Six US Senate races where the tea party counts

After playing kingmaker in the 2010 election cycle, the tea party movement is having a less prominent role in 2012. But its support or opposition could swing some key races and even determine whether Republicans win control of the Senate. Here are six US Senate contests where the tea party could make a difference.

3. Massachusetts: ‘He’s our RINO’

Charles Krupa/AP
In his bid for reelection, US Sen. Scott Brown (R) of Massachusetts drops off signature petitions in Boston on April 10 to qualify for having his name on the ballot.

Republican Sen. Scott Brown’s upset victory in a 2010 special election to win the seat once held by liberal icon Edward Kennedy was the tea party movement’s first big electoral triumph. Once in office, Senator Brown voted with Democrats more than any GOP senator except Susan Collins of Maine.

This time, tea party groups are not endorsing their former poster boy, but neither are they targeting him for defeat in the GOP primary. His battle against likely Democratic nominee Elizabeth Warren, a Harvard professor, is expected to be the most high-profile Senate contest of Election 2012.

“People have a responsibility to represent their states and districts,” says Sal Russo of the Tea Party Express. “He’s a RINO, but he’s our RINO,” said one Bay State tea-party activist.

3 of 6

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.