• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Question for Tea Partiers and those who have an opinion on the TP

What do you think?

  • I am a TPer, we should vote against the bill, increasing the debt

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I am a TPer, we should vote for the bill, increasing taxes

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I am not a TPer, but I think they would increase taxes

    Votes: 2 40.0%
  • I am not a TPer, but I think they would increase the debt

    Votes: 3 60.0%

  • Total voters
    5

Wiseone

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
12,177
Reaction score
7,550
Location
Ft. Campbell, KY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Suppose that in a few elections the Tea Party becomes a prominent part of Congress, either as a wing of the Republican Party or as a totally separate party. Now in this hypothetical the TP is not the majority party, but again is prominent. And assume the debt level is at or near where it is today.

A bill is passed through Congress, by the other members, which creates or increasing spending to a program unpopular and generally the antithesis of TP philosophy. However a separate bill is presented which would increase taxes in general to every American to pay for the spending without increasing the deficit, but if the bill is not passed than the funding will come from borrowing which will increase the debt.

Of course this isn't a very detailed question however the idea is to see which option TPers would see as the lesser evil, increasing taxes or increasing the debt.
 

b.larset

Banned
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
520
Reaction score
76
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I am ateapartier and BUL^&*%$! loaded thread .. damn...... Give me taxes or deficeit? Not one enough to cause us ills we must have either or ? If a bill comes thru congress I expect my fellow tea party patriots to STOP government and obstruct the bill and Pass no legislation. We have had the best and the brightest for far to long diligently keeping us less free. On both the left and the right our deaft representive's have maintained the statuus quo growing government on the left and the right in your name -Including Reagan and Newt . No; but thank you I want my liberty with a lot less weighty two- partymongering. We are here because- We said no! Now we are about to make no the national passion of choice for the electorate. No- Selling us out to foreign governments. No-Going back on your word. No-making our treasurie your own partisan piggy bank for your benefit at election time. No-telling us we are a melting pot while you use us for a crapping pot. One nation one people one word- NATIONALITY. America Rising.
 
Last edited:

repeter

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 2, 2009
Messages
3,445
Reaction score
682
Location
California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
I am ateapartier and BUL^&*%$! loaded thread .. damn...... Give me taxes or deficeit? Not one enough to cause us ills we muct have either or? If a bill comes thru congress I expect my fellow tea party patriots to STOP government and obstruct the bill and Pass no legislation. We have had the best and the brightest for far to long diligently keeping us less free. On both the left and the right our deaft representive's have maintained the statuus quo growing government on the left and the right in your name -Including Reagan and Newt . No; but thank you I want my liberty with a lot less weighty two- partymongering. We are here because- We said no! Now we are about to make no the national passion of choice for the electorate. No- Selling us out to foreign governments. No-Going back on your word. No-making our treasurie your own partisan piggy bank for your benefit at election time. No-telling us we are a melting pot while you use us for a crapping pot. One nation one people one word- NATIONALITY. America Rising.
Yeah, because it makes perfect sense to decrease the deficit while maintaining taxes, and pet projects, and oh yeah, don't forget the defense budget.

One or the other has got to give, and I'd say both are going to happen.
 

Wiseone

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
12,177
Reaction score
7,550
Location
Ft. Campbell, KY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
For clarity I'm not a TPer but I think they would increase the debt.

AND this is a reasonable hypothetical scenario even if ONE TPer is elected to Congress, which certainly happen. What will that individual do if this vote is introduced? In hindsight I should have added a 3rd option for TPers and non-Tpers which would be that the TP congressman would NOT vote at all, which is a perfectly valid option for any congressmen.
 

FederalRepublic

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 21, 2010
Messages
2,942
Reaction score
711
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate
Suppose that in a few elections the Tea Party becomes a prominent part of Congress, either as a wing of the Republican Party or as a totally separate party. Now in this hypothetical the TP is not the majority party, but again is prominent. And assume the debt level is at or near where it is today.

A bill is passed through Congress, by the other members, which creates or increasing spending to a program unpopular and generally the antithesis of TP philosophy. However a separate bill is presented which would increase taxes in general to every American to pay for the spending without increasing the deficit, but if the bill is not passed than the funding will come from borrowing which will increase the debt.

Of course this isn't a very detailed question however the idea is to see which option TPers would see as the lesser evil, increasing taxes or increasing the debt.
Not a chance in hell I would vote for either bill in your example. When someone asked me why I voted for increasing the debt (as you put it), I raise my hand and say "NOT IT". I wouldn't be the one who wrote the check, so my conscience would be clear.
 

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
34,340
Reaction score
16,230
Location
A place where common sense exists
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
I am not a tea partier. At the same time I am not for higher taxes nor am I for increasing the debt. So the obvious answer is to vote against both bills, that is what politicians can do. Politicians do not have to vote yes for every bill or every other bill.
 
Last edited:

apdst

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
131,687
Reaction score
30,486
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Suppose that in a few elections the Tea Party becomes a prominent part of Congress, either as a wing of the Republican Party or as a totally separate party. Now in this hypothetical the TP is not the majority party, but again is prominent. And assume the debt level is at or near where it is today.

A bill is passed through Congress, by the other members, which creates or increasing spending to a program unpopular and generally the antithesis of TP philosophy. However a separate bill is presented which would increase taxes in general to every American to pay for the spending without increasing the deficit, but if the bill is not passed than the funding will come from borrowing which will increase the debt.

Of course this isn't a very detailed question however the idea is to see which option TPers would see as the lesser evil, increasing taxes or increasing the debt.
We'll vote their stupid asses out, just we're fixin' to do to the Democrats.
 

Psychoclown

Clown Prince of Politics
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
1,780
Reaction score
1,460
Location
Hiding from the voices in my head.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I would expect and want the Tea Party candidates to vote against the tax increase. They should also start making the rounds in media and on the campaign trail to explain that this is why they opposed the new spending program. And they could easily campaign on promising to repeal said program in order to remove the need for a tax increase.
 

samsmart

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
10,316
Reaction score
6,470
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Suppose that in a few elections the Tea Party becomes a prominent part of Congress, either as a wing of the Republican Party or as a totally separate party. Now in this hypothetical the TP is not the majority party, but again is prominent. And assume the debt level is at or near where it is today.

A bill is passed through Congress, by the other members, which creates or increasing spending to a program unpopular and generally the antithesis of TP philosophy. However a separate bill is presented which would increase taxes in general to every American to pay for the spending without increasing the deficit, but if the bill is not passed than the funding will come from borrowing which will increase the debt.

Of course this isn't a very detailed question however the idea is to see which option TPers would see as the lesser evil, increasing taxes or increasing the debt.
You probably should have added a 3rd option: decreased government spending.

Ideally, I believe, that would be how most TPers would want to cut the deficit without raising taxes. And to some degree, I agree with that - I'm all for finding effeciencies in government spending.

However, what the TPers, and the Republican Party that those getting elected will caucus with, don't do so well is list which cuts to government spending they propose.

Many of the Republican mainstayers advocate less government spending in all districts and states but their own. This is where we get to the problems non-conservatives have with "corporate welfare" that Republican politicians advocate through their handing out of government contracts to their corporate campaign contributers.

However, I don't think many TP candidates are mainstayers, or are preparing to be mainstayers. I have a feeling that many TP officials will shoot themselves in the foot by rejecting government spending even if it will help their constituents in the short term. For this, I applaud them, because I, like many others, are against wasteful government spending.

On the other hand, I, unlike most TPers, am not against productive government spending. Many TPers want to slash government spending on principle, but I support government spending, especially for long-term gain. I would especially prefer spending to rebuild our infrastructure, especially in rural and suburban areas to provide rail service as well as rebuilding roads to include walkways and bike paths.

So it will be interesting to see where the conviction of TPer candidates lay. Will they vote against government spending even in their own districts? Or will they cut spending even at the economic cost of their constiuents, and therefore imperil their re-election next campaign season?
 
Top Bottom