Difference between revisions of "Talk:Tea Party Movement"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(agree) |
(→"An under-organized, underfunded amateurs' movement with obscure leadership.": yes the truth is needed here) |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
:I agree.It is a grassroots movement, amateurish is not accurate. The movement does not have any one leader or leaders- mediocre leadership??? Under-organized? possible two million people met in D.C. on 9/12. Underfunded? I did not realize that sponsors are hurting for cash. Marc Rubio is trying to be elected as a conservative candidate for Senate. I see nothing whereby he is vying for leadership position within the TEA party movement. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 00:02, 15 January 2010 (EST) | :I agree.It is a grassroots movement, amateurish is not accurate. The movement does not have any one leader or leaders- mediocre leadership??? Under-organized? possible two million people met in D.C. on 9/12. Underfunded? I did not realize that sponsors are hurting for cash. Marc Rubio is trying to be elected as a conservative candidate for Senate. I see nothing whereby he is vying for leadership position within the TEA party movement. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 00:02, 15 January 2010 (EST) | ||
| + | ::Yeah, it's accurate. "amateur" -- yes this is a movement against professionals by people with no political experience. The national and state leadership cannot even be named because they do not exist. The funding does not exist. Who't the treasurer? where are the required financial reports? There's grass roots enthusiasm but much less organization than a high school pep rally. Now people may rejoice in this unled, underfunded, unorganized group but we're an encyclopedia and it's our job to describe it accurately and not ignore its most obvious characteristics. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 00:09, 15 January 2010 (EST) | ||
Revision as of 05:09, January 15, 2010
TEA Party - wouldn't this be a backronym? When it first started, it was just in reference to the Boston Tea Party, as far as I can tell - making it stand for something seems to have come later. --JTutone 13:20, 9 December 2009 (EST)
- Since before the Tax Day Tea Parties took place, TEA was and always has stood for 'Taxed Enough Already'. There's a difference between an acronym and a theme. You should read the Tea Party Movement page, the intro will answer your question and the rest will clarify it for you. DerekE 00:17, 11 December 2009 (EST)
Please fix vandalism
"In early 2010 it remains an under-organized, underfunded amateurish movement with mediocre leadership. But several aspiring conservatives especially Marco Rubio of Florida and Gary Johnson of New Mexico, are unofficially competing to become its leader." danq 22:43, 14 January 2010 (EST)
"An under-organized, underfunded amateurs' movement with obscure leadership."
Does this really need to go back in the article, RJJensen? AlexWD 23:58, 14 January 2010 (EST)
- I agree.It is a grassroots movement, amateurish is not accurate. The movement does not have any one leader or leaders- mediocre leadership??? Under-organized? possible two million people met in D.C. on 9/12. Underfunded? I did not realize that sponsors are hurting for cash. Marc Rubio is trying to be elected as a conservative candidate for Senate. I see nothing whereby he is vying for leadership position within the TEA party movement. --Jpatt 00:02, 15 January 2010 (EST)
- Yeah, it's accurate. "amateur" -- yes this is a movement against professionals by people with no political experience. The national and state leadership cannot even be named because they do not exist. The funding does not exist. Who't the treasurer? where are the required financial reports? There's grass roots enthusiasm but much less organization than a high school pep rally. Now people may rejoice in this unled, underfunded, unorganized group but we're an encyclopedia and it's our job to describe it accurately and not ignore its most obvious characteristics. RJJensen 00:09, 15 January 2010 (EST)