Yep. The thing is, though, that a lot of Republican primary voters support the Tea Party's message of lower taxes, limited government, and a return to constitut

Yep. The thing is, though, that a lot of Republican primary voters support the Tea Party's message of lower taxes, limited government, and a return to constitutional norms -- to the extent that they're willing to toss out an incumbent, which loses DC seniority and risks having an even-worse Democrat elected instead. That's trading short-term costs for long-term benefits. It's not yet clear whether R and D primary voters care enough about NSA surveillance to vote out incumbents on those grounds alone. (What about abortion? Environment? The need for higher or lower taxes? Gay rights? Firearms? Etc.) I suspect that NSA revulsion among R and D primary voters is insufficiently strong to make displacement a real threat. Look at SOPA author Lamar Smith's easy cruise to primary reelection victory in Texas hill country -- after being feted by those SOPA-loving liberals in Hollywood and opposed by Reddit's TestPAC. Smith won nearly 80% of the primary vote. BTW, Feinstein, one of the most prominent NSA loyalists, isn't up until 2018. If anti-NSA activists really want to have a tremendous political impact, they should unseat Rep. Mike Rogers, who beats out even Feinstein in his defense of warrantless surveillance. But National Journal last year said Rogers is in a "safe congressional district that’s poised to keep reelecting him until he decides to retire": http://www.nationaljournal.com/congress/the-reason-mike-rogers-won-t-run-for-the-senate-20130603 http://www.nationaljournal.com/congress/the-reason-mike-roge... So good luck with that.