# Liberty Movement > Liberty Campaigns >  Let's get ahead of the game for 2016?

## Anti-Neocon

Just a thought I had.  Once the Rominee loses this election, the GOP establishment is going to look for a new replacement for the Rominee in 2016.

Well, truth of the matter is, they've already hinted at who they'd like to see in 4 years.  I think it helps to get started as early as possible to do some opposition research on:
Chris Christie
Paul Ryan
Marco Rubio
Jeb Bush

I'm personally doing my activism by looking for articles about these guys on conservative sites, and exposing them for the phony conservatives that they are.  The more people who are reached, the better, and we can do our part to spoil other peoples opinions of these guys before the primary season rolls around in 2015.

Anyone with me?

----------


## GeorgiaAvenger

I agree. Makes exposes on them all ahead of time.

Also, taking domain names for their websites is a great idea too.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> I agree. Makes exposes on them all ahead of time.
> 
> Also, taking domain names for their websites is a great idea too.


Haha awesome!  We got any people on this?

----------


## heavenlyboy34

Perpetual campaigning, nazi-style.  Awright!

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

What really matters though is how the early primary states views these people.  Iowa, NH, SC especially.  We need to hit them hard in those regions and build up Rand at the same time.

----------


## FSP-Rebel

I'd venture to say that sending Lindsey out to pasture is priority #1 going forward and getting Forsythe into the Senate from NH is a very close second yet won't take as much doing as the first.

----------


## Shane Harris

> I'd venture to say that sending Lindsey out to pasture is priority #1 going forward and getting Forsythe into the Senate from NH is a very close second yet won't take as much doing as the first.


Agreed. Getting Davis into the US Senate will also be a nice benefit seeing as then Rand would have at least one US Senator from SC endorse and campaign for him. Hell seeing their relationship even Demint might endorse Rand in 2016. If we got both SC Senators to endorse our nominee that would be amazing. Or is Demint retiring before then? Either way he will still be a big name. Ron did well in Iowa and New Hampshire. If we can build on the support Ron has in those states for Rand, and add to it this potential strength in SC, we have a legitimate shot.

----------


## Rocco

After getting Senator Davis elected, this should be high on our priority list. Start exposing them NOW and we will have our attacks honed long before the election comes.

----------


## Carehn

Don't forget Frothy, He is next in line. Frothy will be the one to beat. Just watch and see.

----------


## Shane Harris

> Don't forget Frothy, He is next in line. Frothy will be the one to beat. Just watch and see.


Dear God I hope and pray with every fiber of me being that you are wrong.

----------


## Carehn

HA HA. I just went to buy www.Randpaul2016.com to hold it for him.... Look what it leads to...

----------


## Carehn

Looks like someone has plans for sher

----------


## GeorgiaAvenger

> HA HA. I just went to buy www.Randpaul2016.com to hold it for him.... Look what it leads to...


Planning ahead.

----------


## Adrock

Davis would be the main priority. Our best bets are filling seats where incumbents retire though. Hopefully we can have good candidates to support when that happens. Replacing Lindsay with Davis is the exception to that rule though.

----------


## GeorgiaAvenger

> Agreed. Getting Davis into the US Senate will also be a nice benefit seeing as then Rand would have at least one US Senator from SC endorse and campaign for him. Hell seeing their relationship even Demint might endorse Rand in 2016. If we got both SC Senators to endorse our nominee that would be amazing. Or is Demint retiring before then? Either way he will still be a big name. Ron did well in Iowa and New Hampshire. If we can build on the support Ron has in those states for Rand, and add to it this potential strength in SC, we have a legitimate shot.


Getting Davis elected is essential to getting Rand elected.

You really have to win SC or FL, if not both.

----------


## Carehn

> Dear God I hope and pray with every fiber of me being that you are wrong.


I'm Not and I'm with you. I cannot stand that guy. I actually hate him. I would much rather mittens over Frothy.

----------


## Carehn

> Planning ahead.


well maybe not, his senate seat will be up for grabs as well then.

----------


## Shane Harris

> well maybe not, his senate seat will be up for grabs as well then.


I was thinking the same thing. However like Erin Burnett pointed out, just like his pac name, it is ambiguous enough so that he can always switch what he's running for.

----------


## Shane Harris

> Getting Davis elected is essential to getting Rand elected.
> 
> You really have to win SC or FL, if not both.


Florida will be the difficult one. Can't think of a single edge we have there. It's all old neocons.

----------


## Shane Harris

One problem Rand will have is his inexperience. Is one term long enough to be considered legitimate?

----------


## Carehn

> One problem Rand will have is his inexperience. Is one term long enough to be considered legitimate?


I may be wrong but I think thats all Obama had at the time.

He should have a most savage record to run on, discounting that horrible endorsement of mittens

----------


## supermario21

Obama didn't even have a full Senate term (elected in 04). I agree about targeting early primary states. Rand is popular in Iowa, New Hampshire, and trying to take out Lindsey in 2014 will establish a good ground game which should transfer over to Rand in 2016.

----------


## TCE

Will Rand have to give up his Senate seat to run? If he does, then running in 2016 is a Fool's Errand.

----------


## Feeding the Abscess

> Will Rand have to give up his Senate seat to run? If he does, then running in 2016 is a Fool's Errand.


Kentucky may have the LBJ rule in place, which would allow him to run for both the presidency and the Senate seat. Or, if he falters in the presidential primary, he can drop out and try to keep his Senate seat.

EDIT: you got to the second point before I could

----------


## TCE

> Kentucky may have the LBJ rule in place, which would allow him to run for both the presidency and the Senate seat.


Does anyone know for sure? If they don't, then perhaps he could float his candidacy, and if it flops, he can drop out.

----------


## Smart3

Rand should not run for Pres in 2016, since it is so obviously pro-Dem. Three consecutive Establishment Repubs losing will provide a perfect path to victory in 2020.

In addition, 2020 avoids the re-election problem, and by then, we may have as many as 10 Senators and 35 Congressman lined up to endorse Rand.

----------


## cindy25

> Don't forget Frothy, He is next in line. Frothy will be the one to beat. Just watch and see.


he might run, but the establishment hates him almost as much as they hate Rand

Ryan will get blamed for any loss.  
Christie could easily lose to Booker

I think the push will be Rubio Mandel

----------


## cindy25

> Rand should not run for Pres in 2016, since it is so obviously pro-Dem. Three consecutive Establishment Repubs losing will provide a perfect path to victory in 2020.
> 
> In addition, 2020 avoids the re-election problem, and by then, we may have as many as 10 Senators and 35 Congressman lined up to endorse Rand.


if Obama wins there is no way 2016 will be a Dem year; 3 terms for one party only happened once (1988) post war

----------


## Karsten

> Don't forget Frothy, He is next in line. Frothy will be the one to beat. Just watch and see.


The social cons are a dying breed.

----------


## Karsten

> Rand should not run for Pres in 2016, since it is so obviously pro-Dem. Three consecutive Establishment Repubs losing will provide a perfect path to victory in 2020.
> 
> In addition, 2020 avoids the re-election problem, and by then, we may have as many as 10 Senators and 35 Congressman lined up to endorse Rand.


Completely disagree.  We've taken over the party structure in Iowa and we should take advantage of it immediately before it changes back.

----------


## Karsten

> I may be wrong but I think thats all Obama had at the time.


Should Rand become elected in 2016, he will have spent more time (6) years than Obama spent (4) in the Senate.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> I'd venture to say that sending Lindsey out to pasture is priority #1 going forward and getting Forsythe into the Senate from NH is a very close second yet won't take as much doing as the first.


Definitely.  It would be a huge coup if we not only dumped Graham on the ash heap of history, but replacing him with a liberty candidate is a total game changer.  Other candidates would be put on notice that the liberty movement is a force to be reckoned with.  Forsythe would be another stellar Senate pick up.  I'm saving money for those two potential candidates already.  Can we get the huge Ron Paul fanbase to notice these guys is the question?  I'm sure Ron would help campaign for both of them in whatever capacity.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> Getting Davis elected is essential to getting Rand elected.
> 
> You really have to win SC or FL, if not both.


That's essentially how I see it too.  Rand would have a great shot at a 3 state sweep (Iowa, NH, SC) and if that happens we might be able to go for the knockout blow to Jeb Bush/Rubio in Florida.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> Florida will be the difficult one. Can't think of a single edge we have there. It's all old neocons.


And its expensive as hell to run ads there.  You need 10 million just to get your foot in the door.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> Will Rand have to give up his Senate seat to run? If he does, then running in 2016 is a Fool's Errand.


Not as bad as you might think.  We could have Massie run to fill Rand's seat so we don't lose it  we'd just need to find someone in the 4th district to step up and replace Massie's very secure House seat.  I'd hate to see a neocon like Webb-Edgington swoop in and take it or establishment hack Gary Moore.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> The social cons are a dying breed.


I tend to agree, but they are still a force.  We need to win them to our side.  The problem though is that they're suckers for a good Jesus freak, works every time like clock work...Huckabee, Santorum.

----------


## Anti-Neocon

> I tend to agree, but they are still a force.  We need to win them to our side.  The problem though is that they're suckers for a good Jesus freak, works every time like clock work...Huckabee, Santorum.


Christie, Ryan, Rubio, and Bush are Catholics.  Ryan may be a slight threat in Iowa, but the others really aren't.  I do worry though that Ryan can take Iowa and New Hampshire, and then run away with the nomination.  At least there will be a lot of debates where Rand can expose him for who he is.

Rand Paul is a strongly pro-life Protestant, who probably can pass as more of a Jesus freak than any of those guys.  The two biggest competitors in that arena, Huckabee and Santorum, are not really threats at all.  Huckabee probably won't even run, and Santorum is polling below Rand in Florida.

So what can help out the Rand Paul 2016 effort?
2012 - Obama wins.  Preferably in a landslide, turning the GOP base against northeastern moderates like Christie
2013 - Cory Booker runs for NJ Gov, beating Christie
2014 - Tom Davis primaries out Graham, bringing liberty to SC
Furthering of the Democrat amnesty for illegals agenda, turning the GOP base against Rubio and Bush.
Second term of failed Democrat interventionism in the Middle East, turning the GOP base more in the direction of non-interventionism.

----------


## Uriah

> Christie, Ryan, Rubio, and Bush are Catholics.  Ryan may be a slight threat in Iowa, but the others really aren't.  I do worry though that Ryan can take Iowa and New Hampshire, and then run away with the nomination.  At least there will be a lot of debates where Rand can expose him for who he is.


Are you from Iowa? All of those options you mentioned are popular here. Religion doesn't matter as much as you think. However, if there is a strong hawkish social conservative candidate then they will do well. Just like Santorum and Huckabee did well. The religious right here in Iowa are suckers for people that talk about God and forcefully 'protecting us from evil'.

----------


## Smart3

> if Obama wins there is no way 2016 will be a Dem year; 3 terms for one party only happened once (1988) post war


I believe Obama is Reagan, and whoever the Dems nominate in 2016 is Bush Sr.

----------


## Anti-Neocon

> Are you from Iowa? All of those options you mentioned are popular here. Religion doesn't matter as much as you think. However, if there is a strong hawkish social conservative candidate then they will do well. Just like Santorum and Huckabee did well. The religious right here in Iowa are suckers for people that talk about God and forcefully 'protecting us from evil'.


None of those 4 candidates mention God that much except maybe Paul Ryan?  The others seem to be a lot more laid back about religion.

Anyway:
Chris Christie - Liberal with a big mouth
Paul Ryan - Phony deficit hawk (takes 30 years to balance budget, voted for TARP)
Jeb Bush - RINO establishment amnesty lover, George Bush's liberal brother
Marco Rubio - ???

What's the dirt on Rubio to make your run of the mill FOX News watcher dislike him?  He's a raging neocon but they like that.  If we don't find a way to take down Rubio, things may get difficult

----------


## supermario21

I'm a bit concerned about those wanting Dem landslides? Do you realize that the MSM thinks we're too conservative ALREADY?! We need a win so people can proclaim conservatism is alive again and then when Romney starts governing in the middle we force his hand by sending out Davis, other conservatives to primary establishment Republicans. If we lost by a landslide all we would hear about is how far to the right we are and Christie/Bush types will be galvanized to take over the party again.

----------


## Aratus

doctor rand to a 95% probability has a binary choise in 2016 --- he either potus or senate runs

----------


## Anti-Neocon

> I'm a bit concerned about those wanting Dem landslides? Do you realize that the MSM thinks we're too conservative ALREADY?! We need a win so people can proclaim conservatism is alive again and then when Romney starts governing in the middle we force his hand by sending out Davis, other conservatives to primary establishment Republicans. If we lost by a landslide all we would hear about is how far to the right we are and Christie/Bush types will be galvanized to take over the party again.


I hope you're not being serious.  After losing an election by a landslide, do you think people are going to want another similar candidate?

McCain ran away with the nomination in 2008, and Romney got away by the skin of his teeth in 2012.  This is the breaking point for establishment neocon big government types getting the nod, and you want to elect the very poison in the well?

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> Christie, Ryan, Rubio, and Bush are Catholics.  Ryan may be a slight threat in Iowa, but the others really aren't.  I do worry though that Ryan can take Iowa and New Hampshire, and then run away with the nomination.  At least there will be a lot of debates where Rand can expose him for who he is.
> 
> Rand Paul is a strongly pro-life Protestant, who probably can pass as more of a Jesus freak than any of those guys.  The two biggest competitors in that arena, Huckabee and Santorum, are not really threats at all.  Huckabee probably won't even run, and Santorum is polling below Rand in Florida.
> 
> So what can help out the Rand Paul 2016 effort?
> 2012 - Obama wins.  Preferably in a landslide, turning the GOP base against northeastern moderates like Christie
> 2013 - Cory Booker runs for NJ Gov, beating Christie
> 2014 - Tom Davis primaries out Graham, bringing liberty to SC
> Furthering of the Democrat amnesty for illegals agenda, turning the GOP base against Rubio and Bush.
> Second term of failed Democrat interventionism in the Middle East, turning the GOP base more in the direction of non-interventionism.


I would add 2014 - Jim Forsythe runs for Senate from NH (Forsythe is Ron Paul incarnate, he'll be outstanding)

And maybe 2014 - Joe Miller runs for Senate from Alaska (I think Miller would've been on par or even better than Mike Lee!)

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> I'm a bit concerned about those wanting Dem landslides? Do you realize that the MSM thinks we're too conservative ALREADY?! We need a win so people can proclaim conservatism is alive again and then when Romney starts governing in the middle we force his hand by sending out Davis, other conservatives to primary establishment Republicans. If we lost by a landslide all we would hear about is how far to the right we are and Christie/Bush types will be galvanized to take over the party again.


We don't want Romney in there.  It will only confuse the rank and file republicans.  Romney could do any number of bogus policies and the vast majority of republicans will simply sit on their hands or sweep it under the rug like they did with GWB's transgressions.  We want the party and base hungry...chompin at the bit for a real conservative in 2016.  If Romney loses I think the pendulum in the republican party swings our way to the libertarian/paleoconservative side.

----------


## supermario21

But nobody was ever there to challenge Romney (or any neocon). It looks like Rand is going to be a formidable opponent and not a pushover in the Senate, which if the Republicans do not have control of, will need to be very careful because it wouldn't surprise me to see Rand try and thwart neoconservative intervention. George W. Bush in 2000 was the only Republican to win on a platform we would approve of. Since then, the party has gotten more "conservative" (really more neocon than anything) and the media has said we are too far right. Romney is being framed by the left in a way we'd approve (privatize SS+Medicare, cut taxes, deregulation, etc) when he is really not very close to us on many issues. A Romney loss will "moderate" the Republican party so we prop up more RINO's. Yes, the neocons will lose out, but we will move the needle in the wrong direction if Obama wins. Look at the conservatives in Europe, all they want to do is run government more efficiently, not fundamentally change Washington.

----------


## trey4sports

> I tend to agree, but they are still a force.  We need to win them to our side.  The problem though is that they're suckers for a good Jesus freak, works every time like clock work...Huckabee, Santorum.


We don't even have to win a majority. If we can just get 20 - 30% we will be in good shape in a crowded primary. Not only that, but might i remind you Ron nearly won evangelicals in Iowa. So Libertarianism gaining traction in the religious right.

----------


## Rocco

If we are serious about getting ahead of the game for 2016, the first major event we must "win" is the presidential straw poll at CPAC 2013 in March. This will be the first major conservative event after Romney loses in November, and a straw poll win here begins to build momentum. If we win CPAC in a Randslide, the entire conservative base will be talking about our momentum. We will have to beat Ryan, Christie, Rubio, Palin, Santorum and Huckabee at this event in the straw poll. Having all of them in it may help us. 

Our first major electoral targets have got to be Tom Davis 2014 and Joe Miller 2014, as Davis has an outstanding chance and I think you could even call Miller the favorite in that race. Forsythe 2014 needs to be a big priority as well, but some in New Hampshire have said that would be a very hard race for him to win in the general,while Davis and Miller are more or less guaranteed wins in the general election if they can win the primary. We will also need to anticipate and strongly challenge a primary race against Bentivolio in 2014. 

After that, a fast transition to preparing for the Iowa straw poll will need to happen. THE biggest thing we can do for Rand's chances in 2016 is to WIN the Iowa Straw Poll. This will be in August 2015, and there is NO reason we shouldn't win it. After the November 2014 elections we basically have 9 months to get ready for this, and all focus must go towards it. By this point, we will have a concrete list of candidates to choose from. I think we can count on Rand, Rubio, Christie, Jeb Bush, Santorum and Ryan to run in this cycle. I think there's a very good chance Bob McDonnell throws his hat in the ring as well. I think there's a chance Sarah Palin decides that running after 8 years of Obama is her best chance to win. I think there's a chance Huckabee throws his hat back in the ring. Ultimately, I think only 7 of the 9 I listed will run (Palin and Huckabee won't both run unless Santorum decides not to for some reason), but those are the major contenders at this point forward.

----------


## PatriotOne

> And its expensive as hell to run ads there.  You need 10 million just to get your foot in the door.


We have ~3 years to accumulate a war chest.  I wonder if it is legal to start sending in donations for a Presidential run to Rand PAC.  If so, perhaps a drive for people to start sending in $25, $50, etc., every month would be a good idea.  There's several things I could do without to free up $25.00 a month and I wouldn't even notice.  Not my fancy coffee though...that's where I draw the line....not even for Rand.

----------


## Origanalist

> Just a thought I had.  Once the Rominee loses this election, the GOP establishment is going to look for a new replacement for the Rominee in 2016.
> 
> Well, truth of the matter is, they've already hinted at who they'd like to see in 4 years.  I think it helps to get started as early as possible to do some opposition research on:
> Chris Christie
> Paul Ryan
> Marco Rubio
> Jeb Bush
> 
> I'm personally doing my activism by looking for articles about these guys on conservative sites, and exposing them for the phony conservatives that they are.  The more people who are reached, the better, and we can do our part to spoil other peoples opinions of these guys before the primary season rolls around in 2015.
> ...


What if he wins?

----------


## Anti-Neocon

> What if he wins?


 Then we're screwed worse than we already are.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> We don't even have to win a majority. If we can just get 20 - 30% we will be in good shape in a crowded primary. Not only that, but might i remind you Ron nearly won evangelicals in Iowa. So Libertarianism gaining traction in the religious right.


That's very true, we don't have to win them all.  I think Rand would have a decent shot to win a good percentage of evangelicals.  If we win 1/3 or more we're in the drivers seat.

----------


## Origanalist

> Then we're screwed worse than we already are.


Yep.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> What if he wins?


Plan doesn't change.  It's still get our people into office.  Davis, Forsythe, Miller and anyone else that emerges.

----------


## trey4sports

> If we are serious about getting ahead of the game for 2016, the first major event we must "win" is the presidential straw poll at CPAC 2013 in March. This will be the first major conservative event after Romney loses in November, and a straw poll win here begins to build momentum. If we win CPAC in a Randslide, the entire conservative base will be talking about our momentum. We will have to beat Ryan, Christie, Rubio, Palin, Santorum and Huckabee at this event in the straw poll. Having all of them in it may help us. 
> 
> *Our first major electoral targets have got to be Tom Davis 2014 and Joe Miller 2014, as Davis has an outstanding chance and I think you could even call Miller the favorite in that race. Forsythe 2014 needs to be a big priority as well, but some in New Hampshire have said that would be a very hard race for him to win in the general,while Davis and Miller are more or less guaranteed wins in the general election if they can win the primary. We will also need to anticipate and strongly challenge a primary race against Bentivolio in 2014.* 
> 
> After that, a fast transition to preparing for the Iowa straw poll will need to happen. THE biggest thing we can do for Rand's chances in 2016 is to WIN the Iowa Straw Poll. This will be in August 2015, and there is NO reason we shouldn't win it. After the November 2014 elections we basically have 9 months to get ready for this, and all focus must go towards it. By this point, we will have a concrete list of candidates to choose from. I think we can count on Rand, Rubio, Christie, Jeb Bush, Santorum and Ryan to run in this cycle. I think there's a very good chance Bob McDonnell throws his hat in the ring as well. I think there's a chance Sarah Palin decides that running after 8 years of Obama is her best chance to win. I think there's a chance Huckabee throws his hat back in the ring. Ultimately, I think only 7 of the 9 I listed will run (Palin and Huckabee won't both run unless Santorum decides not to for some reason), but those are the major contenders at this point forward.



Maybe i'm just out of the loop but how is Joe Miller the favorite to win the Alaska Senate Race? The guy couldn't even beat Lisa Murkowski running a write-in campaign....

Don't get me wrong, I think Joe is fantastic but i think him winning that seat would be a longshot. Unless of course you are referring to a house seat.

----------


## Spoa

> Maybe i'm just out of the loop but how is Joe Miller the favorite to win the Alaska Senate Race? The guy couldn't even beat Lisa Murkowski running a write-in campaign....
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I think Joe is fantastic but i think him winning that seat would be a longshot. Unless of course you are referring to a house seat.


I think Joe Miller should run against RINO Don Young. (I know that Congressman Paul has endorsed Young in the past, but that is primarily because of his decent stance on civil liberty issues. He is terrible on fiscal policy: voting for the debt ceiling increase, CRs, and using his time to make tv ads for liberal democrats.)

----------


## supermario21

> Maybe i'm just out of the loop but how is Joe Miller the favorite to win the Alaska Senate Race? The guy couldn't even beat Lisa Murkowski running a write-in campaign....
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I think Joe is fantastic but i think him winning that seat would be a longshot. Unless of course you are referring to a house seat.


With Lisa in her own seat, there is nobody to stop Miller. Also Alaska may have been a bit Palin-fatigued when Miller ran (he had huge support from her). Democrats also voted for Lisa seeing as they knew their candidate had no shot. Begich should never be in there in the first place, considering the DOJ basically screwed over Stevens to get a Dem in there.

----------


## Shane Harris

> The social cons are a dying breed.


literally lol

----------


## Rocco

Exactly. Without a split republican vote Miller should easily prevail in the general should he decide to run. 




> With Lisa in her own seat, there is nobody to stop Miller. Also Alaska may have been a bit Palin-fatigued when Miller ran (he had huge support from her). Democrats also voted for Lisa seeing as they knew their candidate had no shot. Begich should never be in there in the first place, considering the DOJ basically screwed over Stevens to get a Dem in there.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

I think Miller flew under the radar to a lot of Paul supporters or they discovered him too late in the process to really put together a huge fundraising drive.  Miller also had a few missteps like dissin Palin for one, which wasn't smart.  I think those issues can be ironed out and Miller would have a good shot at winning.

----------


## TCE

> Not as bad as you might think.  We could have Massie run to fill Rand's seat so we don't lose it  we'd just need to find someone in the 4th district to step up and replace Massie's very secure House seat.  I'd hate to see a neocon like Webb-Edgington swoop in and take it or establishment hack Gary Moore.


It's pretty bad. Rand, no matter how much money he has, will be a heavy underdog and giving up a Senate seat for the right to challenge the tens of people who will compete on the GOP side is way, way too high of a price to pay.

We need a little less pie-in-the-sky and a little more realism. Rand giving up a Senate seat just to turn around and lose it would cripple us. All of that time spent in 2009 and 2010 will be for nothing. This is a serious, serious decision, and one I hope Rand does not make lightly.

----------


## Anti-Neocon

Is Joe Miller really a liberty candidate?  Serious question here.  I know he'd be better than Don Young, but he seems more like a Jim DeMint type than anything.  I do really like that he basically endorsed Ron Paul in the primary, so we should help him out in 2014.  I just don't think we should have the highest expectations for what he'll do in office.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> Is Joe Miller really a liberty candidate?  Serious question here.  I know he'd be better than Don Young, but he seems more like a Jim DeMint type than anything.  I do really like that he basically endorsed Ron Paul in the primary, so we should help him out in 2014.  I just don't think we should have the highest expectations for what he'll do in office.


I remember him being surprisingly good.  Better than Demint and at Mike Lee level.

----------


## Smart3

> Is Joe Miller really a liberty candidate?  Serious question here.  I know he'd be better than Don Young, but he seems more like a Jim DeMint type than anything.  I do really like that he basically endorsed Ron Paul in the primary, so we should help him out in 2014.  I just don't think we should have the highest expectations for what he'll do in office.


He'd be in between Paul/Davis and Lee/DeMint in terms of votes.

----------


## Smart3

> Is Joe Miller really a liberty candidate?  Serious question here.  I know he'd be better than Don Young, but he seems more like a Jim DeMint type than anything.  I do really like that he basically endorsed Ron Paul in the primary, so we should help him out in 2014.  I just don't think we should have the highest expectations for what he'll do in office.


He'd be in between Paul/Davis and Lee/DeMint in terms of votes.

----------


## Dick Chaney

Rand can run all he wants, he's not getting my vote. He's done a good job in the senate, but he's gotten too comfortable with the Republican establishment, and that's dangerous.

----------


## Bastiat's The Law

> He'd be in between Paul/Davis and Lee/DeMint in terms of votes.


I agree.  Miller would arguably the #2 best Senator after Rand right now.  He'd be #3 best if we get Davis in there come 2014.

----------


## KingNothing

> Don't forget Frothy, He is next in line. Frothy will be the one to beat. Just watch and see.



I tend to agree with the "next in line" theory, especially as it pertains to Republican nominees (Nixon, HW, Dole, McCain, not sure if Romney fits it though as it seems he had to fight for his shot) but I can't imagine that the party would be willing to slit its wrists and nominate a contemptible socialcon like Santorum, even if he has paid is party dues.

----------


## KingNothing

> One problem Rand will have is his inexperience. Is one term long enough to be considered legitimate?



If what he's done with his time so far is any indication of what he'll do in the remaining years of his term, sure.  Especially when you consider the politicking and political maneuvering he's learned from his father's last two presidential campaigns and congressional-return campaign.  Rand knows the game.  He's lived it for decades.

If Mitten's somehow manages to upset Obama, I'd love to see Randy take a shot at the governor's house in Kentucky, though.  That would give him all sorts of presidential bona fides when the time ultimately came.

----------


## FSP-Rebel

> Rand can run all he wants, he's not getting my vote. He's done a good job in the senate, but he's gotten too comfortable with the Republican establishment, and that's dangerous.


You'll come around.

----------


## jmdrake

> Just a thought I had.  Once the Rominee loses this election, the GOP establishment is going to look for a new replacement for the Rominee in 2016.
> 
> Well, truth of the matter is, they've already hinted at who they'd like to see in 4 years.  I think it helps to get started as early as possible to do some opposition research on:
> Chris Christie
> Paul Ryan
> Marco Rubio
> Jeb Bush
> 
> I'm personally doing my activism by looking for articles about these guys on conservative sites, and exposing them for the phony conservatives that they are.  The more people who are reached, the better, and we can do our part to spoil other peoples opinions of these guys before the primary season rolls around in 2015.
> ...




We should be preparing for 2014 regardless of who wins 2012.  2016 is too far out and it will take care of itself.

----------


## Todd

> One problem Rand will have is his inexperience. Is one term long enough to be considered legitimate?



Didn't affect Obama.  That argument may get tossed in, but it's pretty ineffective these days

----------


## Todd

> HA HA. I just went to buy www.Randpaul2016.com to hold it for him.... Look what it leads to...


Are you suggesting it's for POTUS?  He was elected in 2010.  Senators are elected every six years.  Couldn't this mean he's vying for the Senate again?

----------

