>>20
Obviously. And for the record
>>22 is also the samefag as
>>16 and
>>18.
>>21
It had potential to be real opposition to the two party status-quo, but didn't.
But it wasn't supposed to. It wasn't a third party. It intentionally was meant to be the nagging backseat driver.
anti-intellectual, brain-damaged populism
"Brain-damaged" is uncalled for, but what counts as "intellectual" to make them the "anti?"
Anyway, the "Coffee Party" is by their own admission the "anti-Tea Party." Saddling itself with that belittling task, there was no way it could not sputter. It just blends into the rest of the political noise the Tea Party positioned against as contrasting backdrop, unintentionally making the Tea Party even more visible but barely contributing anything (new) against it.