Thought experiment: If the two parties switched economic positions...

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

Thought experiment:

Imagine that the two parties switched all positions on money issues: taxes, the economy, the deficit, etc.

Would the majority of teabag types switch parties?

I doubt it.

Most (not all, but most) teabag types will gravitate to the party least supportive civil rights and human rights.

Does that mean they are not motivated by economic issues?

No. That's the funny part. Republican cannon-fodder types really are worried about money but they pretzel themselves into a series of contradictory economic positions because they don't understand economics at all and rely on primitive group identification to assess who is on their side.

"I am a white guy. The Republicans are hostile to women and non-white people. Hence the Republicans must be the party that represents my interests, including my economic interests."

I do not think all tea-bag types are primarily motivated by racism. (Many but not all.) They are, however, all attracted to racism as a perceived marker of group identity and interests.

[Dr Morbius]

1. Economic issues are fungible. You can easily shift that.

Emotional issues are critical. It is emotional issues which tie people to ideologies, and the ideologies then tie them to the party. The party in turn reinforces the ideological base and the wheel turns 'round.

The "tea-party" folks are largely worried and frankly mostly stupid. They've been told for over a year to be scared out of their wits and accordingly, their wits are long left behind. This is entirely emotional, this "movement".

[TransitJohn]

2. Haven't you heard the poll results? They're all independents.

:sarcasm: