Rand surges to 4th in the latest national poll!

[Feelgood]

First of all, Cruz has no chance of winning and he knows this.

And do you honestly believe Rand does? Or that Rand has that much better a chance to win than Cruz?

You're thinking about this in a tremendously selfish manner.

Cruz owes us absolutely nothing. He's doing what he feels is in the best interest for his family, his country, and himself. Expecting him to just fall in line with Rand, particularly when he's been outpolling and outraising Rand, is preposterous. On the flip side, if Rand starts polling two or three times what Cruz is, and money starts to flow to Rand, Cruz should drop. Until then, it would be just as fair for the Cruz supporters to call Rand out for not dropping.

THANK YOU! I was just about to post something similar. Seems the Rand die hards here are developing that damned entitlement mentality.

Statistically tied for 3rd actually

Technically tied for 4th actually.

 

[NoOneButPaul]

For those of you that think he owes the Pauls nothing that's my disagreement. The Pauls were instrumental in both getting this guy elected and putting him on the national scene in 2012. Cruz is an ass hole for not sitting this one out from the beginning because he did owe the Pauls for that. Instead of fracturing what's already a minority within the GOP he should have tried to encouraged unity by backing Paul from the start with the idea being Paul would do the same next election cycle when it was Cruz's turn. Cruz running made absolutely no sense unless Cruz's entire goal was sabotage - he knew Rand was running so he knew that his support would be split as well yet he still went ahead and did it. The second Cruz announced he was running Rand's support was split and his momentum stalled and I do not believe he ever really recovered from it. Between his talking over Rand at the debates and stealing his talking points (not to mention his laughable bail out explanation last debate that proved to me he has no idea what he's talking about) I think it's safe to say there's good reason not to trust this guy.

My point is just about loyalty... it doesn't even get into the laundry list of bullshit surrounding Cruz like his CFR membership or his Ex-Goldman Sachs Wife which I don't even care about in comparison to what I perceive to be as an incredibly dickish move by running in the first place - which has then made worse by his constant interrupting of Rand and theft of his talking points (without really understanding what the hell is going on - I'd love to hear him explain how bailouts work again or how he plans to actually get gold back into the monetary system - bottom line is the guy can't because he has no real intention of doing any of that and he's just saying what the libertarian wing wants to hear and everyone financing the guy knows it and they're fucking laughing at you guys for falling for it.)

And before someone accuses me of being a Rand homer go back and look at my posts over the last 4 months. I've been about as hard on Rand as i'm being on Cruz right now.

 

[fcreature]

Sorry, never voting for Cruz. Don't trust the guy one bit. On top of that, I would like a refund of all the money I gave him for his Senate campaign.

 

[Dr. Dog]

I'd vote for Cruz over anyone but Rand.

 

[ds21089]

I'd vote for Cruz over anyone but Rand.

Trump supports Cruz so he must be great!

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box...492-trump-names-cruz-when-asked-about-vp-spot

 

[Dr. Dog]

Trump supports Cruz so he must be great!

Cruz is a great Senator. He's the closest their is to Rand in the Senate (apart from perhaps Mike Lee). He's been a consistent voice for liberty since his election and would be a great president.

 

[ds21089]

Cruz is a great Senator. He's the closest their is to Rand in the Senate (apart from perhaps Mike Lee). He's been a consistent voice for liberty since his election and would be a great president.

You mean he's copied Rand's voting for the long game of always competing against Rand should he choose to run for president so he can say "look at my record, see I'm legit" im sorry but nobody connected to goldman sachs and CFR is a good person. It just doesnt happen.

Cruz is just a very clever actor.

https://pjmedia.com/blog/video-ted-cruz-acts-out-princess-bride-scene-completely-nails-it

 

[bronc_fan23]

Cruz is a great Senator. He's the closest their is to Rand in the Senate (apart from perhaps Mike Lee). He's been a consistent voice for liberty since his election and would be a great president.

I just don't trust him. I understand he does a great service by espousing the ideas of liberty, but with his wife's ties to Goldman Sachs and his Father's rather interesting religious views, I just don't know how much he would follow through without turning in to the establishment. This is also speculation, but I feel that he would get crushed in the general due to the fact that he hasn't been vetted like a front runner by the media, and that he'll get tied to his Father's anti-homosexual views. He's an excellent debater and speaker, but I just don't trust him.

 

[Liberty74]

I just don't trust him. I understand he does a great service by espousing the ideas of liberty, but with his wife's ties to Goldman Sachs and his Father's rather interesting religious views, I just don't know how much he would follow through without turning in to the establishment. This is also speculation, but I feel that he would get crushed in the general due to the fact that he hasn't been vetted like a front runner by the media, and that he'll get tied to his Father's anti-homosexual views. He's an excellent debater and speaker, but I just don't trust him.

Exactly, he's great on his toes because he has a photographic memory at remembers speeches, one liners, etc.

The problem is...Cruz is STILL a big spending warmonger. It's time for a change...we have tried that recipe for 50 plus years now. But I am glad him and Rand agree on maybe 75% of the other issues. However, Rand and any real liberty person would never go to some crazy anti-gay rally. It's anti-liberty.

 

[speciallyblend]

can only hope he keeps rising, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A51gkF7eu_A

 

[CPUd]

I just don't trust him. I understand he does a great service by espousing the ideas of liberty, but with his wife's ties to Goldman Sachs and his Father's rather interesting religious views, I just don't know how much he would follow through without turning in to the establishment. This is also speculation, but I feel that he would get crushed in the general due to the fact that he hasn't been vetted like a front runner by the media, and that he'll get tied to his Father's anti-homosexual views. He's an excellent debater and speaker, but I just don't trust him.

Just attending that "execute the gays" rally last week is enough to lose the general election. They could bring back Lincoln Chafee to run against him and Cruz would lose in a landslide.

 

[nikcers]

Just attending that "execute the gays" rally last week is enough to lose the general election. They could bring back Lincoln Chafee to run against him and Cruz would lose in a landslide.

I really don't understand the outcome they are looking for due to their strategy. Is there some genius out there that thinks that executing all of "the gays" would get rid of all of them forever because they wouldn't be able to reproduce anymore? What is their end game, what is their goal? It was easy to realize that black lives matters had ulterior motives because they used extreme tactics in order to generate headlines to advance their cause. What headlines does this generate and what cause does it advance?

 

[ds21089]

I really don't understand the outcome they are looking for due to their strategy. Is there some genius out there that thinks that executing all of "the gays" would get rid of all of them forever because they wouldn't be able to reproduce anymore? What is their end game, what is their goal? It was easy to realize that black lives matters had ulterior motives because they used extreme tactics in order to generate headlines to advance their cause. What headlines does this generate and what cause does it advance?

Securing the evangelical vote?

 

[squirl22]

There was an article linked by drudge a few days ago that said that Cruz had the most support from Wall St than any other candidate. So, I am to believe he is just like Rand? Maybe better? There is no way he would be getting that kind of support if he was "just as good as Rand, maybe better"?

THANK YOU! I was just about to post something similar. Seems the Rand die hards here are developing that damned entitlement mentality.

Are you kidding? This is the Rand Paul forum and if someone supports Rand they are a diehard with entitlement mentality? Are you a Cruz troll? Or, are you a fool?

Cruz is just a very clever actor.

You nailed it.

 

[Krugminator2]

Cruz is a great Senator. He's the closest their is to Rand in the Senate (apart from perhaps Mike Lee). He's been a consistent voice for liberty since his election and would be a great president.

I agree and probably would vote for him. That said, he would be an extraordinarily bad choice for people who vote primarily on foreign policy. He's more hawkish than George W. Bush. I don't think a lot of people realize how out there he is. Based on his advisors and his comments to evangelical groups, he is McCain level, despite how he has tried to brand himself in general.

 

[rich34]

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.

But are these guys not the same ole shit we all batch about?

Cruz, sure, rails against the Fed while raking in more money from wall street than any other candidate including a guy named Bush.

Carson, the guy like Trump that has been a democrat all his life talks a big game on taxes and budget cuts, but just as Cruz, more bullshit.

Trump, yeah sure he might rail against an interventionist foreign policy, but hell did George W. not do the same Damn thing while on the campaign trail? Add to the fact that this man has stuck his finger in the air on almost every issue just to see which way the political winds are blowing before making up his own damn mind.

Are people like these guys"really" helping the cause? Fake ass imposters talking and getting more attention on issues everyone knows they would't do a flipping thing about. All the while Rand is being crowded out of the media by these frauds which otherwise if not for them he'd be front and center on all these issues.
I'm sure there's pros and cons either way, but having these fakes running for office is far worse to Rand and more detrimental to the liberty movement if they were not. Hell I got more respect for the likes of Bush, Rubio etc... just for the simple fact you KNOW what you're getting with them, while these other jesters merely say the things they know people wanna hear while making sure at least one of their main issues is something Rand is very real and dead serious about changing. I apologize in advance for some of my French, but this topic strikes a nerve within me.

 

[Mad Raven]

Nice. Best part about it..

Where's the establishment ?! WHERE ?!
Well still there but I bet they are soiling their undies.

It's fascinating that 4 out of the top 5 are not establishment. You think some libertarians dislike Cruz? Congress hates him more.

When was the last time this happened?? In 2012 it was a solid lineup of establishment politicians, plus RP and Romney. Romney wasn't a politician but was fully establishment supported. I paid no attention prior to that.

 

[69360]

It's fascinating that 4 out of the top 5 are not establishment. You think some libertarians dislike Cruz? Congress hates him more.

When was the last time this happened?? In 2012 it was a solid lineup of establishment politicians, plus RP and Romney. Romney wasn't a politician but was fully establishment supported. I paid no attention prior to that.

The former governor Massachusetts wasn't a politician?

 

[r3volution 3.0]

I agree and probably would vote for him. That said, he would be an extraordinarily bad choice for people who vote primarily on foreign policy. He's more hawkish than George W. Bush. I don't think a lot of people realize how out there he is. Based on his advisors and his comments to evangelical groups, he is McCain level, despite how he has tried to brand himself in general.

He's a fraud on civil liberties as well: voted for the Freedom Act, touting it as a big pro-liberty reform (when it's actually just the Patriot Act under another name, designed to appease gullible civil libertarians) and then trashed Rand for opposing it.

 

[Mad Raven]

The former governor Massachusetts wasn't a politician?

Oh yeah, right. I don't pay a lot of attention and forgot he wasn't just a businessman.