riddler78 saidI disagree with Coulter's approach but I don't know that by supporting this idiot she is therefore antigay either - at least based on the links provided - though I can see how some invested in the idea that all Republicans must be stupid, racist and homophobes might think that.
She obviously believes that the end justifies the means. She is prioritizing deficit cutting and fiscal restraint over everything else - including gay rights and personal values. I disagree with this approach but in any election, voters prioritize - you have to. You aren't going to agree with a candidate on every issue - and some issues will be deal breakers for you. In this case, Paladino's comments are so ridiculous that one can't help but question his judgement in all other areas.
This being said, given the uniting ideas behind the Tea Partiers are not their social values, a lot of those who are socially liberal but economically conservative will place the latter ahead of the former because out of control spending and regulatory burdens hurt everyone - including but especially minorities.
This is demonstrably untrue. In fact, almost every notable Tea Party candidate is a social conservative - Sharron Angle, Rand Paul, Carl Paladino, Christine O'Donnell. And recent polls of Tea Party members suggest they are much more socially conservative then originally thought.
Basically, they're mostly the same anti-government, anti-woman, anti-gay folks that have always formed the far right of the Republican party.
Just curious, do you have any actual data to back up your views other than conjecture and wishful thinking as those links can be mostly characterized? I've seen quite the opposite in commentary and polling that suggests that the Tea Partiers are far more mainstream than previously believed - that they tend to be wealthier and more accepting and that generally more people in the US have more favorable views of the Tea Party than unfavorable ones. Most recent polling data here: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/platinum/political_tracking_crosstabs/october_2010/crosstabs_tea_party_october_6_7_2010
Watch Russ Feingold extol his "Tea Party values" here: http://althouse.blogspot.com/2010/10/russ-feingold-and-his-gop-challenger.html. And then of course the apparently original Tea Partier himself, Jimmy Carter: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/20/jimmy-carter-tea-party-wi_n_731445.html (there are more links if you look for Jimmy Carter + Tea Party but I figured I'd deliberately quote from the right wing Huffington Post)
I can see why you are one of the people invested in this idea that they must be "anti-government, anti-woman, anti-gay folks". Given the extreme positions you hold, practically any view is bound to come across as extreme to you.
The Rassmusen site doesn't work, not that it would matter because their polls are nearly always spun to the right. You can see this in any comparison between them and mainstream pollsters.
The rest of your response is silly, comparing Feingold's assertion that he believes in the primacy of the Constitution as Tea Baggers do, doesn't take away from the, yes, anti-gay, anti-woman, anti-middle class, anti-separation of Church and State, and, lest we forget, anti-masturbation, positions of the Tea Party candidates.
Supports DOMA, DADT, opposes abortion even in cases of rape and incest, does not believe in separation of Church and State.
Opposes abortion even in cases of rape or incest, opposes same-sex marriage - though does believe it's a state issue.
Against same-sex marriage, believes women who are raped should give their children up for adoption, even in cases of incest, would repeal the Taylor Law, eliminate welfare in NY State.
Opposes abortion, including in cases of rape and incest, but if the woman was otherwise going to die, she would allow family members to decide which life to save; believes homosexuality is an identity disorder; beliefs masturbation is a sin.
Now, explain again how these candidates are not anti-gay, anti-woman, anti-middle class, etc.