And people like to blame Rand for his low poll numbers.

[Ronin Truth]

What Rand blaming people are those?

 

[cajuncocoa]

Boobus' mindset:

This is why we can't have nice things.

 

[enhanced_deficit]

This is what GOP base approval/primaries game is mostly about.. rest of issues are connected to this and by themseves will be small change.

Can Rand win GOP base without fiercely attacking Obama?

 

[Dary]

Yeaw and you missed the whole point.

If that is what you think, then you surely missed mine.

 

[klamath]

If that is what you think, then you surely missed mine.

Until you figure out that by Americans I mean a large electoral majority then yes you missed the point. Stand with Rand was a slogan for ELECTORAL victory.

 

[Peace&Freedom]

The public was increasingly coming around to Rand's arguments about the wastefulness of foreign invervention and the need to protect the fourth amendment, UNTIL, of course, an eeeevvvverrr so convenient spate of terrorist and/or shooting incidents put them into "fear, fear fear, we're under threat" mode, and scared them right back into compliance with accepting 24/7 war and surveillance.

Part of the problem IS Rand's fault, as this kind of thing is exactly what I mean about "challenging the mainstream." We should all know by now that most or all of the above "incidents" are in fact false flag covert ops, designed to steer domestic and international opinion back into supporting more intervention or more surveillance, just in time for primary and election season. Unless Rand confronts the fear racket by exposing the cynically timed "threat" as manufactured, he will have to accept the premise the threat is real, which short-circuits his arguments for peace, privacy and freedom.

 

[The Northbreather]

The end goal was always to implant the idea that "anyone" could be a terrorist, your neighbor, your coworker, people who believe in privacy, and only the government can save us by removing your freedoms.

At first it was foreign fighters but we have reached the "anyone" phase.

Just took a few domestic incidents to make us all guilty, having to prove our commitment to nationalism or be considered suspect.

 

[Dary]

Until you figure out that by Americans I mean a large electoral majority then yes you missed the point. Stand with Rand was a slogan for ELECTORAL victory.

Until you figure out that Americans do stand with Rand, and that saying "Americans don't stand with Rand" is a collectivist, groupspeak statement that comes across as an attack, then you have missed my point.

If what you meant to say was that you think that a large electoral majority doesn't stand with Rand, then maybe that's what you should have posted.

But I did figure that WAS in fact what you meant. Especially after Hells Unicorn tried to expand on what you had posted.

And that is why I posted in response that I agreed with much of what was said.

I was objecting to blanket, general statements that come across as attacks.

Get it?

 

[Cabal]

Americans DON'T stand with Rand.

You're just realizing this?

The average voter is thoroughly statist, as far as I can tell.

 

[Anti-Neocon]

The tone-deafness in this thread is amazing. People really don't care about these issues much at all. They aren't supporting Rand because he doesn't seem like a contender and a fighter, and has high unfavorables due to: bad media coverage, negativity about Trump, and there are still people who think he is Paul Ryan or Ron Paul. Cruz is running a more effective campaign - defending most of Rand's ideas that he supported while still maintaning crazy high favorables. This isn't a race about policy, which is also evident with how someone with minimal knowledge like Trump is leading. It's a race to get the most media attention and make people feel like you are fighting for them. Both Trump and Cruz have succeeded in that measure, which is why they are leading the polls.

Seriously, ask 100 primary voters what they actually think of Rand Paul and why, and very few will give anything resembling articulate policy reasons to dislike him.

 

[klamath]

The public was increasingly coming around to Rand's arguments about the wastefulness of foreign invervention and the need to protect the fourth amendment, UNTIL, of course, an eeeevvvverrr so convenient spate of terrorist and/or shooting incidents put them into "fear, fear fear, we're under threat" mode, and scared them right back into compliance with accepting 24/7 war and surveillance.

Part of the problem IS Rand's fault, as this kind of thing is exactly what I mean about "challenging the mainstream." We should all know by now that most or all of the above "incidents" are in fact false flag covert ops, designed to steer domestic and international opinion back into supporting more intervention or more surveillance, just in time for primary and election season. Unless Rand confronts the fear racket by exposing the cynically timed "threat" as manufactured, he will have to accept the premise the threat is real, which short-circuits his arguments for peace, privacy and freedom.

And No we don't know that they are false flags and I really challenge to stand up and tell the American people that the terrorist attacks are false flags on a national republican debate. Do you know what the sound of a Boo it? Well you would after you said that.

 

[Peace&Freedom]

And No we don't know that they are false flags and I really challenge to stand up and tell the American people that the terrorist attacks are false flags on a national republican debate. Do you know what the sound of a Boo it? Well you would after you said that.

Then they will be booing the truth. Covert ops are frequently being employed to manipulate geopolitics and to steer opinion into constant pro-war/pro-spying mode, whether we say so or not. I say we say so, and thereby destroy the main pillar of the War on Terror Narrative. Whatever the case, the approach of the last three Paul campaigns of NOT challenging The Narrative, has clearly NOT resulted in voters gravitating towards Paul. Until our candidate short-circuits the fear mongering, our liberty arguments will continue to be short-circuited by those emotions, and ignored.

 

[klamath]

Then they will be booing the truth. Covert ops are frequently being employed to manipulate geopolitics and to steer opinion into constant pro-war/pro-spying mode, whether we say so or not. I say we say so, and thereby destroy the main pillar of the War on Terror Narrative. Whatever the case, the approach of the last three Paul campaigns of NOT challenging The Narrative, has clearly NOT resulted in voters gravitating towards Paul. Until our candidate short-circuits the fear mongering, our liberty arguments will continue to be short-circuited by those emotions, and ignored.

In case you have missed it 10,000 years of human history proves you wrong. Humans are warriors. Peace is only the rest period in between the natural human state.

 

[timosman]

In case you have missed it 10,000 years of human history proves you wrong. Humans are warriors. Peace is only the rest period in between the natural human state.

Humans are not warriors. The reason for an only brief period of time between wars is the constant manipulation by the elites("tell them they are being attacked"). While I would advise against laying it out straight, Rand could start suggesting this as a possibility due to lack of an oversight. There are number of agencies within the government whose action are unaccountable and obscure to the POTUS.

 

[klamath]

Humans are not warriors. The reason for an only brief period of time between wars is the constant manipulation by the elites("tell them they are being attacked"). While I would advise against laying it out straight, Rand could start suggesting this as a possibility due to lack of an oversight. There are number of agencies within the government whose action are unaccountable and obscure to the POTUS.

Humans chose the elites to specifically lead them in battle. Those elites would NOT be in power or in a position to be manipulating if the general population doesn't will it to be so.

 

[timosman]

Humans chose the elites to specifically lead them in battle. Those elites would NOT be in power or in a position to be manipulating if the general population doesn't will it to be so.

This is only true for the last hundred years or so. Prior to that the general population had very little input on who the ruler was. While we made some progress recently, the current state of affairs is far from satisfactory. Boobus is simply too naive not to be conned by the psychopaths in charge.

 

[CPUd]

In case you have missed it 10,000 years of human history proves you wrong. Humans are warriors. Peace is only the rest period in between the natural human state.

I would argue that humans don't naturally make war, but they naturally make states and the states naturally make war. (per Rousseau, social contract theory)

 

[RonPaulMall]

Premise is nonsense. 4th Amendment is on the downswing because there is nobody selling it in a popular way at the National Level. Frame it the right way, Civil Liberties are extremely popular. Rand himself demonstrated that back in 2010-2012 when he knew how to effectively communicate his positions. Get somebody out there expressing support for 4th Amendment rights in an effective manner and the people will follow.

 

[timosman]

Premise is nonsense. 4th Amendment is on the downswing because there is nobody selling it in a popular way at the National Level. Frame it the right way, Civil Liberties are extremely popular. Rand himself demonstrated that back in 2010-2012 when he knew how to effectively communicate his positions. Get somebody out there expressing support for 4th Amendment rights in an effective manner and the people will follow.

Yup, Rand needs to talk during the next debate looking at the camera and talking directly to the voters. This is what Christie did during the last debate. Boobus needs to feel special.

 

[klamath]

Premise is nonsense. 4th Amendment is on the downswing because there is nobody selling it in a popular way at the National Level. Frame it the right way, Civil Liberties are extremely popular. Rand himself demonstrated that back in 2010-2012 when he knew how to effectively communicate his positions. Get somebody out there expressing support for 4th Amendment rights in an effective manner and the people will follow.

Two years ago the voters weren't seeing ISIS beheading and terrorist attacks on US and European soil. Your man trump is smart enough to say he will increase domestic spying and he soars in the polls.