Rand Paul "interested in running for President" in 2016

[John F Kennedy III]

some of the comments are quite vicious, they're not even interested in who Rand is, there's alot of hate out there.. we have work to do.

Yes we do. And the work starts NOW.

 

[John F Kennedy III]

Let the poor guy retire in peace already. He'll be what, 80 years old then?

Free speech.

 

[John F Kennedy III]

Once Obama's disastrous reign is done, Rand will be insulated from most of the nonsense they typically employ.

How so?

 

[John F Kennedy III]

You really think Hillary has a shot? I know she might look like good contender on paper, but in the ring I'm not so sure. I got money on Rand making her cry during the debates like Obama's Iowa victory did. She wants power so desperately, pathetic.

I would be very interested to hear how you, and everyone else, see a Hillary Democrat primary playing out and how you see Hillary vs. Rand playing out.

I don't think there's any question she stands the best chance against him out of the Dems.

 

[TrishW]

A lot of it depends on the next four years. But if all goes OK... Hillary with Bill and Obama on the campaign trail would be an unstoppable force. And its about time the women voters got one of their own in the drivers seat.

One thing going in Rand's favor... Hillary says she doesn't want to run.

 

[Shane Harris]

We should be so lucky that he runs against a woman, that way his height won't be a visual disadvantage in the debates. Sad but true.

 

[itshappening]

Clinton would be most difficult to beat in 2016, she will just laugh off any attacks with her demonic cackle and has Bill and Obama, all the "independent women" demographic in the swing states will vote for her in droves.

I still think Bloomberg will become a Democrat next year and go for it though.

 

[AuH20]

How so?

Bush's incompetence paved the wave for Obama. Obama's nightmare tenure will pave the way for Rand and blunt the criticisms, assuming he wins the nomination. The dems are in for a world of hurt the next 4 years, even with the media hiding everything.

 

[TrishW]

The Republican Party needs to define who they are. At this point in time they are too splintered. It seems everyone who is not a democrat decides to call themselves a republican.

Which would not be that bad, except the Party does not even come together as a "family" when its time to defeat the democrats. So it really does not matter who is the Republican parties choice. They will not get enough of their own party's votes let alone steal any of the democrat's votes. Something needs to be done within the party to compromise and bring it together.

 

[GeorgiaAvenger]

Clinton would be most difficult to beat in 2016, she will just laugh off any attacks with her demonic cackle and has Bill and Obama, all the "independent women" demographic in the swing states will vote for her in droves.

I still think Bloomberg will become a Democrat next year and go for it though.

Definitely shortage of New Yorkers...Clinton, Coumo, Bloomberg, Gillibrand....

 

[July]

We should be so lucky that he runs against a woman, that way his height won't be a visual disadvantage in the debates. Sad but true.

I hadn't thought of that, but true...

Will be interesting to see if appearances become a factor for Christie also. Christie has a particular type of facial features that tends to appeals to women, though, as does Rubio and Jeb, and Santorum. Paul Ryan doesn't, but he has classic tall and handsome going for him, like Mitt did.

 

[AuH20]

Rand just needs to move 4 to 5% of the population in his direction, assuming he's the candidate. This is extremely doable, given his speaking abilities and charisma. The democrats are very weak, despite their strong minority, single women and youth voting blocs. Rand could clean up with unafilliated and independent voters, where even Romney did surprisingly well (+13 on Obama). Rand could easily stretch that spread to 20.

 

[jdmyprez_deo_vindice]

ok well I guess the time to organize is now. I volunteer to be one of his joke writers. I am not an experienced comedian but I cannot possibly do worse than he, himself, has done in the joke department.

 

[jct74]

ok well I guess the time to organize is now. I volunteer to be one of his joke writers. I am not an experienced comedian but I cannot possibly do worse than he, himself, has done in the joke department.

Rand does need some new material. He tells the same joke at every speech for like 6 months at a time, then eventually moves on to using another one. Right now he is stuck on the preacher/politician/businessman joke.

 

[itshappening]

I'm optimistic about Rand Paul in the primary

I'm pessimistic about Rand Paul against a Democrat

Reasons:

We have a good organization in Iowa, NH, SC, NV and other states from Ron Paul's two presidential runs that will give Rand Paul a big advantage against other candidates who will have to build those organizations from scratch.

In the general election against a Democrat, the Machine will be out in force to bring out their voters. Whoever the nominee is will have Obama and Bill Clinton's support criss-crossing states. He will be attacked relentlessly on his Civil Rights Act comments, BP comments, his pro-life views, his limited government philosophy, his budget that cuts departments and services and they will brand him as a bad and evil Republican to scare swing state voters.

 

[PatriotOne]

Well, I guess now that he is out of the closet maybe he can start building his election "machine". Let's get ready to ruuuuuuuuuuuummmmmmmbllllllllllllle

 

[July]

Rand does need some new material. He tells the same joke at every speech for like 6 months at a time, then eventually moves on to using another one. Right now he is stuck on the preacher/politician/businessman joke.

Haha you're right he does.... I think he's pretty funny when he's using satire, but that doesn't really translate in a speech. We're probably the only ones who notice though. How many people watch that many Rand speeches in a 6th month period.

 

[AuH20]

I'm optimistic about Rand Paul in the primary

I'm pessimistic about Rand Paul against a Democrat

Reasons:

We have a good organization in Iowa, NH, SC, NV and other states from Ron Paul's two presidential runs that will give Rand Paul a big advantage against other candidates who will have to build those organizations from scratch.

In the general election against a Democrat, the Machine will be out in force to bring out their voters. Whoever the nominee is will have Obama and Bill Clinton's support criss-crossing states. He will be attacked relentlessly on his Civil Rights Act comments, BP comments, his pro-life views, his limited government philosophy, his budget that cuts departments and services and they will brand him as a bad and evil Republican to scare swing state voters.

But that won't work once people see him in the flesh. That's how Romney got his huge poll bounce. Plus, Rand is a small-town doctor. He could kick ass with Reagan democrats.

 

[GeorgiaAvenger]

I don't think the Democrat will do well after 8 years of Obama, even with the increasing Hispanic vote.

 

[Matt Collins]

Rand endorsed Mitt.

Insignifigant, Ron has endorsed lots of big-government people in the past too.

This is hardly a libertarian move, in fact, Rand said he is not a libertarian.

He doesn't want to be labeled in that manner because it's a political kiss of death. He's much more libertarian than he openly admits; his voting record prove this.

Anyway, why would he WANT to run in 16? The economy will be shit and there's nothing he could really do to fix it, unless he were willing to do what his father proposed- bring ALL troops home, cut most federal departments, and end the income tax.

Does Rand have the balls to do any of that?

We'll just have to wait and see. But let's take a hard look at his voting record, and the things he has done in the Senate, including bringing the entire process to a halt in order to force votes on bills such as pulling out of Iraq, ending foreign aid, individual liberties, etc.