Here in Texas we have six Tea Party candidates running for Lieutenant Governor. They are having so-called debates where each candidate tries to 'out conserve' the five others. This is not working since they all agree or purport to agree on the hot button issues that prove their Tea Party street cred:
Abortion: Brain dead pregnant mother should not have been taken off life-support. No exceptions for rape or incest.
Other Issues: All agreed on Tea Party positions on border security, gun rights and education.
I am not posting about the issues per se I am just wondering how does a voter select a candidate in a party primary when so far there appears to be no difference? The only objective criteria I guess is to look at each candidate's history and try to discern sincerity.
I for one think candidates in primaries in all parties pander to their party's base so again an informed voter is going to vote for the candidate that best and truly represents their political and moral views.
With that in mind a recent survey by Farleigh Dickinson University indicated that Fox News listeners were the least informed about current events and international news. MSNBC was a distant second. Sunday news shows had the best informed current events audience and the New York Times, USA Today, and National Public Radio had the best informed international readers and listeners.
I myself quit watching MSNBC because on two occasions I watch Rachel Maddow get flumoxed when a guess did not agree with her assessment of certain events.
Anyway, Tea Partiers, good luck with selecting the RIGHT candidate in your primaries.