Former Ron staffer: "Rand Must Denounce His Father To Win The Nomination"

[TheTexan]

He would lose my vote if he ever did that.

That's ok... I kind of get the impression that you don't vote that hard anyway

 

[philipped]

Troll bait topic.

 

[anaconda]

Denouncing looks weak if it's your father. And it's completely unnecessary.

Maybe the author of the article missed this:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...l-im-done-answering-questions-about-ron-paul/

 

[Carlybee]

That's ok... I kind of get the impression that you don't vote that hard anyway

Why would you have any impression of me at all? You don't know me so you might want to refrain from assumptions.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

Why would you have any impression of me at all? You don't know me so you might want to refrain from assumptions.

BXM has become a forumgoing version of The Onion in the last several months. I wouldn't take anything he says personally. Chances are he was just trying to elicit a chuckle from the peanut gallery.

 

[Ronin Truth]

Where in the "POTUS Candidate Handbook for Dummies", is that bogus BS rule?

 

[erowe1]

According to the author in the OP, he thinks it would be a net gain because Rand would gain many more votes than he would lose.

He's wrong.

 

[erowe1]

It is still a verifiable fact that Ron Paul had not dropped out of the race when Rand endorsed Romney.

This is verifiably false, unless you're using some irrelevant technical meaning of "drop out."

http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/06/rand-paul-endorses-romney-125624.html

And if there were any lingering doubts that Ron's concession was for real, the very fact that Rand endorsed Romney should have been taken as proof that it was, rather than some sign of betrayal of his dad's campaign.

 

[jmdrake]

Denouncing looks weak if it's your father. And it's completely unnecessary.

Maybe the author of the article missed this:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...l-im-done-answering-questions-about-ron-paul/

Truth! And notice what the idiot in the OP is wanting Rand to denounce. Ron's viewpoint on Russia annexing Crimea? Really? How many Americans give a flip about Crimea or have even heard of Crimea? I can tell you this. Not 1 in 100 Americans want to go to war with Russia over Crimea. I doubt 1 in 100 Republicans want to go to war with Russia over Crimea. Oh sure, we can impose sanctions and do other meaningless gestures, but short of a credible thread of war with Russia, Putin would not have been stopped. And frankly, it's not my business. I don't like whats going on in Burma either. I don't want a war over it.

 

[Cowlesy]

I'd fold up my tent if Rand denounced his father.

And I don't think he'd ever in a million years consider doing so.

Opinions are like a-holes, everyone has one.

We can't have an even more gutless coward as the next POTUS.

 

[TheTexan]

The important thing to realize, is that Rand wouldn't be selling out, he would just be pretending to sell out. He would just be pretending to be selling out very very convincingly.

At the end of the day, no matter how much he sells out, or who he sells out, and what he's sold out of, whether that be his values, integrity, etc... at the end of the day, the only thing that matter is that he wins. Values, integrity, these things you can always buy back later. But winning, ... winning, on the other hand, you only get one chance at that.

Rand Paul 2016!!!!!

 

[donnay]

I will denounce Rand if he takes this moron's advice to denounce his father.

 

[William Tell]

I have no doubt that Randco could care less about whether the likes of me votes for him or not.

They had better at least care about anyone of us who would be a delegate for Rand.

 

[William Tell]

It is ironic that the author uses Marine Le Pen as the example of a politician denouncing their father in order to drive out the "holocaust deniers, racists and cranks." Since when Le Pen visited the states in 2011; she specifically requested and received a sitdown with Dr. Ron Paul. Which was well after she had begun distancing herself from her father.

Exactly.... I noticed that too, supposedly Ron or his people wanted it to be kind of an off the record meeting. Kind of ironic as well if true.

 

[opal]

They'll care if the entire movement turns its back on Rand because of this. I'm pretty sure Rasmussen underestimates what the movement is capable of. We have enough support to steer an election away from him. Anyway, I highly doubt Rand would throw his dad under the bus.

In my mind, that's just what he did when he endorsed mittens last time around. I've only read 3 pages but this point is just stuck in my craw.

 

[William Tell]

Rand needs to denounce former staffers like this guy and Jesse Benton.

They destroyed Pat Buchanan in part, by linking Larry Pratt's meeting with some controversial folks. I love Larry Pratt, he is an honorable man. But the media linked him to some folks who were at a meeting, and then used the fact that he was Co Chairman of the Buchanan Campaign to hurt Pat.

 

[jmdrake]

In my mind, that's just what he did when he endorsed mittens last time around. I've only read 3 pages but this point is just stuck in my craw.

I blame Ron Paul Inc (not Ron Paul himself) for allowing the charade to continue in people's minds that he was still running for president under the guise of a "delegate strategy" when that was really organizing for Rand 2016.

 

[William Tell]

I was referring to post #7


I have not formed an opinion on the OP yet... Obviously I dont want Rand to "renounce" Ron as the OP recommends, but it remains to be seen to me if such a "renouncement" would be necessary in order for Rand to win.

My guess is that if attacks tying Rand to some of Ron's more non-mainstream views are successful, Rand may be forced to do a "hard renouncement" or risk losing the nomination... time (and polling) will tell.

He has already made clear his own views, that's fine, what else can he do?
Call his dad names? that would only lose him at least hundreds of thousands of supporters.

 

[Anti Federalist]

Vote harder!!!

The important thing to realize, is that Rand wouldn't be selling out, he would just be pretending to sell out. He would just be pretending to be selling out very very convincingly.

At the end of the day, no matter how much he sells out, or who he sells out, and what he's sold out of, whether that be his values, integrity, etc... at the end of the day, the only thing that matter is that he wins. Values, integrity, these things you can always buy back later. But winning, ... winning, on the other hand, you only get one chance at that.

Rand Paul 2016!!!!!

 

[William Tell]

Would I? Absolutely. But my parents aren't Ron Paul.

My dad is roughly where Rand Paul is ideologically (assuming Rand's statements can be taken at face value), my mom doesn't really have strong political views. I don't associate with either of them in a political sense.

No, I wouldn't get up in front of people and say "I'm more statist than Ron Paul" in order to get elected. Which is effectively what Ron is being told to do. Ron isn't even an "anarchist." I am.

I think the article is closer to suggesting Rand stand up and say:

Hello, my name is Rand Paul, my father is a nutjob racist anti semite looney bin fruitcake, prepare to vote for me

And No, I see no chance of Rand saying that. He has, and will continue to campaign in his own way. I think the worst we may see, would be him saying "I disagree with my father on ______"