A new video from the American Association of Evangelicals says this about George Soros: “through his many funding ventures, has been busily infiltrating the Christian base in America to divide, and ultimately conquer, the religious minded within the Republican Party.”
In the AAE press release they name Reverend Jim Wallis who is touring the states right now to get Christians to vote against Republicans. “Rev. Jim Wallis and allies are now touring many states on ‘Vote Common Good’ buses to … split the evangelical vote before the mid-term elections.”
The video shows a voice recording of Jim Wallis the leader of Sojourners ministry denying he got funds from George Soros. Cheryl Chumley of the Washington Times said this: “But guess what? His denial’s proven a bit — umm, wrong.
Soros-tied Open Society money and grant dollars have not only flowed by the hundreds of thousands of dollars to the Sojourners, AAE reported. But Soros-tied Open Society money and grant dollars have been flowing to the Sojourners for some time.”
“Soros Funding of Sojourners Is Only the Tip of the Iceberg,” wrote National Review in August of 2010. Not only that but this has been going on for years. The Blaze reported this back in October 2011: ““George SorosSends $150000 to Jim Wallis‘ Left-Wing Group Sojourners.”
The Sojourners has wholly given themselves over to the left but continues to masquerade as Evangelical Christians doing the work of Christ.
Their website says things like, “We are evangelicals, Catholics, Pentecostals and Protestants; progressives and conservatives; blacks, whites, Latinos, and Asians; women and men; young and old … [and] seek to discover the intersection of faith, politics, and culture,”
Their magazine says things like “No Wall Between Amigos.” And this: “Conservative Court-Packing Isn’t About Abortion — It’s About Culture: If the Right really cares about abortion, they should reduce poverty.” And this: “In the Midst of a Political Emergency: The administration is threatening the soul of this nation.”
They oppose Trump at every turn. They espouse big government socialism. Remember, they are touring 31 states for the single purpose of getting Christians to vote for Democrats.
There’s nothing pro-Donald Trump, pro-conservative, pro-limited government, pro-Constitution about this group’s goals — or, for that matter, about the Vote Common Good bus tour, currently winding through 31 cities of America.
The front organization for this tour is called Vote Common Good. It’s leader Doug Pagitt said this: ““we believe the Trump administration needs to be restrained” and that he simply wants Americans to “consider the common good when they vote.”
Cheryl Chumley says “What’s going on here is not so much Christianity as it is partisan politicking under cover of religious teaching. It’s the furtherance of a George Soros style of progressivism, but cloaked in Christianity — and backed by George Soros bucks — and made all the worse by the initial denials of the George Soros ties.
Anyone can toss down a Christian card, even an atheist. But a clue to identify an anti-American enemy is the wolves always want Big Government, bigger government, a more powerful centralized system with weakened rights for the individual — and if it’s secret Soros dollars and Bible-thumping that gets them there, so be it.”
Be on guard! Don’t be fooled and don’t forget to vote. This is the single most important election in our lifetime.
By now you have heard or seen the video of Lance Wallnau relating the prophetic warning given to Evangelical leaders by Trump. Trump’s description of the left’s hate for the church, and the plans they have for us after the November midterms are hair-raising.
One of the dumbest things anyone has ever said to me was, “have faith Mario, we got this.” Those words embody everything that is wrong with the American church’s condition near the November midterm elections. It oozes entitlement. It drips with denial. It’s faith without works and it is dead. It is a recipe for disaster.
Look at me: If the election were held today, Republicans would lose the House of Representatives and possibly the Senate. Everything Trump has done for the rights of Christians—the ones Obama removed—would be removed again. On top of that, the most oppressive laws you can imagine would flood American churches from Washington.
Mueller’s investigation would look like a picnic compared to the tidal wave of investigations the left would undertake.
Thugs would be emboldened to physically attack conservatives and Christians. Social media would tear off its mask and fully censor the church.
Right now, Trump and his family are facing hatred that is unimaginable. They hate him because of the long list of things he has done to protect your church. That’s because the left hates you. Hello?
Are you still holding on to the grudge of what the man was 10 years ago? Shame on you!
And what has the church done to repay Trump for his nameless, daily agony on our behalf? We reward him with apathy, ingratitude and ignorance. My friend, we are about to pay an incalculable price for our warped view of this hour.
Don’t be one of those who rejects my warning because you can’t imagine it. Here’s something you can imagine: California. Do you honestly believe many pastors will get in their pulpits in California and tell their people to vote Republican? Of course not.
To those of you that still hold to the fantasy that “we got this,” let me ask you this: Do you see many Pastors at all telling their congregations to vote Republican? Do you see the popular leaders of the Body of Christ unified behind stopping the left’s agenda?
Satan has seduced many preachers who lead empires and independent kingdoms. They—at this hour—will not unify to speak to the nation as one voice. They can’t afford to offend for the sake of finances. Little do they know that once the left gains power they will have no empire left to defend.
Mario is there any hope? Yes, but we need God put electrode paddles to our faintly beating hearts. We need holy rage, holy boldness. We need to talk to every believer we know and wake them up to vote and to tell others to vote. We need to confront Pastors to get in their pulpit and energize believers by the millions.
I realize that it takes courage to support Trump and our faith at this hour. Just remember, right now it is hard but if we lose in November it will go from hard to impossible.
No one believes in miracles more than I—and that’s just what we must have at this hour. We need a miracle of repentance, boldness…but it all begins with humble appreciation that we have this man in the White House.
Remember the horror you felt when you thought Hillary might be president? Save that feeling, you’ll likely need it this November. Up until today I could say Republicans had an edge for the midterms because of money and the victories Trump has won. Now, I can’t say that.
An old familiar virus is infecting the church. It is removing the sense of urgency that got Trump Elected. It is bringing back failed ideas that sidelined the church in two disastrous presidential elections.
In 2008 we were warned what Barack Obama would do. Pastors didn’t think it was right to get involved in politics. On top of that, millions of Christians, with a murky understanding of the Bible voted for him. Those fallacies are back in the church.
Obama ended up being far worse than we could have imagined. The vast machinery of the left that he set in place is still dismantling our freedom. How soon we forget the price of apathy.
By taking the House and the Senate, the left can do as much damage as having Hillary in the White House. The first thing they will do is impeach Donald Trump. While it will take more than impeachment to remove him from office—they will move to do that next.
Before you write me off as an alarmist let me ask some simple questions?
Do you see Christian Leaders trying to rally the church to stop leftist candidates? Think about what everyone is preaching right now. Do you hear anything about the looming threat to our freedom and our children’s? My guess is that you don’t.
Do you notice how many in the church are apathetic because they think that Trump’s victory is the only real victory we need? They are blissfully ignorant of the need for a whole new effort to organize and defeat the coming threat.
Do you realize that there is only one thing you need to know to vote in the midterm election? It goes beyond the fact that they want to take away the second amendment, they would to return to the deficits and government regulations that were strangling our economy and they would go back to the foreign policy that endangered us.
Here is the one thing you must remember: The Democratic Party has declared war on Christianity. Think about it…
Who bankrupted Christian bakers? Who devastated the Little Sisters of the Poor? Who told our chaplains not to mention Christ to our soldiers? Who told pastors they would lose their tax exemption if they told their congregations how to vote? Who put Billy Graham Evangelistic Association’s nonprofit status in suspense for telling voters to vote their conscience? Who booed God and Israel at their convention? Who changed marriage? Who made your children go to schools with transgender bathrooms?
You are about to see the vilest campaign in American history. The left will divest itself of all decency. There will be a billion dollars burned on a propaganda campaign to label anyone who supports Trump or Republicans as racist, sexist, homophobic, and mentally challenged.
Christians are just not prepared—at least not yet—to stand against this wicked assault.At this moment, an old lie is resurfacing—it is the idea that to be sweet Christians we must not take stands that make us look bad.
The other lie is the one that says since God is sovereign and omnipotent we should just trust the outcome of November.
The Word of God shows us that God has chosen to use prayer, repentance, and obedience. 2 Chronicles 7:14 begins with “if my people.” That proves it is on us.
Between now and November I will be doing everything God tells me to warn and provoke the church to action.
President Obama readies a sweeping list of executive actions.
Tied to court-ordered deadlines, legal mandates and international climate talks, the efforts scheduled for the next two months show that President Barack Obama is prepared to spend the remainder of his term unleashing sweeping executive actions to combat global warming. And incoming Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell will have few options for stopping the onslaught, though Republicans may be able to slow pieces of it.
The coming rollout includes a Dec. 1 proposal by EPA to tighten limits on smog-causing ozone, which business groups say could be the costliest federal regulation of all time; a final rule Dec. 19 for clamping down on disposal of power plants’ toxic coal ash; the Jan. 1 start date for a long-debated rule prohibiting states from polluting the air of their downwind neighbors; and a Jan. 8 deadline for issuing a final rule restricting greenhouse gas emissions from future power plants. That last rule is a centerpiece of Obama’s most ambitious environmental effort, the big plan for combating climate change that he announced at Georgetown University in June 2013.
On top of all that, the administration is expected in the coming weeks to pledge millions of dollars — and possibly billions — to help poor countries deal with the effects of climate change.
The administration was committed to all these deadlines many months ago, in some cases under court order, after postponing many of the actions until after the 2012 or 2014 elections. Now that Obama is almost out of time, they’re coming all at once.
On deck are even more climate actions that will stretch well into 2015. In June, EPA is due to put out a final version of its rule for cutting greenhouse gases from the nation’s existing power plants — the linchpin of Obama’s entire climate effort.
“In a world that was turned upside down on Election Day, two things are certain,” said Heather Zichal, who served as Obama’s top climate change adviser until 2013. “One: Corporate polluters and their allies in Congress will continue to fight against progress on the broader climate agenda. Two: The president is and will remain 100 percent committed to his climate action plan and he’ll fight to protect it.”
The kicker for Republicans eager to stomp all over the president’s agenda: Congress has little immediate recourse, despite McConnell’s pledges to use “the spending process” to rein in EPA. With so much action rolling through the pipeline, Republicans will have to choose their battles carefully if they want to make headway while proving they can govern.
In an interview after Election Day, McConnell acknowledged that stopping Obama will be difficult, given the president’s veto power. McConnell has also promised a return to regular order, and Republicans probably won’t want to repeat last year’s government shutdown in hopes of forcing the president’s hand.
“I think that actually preventing EPA from moving forward on the climate change regs will be a challenge,” said industry attorney Jeff Holmstead, who headed the agency’s air office during the George W. Bush administration.
If Congress tries to defang “high profile” regulations like those on carbon emissions, “we would expect the president to veto,” said Cal Dooley, a former Democratic member of Congress who heads the chemical industry’s trade association. “And I don’t expect that you’ll have a two-thirds vote in the Senate to override.”
Greens are counting on Obama to hold the line, especially on climate change.
“We are very confident that he will continue to take the common sense steps necessary to make this strong plan a reality,” League of Conservation Voters President Gene Karpinski said in an email. “That may not please the climate change deniers, but it is the right thing to do for our health, our economy, and our security.”
On the other hand, a GOP-led Congress could pass agency-specific spending bills with riders that undercut rules that seem less important to Obama. Some Republicans think he might swallow an attack on the ozone rule, for example.
Christine Todd Whitman, who served as George W. Bush’s first EPA administrator, said the Republicans’ new Senate leaders will at least try to hobble the agency.
“It’s going to get harder for EPA,” she said. “With Jim Inhofe as chair of the Environment and Public Works Committee, I think what they’re going to do is starve the agency.”
EPA is not the only agency pushing new rules, however. The Interior Department is also expected to release a long-delayed draft regulation in the spring that tightens limits on mountaintop-removal coal mining.
And Obama’s negotiators are working on plans for an international global warming agreement, set to be signed in Paris at the end of 2015, that would require the U.S. and other nations to slash greenhouse gas emissions for decades to come.
The U.S. is also expected to announce in the coming weeks how much money it will contribute to an international fund for helping poor countries deal with the effects of global warming. Developed countries have pledged to raise $100 billion a year from government and private sources for that cause by 2020, with some of the money going to the fund. But the prospect of handing billions of dollars in climate aid to the developing world is not going to win much applause from Republicans, who could block the money through the appropriations process.
The U.S. will probably announce its pledge before or during a Nov. 20 meeting in Berlin.
“I think this will be one of the more challenging outcomes of the elections in terms of implementing the administration’s climate plan,” said Heather Coleman, climate change policy manager at Oxfam America.
The administration had previously postponed many of the upcoming regulatory actions, most notoriously with the surprise September 2011 decision to squelch EPA’s proposal to lower its smog limits. That decision blindsided both EPA leaders and environmentalists, and was widely regarded as an effort to defuse a major regulatory controversy before Obama had to run for reelection.
Similarly, EPA issued a proposed rule on coal ash in 2010, but sat on it for nearly four years until a federal court imposed a deadline for this December.
All the glare focusing on Obama’s big climate rules means that other items on his environmental agenda are getting less public attention than they once did. That could aid Republicans’ push to weaken some of regulations through negotiations with the White House and EPA, perhaps with deals to delay rules rather than repeal them outright. But that would depend on McConnell keeping the House from insisting on hardcore anti-EPA bills that would be surefire veto bait.
The word from the Hill “is that McConnell really is interested in trying to show that Republicans can get things done, so I think they’re going to try to come up with some narrow bills where the President could sign,” Holmstead said.
Among other possibilities, Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.) hopes to bring up legislation that would shift authority away from EPA on regulating coal ash ponds. Given the agency’s previous reluctance to deal with coal ash at all, the White House might not fight him too hard.
Efforts to tighten ozone regulations are clearly not a top White House priority either, given Obama’s efforts to punt the rule in 2011. But defying the court deadline to finish the rule — “that’s where it’s going to take congressional action,” Dooley said. The manufacturing industry broadly opposes tightening the ozone standards, which it says could make permits more difficult and expensive to obtain.
Former Sen. Tim Wirth, a Democrat who served as the Clinton administration’s top international climate negotiator, thinks Obama will push through his main agenda regardless of what Republicans come up with.
“He’ll just do what he’s going to do anyway,” Wirth said.
Romney: ‘This Is Really The Last Chance For America To Pass Judgment On The Obama Administration’
November 3, 2014 8:10 AM
WASHINGTON — Claiming new momentum 48 hours before polls open across America, Republicans on Sunday assailed President Barack Obama in a final weekend push to motivate voters as Democrats deployed their biggest stars to help preserve an endangered Senate majority.
GOP officials from Alaska to Georgia seized on the president’s low approval ratings, which have overshadowed an election season in which roughly 60 percent of eligible voters are expected to stay home.
“This is really the last chance for America to pass judgment on the Obama administration and on its policies,” the GOP’s 2012 presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, said in a message echoed by Republicans across the country on the weekend.
The president has avoided the nation’s most competitive contests in recent weeks, but encouraged Democrats to reject Republican cynicism during a Sunday appearance with Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy.
“Despite all the cynicism America is making progress,” Obama said, imploring Democrats to vote on Tuesday. “Don’t stay home. Don’t let somebody else choose your future for you.”
While the elections will determine winners in all 435 House districts and in 36 governors’ seats, the national focus is on the Senate, where Republicans need to net six seats to control the majority in the Congress that convenes in January. The GOP already controls the House, and a Senate takeover could dramatically change Obama’s last two years in office.
Republicans appear certain of picking up at least three Senate seats — in West Virginia, Montana and South Dakota. Nine other Senate contests are considered competitive, six of them for seats in Democratic hands.
Democratic Party leaders are predicting victory despite disappointing polls.
“I’m very proud of this president,” head of the Democratic National Committee, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., said. “I think we’re going to win the Senate.”
In New Hampshire, former secretary of state Hillary Rodham Clinton headlined a rally for Gov. Maggie Hassan and Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, a Democrat locked in a tough re-election battle against former Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown.
Clinton, who is weighing a 2016 presidential bid, charged that Republicans are running a campaign of fear.
“Fear is the last resort for those who have run out of ideas and hope,” she said in her first appearance in New Hampshire since October 2008.
And in Georgia, where Democrats see an opportunity to gain a seat in traditionally GOP territory, Republican David Perdue repeatedly called Democrat Michelle Nunn a “rubber stamp” for Obama during a Sunday debate.
Nunn mockingly told Perdue he sounds like he’s “running against the president.”
“You’re running against me, David,” Nunn said.
In Colorado, Democratic Sen. Mark Udall’s best hope remains a robust ground game. He made four stops at campaign offices to fire up door-knockers, reminding them, in classic Colorado fashion, to knock on doors before the Broncos game.
“We’re going to bring this one home in the next 72 hours,” Udall said in the suburb of Centennial, telling volunteers to disregard polls that find him narrowly trailing Republican Rep. Cory Gardner.
While the campaigns’ costly voter turnout operations were in full swing, large percentages of younger voters and minorities — groups that typically support Democrats — are expected to sit out the elections altogether.
None of the last four midterm elections drew more than 38 percent of the voting-age population.
Early voting has been strong, however.
At least 16.7 million people have voted so far across 31 states, according to early voting data monitored by The Associated Press. Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Louisiana, Maryland, Montana, North Carolina, Wisconsin and Utah already surpassed their 2010 advance totals; party registration is divided about equally among those who have already cast ballots.
Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell cited encouraging polls as he campaigned across Kentucky, where he’s trying to hold off a challenge from Democrat Alison Lundergan Grimes.
“We expect to win,” McConnell said after riding in a Veterans Day Parade. “This election is largely a referendum on the president of the United States. Most people in my state and I hope around the country believe we need to go in a different direction.”
The final Sunday before the election was bringing out big names, including some who aren’t on the ballot now but could be in 2016.
While Clinton and Obama were on the trail, Vice President Joe Biden campaigned with Florida Republican-turned-Democrat Charlie Crist, who’s trying to unseat Republican Gov. Rick Scott.
“Stand up and show it! Speak up! Vote!” Biden said at a Florida International University event aimed at Hispanic voters.
On the Republican side, former Gov. Jeb Bush, another 2016 primary prospect, campaigned with Scott.
Romney, who reiterated on Sunday that he would not make a third White House run, was campaigning in Alaska with Senate candidate Dan Sullivan and Gov. Sean Parnell.
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who is expected to enter the 2016 Republican presidential primary, made stops in South Carolina, Illinois, Maryland and Pennsylvania. And Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul was campaigning in Kentucky.
Wasserman Schultz appeared on ABC’s “This Week,” while Romney was interviewed on “Fox News Sunday.”
October 29, 2014 White House officials are preemptively spinning a midterm defeat, and they’re using their own fantasies to do it. They’re starting to blame candidates for not supporting President Obama enough. As a top White House official toldThe Washington Post‘s Karen Tumulty, “He doesn’t think they have any reason to run away from him. He thinks there is a strong message there.”
This is pure delusion: Obama is the main reason Republicans are well-positioned to win control of the upper chamber next Tuesday. And Democrats’ biggest strategic mistake in this election is that most candidates didn’t run away far and fast enough. Given the president’s rock-bottom approval numbers in the many Republican-friendly Senate states that Democrats needed to win—as well as the reality of a worsening political environment for the party as early as last winter—that distance was a downright necessity. But a host of Senate candidates failed to create it, and the party is likely to pay the price in Senate seats.
Some candidates bought the White House’s view that the president’s problems were temporary, or only a problem in the most conservative of states. Others naively thought they could pivot away from the president’s problems in hope of individualizing the races and focusing on their challengers’ vulnerabilities. Several understood that moving to the center could risk alienating a base that they needed to turn out, given the party’s much-vaunted Bannock Street ground game. But as the candidates win only weak support from outside the most committed Democrats, those assumptions deserve to be reevaluated. Now, more than ever, it’s clear that individual Democrats could use some clear brand separation from President Obama.
In the traditional swing states such as Colorado and New Hampshire, Sens. Mark Udall and Jeanne Shaheen didn’t think they’d have to break with Obama all that much. After all, they presumed, the Republican Party’s brand was in even worse shape than the president’s.
And in the conservative states held by Democrats, senators tried to have it both ways without telegraphing their differences starkly enough. Simply calling for unspecified fixes to a deeply unpopular health care law, for example, wasn’t sufficient to keep enough disaffected white voters on their side. And while most red-state Democrats tweaked the president for delaying construction of the Keystone XL pipeline, those in the Senate were telegraphing their impotence by not being able to persuade the president otherwise.
An outright rebuke of President Obama wouldn’t have been viable in several Republican states, such as Georgia, Louisiana, and North Carolina, where high turnout among African-American voters is a necessity for Democrats to hang onto the seats. But in ruby-red states where white voters make up a sizable share of the population, Democrats should have been doing their best Joe Manchin impersonations early on.
In Kentucky, Alison Lundergan Grimes was a fresh face who wasn’t burdened by controversial votes in Congress. She benefited by running against Mitch McConnell, whose personal ratings were weak and who faced problems on his right flank, spending all spring fighting off a tea-party primary challenger. But Grimes prioritized appealing to the Democrats’ deep-pocketed donor class above winning over disaffected up-for-grabs voters in her home state. It would have been a defensible strategy, if the political environment in 2014 was more favorable for Democrats. After all, she was one of the Democrats’ most successful fundraisers, and she became a national party star overnight. But her attempts to appease both the party base and more-conservative voters in her state has become painfully awkward. On coal, an issue that’s a political no-brainer in Kentucky, Grimes spent far too much time trying to forge a middle ground between the base and her constituents. McConnell actually lost eastern Kentucky’s coal country to a wealthy Democratic businessman in 2008; that same region could comprise his margin of victory in 2014.
In Arkansas, Pryor seemed content to rely on his strong family name and sharp attacks against Rep. Tom Cotton’s very conservative voting record as a substitute for actively challenging the president. Obama’s approval ratings are as poor in Arkansas as anywhere in the country. And Pryor began the race ahead, hoping to translate his personal likability into votes. But he’s been caught in his own pretzels when asked about the president’s performance on key issues, most recently fumbling a basic question on how he’d grade Obama’s handling of the Ebola crisis.
Even in bellwether Colorado, Udall’s playbook of attacking Gardner almost exclusively on abortion rights and contraception has demonstrated its limits. He boasted a bipartisan brand that he forged in his first Senate race in 2008, but he’s squandered it with a deeply negative campaign. He entered the race with the ability to make a persuasive case over his independence: He’s run to the president’s left on criticizing NSA surveillance and immigration reform. If he was more assertive on energy issues—unequivocally backing the Keystone pipeline and being more outspoken in support of fracking—he could’ve played more to the center-right voters, as well.
But Udall’s reluctance to distance himself from Obama hasn’t helped in a state where the president’s approval numbers have cratered since his last election. By focusing on wedge issues, the freshman senator has cocooned himself as the candidate of the liberal base, and given himself little credibility to distance himself from the president. When Udall said that the last person the White House “want[s] to see coming is me” at a September debate, he was received with laughter. But if he had played his cards differently, it didn’t have to be that way.
To be sure, in a nationalized election, even those who break from an unpopular president often fall victim to his political problems. The biggest victims in the 2010 wave election were House Democrats in conservative districts, most of whom voted against the president’s health care law. Their opposition did little to help them. But in Senate races, where candidates’ personal brands play a bigger role, there’s more opportunity to create space. Manchin, after all, comfortably prevailed in West Virginia in 2010 after (literally) shooting the president’s cap-and-trade legislation. Rep. John Barrow of Georgia may survive yet another tough election, thanks to a savvy ad campaign branding himself as a uniquely conservative Democrat. But few of the red-state Democrats on the ballot this year have even attempted the Manchin/Barrow approach. (Sen. Mark Begich of Alaska comes closest, and he looks to be in the best shape of the bunch.)
This year’s midterms are shaping up to be a referendum on President Obama’s management, giving anxious voters an opportunity to express their frustration about everything from the president’s handling of health care, growing terrorism threats, an Ebola scare, and a broken immigration system, among others. It’s far from an election about nothing. Democrats should have recognized that the president was falling out of favor with the public and inoculated themselves a long time ago. Instead, many bought the White House’s spin, and are at risk of going down with a sinking ship.
FILE: June 2, 2012: Spectators applaud at a rally held by the Racine Tea Party PAC in Gorney Park in Caledonia, Wis. (AP)
The Tea Party movement is showing signs of a resurgence following the revelation that the IRS targeted groups and other politically conservative organizations for the past several years.A recent poll shows Americans have a more favorable opinion of the less-government, anti-tax groups. And one of the biggest groups in the grassroots movement told FoxNews.com this weekend that fundraising and donations have increased since news of the IRS targeting broke earlier this month.However, one of the biggest remaining questions is whether the Tea Party can take the momentum in the 2014 elections.The movement started in 2009 as a reaction to the federal government’s multibillion-dollar bank bailouts in the recession and played a major role in the 2010 midterm elections by backing conservative candidates who helped Republicans take control of the House. However, critics during the 2012 election cycle repeatedly argued the movement had become less relevant.“We’re definitely seeing a spike in both interest and contributions,” Sal Russo, co-founder of the California-based Tea Party Express, told Fox on Saturday.Though Americans responded with anger and disappointment over the news that such groups seeking tax-exempt status were targeted in 2011 and 2012 for additional IRS vetting, Russo said Tea Party members also feel vindicated and energized.
“They knew spending was out of control and their (political opponents) would stop at nothing,” Russo said.
Russo made his comments one day after a Rasmussen Reports poll showed 44 percent of likely U.S. voters now have a favorable opinion of the Tea Party, 14 percentage points higher than in January and just 7 points below the record high of 51 percent in April 2009.
In addition, the percentage of voters who had an unfavorable opinion of the movement was down 5 points from earlier this year, to 44 percent.
The May 21-22 phone survey of 1,100 likely voters by the conservative-leaning polling firm also found 18 percent had a very favorable opinion while 25 percent had a very unfavorable one. The margin of error was 3 percentage points.
Company President Scott Rasmussen told Fox on Sunday the poll showed Tea Party support among Republicans surged from 61 to 80 percent.
Such a change could impact the internal struggles within the party, particularly between the Republican-controlled House’s conservative caucus and the more moderate chamber leadership.
However, Rasmussen thinks the IRS targeting has the potential to thrust the Tea Party into the 2014 elections and that the scandal might have a bigger impact on Democrats.
“This and some of the other recent stories really cut into the heart of President Obama’s agenda, which is faith in government,” he said. “And his health-care plan is tied to the IRS. The large question is will the Democrats’ brand remain tainted.”
Russo was enthusiastic about 2014, saying he was working this weekend on potential races. But he was uncertain about how long the scandal might remain in the voters’ consciousness.
“It’s too early to tell,” he said. “But a lot of people are looking at the Tea Party right now.”