Skip to footer

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.

6. Missouri: a movement entrenched

Christian Gooden/St. Louis Post-Dispatch/AP
US Rep. Todd Akin celebrates his win in the GOP Senate primary race at his campaign party at the Columns Banquet Center in St. Charles, Mo., on Tuesday.

A self-identified tea party candidate, US Rep. Todd Akin prevailed to win Missouri's Aug. 7 Republican primary in a race where all there GOP candidates claimed a measure of tea-party support.

With freshman Sen. Claire McCaskill (D) drawing support of fewer than half of likely voters, Republicans see Missouri as a linchpin in their bid to take back the Senate, where they need a net gain of four seats.

Missouri, a bastion of the tea-party movement, has been shifting right in recent elections. The Tea Party Express and 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin endorsed former state Treasurer Sarah Steelman in the GOP primary.  Self-financing businessman John Brunner had the backing of FreedomWorks, a national tea party umbrella group. But Congressman Akin, in addition to running on tea-party fiscal issues, also had strong support from evangelical Christians and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, now a Fox News personality.

Under fire for her votes in support of President Obama's signature health-care reform as well as a controversial stimulus plan, Senator McCaskill ran ads portraying Akin as the most conservative in the GOP primary – a move that may have been directed to help tip the balance for Aiken with conservative voters in the primary, thus helping her win over independent voters in the general election.

6 of 6
Mark Sappenfield
Editor

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.

Subscribe to insightful journalism

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