Why I'm for Rand Paul.

[Headhunter]

He doesn't believe in spending blood and treasure on countries that couldn't care less about Americans.

He doesn't believe we should spend and waste money we don't have. That's all I need to know.

 

[racernhra]

Amen. So far I like what Ben Carson has to say also.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[JimmyBob]

And we can all take solace that he's not bat-shit crazy like daddy.

 

[BIGOSUFAN]

Paul/Carson or Paul/Rubio in 2016.

Looking forward to seeing a lot of this in 2016:


Paul drills Hillary

 

[Tulsaaggieson]

I think Rand could be the unifying voice the country and the Republican Party needs in 2016. He's quickly becoming my choice for Prez, and I hope he runs.

 

[shortbus]

His daddy isn't crazy.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[racernhra]

Crazy to many is anything outside the status quo. Frustrating.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[aix_xpert]

He's not crazy, but he does have some very radical ideas (such as completely shutting down the Fed). Radical equals Crazy to too many people.

Justin

 

[squeak]

Yes, wanting freedom is a bat shit crazy idea in 2014.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[ThorOdinson13]

If shutting down the fed is radical does that also mean returning to a constitutional form of government is also radical?
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[Tulsaaggieson]

Yes

 

[MegaPoke]

I'm in. Rand will do.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[N. Pappagiorgio]

A little crazy is our only hope. I'd vote for him in a second.
Posted from wireless.rivals.com[/URL]

 

[AC2014]

I'd vote fir him even if I don't agree with him on everything.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[anon_ph7vrsh7abnty]

I benefit indirectly.

My current ad agency is the AOR for kentucky's health exchange.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[windriverrange]

I would be happy with Rand.....anyone but Christie or Bush.

 

[imprimis]

Originally posted by windriverrange:
I would be happy with Rand.....anyone but Christie or Bush.

Agree on Christie and Bush. Christie's penchant for taking on those who attacked him early on was somewhat fun to watch however his true colors are not that appealing. Bush being all in for amnesty puts him firmly in the don't want column.

Rand is by far the best of those three. I do like the term conservatarian hung on him by Silicon Valley.

 

[OSUGD]

I like rand.

His view on freedom of association will get him smeared as being a racist. He is unelectable unfortunately

 

[MegaPoke]

Originally posted by OSUGD:
I like rand.

His view on freedom of association will get him smeared as being a racist. He is unelectable unfortunately

Not necessarily. It gives him an opportunity to clarify an unclear topic.

 

[Tulsaaggieson]

Please elaborate on Rand being unelectable. I just don't see that. Would like to know why you think that?

 

[OSUGD]

Originally posted by Tulsaaggieson:

Please elaborate on Rand being unelectable. I just don't see that. Would like to know why you think that?

I already told you. His views on freedom of association. It will get spun into him wanting separate lunch counters for white and black people and stuff like this. I agree with his principle, but most people can't think about a subject so nuanced.

Here is a sample of whats in store if/when he runs:




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9U4FTd-1m-o

 

[Tulsaaggieson]

First Maddow is a complete idiot, and she puts that on display in that video. Second Rand nails it. I don't think that the majority of American's would disagree with Rand. I say let him articulate his views, ands bring it on. He is not wrong in saying discrimination is bad, but you also have uphold the first amendment. If that is the worst people can do to argue against him, then let them make that point, and we can have that debate. I would also point out that Dr. Paul is now Sen. Paul, and that he was elected in spite of a direct attack from the Dem candidate on that specific subject.

Thanks for your response, though. Do you have any other reasons as to why you think he is unelectable. I still don't see it.

 

[OSUGD]

Originally posted by Tulsaaggieson:

First Maddow is a complete idiot, and she puts that on display in that video. Second Rand nails it. I don't think that the majority of American's would disagree with Rand. I say let him articulate his views, ands bring it on. He is not wrong in saying discrimination is bad, but you also have uphold the first amendment. If that is the worst people can do to argue against him, then let them make that point, and we can have that debate. I would also point out that Dr. Paul is now Sen. Paul, and that he was elected in spite of a direct attack from the Dem candidate on that specific subject.

Thanks for your response, though. Do you have any other reasons as to why you think he is unelectable. I still don't see it.

That is where I disagree with you. The media would absolutely spin it to make him look horrible. There wouldn't be a forum for him to sit down and explain to the american people the nuances of freedom of association. It would be sound bites smearing him. Its just like how the "war on women" smears registered with people, even though that was completely bogus.

I don't think people really grasp what freedom is anymore. People are for freedom as long as it doesn't hurt anyones feelings or make anything unfair.

This post was edited on 7/28 4:20 PM by OSUGD

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

Pink Elephant in the Room #1: His "base". He has some pretty bassackwards, tea party, racist types that just loove his "constitutional" ideas. If he attracts/nurtures crazy as his bread and butter base, then he's going to look crazy.

Remember the Rev. Wright? That was the biggest political problem Obama faced in the first campaign. You can't affiliate with crazy in the big league.

Pink Elephant in the Room #2: His freakin' wig. Say what you want, but lots of the voting public makes their basis on "likability" and if women catch the "He's creepy" vibe, it's over. Image is everything, and if he's being made fun of by every comedian and smartass on tv over his wig it'll hurt him.

All that said, I kind of like what little I know about his foreign policy -- he's sort of from the "walk softly and carry a big stick" school. I personally respect anyone, even if I disagree with their philosophy, that reflexively declines to use power when given it.

 

[TPOKE]

You lost me at racist.

 

[Tulsaaggieson]

I thought the "war on women" only registered with the Dem base. Every independent I know chalked that one up to hypocrisy of the worst order, and it fell flat. Rand is never going to win the Dem base, but he can win the intellectual center who are ready and frothing at the mouth for a return and talk about Constitutional government. The question at that point is would that enough to win it any more, or have the Dems done enough damage to the voting block?

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

Originally posted by TPOKE:
You lost me at racist.

Really? Your excursion outside the bubble lasted longer than I thought it would!

 

[anon_ph7vrsh7abnty]

Originally posted by syskatine:
Pink Elephant in the Room #1: His "base". He has some pretty bassackwards, tea party, racist types that just loove his "constitutional" ideas. If he attracts/nurtures crazy as his bread and butter base, then he's going to look

His KY senate opponent was the one that carried E. Kentucky.

If you knew anything of the area, that is where the crazy lives (close to WV).


Fayette county (Lexington) was nearly a split and Jefferson county (Louisville) fell in line with the D/R margin for general elections.

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

Good point, but a state like Kentucky and Oklahoma just doesn't translate to the rest of the country in presidential politics. We've elected Inhoffe how many times, and the rest of the country considers him a poster boy for dysfunctional Washington politics.

Maybe I'm wrong -- I haven't followed the guy much. We'll see. I think the 2016 presidential election looks like the worst batch of candidates since '88.

 

[anon_ph7vrsh7abnty]

KY has a democratic governer.

It's not a mirror of the country, but it's not the blood red state you make it out to be.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[MegaPoke]

Your post reeks of fear.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[MegaPoke]

Your post reeks of fear.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[Headhunter]

A lot of independents and rational Democrats are seeing the train wreck of incompetence that is Obama. They are going to be very leery of electing another liberal.

A Rand Paul libertarian is starting to look a lot better to a very wide array of people.

If the Republicans nominate another establishment person they might as well fold up their tents and go home because I will be one of many that will be done with them.