Political Hotsheet
By

Brian Montopoli /

CBS News/ November 3, 2010, 2:20 AM

Did the Tea Party Cost Republicans the Senate?

Sharron Angle.

/ AP

While we don't yet know the final results in some Senate races, we do know that CBS News projections show that Democrats will hold onto the Senate. (Full Election Results)

We also know that they might not have done so had two Tea Party candidates not won their GOP primaries. One is Christine O'Donnell, who rode the backing of the Tea Party Express to an upset primary victory over moderate Republican Rep. Mike Castle in Delaware.

Castle had been favored to beat Democrat Chris Coons in a general election, but Coons soundly defeated O'Donnell, keeping Joe Biden's old Senate seat in Democratic hands.

The website Conservatives4Palin, which is closely tied to Sarah Palin, argued in the wake of the results that "Chris Coons Would Have Defeated Mike Castle Anyway." (Palin endorsed O'Donnell.) The site pointed to Delaware exit poll numbers, which showed Coons defeating Castle by one point among voters who showed up in this election.

The problem with this argument is that there would have been a different Delaware electorate (and a different campaign) had Castle been in the race. Had he been in, despite those exit poll results, there would have been a good chance for a GOP pickup.

The story isn't much different in Nevada, where Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid won after a bitter campaign against Republican Sharron Angle (see full results). Reid's reputation as a Washington deal-maker has hurt his standing in Nevada, and he would have faced a tough fight against the woman who was expected to be his general election opponent, Sue Lowden.

Ominous Signs For Obama In 2012
Why Democrats Lost the House to Republicans
How Boxer Bucked a National Trend in California
Why Key Midwest Swing States Flipped to the GOP
Harry Reid Wins: How He Did It
Who Are the Tea Party Supporters?

But Lowden lost the primary to Angle, thanks in large party to the Tea Party movement (as well as behind-the-scenes maneuvering by Reid, who didn't want Lowden to make it to the general election). Reid was well aware that the only way to win the race was essentially to make his opponent as unpopular as he was - and Angle, thanks to her positions on a range of issues (among them Social Security and the Department of Education), gave him an opening to do so.

Meanwhile, the damage may not be done: There is an outside chance Democrat Scott McAdams could emerge from the Alaska Senate race with a victory, thanks to a split in the GOP vote between Sen. Lisa Murkowski and Joe Miller, the Tea Party backed candidate who defeated her (see full results). And in Colorado, Tea Partier Ken Buck is in a tight race against Democrat Michael Bennet, a prime target for Republicans heading into the campaign cycle (see full results).

There are, of course, Senate Tea Party candidates who won - Utah's Mike Lee, Kentucky's Rand Paul and Florida's Marco Rubio - but those seats would likely have gone Republican anyway.

Ultimately, it's impossible to know exactly how things would have played out had the Tea Party movement not existed. But it certainly appears that the nomination of both O'Donnell and Angle cost the Republican Party. Had those two seats gone to the GOP, Republicans might now be in a position to celebrate a takeover of both houses of Congress -- instead of just one.


Brian Montopoli is a political reporter for CBSNews.com. You can read more of his posts here. Follow Hotsheet on Facebook and Twitter.
© 2010 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.
38 Comments Add a Comment
linkicon reporticon emailicon
krisd999-2009 says:
Without the TEA party, the Republicans would be on the trash heap of history. Stick to eliminating laws, regulations and agencies and cutting taxes and ELIMINATING the deficit. Read the Constitution! I DON'T want any trojan horse issues like gays in the military, gay marriage, abortion, prayer in schools, flag burning, baseball steroid users and other crap like that!
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
kristin37 says:
I can guarantee you that I would have voted for Castle over Coons and I know a lot of other people that would have done the same. It had nothing to do with O'Donnell being a Tea Party affilliate that lost her the vote, but the lack of confidence that the a lot of the Delaware people had in her. If the Tea Party chose an intelligent and capable candidate, then the outcome might have been different.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
stn_sage says:
NO! The Tea Party didn't 'cost' the Republicans anything! GOP corruption and bungling during the Bush administration and the last time they controlled Congress, caused many Tea Partiers to leave the GOP! In other words, the GOP 'did themselves in'!
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
radicalmoderate says:
The GOP is the reason they did not win the Senate. They shot themselves in the foot by not endorsing their Primary winners. Instead they whined like babies who didn't get their way. Meanwhile, the Dems were smart enough to back conservatives like Manchin who won in W Va.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
pohd1 says:
If it was not for the Tea Party the Democrats and Pelosi would still be in control of the House. To whine that the Tea Party lost the Senate is not from Republicans but from Democrats in a hope to divide the Republicans. Will Pres. Obama be willing to compromise or expect the Republicans like the past to yield to the Democrats? Obama stated the election his on his policies therefore the people rejected it. Will he accept that or still follow his core values of social justice and income distribution?
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
FoolKiller says:
THAT?S the best you got???
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
jxknowles says:
Not really. If you go through the vote tallies from last night, state by state, the people who stood on the sideline decided the election. In our state Democratic votes were off nearly 35% while GOP vote totals were the same. It cost a Senate seat and the Governor's office. If the same number of DEMs voted as 2008, we would have won every seat in the state. Lesson learned.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
karlejohn says:
The tea party is a foot stool for the Democrats! Praise the Lord!
reply
thanksgreed replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
and the TP has stupid comebacks...
linkicon reporticon emailicon
wdrussell1 says:
One thing the wingnuts and fundis don't understand. The wealthy don't like them any more than normal people do. The wealthy will put up with them as long as they support their agenda of more wealth for the wealthy.
Take away that and the wealthy will drop them so fast they will think they are in freefall.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
alaskan2008 says:
the lower 48 only needs to look to alaska where the people trounced palin licker joe "i risked my life for my country" so i could handcuff a free press miller by electing lisa murkowski our admirable palin hater. the tea party...a koch bro scam designed to take over alaska and then the country for their oil money...has failed. it started in alaska and it has ended here. any other talk of tea party success is just a sideshow republican scam. ding dong the tea party witch is dead!!!
reply
radicalmoderate replies:
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Actually, Murkowski's temper tantrum is what lost Alaska. Meanwhile, Dems pulled together (at least in Congress), supported each other, and salvaged what could have been a very ugly situation. If the established GOP gets over their snit, they could be dangerous.
See all 38 Comments
Scroll Left Scroll Right