That's it, huh? 'Winning' over principles and sovereignty.
Frankly, his idea of 'winning' is the same as Charlie Sheen's 'winning.'
That whole nebulous expression is just code for 'Amnesty'.
Sounds like Paul wants a mini-Democrat party. You can’t out-promise the Socialists, you silly man.
Good-bye, Rand.
They still think they can get liberals to like them if they just act more like them. In reality, the only thing they see is the (R).
Effe Ru Paul. Another nut from the insanity tree.
Dear Rand Paul,
If you try to stand for everything, you stand for nothing.
Bryan24
(Note - I am a conservative voter who will NOT vote for any more non-conservative candidates. You recent statements on winning elections by winning broad coalitions tells me that you are not conservative.)
This is SO MUCH like 2012 it’s scary.
In 2012 you had a precession of kooks that popped up, made fools of themselves, and then went away, until only one person was standing - Romney - who then figured he could COAST TO VICTORY on the basis of his first debate with Obama.
It sucked. I LOVED Cain, but it was obvious to me that he not only did he not follow the necessary issues to become presidential material, he didn’t even following current events. Sorry, but you don’t win by doing that.
Then Perry, who figured he could say “Texas Miracle” until he was blue in the face, and then coast into office. I hated him (being here in Texas) because he sabotaged just about every conservative goal (with help from suck-ups in our legislature), including Voter ID, securing the border, etc. Eventually he couldn’t hide it either - national politics was of NO INTEREST to him for his entire life up til then, and one doesn’t learn national politics from scratch in 6 months. Cannot be done - as once you scratch the surface, it was clear that he was clueless.
So now Rand pops up, TOTALLY CONNECTS with “the youth” on drones and privacy, manages to vote against Amnesty in the Senate (but he did waiver, big time), and looked more sane than his father. All that was left was to pull in the Republican base and he had a CLEAR SHOT right into the oval office.
...BUT NO, not good enough for him. He has to TRANSFORM the Republican Party first. Get us off of our pedestal of thinking that sex with animals is NOT ok, or that abortion is something other than a beautiful event, or that a STONED society is a productive one ready to take on China and Russia. No, we have to come around to his SICK libertarian views these issues.
So we’ll end up with Jeb or some other loser - he will get the usual business money, and he will, again, lose “the good fight”. And if we’re lucky, we’ll still have some power in Congress so that Hillary can kick us around like a battered wife.
When the GOP won 5 of 7 election cycles from 1980 through 2004 did we see the Democrats panic with dire warnings that they have to “evolve, adapt or die”?
When the Rats lose an election, they never, ever give up one iota of their leftist principals. The GOP “leaders” on the other hand, trip all over themselves, compromising ALL of their principals, and never get any credit for it by the lap dog media.
So is the gop going to “evolve” a method for matching Democrat vote fraud with vote fraud of its own?
Any possibility “evolving” might include returning to conservative values?
Probably not.
Paul meets with Romney....
Paul wants to shake up GOP after meeting with Romney......
Romney wants conservatives out of GOP.....
Paul it is becoming clear needs.....well - good bye
Go “lecture” somebody else, Rand. Your condescension is disgusting. You’re an arrogant man who set out to lead the world from the get-go. I’ll never vote for you. You do not speak for me.
Paul has turned out to be a real nut case like his father.
Failing that, it's seriously time to find another country to live in.
They talk about smaller government, but what it comes down to eventually is always social Liberalism first, fiscal Conservatism later, if we can, eventually, maybe next Tuesday, or not.
Like Liberals, a lot of Libertarians do not understand their own belief system and end up supporting things which they think they oppose.
Liberal Example: Democrat do-gooders who oppose racism support affirmative action, segregated schools (to build self-esteem) and lowered expectations for blacks. This increases racism in the effort to fight racism.
Libertarian Example: Easy immigration, easy drugs, doing more to help minorities -- all of these things end up necessitating a larger welfare state. The people who "oppose big government" support the nanny state as the path to shrink government. It's madness.
It appears Rand Paul went to the Marco Rubio School of how to destroy a run for president - before you even get started.
RETURN TO OUR CONSERVATIVE PRINCIPLES!
It is the ONLY way to WIN!
This crap about “evolving, adapt, or...” is code for “CAVE TO THE ENEMY”!
It is not possible to out liberal a liberal.
Compromising with Satan is only a quicker path to Hell.
In the beginning there was “Right” and “Wrong” and we’ve been compromising in the “Wrong” direction ever since!
The only thing the republicans have to do is evolve into better fighters, strategists, stop eating there own base, stop funding acorn, cut npr, stop funding all liberal causes period! And lastly, GET CONTROL OF THE VOTER FRAUD!
“Team Romney” needs to be put of any office cubicle they inhabit, onto the cold hard curb, with no paycheck, period!
Partnering with losers, great strategy their Rand!