I can understand that both movements are disillusioned with the government, but how can you compare the two? One wants to "fundamentally transform" this country while the other just wants to restore its promise.
The title on Christie's YouTube video reads: "I understand why they are frustrated."
What do you think? Is this a fair comparison?
Philip Klein writes that Christie has it all wrong, arguing that the two movements offer vastly different solutions because come from different -- nearly opposite -- philosophical perspectives:
There might be superficial overlap between the two groups. For instance, you may find signs at either rally opposing the Wall Street bailout. But the Wall Street protesters who oppose the bailout do so because they think the government should have bailed out other Americans, such as homeowners, instead. Tea Partiers are opposed to the whole idea of using taxpayer money to reward people for their reckless behavior, regardless of their wealth.
To suggest that the two groups have the same perspectives is to say that conservatives and libertarians who supported market-based health care and liberals who advocated a fully socialized health care system came from the "same perspective" when they both opposed Obamacare.