Rand Paul announces presidential run

Rand Paul has become the second Republican to formally announce his intentions to run for president in the upcoming election.

Sen. Rand Paul, the maverick first-term senator who rode a Tea Party wave from a Kentucky ophthalmology practice to Congress, on Tuesday formally announced a bid for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination.

"I am running for president to return our country to the principles of liberty and limited government," Paul wrote on his official campaign website, hours ahead of an official campaign launch in Louisville.

...

On the campaign trail, the Kentucky senator is expected to continue the pitch he’s made while traveling the country to lay the spadework for a presidential run: that the Republican Party needs to broaden its appeal to voters who have traditionally shunned it.

www.washingtonpost.com...

He may not be his father, but if a Republican were to win the US presidential election, i would like that person to be Rand Paul.

And with that let me remind everyone that Rand Paul is not a libertarian. He is a Republican.

a reply to: damwel

Better than Bush, Clinton or Obama.


One of the better choices I have seen as a candidate with any chance in the last 20 years.

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: damwel

Better than Bush, Clinton or Obama.


One of the better choices I have seen as a candidate with any chance in the last 20 years.

I think it is impossible to gauge whether he will be better than past presidents, but i think he would be better. Still, the USA will truly be doomed if Clinton or Bush get elected in this race...i hope Rand is able to push it far enough to become the next President. It would be a welcome change for not only Americans, but for others the world over.

My humble opinion ,and I may be wrong but I think ,Yes this guy is controlled opposition ,don't fall for it. I have already seen comments from Rand that made me think he is with the agenda . I remember Ron Paul did not even ask for a recount in disputed states on his election results. He just simply bowed out and disappeared at the end of the election with no dispute. When that happened the sirens went off that I had been fooled again. This also made me know inside he was under the thumb of the dark satanic murderers that run the show. In my view Ron served to divide the repubs and made sure the dems stayed in. Its all a big brainwashing operation. Rand talks out of both sides of his mouth I have seen.
Besides all that, with electronic voting machines its ridiculous to think we actually have a say in who is the top TV actor for the dark evil men who are intent on making the entire world suffer so they can feel powerful. They will get what they deserve when that have to answer to the creator.

originally posted by: daaskapital

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: damwel

Better than Bush, Clinton or Obama.


One of the better choices I have seen as a candidate with any chance in the last 20 years.

The USA will truly be doomed if Clinton or Bush get in...i hope Rand is able to push it far enough to become the next President. It would be a welcome change for not only Americans, but for others the world over.

If you get another Bush or Clinton, King George III will rise from his grave and take a big zoombie crap on the washington memorial

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: daaskapital

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: damwel

Better than Bush, Clinton or Obama.


One of the better choices I have seen as a candidate with any chance in the last 20 years.

The USA will truly be doomed if Clinton or Bush get in...i hope Rand is able to push it far enough to become the next President. It would be a welcome change for not only Americans, but for others the world over.

If you get another Bush or Clinton, King George III will rise from his grave and take a big zoombie crap on the washington memorial

I'm Australian...i wouldn't particularly mind.

Let's see if he can reign in his nuttery better than his dad.

originally posted by: damwel
And with that let me remind everyone that Rand Paul is not a libertarian. He is a Republican.

True...as he has reminded us all more than once, too.

But the reality is that a purely libertarian candidate will not win an election in the foreseeable future, so if I'm voting for a Republican, Mr. Paul is about as good a choice as I can see in the contemporary field of possible candidates (from both parties).

He is a Republican with a LOT of libertarian views. You will never be 100% happy with someone unless you run yourself.

a reply to: dntwastetime

If you truly believe all of your post then you know why Jeb Bush will be the next President.

He's one of the only politicians that has had a fairly consistent message of smaller government and less military involvement in foreign countries. But at the end of the day he is just that, a politician. The sad fact is that only a career politician could claim the POTUS throne.

Had a chance to be there in Louisville today, but a smashed toe of the wife of my friend driving stopped that trip :/

So far, he has my vote, and when looking at the other possible candidates, I don't think that will change unless he himself does something really stupid.

Now I can ring up the bookies in vegas and place a longshot bet ... getting bit bored with horse racing and tired of losing betting on 4D .. may as well try to recoup some losses betting on the rigged game of american politics ..

a reply to: daaskapital

"I am running for president to return our country to the principles of liberty and limited government," Paul wrote

I have yet to have met a person (Republican or Democrat) who did not think that politicians for the most part are corrupt .

With that said for the life of me, I can't understand why anyone including democrats can't grasp the concept that with corrupt politicians the last thing you want is bigger gov't?

Now lets see if Rand passes the corruption litmus test :

If he gets endorsed by the GOP than its a 99% chance he is bought and paid for by big Corp. However, there is a 1% chance of him and his Father being smart enough to have infiltrated the Political system in this country to play along until its time to not play along?

Yeah I know its a catch 22 and Hope usually turns to you into a dope.

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: damwel

Better than Bush, Clinton or Obama.

I really don't understand how the three are even remotely comparable, and I find it bizarre that people can even make such comparisons with a straight face.

Bush passed the Patriot Act, 9/11 happened on his watch, he took America into two wars, gave the NSA massive opportunity to abuse millions of innocent people, supported torture, allowed private military contractors to abuse people in foreign countries...

What have either of the other two done to damage the country? I really can't see it.

Besides, for those who want to claim that Rand is a Libertarian, he's really not. He might talk the talk, but he in no way walks the walk, but other than what he claims to be about he's really just another Republican determined to meddle in the rights and liberties of people who aren't straight, white, wealthy Christians, all while attempting to cash-in on his dads legacy.

Rand Paul Opposes Abortion Rights, Sponsored Legislation That Would Make All Abortions Illegal
Rand Paul Opposes Same-Sex Marriage, Finds It ‘Offensive’
Rand Paul Supports A Massive Increase In Defense Spending
Rand Paul Supports Extensive Use Of Drones At Home And Abroad
Rand Paul Opposes The Legalization Of Marijuana
Rand Paul Suggested Putting People In Prison For Listening To ‘Radical Political Speeches’

Source

originally posted by: newWorldSamurai
He's one of the only politicians that has had a fairly consistent message of smaller government and less military involvement in foreign countries.

But he wants to increase military spending, and wants to increase use of drones, while also using them in the US.
He also wants to make freedom of speech and association a mandated activity, deciding who can be arrested and charged for attending a talk that doesn't conform to his notions of what is right.

That is in no way a Libertarian. In fact, given some of the things he's said and supported, he's one of the most radical Republicans the US has ever seen.

When you have a prospective President who wants to use drones against American citizens, you have a MAJOR problem, let alone the bizarre belief that opinion should be mandated by the government. How anyone can seriously think he's a Libertarian is beyond me.

a reply to: Rocker2013

Bush passed the Patriot Act, 9/11 happened on his watch, he took America into two wars, gave the NSA massive opportunity to abuse millions of innocent people, supported torture, allowed private military contractors to abuse people in foreign countries... What have either of the other two done to damage the country? I really can't see it.

Obama and his cabinet not only allowed Bush policies to continue but he expanded them, he continued the corporate bailouts, he continued the foreign occupations, Guantanamo , and everything else you just mentioned that BUSH did.

Obama also broke simple promises he could have kept within the first week of taking office when he promised to not hire lobbyist in his cabinet. He broke his promise in gov't transparency and has done the exact opposite. Under Obama the gov't is even more hidden than under the Bush eyes.

Regardless which party (Dem or Rep) is in office the outcome is always the same:
1. Bigger gov't
2. Less privacy
3. More debt
4. More corporate friendly laws and benefits that hurt the majority of consumers.

Thinking there is a difference between what party or president is in control is either naive at best or delusionally biased thinking.

originally posted by: Rocker2013

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: damwel

Better than Bush, Clinton or Obama.

I really don't understand how the three are even remotely comparable, and I find it bizarre that people can even make such comparisons with a straight face.

Bush passed the Patriot Act, 9/11 happened on his watch, he took America into two wars, gave the NSA massive opportunity to abuse millions of innocent people, supported torture, allowed private military contractors to abuse people in foreign countries...

What have either of the other two done to damage the country? I really can't see it.

Besides, for those who want to claim that Rand is a Libertarian, he's really not. He might talk the talk, but he in no way walks the walk, but other than what he claims to be about he's really just another Republican determined to meddle in the rights and liberties of people who aren't straight, white, wealthy Christians, all while attempting to cash-in on his dads legacy.

Rand Paul Opposes Abortion Rights, Sponsored Legislation That Would Make All Abortions Illegal
Rand Paul Opposes Same-Sex Marriage, Finds It ‘Offensive’
Rand Paul Supports A Massive Increase In Defense Spending
Rand Paul Supports Extensive Use Of Drones At Home And Abroad
Rand Paul Opposes The Legalization Of Marijuana
Rand Paul Suggested Putting People In Prison For Listening To ‘Radical Political Speeches’

Source

Progressive Democrat I would guess. Blind to Obama and Clinton actions and lack of actions?

Please tell us how much less war we have these days.

Please show us how "transparent" this administration is in this new golden era of accountability.

Please show us how less corrupt this administration is. (This one with a straight face... LOL)

So, Rand Paul has jumped in with all four feet (counting two for him and two for his dad). Wondering if Ron Paul will be doing campaign appearances with him (probably in Texas or sure, but the other states?). If nothing else should make for some interesting debates.

originally posted by: Aleister
So, Rand Paul has jumped in with all four feet (counting two for him and two for his dad). Wondering if Ron Paul will be doing campaign appearances with him (probably in Texas or sure, but the other states?). If nothing else should make for some interesting debates.

If Rand is smart, he'll try to distance himself from his father just a bit.

Ron Paul was treated as a joke by the majority of Americans when he ran for President. Rand needs to present himself as a less-extreme version of Ron if he wants to have any chance in hell of getting some votes.

The problem with Ron Paul is most people responded like this whenever he was talking during the debates:

"Yeah, I can get behind that."
"Hey, he's got a good point!"
"Hell yeah! I like what this guy's saying!"
"I might have just found my candidate!!!"
"Wait, what the hell did he just say? Dude's out of his mind!"