Rand Paul: I'm Not a libertarian...

[John F Kennedy III]

Are you going to put Alex Jones on ignore?

I'm referring to those that defend Rand no matter what and troll anyone who questions His Holiness. I have no problem with anyone supporting Rand. I possibly will still vote for him as the best option, but I'm quickly becoming thoroughly disgusted with him.

Funny you should mention AJ, I've only listened to his show twice since September.

 

[Christian Liberty]

Labels are just how they define you. Rand is a good dude and the best we have.

By some peoples label even Ron Paul isn't a libertarian. Who cares about labels?

This isn't an issue unless bored people want to make it one.

Ron Paul is a libertarian by a plausible definition of that word. Rand is not.

Granted, Ron isn't an ANARCHIST but not all libertarians are anarchists. All libertarians are opposed to banning of victimless activities like drug use.

 

[erowe1]

It's political suicide because the media will spin it that Rand Paul supports legalizing Heroin.

People in general don't understand states' rights.

If that's true then they need to be challenged to change their minds.

Rand's task isn't to be all things to all people. It's to define himself in a way that embraces just large enough of a coalition of support to win and challenge the status quo in the process.

 

[FrankRep]

Is it bad that he failed to get rid of me? (LOL)

Are you talking about me? You were spreading lies about me and I disapproved of your dirty tactics.

 

[erowe1]

Is it bad that he failed to get rid of me? (LOL)

No. As long as there's a vocal and visible contingent.

Plus, there's still time.

 

[erowe1]

Are you talking about me? You were spreading lies about me and I disapproved of your dirty tactics.

I thought he was talking about Rand.

 

[FrankRep]

If that's true then they need to be challenged to change their minds.

Rand's task isn't to be all things to all people. It's to define himself in a way that embraces just large enough of a coalition of support to win and challenge the status quo in the process.

It's your task to "change their minds."

Rand Paul's task, as a politician, is to get elected.

 

[Christian Liberty]

Are you talking about me? You were spreading lies about me and I disapproved of your dirty tactics.

I was talking about Rand Paul...

No. As long as there's a vocal and visible contingent.

Plus, there's still time.

Am I hurting Rand by continuing to support him but criticizing him for what I perceive to be silly statements such as this one?

 

[BlackTerrel]

That's NOT what this thread has been about. Randroids sure are dense!

Is that a new term? clever

Look I don't know when the last time it was that you checked the demographics but more than half of Republican voters are some form of evangelical Christian. You're not winning an election without them. So Rand going on CBN and getting positive coverage is necessary.

Do you want to win 5% and snipe on the internet or do you want to effect real change in the country? I want the latter.

 

[erowe1]

It's your task to "change their minds."

Rand Paul's task, as a politician, is to get elected.

I think his task is both. And part of getting elected is proving to people that he's enough of a leader to do that.

 

[erowe1]

Am I hurting Rand by continuing to support him but criticizing him for what I perceive to be silly statements such as this one?

I don't think so. But I don't think you need to worry about it. Just be yourself and leave the Machiavellian calculations up to the professionals.

 

[RonPaulFanInGA]

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/04/paul-on-the-rise-hillary-at-new-high.html

I think what bothers some here is their impotency at stopping Rand Paul. Rand Paul is jettisoning the people that need to be so, and he's polling higher nationally (17%) then Ron Paul ever polled nationally, in any independent poll by any major polling agency. I think Ron Paul's peak nationally was 13% or 14% in an early 2012 Gallup poll, after the field (and thus the polls) was narrowed down to only four candidates.

The little yappy dogs will continue to nip at Rand's heels over increasingly benign subject matter. These blow-up threads were a lot less frequent back in 2011, because the same things said then didn't create the same faux drama they do now. It's only going to get worse, because I think some here would rather Chris Christie be the GOP's presidential nominee than Rand Paul, if only so they can lie to themselves that Rand Paul lost because of their crowd's lack of support.

 

[Christian Liberty]

I don't think so. But I don't think you need to worry about it. Just be yourself and leave the Machiavellian calculations up to the professionals.

Fair enough. And for the record, I really DON'T bash Rand all the time. I've already talked to a couple of my conservative teachers at my school and told them they should support him. I've already talked to my dad, and I basically told him, no, I don't agree with Rand on everything but he's right up your (That is, my dad) alley." I am trying to persuade conservatives to vote for him. And I think he's a great conservative. I'm just not really a conservative, I'm a libertarian, and therefore I'm not going to agree with everything that he says.

I'm fine with letting Rand be what he is but I definitely do think he IS more moderate than Ron was. I feel like some people are simply lying to themselves on that matter.

Is that a new term? clever

Look I don't know when the last time it was that you checked the demographics but more than half of Republican voters are some form of evangelical Christian. You're not winning an election without them. So Rand going on CBN and getting positive coverage is necessary.

Do you want to win 5% and snipe on the internet or do you want to effect real change in the country? I want the latter.

 

[Brett85]

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/04/paul-on-the-rise-hillary-at-new-high.html

I think what bothers some here is their impotency at stopping Rand Paul. Rand Paul is jettisoning the people that need to be so, and he's polling higher nationally (17%) then Ron Paul ever polled nationally, in any independent poll by any polling agency. I think Ron Paul's peak nationally was 13% or 14% in an early 2012 Gallup poll, after the field (and thus the polls) was narrowed down to only four candidates.

The little yappy dogs will continue to nip at Rand's heels over increasingly benign subject matter. These blow up threads were a lot less frequent back in 2011, because the same things said then didn't create the same faux drama they do now. It's only going to get worse.

Lol, who wants to "stop" Rand Paul? You and others seem to get this idea that any criticism of Rand at all means that we don't support him or are "Rand haters." I personally support him but just make it known when I disagree with what he says and his strategy.

The most recent PPP poll has Rand back to 14% with a -6 favorability rating overall. His favorability rating was quite a bit better the previous month. I view that as a result of the drone debacle that was all over the news and Rand not taking firm stances in general.

 

[Christian Liberty]

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/04/paul-on-the-rise-hillary-at-new-high.html

I think what bothers some here is their impotency at stopping Rand Paul. Rand Paul is jettisoning the people that need to be so, and he's polling higher nationally (17%) then Ron Paul ever polled nationally, in any independent poll by any polling agency. I think Ron Paul's peak nationally was 13% or 14% in an early 2012 Gallup poll, after the field (and thus the polls) was narrowed down to only four candidates.

The little yappy dogs will continue to nip at Rand's heels over increasingly benign subject matter. These blow-up threads were a lot less frequent back in 2011, because the same things said then didn't create the same faux drama they do now. It's only going to get worse, because I think some here would rather Chris Christie be the GOP's presidential nominee than Rand Paul, if only so they can lie to themselves that Rand Paul lost because of their crowd's lack of support.

Chris Christie is a real Republican, and a northeastern one at that. That means he's a progressive. Rand, by contrast, is an actual conservative. I'd take Rand Paul over Christie in a heartbeat.

 

[Christian Liberty]

Lol, who wants to "stop" Rand Paul? You and others seem to get this idea that any criticism of Rand at all means that we don't support him or are "Rand haters." I personally support him but just make it known when I disagree with what he says and his strategy.

The most recent PPP poll has Rand back to 14% with a -6 favorability rating overall. His favorability rating was quite a bit better the previous month. I view that as a result of the drone debacle that was all over the news and Rand not taking firm stances in general.

Is this 14% of Republicans or 14% of the country period?

Is that high enough that he actually has a chance?

 

[Brett85]

Is this 14% of Republicans or 14% of the country period?

Is that high enough that he actually has a chance?

14% of Republicans. Nationally he's behind Hillary Clinton by 10% and Joe Biden by 2%.

 

[RonPaulFanInGA]

The most recent PPP poll has Rand back to 14% with a -6 favorability rating overall.

"Back" to 14%? It's in the margin of error of 17%. Not to mention the positive state polls that have come out in Iowa and New Hampshire between PPP's last two national pollls.

People here would have killed for Ron Paul to be "back" to 14% in May 2009.

 

[Icymudpuppy]

Is it too much to ask that someone on this forum who is close to the Senator's office ask him to clarify his statements and put his response on this board? A simple apology voiced through a third party such as Mr. Collins that he personally is sending Rands assertion that his statement was just poorly worded and what he meant to say was "x...x". That's all I want. Some assertion that Rand is still listening to us.

 

[fr33]

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/04/paul-on-the-rise-hillary-at-new-high.html

I think what bothers some here is their impotency at stopping Rand Paul. Rand Paul is jettisoning the people that need to be so, and he's polling higher nationally (17%) then Ron Paul ever polled nationally, in any independent poll by any major polling agency. I think Ron Paul's peak nationally was 13% or 14% in an early 2012 Gallup poll, after the field (and thus the polls) was narrowed down to only four candidates.

The little yappy dogs will continue to nip at Rand's heels over increasingly benign subject matter. These blow-up threads were a lot less frequent back in 2011, because the same things said then didn't create the same faux drama they do now. It's only going to get worse, because I think some here would rather Chris Christie be the GOP's presidential nominee than Rand Paul, if only so they can lie to themselves that Rand Paul lost because of their crowd's lack of support.

Tbh Rand doesn't bother me near as much as people like you do. I can understand that Rand is going to fib and say things to please others but there is nothing wrong with pointing out when he says something wrong. According to your post, you don't want me to support Rand. Of course he'll get my vote but this stuff sure can help me to decide to keep my own money rather than donate.