Rand Paul to GOP: Our voter ID push is “offending people”

Natural Citizen said:
Is it constitutional to demand ID to vote for representation? Yes or no will suffice.
Click to expand...
What gunny said, plus that is not the reason used for opposing these laws. But I'll respect it if that was his justification for opposing it, not bcos it hurt peoples feeling.
 
juleswin said:
What gunny said, plus that is not the reason used for opposing these laws. But I'll respect it if that was his justification for opposing it, not bcos it hurt peoples feeling.
Click to expand...

It's just a delicate thing is all in the long term. I'm not a fan of disfranchisement though. I've seen enough of it already. Especially when a billion dollar corporation can just come in and buy some representation to trample state law like we see with Pompeo and the Koch network in Kansas. No ID required. Just sign the check. Too many states are having their power to block government intrusion of it's citizens voided by special interests with politicians in their pockets. This seems like just another way to disfranchise states and their citizens to me.

And what further compounds this is the fact that both establishment parties are pretty much in agreement across the board and are merely fighting for control over who gets to bend us over.
 
Last edited:
erowe1 said:
Rand will be crushed in a debate by Santorum? How?
Click to expand...


Take Iowa for example. Republican primary voters are against any kind of amnesty and having to show picture ID to prove you're even eligible to vote is red meat to this crowd. Voter ID is just commonsense. Immigration destroyed Rick Perry in Iowa in 2012 when Santorum raked him over the coals during a debate.

Rand is getting so full of himself methinks he's blowing it. A populist like Santorum is going to remind primary voters over and over that a record number of Americans are out of the workforce and Rand wants to grant amnesty to illegals. R


Rand has sold out to the cheap labor lobby
 
Traditional Conservative said:
I think that what he was saying is that with these kind of statements, Rand is making Santorum look like a conservative. Rand is moving far to the left on a number of different issues, and it's mind boggling why he's choosing to do that.
Click to expand...

It's not even that he's moving to the "left" in his positions.

It's how he's FRAMING his positions (and/or the positions he doesn't think Conservatives should "focus on" and/or "go crazy" about).

To many on the right who are rightfully sick and tired of having their honestly held beliefs spun by dishonest DEMs and hacks in the MSM as being motivated by racist, selfish, sexist and/or anti-science reasons, Rand's comments (even when given context) not only reinforce the DEM & Daily Show framing that in the debate about Voter ID, it's the conservative position that's "OFFENSIVE", not the Left's, but also suggest that he's a "squish" when it comes to standing up for core conservative principles and/or making the case for why they're actually the best way to help the people DEMs claim to want to help most.

Again, this plus other recent comments come way to close for comfort to Rick Perry's campaign ending comment that people who against FREE TUITION for illegal immigrants were so not any constitutionally, economicly, and/or philosophically VALID/LEGITIMATE reasons but because they "don't have a heart".

If there's 1 thing Tea Party-ers & Conservatives have become - legitimately - hyper-sensitive about, it's being forced into defending/disproving/rejecting a transparently dishonest/misleading/mendacious framing of their beliefs and/or positions
EXAMPLE: on the issue of welfare... 99% of conservatives are against it NOT because they're selfish, racist, hate the poor and/or want poor minority children to starve BUT because they genuinely/honestly/actually want to HELP the poor and believe - based on logic, reason, personal experience & a preponderance of EVIDENCE - that conservative solutions are far more effective at decreasing poverty than liberal policies are).
​

For comparison, note how Cruz flips the left's disingenuous demagoguery right back at them:
Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, often seen as a party rival to Mr. Paul, has said that it is unfortunate that it is “minority voters who are the victims of that fraud,” but that governments “should not be working to undermine the integrity of our elections.”
Click to expand...

Rand, of course, FULLY understands all of this - being not only capable of offering a Cruz-like (#Rhetorics101) response to Voter ID questions in his sleep, but also being as almost as good as Obama at intuitively understanding how best to "frame", "demagauge" & "personalize" an issue in a way that puts his opponents on the defensive - so I'm sure this wasn't unintentional.

But I'd still like to hear/understand what the reasoning/strategy is behind it.
 
Last edited:
WD-NY = well said. I would only add a couple of points. First of all, the liberal solutions not only don't work, but also - and this is the main reason - immoral. Because all of them are based on stealing other people money. So even if it "worked," their solutions would be wrong. As Ron Paul used to say - bank robberies "work" for bank robbers. By the way, Rand in general has the problem of trying to prove that his solutions "work," without discussing morality.

Secondly, these points are absurd. Increasing minimum wage, not asking for photo ID of voters, giving amnesty for illegals are all issues that are very easy to argue against. Politically, arguing against those is a winner as well. Rand shows weakness by accepting liberal media statements as facts.

Also, from a leader, I would expect challenging not only liberal statements, but fighting for the agenda. Why are we discussing photo id and not discussing paying $10 for the right to vote? Not letting people who work for the government and/or getting benefits to vote? Or the right to pass your vote to another candidate if your candidate didn't win?

And like WD said, not only Rand justifies and validate absurd positions, but also justifies absurd reasoning behind those positions.
 
Actually, I didn't need to show ID to vote. I just brought my little gray pamplet that was mailed to me and I just go to the designated ballot place.
 
Natural Citizen said:
But there are states who say that it is unconstitutional. Right? I think Arkansas is the most recent to point out voter disfranchisement by way of a violation of state constitution?
Click to expand...

I dunno, I haven't read all 50 State Constitutions. It's Constitutional in the North Carolina State Constitution. At this point that's really all I am concerned about.
 
alucard13mm said:
Actually, I didn't need to show ID to vote. I just brought my little gray pamplet that was mailed to me and I just go to the designated ballot place.
Click to expand...

That's pretty typical, most VoterID laws allow the use of the voter registration card as ID. NC went one step further, allowing the use of the reg card AND allowing for free ID cards for those who can not afford them.
 
Matt Collins said:
Good thing you're not advising him....


Rand is already running for the general election it appears.

Here is an explanation:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...ng-people%94&p=5523547&viewfull=1#post5523547
Click to expand...

And why is he running for the general election when he has to win the GOP nomination first? That's what doesn't make any sense. He's acting like he's the presumptive Republican nominee, already moving to the left to position himself for a general election campaign. In reality, it's going to be extremely hard for him to win the GOP nomination, and with his recent comments on voter ID, immigration, abortion, Obamacare, etc, it just makes it that much harder.
 
Traditional Conservative said:
83% of voters support voter ID laws, including 72% of Democrats.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journa...-of-touch-on-voter-id-laws-83-percent-approve
Click to expand...

That's true. NC passed a VoterID law in 2011 that doesn't even go fully into effect until 2016, but the vast vast majority of the voters (regardless of Party) at my precinct Tuesday (2014) were desperate to show their ID to vote. We had a big shpiel we had to tell every voter about 2016, and provide information to help them comply with the requirement by 2016. Of the ~500 voters we had, only 2 grumbled about the impending VoterID.
 
Traditional Conservative said:
And why is he running for the general election when he has to win the GOP nomination first? That's what doesn't make any sense. He's acting like he's the presumptive Republican nominee, already moving to the left to position himself for a general election campaign. In reality, it's going to be extremely hard for him to win the GOP nomination, and with his recent comments on voter ID, immigration, abortion, Obamacare, etc, it just makes it that much harder.
Click to expand...

maybe he's positioning himself a little bit for the upcoming speech to the NAACP in July. that will be a big event.
 
Last edited:
Matt Collins said:
You don't have to worry about that
Click to expand...

Well, with one Paul Inc. person staying away from Gunny if he decides to run for anything, his chances just increased significantly at actually winning!

But on this issue, he (Rand) would lose it in a landslide at the very core with a simple meme to hit the net. I don't even have to spell it out, before it gets created and causes one more issue for Rand in the future, for treading into an area that he doesn't, and didn't, need to go.
He should be just repeating, "6/6/6/" at this point, and pulling a Herman Cain.
Marketing with a simple message, that is easy to understand. Not this, "Pander to the New York Slimes" crap.
 
Last edited:
jjdoyle said:
Well, with one Paul Inc. person staying away from Gunny if he decides to run for anything, his chances just increased significantly at actually winning!

But on this issue, he would lose it in a landslide at the very core with a simple meme to hit the net. I don't even have to spell it out, before it gets created and causes one more issue for Rand in the future, for treading into an area that he doesn't, and didn't, need to go.
He should be just repeating, "6/6/6/" at this point, and pulling a Herman Cain.
Marketing with a simple message, that is easy to understand. Not this, "Pander to the New York Slimes" crap.
Click to expand...

You are aware that I heavily promoted VoterID in 2010-2011, and voted for it in 2011, and voted to override Perdue's veto to actually pass it, right? My opinion on the matter has not changed. Support for VoterID in NC is in the very high 80's. How will this hurt me in a Republican Primary?
 
GunnyFreedom said:
You are aware that I heavily promoted VoterID in 2010-2011, and voted for it in 2011, and voted to override Perdue's veto to actually pass it, right? My opinion on the matter has not changed. Support for VoterID in NC is in the very high 80's. How will this hurt me in a Republican Primary?
Click to expand...

Not you. But I don't see how this helps Rand in one. Or, even in the general. The far left leftist that don't want the VoterID laws, wouldn't even think about voting for a Republican. So, it's a topic that I don't see the point of talking about, especially when it's up to states to decide.

If someone from the likes of the New York Slimes brings it up, it's very easy to rebut them on why people support the VoterID laws. Very easy.
 
jjdoyle said:
Not you. But I don't see how this helps Rand in one. Or, even in the general. The far left leftist that don't want the VoterID laws, wouldn't even think about voting for a Republican. So, it's a topic that I don't see the point of talking about, especially when it's up to states to decide.

If someone from the likes of the New York Slimes brings it up, it's very easy to rebut them on why people support the VoterID laws. Very easy.
Click to expand...

Oh, ok you were talking about Rand. Got it.

You see, unlike Matt Collins, when somebody tells me I am wrong, I actually consider what they have to say very carefully, and then if my analysis reveals that they are correct then I change my position. In adultworld, we call that "maturity." :)

And you are 100% correct. The people who oppose VoterID would never vote Republican for any reason under any circumstances anyway, so opposing it would not help in a General either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
Time to Say It: Trump’s “Real ID” is the Mark of the Beast, is He the Anti-Christ?
Replies
17
Views
115
Firestarter
Firestarter
J
URGENT for All Americans! Trump’s “Real ID” Will Be Used to Mandate Vaccinations, “Stop Real ID” Campaign Launched ACTION PAGE HERE
Replies
11
Views
55
unknown
unknown
J
Sen. Rand Paul’s Criminal Referral Against Fauci to DOJ Still There. Trump DOJ Must Act On It
Replies
15
Views
831
Matt Collins
Matt Collins
J
Insane Bill Gates-Funded Prof. Has Spliced Bird Flu W/ Deadly Spanish Flu in Gain-of-Function
Replies
3
Views
397
acptulsa
acptulsa
W
Repeal Espionage Act and Its Threat to Free Speech, Urges Rand Paul
Replies
1
Views
2K
Anti Globalist
Anti Globalist
Back
Top