not want any clean air, clean water or clean food laws.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

37. I think he's doomed to disappointment for the most part.

There might be a TINY percentage of them who could be convinced to join him on a very few issues, but tbh, I think he'll turn off more moderates on either side of the aisle by even trying to work with him than he'll gain in teabaggers.

[TBF]

38. The way to reach out is through the churches -

I am not sure how this can be done but I can tell you that after living in the midwest, on the east coast, and now in Texas - the heartland revolves around the churches. It is where people gather and feel safe. The republican party's co-opting of the churches is probably one of the smartest political moves ever. I think Pope Francis gives us an opening because he is clearly very sensitive to income inequality. Maybe there is a way to reach out to conservative catholics given his stature and opinions. But I don't have any great ideas about reaching out to evangelical protestants.

[old guy]

39. No.

[old guy]

40. No

[Inkfreak]

41. I think individuals in the Tea Party possibly could be open to working together.

But the party itself never would. I think they make their bread & butter sowing discord. With obscene far right policies and just hating on Dems & the Prez.

[AlinPA]

43. Bullshit.Sanders must have been drunk.Working with those stupid, ignorant, xenophobic, racist slobs?

How can you work with those hard core bigots, who get all their ideas from Fox ‘news” and walk around toting their assault rifles in stores, blowing diesel smoke out of the truck exhausts just to annoy people, and call the President all kinds of names?

[canoeist52]

45. Those are the ones you can't change. But you can chnges the minds of those who follow them

because "They know not what they do"

An yes, as was said up-thread, we do this through religion. "What would Jesus do?" usually stops them in their tracks.

[Enthusiast]

46. I agree that, yes, they blame it on the wrong people.

Much of the Tea Party is irredeemably racist and ignorant.

I'm surprised that Bernie doesn't recognize this.

[Laelth]

47. This is an important discussion.

I have long held (and it's Democratic Party dogma in the South) that most people who vote for Republicans are ticked-off Democrats. I think they agree with us on most economic issues. We disagree about whom to blame, but even the ticked-off Democrats are starting to see the light. As much as they hate to admit it, most of them know they have more in common with persons of differing skin tones than they do with the oligarchs who rule and exploit them.

In my opinion, it's the social issues that scare them away from voting for Democrats. We have undergone enormous social change over the past century, and a lot of people are afraid as a result. These people vote to see their cultural and social values affirmed, even if they will be shafted on economic issues as a result. We can, I think, work with social conservatives if we lessen our emphasis on social change. Society is changing on its own, and much of that change is beyond politics. We don't need government to advance social change. The social changes are already happening, and, while some might lament that government is slow to catch on and adapt to these changing social norms, I see this as a secondary concern when compared to the massive economic changes (in the wrong direction) that are certainly controlled by government and that are eroding the American middle class and turning us into a third-world country.

In particular, I think if we could abandon gun control, we could work with social conservatives quite nicely. There would be plenty of common ground between us. That said, to the extent that we're talking about the Tea Party defined as the "I got mine, so FU" crowd, then no. With that group I see no common ground that it would be useful for us to explore and develop. We could agree with them on some social issues, but that's not what I want government focused on at this time.

-Laelth

[canoeist52]

48. Excellent post. Two third-rails on which I will generally not comment, are religion and guns.

You just go in circles, end up with bad feelings and burn bridges because their beliefs on those subjects are way out of proportion to reality.
I try to stick with the economic issues. And, yes, I know everything is connected, but these people don't see that and keep their beliefs in boxes that can never touch.

[Laelth]

50. Thanks for the kind words.

I am on record arguing that it's the economic issues that make us liberals.

In that journal entry, I also argue that "the left" has already won the hearts and minds of the people on the most significant social issues of our time. That's why the economic issues are now paramount to me. This is also why I am a fan of Elizabeth Warren.

Of course, ymmv.

-Laelth

[shaayecanaan]

49. Sanders gets plenty of farmers to vote for him

despite his socially liberal stances. Gay marriage is not a huge priority for these people, they might oppose it but it is way down the list. Cost of living issues, jobs, economic issues are right at the fore.

If there is clear daylight between the dems and repubs on who will put more dollars in these peoples' pockets then they will vote accordingly. The problem has been for the last twenty years that clear daylight hasn't existed.

[Prophet 451]

51. Frankly, no.

The stuff about foreign policy is just a pretext for a murderous hatred of anything remotely to the left of Dick Cheney. Talking about common ground is missing the point when they literally want us dead. And the disdain for crony capitalism is only pretended. In reality, they're as in love with big business as any other fascists.

[Thinkingabout]

52. When I hear TP, I see Ted Cruz oozimg up from a rotten volcano, spewing hate and

Discontent. I don't think those like Cruz is capable of working with others. We don't need any Cruz missiles in the DNC.

[Orsino]

53. I try to see Republican voters as my fellow victims, not as the enamy.

That means they are potential or even inevitable allies, perhaps just a little more isolated or a little slower on the uptake than I like to think I am.

Our real enemies have done a fine enough job of dividing us against each other without my help.