Skip to content

Issues effecting all citizens and country

How the Tea Party helped Trump

How the Tea Party helped Trump published on 1 Comment on How the Tea Party helped Trump

Fox News




How the Tea Party helped Trump win the election

By Jenny Beth Martin


Published November 12, 2016


Trump’s transition team considers Cabinet, key appointments

Now that the American people have hired Donald Trump and the Republicans to right the ship of state, it’s time to get to work.

Trump’s stunning win on Election Night defied the pollsters’ expectations, conventional wisdom about how campaigns must be run, and even the Washington Establishment’s narrative about what it is, exactly, that American voters want.

That last point is of particular interest to Tea Party conservatives. We have long argued that the Washington Establishment is disconnected from (and sometimes simply disinterested in) the issues that are most pressing to American voters.

By all accounts, Donald Trump should not have won. In fact, looking at any number of metrics, Trump’s campaign lagged far behind Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

For months, he consistently trailed Clinton in every major national poll. He raised significantly less money than she did (and as of the end of October, had raised only roughly half as much as Clinton’s campaign).

He underperformed in the first debate. And his campaign, we were constantly reminded, was light-years behind Clinton’s campaign in terms of a ground game, grassroots operations, and Get Out the Vote (GOTV) efforts.

The Republican nominee’s win, then, is nothing short of remarkable, and it challenges many of the fundamental beliefs held by the political class.

Donald Trump won because, at the end of the day, this election was not about money raised, or slick campaign operations. This election was about one overarching theme: ending the status quo in Washington, D.C.

Throughout his campaign, Trump reiterated his willingness to disrupt all of the “norms” in Washington. Those “norms” include the culture of cronyism, the backroom deals, and the pervasive notion that rules simply do not apply to the Washington Elites.

In electing Donald Trump, the American people delivered a firm repudiation of “business as usual” in Washington.

Donald Trump won his bid for the White House because he ran on overwhelmingly popular and commonsense issues, including bringing accountability to Washington, D.C., enforcing our nation’s immigration laws, and restoring fiscal sanity to the out-of-control spending culture that reigns in Washington.

If that agenda sounds familiar, it should. It’s the same agenda the Tea Party movement broadly, and Tea Party Patriots specifically, has helped to advance over the last several years.

Because of his willingness to stand up for our economic principles and our commitment to enforcing the country’s existing immigration laws already on the books, Tea Party Patriots activists across the country came together to back Mr. Trump.

Our army of activists engaged in a variety of voter-to-voter contacts, including knocking on tens of thousands of doors in swing states, writing out postcards with personal messages, and making more than 1.5 million volunteer phone calls.

Our efforts have paid off, and Tea Party Patriots Citizens Fund is proud of our tens of thousands of volunteers who devoted time and energy to ensuring that Donald Trump would win, and that the GOP would retain its majority in the Senate.

President-elect Donald Trump deserves to be congratulated, not only for winning the presidency, but also for campaigning so unabashedly on his promise to shake things up in Washington. Because of Trump’s consistent emphasis on his intentions to rein in the federal government, it turns out that the real loser in this election cycle was not primarily a political candidate or campaign, but, rather a political philosophy – namely, the political viewpoint that Big Government is the end-all and be-all solution to every problem. This viewpoint was the signature feature of Barack Obama’s presidency, and it was the campaign platform for all of the Democrats, from Hillary Clinton to Senate Democrat candidates. Americans resoundingly rejected that viewpoint this election cycle.

In addition to defeating the Big Government philosophy, another significant collateral “win” from this election is that it effectively mutes the Washington Establishment’s oft-repeated allegation that the tea party movement is dead.

The myth that the Tea Party movement has run its course and is on the decline is a convenient narrative, and a clever technique to dismiss and sideline an effective political opponent. After all, no one needs to take seriously a dormant or dead movement.

This election, however, is definitive proof not only of our ability to engage in political races and help the candidates win, but also affirms the broad popularity of our message and agenda.

Winning elections is only half the battle, of course. While we celebrate the election victories this week, we are also preparing for the next phase – helping Mr. Trump and the Republicans in Congress live up to their campaign pledges to repeal ObamaCare, pursue a balanced budget, immigration policies that respect the rule of law, and sound tax policy. In other words, the hard work really begins in January.

The Tea Party is looking forward to rolling up our collective sleeves and getting to work.

Jenny Beth Martin is co-founder and national coordinator of Tea Party Patriots, a national grassroots organization with more than 3500 chapters.

Prop 63 Whats Next Gun Control

Prop 63 Whats Next Gun Control published on

🌵 Yes, Prop 63 passed. Here’s what happens next.  🌵gun-control-210x210

Statement on Prop 63 & Where To Go From Here
November 9, 2016 By CRPA
With the passage of seven new gun bills in July that essentially duplicated Gavin Newsom’s Proposition 63, Prop 63 became redundant. So while still opposing the initiative aggressively, the Coalition for Civil Liberties’ partners, including the NRA, shifted some of their resources to fighting the battle that mattered most. With our victory in the presidential election, successful legal challenges will now be filed against all these new ill-conceived and unconstitutional laws, and those cases will be heard by a new Supreme Court that will see these laws as the Second Amendment violations that they are.

Meanwhile, Newsom’s self-promoting initiative has caused all of the major law enforcement associations to join with the Coalition and to uniformly condemn ill-conceived gun control efforts, while prompting hundreds of thousands of law abiding California gun owners to join NRA and CRPA, and to engage politically at a level not seen in decades. Those activists are now a part of the self-defense civil rights coalition political action committee, and a grassroots activist force that anti-gun-owner politicians will have to reckon with for years to come.

All of the Coalition partners greatly appreciate the efforts of and donation from these grassroots activists. NRA and CRPA are committed to marshalling our forces and newly developed resources to defend the right to choose to own a gun for sport, or to defend your family in California.

CRPA will be distributing more information about Prop 63 and the newly passed gun laws, and the Coalition for Civil Liberties’ plans for future advocacy on behalf of California gun owners within the next few days. In the meantime, you can learn more about these laws by watching the free webinars that NRA / CRPA prepared at www.crpa/org/webinars.

Chuck Michel
California Rifle & Pistol Association


TODAY IS TO VOTE ⚡ 🌀 published on

Congratulations Donald Trump

The Country Just Won   Leave a Comment








Vote published on

🌟 🍀 Dont Be Mislead 🌟 🍀

“‘Central View,” by William Hamilton, J.D., Ph.D.

Election 2016: Don’t be myth-guided

Although voting is a key function of citizenship, to vote or not vote is all-too-often the subject of myth:

My one vote won’t make a difference.Wrong. In 1910, the election in a New York Congressional District was decided by just one vote. Here are some state-level House or Senate races decided by one vote: 1968, Wisconsin; 1970, Missouri and Rhode Island; 1978, Rhode Island (again) and North Dakota; 1980, New Mexico and Utah; 1982, Massachusetts and Maine.

I’ll only vote for a candidate who thinks just as I do: Wrong. Only you have your own unique set of views on the issues. If you do not have the ability to run for office yourself, then you must give that role to someone who will run. But some compromise will be necessary. Vote for the candidate you think has the strength of character to stand up for the issues on which you are in agreement and will help you get at least a portion of what you believe in translated into reality. A half loaf is better than no loaf at all.

Voting for a splinter-party candidate will make a difference: Wrong. If you want to throw your vote away, then that is exactly the way to do it. Some voters think they are sending a “message” to the two major parties by voting for splinter-party candidates. If former President Teddy Roosevelt couldn’t win on a third-party ticket, it probably won’t ever happen. By voting for a third-party candidate, you are probably helping elect someone you don’t like at all.

When my wife and I don’t agree, I must cancel her vote: Wrong. Couples don’t always agree on every candidate and every ballot issue. They should talk it out. Sometimes, minds are changed. When that isn’t possible, work out a deal where one mate gives in on some issues and the other mate gives in on other issues. Vote cancelling achieves nothing.

Term Limits provide needed turnover and I don’t need to vote. Wrong. The Law of Unintended Consequences is always at work and it has a role to play with term limits. In many jurisdictions, term limits have either never been imposed or have been lifted. But, given that both sides think the federal government is corrupt, the idea of congressional term limits may be making a comeback.

It is better to vote for the person and not a political party: Often, wrong. If you judge one candidate to be a bad person and judge the other as good, vote for the good person. But if there are no issues of character between two candidates, one should look to see which candidate’s party is the majority party. After all, the point of voting is to get some of your agenda enacted. If one has a choice between an experienced member of the majority party versus a novice of the minority party, a vote for the majority candidate usually offers the way to get your agenda made into law. So, often it is better to vote for the party rather than the individual.

Don’t be myth-guided. And be sure to vote before or on November 8, 2016.

Nationally syndicated columnist, William Hamilton, is a laureate of the Oklahoma Journalism Hall of Fame, the Colorado Aviation Hall of Fame, the Oklahoma University Army ROTC Wall of Fame, and is a recipient of the University of Nebraska 2015 Alumni Achievement Award. He was educated at the University of Oklahoma, the Army Language School, the George Washington University, the U.S Naval War College, the University of Nebraska, and Harvard University.

©2016. William Hamilton.

San Bernardino Still Bleeding

San Bernardino Still Bleeding published on

☁ ☁

Dr. Lisa Bardack’s Faustian Bargain

Dr. Lisa Bardack’s Faustian Bargain published on

☁ ☁

Serious Medical Condition

Serious Medical Condition published on

⚡ 🌀 Is Hillary Sick ⚡ 🌀

San Bernardino Shootings

San Bernardino Shootings published on

👿 Deadly Shootings 👿