Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Slinger
I would argue yes. The TEA party ran candidates against Republicans in primaries.
|
The Tea Party was not an alternative or splinter movement. The Tea Party was devised and run by well-known Republican operatives at the bidding of their libertarian funders. What appeared to be grassroots was actually astro turf.
Quote:
|
It's really as much as you can do in a 2 party system.
|
Yep, this is how you radicalize and quickly shift party position away from reasonable and centrist governing practices. The benefactors were tired of a slow shift to the right and manufactured a seismic event to shake the party foundations and create an apparent groundswell of support. In reality it was a very small segment of the base, but the echo chamber provided by Fox and Hate Radio made the movement appear larger and gain traction in the mainstream base. It was a brilliant psyops campaign and proved very effective. Lessons learned from observing this were used to weaken ISIS and radical Islam in the Middle East.
Quote:
|
Right-wing ideologies usually have strength and power as one of the dynamics. So, it's not surprising that they tend to be pragmatic when it comes to splitting votes and watering down their influence.
|
They don't
have strength and power, but they desire strength and power. They will do anything and everything to attain positions where strength and power are benefits, then do anything to maintain that power. Pragmatism rarely enters the equation. The playbook for these power thirsty ######bags is
The Prince and they embrace every sub-human characteristic described in that text.