POLL: RAND PAUL BEST REPUBLICAN TO DEFEAT HILLARY CLINTON

Breitbart - Big Government ^ | Alex Swoyer

[Jack Black]

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY)93% is most likely the Republican candidate that could beat Hillary Clinton, the likely Democratic nominee, according to a Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll released Tuesday. “The GOP candidate who came closest to Mrs. Clinton was Sen. Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY)93% , who trailed by 47%-44%,” reports the Wall Street Journal. Paul leads Clinton among independent voters 45 percent to 37 percent. Last month Paul defeated Clinton in key swing states, according to a Quinnipiac University poll.

[Jack Black]

Being "able to win" is an elusive quality that will change over timed. It' makes little difference to Conservatives if the candidate is able to win but evinces little love for conservative principles.

Having said that Rand, despite having many detractors here for various reasons, in generally considered (based on standard rankings) to one of the most conservative candidates in the race. Therefore his apparent strength in one-on-one matchups with Hillary should be interesting to people.

[Ingtar]

What difference would it make?

[2ndDivisionVet]

Did they poll Colorado and Washington State pot shops?

[cripplecreek]

He’s unbeateble like his dad.

[Mase]

How do the Paulbots manage to influence so many polls? Rand's father did well in all sorts of polls but, deservedly so, sucked wind when it came to actual voting.

[Don Corleone]

Looks like Bill and Hill are the best bet to beat themselves.
Aside: I am looking at some of the pictures of Bill as he assists Hillary and he really looks spacey. Heavy lidded, slack jawed like he is just on or just off something very very illegal.

[Diana in Wisconsin]

Late stage penicillin-resistant syphilis? *SNORT*

[ansel12]

Paul wants to move the GOP left.

“”Evolve, adapt or die. That is the fate of our current Republican party. We must evolve as a party and find a way to attract millennials to the conservative movement or we will never succeed in realizing our ideals of individual freedom and freedom from government interference.””

“I think that the Republican Party, in order to get bigger, will have to agree to disagree on social issues,” Paul advised. “The Republican Party is not going to give up on having quite a few people who do believe in traditional marriage. But the Republican Party also has to find a place for young people and others who don’t want to be festooned by those issues.”

[DoughtyOne]

This would cast a paul over the party...

[apoliticalone]

A lot of conservative Americans are fed up with those who wish to keep us immersed in debt and perpetual wars for the benefit of global corporations and foreign interests. Instead of defending Americans and our borders these same interests also support efforts to give illegals amnesty and new trade pacts that steal our USA sovereignty, and open the nation to H1B visas.

I refuse to vote for another candidate who has neocon ideas.

[MeshugeMikey]

TWO WORDS: Panther Whizz!!

[ansel12]

Paul seems totally ignorant of military issues.

[Nervous Tick]

>> Did they poll Colorado and Washington State pot shops?

Those constituted 93% of the sample, apparently.

[SoConPubbie]

Having said that Rand, despite having many detractors here for various reasons, in generally considered (based on standard rankings) to one of the most conservative candidates in the race. Therefore his apparent strength in one-on-one matchups with Hillary should be interesting to people.

Uh, No he is not. He has detractors because he is a big "L" Libertarian as his actions clearly show.

Hat tip to SunkenCiv for keeping up with the UN-Conservative actions of Rand Paul!

• Paul: We probably can't get rid of 'Obamacare'
• Paul: We probably can't get rid of 'Obamacare' - [Sep. 21, 2013 9:56 PM EDT ]
• Paul: 'Difficult to turn the clock back' on O-Care
• Rand Paul: GOP 'probably can't defeat' Obamacare
• Rand Paul on abortion: "We're not changing any of the laws until the country is persuaded otherwise"
• Sen. Paul: 'We're Not Changing Any' Abortion 'Laws Until the Country is Persuaded Otherwise'

Rand Paul On Shutdown: "Even Though It Appeared I Was Participating In It, It Was A Dumb Idea"

I said throughout the whole battle that shutting down the government was a dumb idea. Even though it did appear as if I was participating in it, I said it was a dumb idea. And the reason I voted for it, though, is that it's a conundrum. Here's the conundrum. We have a $17 trillion debt and people at home tell me you can't give the president a blank check. We just can't keep raising the debt ceiling without conditions. So unconditionally raising the debt ceiling, nobody at home wants me to vote for that and I can't vote for that. But the conundrum is if I don't we do approach these deadlines. So there is an impasse. In 2011, though, we had this impasse and the president did negotiate. We got the sequester. If we were to extend the sequester from discretionary spending to all the entitlements we would actually fix our problem within a few years.

[Posted on 11/19/2013 12:16:51 PM by Third Person]

• Rand Paul's excuse for avoiding the 'religious freedom' law controversy doesn't add up
• Why Won't Rand Paul and Chris Christie Take a Position on Indiana's "Religious Freedom" Law?
• Heartache: It's over, Rand Paul lost
• Sam Youngman: A critical look at Rand Paul and 'winnability'
• Rand Paul's Big, Risky Bet on Youth
• Rand Paul: Christie Win Shows GOP Has Room for Moderates
• Rand Paul: Republicans Need to Soften on Social Issues

Rand Paul: Time for GOP to soften war stance

...by softening its edge on some volatile social issues and altering its image as the party always seemingly "eager to go to war... We do need to expand the party and grow the party and that does mean that we don't always all agree on every issue" ... the party needs to become more welcoming to individuals who disagree with basic Republican doctrine on emotional social issues such as gay marriage... "We're going to have to be a little hands off on some of these issues ... and get people into the party," Paul said.

[Posted on 01/31/2013 5:08:50 PM PST by xzins]

• Rand Paul: I think Republicans may have over-emphasized voter fraud
• Rand Paul Wants Bigger GOP: 'You Go to a Republican Event and It's All White People'
• (Rand) Paul: GOP Needs to 'Look Like the Rest of America' to Win Again (again)
• Rand Paul slams Cliven Bundy's racist rant
• Rand Paul: Bundy's racist remarks are 'offensive'
• Rand Paul: I'm Open to Voting for Immigration Bill
• Paul: Still hope for immigration reform this year

Rand Paul's immigration speech

...The Republican Party must embrace more legal immigration.

Unfortunately, like many of the major debates in Washington, immigration has become a stalemate-where both sides are imprisoned by their own rhetoric or attachment to sacred cows that prevent the possibility of a balanced solution.

Immigration Reform will not occur until Conservative Republicans, like myself, become part of the solution. I am here today to begin that conversation.

Let's start that conversation by acknowledging we aren't going to deport 12 million illegal immigrants.

If you wish to work, if you wish to live and work in America, then we will find a place for you...

This is where prudence, compassion and thrift all point us toward the same goal: bringing these workers out of the shadows and into being taxpaying members of society.

Imagine 12 million people who are already here coming out of the shadows to become new taxpayers.12 million more people assimilating into society. 12 million more people being productive contributors.

[Posted on 03/19/2013 7:04:07 AM PDT by Perdogg]

---

Rand Paul calls on conservatives to embrace immigration reform

Latinos, should be a natural constituency for the party, Paul argued, but "Republicans have pushed them away with harsh rhetoric over immigration." ...he would create a bipartisan panel to determine how many visas should be granted for workers already in the United States and those who might follow... [and the buried lead] "Imagine 12 million people who are already here coming out of the shadows to become new taxpayers...

[Posted on 04/21/2013 1:52:42 PM PDT by SoConPubbie]

---

[but he's not in favor of amnesty, snicker, definition of is is]

• Rand Paul: End 'welfare' to Israel
• Rand Paul: Iran Wants Nukes Because It "Feels Threatened"
• Rand stands with Obama and Kerry on Iran
• Rand Paul: I don't think we should impose new Iran sanctions while negotiations are ongoing
• Rand Paul: Let's get this straight -- I'm not for containing Iran
• Rand Paul stands alone against Senate's 'preemptive war' resolution for Iran [Sept 2014]
• Rand Paul: It's America's Fault
• Rand Paul clarifies: No containment on Iran
• Rand Paul Calls for a Formal Declaration of War Against ISIS
• Sec. of State Kerry: U.S. Not Responsible for Chaos in Iraq, Libya
• NANCY PELOSI: IRAQ IS NOT OUR RESPONSIBILITY
• Paul Blames Iraq Crisis on Bush Administration
• Rand Paul Defends Obama Against Dick Cheney
• Rand Paul Defends President Obama From Dick Cheney
• Casting a Paul on American Strength: In defense and foreign policy, Rand Paul is a menace.
• Rand Paul Sounds Like a Democrat Criticizing GOP Rivals' Foreign Policy
• Rand Paul's Brother: "No Difference" Between Rand And My Dad On Ideology

Rand Slams Congress for Funding Egypt's Generals: 'How Does Your Conscience Feel Now?'

Sen. Rand Paul is hammering his fellow senators for keeping billions in financial aid flowing to Egypt's military -- even as Cairo's security forces massacre anti-government activists. [by "anti-government activists" is meant church-burning Christian-murdering jihadists]

[Posted on 08/15/2013 5:44:10 PM PDT by Hoodat]

[Jack Black]

How do the Paulbots manage to influence so many polls? Rand's father did well in all sorts of polls but, deservedly so, sucked wind when it came to actual voting. In 2012 Ron Paul got slightly over 2 million votes, about 11% of the total cast. He finished fourth in popular votes behind Newt, Santorum and the winner, Mitt. Santorum had about 4 million votes, Mitt about 10 million. Newt had 2.7 million.

He won 4 states by plurality of delegates, 2 more than Newt, 2 less than Santorum.

I'm not sure I would describe this as "sucked wind". If you mean "didn't win", well sure. He had a considerable improvement in his standing from 2008 to 2012.

Michele Bachmann, Jon Huntsman and Rick Perry sucked wind. Herman Cain sucked wind. None won anything, among them only Perry had a single delegate vote for them at the convention.

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

He is a libertarian and I won’t vote for him. I think the poll is meaningless at this point. Wishful thinking for someone, maybe. He could win without my support just as Hillary could. The more people actually hear him, the less they will support him, imo. At this point he probably has a lot of Democrat support just because they see him as helpful to their social agenda.

[Jack Black]

You are using the forum as a campaign tool, and splat your anti-Rand "link-meme" all over various threads, but don't really talk about what's being discussed in the thread.

"Big L" refers to people who are members of the Libertarian party. Rand is not a Libertarian, he's a Republican. "Little l" refers to anyone with libertarian tendencies. He is certainly a "little l" libertarian, but so was Ronald Reagan and so is your hero Ted Cruz.

Your next five bullets are about repealing Obamacare. Perhaps Rand is right? I haven't seen the Senate pass a repeal bill. Last I checked Cruz has seat there, where is the bill to end it? And, lets admit it even if the Senate did pass such a bill, and the House a matching on it will be vetoed.

If Ted wins the White House he will sign a bill to repeal if it's sent to him, but again, the Senate is sending a bill like that now, with each session it seems less likely they will.

Rand seems somewhat pragmatic, wanting to find a way forward. Cruz is a bomb-thrower, he says intentionally provocative things. It's red meat for the true believers, but it's not clear it can win a nomination, much less the election.

Goldwater was a much purer conservative than Reagan, but he lacked pragmatism. Like Cruz he enjoyed throwing red meat to the true-believers. "Extremism in the defense of Liberty is not a vice". The net result for America was the odious LBJ, who did more to harm America than any President since FDR. A little more pragmatism.

Telling difficult truths like "we can't consider ending abortion before we change opinions" makes a politician appealing to me, do you really think there is any hope for anti-abortion laws in the country as a whole today?

Would you rather have a politician telling you what you want to hear, instead of what is true?

I do think your style is probably effective, perhaps I'll adopt it myself and slam every Ted Cruz thread with 20 or 30 anti-Cruz links calling him names. Because all the candidates have weaknesses.

[SoConPubbie]

"Big L" refers to people who are members of the Libertarian party. Rand is not a Libertarian, he's a Republican. "Little l" refers to anyone with libertarian tendencies. He is certainly a "little l" libertarian, but so was Ronald Reagan and so is your hero Ted Cruz.

Saying something and doing something, Jack, Are two different things.

The links speak for themselves and accurately depict Rand Paul as the big "L" Libertarian he is by his own words and actions.

As for using these posts for campaign purposes, I am not part of any campaign. I am an advocate for Ted Cruz, however, and Ted Cruz IS a conservative, and this site is all about conservative advocacy.

Nice try Jack!

[Mase]

Ron Paul's candidacy proved one thing: there are two million voters out there who need to have their heads examined.

[Jack Black]

Yes, because Santorum, Gingrich and Mitt were WINNERS and the resulting Obama 2nd term has been a great success for conservatives!