General Rand Paul: Friend or Foe?

[W_BRANDON]

It's kind of a joke to post this under Opposing Candidates but I have a couple of points to add about the Rand Paul endorsement of Mitt.

For those of you who feel like this was some stroke of political genius, why didn't any of you come out and suggest Rand make this move earlier or recommend he do it when he did it? Being that this was so "politically expedient and strategic and all," you think someone would have been able to come up with it in Grassroots.

I keep watching this Hannity clip over and over again, and I swear I pick up something new every time. The feeling I get when I watch this pitch for Romney is: it was far better (in content and tone) and done with more sincerity and energy than ANY pitch he [Rand] ever gave for HIS DAD. I always felt like Rand's interviews endorsing Ron Paul were either half-assed or that it was just his style (unexcited and dull) when the topic wasn't on himself. Now this confirms it.

I don't know the motivations but neither do you, so question it. We know who Ron is, he's paid his dues. What about Rand? My support doesn't automatically go to Rand just because he says good things and shares DNA with Ron. Rand only has 1.5 years in office and already has two strikes against him (1. Aye on latest Iranian sanction measure; 2. Endorsing Romney). I don't think any of us should be so quick and careless with our support as to blindly throw it behind Rand. Who, if you don't know, is on the Mitt Romney 2012 campaign trail.

 

[matt0611]

Because now its pretty clear the Ron is not going to win the nomination.

Come one, this isn't rocket science here. Rand was always going to endorse the nominee (which is going to be Mitt Romney). This was always coming, stop pretending that it wasn't.

Rand is the best Senator we have, and if his voting record is as consistent as it is now I will support him for President in 2016.

If I was in his position I would make the exact same move.

BTW, I don't know what endorsement you were watching, I thought the endorsement of Romney was as dull as could be, I think you're just seeing what you want to see to be honest.

 

[Tonewah]

The bottom line is that we needed around 10+ million dollars from our last moneybombs to have competed in CA and TX. Ron Paul had to compete not only with his opponents, but with the media. We didn't even break a million in the last one. The campaign kept having to extend them to get close to a million in each moneybomb.

The odds of RP getting the GOP nomination, now, are slim to none, though I still have hope that we can have an impact and sway some of the other delegates.

I don't blame Rand. He is trying to salvage what he can, now. I think the move is naive, but I know why he did it.

Ron Paul would never tell his supporters that they didn't help enough, because he knows how much we tried and sacrificed... more than any other candidate's supporters. We just continue to be forced to fight the media and that's an expensive endeavor.

If anyone is to blame, it is those of us who didn't motivate enough other people to contribute. I admit I am guilty. Although I gave to EVERY moneybomb, I was too busy trying to argue that Ron is right to realize I needed to ignore those who want to argue and motivate those who agree with him to give to the campaign. I really feel like I could have done more and I know there are probably too many more like me... Maybe those who sit on message boards instead of going door to door, finding liberty-lovers to motivate?

 

[brandon]

Rand Paul will probably be the next Reagan. I didn't get involved in this out of my love for Reagan, to say the least.

 

[cheapseats]

...I don't blame Rand. He is trying to salvage what he can, now.

So is Gary Johnson . . . WITHOUT endorsing and campaigning for Mitt Effin' Romney.

If anyone is to blame, it is those of us who didn't motivate enough other people to contribute. I admit I am guilty.

Stockholm Syndrome.

 

[BamaFanNKy]

So is Gary Johnson . . . WITHOUT endorsing and campaigning for Mitt Effin' Romney.

Um..... How would it be politically smart for GJ to endorse Romney?

 

[cheapseats]

Um..... How would it be politically smart for GJ to endorse Romney?

Do you believe it was "politically smart" for Ron Paul's SON to play paddy-cake with Entrenched Elite...I mean, to endorse/campaign for Mitt Romney?

Gary Johnson could have PLAYED THE SAME GAME, rather than mount a third-party run. Drop out of the Republican race, endorse and campaign for the presumptive nominee...maybe snag a VP slot, maybe "just" circle wagons for a run in 2016. Y'know...LIKE RAND.

 

[Cowlesy]

Do you believe it was "politically smart" for Ron Paul's SON to play paddy-cake with Entrenched Elite...I mean, to endorse/campaign for Mitt Romney?

Gary Johnson could have PLAYED THE SAME GAME, rather than mount a third-party run. Drop out of the Republican race, endorse and campaign for the presumptive nominee...maybe snag a VP slot, maybe "just" circle wagons for a run in 2016. Y'know...LIKE RAND.

Need moRE CAPSLOCK for EMPHASIS.

 

[cheapseats]

Need moRE CAPSLOCK for EMPHASIS.

Is this better?

Do you believe it was "politically smart" for Ron Paul's son to play paddy-cake with Entrenched Elite...I mean, to endorse/campaign for Mitt Romney?

Gary Johnson could have played the game, rather than mount a third-party run. Drop out of the Republican race, endorse and campaign for the presumptive nominee...maybe snag a v.p. slot, maybe "just" circle wagons for a run in 2016. Y'know...like Rand.

Does that allow you to address substance over style?

 

[wizardwatson]

One of the main points I take from the interview is that Rand doesn't identify his supporters as his dad's supporters. He's trying to be more in line with mainstream republicans. That's what I'm guessing his strategy is with this Romney endorsement. Notice how he says "my Dad has a legion of supporters who think they own the internet". He doesn't say "I" have a legion of internet supporters.

He also doesn't mention the Constitution. Ron would say "the constitution says" while Rand says "Romney and I agree that declaration of wars 'should' begin in the legislature". Rand didn't mention the Constitution at all in his endorsement.

I understand Rand's strategy. He wants to have as large of an impact as possible and he sees decoupling from the uncompromising wing of the movement as a necessary part of expanding his base of constituents. Naturally the part of the movement that's getting kicked in the face will decouple from him as well.

What I don't understand is all the hostility towards those that see this as a betrayal on these boards. They have good reason. Rand has drawn a strategic line in the sand and people are choosing now which side they want to be on. I don't think either side is being irrational. Ron drew a line in the sand too. But his line is one of principle. It was a uniting line. A line of who is for freedom and who is not. Rand has drawn a political line. It is a line that is now dividing those on the side of freedom.

 

[Bruehound]

Many are naive if they don't understand Romney had to pay a price for this. We just don't know what it is yet. The immature petulence of this movement is frustrating.

 

[Brent H]

Many are naive if they don't understand Romney had to pay a price for this. We just don't know what it is yet.

This rich man can afford to pay the price of cheap sell-out.

 

[fisharmor]

Rand Paul will probably be the next Reagan.

So, he's going to be the next guy who uses a lot of Libertarian platitudes, and then starts stabbing us in the back at the earliest opportunity?

 

[brandon]

So, he's going to be the next guy who uses a lot of Libertarian platitudes, and then starts stabbing us in the back at the earliest opportunity?

Yea that's pretty much what I meant by it. He may make a couple good changes in economic and tax policy. Probably moreso than any of the alternatives would. But by and large - more of the same.

 

[W_BRANDON]

Many are naive if they don't understand Romney had to pay a price for this. We just don't know what it is yet. The immature petulence of this movement is frustrating.

What could this price be? Then ask yourself, what type of guarantees could this “price” potentially have? Are we to trust Romney and company, the establishment archetype, will follow through and honor any hypothetical commitments or assurances given to Rand?
No sir, you are the naïve one and your evaluation of this move by Rand is at the very best, premature, but probably just ignorant, especially being that you are the type to use insults to unsuccessfully make a point.

 

[Bruehound]

What if the deal was to make Ron Paul Speaker of the House ?

 

[falconplayer11]

What if the deal was to make Ron Paul Speaker of the House ?

Ron Paul is retiring. And Ron Paul has never been about "deals". That is sleazy and something no honest person should engage in.

Endorsing someone you don't agree with because they did you a favor is dishonest.

 

[Aratus]

the Daily Paul is about to interview Rand Paul and wants a few good questions from us! we are about to get answers!

 

[RonPaulFanInGA]

So, he's going to be the next guy who uses a lot of Libertarian platitudes, and then starts stabbing us in the back at the earliest opportunity?

Reagan stabbed who in the back, exactly? The Democrats? He was never a Libertarian.

 

[Bruehound]

Ron Paul is retiring.

One does not need be a sitting member of Congress to be Speaker. And to me, that would be the kind of deal I would accept.