Rand Paul gets speaking slot at Republican National Convention

[sailingaway]

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%.

You do know that Reuters had Ron over 20% nationally in second place in Feb, right? And Ron never even ran ads nationally. Had media reported that you would have seen a surge I am convinced. You saw the media with Rand in his election. Do you think they will help him more than they did Ron?

 

[NoOneButPaul]

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.

This is the problem with you and all the people of your ilk, you make these dumb assumptions with absolutely NO evidence. You don't like the way Rand plays the game, or the fact he plays the game at all, so you paint him as a traitor.

Rand's not the future? Really? Please enlightening me on the army of Senators and Representatives who are better equipped to handle the cause for Liberty on the National Stage? Wait, no army? Is there even 1 other person? Anyone that can handle that heat?

 

[sailingaway]

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

in Kentucky maybe. A nationwide race is different. And would he have won without the support RON had excited across the nation?

Ron is the one whose brand of recruiting we will be losing, Rand will be there, for whatever that is worth, wonderful or not. It isn't going away. I do believe RON's campaign should be about Ron.

 

[Brett85]

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.

That's ridiculous. Rand agrees with Ron on every single issue except for one, which is the Iran sanctions issue. That is an important issue, and an issue where I agree with Ron over Rand. But to say that Ron and Rand don't have the same basic philosophy is ridiculous.

 

[cajuncocoa]

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%.

If selling one's soul is the only way to break through the 1% barrier, I'd rather continue to lose. At least I will still sleep well at night.

 

[parocks]

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.

46 posts is bad. But basically there's a lot of right there, even though you aren't a Ron Paul supporter perhaps.

You should also mention that Libertarians are terrible voters and the Republicans said "FU" a long time ago to them. Because of the behavior of Libertarians in the past, the Republicans have figured out how to win without them. Republicans say "oh, so the Libertarians aren't going to vote for us under any circumstances. Again. What should we do to make them a little bit more happy? Nothing."

I talked to a fellow Ron Paul state convention delegate on Sat night, and I pointed out that Ron Paul supporters are not smarter than the supporters of other candidates. But stupider.

It just so happens that Ron Paul supporters happen to like the right candidate.

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

Excuse me, but I followed Rand's campaign and donated thousands to it. I am familiar with his communication and charm, and also know he has started to pepper it with red meat which, attractive to some, revolts others. I repeat, Rand will reach GOP primary voters better, however they have a huge stable to pick from in an election when they are only picking their favorite which resulted in the huge surges and clifflike drops in the polls of the 'non Ron Paul' and 'non Romney' candidates this election. Those voters are not loyal, necessarily, and they think many are 'good guys' which makes it easy for the establishment to steer them to another perceived good guy. And Rand doesn't reach the people Ron reaches. Rand will do what he will do, but this campaign is Ron's and it seems like Rand is getting the prize of it and it seems like Ron's leverage is being dissipated for Rand to get it. And we don't have another Ron to get the people he reaches. Rand will be here, later.

Actually Rand does reach the people Ron reaches and you're a perfect example of that by donating thousands to his campaign. I'm not sure why you're surprised at this, Rand was always going to be the future of this movement, whether Ron won or lost. Plus, Rand is a magnificent campaigner, he'd speak everywhere and often during his run for Senate. Ron was somewhat apathetic about it, which is understandable being 76 and how tedious travel is.

 

[Eire4RonPaul]

You add nothing intellectually here.

If I'm not adding anything, you can only imagine the absolute drivel coming from your mouth, ay "string bean"...?

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

Look, I agree, that is the way conventions should be, but that isn't how it's going to be this year. It just isn't. It'll never be that way ever again until and unless we get more (a LOT more) people involved in the GOP, specifically at the state conventions, and swing the elections of RNC Committeemen and Committeewomen. They make those decisions.

That level of involvement takes time. A lot of time. After my first 3 state conventions, I realized that what we're after here wasn't going to be accomplished within one or two election cycles. We're talking 10, 15, maybe 20 years here. And I know, I know, we don't have that long, the currency's gonna collapse, yada, yada, I get it. Whatever's going to happen with the financial system doesn't change basic human nature, and basic human nature is that radical new ideas take a lot of time to digest and internalize.

We can either accept that, put our heads down, work hard, and be patient, or we can get ulcers being pissed off about it.

I think it will happen much sooner than that. 2016 is our year my friend

 

[AuH20]

If selling one's soul is the only way to break through the 1% barrier, I'd rather continue to lose. At least I will still sleep well at night.

Selling one's soul is highly interpretative. Absolutism doesn't get you anywhere in this struggle. If the neoconservative intellectual cabal thought as you 40 years ago, they would have simply retreated to their spacious estates.

 

[sailingaway]

Actually Rand does reach the people Ron reaches and you're a perfect example of that by donating thousands to his campaign. I'm not sure why you're surprised at this, Rand was always going to be the future of this movement, whether Ron won or lost. Plus, Rand is a magnificent campaigner, he'd speak everywhere and often during his run for Senate. Ron was somewhat apathetic about it, which is understandable being 76 and how tedious travel is.

but I have soured considerably with his rhetoric to be honest and definitely with his endorsement while his dad was still running for delegates. I have no deadline to make a judgment about Rand today, and I refuse to. But I did support him many times when I had doubts because he was his father's son, and I trusted THAT.

 

[Bastiat's The Law]

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.

Here, Here!! +Rep

 

[cajuncocoa]

Selling one's soul is highly interpretative. Absolutism doesn't get you anywhere in this struggle. If the neoconservative intellectual cabal thought as you 40 years ago, they would have simply retreated to their spacious estates.

And that would be bad.....how?

 

[dskalkowski]

This is the problem with you and all the people of your ilk, you make these dumb assumptions with absolutely NO evidence. You don't like the way Rand plays the game, or the fact he plays the game at all, so you paint him as a traitor.

Rand's not the future? Really? Please enlightening me on the army of Senators and Representatives who are better equipped to handle the cause for Liberty on the National Stage? Wait, no army? Is there even 1 other person? Anyone that can handle that heat?

Thank you. Someone understands..

 

[AuH20]

And that would be bad.....how?

My point is that we must be as persistent and tireless as our enemies, gobbling up yards of ground anytime the opportunity presents itself.

 

[Eire4RonPaul]

This is the problem with you and all the people of your ilk, you make these dumb assumptions with absolutely NO evidence. You don't like the way Rand plays the game, or the fact he plays the game at all, so you paint him as a traitor.

Rand's not the future? Really? Please enlightening me on the army of Senators and Representatives who are better equipped to handle the cause for Liberty on the National Stage? Wait, no army? Is there even 1 other person? Anyone that can handle that heat?

Your first mistake was assuming I was painting Rand Paul as a traitor.

I'm sure Rand Paul is a great guy, with the utmost integrity. And I don't, unlike others on here - disrespect Rand Paul by calling his endorsement "silly", "means nothing" or "playing the game". I believe Rand intended to endorse Romney through and through, he's not a liar - he wouldn't do something for the sake of it and for that reason I respect him as a person. BUT what I am saying is that Rand Paul is not Ron Paul. Therefore, he is his own man and I don't see him as leading from the front because of several issues not least because; a) he doesn't agree with his father on many issues, and most importantly b) his father had an uncanny ability to draw support from all corners of the political spectrum which in turn garnered money to run a campaign/voters etc etc. By contrast, Rand Paul does not appeal to Libertarians; Rand Paul does not appeal to Anarcho's of every color, agorists, voluntaryists etc. He only appeals to Republicans and his support will be a non-issue because of this.

Remember, there are a lot of different people behind Ron - most of which could NEVER...get behind Rand.

 

[sailingaway]

My point is that we must be as persistent and tireless as our enemies, gobbling up yards of ground anytime the opportunity presents itself.

but not from eachother

I don't want to continue this. I've made my points.

 

[Brett85]

If selling one's soul is the only way to break through the 1% barrier, I'd rather continue to lose. At least I will still sleep well at night.

Not being 100% pure on every single issue is not "selling your soul."

 

[Kotin]

but I have soured considerably with his rhetoric to be honest and definitely with his endorsement while his dad was still running for delegates. I have no deadline to make a judgment about Rand today, and I refuse to. But I did support him many times when I had doubts because he was his father's son, and I trusted THAT.

do you really believe Rand was working against Ron?

they both knew Ron could not win after a certain point.. Ron was not after delegates for the purpose of winning the nomination at the point that Rand endorsed.

I wish people would let go of the idea that Ron can win or could win after SC.. its simply not reflective of reality.. Rand did what he had to so he doesnt get pigeon-holed. He is working with Ron not against him, and anyone that thinks different needs to take a closer look.

 

[Brett85]

he doesn't agree with his father on many issues.

You keep saying this without naming a single issue they disagree on.