IOWA: Rand Paul is GOP's best candidate for 2016

[FriedChicken]

$10 says JC has had a child aborted in the past ... can't think of any other reason that he (assuming he is a he) wants to bring up an abortion argument up in every thread not about abortion.

 

[matt0611]

This is good news.

In a real election Hillary would be at a huge disadvantage because she's a woman.

And old. She'll be almost 70 years old by the time 2016 rolls around.

 

[Warlord]

The age thing is not going to matter. Reagan was president at 70.

It will either be Hillary or Biden. No other Democrat simply has the profile to realistically defeat them. I'm sure a few liberal governors will try but they wont get money and endorsements like these two.

And I think Rand can beat either though Clinton might make it difficult if she can count on AR but surely she would be forced into being very liberal to get through the primary and would lose this alleged "centrist" appeal that would enable her to compete in southern states.

 

[matt0611]

The age thing is not going to matter. Reagan was president at 70.

Hmm I'm not so sure, I think its different for an older woman than an older man.

 

[Warlord]

Hmm I'm not so sure, I think its different for an older woman than an older man.

Either one of these "older" Democrats will be on the ticket in 2016. Pretty sure the odds on that are short!

And when they are if you look at the last 15 presidential races they have a 50/50 chance of becoming president.

Although if you look at the history of a third term of the party in the White Hose it is pretty bad with only HW BUSH pulling it off in modern times and that was on Reagan's nostalgic coat tails as the economy was good. The economy is going to collapse before 2016 as the stimulus is withdrawn and the sham is exposed so I dont see how the Dems will win. They've also got Obamacare hitting in 2014 and by 2016 people's health premiums will be rocketing 150%. A lot of people will be angry with the Democrats when they realize the full horror of Obama's 2 terms (which are just a continuation of Bush's two)

 

[JCDenton0451]

I dont think it's that damaging. Warlord has worried about this in the past with his cousin and we've had debates about how it might hurt him usually involving excellent posts from a member called JMDrake who is enlightened on this issue and is somewhat of the forum expert on abortion matters.

I've concluded that issues like jobs and economic issues are where the elections will be decicided and that if you're a superior candidate you can overcome any negative aspects from having an absolutist position on abortion i.e Cooch in VA will do great. Rand has done great and the polls look ok (see original post). Sanford did fine despite massive scandals and spending against him because he's a superior candidate who outworks and outcampaigns opponents and is confident and strident in his positions. It's amazing what you can get a pass on if you have the likability factor.

Sanford won because he ran in R+11 district, and the electorate was receptive to his message. He ran against Nancy Pelosi in a district, that hates her guts. Rand's challenge will be to win over voters, who typically associate hardline socially conservative positions with crazy people like Rick Santorum or Todd Akin...But I'm glad you at least acknowledged absolutist pro-life stance as a liability in the general election. That's encouraging.

 

[Warlord]

Sanford won because he ran in R+11 district, and the electorate was receptive to his message. He ran against Nancy Pelosi in a district, that hates her guts. Rand's challenge will be to win over voters, who typically associate hardline socially conservative positions with crazy people like Rick Santorum or Todd Akin...But I'm glad you at least acknowledged absolutist pro-life stance as a liability in the general election. That's encouraging.

My cousin has debated this issue before and at length because he was worried about the absolutist position but he was assured by members like JMdrake it wouldn't be much of an issue and im leaning towards that. Once the primary is over all Rand needs to do is shut up about abortion and the less it comes up the better although sending coded signals to the base will help drive GOP turnout which is important.

You really need to talk to JMdrake about this... he's the expert and has the polling stats and everything else to back up his positions.

The fact is the voters want the candidates to talk about jobs, economy, healthcare and a few other issues. If the Dems just attack Rand 24/7 because he's pro-life they're going to seem out of touch with voters concerns. It doesn't press as many buttons as they would like you to believe. People vote and decide on other issues.

 

[Warlord]

Here's a comparison for you: Obama is basically a socialist who believes in state control of healthcare which is 1/6th of the entire US economy! He's setting up Federal exchanges across the land and insuring everyone. This is pure socialism.

But Obama doesn't campaign in OH and VA telling everyone there he's an avowed socialist who wants to nationalize the healthcare industry and someone like Rand isn't going to run round the US promising to ban abortions. He's going to shake hands, campaign, smile, look good and talk about jobs, the economy, low taxes and repealing Obamacare.

Obama just did pretty much the same without saying he's a socialist. Most voters don't look at things too deeply and if you message things right then there's no problem with being an absolutist on abortion just as long as you dont say something dumb and make it a central issue of your campaign

 

[RockEnds]

Hmm I'm not so sure, I think its different for an older woman than an older man.

Health and longevity are still the issue. Hillary has already begun to have health problems. Without any scandals or other negatives, her age will be difficult to overcome.

 

[JCDenton0451]

You really need to talk to JMdrake about this... he's the expert and has the polling stats and everything else to back up his positions.

JMdrake? You mean jmdrake , whom I debated bitterly in this thread (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?413703-Creationists-Fail-a-Fourth-Grade-Science-Test ), who downrated my posts three times, and called me "basically a communist" because I support science education in schools...Is this your authority on abortion? You gotta be kidding me! :facepalm:

 

[Warlord]

JMdrake? You mean jmdrake , whom I debated bitterly in this thread (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?413703-Creationists-Fail-a-Fourth-Grade-Science-Test ), who downrated my posts three times, and called me "basically a communist" because I support science education in schools...Is this your authority on abortion? You gotta be kidding me! :facepalm:

On abortion he's the expert and Warlord would trust his judgement.

Do you recognize the comparison between Obama not saying he's a socialist when he clearly is one and Rand not saying he's an anti-abortion fanatic when he is one? Do you see how with the right messaging a politician can actually hide their true agenda from the fickle and shallow voters?

 

[FriedChicken]

JMdrake? You mean jmdrake , whom I debated bitterly in this thread (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?413703-Creationists-Fail-a-Fourth-Grade-Science-Test ), who downrated my posts three times, and called me "basically a communist" because I support science education in schools...Is this your authority on abortion? You gotta be kidding me! :facepalm:

He is more credible than you are on these forums and I don't how his views on public education, regardless of what his views are, could discredit him on this topic. Since this topic is already completely derailed because of the abortion argument you insist on having at ever possible opportunity I guess I shouldn't fear derailing it more: I haven't read the topic you linked to, but I'm going to take a guess and assume that when you say "science education in schools" you mean "teaching the evolution theory as a fact in publicly funded schools".

 

[Warlord]

By the way, Rand is beating pro-choice (fake Catholic) Joe Biden in this poll... the sitting vice president. And he's only a few points behind the pro-choice late-term abortion fanatic Clinton. So it's obviously not hurting him here in a state that voted for Obama and Harkin all these years and people in Iowa would generally know Rand's pro-life although he won't be known to everyone there.

He still has room to improve his name ID nationwide and outside Kentucky while his opponents basically have 100% name ID (Clinton being the most famous names in America and in some kind of public service for 20 years and Biden being in the Senate for 35 years and VP for 4 and on the ballot in Iowa multiple times).

SO I'd say he's doing pretty well dont you think JCD?

 

[Rudeman]

Sanford won because he ran in R+11 district, and the electorate was receptive to his message. He ran against Nancy Pelosi in a district, that hates her guts. Rand's challenge will be to win over voters, who typically associate hardline socially conservative positions with crazy people like Rick Santorum or Todd Akin...But I'm glad you at least acknowledged absolutist pro-life stance as a liability in the general election. That's encouraging.

Why are you comparing Rand to people who made idiotic statements/gaffes? Akin and Mourdock lost because of their stupid gaffes not because they were pro-life. Santorum was a 2 term senator in a state that isn't solid red. He lost reelection because of gaffes he made (supporting Arlen/Bush, his book etc.).

 

[Warlord]

Why are you comparing Rand to people who made idiotic statements/gaffes? Akin and Mourdock lost because of their stupid gaffes not because they were pro-life. Santorum was a 2 term senator in a state that isn't solid red. He lost reelection because of gaffes he made (supporting Arlen/Bush, his book etc.).

I'm sure if you looked on Democratic Underground in 2007/8 they'd be debating things like:

"Can Obama win Ohio, Florida and Virginia considering he's so liberal? I'm really concerned... he should tone down the rhetoric about the rich having to pay more and arguing for the forced redistribution of wealth... it might hurt him in rural Virginia".

In fact.... it didn't. One of the most liberal guys running for president in 30 odd years won somewhat conservative states twice and fairly easily despite promising to nationalize 1/6th of the economy. Yet JCD is really worried about a polished candidate being pro-life.

 

[Warlord]

JCD, are you going to reply to any of Warlord's posts?

 

[jmdrake]

JMdrake? You mean jmdrake , whom I debated bitterly in this thread (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?413703-Creationists-Fail-a-Fourth-Grade-Science-Test ), who downrated my posts three times, and called me "basically a communist" because I support science education in schools...Is this your authority on abortion? You gotta be kidding me! :facepalm:

Nice lie JCDenton. I called you a socialist because you want to force schools to adopt your views on science, even when those students are doing better than average on standardized science tests. There is a world of difference between saying "I support kids learning science" and saying "I support the state forcing private schools and homeschools to adopt a science curriculum they and their customers may disagree with because I believe the state knows best." Seriously, you are on the wrong forum. Taking away parental freedom to educate their children the way they see fit is a core tenant of socialism. One of the stories that garnered a lot of attention here at RPF is the story of the German couple being deported who were seeking asylum because in Germany they don't have the right to homeschool.

You also used the race baiting excuse that public school kids do worse than private and homeschoolers because of "minorities" in public school. The truth is that black homeschoolers do significantly better than white public school kids on average and blacks are represented in homeschool at about the same rate as their representation in the population. You basically called me a liar and said I made that argument up....until I posted the links with the stats to prove I was right.

Tell me this. What is your view on the Ron Paul curriculum? You do realize that Ron Paul questions evolution right? You realize that one of the authors of the curriculum, Gary North, is a fundamentalist Christian right? Now I'm not asking if you would endorse it use it. I have my own reservations about Gary North. But I wouldn't suggest banning it. Would you?

 

[JCDenton0451]

Do you recognize the comparison between Obama not saying he's a socialist when he clearly is one and Rand not saying he's an anti-abortion fanatic when he is one? Do you see how with the right messaging a politician can actually hide their true agenda from the fickle and shallow voters?

I don't think this is a very good analogy.

Obama doesn't see himself as a socialist, and most neutral observers don't call him that way, even Republican party leaders don't call Obama a socialist. His reelection campaign was mostly based on negative advertising, but he didn't exactly run from his record either. Obamacare was a big part of his pitch to black and latino voters, and women. He defended Obamacare publicly and he was able to do it without alienating huge swathes of moderate and independent voters, because Obamacare is nowhere near as controvercial as the Religious Right's crusade against abortion. The country is split roughly 53-47 on Obamacare, the GOP base may hate it, but the rest of the nation is more positive.

Also, don't underestimate the power of the media to form and manipulate the public opinion. They were actively aiding Obama, and they will be working against Rand. No way they will let his anti-abortion stance slip under the radar.

 

[Warlord]

Obama is a socialist. He calls for the rich to be punished and he massively expands the state. massive spending and nationalizing of industries like healthcare (the full effects of which will take shape in just 6 months so you might want to check the polls then JCD).

But he doesn't go to OH and VA and say this publicly. That's my point. Rand isn't going to be saying ban all abortions either.

And yes I think healthcare premiums rising 100-400% and the daily replays of him saying 'Obamacare will lower your premuims' is going to be hugely controversial and damaging to the Democrats. Probably for a whole generation. People are going to very mad in a few months time They're not going to care about a politicians social position when their health premiums have risen 200%.

 

[JCDenton0451]

By the way, Rand is beating pro-choice (fake Catholic) Joe Biden in this poll... the sitting vice president. And he's only a few points behind the pro-choice late-term abortion fanatic Clinton. So it's obviously not hurting him here in a state that voted for Obama and Harkin all these years and people in Iowa would generally know Rand's pro-life although he won't be known to everyone there.

SO I'd say he's doing pretty well dont you think JCD?

He would be doing at least as good, if he supported abortions in cases of rape and incest, simply because all these crazy pro-life voters have nowhere else to go. He's taking a huge risk with his 100% pro-life stance.