The tea party defies definition because it's not a political party in the classic sense. A more apt characterization of the Tea Party would be that of an antiparty, a loose conglomeration of individuals coalescing around certain principles, challenging existing political parties to embrace them. The movement has no formal, centralized decision-making authority that dictates talking points or policy positions to its members. Each Tea Party group has sprung up from local grass roots, developing its own sense of priorities and methods of influencing local elections. But it would be a mistake to assume that the Tea Party's decentralization translates into a lack of definable principles. Despite its disperse nature, as this book has shown, Tea Party groups share a belief in three core principles – limited government, U.S. sovereignty, and constitutional originalism – that animate their position on the most contentious issues of the day. More than anything else, these principles define the Tea Party movement, not any unified logo, slogan, office, or central organizing committee. And the common thread running through all three principles is that they're derived from the U.S. Constitution itself.

The Tea Party's future will be largely determined by whether the majority of Americans – most important, political independents – agree that these principles are both important and under serious threat. The midterm elections of November 2010 suggested that these principles are resonating, but the biggest test will come with the presidential and congressional elections in 2012. The emergence of a presidential contender with significant Tea Party support, for example, could provide the barometer by which to gauge the depth and breadth of Americans’ embrace of these constitutional principles.