Rand Paul Opposes Iran Deal, David Frum Declares His Candidacy Dead (Again)

This bs vote was a trap for Rand either way. He votes for it, then it gives his republican contenders something to blast him on and portray him as weak on foreign policy and siding with Obama. He votes against it, and now some of his own damn base are crying foul. Good thing there's still a long way to go before the primary and this will blow over...
 
If Rand can't make a stand here then why would he as president? If he's so concerned about appealing to Republican base then why wouldn't he sell us out completely to feed his own ambition as president? Are we going to wait until his 2nd term until he finally unleashes the libertarianism? He should of stuck with us instead of the neocons, if that is what the Republican electorate really wants then we can't win regardless.
 
I'm firmly in the "I'd rather lose with principle than win by pandering" camp. Rand is all over the map, trying to be all things to all people and please everyone. Ron Paul said what he meant and meant what he said, the consequences be damned.

This sucks.
 
jkob said:
If Rand can't make a stand here then why would he as president? If he's so concerned about appealing to Republican base then why wouldn't he sell us out completely to feed his own ambition as president? Are we going to wait until his 2nd term until he finally unleashes the libertarianism? He should of stuck with us instead of the neocons, if that is what the Republican electorate really wants then we can't win regardless.
Click to expand...

He isn't selling out anything; he knows its a bad deal. You just happen to disagree. But go ahead and keep believing that Obama and Hillary are suddenly peace mongers.
 
Feeding the Abscess said:
The LP isn't going that route. They've been increasingly taking the Rand Paul approach to electoral politics over the last two decades.
Click to expand...

That's why I washed my hands of the LP back in 1999-2000, when Perry Wills (the National LP Communications director at the time) broke the party's own rules in order to support his preferred candidate for the LP's POTUS nomination (Harry Browne). He tried to justify it on the grounds that Browne was the only candidate in the field of potential nominees who was "electable." He was probably right about that, as far as it goes. But I could see the writing on the wall ...

Once you set off on the road of making excuses for doing whatever you think it takes to "win," then prinicples are inevitably going to become inconveniences to be gotten around, rather than things to be fought for. You can't be the "Party of Principle" if your principles become secondary to "winning." Not that the LP has had much success in that regard, either ... (it really sucks when you sell your soul and you don't even get a lousy tee-shirt ...)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top