When tea is a stronger drink than tequila
For a movement that so many people like to deride, the tea party sure is attracting its share of imitators. First the coffee party; now, the tequila party. From the Las Vegas Sun:
Latino leaders in Nevada and nationwide are quietly debating whether to sever their traditional Democratic ties and form an independent grass-roots political group.
The idea, born of frustration over the party’s inaction on immigration reform and fears that as a voting bloc they’re a political afterthought, Latino leaders have discussed the idea among themselves locally and in conference calls with colleagues across the country.
The unlikely model for the movement they would like to launch is the Tea Party — not in substance, of course, but in its grass-roots organizational style. Acknowledging the source of their inspiration, Latino leaders have dubbed the proposed movement the “Tequila Party.”
These Hispanic leaders have noticed that while the Tea Party has had spotty electoral success, it has called attention to its concerns and values and put the establishment on notice.
“I don’t know if it’s going to happen, but there’s talk,” said Fernando Romero, president of the nonpartisan Hispanics in Politics, Nevada’s oldest Hispanic political group. “There’s discussion about empowerment of the Latino vote.”
I’ve written before that members of self-identified voting blocs are wise to make political parties compete for their votes, lest they be taken for granted. In the big picture, a re-cobbling of traditional voting interests could be a good thing.
At the same time, I think there are some reasons to think the tequila party — as its vision is described in the Sun article — won’t be as successful as the tea party has been so far:
1. Sheer Numbers: The most recent opinion poll I’ve seen, this one from USA Today, shows a statistical tie between those Americans who want the tea party to take the lead in setting policy (27 percent) and those who want President Obama to lead (28 percent). That’s not just an astoundingly high number for a 21-month-old movement relative to the leader of the free world. It’s about 50 percent larger than the entire Hispanic population in the U.S., which is estimated at around 15 percent. So, the tequila party wouldn’t have the same numerical reach as the tea party even if every Hispanic American joined. Which leads us to…
2. Sheer Politics: Despite portrayals to the contrary, Hispanic voters do not march in lockstep with the Democratic Party to nearly the same degree as, say, black voters. Republican candidates for the U.S. House won 38 of Hispanic voters in this year’s mid-term elections, according to exit polls. Among racial groups, only the Asian-American vote was more competitive (58 percent Democrat, 40 percent Republican). Which leads us to…
3. Identity Politics: The tea party is focused on a narrow list of issues, but it is open to anyone who subscribes to those issues. The tequila party, on the other hand, seems to be trying to get an entire racial group to subscribe to the same (Democratic/liberal) view of a policy, immigration reform. As Allahpundit writes at Hot Air, the driving issue seems to be “amnesty and, er…amnesty.” But if any single issue, and particularly a decidedly partisan/ideological take on that issue, were enough to drive the Hispanic vote, would we really have seen 38 percent of Hispanic voters choose Republican House candidates?
4. The Grassroots: The tea party famously began as a spontaneous eruption from people who weren’t already political operatives. Who are the people apparently pushing the tequila party? Political operatives.
As I said, it’s all well and good if Americans — individually or in groups — are pushing political parties not to take their votes for granted. But the authenticity and free form of the tea-party model is going to be a tough one for a lot of groups to copy if they are really just trying to get people to circle back to the same place.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Find me on Facebook
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
23 comments Add your comment
Left wing management
December 1st, 2010
10:42 am
“But the authenticity and free form of the tea-party model is going to be a tough one for a lot of groups to copy if they are really just trying to get people to circle back to the same place.”
But the irony here is that it very much remains to be seen whether this is not actually the case with the Tea Party itself. I’m not yet convinced that the TP is not simply a reconsolidation of certain parts of the GOP base.
Hillbilly Deluxe
December 1st, 2010
10:53 am
Any time a movement aligns itself with one party, it is painting itself into a corner. The other party will write off it’s votes and give it nothing, while the party it aligns with, will take it for granted and give it lip service and throw it the occasional bone. Best to not put all your eggs in one basket.
JKL2
December 1st, 2010
11:14 am
Good idea. Too bad none of them are registered voters (or citizens for that matter).
Ragnar Danneskjold
December 1st, 2010
11:39 am
Perhaps my observation is perverse, but the only close analogy to the Tea Party in my lifetime was the anti-war movement of the 1960s, which also openly embraced non-capitalist economic theories. While much of that 1960s rebellion may have been ginned up by the KGB, it eventually took on a life of its own. Those 1960s radicals had control of Congress from 2006 until now. With any luck its mirror will similarly take control, and soon.
Matti
December 1st, 2010
11:42 am
I hope this was intended as a comedy piece, Mr. Wingfield, because it’s funnier than anything I’ve read in awhile. Are you vying for a position as a Daily Show writer? HILARIOUS stuff!!!!
Ragnar Danneskjold
December 1st, 2010
11:42 am
Dear Leftwing @ 10:42, “I’m not yet convinced that the TP is not simply a reconsolidation of certain parts of the GOP base.” I think you are exactly right, the Tea Party seems to me to be mostly disaffected Reagan libertarians.
Ragnar Danneskjold
December 1st, 2010
11:43 am
Dear Matti @ 11:42, you have a strange sense of humor. I thought Kyle’s essay showed impressive insight. I guess you thought it merely inciteful?
CJ
December 1st, 2010
11:53 am
Just a friendly reminder that the Tea Party consists primarily of partisans who are too embarrassed to call themselves Republicans, but always have and always will vote Republican. Their electoral success is worse than spotty and their batty candidates (e.g, Angle, O’Donnell), many argue, cost Republicans the Senate.
Meanwhile, days after voting to ban earmarks in the Senate, the second highest ranking Senate Republican, Jon Kyle, slipped a $200 million earmark into a measure that passed the Senate. Tea Party leader Michelle Bachmann is redefining earmarks (”…advocating for transportation projects for one’s district in my mind does not equate to an earmarks.”), and our own Senator Chambliss is coming up with his own definitions–as needed.
Where’s Kyle’s post communicating the Tea Party’s outrage? In fact, there is no outrage. As always these GOP voters and their media “watchdogs” have one set of standards for Dems and another for their own party.
More evidence of their hypocrisy is the fact that these faux deficit hawks are willing to allow their candidates to continue to bust the budget with tax cuts for the wealthy that are not offset with spending cuts. This at the same time that the president of Tea Party Nation is advocating to change the Constitution such that only property owners can vote.
Some populists.
CJ
December 1st, 2010
12:09 pm
“The tea party famously began as a spontaneous eruption from people who weren’t already political operatives.”
By the way, Kyle has a pretty narrow definition of political operatives since it obviously excludes Dick Armey, Sarah Palin, political organizations financed by the Koch brothers, and many other, well, political operatives.
Of course, he also has to ignore the roots associated with a former Presidential candidate (Paul), a whiny, self-absorbed CNBC television personality (Santelli), and a right-wing media that treats two Tea Partiers standing on a street corner as major news event.
Jimmy62
December 1st, 2010
12:18 pm
I like how it says “spotty electoral success.” Find me another group this young that won as many elections as they did, and I might agree. But that other group doesn’t exist. The Tea Party won more offices than all but the most optimistic of Tea Partiers could have imagined a few months ago. The ones they lost are the ones the media likes to highlight. Murkowski who has tons of money and lots of name recognition in Alaska, tough to beat a dynasty, but Joe MIller almost did. Angle couldn’t beat the senate majority leader, big surprise, a newbie couldn’t beat a long time incumbent with lots of establishment backing….. And then there was the crazy woman in the northeast, and no one really expected her to do well.
But then you’ve got all the people who won other elections, and at the state level, too. This is the media trying to downplay the fact that their team got their asses kicked all over the country by political neophytes, and they won because that’s what the American people want.
DebbieDoRight
December 1st, 2010
12:44 pm
CJ: and a right-wing media that treats two Tea Partiers standing on a street corner as major news event.
Not to mention a right wing media that can’t count either. eg: September 2009 rally at Freedom Plaza in Washington.
Jimmy62: Find me another group this young that won as many elections as they did, and I might agree. But that other group doesn’t exist. The Tea Party won more offices than all but the most optimistic of Tea Partiers could have imagined a few months ago.
Jimmy there isn’t a National Voting Block called “The Tea Party”. There is however one called “Republicans”.
Thurston B. Howell III
December 1st, 2010
1:38 pm
I take Tea at three thank you.
Hillbilly Deluxe
December 1st, 2010
2:05 pm
Thurston
I’ve always wondered, why did you take everything you owned, on a three hour tour?
BS Aplenty
December 1st, 2010
2:25 pm
Well argued, Mr. Wingfield.
I’d be interested in how the Cuban-American community, the Mexican-American, other Central American-American communities and other sub-groups would vote. I suspect the majority of the amnesty now group would be in those affected populations of Mexican-Americans and other Central American-Americans. Cuban-Americans don’t have much skin in the amnesty game, so to speak, but I could be mistaken.
BS Aplenty
December 1st, 2010
2:29 pm
Also, Bookman and Tucker continue to ban me from their blogs. This is DAY 43 in my hunger strike protest. I’ve started to lose weight. Nevertheless, my cause is just and they’re just confused. I think I used the “colored” too much as in, “I liked Mr. Luckovich’s ‘colored’ drawings.”
I think I used the word “plethora” on one of Ms. Tucker’s blogs and I could sense the outrage.
Jimmy62
December 1st, 2010
2:40 pm
Debbie: I guess it depends on what you mean by voting block. A whole bunch of people who vote the same way? Tea Party. An actual political party? Not the Tea Party. And there was a definite difference between establishment GOP candidates and Tea Party backed GOP candidates. Just because you don’t want to give credence to the Tea Party doesn’t mean it didn’t have a tremendous effect.
Skip
December 1st, 2010
3:06 pm
Had Chinese for lunch, the hot tea was good on a day like today.
A Hearty Cheese Sauce
December 1st, 2010
3:27 pm
As long as the Tequila Party remembers no alcohol sales on voting days.
jconservative
December 1st, 2010
3:46 pm
I would be more impressed by an electorate that did not make its voting decisions on the basis of the latest 30 second TV ad.
Not So Casual Observer
December 1st, 2010
4:49 pm
Debbie should go stand in the corner for failure to complete her homework.
How uninformed and inaccurate can one person be? Just read Debbie’s comments for unintentional humor.
Fear brings out the worst in Debbie and her fear of the Tea Party is obvious.
saywhat?
December 1st, 2010
7:26 pm
You have two real laughers in that column Kyle. The first has been pointed out by CJ and Debbie, namely this gem-”The Grassroots: The tea party famously began as a spontaneous eruption from people who weren’t already political operatives. Who are the people apparently pushing the tequila party? Political operatives.” It is embarrassing that you would ignore the well known REAL origins of the tea party, in an attempt to create some unnecessarily contrived difference between what would be two very different entities.It is as if you highlighted this particular “difference” purposefully to perpetuate the myth that the teaparty is a true grassroots group vs astro-turfed. Shameful.
The second laugher is this-”The tea party is focused on a narrow list of issues, but it is open to anyone who subscribes to those issues”
If the teaparty has any issue, it is “We don’t like Obama because he is a Democrat and won the election, and so we will criticize everything he does, everything he doesn’t do, and call him a socialist, even though it is apparent we don’t know what the word means”. This is not so much an actual isuue however, but rather just sour grapes over an election lost. But yes, the teaparty IS open to any who suscribes to that view, and one sees the high caliber of individual they attract.
The issue of immigration reform on the other hand is an actual issue of far reaching importance, that effects the economy, jobs, government spending, law enforcement, national security, human rights, etc. Whether any particular reforms would have positive or negative effects on all of these areas is certainly debatable, but at least it is worth debating. The teaparty “issue”, not so much.
Question Authority
December 2nd, 2010
12:53 pm
The Republican and Democratic parties are complete jokes. They only continue to exist because of the horribly restrictive ballot access laws they have passed over the decades that make the formation and success of any third party (or fourth, fifth, etc.) an impossibility. Combine that with the complicity of the media who generally only cover the two major parties and the deck is pretty well stacked against success for alternates.
Neither party has any true principles, other than a belief in big government to be used to enhance the financial stake of their particular group of “friends.” On one hand those who benefit from the welfare state and on the other those who benefit from the warfare state.
The founding fathers never envisioned political parties. At the time, the greatest difference between the two factions of Federalist and Anti-federalist was the need for a strong central government. Both at least agreed that the constitution provided limits and rights that could NEVER be violated. Now the two parties agree that there are NO LIMITS whatsoever especially if they can get majority support.
Good luck Tequila Party. Your goals are completely misguided but anything that helps destroy the duopoly that has destroyed america is a good thing. I’ll certainly throw back a few shots in support of your movement.
Tea Party Gains Respect « Thomas Jefferson Club Blog
December 3rd, 2010
8:09 am
[...] latest attempt to emulate the Tea Party is the “Tequila Party”, a Latino attempt at a grass-roots organization primarily aimed at immigration issues. The [...]