- Joined
- Jul 13, 2007
- Messages
- 63,529
Rand surges to 4th in the latest national poll!
- Thread starter Brian4Liberty
- Start date
luctor-et-emergo
Member
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2012
- Messages
- 7,420
Nice. Best part about it..
Where's the establishment ?! WHERE ?!
Well still there but I bet they are soiling their undies.
Where's the establishment ?! WHERE ?!
Well still there but I bet they are soiling their undies.
NoOneButPaul
Member
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2012
- Messages
- 1,850
This is why I can't stand Cruz. Had he done the honorable thing and stepped aside in 2016 for Rand - like he should have - Paul would be between 10-12% right now. Instead Cruz ran and has now split the vote. Obviously he has to realize this? The Pauls helped him get elected in 2012... really makes you wonder why he couldn't hold off until 2020 or 2024. Obviously they all seem on friendly terms and I don't discount the possibility they team up if either one wins but the entire thing still rubs me the wrong way.
randomname
Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2008
- Messages
- 2,712
Statistically tied for 3rd actually
65fastback2+2
Member
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2015
- Messages
- 1,396
goodness carson tanked
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2007
- Messages
- 63,529
Nice. Best part about it..
Where's the establishment ?! WHERE ?!
Well still there but I bet they are soiling their undies.
Establishment boy is in third, based primarily on the fact that he is a stealth establishment candidate.
A_Silent_Majority_Member
Member
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2011
- Messages
- 235
confirms why the poll silence since the debate. This is the longest gap with no new national gop polls up at rcp. 
mit26chell
Member
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2011
- Messages
- 809
Not sure how many times I have to mention this here, but Cruz does not play on our team. Cruz is establishment - in disguise. Sheldon Adelson said last year that if Rand Paul took off they would just run Cruz to drown him out.
Why do you think Cruz steals every one of Rand's ideas and repeats them verbatim like they're his ideas? Have you not noticed that?
grizzums
Member
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2007
- Messages
- 531
Link?
Edit - nevermind.
http://hotair.com/archives/2014/03/31/hawkish-gop-donors-to-time-mag-well-stop-rand-paul-in-the-primaries/
Last edited:
SilentBull
Member
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2007
- Messages
- 2,700
confirms why the poll silence since the debate. This is the longest gap with no new national gop polls up at rcp.
I really am starting to take this theory seriously now. My brother was telling me yesterday that a friend of his who didn't like Rand Paul at all after the first three debates, completely changed his mind about him after this last debate. He said he really liked him now.
Jonderdonk
Member
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2015
- Messages
- 484
Lol can't a guy just want to be President without being in bed with the establishment in a massive joint effort conspiracy to keep the Pauls out of the White House?
YesI'mALiberal
Member
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2013
- Messages
- 325
Lol can't a guy just want to be President without being in bed with the establishment in a massive joint effort conspiracy to keep the Pauls out of the White House?
Nothing that happens anywhere ever is not part of the massive joint effort conspiracy to keep the Pauls out of the White House. My bacon this morning was subpar to make me feel less favorable to a market economy.
opinionatedfool
Member
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2011
- Messages
- 2,340
The Paul's and many people on this forum. He has no sense of loyalty and that's one of the reasons I went sour on him.
Cruz is not the enemy. Cruz running is not bad for Rand. Trump/Cruz/Carson running is great for the liberty movement as they each espouse some of Rand's views and are bringing them into the mainstream. Trump has led the way on calling out America's interventionist foreign policy as dangerous, Cruz has made the federal reserve an enemy of the base, and Carson has been even more hard line on budget cuts and tax reduction.
The Rubio/Bush wing of the party, the spend more and intervene more candidates have just a combined 13% support. Romney never fell below 20% in 2012, and his adversaries Perry/Cain/Gingrich were much closer to that philosophy than Trump/Cruz/Carson are. Paul in 2007 was split from the rest of the candidates and the party on taxation, spending, size of government, and foreign policy. Rand now has people saying his father's talking points on the stage with him, and those positions could create a winning coalition which just wasn't possible 8 years ago.
Say these guys stayed out, and we had debate stages of Graham/Jindal/Kasich/Christie/Rubio/Bush/Paul/Huckabee/Fiorina/Santorum. There would be 8+ guys on stage disagreeing with Paul on foreign policy and size of government. He'd get drowned out, and while he might be polling higher than he is today, it wouldn't be possible to assemble a winning coalition as candidates dropped out.
Last edited:
Lol can't a guy just want to be President without being in bed with the establishment in a massive joint effort conspiracy to keep the Pauls out of the White House?
First of all, Cruz has no chance of winning and he knows this. Also if that's the case, why is he deliberately stealing Rand's lines and attempting to talk over Rand instead of his "opposition". It's funny how you guys can believe media bias, but can't believe that with billions of dollars and massive amounts of power on the line, that money isnt being pumped in to prevent true candidates from winning. It doesn't have to be the Pauls...it's just they've been the only people running who couldnt be bought or just purely have ill intent lately. Anyone who emerges who cant be bought will be met with the same opposition. Riddle me this. Rand is always met with staunch opposition in the media and is never announced the debate winner even though he clearly won the last debate, yet Cruz and Rubio were determined the winners twice. We all know Rubio is a shill..You think Cruz would get that positive bump as well if he wasnt also one?
r3volution 3.0
Banned
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2014
- Messages
- 18,553
It was natural to assume that the Paris attacks would hurt Rand politically, but I don't see that happening.
On the contrary, he's using his media time to tie together his foreign policy, his immigration policy, and his view on civil liberties in a new and very effective way.
...the interview he just did on Fox this afternoon was perfect, I'll post the tube when I find it (very similar to his Laura Ingraham interview yesterday).
He's now given at least two interviews where the talking points (clearly thought out in advance) are as follows:
--Stop funding and arming radicals in the ME, in Syria and elsewhere
--Stop supporting those of our "allies" who sponsor terrorism, calling out Saudi Arabia by name
--Take this money we're sending to our enemies and use it bolster our own defense
--No more refugees from terrorist hotspot until we have a real screening process
--Mass surveillance doesn't work, the French had it in spades and couldn't prevent the attack
--Can't abandon the very liberties we're fighting for
--OVERALL: pointing out that he's held these views for years, and has been blocked by Democrats and fellow Republicans
Now, none of this is substantively new (Rand has, indeed, been talking about all of this for years), but I've never seen him put it all together in such a neat package, deliverable in a short TV interview. I get the impression that this message is starting to resonate with teocon types. It's allowing them to see for the first time how Rand's various aberrations from hawk orthodoxy actually fit together into a coherent policy, that makes good common sense. He's not just an idealist making theoretical points (as many of them have thought up to now), he has a practical plan.
Last edited:
Similar threads
