phill4paul
Member
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2007
- Messages
- 46,967
It's early. We'll see. Undecided.
Do you support Rand Paul for president?
- Thread starter Rocco
- Start date
Cabal
Member
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2011
- Messages
- 2,972
He is very serious, I'm afraid.
RonPaulFanInGA
Member
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2007
- Messages
- 12,749
I hope you'll at least wait until Rand Paul announces he's suspending his campaign, as Ron Paul did in early May 2012, and Romney has become the presumptive nominee, as Romney did after winning Texas on May 29, 2012, before doing such a thing. Remember, Rand Paul waited until after all that, endorsing Romney in June of that year.
Though it is hard to imagine Romney getting that far again.
fisharmor
Member
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2008
- Messages
- 12,455
Yeah, I'm familiar with this particular outright lie that you guys like to trot out every time it comes up.
Reece
Member
- Joined
- May 7, 2011
- Messages
- 121
Even if that is false, Rand clearly did campaign for Ron through the entire 2007-2008 campaign, and then during a large part of the 2011-2012 campaign (and the part that mattered most, early on, before Iowa and NH).
RonPaulFanInGA
Member
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2007
- Messages
- 12,749
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Paul_presidential_campaign,_2012
Wikipedia said:
Not sure in what fantasy world one would have to live in to think Ron Paul was still a for-real presidential candidate in June 2012.
Jingles
Member
- Joined
- May 9, 2011
- Messages
- 1,235
Rand plays politics and I absolutely hate it. I suppose you have to do that though when you have a stupid and/or disinterested public. I just put undecided because I'm not sure if I'll be out campaigning or whatever. A lot can happen in until the actual race starts. I'll more than likely vote for him in the primaries. I really don't think much of voting anyways. If he goes further than that I will in the general as well, probably.
Rand just doesn't bring the same enthusiasm that Ron brought to me. I'll probably support him in hopes that beneath all the political pandering there will be some awesome stuff when he gets in office. If he up and pulls a Reagan then he will just be dead to me. I won't ever try to defend positions or actions of his I disagree with if he is president.
It is fine to work on electing him and etc... But don't forget your roots/true views in the mess of the electoral process. We work to advance principles, not men.
Rand just doesn't bring the same enthusiasm that Ron brought to me. I'll probably support him in hopes that beneath all the political pandering there will be some awesome stuff when he gets in office. If he up and pulls a Reagan then he will just be dead to me. I won't ever try to defend positions or actions of his I disagree with if he is president.
It is fine to work on electing him and etc... But don't forget your roots/true views in the mess of the electoral process. We work to advance principles, not men.
PAF
Member
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2012
- Messages
- 13,613
Start building your resume to retain RPF membership early!
I do not participate on this board, I post only when necessary. ^^ What does this mean?
cajuncocoa
Banned
- Joined
- May 15, 2007
- Messages
- 16,013
There are many here who would like that to be the official policy, but I don't think it will be.
I may be wrong.
Christian Liberty
Member
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2013
- Messages
- 19,707
HahaThat's a great point - I'm not sure what comparing libertarians that won't vote for Rand to Peter King accomplishes, besides pushing these people off. Pushing away a potential voter is just as big of a deal as one libertarian deciding not to vote.
I'm actually posting this now to make a point: I do like Rand to some degree but I'm not in any way attached to him and I don't think he's his dad. I'm not afraid to not vote for him solely based on what happens on these forums if dissenting views get squashed. I hope I'm not the only one.
KingNothing
Member
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2011
- Messages
- 6,662
As a politician, I like Rand better than his father.
As a statesman, I like Ron better than his son.
They're different men who have different aspirations and different styles. Both are ABSOLUTELY necessary and very important to America. Having one without the other is entirely meaningless. We need both.
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2010
- Messages
- 40,047
I did not vote in the poll, because I do not know what "support" is supposed to mean in this context (and the OP does not bother to explain).
If "support" means "voting for Rand if he is the GOP nominee for POTUS" then the answer is "probably - assuming I bother to vote at all ..."
But if it means "wanting Rand to run for POTUS" then the answer is an emphatic "no." I think Rand should just stay where he is right now - in the senate. When it comes to electoral politics, the liberty movement should really stop obsessing so much over the bright, shiny object of the presidency. I know that there are positive things that Rand could theoretically do as POTUS - but if Rand actually does become president, I think a LOT of people are going to end up being VERY disappointed over (at least) three things.
First, they'll be disappointed at the limited range of what President Rand actually tries to accomplish. Without a sufficient base of support in Congress, Rand is going to have serious problems pursuing any kind of across-the-board "libertarian" agenda. Rand is too smart to waste his time on non-starters. (And of course, we'll see the usual "looking ahead to the next election" phenomenon rearing its ugly head ...)
Second, from among the things he does try to do, they'll be disappointed at what he is actually able to accomplish. He'll have to expend enormous "political capital" in order to do anything really significant against Establishment opposition - which will be heavy and will come from both Republicans & Democrats. (And the "next election" syndrome will be a factor here as well.)
And third, they'll be disappointed at the lack of "durability" that much of what Rand might be able to achieve will have. Executive orders can be superceded by subsequent presidents, policies can be reversed or old ones reinstated, etc., etc. Without a sufficiently large & assertive pro-liberty base in Congress, anything that Rand might do as president can be just as easily undone by the next administration.
In short, you can't climb a mountain by starting at the top - and it is foolish to let the vanguard get too far ahead of the main body of your forces. It takes time, patience and diligence - and the "instant gratification" promised by "silver bullets" (such as taking POTUS before the necessary foundations are laid) is illusory
If "support" means "voting for Rand if he is the GOP nominee for POTUS" then the answer is "probably - assuming I bother to vote at all ..."
But if it means "wanting Rand to run for POTUS" then the answer is an emphatic "no." I think Rand should just stay where he is right now - in the senate. When it comes to electoral politics, the liberty movement should really stop obsessing so much over the bright, shiny object of the presidency. I know that there are positive things that Rand could theoretically do as POTUS - but if Rand actually does become president, I think a LOT of people are going to end up being VERY disappointed over (at least) three things.
First, they'll be disappointed at the limited range of what President Rand actually tries to accomplish. Without a sufficient base of support in Congress, Rand is going to have serious problems pursuing any kind of across-the-board "libertarian" agenda. Rand is too smart to waste his time on non-starters. (And of course, we'll see the usual "looking ahead to the next election" phenomenon rearing its ugly head ...)
Second, from among the things he does try to do, they'll be disappointed at what he is actually able to accomplish. He'll have to expend enormous "political capital" in order to do anything really significant against Establishment opposition - which will be heavy and will come from both Republicans & Democrats. (And the "next election" syndrome will be a factor here as well.)
And third, they'll be disappointed at the lack of "durability" that much of what Rand might be able to achieve will have. Executive orders can be superceded by subsequent presidents, policies can be reversed or old ones reinstated, etc., etc. Without a sufficiently large & assertive pro-liberty base in Congress, anything that Rand might do as president can be just as easily undone by the next administration.
In short, you can't climb a mountain by starting at the top - and it is foolish to let the vanguard get too far ahead of the main body of your forces. It takes time, patience and diligence - and the "instant gratification" promised by "silver bullets" (such as taking POTUS before the necessary foundations are laid) is illusory
Everything you just said is also true in spades for Ron Paul,yet here we are on a site that was formed and dedicated to getting him elected President of the United States of America.
I guess we're just a bunch of starry-eyed optimists at heart.
I guess we're just a bunch of starry-eyed optimists at heart.
My take is this. Ron Paul woke me up. Just like many others. His speeches 99% of the time are educational. So a Ron Paul president would be the good doctor educating the american people.
Rand from my opinion isn't having that effect on people. Serious is there anyone new to these forums or whatnot talking about how Rand Paul cured their apathy? I was proud of him for the filibuster. People didn't even know what that was, some was saying it was illegal. (not on this forum) So i got good laughs about how uniformed they are. The politics stuff is annoying. Just think why did Ron stayed in office for so long. He was kept there by his people, not because of the back room deals with other politicians.
jllundqu
Member
- Joined
- May 24, 2011
- Messages
- 7,304
Amen brother. +rep
jllundqu
Member
- Joined
- May 24, 2011
- Messages
- 7,304
Very good points.
I don't see thousands of inspirational youtube videos claiming that Rand Paul cured their apathy...
Ron Paul had the magic. Rand may be a good president, but I don't think he will be a GREAT one.
Similar threads
