Sen. Rand Paul endorses Judge Roy Moore for U.S. Senate

[Influenza]

Foreign policy is important for a lot of reasons. But Cuba has good foreign policy. It doesn't matter at all unless you have things taken care of domestically. It is nice that Gabbard has good views on Syria, but frankly that doesn't affect my life and most people in the US nearly as much as numerous other issues. The issues I care about in order of importance.

1. Government spending
2. The drug war
3. Cutting taxes
4. Monetary policy
5. Health care policy
6. Regulations
7. Civil liberties
8. Foreign Policy





I support the existence of government. It is prerequisite to liberty. Ron didn't say it best. The amount of money spent overseas is peanuts. The United States spends 3.5% of GDP on the military- total. We spent 5% of GDP in 1950. We spent 10% in 1960. Bringing people home from overseas is probably good policy, but it does nothing to spending. Total military spending is about 17% of the total budget. Entitlement spending is two-thirds of the budget.

Obviously I really take issue with the order of the issues you have (I guess I think people not dying in needless wars is more important.) You kinda ignored that and just thought about how much it costs... And that number is understated anyways.

How many republicans actually want to reduce government spending? When it comes to action, not many. End the drug war? Few. Cutting taxes? Yes, but not for the people who need it most. Monetary policy? Almost No one cares, R or D. Health care? Obamacare style system was a republican compromise while liberals wanted single payer. Regulations? Reps want to remove those usually, until some corporation asks for one to deter competition, then they all will vote for it. Civil liberties? The party of the patriot act. Gabbard is definitely better on drug war, foreign policy, and she might be better on civil liberties too (I would have to check I'm not sure.) Worse on taxes, health care... Still way better than most reps in my mind.

 

[surf]

i'm with Influenza - there is no more prudent fiscal and defense policy than cutting the shit out of our military budget and bringing troops home. that's important to me, but judge Godsquad seems to view Iran as a threat.

I think Tulsi Gabbard is a huge ally in this effort. and we've seen, she gets as much support from her party as Ron Paul did....

Rand totally fucked up here, imo.

 

[specsaregood]

Rand totally fucked up here, imo.

Yeah, cuz endorsing a guy that after winning the GOP nomination came to DC and specifically requested/had a private meeting with Randal and snubbed all the bigwigs was a "fuck up". Obviously Randal liked what he heard in their meet.

 

[Brett85]

Foreign policy is important for a lot of reasons. But Cuba has good foreign policy. It doesn't matter at all unless you have things taken care of domestically. It is nice that Gabbard has good views on Syria, but frankly that doesn't affect my life and most people in the US nearly as much as numerous other issues. The issues I care about in order of importance.

1. Government spending
2. The drug war
3. Cutting taxes
4. Monetary policy
5. Health care policy
6. Regulations
7. Civil liberties
8. Foreign Policy





I support the existence of government. It is prerequisite to liberty. Ron didn't say it best. The amount of money spent overseas is peanuts. The United States spends 3.5% of GDP on the military- total. We spent 5% of GDP in 1950. We spent 10% in 1960. Bringing people home from overseas is probably good policy, but it does nothing to spending. Total military spending is about 17% of the total budget. Entitlement spending is two-thirds of the budget.

All of that is true, but you have to remember that a lot of times war spending isn't even included in the regular budget. During the Iraq War, war spending was often times classified as "emergency spending," and it wasn't included in the regular budget. We spent at least two trillion on the Iraq War, and much of that spending wasn't included in the regular budget.

 

[William Tell]

Bill Kristol and Jennifer Rubin are pulling for the Democrat. Rand and Roy must be doing something right.

https://twitter.com/BillKristol/status/920763879390679040

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2017/10/19/the-gop-is-the-party-of-roy-moore/?

 

[RonPaulMall]

First off he should really not endorse anyone ever... but if he feels the need to, he should have done it when it mattered, such as during the primary. Doing it now means absolutely nothing and brings only negatives as a result.

Endorsing the primary opponents of sitting Republican Senators makes your colleagues hate you. No reason for it. Rand is one of the first big time politicians to endorse Moore anyway, so he's reaping all the rewards without any of the risk.

 

[Matt Collins]

Endorsing the primary opponents of sitting Republican Senators makes your colleagues hate you.

I agree but it was pretty obvious Luther was going to lose. And in a red state like Alabama, an endorsement during the general election means nothing.

No reason for it. Rand is one of the first big time politicians to endorse Moore anyway, so he's reaping all the rewards without any of the risk.

You have that backwards actually... he is getting no benefit from the endorsement at all, and is only getting grief from it.

 

[Krugminator2]

I agree but it was pretty obvious Luther was going to lose. And in a red state like Alabama, an endorsement during the general election means nothing.

You have that backwards actually... he is getting no benefit from the endorsement at all, and is only getting grief from it.

I would have voted for Mo Brooks in the primary. His policy seems to be not endorsing in primaries unless there is a very good reason. There wasn't a great candidate in this race.

Whether it is good idea to support Moore can be debated. I am certain Rand's reasoning is that Moore is crazy and likely to buck leadership. Moore has been very complimentary of Rand and is likely to move things in the right direction on budget issues given how close the vote is. Rand's endorsement and fundraising will have no affect on the vote but could very well have a big impact on how often Moore sides with Rand.

 

[specsaregood]

I am certain Rand's reasoning is that Moore is crazy and likely to buck leadership. Moore has been very complimentary of Rand and is likely to move things in the right direction on budget issues given how close the vote is. Rand's endorsement and fundraising will have no affect on the vote but could very well have a big impact on how often Moore sides with Rand.

And as I mentioned, Moore went to DC after winning the primary it to meet with Sen. Paul. I think its clear he asked for the endorsement and convinced Randal he would prove an ally on the important issues.

With that said, I got a fundraising email from moore last week and the whole email was about how his opponent loves trannies and wants to put trannies everwhere. And while I'm not party to the turn everybody into a tranny agenda, it certainly isn't an argument that is going to get me to open up my pocketbook.

 

[Origanalist]

And as I mentioned, Moore went to DC after winning the primary it to meet with Sen. Paul. I think its clear he asked for the endorsement and convinced Randal he would prove an ally on the important issues.

With that said, I got a fundraising email from moore last week and the whole email was about how his opponent loves trannies and wants to put trannies everwhere. And while I'm not party to the turn everybody into a tranny agenda, it certainly isn't an argument that is going to get me to open up my pocketbook.

Why do you hate straight people?

 

[RonPaulMall]

You have that backwards actually... he is getting no benefit from the endorsement at all, and is only getting grief from it.

Grief from all the right people. Establishment hacks hate what Rand is doing, but he's winning huge points among grass roots conservatives. Rand's high profile paling around with Trump and his early endorsement of Moore is what gives Rand the political cover to get away with things like voting against the Health Care Bill without hurting his standing among the base.

 

[Matt Collins]

Grief from all the right people.

Uh no, you must be new to this...

Rand isn't getting grief from establishment people for endorsing a Republican nominee for Senate. Rand is however getting considerable grief from large portions of Rand's own base because of their distaste for Moore. It was unnecessary for Rand to endorse at all, and he gets zero benefit from endorsing after Moore already won the primary. But he is eroding support from his own base for doing so. There are a lot of legitimate reasons not to like Moore and Rand is attaching himself to him. If he was going to endorse Moore he should have done it when it mattered, during the primary, where it would have looked like his endorsement carries some weight.

It is actions like this which killed Rand during the 2016 Presidential campaign; he kept eroding his base until there was nothing left.


And for the record I'm glad Moore won because he will not be beholden to Mitch. But I also recognize that he isn't anything close to a libertarian either.

 

[RonPaulMall]

Uh no, you must be new to this...

Rand isn't getting grief from establishment people for endorsing a Republican nominee for Senate. Rand is however getting considerable grief from large portions of Rand's own base because of their distaste for Moore. It was unnecessary for Rand to endorse at all, and he gets zero benefit from endorsing after Moore already won the primary. But he is eroding support from his own base for doing so. There are a lot of legitimate reasons not to like Moore and Rand is attaching himself to him. If he was going to endorse Moore he should have done it when it mattered, during the primary, where it would have looked like his endorsement carries some weight.

It is actions like this which killed Rand during the 2016 Presidential campaign; he kept eroding his base until there was nothing left.


And for the record I'm glad Moore won because he will not be beholden to Mitch. But I also recognize that he isn't anything close to a libertarian either.

Rand Paul's "base" is not Libertarians. His base is grass roots conservatives, and they are very grateful for what he did, especially now with the Fake News hit attack by the Washington Post.

 

[Influenza]

Rand Paul's "base" is not Libertarians. His base is grass roots conservatives, and they are very grateful for what he did, especially now with the Fake News hit attack by the Washington Post.

Regardless of whether the allegations are true or not, the anti-liberty jesus freak roy moore should not be anywhere near the fed. government, and should certainly not have been endorsed by Rand

 

[Matt Collins]

Rand Paul's "base" is not Libertarians. His base is grass roots conservatives

Yep, exactly as I thought, you know nothing.

 

[Matt Collins]

Regardless of whether the allegations are true or not, the anti-liberty jesus freak roy moore should not be anywhere near the fed. government, and should certainly not have been endorsed by Rand

Roy Moore will be a better Senator than Luther Strange if for only one reason: he is independent, anti-establishment, and enemies of Mitch.

 

[sparebulb]

Actually she is better than exactly zero Republicans. Peter King is better. Anyone with R next to their name is better than Tulsi Gabbard. Susan Collins will accidentally vote correctly more often than Tulsi Gabbard. She is a Bernie Sanders Communist.

Yes, but which of these people would you want to be stuck with on a desert island.......naked with only a bottle of courvoisier and time to kill?

 

[helenpaul]

I have been reading that his accuser is a democrat operative. Timing is just too convenient.

 

[eleganz]

I have been reading that his accuser is a democrat operative. Timing is just too convenient.

Remember there are 4 people. If all of them were democratic operatives or linked to that would be the coincidence.

But yes either way, the timing is impeccable...

 

[Zippyjuan]

I have been reading that his accuser is a democrat operative. Timing is just too convenient.

She did sign language interpretation at Clinton speeches. An "operative" would be a huge exaggeration.

Jesus's parents did it: http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/10/politics/moore-unholy-excuses/index.html

"Take Joseph and Mary," Alabama State Auditor Jim Zeigler told the Washington Examiner. "Mary was a teenager and Joseph was an adult carpenter. They became parents of Jesus. There's just nothing immoral or illegal here. Maybe just a little bit unusual."