Well I guess we can write off another potential candidate for POTUS

[steveh_131]

 

[Tombs]

He isn't making the mistakes his father did, which is, being unwilling to play ball to win the game. It's pretty obvious he's figured out what has to be done to get something accomplished.
I don't find him ultimately compromising, only finding different ways of doing things that prevent getting stone walled before he has the chance. Politics is now about media popularity, getting everyone wanting to kill you isn't going to achieve much.

It's obvious others are picking up on this and seeing their dream of being a career aristocratic politician going down the drain, such is the case with the RINO crying.

 

[buckstopshere]

Not that I think it matters a whole lot in the soundbite world we seem to live in, but I thought I should at least point out that Rand Paul did cast a NO vote to the extension of the Patriot Act. He also introduced his own amendment that would restrict the National Security officials from looking through gun dealer records to try and track terrorists.

Rand is probably your teams best chance of a victory in 2016. Still confused why you're trying to paint him as an establishment guy. Clearly he's not. I'm not 100% certain I would vote for him or cast another vote for Gary Johnson. I'm more interested in how he votes and so far, I'm liking what I see. I just have little faith that the GOP will actually put up a nominee like Rand Paul.

 

[Bunnykid68]

Most Republicans suck as bad as their democrat counterparts.

 

[indiucky]

And this whole thread is intended to do nothing but pick a fight with libertarians.

You don't have to try and pick a fight with someone that is always looking for a fight...Libertarians are kind of like the LGBT community in the sense that they are a very noisy 1 to 2 % of the population that look for reasons to be slighted or offended...I like Libertarians though...They speak the truth and live in a dreamy world of "the way things ought to be" and tend to vote with their heart and there is nothing wrong with that...

And then, right about the time I think I can take them seriously, their Presidential candiate jumps into a crowd and body surfs ala Lady Ga Ga...They (Libertarians) tend to blindly vote for their candidate, no matter how ridiculous the candidate behaves, and then look down their nose at Republicans for doing the same thing...I.E. Holding their nose and voting the party line...

All offered IMHO as someone who splits his vote between Libertarian and Republican candidates dending on the candidate

 

[rambone]

Rand has the views of his father with rhetoric that will not (as badly) inflame the neocon majority of the GOP.

I have to say that I enjoyed his dad's style of calling everything for what it was; a police state on the road to fascism and economic collapse, etc. Ron was very blunt and very accurate. A man by my own heart.

Rand's campaign will be markedly different than his father's. The strategy will be different but the goals will be the same. I think he will offer less of an abundance of controversial opinions on every topic, and focus on more popular pro-liberty sentiments to gather a political base. Most people agree that is more of an election winner.

Rand has most of the same political machinery behind his campaign as his father. Some of the most hardcore liberty activists you can imagine. They vouch for Rand.

Ultimately the GOP establishment will fight Rand and undermine his campaign in any way possible. You already hear it from some of the GOP big shots. Before the election he will be taking fire from all the Establishment talk show hosts in an effort to see a corporatist neocon win the primary.

My Ron Paul 2012 group has already been converted into a Rand Paul 2016 group. There's nobody else that comes close right now.

 

[lucky4034]

What in the hell is everyone here talking about... Everyone does realize that Rand Paul is in the Republican Party right?

 

[lucky4034]

Ultimately the GOP establishment will fight Rand and undermine his campaign in any way possible. You already hear it from some of the GOP big shots. Before the election he will be taking fire from all the Establishment talk show hosts in an effort to see a corporatist neocon win.

Obviously the faithful here on INGO have already fallen for the programming... hence this thread. Its no wonder Republicans can't win an election... they are too busy trying to sabotage the best candidates.

As of right now... If Rand Paul becomes the GOP nominee, the Republican Party can count on my vote. If they **** this up and put lard ass up... I will probably again use my sharpie and write RON Paul on the ballot.

Or maybe I will write in marker the word "Killary" just for the **** of it, that way the RINO's can correctly tell me that I voted for Hilary Clinton.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

But back to the topic of the interview in the clip above. I think it's great to see guys like Paul and Cruz "push back". This defunding of ObamaCare in the next CR is a terrific idea. I'm all for it. I think their approach of "we're not here to shut down the .gov", while many of us wouldn't mind a .gov shutdown so much, is an interesting ploy to head off the certain retaliation of the pro-ObamaCare crowd. I'm supporting them on this and will be contacting my reps and sens. the urge their support also.

 

[netsecurity]

Still trying to understand how the INGOers who hated Ron Paul the most are now trying to tell us Rand is the best thing since sliced bread and that they're one in the same.

I never hated Ron Paul, I just knew he was un-electable, because he spoke too bluntly. Rand Paul comes off as presidential to me, and I would certainly prefer him over any candidate imaginable. I even ordered a Rand Paul 2016 bumper sticker!

 

[Mark 1911]

Rand Paul and Ted Cruz are both far favorable alternatives to what we have now.

 

[netsecurity]

Rand Paul and Ted Cruz are both far favorable alternatives to what we have now.

They are more than just favorable, they are needed in the worst way to help fix this country.

 

[Mark 1911]

They are more than just favorable, they are needed in the worst way to help fix this country.

Amen brother!

 

[Bunnykid68]

I never hated Ron Paul, I just knew he was un-electable, because he spoke too bluntly. Rand Paul comes off as presidential to me, and I would certainly prefer him over any candidate imaginable. I even ordered a Rand Paul 2016 bumper sticker!

If they would have put him on the Republican ticket every Republican that voted for Romney would have voted for him as well all the others that stayed home and some that voted 3rd party

 

[jamil]

If they would have put him on the Republican ticket every Republican that voted for Romney would have voted for him as well all the others that stayed home and some that voted 3rd party

I disagreed with Ron Paul on several issues. But I would have voted for him had he won the nomination. And I certainly find disagreement with Rand on several issues too. If he runs and wins the nomination, I'll vote for him. I disagreed with Romney on several issues as well, but a Romney presidency would have been much better than what we have now.

But if that fat ass pussbag wins, I may have to borrow Lucky's sharpie. If it's a Christie/Clinton showdown, it'll basically be the battle of the *****es. The only difference between the two may be that Hillary's balls are bigger.

 

[lucky4034]

If it's a Christie/Clinton showdown, it'll basically be the battle of the *****es. The only difference between the two may be that Hillary's balls are bigger.

Yeah... but Christie has bigger breasts!!!

 

[firehawk1]

Bashing libertarians is a fave pastime for a few on here as well. And this whole thread is intended to do nothing but pick a fight with libertarians.

No sorry wrong answer, no libertarian bashing was stated or intended, a little sarcasm maybe. If that is how you interpreted it nothing I can say or do will change your mind.

My point is/was the Ron Paul/Gary Johnson/Rand Paul/et al supporters have consistently stated over and over they will accept nothing but perfection by their inability to accept any form of compromise. My position has always been one must learn to pick their battles as one will never win all the time, and at times be willing to accept the very best one can get at that moment and work from there.

Actually I have never "bashed" anyone, but I have been on the receiving end of it many times. I have consistently stated my position and have caught hell from others because of it. One even resorted to calling me a traitor simply for having a differing opinion on how to arrive at the same goal.

My question still stands, is Rand Paul out as an acceptable candidate for POTUS?

 

[rambone]

My question still stands, is Rand Paul out as an acceptable candidate for POTUS?

[STRIKE]Yes.[/STRIKE]

EDIT: No... I misread the question. Rand is acceptable. I'm supporting him unless something drastic changes.

 

[jbombelli]

No sorry wrong answer, no libertarian bashing was stated or intended, a little sarcasm maybe. If that is how you interpreted it nothing I can say or do will change your mind.

My point is/was the Ron Paul/Gary Johnson/Rand Paul/et al supporters have consistently stated over and over they will accept nothing but perfection by their inability to accept any form of compromise. My position has always been one must learn to pick their battles as one will never win all the time, and at times be willing to accept the very best one can get at that moment and work from there.

Actually I have never "bashed" anyone, but I have been on the receiving end of it many times. I have consistently stated my position and have caught hell from others because of it. One even resorted to calling me a traitor simply for having a differing opinion on how to arrive at the same goal.

My question still stands, is Rand Paul out as an acceptable candidate for POTUS?

You started this whole thread and predicted a bunch of hypocrisy that should "...prove entertaining." Your whole premise is to start a fight with libertarians. Who else were you addressing, when you said what you said?

Your version of "compromise" is "vote for our guy." Instead of finding someone we can ALL get behind, you put people like ROMNEY and then say WE won't compromise. We don't seek perfection; we seek someone who is at least more of a compromise in OUR direction than a compromise in the direction of the Democrats. Candidates like Romney are an attempt to appease the Democrats, not an attempt to gain the libertarian vote.

I don't think Rand Paul will push to repeal the Patriot Act or NDAA, or to end the war on drugs, or veto unbalanced spending bills, or any number of other things. And if he's not willing to at least SAY it, I'm CERTAINLY not going to BELIEVE it. I spent a long time believing in Republicans, every one of whom turned out to be a big disappointment. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me several times and I'm a ******* idiot. I woke up from my idiocy.

But I guess I'm the hypocrite because I vote for who I like, who I think best represents me, rather than who you want me to vote for.

Hopefully SOMEBODY you guys put up will actually campaign on what I want. At least in part. IF they do, then I just might vote for them. Rand Paul? That remains to be seen at this point.

 

[firehawk1]

Yes.

Ram, thank you. There see people it wasn't that hard... no bashing, no insulting, no name calling...