It Was the Tea Party Movement That Saved Democratic Control of the Senate

It Was the Tea Party Movement That Saved Democratic Control of the Senate

It Was the Tea Party Movement That Saved Democratic Control of the Senate

Tea Party candidates who beat electable Republicans made it possible for Democrats to keep a majority. (Updated with fresh results.)

Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky
Pocket
Email

The Tea Party movement gave the Republican Party an energy boost and some genuine grassroots support.

But it did a lot more for the Democratic Party.

With Republicans taking complete control of the US House and most of the states, the only thing that kept the 2010 midterms from being worse for Democrats than the 1994 "Republican Revolution" was the GOP failure to take the Senate.

And for that the Democrats have the Tea Party movement to thank.

As of Thursday morning, Republican had secured forty-seven US Senate seats.

Washington state had re-elected Democratic Senator Patty Murray, while Alaska is still sorting things out.

The Alaska count looks at this point as if it will produce a win for Senator Lisa Murkowski, whose write-in votes substantially exceed those cast for the man who beat her in the state’s Republican primary, Joe Miller. Murkowski, who pursued her re-election campaign without national party support, would likely sit as a Republican or a Republican-leaning independent. Were Miller to win, he would sit as a Republican—albeit grudgingly, as he does not believe in maintaining an elected Senate. 

That puts the GOP two seats short of a tied Senate, three seats short of a clear majority.

Could the Republicans have gotten to 51?

Consider this:

In Colorado, Republican leaders in Washington and nationally wanted former Colorado Governor Jane Norton, a popular mainstream conservative who polls suggested was a likely November winner. Norton lost to Tea Party favorite Ken Buck.

Now Buck has been beaten by Democratic Senator Michael Bennet. Count Colorado as an opportunity missed for the GOP — an opportunity missed because the Tea Party picked a weak November contender in a state that, by all indications, a stronger Republican could have won.

In Delaware, Republican leaders in Washington and locally wanted moderate Congressman Mike Castle to be their Senate candidate. Castle had never lost an election; the woman who beat him in the primary, Tea Party favorite Christine O’Donnell, had never won an election.

Even Democrats agree that Castle would have won the Delaware seat. O’Donnell continued her losing streak. With Castle as the candidate, Delaware would have given the Republicans seat 50.

In Nevada, Republican leaders in Washington and locally had several solid contenders to take on Senate majority leader Harry Reid, a very vulnerable Democrat. The primary winner was Tea Party favorite Sharon Angle, whom Nevada political observers described as "the only Republican who could lose to Harry Reid."

Angle lost. Nevada would have given the Republicans seat 51.

Democrats will be sending a lot of condolence cards today.

They might want to address one thank-you card to the Tea Party movement.

It kept the Democrats in control of the Senate and averted a narrative that would have said 2010 was a better year for Republicans than 1994.

 
Like this Blog Post? Read it on get the Nation’s free iPhone App, NationNow.
NationNow iPhone App
 

Disobey authoritarians, support The Nation

Over the past year you’ve read Nation writers like Elie Mystal, Kaveh Akbar, John Nichols, Joan Walsh, Bryce Covert, Dave Zirin, Jeet Heer, Michael T. Klare, Katha Pollitt, Amy Littlefield, Gregg Gonsalves, and Sasha Abramsky take on the Trump family’s corruption, set the record straight about Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s catastrophic Make America Healthy Again movement, survey the fallout and human cost of the DOGE wrecking ball, anticipate the Supreme Court’s dangerous antidemocratic rulings, and amplify successful tactics of resistance on the streets and in Congress.

We publish these stories because when members of our communities are being abducted, household debt is climbing, and AI data centers are causing water and electricity shortages, we have a duty as journalists to do all we can to inform the public.

In 2026, our aim is to do more than ever before—but we need your support to make that happen. 

Through December 31, a generous donor will match all donations up to $75,000. That means that your contribution will be doubled, dollar for dollar. If we hit the full match, we’ll be starting 2026 with $150,000 to invest in the stories that impact real people’s lives—the kinds of stories that billionaire-owned, corporate-backed outlets aren’t covering. 

With your support, our team will publish major stories that the president and his allies won’t want you to read. We’ll cover the emerging military-tech industrial complex and matters of war, peace, and surveillance, as well as the affordability crisis, hunger, housing, healthcare, the environment, attacks on reproductive rights, and much more. At the same time, we’ll imagine alternatives to Trumpian rule and uplift efforts to create a better world, here and now. 

While your gift has twice the impact, I’m asking you to support The Nation with a donation today. You’ll empower the journalists, editors, and fact-checkers best equipped to hold this authoritarian administration to account. 

I hope you won’t miss this moment—donate to The Nation today.

Onward,

Katrina vanden Heuvel 

Editor and publisher, The Nation

Ad Policy
x