As long as the "Tea Party" is just a vocal minority within the Republican party there is little meaningful difference.
Or can you actually point to an elected official that says, let's END social security, medicare, and farm subsidies, cut the DoD budget by 80% and gut the rest of the federal budget?
I would self identify as a fiscally conservative proponent of free markets and I vote for the Democratic candidate most of the time though I have been leaning to the Libertarian party lately.
Yet Paul’s plan would not return the country to the 1990s, let alone the 19th century. It calls for total outlays of $2.9 trillion in 2015, which is about as much as the federal government spent as recently as 2003, adjusted for inflation. http://www.suntimes.com/news/otherviews/8278110-452/ron-paul...
Counting savings from ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Paul calls for $832 billion in cuts over four years, which would leave the Pentagon’s base budget in 2016 about 2 percent lower than it is now
> Or can you actually point to an elected official that says, let's END social security, medicare, and farm subsidies, cut the DoD budget by 80% and gut the rest of the federal budget?
I'm confused - are you claiming that the Tea Party supports all of those things? If so, some cites would be nice. (There is some Tea Party support for ending farm subsidies and possibly "gut the rest" for some definition of "the rest".)
Or can you actually point to an elected official that says, let's END social security, medicare, and farm subsidies, cut the DoD budget by 80% and gut the rest of the federal budget?