http://www.foxnews.com/poli...op-primary-kentucky/

Tea Party Favorite Rand Paul Wins Senate GOP Primary in Kentucky

Tea Party favorite Rand Paul, who defeated Republican establishment candidate Trey Grayson in Tuesday's GOP Senate primary in Kentucky, warned Washington to "watch out, here we come."

After giving the anti-big government movement its most significant political victory yet, Paul said the Tea Party movement has a message, loud and clear.

"We have come to take our government back," he said in his victory speech, drawing thunderous applause from his supporters.

"It's just a tremendous mandate for the Tea Party," he said. "It cannot be overstated that people want something new. They don't want the same old, same old politicians and I think they think the system is broken and needs new blood."

Paul was leading late Tuesday with 59 percent of the vote to Grayson's 35 percent, with nearly all the precincts reporting.

Secretary of State Grayson conceded the race, telling his supporters to "put all differences aside" and unite behind Paul.

"No candidate ever enjoys coming up short but in this moment of great challenges for our nation it is clear to me that theres much more at stake," he said.

Paul, son of Texas Rep. Ron Paul, is a 47-year-old Bowling Green eye surgeon who had never before run for office and turned to the Internet fundraising model used by his father to pay for his campaign. Grayson stayed competitive, drawing heavy financial support from traditional GOP donors inside Kentucky.

The Kentucky primary was one of several high-stakes Senate races in three states that political analysts were closely watching for a glimpse into the mood of the country's electorate less than five months before November's midterm elections, in which Republicans will seek to regain control of both houses in Congress.

Arlen Specter, a 30-year veteran of the Senate, lost the Pennsylvania Democratic primary to Rep. Joe Sestak. And in the Arkansas primary, Democratic Sen. Blanche Lincoln was forced into a runoff against her top party challenger, Lt. Gov. Bill Halter.

In a fourth race with national implications, Democrat Mark Critz beat Republican Tim Burns in a special election to fill out the final few months of the term of the late Pennsylvania Rep. John Murtha, keeping the seat in Democratic hands.

In Kentucky, Grayson was backed by the state's Republican establishment while Paul enjoyed the support of the Tea Party, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, retiring Sen. Jim Bunning and conservative Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina.

Democrats quickly sought to cast Paul's victory as a loss for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., who backed Grayson.

"Today, Kentucky Republicans selected Rand Paul as their Senate nominee, handing Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell a stunning loss," said Democratic National Chairman Tim Kaine in a written statement.

"In a show of weakness for the minority leader, and in a race that symbolized the fight over the heart and soul of the Republican Party, Rand Paul overcame McConnell's handpicked candidate by a large margin," he said. "Unfortunately for Republicans, ordinary Americans are unlikely to be receptive to extreme candidates like Rand Paul in the general election this November."

Murray resident Bill Osburn said he voted for Paul because "he's not a politician."

"I'm against the establishment. They're all crooked, unreliable and selfish for power," said Osburn, 79, a military retiree. "We need citizen representatives, not political politicians."

The two leading Democratic Senate candidates, Lt. Gov. Daniel Mongiardo and state Attorney General Jack Conway, were locked in a close race. Mongiardo barely lost six years ago to Bunning.

Although Kentucky is solidly Democratic by voter registration, it tends to vote Republican in federal races. The GOP holds both of the state's Senate seats and four of six House seats, and Republican John McCain carried the state in last year's presidential election with 57 percent of the vote.
******************

I won't predict who may win in November but, as the polls indicated, Americans or at least Kentuckians are tired of the status quo and spoke. Change and hope you can believe in. No, I'm not a member of the Tea Party but, I sense there's going to be a significant change in our government. Speaker Pelowsi said she was ready to lead, I hope she knows where the exit is so she can lead her minions out the door.

Ron

[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 05-19-2010).]

From my facebook page:
On tour in PA, Obama said: "It's just nice to get out of Washington." Well in 2012, we will make that happen, permanently. lol

A high school friend told me through posting her reply: "not funny."

I replied [about her statement] in [facebook's notes feature] notes:


It seems I may have ruffled more then a few feathers in my pages subject matter. Maybe I should apologize for that...

No, I will not!

Before I start, and you decide to play the race card; know this I was adopted and raised in an African American home by genuinely loving and trusting parents. I am not racist.

But I cannot stand by and watch our country turn into a socialist cess pool any more.

I watched as the currentl leadership in Washington assumed power. At the time I actually thought it was "neat."

But I soon woke up when I saw what was in my opinion several wrong turns in the direction our country was going in.

I was never, and I mean NEVER political before this. Hell I only voted for president twice: Once for Reagan in '84 and for Bush in '04.
But when I see political corectness and "you cannot do this because..."

And don''t even get me started on global warming and such...

Well, like many Americans I am fed up about the current leadership apologizing and bowing to foriegn powers.

I want my country back, and dammit I an entiled to live in a clean healthy America that apologizes to no one.

An international leader that other countries look up to and respect.

I will see to it with others that we have that America back once more.

Come 2010, and 2012, WE WILL TAKE AMERICA BACK.

you can take that to the bank.

um, that was a Republican candidate, not a Tea Party candidate. there is no Tea Party candidate. there is no Tea Party.

I am interested to see how the elections play out in the traditionally more liberal states. States like NY, California, etc, which predominantly elect democrats and liberals to office. If we start seeing a swing in those states, even if only a few seats here or there, I think that would be very telling towards how much support is behind the anti-big government movement.

Paul Victory in Kentucky Major Show of Tea Party Clout
http://www.newsmax.com/Head...2010/05/18/id/359429

quote Political novice Rand Paul rode support from tea party activists to victory in Kentucky's Republican Senate primary Tuesday night, delivering a jolt to the GOP establishment and providing fresh evidence of widespread voter discontent in a turbulent midterm election season... Whatever the fate of the parties, public opinion polls — and the defeat of two veteran lawmakers in earlier contests — already had turned the campaign into a year of living dangerously for incumbents.

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: um, that was a Republican candidate, not a Tea Party candidate. there is no Tea Party candidate. there is no Tea Party.

Should we even bother to explain it to him?

Schoen: Strong ‘Anti-Obama Vote’ in Results
http://www.newsmax.com/Insi...al&promo_code=9E85-1

quote Democratic pollster Doug Schoen told Fox News Tuesday night that election results are showing a strong “anti-Washington” and “anti-Obama” vote. With news that Obama-backed Arlen Specter was defeated and Tea Party favorite Rand Paul won, Schoen suggested that establishment candidates will be under fire this November. He said that the Tea Party’s power “can’t be underestimated” and that Paul’s election shows the level of anger among grass-roots Republicans to the party’s leadership in Washington. Still, he said the GOP should benefit this November because the Democrats control Congress and the White House. Schoen said if the Democrats don’t move quickly to the center, they are “going to pay a huge price” in Congressional elections.

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: um, that was a Republican candidate, not a Tea Party candidate. there is no Tea Party candidate. there is no Tea Party.

quote Originally posted by fierobear: Should we even bother to explain it to him?

quote Originally posted by Fformula88: I am interested to see how the elections play out in the traditionally more liberal states. States like NY, California, etc, which predominantly elect democrats and liberals to office. If we start seeing a swing in those states, even if only a few seats here or there, I think that would be very telling towards how much support is behind the anti-big government movement.

Yup, that's going to be interesting. Boxer, Pelosi and the CA governor's spots are all up for grabs.

Correction - Pelosi isn't up for re-election, but her Speaker's seat is in jeopardy depending on the Dem majority holding up.

[This message has been edited by fierobear (edited 05-19-2010).]

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: um, that was a Republican candidate, not a Tea Party candidate. there is no Tea Party candidate. there is no Tea Party.

I don't beleive anyone said Paul was a Tea Party candidate, only that the Tea Party is having an impact.

Whether you admit that the Tea Party is a political force or not, I don't really care.

I also see the Tea Party as a potentially dividing force in the Republican Party which could benefit Democrats but is attracting many independents but, they are a force. Get used to it.

Ron

[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 05-19-2010).]

quote Originally posted by fierobear: Yup, that's going to be interesting. Boxer, Pelosi and the CA governor's spots are all up for grabs.

Predictions from an outsider:

CA governor: Gray Davis comes back to run. lol

Boxer: loss.
Pelosi: squeaks out a win. The SF voters may not have had enough Kool aid yet.

I do hope I am wrong, but somehow I see pelosi winning. Why I dont know, but it just seems to me SF will never vote in someone who isnt left. (OPINION)

Its about the chances of Berkeley turning consertave.

Of course I lived in the high desert of CA, so its not I actually know whats going on in CA government.

quote Originally posted by fierobear: Should we even bother to explain it to him?

I say let it be a surprise. LOL.

Brad

quote Originally posted by blackrams: I don't beleive anyone said Paul was a Tea Party candidate, only that the Tea Party is having an impact. Whether you admit that the Tea Party is a political force or not, I don't really care. I also see the Tea Party as a potentially dividing force in the Republican Party which could benefit Democrats but is attracting many independents but, they are a force. Get used to it. Ron

fear not - it wont be. They can do nothing but vote Republican - as shown above.
the Tea Party would be a subset of the Republican party - if it was an actual political party - but it is not.
They will never vote Libertarian, which is an actual party, which represents their actual ideals.
members of the republican party are republicans
members of the democrat party are democrats
members of the tea party are tea? nope. they are republicans. again - as shown above.
trying to ride the cool wave of history
and spewing up some rebranding to distance themselves from GW Bush.
and, even more so, dont actually have ANYTHING to do with the actual event known as the Tea Party

quote Originally posted by htexans1: Predictions from an outsider: CA governor: Gray Davis comes back to run. lol

No, it's even worse than that...Jerry Brown is back! Poll numbers look pretty good for Meg Whitman against Brown.

Governor Moobat...again??? Gawd, I hope not.

quote Boxer: loss.

Yeah, it doesn't look good for Boxer. They say if an incumbent is polling below 50%, they're in *serious* trouble. She's in a [url=]dead heat with Tom Campbell.

I really dont know, but seems to me there is nothing to say there cant be a tea party, is there anything that says there is only permitted to be a republican and democrant and liberal? I dont recall anything. This isnt about this thread, since no one said he was a member of the tea party, but who is to say there couldnt be one? Course most of the values align with the republican party so it probably wont happen, but more choice wouldnt be a bad thing.

quote Originally posted by 86GT3.4DOHC: I really dont know, but seems to me there is nothing to say there cant be a tea party, is there anything that says there is only permitted to be a republican and democrant and liberal? I dont recall anything. This isnt about this thread, since no one said he was a member of the tea party, but who is to say there couldnt be one? Course most of the values align with the republican party so it probably wont happen, but more choice wouldnt be a bad thing.

mostly the point
there CAN be a Tea Party, but noone would vote for them, because their potential voters will vote Republican

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: um, that was a Republican candidate, not a Tea Party candidate. there is no Tea Party candidate. there is no Tea Party.

Before the election is done, most dems will be aligning themselves with the ideals of the so called non existent Tea Party.
The dem in PA has already started the ball rolling.

quote Originally posted by partfiero: Before the election is done, most dems will be aligning themselves with the ideals of the so called non existent Tea Party. The dem in PA has already started the ball rolling.

we can only hope.
but, it is still not a party. and never will be.
its called Libertarian. but, being unable to vote for anything but Republicans makes it moot.

Yes the democrats are going to get slaughtered, it was a very narrow victory last time, and the wool has fallen away from the eyes of most of their supporters, people have realized that healthcare was a horrible idea, even a majority of those who wanted it so badly in the begining, and people are starting to realize this great change they wanted is not the change they are getting. All the dems are doing diffrently is trying to buy votes from the needy by expanding government assistance programs.

I dont know there could be an 'inbetween' party, most of the critical issues are black and white, and it seems always one party is at the far extreme of issue A where as the other party is trying to compromise a little on the same issue, thus being in the middle ground.

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: we can only hope. but, it is still not a party. and never will be. its called Libertarian. but, being unable to vote for anything but Republicans makes it moot.

It is not a political party in the R or D or L sense.
It is like you starting a movement and calling it the Pyrthian Party.
And even though most it's ideals may align itself with Socialism, (not saying you are), it is not really a Socialist party, even though the Socialist Party candidate may benefit from the block of votes that you hold.
And if The Pyrthian Party has a big enough block of votes, then all of the candidates will claim they have these same Socialistic views, be it they are from the What Ever Party, because getting elected is NUMBER ONE> and lying about your true colors is a small sacrifice to gain power.

quote Originally posted by blackrams: ................................... I also see the Tea Party as a potentially dividing force in the Republican Party which could benefit Democrats but is attracting many independents but, they are a force. Get used to it. Ron

This is a REAL danger. I take comfort in the fact that they are not supporting candidates on an independent or third-party ticket. They are supporting candidates who are MORE conservative than the RNC supported candidate.

Voting for a candidate other than one who is in one of the two major parties will only split the vote. If that happens, Obama will be the recipient of a second, lame-duck term. Do we need to be reminded of Ross Perot?

If that happens, God save us.

quote Originally posted by texasfiero: This is a REAL danger. I take comfort in the fact that they are not supporting candidates on an independent or third-party ticket. They are supporting candidates who are MORE conservative than the RNC supported candidate. Voting for a candidate other than one who is in one of the two major parties will only split the vote. If that happens, Obama will be the recipient of a second, lame-duck term. Do we need to be reminded of Ross Perot? If that happens, God save us.

and this is my point in a nutshell - the Tea Party is the Republican party. they will NEVER vote any other way than republican.
it is an attempt to re-brand republicans and distance themselves from GW Bush.

next, we'll get Democrats trying to rebrand themselves from Obama - just wait - they'll call themselves the Paul Reveres or some crap like that.....
or maybe the Democrat women, and call themselves the Liberty Belles.....

or, maybe stealing a name from WWII would be a better choice?

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: and this is my point in a nutshell - the Tea Party is the Republican party.

Yes, they ARE Republicans, but they are VERY angry at RINOs who call themselves conservative and govern as liberal democrats. They are supporting alternatives to the RNC candidate in most cases. They'll solidly get behind true conservative candidates.

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian:they will NEVER vote any other way than republican. it is an attempt to re-brand republicans and distance themselves from GW Bush.

Would you rather they turn from what they believe and give us more Obamism? We understand that voting third-party only gives us the lesser of three evils.

The reason that the 'Tea-Party' exists in the first place is that they had to hold their noses and vote for McCain.

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: and this is my point in a nutshell - the Tea Party is the Republican party. they will NEVER vote any other way than republican. it is an attempt to re-brand republicans and distance themselves from GW Bush. next, we'll get Democrats trying to rebrand themselves from Obama - just wait - they'll call themselves the Paul Reveres or some crap like that..... or maybe the Democrat women, and call themselves the Liberty Belles..... or, maybe stealing a name from WWII would be a better choice?

The dems are already running away from BO. In Nov he will be sitting on his hands for the most part and not out stumping.
The BO controlled Progressive Democratic Party is quickly dissolving because the majority of Americans are not behind their policies.
This is an opening for the Clintons to once again dominate the party. But this will only bring more division.
The Republicans are in the same boat in the sense that is is time to realign, little to do with Bush as he is not in control of the party.
The Tea Party block will bring fresh blood to the party, while the Democrat Party is stuck with the old cancerous blood until they are defeated and are forced to realign.
That's the politics baby. Constant realignment is why we have survived so long.

[This message has been edited by partfiero (edited 05-19-2010).]

quote Originally posted by texasfiero: Yes, they ARE Republicans, but they are VERY angry at RINOs who call themselves conservative and govern as liberal democrats. They are supporting alternatives to the RNC candidate in most cases. They'll solidly get behind true conservative candidates.

They are not just rebubs, I know a few dems that are joining and have heard there are quite a few in the ranks already and of course there is very strong libertarian support.

It is almost getting laughable listening to the liberal news and talk shows take it upon themselves to define the tea party. Hysterical really. Only thing funnier are the morons that buy that horse poo.

I would not be surprised at all if the tea party in fact ends up backing some of the more sensible, moderate dems. I see good things coming from this.

quote Originally posted by Red88FF: They are not just rebubs, I know a few dems that are joining and have heard there are quite a few in the ranks already and of course there is very strong libertarian support. It is almost getting laughable listening to the liberal news and talk shows take it upon themselves to define the tea party. Hysterical really. Only thing funnier are the morons that buy that horse poo. I would not be surprised at all if the tea party in fact ends up backing some of the more sensible, moderate dems. I see good things coming from this.

quote Originally posted by Red88FF: They are not just rebubs, I know a few dems that are joining and have heard there are quite a few in the ranks already and of course there is very strong libertarian support. It is almost getting laughable listening to the liberal news and talk shows take it upon themselves to define the tea party. Hysterical really. Only thing funnier are the morons that buy that horse poo. I would not be surprised at all if the tea party in fact ends up backing some of the more sensible, moderate dems. I see good things coming from this.

yup. it sure could. but it wont.
if they would actually support their ideals, and not the republicans
but they wont. they cant. as explained above.

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: um, that was a Republican candidate, not a Tea Party candidate. there is no Tea Party candidate. there is no Tea Party.

There is in Michigan. A group of Soros-bots is currently paying $1 a signature to put a "TEA Party" candidate on the ballots to split the conservative vote come November.

quote Originally posted by D B Cooper: There is in Michigan. A group of Soros-bots is currently paying $1 a signature to put a "TEA Party" candidate on the ballots to split the conservative vote come November.

and there ya go!
the Republicans dont need to listen to the Tea Party because they already know the Tea Party folk will vote republican anyways

I'd consider voting Tea Party vs my usual Libertarian.
Rarely will I vote R or D - but I did vote for Clinton the 2nd time

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: um, that was a Republican candidate, not a Tea Party candidate. there is no Tea Party candidate. there is no Tea Party.

Sometimes it pays to go to the top of a thread and read through again. I did.

The question was: "Who says the Tea Party hasn't made an impact?" Pyrthian!

quote Originally posted by texasfiero: Sometimes it pays to go to the top of a thread and read through again. I did. The question was: "Who says the Tea Party hasn't made an impact?" Pyrthian!

and it hasnt, has it?

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: and it hasnt, has it?

Being stuck in a hole probably isn't much fun. Your argument that the Tea Party isn't a "Party" isn't even a question in this. You are correct that it isn't a nationally recognized/incorporated or administered political group yet. It may never be, only time will tell. I agree and recognize that but, that doesn't mean that those who consider themselves as members of the Tea Party, the Boy Scouts of America, or the Catholic Church can't affect the political direction of our government. The Tea Party has effectively demonstrated that power in the KY race.

Ron

quote Originally posted by blackrams: Being stuck in a hole probably isn't much fun. Your argument that the Tea Party isn't a "Party" isn't even a question in this. You are correct that it isn't a nationally recognized/incorporated or administered political group yet. It may never be, only time will tell. I agree and recognize that but, that doesn't mean that those who consider themselves as members of the Tea Party, the Boy Scouts of America, or the Catholic Church can't affect the political direction of our government. The Tea Party has effectively demonstrated that power in the KY race. Ron

trying to make things mean something they dont aint much fun, or very honest
so, Tea Club would be more accurate? I'll buy that.

so, you (or Mr Paul) trying to imply that without the Tea Club, Democrats would have won, eh?
well, I suppose you are completely allowed to think that.
the Tea Club is the republican party. thats it. you can try and make up all the excuses you like.
no Tea Club member is ever gonna vote other than replublican, and the republican party knows that, so they dont have to listen to any of this nonsense.

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: um, that was a Republican candidate, not a Tea Party candidate. there is no Tea Party candidate. there is no Tea Party.

Depends on how you define party. To me it is.

[This message has been edited by User00013170 (edited 05-19-2010).]

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: and there ya go! the Republicans dont need to listen to the Tea Party because they already know the Tea Party folk will vote republican anyways

Or if they don't like their candidate, they just won't vote?
That is why they are listening now, even the (oxymoron)>"smart dems" are listening.

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: yup. it sure could. but it wont. if they would actually support their ideals, and not the republicans but they wont. they cant. as explained above.

You are making blanket statements that are only your theories, many people do not fit the mold you are casting them in.

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: members of the tea party are tea? nope. they are republicans. again - as shown above.

quote and this is my point in a nutshell - the Tea Party is the Republican party. they will NEVER vote any other way than republican.

Don't ever call me a Republican, or accuse me of only voting Republican! I left that party because they moved to the left. For your information, I'm a member of the Constitution Party, because it's the one that most closely stands for what I believe. But I'll vote for the best candidate, and that has nothing to do with their party affiliation.

But I am also aware of the danger of "splitting the vote", so I will get behind the conservative who has the best chance of winning. I DETEST voting for the lesser of two (or more) evils, because that's still voting for evil, but there is such a thing as reality.

All of this is a waste of keystrokes, because I believe We the People no longer have a real influence on the eventual outcome of America's direction. The forces in charge of that are far too powerful now for anything but God to stand in their way of us becoming part of a global governance.

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: so, you (or Mr Paul) trying to imply that without the Tea Club, Democrats would have won, eh?

Mr. Paul did not beat a Democrat, this was a primary. What he did was beat Senator Mitch McConnell's and the NRC's pick to fill Senator Bunnings seat.
But, the question still stands. Tell me how the Tea Party didn't impact this primary.

Ron

[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 05-19-2010).]