GOP - Rand Paul's Presidential Highlight Reel w/ his Libertarian Twist

[Chef Ramsay]

my problem with hilary is that she's the same sold same old.. she brokered that secretary of state to pretty much push the U.S. imperialistic agenda forward. i don't think her campaign message would be anything similar to "hope and change," because it's obvious she'll do shit the same way as the US has done before.

The thing is the MSM which consists of all stations from Abc/Nbc/Cbs/Cnn/Msnbc will all glorify whoever the Democrat is. Many of the boobs only get their news from the big 3 Abc/Nbc/Cbs because they're the free stations that everyone gets. True lefties and righties prefer their Msnbc/Cnn and Fox but the extremely low info voters get there's from the former and those stations typically don't give coverage to the likes of a libertarian unless they're too big to ignore. And even then, it's slanted heavily toward the statist flavor.

[Kluge]

Fwiw, from a 2013 interview of Bloomberg:
If you’re an executive, can you really rule out running for president in 2016?

Yes. It’s just impossible. I am 100 percent convinced that you cannot in this country win an election unless you are the nominee of one of the two major parties. The second thing I am convinced of is that I could not get through the primary process with either party.

And, incidentally, I think I’ve got a better job than the president’s. He’s got a very tough Congress, and he’s removed from the day-to-day stuff. My job is the day-to-day stuff. That’s what I’m good at—or at least what I think I’m good at. [src]

[TheButterZone]

What a load of shit. He can absolutely buy his way through any "democratic" process at all levels, "win" the presidency with only 2 votes in the whole U.S., issue an executive order for the summary execution of all law-abiding gun owners (the "gun control" final solution), and be completely immune from any real punishment whatsoever, because that's what you get as POTUS.

[Chef Ramsay]

Rand Paul, Still Mum, Lays 2016 Groundwork
Senator Hires Experts in Three Key States, Raises Funds Aggressively

By Beth Reinhard and Rebecca Ballhaus

Sen. Rand Paul hasn't said whether he will seek the 2016 GOP presidential nomination. But his aggressive groundwork seems to point to no other outcome.

In recent weeks, the Kentucky Republican announced political hires in quick succession in Iowa, New Hampshire and Michigan— states key to winning his party's nomination. Staffers mention a future campaign headquarters in Louisville and claim an email list of one million supporters, details most potential presidential hopefuls keep quiet. A super PAC launched by backers shortly before the 2012 election offers a repository for big donors.

On Monday, Mr. Paul begins a three-day, 10-stop swing through Iowa, marking his 10th visit in this election cycle to one of the first three states on the traditional nominating calendar. Only Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) has made more trips, at 11.

The early spade work serves an important purpose for Mr. Paul, a 51-year-old tea-party favorite elected to the Senate less than four years ago. As a central figure in a movement at odds with the political establishment and an apostate from his party's muscular stance on foreign policy, Mr. Paul must prove that he has broader national support than his father, former Rep. Ron Paul, a two-time presidential candidate who never won a nominating contest.

"Rand Paul is for real—a 100%, dead-serious contender, and anyone who underestimates him should have his head examined," said Phil Musser, a Republican strategist who advised GOP presidential hopefuls Tim Pawlenty and Mitt Romney but is unaffiliated with any potential 2016 candidates. "He has changed the perception that a Paul could never win the nomination."

...

http://online.wsj.com/articles/rand-paul-still-mum-lays-2016groundwork-1407109404

[Chef Ramsay]

[beetcoin]

rand paul is being called out for going back on his word.. it's already happening, he's getting all this scrutiny and his message is starting to get muddled because he has to appeal to the populous.

http://news.yahoo.com/rand-paul-says-he-never-proposed-ending-aid-to-israel--even-though-he-did-193355206.html?soc_src=mediacontentstory

Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul on Monday denied that he once supported ending federal aid to Israel — an idea he proposed as recently as 2011.

Related Stories

Israel's Iron Dome Huffington Post
Lawmakers try to seal $225M aid package for Israel Associated Press
US Congress approves funding for Israel's Iron Dome AFP
Obama signs funding package for Israel's Iron Dome Associated Press
Congress backs Israel's Iron Dome missile defense Associated Press
“I haven’t really proposed that in the past,” Paul told Yahoo News when asked if he still thought the U.S. should phase out aid to Israel, which has been battling Hamas in Gaza for weeks. “We’ve never had a legislative proposal to do that. You can mistake my position, but then I’ll answer the question. That has not been a position — a legislative position — we have introduced to phase out or get rid of Israel’s aid. That’s the answer to that question. Israel has always been a strong ally of ours and I appreciate that. I voted just this week to give money — more money — to the Iron Dome, so don’t mischaracterize my position on Israel.”

Paul, who was in Omaha campaigning for Nebraska Senate candidate Ben Sasse before a three-day tour of neighboring Iowa, may not like it when reporters bring up his proposal from three years ago to end all U.S. foreign aid — including to Israel. But that was in fact his position.

In 2011, the newly elected Paul proposed a budget that would have cut $500 billion from the federal budget in part by cutting off foreign aid to all countries, including financial grants to Israel. The United States provides about $3 billion to Israel annually, and last week the Senate approved $225 million to help support Israel’s Iron Dome technology, which blocks rocket fire from Gaza. (Paul supported the measure.)

Paul, in his first months in office, however, defended phasing out aid by saying that the U.S. could no longer afford to give cash to other countries.

“I’m not singling out Israel. I support Israel. I want to be known as a friend of Israel, but not with money you don’t have,” Paul said in 2011 during an interview with ABC News. “We can’t just borrow from our kids’ future and give it to countries, even if they are our friends.”

He even pointed to Israel as an example of a nation that doesn’t need foreign aid because of its own wealth.

“I think they’re an important ally, but I also think that their per capita income is greater than probably three-fourths of the rest of the world,” Paul said, also in 2011. “Should we be giving free money or welfare to a wealthy nation? I don’t think so.”

Paul, a possible 2016 presidential contender whom some in the GOP regard as insufficiently pro-Israel, has recently changed his tune on foreign aid to the Jewish state. His budget proposals since 2001 have included aid to Israel.

It’s one thing for a politician to admit that his views have changed on an issue and an entirely other thing to say that he never held the position at all.

[Bitsaurus]

elizabeth warren is now being pressured to run by the kennedys.. she is basically my democrat version of rand paul. i like her quite a bit. imagine a warren vs. paul presidential bid.. that'd be great. http://www.newsmax.com/newswidget/kennedys-pushing-warren-hillary-clinton/2014/08/03/id/586512/?promo_code=13074-1&utm_source=13074The_hill&utm_medium=nmwidget&utm_campaign=widgetphase1

Warren lost all credibility from moderates when it was revealed how much in contributions she took from those big banks she supposedly was supposed to shake a stick at.  I find it funny that the big banks that would be so fearful of her vengeance are throwing money at her.  Must be because so many of them were jailed by Obama/Holder.

[beetcoin]

elizabeth warren is now being pressured to run by the kennedys.. she is basically my democrat version of rand paul. i like her quite a bit. imagine a warren vs. paul presidential bid.. that'd be great. http://www.newsmax.com/newswidget/kennedys-pushing-warren-hillary-clinton/2014/08/03/id/586512/?promo_code=13074-1&utm_source=13074The_hill&utm_medium=nmwidget&utm_campaign=widgetphase1

Warren lost all credibility from moderates when it was revealed how much in contributions she took from those big banks she supposedly was supposed to shake a stick at.  I find it funny that the big banks that would be so fearful of her vengeance are throwing money at her.  Must be because so many of them were jailed by Obama/Holder.

that does sound fishy. but on the other hand, there are probably a lot of people who work for banks/wall street and want to change the status quo, but don't speak up openly.. it's quite a big group of people after all.

it is a bit ridiculous how much obama received from wall street. they knew there was going to be a big fallout, so they probably paid him all of that money for "protection."

[Kluge]

rand paul is being called out for going back on his word.. it's already happening, he's getting all this scrutiny and his message is starting to get muddled because he has to appeal to the populous.

http://news.yahoo.com/rand-paul-says-he-never-proposed-ending-aid-to-israel--even-though-he-did-193355206.html?soc_src=mediacontentstory

That's disappointing. Oh, well... maybe Dennis Kucinich will run again. (Please, God, don't make me vote Libertarian!)

[Chef Ramsay]

rand paul is being called out for going back on his word.. it's already happening, he's getting all this scrutiny and his message is starting to get muddled because he has to appeal to the populous.

http://news.yahoo.com/rand-paul-says-he-never-proposed-ending-aid-to-israel--even-though-he-did-193355206.html?soc_src=mediacontentstory

That's disappointing. Oh, well... maybe Dennis Kucinich will run again. (Please, God, don't make me vote Libertarian!)

Yeah, he's hobnobbing w/ all these Iowa pastors on this 3 day tour of Iowa and appears to be stepping in it slightly. His sometimes nuanced positions, in this case, is coming back to bite him since he clearly did call for Israel aid to be finished off yet he said that in his trip to Israel. I know he's trying to balance his foreign policy positions to not have neocons wanting to stick a knife in his back but that may prove impossible. I tend to look the other way when he tries to thread the needle but it does seem like he's not been having that great of a week. However, the main goal of defeating democrats by building his conservatarian box seems to still be on fire since dems have been sending out do or die fundraising pleas based on him.

Rand Paul = Democrats’ Enemy #1
The senator’s broad appeal threatens to weaken Democrats for 2016, and they are going on offense—sending out no less than 10 press releases on his latest trip to Iowa.

Olivia Nuzzi
08.07.14

Democrats fundraise and campaign by exploiting concerns about right-wing extremism. But at least at the moment, what they apparently fear most is the rise of a candidate who could potentially poach enough of their supporters to beat them in 2016.

Rand Paul has not yet formally announced he is running for the Republican nomination. But with a lead in GOP polls and already laying the foundation for the infrastructure of a campaign, the junior senator from Kentucky is considered the early front-runner, one who is transparent about his desire to appeal to a broad range of voters—and that has Democrats worried.

For the 10th time in two years, Paul arrived on Monday in Iowa, where the first presidential caucuses will be held in 17 months, to try out his message on a three-day, multi-city, headline-generating tour.

Over the course of the trip, the Democratic National Committee sent out 10 press releases about Paul’s every move and utterance. “What it can tell you as a political observer is that they recognize what we’re trying to point out, which is Rand is the Republican who has the best chance of keeping and energizing the base while going into their constituencies," a senior aide for Paul told The Daily Beast.

...

“He’s working not to get out of the conservative box but to redefine it,” Simon Rosenberg, president of the New Democrat Network, told The Daily Beast. If Paul gets the nomination, he becomes the effective leader of his party—meaning his redefinition of that conservative box could become the definition, a problem for Democrats, as Paul has a tendency to stake out atypical positions for a conservative and reach across party lines.

...

More...http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/08/07/rand-paul-democrats-enemy-1.html

[beetcoin]

rand paul ducking the dreamer girl was pretty funny. it's not really a big issue, and maybe what he says is true, but it's pretty funny how he just gets up and leaves once the mexican girl is there 

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/08/05/rand_paul_i_didnt_run_from_dreamer_i_was_about_to_do_an_interview.html

[Bit_Happy]

Sorry to see the Iowa trip isn't going better. It's not easy trying to be both principled and popular.

[Chef Ramsay]

rand paul ducking the dreamer girl was pretty funny. it's not really a big issue, and maybe what he says is true, but it's pretty funny how he just gets up and leaves once the mexican girl is there 

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/08/05/rand_paul_i_didnt_run_from_dreamer_i_was_about_to_do_an_interview.html

Yeah, I saw that but that last thing a politician wants to do is to do an 'interview' on someone else's terms. The dreamers were actually focused on Rep. King and if you watched that it was clearly an attack w/ a readied camera. She was 'asking' the Rep if he would tear up here driver's license iirc but he should've flipped it back on here and asked what would happen to him or someone similar if they'd been either born or residing in one of these other countries for a while. As in, they'd be deported or imprisoned in a heart beat upon discovery. My litmus test for these that flew under the radar would be if they've existed all this time and haven't used public handouts then they should get fast-tracked to citizenship if that's what they desired. Sadly, this is almost never the case.

[Chef Ramsay]

Sorry to see the Iowa trip isn't going better. It's not easy trying to be both principled and popular.

From the standards that we're used to seeing as far as Rand always being in tip top shape, I'm sure there's plenty of good things going on in his favor on this trip that either haven't been reported yet or are going on behind the scenes such as building or kindling key relationships w/ party officials and donors. However, w/ these pastors and their flocks it's the same thing every 4 years trying to hustle a libertarian message to them when all they care about is abortions, blindly backing Israel and banning gay marriage as the key issues. Lately, we've seen Rand in general election mode trying to make himself and his message more acceptable to blacks and independents but now he's reverted back to primary mode re-establishing himself as a conservative on certain things. I'm sure we all consider ourselves no-nonsense types of people, including my fellow ancaps, but sadly injecting libertarianism into politics w/ a demagoguing media awaiting to attack takes some skill if ya know what I mean.

[beetcoin]

i really like rand's gameplan - it's far superior to anyone else's. if i had to bet on it, he's definitely coming out of the primaries out on top. seems like he's taking the centrist position, even before the primaries where he has to take an extremist position. in the meanwhile, he'll tell the GOP base that he has the best chances of winning, and it's either him or hilary. because of that, it gives hilary less ammunition to attack him during the presidential election.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) doesn't think the Republican Party can simply "flip" on the issue of same-sex marriage, but he does believe that it can be more tolerant of differing "opinions" ahead of the midterm elections.

The possible 2016 presidential contender made his remarks in a New York Times interview published on Thursday.

"The party can’t become the opposite of what it is," the libertarian-leaning senator said. "If you tell people from Alabama, Mississippi or Georgia, 'You know what, guys, we’ve been wrong, and we’re gonna be the pro-gay-marriage party,' they’re either gonna stay home or -- I mean, many of these people joined the Republican Party because of these social issues."

"So I don’t think we can completely flip. But can we become, to use the overused term, a bigger tent?" he added. "I think we can and can agree to disagree on a lot of these issues. I think the party will evolve. It’ll either continue to lose, or it’ll become a bigger place where there’s a mixture of opinions."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/07/rand-paul-gay-marriage_n_5658937.html

[Bit_Happy]

Fwiw, from a 2013 interview of Bloomberg:
If you’re an executive, can you really rule out running for president in 2016?

Yes. It’s just impossible. I am 100 percent convinced that you cannot in this country win an election unless you are the nominee of one of the two major parties. The second thing I am convinced of is that I could not get through the primary process with either party.

And, incidentally, I think I’ve got a better job than the president’s. He’s got a very tough Congress, and he’s removed from the day-to-day stuff. My job is the day-to-day stuff. That’s what I’m good at—or at least what I think I’m good at. [src]

Glad to see that, thank you. In both 2008 and 2012 Bloomberg made very clear statements about "thinking of running", and (by coincidence ?) it was at the same time that Ron Paul's fundraising and grass-roots momentum were at/near the peak.

[pungopete468]

I just had a sinister thought... This is way out there in tinfoil hat land, so don't take me too seriously here on this one!

What if Rand Paul is meant to win the Presidency in 2016? I mean, say the globalists are pushing him into power for the express purpose of collapsing the US economy while a Libertarian is holding office; they could then use the public sentiment and desperation to rebuild a socialist America undermining or destroying the US Constitution. Basically, they could pin everything on the Libertarians and the Constitution, then make the final push towards Socialism when the public support for a Constitutional system of government is at its weakest.

Lets face it, there's no way to save the US economy from a catastrophic collapse; the question is who they'll vilify when it does.

How crazy would that be?

[beetcoin]

chris christie has yet to recover from bridgegate.. funny how an event that happens 3ish years before the presidential election will pretty much ruin his chances.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/07/chris-christie-poll_n_5659214.html

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) continues to struggle with his image in the state months after it was revealed that his aides intentionally created traffic gridlock near the George Washington Bridge to punish a mayor who had not supported Christie's re-election, a new Quinnipiac poll finds.

Forty-nine percent of New Jersey voters said they approve of the job Christie is doing as governor, while 47 percent disapprove. Respondents were split along party lines, with 86 percent of Republicans approving of Christie's job performance, compared with 47 percent of independents and only 23 percent of Democrats.

Christie's favorability rating is even, with 47 percent saying they have a favorable opinion of him and another 47 percent saying they have an unfavorable opinion. In November, 64 percent of respondents expressed a favorable opinion of Christie, and only 29 percent said they had an unfavorable opinion.

Opinions about Christie's personality in particular have soured. When asked whether they saw Christie as more of a bully or a leader, 48 percent of respondents said bully, while another 48 percent said leader. In a January Quinnipiac poll, conducted as information about the bridge scandal was first being released, 54 percent of respondents saw Christie more as a leader, while 40 percent saw him as a bully.

[michaelwang33]

my problem with hilary is that she's the same sold same old.. she brokered that secretary of state to pretty much push the U.S. imperialistic agenda forward. i don't think her campaign message would be anything similar to "hope and change," because it's obvious she'll do shit the same way as the US has done before.

The thing is the MSM which consists of all stations from Abc/Nbc/Cbs/Cnn/Msnbc will all glorify whoever the Democrat is. Many of the boobs only get their news from the big 3 Abc/Nbc/Cbs because they're the free stations that everyone gets. True lefties and righties prefer their Msnbc/Cnn and Fox but the extremely low info voters get there's from the former and those stations typically don't give coverage to the likes of a libertarian unless they're too big to ignore. And even then, it's slanted heavily toward the statist flavor.

This is true regarding the ideologies of the stations but I think enough of the population has access to cable that most can watch all the MSM stations. I think that liberals have a huge media advantage in any election and this causes them to get more of the vote then the ideology of the country would suggest.

[beetcoin]

my problem with hilary is that she's the same sold same old.. she brokered that secretary of state to pretty much push the U.S. imperialistic agenda forward. i don't think her campaign message would be anything similar to "hope and change," because it's obvious she'll do shit the same way as the US has done before.

The thing is the MSM which consists of all stations from Abc/Nbc/Cbs/Cnn/Msnbc will all glorify whoever the Democrat is. Many of the boobs only get their news from the big 3 Abc/Nbc/Cbs because they're the free stations that everyone gets. True lefties and righties prefer their Msnbc/Cnn and Fox but the extremely low info voters get there's from the former and those stations typically don't give coverage to the likes of a libertarian unless they're too big to ignore. And even then, it's slanted heavily toward the statist flavor.

This is true regarding the ideologies of the stations but I think enough of the population has access to cable that most can watch all the MSM stations. I think that liberals have a huge media advantage in any election and this causes them to get more of the vote then the ideology of the country would suggest.

you can't peg it all on the liberal media though. once the official election comes around, both candidates will get a shitload of exposure.. only problem is that the last 2 republicans to run were piss-poor candidates.

MSNBC appears to even like rand paul, at least a lot more than the other republican candidates. also, i don't think really has a strong leaning towards democrats for the election cycle. they just try to over-report on both sides.