Trump May Not Seek Re-election: Rand Paul

[TheTexan]

If Trump doesnt run in 2020, it'll be because he accomplished what he set out to do (MAGA)

 

[oyarde]

The neocons have Pence in place and guaranteed as the next GOP pick. He will be their greatest victory yet.

It is a lock as far as i know .

 

[Suzanimal]

It is a lock as far as i know .

Did you consult the Magic 8 ball?

 

[oyarde]

Did you consult the Magic 8 ball?

3 times

 

[LibertyEagle]

Rand was doing well until Trump jumped in and the avalanche of media coverage followed him. He got buried along with all the other republican candidates.

OH PLEASE. Rand killed his own chances. He did it all by himself. If he had wanted to kill his campaign, he couldn't have done a better job of it. Now, THAT is the truth. Deal with it.

 

[Ender]

OH PLEASE. Rand killed his own chances. He did it all by himself. If he had wanted to kill his campaign, he couldn't have done a better job of it. Now, THAT is the truth. Deal with it.

That is NOT the truth.

Trump-lovers & the media took Rand down.

Deal with it.

 

[LibertyEagle]

That is NOT the truth.

Trump-lovers & the media took Rand down.

Deal with it.

Nope.

It was indeed sad to watch. It started with Rand supporting McConnell against being called a liar on the Senate floor. It made him look like establishment, in a political climate where establishment was not the thing to be.

You have a convenient memory, Ender.

 

[jllundqu]

Nope.

It was indeed sad to watch. It started with Rand supporting McConnell against being called a liar on the Senate floor. It made him look like establishment, in a political climate where establishment was not the thing to be.

You have a convenient memory, Ender.

Sadly I must agree. If Rand had ran on a firebrand don't-give-a-fuck all out Lion for Liberty campaign, he would have done much better... but he played politics with McConnell and the RINOs and people saw right through it.

 

[undergroundrr]

Rand was doing well until Trump jumped in and the avalanche of media coverage followed him. He got buried along with all the other republican candidates.

Yes. Not only that, but I still haven't seen any solid evidence that trump wasn't a Hillary plant. The Podesta Manafort collusion says it all.

Of course, on script you get a bunch of people saying Rand was too compromising and not alpha enough. The McConnell alliance wasn't a factor. The voting populace doesn't even know who McConnell is.

But I will accuse Rand of stupidly trying to beat trump at his own game, trying to be brash and insulting and failing miserably during the debates. It's not in Rand's nature to be confrontational. He's a man of ideas. The high road would have suited him better. Without trump and the meticulously orchestrated anti-ISIS outrage, 2016 could have been a campaign of policy discussion that would have educated the populace (those who didn't fall asleep) like never before in history.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

Paul will not do well in a 2020 Primary if that's what people are hoping for. The nation is far far too polarized and brainwashed by Trump (both for and against) for anyone with actual principles or ideas to make any headway in his wake. Republicans are now chiefly concerned with merely pissing off liberals and stomping on them every chance they get, regardless of the underlying principles or morality. Democrats meanwhile are going to see every Republican as a reprehensible MAGA-hat-wearing Trump disciple and ignore anything else, especially any theoretical idea requiring more than 2 neurons to comprehend.

Mark my words- 2020 is going to be worse than 2016 in terms of discourse. Trump and the ignorant, emotionally-driven overreaction to Obama which he led, with no foundation in theory or principles, is what did this. America will need 4 years after him to reset before it even starts thinking again.

The public will eventually develop clown fatigue and throw their support behind a (relatively) sober, policy-driven candidate.

That's not necessarily Rand, of course, but it's a better environment for him than the current circus.

It's the sort of environment that he was anticipating in 2016, and for which his campaign was well designed.

When? You say 2024/28. I'm a little more optimistic. 2020 is realistic if Trump continues to make an ass of himself while failing to deliver anything.

 

[nobody's_hero]

OH PLEASE. Rand killed his own chances. He did it all by himself. If he had wanted to kill his campaign, he couldn't have done a better job of it. Now, THAT is the truth. Deal with it.

I recall noting a pattern during the debates where anyone who attacked Trump had the tables turned on them and it wrecked their campaign. When it came to Rand's turn to speak, I was like, 'okay, all these others attacked Trump right out of the gates, and he's just getting stronger, so don't do it, Rand. Play it smar—- - - No! Rand.No!!!!! NOOOOOOOO!!!!'

 

[kahless]

That is NOT the truth.

Trump-lovers & the media took Rand down.

Deal with it.

Rand was doing well in early 2015 but made a strategic mistake of giving the appearance of positioning himself with the GOP establishment and the far left at the absolute worst time to do it. The people were looking for exactly the opposite of that and Trump was the only one offering it up on a silver platter. It sunk his campaign.

His strategy may have worked temporarily for a previous cycle but not in 2015 and not for the length of time he continued on that path. It really sent the message that he was running just an educational campaign in preparation for running in 2020 after a Trump loss in 2016.

 

[The Rebel Poet]

Here's hoping for a Trump/Paul ticket in 2020

Decapitate that ticket and I'm in.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

I recall noting a pattern during the debates where anyone who attacked Trump had the tables turned on them and it wrecked their campaign. When it came to Rand's turn to speak, I was like, 'okay, all these others attacked Trump right out of the gates, and he's just getting stronger, so don't do it, Rand. Play it smar—- - - No! Rand.No!!!!! NOOOOOOOO!!!!'

Cruz tried the other approach, and that didn't work either.

The time was simply ripe for a culture war demagogue, and Trump was just the rabble-rouser for the job.

 

[dannno]

Yes. Not only that, but I still haven't seen any solid evidence that trump wasn't a Hillary plant.

........he won??

 

[undergroundrr]

The time was simply ripe for a culture war demagogue, and Trump was just the rabble-rouser for the job.

That's reality.

But Rand would have looked infinitely less wimpy if he had not dabbled with the tough guy act. I really think those un-genuine moments in front of a large audience did more damage to his image going forward than his alliances intra-party or across the aisle.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

That's reality.

But Rand would have looked infinitely less wimpy if he had not dabbled with the tough guy act. I really think those un-genuine moments in front of a large audience did more damage to his image going forward than his alliances intra-party or across the aisle.

Trump's the perfect example of how totally unprincipled people are natural actors.

Rand and Ron are perfect examples of the opposite.

 

[ds21089]

OH PLEASE. Rand killed his own chances. He did it all by himself. If he had wanted to kill his campaign, he couldn't have done a better job of it. Now, THAT is the truth. Deal with it.

Nope.

It was indeed sad to watch. It started with Rand supporting McConnell against being called a liar on the Senate floor. It made him look like establishment, in a political climate where establishment was not the thing to be.

That is wrong on so many levels. First of all, when you're the only non-corrupt candidate, any move is a move they'll try to attack you for. If he was against McConnell they would've just instead pushed the narrative of him not being a Republican.. that he should just run as a Democrat instead. There is no "right" move when anything you do will be twisted and manipulated to make you look bad when the entire army of the media is against you.

The real reason he lost? Sanders was propped up to siphon the disenfranchised young voters that would've otherwise voted for Rand, just as how the young people voted for Ron.. however the promises to rid them of their insane student debt seemed too tempting. Ok so that angle is covered.

Next group of people who would support Rand? Conservatives / Constitutionalists. Ok, how do we siphon that group from him? Ted Cruz. All the pied piper talking heads who pretend they care about the constitution only to lead their viewers astray when it matters the most (ensuring what they claim they're for never really happens) push Ted Cruz hard. "He's Rand Paul, but better on foreign policy".

What remaining people would've went to Rand? People who realize the media is bullshit and that being an enemy of the media actually makes you look good 'cuz you know they're corrupt..Obviously they set up Donald Trump to be against the media to help him win.. It may have seemed like it was to hurt him, but it was only to ensure that he was labeled the anti-media candidate. If they truly wanted Trump to lose, they wouldn't have given him nearly as much air time. What's a few million dollars vs losing your control of media if you truly thought he was a non-corrupt guy who would rid them of corruption if elected?

A portion of the remaining people left to support Rand are young people who've done extensive research when it comes to the government, economy, foreign policy..but a lot of those people dont have the money to donate to his campaign.

Now tell me. What could Rand have possibly done against this and billions of dollars that would've garnered him nearly enough support to be viable? You can't compare his campaign to Ron's. When Ron ran, he didnt have all these fake groups created to steal his support. He stood alone in being against government intrusion and media bias and for the Constitution. Just as how they implemented super delegates to corrupt the electoral process, they've implemented candidates crafted to siphon support from truly good candidates.

 

[Ender]

Sadly I must agree. If Rand had ran on a firebrand don't-give-a-$#@! all out Lion for Liberty campaign, he would have done much better... but he played politics with McConnell and the RINOs and people saw right through it.

Disagree.

The MSM used anything against Rand, even ignoring him like his Dad, while pumping up Trump & making people think he was anti-establishment.

 

[The Rebel Poet]

That is wrong on so many levels. First of all, when you're the only non-corrupt candidate, any move is a move that'll try to attack you for. If he was against McConnell they wouldve just instead pushed the narrative of him not being a Republican.. that he should just run as a Democrat instead. There is no "right" move when anything you do will be twisted and manipulated to make you look bad when the entire army of the media is against you.

The real reason he lost? Sanders was propped up to siphon the disenfranchised young voters that wouldve otherwise voted for Rand, just as how the young people voted for Ron.. however the promises to rid them of their insane student debt seemed too tempting. Ok so that angle is covered.

Next group of people who would support Rand? Conservatives / Constitutionalists. Ok, how do we siphon that group from him? Ted Cruz. All the pied piper talking heads who pretend they care about the constitution only to lead their viewers astray when it matters the most (ensuring what they claim they're for never really happens) push Ted Cruz hard. "He's Rand Paul, but better on foreign policy".

What remaining people wouldve went to Rand? People who realize the media is bullshit and that being an enemy of the media actually makes you look good cuz you know they're corrupt..Obviously they set up Donald Trump to be against the media to help him win.. It may have seemed like it was to hurt him, but it was only to ensure that he was labeled the anti-media candidate. If they truly wanted Trump to lose, they wouldn't have given him nearly as much air time. What's a few million dollars vs losing your control of media if you truly thought he was a non-corrupt guy who would rid them of corruption if elected?

A portion of the remaining people left to support Rand are young people who've done extensive research when it comes to the government, economy, foreign policy..but a lot of those people dont have the money to donate to his campaign.

Now tell me. What could Rand have possibly done against this and billions of dollars that would've garnered him nearly enough support to be viable? You can't compare his campaign to Ron's. When Ron ran, he didnt have all these fake groups created to steal his support. He stood alone in being against government intrusion and media bias and for the Constitution. Just as how they implemented super delegates to corrupt the electoral process, they've implemented candidates crafted to siphon support from truly good candidates.

This is exactly what I was going to say. Only thing I'd add is they also threw Carson in for Rand's minority outreach.