Rand Paul gets speaking slot at Republican National Convention

[LibertyEagle]

It isn't just a speaking slot it is a nomination from the floor and a real convention not a show coronation for the first time since 1976. It sounds like you didn't watch Ron's speech to the Texas state convention (the same day Rand endorsed) reminding people he had been a delegate in 1976 for Reagan and that that had been the last time the people actually got to choose the nominee -- and that he thought that was the way conventions should be.

Yes, they should. But, the cheating GOP establishment appears to have blocked that from happening. All the more reason why we have to keep replacing them.

 

[The Free Hornet]

It's funny how so many Paulites think they are so indispensable to the GOP and to libertarian candidates, in this case Rand Paul, that by withdrawing their support they'll be able to change the world. When you withdrew your support from Romney and gave it all to Ron Paul, he didn't win the nomination remember? You can't complain about the GOP excluding you when all you do is attack them.

*** CLICK TO NEG ***

1) Using "Paulites" in a derogatory manner.

2) Although criticality to the GOP is questionable, it is less so to liberty or libertarian candidates.

3) Who the hell withdrew their support from Romney? He never had my support.

4) Maybe half of what is done is working inside the GOP to improve. With exceptions, most complaints pertain to the nomination process or specific players in the GOP or neocon landscape.

Even if they followed the rules, Ron Paul would still not win the nomination in any fashion remotely resembling the wishes of Republican voters.

Now everyone, run along and vote for Gary Johnson.

*** CLICK FOR FREE PUPPY! ***

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

Yeah, but cute isn't what drew the crowd at UCLA. Or Berkeley, or Chico, or Fullerton, or UTAustin or A&M or Michigan, or Wisconsin....

Once again you're missing the point.

 

[coffeewithchess]

Why would you make a confrontation on behalf of a man who doesn't want a confrontation?

Exactly. More importantly, why go to the convention for a campaign/man that didn't want to win it?

 

[Eire4RonPaul]

I would vote for Goode probably in that scenario. Why would I vote for Johnson over Goode?

Take a wild guess.

Regardless, writing in Paul is the worst option.

 

[sailingaway]

Once again you're missing the point.

No, I'm saying your countering my evidence of Ron's ability to speak to crowds with a fairly dismissive comment that he is old and cute pissed me off.

 

[parocks]

Exactly. More importantly, why go to the convention for a campaign/man that didn't want to win it?

It's a party. A big ass party. There will be I don't know how many hookers, but yes, hookers a plenty. People can get little nervous breakdowns there too. Could easily be the most intense experience ever for quite a few RP delegates. It's pretty intense when there's no real possibility of drama. The delegates, the people there, will be bumping into famous people all over the place. Every last tv pundit will be on the floor talking to everybody. So, yeah, it's kinda fun.

I recommend, if you want to avoid sensory overload and a nervous breakdown, eat food whenever you can. And sleep as much as you can. Very possible people will be running on pure adrenaline there at the end. It's worth doing. But others could think "danger - avoid".

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

Post count is irrelevant. And I don't see what someone not being an American has to do with their opinion on this website. Remember this?

The people in that pic aren't Americans either.

They also aren't on the forums trashing Ron Paul's son and the future of this movement. It's quite obvious to me that many people are fearful of the enormous impact we've had over the past few years and will stop at nothing to derail it. Their current M.O. is to trash Rand Paul, who is the future and create a wedge in an attempt to scatter this movement to the wind.

Divide and conquer is the method of Rand hating trolls.

 

[donnay]

Yeah, I do. I support a man who is our absolute best senator by leaps and bounds. Perhaps you should go look at what Rand has been doing in the Senate and how he has been helping reshape the GOP rather than base your support on some meaningless endorsement.

If it was so meaningless, then he should have declined to commit and waited until after the convention. It was the timing of his endorsement that I have been upset with. Not to mention, to give this exclusive endorsement on none other than Sean Hannity.

 

[Grindleader]

Personally, I am waiting to see what happens. I prefer not to assume pre-concluded motives or outcomes like the media has been doing. I will reserve judgement until after I see what actions actually occur, rather than what might occur.

 

[AuH20]

They also aren't on the forums trashing Ron Paul's son and the future of this movement. It's quite obvious to me that many people are fearful of the enormous impact we've had over the past few years and will stop at nothing to derail it. Their current M.O. is to trash Rand Paul, who is the future and create a wedge in an attempt to scatter this movement to the wind.

Divide and conquer is the method of Rand hating trolls.

There is a segment that hates that Rand is gaining traction. It started before he even won Kentucky. I advise they go back to their Libertarian clubhouse where they can brainstorm how they can break 1%.

 

[coffeewithchess]

"Rand will win over thousands of new converts because he's intelligent, funny, and charismatic."

Rand is intelligent? I haven't seen many smart political decisions by him honestly, other than running on his father's name/record to get elected. Rand Paul did nothing on his own that I'm aware of, to run for Senate other than use his father's name/record and resources. How much of it was actually Rand, not sure.

As for "intelligent" "funny" "charismatic" I don't get any of those from when I have heard him speak or be interviewed. I'm being serious. If you can't do the biggest endorsement you are doing in the 2012 campaign the right way, that doesn't show intelligence.
Funny? Charismatic? Am I missing something here? I seriously think there are going to be some people that are surprised when the "establishment" turns on Rand in 2015/2016, because they don't trust him and then what will his up "friendship" with the GOP have gained him? Absolutely nothing. It's exactly why Rick Santorum has more credibility from this campaign, than Ron Paul and company. Rick Santorum absolutely attacked Romney and was attacked back, but even after Rick Santorum said things like Mitt Romney is the same as Obama, he gets a speaking slot at the convention...yet some thought not attacking Romney would give RP a speaking slot. LOL.

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

I didn't know post counts were a reflection of one's qualifications, education, principle or integrity. If that is so, it seems you may be a qualified Loser that sits in front of a RP forum too much. I will be voting, yes. It's good to see peoples assumptions of this movement as an inward looking, inbred shower of flag waving morons is proving correct because I certainly cannot see any contradiction when it comes to foreign people on this site....do you take exception to this? If so, it seems Ron Paul is not your ideal candidate so...because this is a world movement, NOT an American movement.

And for the record, I'm sure you can come up with something a little less childish than "string bean"....lmfao.

You add nothing intellectually here.

 

[AuH20]

"Rand will win over thousands of new converts because he's intelligent, funny, and charismatic."

Rand is intelligent? I haven't seen many smart political decisions by him honestly, other than running on his father's name/record to get elected. Rand Paul did nothing on his own that I'm aware of, to run for Senate other than use his father's name/record and resources. How much of it was actually Rand, not sure.

As for "intelligent" "funny" "charismatic" I don't get any of those from when I have heard him speak or be interviewed. I'm being serious. If you can't do the biggest endorsement you are doing in the 2012 campaign the right way, that doesn't show intelligence.
Funny? Charismatic? Am I missing something here? I seriously think there are going to be some people that are surprised when the "establishment" turns on Rand in 2015/2016, because they don't trust him and then what will his up "friendship" with the GOP have gained him? Absolutely nothing. It's exactly why Rick Santorum has more credibility from this campaign, than Ron Paul and company. Rick Santorum absolutely attacked Romney and was attacked back, but even after Rick Santorum said things like Mitt Romney is the same as Obama, he gets a speaking slot at the convention...yet some thought not attacking Romney would give RP a speaking slot. LOL.

Trey Grayson would have comfortably beat Ron Paul by 10 to 15% points. You have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[Eire4RonPaul]

They also aren't on the forums trashing Ron Paul's son and the future of this movement. It's quite obvious to me that many people are fearful of the enormous impact we've had over the past few years and will stop at nothing to derail it. Their current M.O. is to trash Rand Paul, who is the future and create a wedge in an attempt to scatter this movement to the wind.

Divide and conquer is the method of Rand hating trolls.

If you think Rand Paul, who doesn't even agree with his father on a philosophical sense, is the future of this movement then we might as well call it a day right now.

Rand Paul is NOT the future of this movement.

 

[coffeewithchess]

Trey Grayson would have comfortably beat Ron Paul by 10 to 15% points. You have no idea what you are talking about.

So, Rand Paul didn't get elected because of his father's name/influence? Rand Paul was a nobody of a Senator, with no family connections to Washington D.C. and the politics? I must be thinking of another Rand Paul.

 

[NoOneButPaul]

Right? :o the presumption that anonymous forum posters know better is hilarious.

Dude don't you know where you're at? This is RPF! Where posters sitting miles from the action at their keyboards know more than Rand and Ron Paul...

 

[cajuncocoa]

They also aren't on the forums trashing Ron Paul's son and the future of this movement. It's quite obvious to me that many people are fearful of the enormous impact we've had over the past few years and will stop at nothing to derail it. Their current M.O. is to trash Rand Paul, who is the future and create a wedge in an attempt to scatter this movement to the wind.

Divide and conquer is the method of Rand hating trolls.

That's nice if you're happy with Rand's actions over the past couple of months. Some of us aren't. I'm an American; I have almost double your post count, and have been here far longer than you. And I'm in complete agreement with what Eire4RonPaul had to say.

 

[cajuncocoa]

If you think Rand Paul, who doesn't even agree with his father on a philosophical sense, is the future of this movement then we might as well call it a day right now.

Rand Paul is NOT the future of this movement.

If he is, we're screwed. And don't let the know-it-alls get you down.

 

[AuH20]

So, Rand Paul didn't get elected because of his father's name/influence? Rand Paul was a nobody of a Senator, with no family connections to Washington D.C. and the politics? I must be thinking of another Rand Paul.

Ron laid the financial foundation so to speak, but Rand went out there and worked for every vote, despite being an extreme longshot at the beginning. He made a profound connection with the people of Kentucky.