Rand Paul's going to run for President in 2016

reply to post by amfirst1


I don't vote along party line, I vote based on character and Ron Paul did not approve of Rands decision to endorse Romney.

Good, if he runs the democrats will be stronger.

I don't know. I am also leery and skeptical. I was one of the people who was really ticked when he endorsed Romney. But I also really enjoyed his filibuster. I will also wait and see. He's not his father and that totally sucks. But I'm so jaded and cynical about the whole process I'm questioning the point and validity of elections at all.


P.S. having to retype every post and copy/paste because of this weird timeout error is seriously annoying.

Personally I'd like to see Jesse Ventura run with RON Paul (not Rand) as his VP.

Make it a new party call it "We The People".

It would be a quiet Revolution.

reply to post by NewAgeMan


I can't help loving Jesse Ventura either. I think as a president he could make me feel safe. He's got military training and he's scary. Can you imagine him sitting across a table from someone with untoward intentions toward us? *shivers* Plus he's got an aura of authenticity. When he says something I tend to believe him. Or at least that he believes what he's saying.

reply to post by SaturnFX


Don't be rude. Not only are you criticizing him but his children??? Did YOUR parents teach you common manners or did they teach you to be rude?
Not trying to be rude but that is pretty cold....

I have some contacts who are pretty close to Rand.

Based on conversations over the years, I believe that the guy's heart is in the right place.

My gut tells me that he has the noble intention of re-shaping the Republican Party in the direction of the liberty movement. It's the next step in the process begun by his father.

Why didn't Ron keep running Libertarian? Because he knew that the two party scam was entrenched. So he fought on the fringes of the GOP, and his son is trying to take it a step farther.

As to the endorsement of Romney...my recollection is that he gave a practical answer to a question about who he would support. Sort of a hold your nose and vote for Romney response.

At the time, I took it as a signal that Ron wasn't really going to try to win, even though some believed all the way to the Convention.

I could be wrong about this. Maybe Rand's stance did upset Ron. My feeling was always that it was a calculated political move to further get Rand into the good graces of the national party.

Even though I think Rand may well be honorable in his intentions, I have a lot of trouble believing much good can come of it. I don't think he will be allowed to win at the primary level, even if he has the support. At the least I suppose he can keep the conversation moving forward, which may be all we can hope for at this time.

reply to post by NewAgeMan


That would be great. Rand Paul would make for a great conservative president IMO. If he runs in 2016 he should have a good chance to win in 2024. The guy is still young.

Originally posted by otie1
reply to post by SaturnFX

 

Don't be rude. Not only are you criticizing him but his children??? Did YOUR parents teach you common manners or did they teach you to be rude?
Not trying to be rude but that is pretty cold....

edit on 18-4-2013 by otie1 because: (no reason given)

Don't be rude...to a politician...about being a politician who tends to have father to son political agendas...

Yes...Hail Caesar

Originally posted by muzzleflash
I don't vote for traitors.

Especially ones that threw their own dad under the bus just for political gain.

Rand = Traitor

I am going to have to completely agree with you here. I think he will just turn into a puppet that will tell the masses what they want to hear on the campaign trail and then run whichever direction the wind is blowing after being elected. If you prove yourself as a traitor then you kind of just ruin your career early on.
Actually, I had a glimmer of hope there for a second... I first read "Ron Paul running for president in 2016..." then I read it again

With the way the country, the economy, foreign relationships, domestic policy is going, who in their right mind would WANT to run for office?

Originally posted by redoubt
Personally, I don't really care about who either Paul voted for. What matters to me at election time is where each candidate stands on critical issues.

IMO, we already spend too much time holding grudges based on humanity's shallowest of endeavors.

NOTE: Second attempt to post on this topic. Over the day, there's been numerous incidents of my comments being either redirected or, in this case, a screen that came up with the words: 'Security error".

How has a candidates stance on critical issues changed anything? Have you ever known a president that actually kept a campaign promise that produced any real results? Obama ran in 2008 on the promise to bring the troops home in 18 months. That was his stance on the critical issue of the day... its just more mindless rhetoric in the lesser of the two evils paradigm. It makes me wonder what will happen that might ever restore my faith.

Rand Paul is just like every other mainstream republican out there nowadays.

Anti-abortion
Anti-gay marriage
Voted for sanctions on Iran
Endorsed Mitt Romney

But then calls himself a part of some "liberty movement".......



He used his father to set up his career then ditched him when it counted most. If you sell out your own father you will sell out strangers.

reply to post by NewAgeMan


YAWN. I'm tired of hearing about all the possible presidential candidates in 2016, whether they be Republican or Democrat. All the yacking about Bilary running just gives me the mental runs. If some viable independent, third-party candidate would begin campaigning now, that would be another matter. Otherwise, I'd rather that people concentrate on the terrible job of governing that both major powers are continuing to do, and how they are in the pocket of corporate and financial interests.

As for Rand Paul in particular, I'm not terribly impressed. Rachel Maddow ate his lunch the one time he went on her show, when he squirmed and attempted to back pedal on what he said his view on the Civil Rights Act is; he won't go back on although he has been invited to do so several times because he knows he can't handle it.

Anyone hear his recent speeches before a Latino organization and then another at Howard University? He patronized Latinos by professing his admiration for the romance of Latino culture (sounds like he is going to be head'n out on the "Appalachian Trail" too - nudge nudge, wink wink), and then tried Randsplaing US political history to the Howard students, attempting to conflate the post Civil-War Jim-Crow Democratic Party with its post-Depression realignment. To paraphrase Freddie Prinze: LOOKING BAD!

On another subject completely: what's with the time-out errors when trying to post at ATS tonight?

Originally posted by beezzer
With the way the country, the economy, foreign relationships, domestic policy is going, who in their right mind would WANT to run for office?

Anyone -- such as Obama or Romney this past time around -- who thinks there is more money and power to be accrued by catering to corporate and financial interests and the military/industrial/security complex.

reply to post by MrInquisitive


Rand at Howard University was particularly painful. He got up there and LIED.

When in front of republicans he admits he would not sign the civil rights act.

When in front of a black audience he pretends he never said that he was against it.

He went onto ignore history then laugh about it for his own gain. The guy is a complete fraud.

"The Southern strategy I didn't mention – I didn't really go there to mention the things that don't make us look so good in the Republican Party, so that was one reason for not bringing up the Southern strategy," he said with a chuckle this morning at a press breakfast sponsored by the Christian Science Monitor.

www.usnews.com...

reply to post by WaterBottle



I hadn't heard/read his follow up regarding not going into the GOP Southern Strategy during his Howard U talk. The guy is a mendacious and greasy smurf. In his speech at Howard, he claimed FDR promised to give them (black folk) stuff -- that is why they voted for him. Yep, make it all about the economic givers and takers again -- and imply that most African Americans are takers, of course.

Speaking in all seriousness, Rand Paul makes Mitt Romney sound like an astute rhetorician.

And Rand Paul tried to score political points with his filibuster of John Brennan's appointment as CIA director, but he voted FOR ending the discussion on the matter in the end, i.e. against further filibustering. What changed his mind? A letter from Holder saying: "It has come to my attention that you have now asked an additional question: ‘Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil?’ The answer to that question is no.” Ooh, you really played hardball there with the administration, Rand.

I'm hoping for a Rand Paul/Mark Sanford GOP ticket in 2016.

This is how I see it, and I believe even Ron Paul himself has said it. Rand Paul is not Ron Paul, Rand makes his own decisions. Ultimately, I believe Rand is looking out for the interests of the people still. If he hadn't endorsed Romney, then he probably would be labeled as a nutcase like people label Ron Paul.

I'm pretty sure Ron Paul knew he wasn't going to seize the day, so I'm sure him and Rand had an agreement in what would be better for Rand in the long run, because his dad was retiring and it was about Rand trying to uphold his image. Just think, just because ATS didn't agree with Romney doesn't mean a massive voter base doesn't agree with him, and that's what it's about... getting Romney and his father's constituents so he can try and mount a successful run in 2016.

I didn't like that he endorsed Romney, but he's still standing on the side of liberty, and hasn't bent to corporate will, and hopefully won't. Just my 2 copper.

reply to post by Covertblack

What kind of competition is he facing from Democrats? Nancy Pelosi or John Kerry? Looks like a win to me. He's not Ron Paul, so the media hasn't trashed his reputation yet, and I like his policies and his father's policies, and would totally vote Republican for once.