Rand got less than half the votes than Ron got

[Aratus]

the main thing now is to get the campaign out of Iowa and onto New Hampshire and South Carolina.
Four or five GOP campaigns are going to royally go down in flames over the next month, I am hoping
that Rand Paul keeps on debating and contesting politics as usual, and Donald Trump's demagoguery.

 

[LibertyEagle]

No it's not the truth and you prove again that you don't know shit. Rand Paul's strategy to court the rank and file morons in the GOP did him in. He decided early on to distance himself from his father and the movement that brought him to the dance. The weak money bombs and the lack of enthusiasm proved it. Did you see any sign bombs on freeway overpasses? In 2012, a sea of people with home made signs followed Ron Paul wherever he went often preceding him before he even got there. Did you see the same enthusiasm for Rand Paul? His strategy of working with the establishment didn't work. Plain and simple. It didn't gain him any support but it did lose him some with his father's base.

It may be too late for this election but all is not lost. The rEVOLution is still out there and Rand Paul can lead it. He needs to go back to the Rand Paul of 2010. The one that said Iran was no threat to us. The one that said he would end aid to EVERYONE including Israel. The one that won't kiss the ring of whoever is leading the GOP. Hopefully he learns now to go home with the one that brought him to the dance. The country will still need it.

Even if he had given you the blowjob you wanted, he would have still lost.

Junior senators don't get on prestigious committees like Rand is on. And if he hadn't, he would have gotten 0 press and would have had zero impact. McConnell did that. So yeah, I can't stand McConnell either and I seriously doubt Rand can either. But, Rand was trying to save the country.

 

[LibertyEagle]

the main thing now is to get the campaign out of Iowa and onto New Hampshire and South Carolina.
Four or five GOP campaigns are going to royally go down in flames over the next month, I am hoping
that Rand Paul keeps on debating and contesting politics as usual, and Donald Trump's demagoguery.

Rand needs to be pushing his own vision and leave Trump dissing to Cruz and Rubio. Otherwise, it will just cement Rand in people's minds as an establishment candidate.

 

[misterx]

Is it over for Rand now or is he still in it to win it?

He'll stay in for NH at least, but at this point it's about getting exposure and spreading the message.

 

[Foreigner]

matt. you are banned for a bit. fuck off you piece of shit.

How am I supposed to neg rep teh Collinz if he is banned?

This.


...Nah, it's not Matt's fault we lost. He's done a lot of good work with Rand and has decent insight. Bring him back soon.

 

[Crashland]

Until I saw this from a MOD to somebody with over 41,000 posts and been here since 07, I only thought tonight things were over for Rand.
Now I realize something even much sadder, this night brings to end to RPF as viable place to post and discuss politics realistically and pragmatically.

It's a very sad night indeed

41,000 posts doesn't mean you are exempt from the community guidelines. He was trolling in several places not just this thread, and it was not constructive

 

[Aratus]

Until I saw this from a MOD to somebody with over 41,000 posts and been here since 07, I only thought tonight things were over for Rand.
Now I realize something even much sadder, this night brings to end to RPF as viable place to post and discuss politics realistically and pragmatically.

It's a very sad night indeed

ProBlue33 ----- Kotin may have only done a "temp" ban on poor Matt. I think we all need to step back and smell the coffee.
I've been here off and on since 'o8 and know that Matt likes to be edgy & push an envelop. Kotin has been very fair with us.

 

[Aratus]

Kotin is one of the better moderators. Until you've done likewise,
you don't know what a thankless job it can be at times. Matt is
known for being a prankster and for roiling people. At one point,
he even did a write-up for himself for Wikipedia that was found out!
I'm inclined to give Kotin the benefit of the doubt on this decision.

 

[Danke]

matt. you are banned for a bit. fuck off you piece of shit.

Could be fundraiser event for Rand.

 

[Miguel]

I agree with this. People are blaming Rand when the circumstances were simply beyond his control.

Exactly

 

[ProBlue33]

If he deserved to be banned for something he posted in another thread like that video, then he should be been chastised for that in that thread and banned there.
Not for posting factual information comparing Ron's figure's in 08 and 12 to Rand's in 16, it sends the wrong message to all the forum members.
That is my point.

 

[Influenza]

Can someone please explain to me how the quintessential neck-beard convinced himself that he is someone important in this liberty movement?

 

[CPUd]

If he deserved to be banned for something he posted in another thread like that video, then he should be been chastised for that in that thread and banned there.
Not for posting factual information comparing Ron's figure's in 08 and 12 to Rand's in 16, it sends the wrong message to all the forum members.
That is my point.

He'll be fine. He has 3 or 4 other active accounts here he can post on till they get banned too.

 

[jmdrake]

Ron running this year would have done much worse than Rand did. When Ron was running he was the only anti-establishment candidate both times.

Uhhh....no. You don't get it. Ron would have done better this year Trump would have muted any criticism against Ron for being against the Iraq war. Hell, Trump was against the Afghanistan war until he was for it. Trump was have muted any criticism against Ron being tied to 9/11 truthers since Trump grabbed the "twofer" mantle and ran with it, both attacking dubya for "not protecting us" prior to 9/11 (undermining the official story that there was no actionable intelligence) and being proud to go on the Alex Jones show, something Rand has not been willing to do after Alex went temporarily insane following Rand's endorsement of Romney. And Ron most likely wouldn't have played the fool and gone after Trump to try to get him to "pledge not to run third party" and "pledge to support the eventual Republican nominee" the way Rand did. Seriously, Rand has made some actual mistakes (I know that's hard for some people to admit) and that's part of the reason why he didn't do as well.

Ron would have done even worse than Rand in this toxic political climate, imo.

Yeah...you don't get it either.

Well I certainly do not want banned but technically speaking I can find no wrong with anything he said?? The truth is Rand took a different approach that he thought would be a winner but he wasn't counting on Trump being a media darling and Cruz being funded by Goldman Sachs who he likes to claim is his grassroots. I think if anything Rand or anyone else should learn from this is people want the cold hard truth, they don't want it sugar coated. Go Rand, nonetheless!

You get it. Add to this in this crazy year an endorsement by the GOP senate majority leader Mitch McConnell is a "kiss of death" and there you have it. Rand makes friends with McConnell. Cruz calls McConnell a liar. Rand chides Cruz for being rude to McConnell. Rand drops in the polls.

I highly doubt that. Dopey old Ben Carson got 10% just by declaring himself anti-establishment and then falling asleep. Ron would have done much better than him. Rand failed because he ran as an Establishment candidate in the most anti-establishment year on record and the establishment felt they had better options (and they did, because guys like Rubio, Kasich, and Jeb are far more establishment than Rand).

For a liberty candidate to win, he basically has to run as a more electable version of Ron Paul. That is the formula Rand Paul followed quite successfully in 2010. Not sure why he ditched it this time.

You get it as well. Only....Rand had not choice to run against the establishment in 2010 as the establishment actively ran after him! It wasn't Rand's fault that Mitch McConnell decided to fund raise for Trey Grayson. Then somebody (*cough* Jesse Benton *cough*) thought it would be a good idea after beating the establishment to make friends with the establishment. That wouldn't have been so bad if that same somebody hadn't decided to treat certain parts of the Ron Paul movement as "undesirable." That would be okay if the teocons had been enough to replace the "undesirables." But Cruz soaked up most of the tea party. And Trump soaked up the stupids.

There was no base. Anyone who decided to vote for Trump or Bernie was not part of any liberty base in the first place.

If all else false blame the voters? Newsflash. Cruz beat Trump today. So...does it really matter if people who didn't vote for Rand voted for Cruz? Here is what you are missing. What made Ron so awesome is that he could get people to trust him long enough to learn about liberty. You don't do that by going on a rant after the BP oil spill saying that this foreign corporation that poisoned the Gulf is somehow being "bullied." You don't do that by signing the Tom Cotton letter that said "Screw you Iran! We don't want peace!" I understand why Rand has run the campaign the way he has. He's been trying to build a broader coalition to include more teocons. But in the process he lost people that otherwise might have voted for him. It's not their fault. Blaming them will not help Rand rise in the polls. Learning how to reach more teocons while still reaching the people Ron reached is the key.

 

[jaymur]

2008 was a disappointment but 2012 was horrible

It seemed that in 2012 Ron Paul started out with more people knowing about him and it seemed like support had only grown in the time between elections. It was sooooooo disappointing that Mitt Robbery won. I know it has been tough for me to get behind Rand as much because of the major disappointment I felt with the American people in 2012. And now, I mean, Bernie Sanders "THE SOCIALIST" getting 50% of the vote? I remember people were treated as crazy or as racists for even suggesting Obama was a socialist.

Looks like Ron outperformed Rand in BOTH 2012 and 2008.


In case anyone is wondering Ron received 26,036 votes or 21.5% of the Iowa vote in 2012.


Rand will receive far less than half of that this year in 2016


Just to put into perspective, Ron also received 11,817 or 10% of Iowa in 2008.



So much for trending upwards and growing the base.

 

[jmdrake]

Rand needs to be pushing his own vision and leave Trump dissing to Cruz and Rubio. Otherwise, it will just cement Rand in people's minds as an establishment candidate.

Rand absolutely needs to diss Trump but for the right reasons. He needs to diss trump for calling for a complete assault weapons ban.

 

[Krugminator2]

Ron running this year would have done much worse than Rand did. When Ron was running he was the only anti-establishment candidate both times.

I think he would have done better than Rand but I think he would have been a big underdog to break 10%. That's assuming he ran for a third time. If this were his second campaign, you might be right.

 

[dbill27]

There's some truth in the fact that Rand's strategy did not work but there's also some Truth in the fact that Rand was very unlucky to run at the same time as Cruz and Trump. Many of the voters who wanted "tell it like is" and anti-establishment went for trump when Rand would have gotten some of those votes perhaps, Cruz also took many of the votes that Rand would have had a shot at.

 

[Miguel]

It's absolutely ridiculous to compare 08' 12' elections to 16' it's not even close

 

[Crashland]

And yet the candidate who ran on building that liberty/teocon coalition, the coalition that some are blasting Rand for trying to create, is the one who won the Iowa caucus.