Time for a Rand Paul Thread

It's not even that. Money is a huge problem, but the real issue is simply getting them the right to be heard. The debates that we see between the Dems and the GOP are run by them. They don't let the Third parties in. It's disgraceful when you have to watch Gary Johnson and Jill Stein struggle with technical issues on Google Hangout because they weren't allowed to debate on national TV.

 

Randy could do well in Iowa, South Carolina, and New Hampshire, but Carrot Top Adelson whose bankroll kept Gingrich on life support in the 2012 Republican primaries (because Newtie was the best at spouting Netanyahu's foreign policy for the US) will not allow the GOP to nominate Randy Paul who would advocate that the US conduct its own foreign policy in its own interests.

The GOP sleaze balls are already up to their old tricks:

Where is the integrity of putting your money where your mouth is if you need to hide while you shout? What kind of election is it that can be funded by foreign interests?

 

Yep, that's another problem. Money helps, I'm sure. Also, money helps you get your name out there, pays for ads, etc. The two major parties are like gluttonous pigs. Can't stand either of them. They are dividing our country, that's about all they're good for.

 

They just need to get 5% of the vote. That's it. Then they can qualify for financial aid from the federal government. And they can have it all to themselves.

 

Financial aid? I wasn't aware of that. Anyways, 5% of the vote is apparently pretty tough for them to get. There are so many 3rd party candidates that I've never even heard of! I'm thinking that is because it's so expensive to advertise. As with everything, it takes money unfortunately. I still have hope though. I can see that a lot of people are growing tired (finally) of the monopoly that the two major parties have held for so long.

 

People live in the age of choice, we want more choices. It's also pretty hard to keep everyone in line when the party bosses have been weakened and anyone can appear on the 6 o clock news.

 

Very small nowadays. Ross Perot founded it, Buchanan hijacked it, taken back from Buchanan and now it is active in only few states. But it is trying to get back to where it was during Perot's time.

http://reformparty.org/

 

Thanks for the link!

 

I stand with Rand

 

Rand Paul and flip flopping

 

I think I'm more interest in this guy already. Just watching te right and left wingers attacking him means both parties are scared of him and that's exactly what we need. These two turds of a party both needs to be ripped about. Im time of this BS from both sides. Rand has proven he can a willing to work on both sides unlike Obama.

 

I'm sure you know all about flip flopping watching Obama do so for so many years. So if you tell me Rand flip flopped I believe you. Obama lovers would know all about it.

 

I think most, not all, of these foreign policy and flip flipping attacks are the establishment grasping at straws.

His foreign policy is intelligently centrist with the important aspect of believing in American superiority.

His "flip-flips" are only adjustments and clarifications. If I said "I think all drugs should be legal" then said "I think we should legalize marijuana" that's not flip flopping.

 

He's the one Republican I'd be excited about supporting, especially because of his non-interventionist foreign policy.

 

Agreed. He might be the only one with a chance of winning besides maybe Scott Walker. Walker-Paul or Paul-Walker would be a great ticket.

 

Tu Quoque fallacy, much?

 

Once in awhile. Mostly when sitting on the toilet. How about you?
Are you telling me obama hasn't flipped flopped? Lol please say you aren't cause I don't think you want to get yourself into that fight. Justify all his lies and flopping.

 

Yeah, he flop flops. What does that have to do with Rand Paul's flip flops? I don't give a crap what Obama does. This thread is not entitled "Time for a Barack Obama Thread" is it?

 

So if all politicians have done it why hold him to some fake progressive standard?

 

no libertarian believes in much of a military, certainly not more than about 10% of the military that the US has. all the US military is, is a giant unemployment bureau, average pay being 1/2 million $ per year. and still letting a million invaders per year into the US. so why bother with a US military, when it just gets used to cause trouble everywhere and is not used for what it's needed?

 

Rand Paul's non-interventionist foreign policy is the thing that scares me just a bit. He's right in that we don't need to get involved in every little war around the world, but we also need to make sure we defend our own country and our allies. We may not need as big of a military as we have now, but we need a military that is at least 90% of what we have. I like that he's not as libertarian as his father, but I just hope he doesn't plan to drastically cut the size of the military. If he cuts, he needs to just a mere trim, not deep cuts. And, whatever we do, do not cut the funding to the military. If anything, we need to pay our military personnel substantially more than what they are getting now. I would definitely support him over Hillary, but that's the main question I have about his foreign policy.

 

It's a matter of degree. Rand Paul's flipflopping is extraordinary by anyone's standards. In comparison, Obama is a model of consistency.

Rand Paul's sensitivity about his flipflopping is also extraordinary. If he's asked about his past statements, he switches the conversation to why it's unfair to ask him about the things he actually said. That doesn't play well on the national stage.

 

If we're saying he's just like all politicians, why tout him as "a new kind of Republican"? Why pretend like a Paul presidency is going to be any different than what we've been getting? Simply put, when you tout yourself to a higher standard you will get held to a higher standard.

 

Obama is just like Bush and the progressive voted for him did they not?
If the left and the right is attacking him that means they are scared. Maybe he is what we need to break up this BS grid lock. He has worked with both sides more than obama ever has.

 

Like obama said he was change and now he is just like Bush?