The Democrats’ long-delayed health-care triumph last week was almost overshadowed by events that, in any case, will play to the Left’s rhetorical advantage. These were the raucous protests and, more seriously, the ominous threats that Tea Party members leveled against congressional Democrats in the final hours of the health bill’s odyssey to become law. At least ten Democrats reported vandalism or threats related to the health bill, as did GOP Whip Eric Cantor, though he declined to say whether his case related to the bill. It’s not clear that all of the above come from anti-big government group members known as Tea Partiers, but it is clear that at least some did. Anyone who thinks that this is good news for the Right is, to put it mildly, out to lunch. Most Americans, from all indicators and for a variety of reasons, aren’t overjoyed about the health care bill. But they’re far less receptive to death threats and vandalism than to, say, the reconciliation rule as an appropriate tool for accomplishing political ends.

Regardless, the Tea Party movement, bane of the Left and irritant to the Right, keeps on chugging. This week, activists will descend on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s hometown of Searchlight, Nevada for a protest headlined by Sarah Palin. Like American populist movements from the 1890s, the Tea Party is long on slogans and short on constructive policy prescriptions, a fact that leaves conservative intellectuals concerned. The Left is even more upset, largely—and understandably—because of the threats made by fringe members of the groups.

However, none of these responses gets anyone closer to explaining the Tea Party’s popularity. After all, despite the sometimes blatant lunacy, the negative publicity, and the thinness of its philosophical logic, it’s still there. And not all its members are unhinged, either. Take Pam Stout, an Idaho retiree and proud Tea Partier who once worked in federal housing programs. According to the New York Times, “Mrs. Stout said she awoke to see Washington as a threat, a place where crisis is manipulated—even manufactured—by both parties to grab power. ‘I can’t go on being the shy, quiet me,’ she said. ‘I need to stand up.”’ That is hardly crazy city.

What characterizes a rank-and-file Tea Partier like Mrs. Stout is profound disillusionment with the institutions that govern our country. A lot of this is due to the gaping irresponsibility that the economic crisis exposed. A lot is thanks to George W. Bush. And some of it is a result of the depressing tableau of special interests that have been jockeying for spoils throughout the arduous, year-long health-care war. Many Americans share their feelings of disgust, which make them sympathetic to a group of people who seem to be saying, “Enough is enough; the government may have ruined Iraq but we won’t let them ruin our health coverage!”The widespread disillusionment with government isn’t likely to vanish now that the health-care bill has passed, either. The day after the bill was signed into law, the New York Times ran an editorial urging the President to “build on this success, not rest on it” by continuing to push forward with his progressive agenda. That the Times feels the need to issue this encouraging statement is almost laugh-out-loud funny. If we’ve learned one thing about Barack Obama during these past months, it’s that he’s willing to upset the system, and not just when it comes to health-care reform. In the past two months alone, he’s taken the unprecedented steps of picking public fights with both Israel, traditionally one of our closest allies, and the Supreme Court, traditionally above the political fray. So the sparks will keep flying, the voters will get to see more episodes of incompetence as the President takes on the Sisyphean task of getting meaningful legislation through congress, and Glenn Beck will continue to rev up Tea Party activists with claims that Obama’s progressivism is actually socialism in disguise.

But for all the sound and fury they’ll undoubtedly gin up, at the end of the day, the Tea Partiers must face the problem that they don’t actually present a viable alternative to the Democrats. No one—no sensible, unthreatened person viewing the situation on its merits—actually believes that it’s possible or even desirable to return to a 1920s utopia of Calvin Coolidge-style laissez-faire government. All of this means that someday, a section in a U.S. history book will identify the Tea Partiers as the first twenty-first century American populist movement. Unless, of course, they become an independent party and help split the Republican vote in 2012. In that case, they’ll be part of the story on how Barack Obama glided into an easy second term.