Posted on 04/28/2014 5:17:11 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Via Dan Riehl, people are going nuts over this in the Headlines thread but I don’t know why. He’s not endorsing her over some tea-party primary opponent. She has no primary opponent. He’s endorsing her over the Democrat in the race, Shenna Bellows (whose civil-libertarian cred from working at the ACLU evidently gave Paul no pause).
Even Jim DeMint, who once said he’d rather have 30 principled conservatives in the Senate than a 60-seat majority of RINOs, saw fit to endorse Scott Brown on the eve of his big special election upset in 2010. If Rand can hold an extra Senate seat for the GOP in 2014 by nudging Maine tea partiers to pull the lever for Collins, what’s the harm?
Q: You’re going to join U.S. Sen. Susan Collins for a state party fundraiser today. She’s defended National Security Agency spying programs you oppose, and she’s also running against a Democrat, Shenna Bellows, who comes pretty close to sharing your views on that and other privacy issues. Do you support her, despite disagreement on many of those issues?
A: I wholeheartedly endorse Senator Collins for re-election. I think she’s doing a great job for Maine and for the country. … I don’t really know, exactly, what her position is on the NSA; you’d have to ask her about that.
I just know my position, but I think we’re a big political party. There’s room for not-entire agreement on every issue.
So why are grassroots righties annoyed? Here’s a representative comment from Headlines:
Well, since Collins is running unopposed on the Republican side, it’s logical for Paul to support her over her democrat opponent. However, this is less about “GOP unity” than it is about Rand Paul being desperate to publicly secure his position within the GOP establishment ranks – Republicans would have supported Collins without Rand Paul’s endorsement, so, it’s all pretty meaningless as far as the Maine election goes.
Rand Paul wants to make that everyone knows that he has shifted from the conservative side, to the establishment side – and his ‘wholehearted’ support for Collins is just one more box checked.
Yeah, the “wholehearted” Collins endorsement is interesting mainly as a temperature check on how Paul’s effort to mainstream-ize himself before 2016 is going. Nearly every GOP candidate has a problem with either the establishment or with grassroots conservatives. (The only major contender I can think of who really doesn’t is Scott Walker.) Paul’s problem, needless to say, is with the establishment, who think he’s too dovish, too much like dad, and just too anti-status quo to be a safe pick, so he’s been at pains lately to try to solve it. At some point, between endorsing Mitch McConnell and shifting to a hawkish posture on Russia and running away from Cliven Bundy and making status-quo noises on abortion and ObamaCare, he risks pandering a bit too much to the donor class and thereby irritating his base of righties and libertarians. Backing Collins so effusively when he could have demurred with a simple “I always support Republicans over Democrats” might have been the last straw, definitive proof that he’s “over-correcting.” Bad enough that he’d back McConnell, tea-party enemy number one for the moment, over a grassroots favorite, but to cheer on someone who voted for the stimulus? C’mon.
The risk here isn’t that righties won’t forgive him. He’s already hard at work on a remedial pander, floating a bill to cut foreign aid to the Palestinians unless they recognize Israel’s right to exist. The risk is that he’s putting himself at a disadvantage against Cruz in the battle for tea-party hearts and minds while not reaping any concomitant benefits among the establishmentarians he’s trying to impress. Paul doesn’t expect to win their votes; all he wants is for them to see him as an acceptable nominee, sufficiently status-quo that they won’t unite to destroy him if he pulls an upset in Iowa or New Hampshire. He even met with Romney’s donor network recently, the creme de la creme of the GOP donor class, to make nice. How’s it going so far? You tell me:
The darkest secret in the big money world of the Republican coastal elite is that the most palatable alternative to a nominee such as Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas or Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky would be Clinton, a familiar face on Wall Street following her tenure as a New York senator with relatively moderate views on taxation and financial regulation.
“If it turns out to be Jeb versus Hillary we would love that and either outcome would be fine,” one top Republican-leaning Wall Street lawyer said over lunch in midtown Manhattan last week. “We could live with either one. Jeb versus Joe Biden would also be fine. It’s Rand Paul or Ted Cruz versus someone like Elizabeth Warren that would be everybody’s worst nightmare.”…
Ted Cruz, whose wife works at Goldman Sachs, is viewed negatively by many in the industry for his support of last year’s government shutdown and scorched earth approach to political battle. Cruz fired up an activist gathering in New Hampshire earlier this month with the kind of provocative populist message that makes bankers very nervous. “The rich and powerful, those who walk the corridors of power, are getting fat and happy,” Cruz thundered. At the same event, Paul argued that the GOP “cannot be the party of fat cats, rich people and Wall Street.”
As a wise man recently said, the first duty of establishmentarians is to the establishment, meaning that stopping Paul (or Cruz) will almost certainly take precedence for rich Republicans in 2016 over stopping Hillary. I guess, in theory, with enough pandering Rand could convince them that he’s marginally better than her, but how much pandering could he realistically do before convincing his grassroots fans that he’s sold out and would be as disappointing to righties as president as Obama was to hardcore lefties? Maybe there’s no way out of this bind.
You've lost track of sniper vs. snipee here. You initiated this exchange by coming after me for supporting Rand because of some partisan reason. I called you on it and said that the issue we face isn't a WHO but a WHAT - the government sinking America like the Titanic. It's actually hard to follow what you're talking about.
Look, you and I , and most of the folks here could find a million things to argue and disagree about. So what? What good is that? There's one thing almost everyone here and many other places could agree on and unite behind: taking down this unconscionable, unconstitutional, and wholly out of control $4 trillion government. If we do that and find the candidates most focused on that, we have a good chance of winning. Otherwise, we unwittingly do the Leftists' bidding.
Did you READ any of my posts BEFORE you decided to type????
What are you talking about? You initiated the discussion by challenging me. I responded.
This is my last to you because you apparently have not followed any train of posting thought at all.
Check out your RESPONSE to my 39 (and if you actually read 39 maybe you read 38 since it was just one post up).....
38 posted on Monday, April 28, 2014 8:26:52 PM by Nifster [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies | Report Abuse]
He is a LIBERTARIAN.... he cares not a wit for conservatives
39 posted on Monday, April 28, 2014 8:28:13 PM by Nifster [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies | Report Abuse]
If he’s seriously for cutting the $4 trillion government which threatens our lives, freedoms, and future, I don’t care whether he’s Donald Duck.
40 posted on Monday, April 28, 2014 8:30:28 PM by PapaNew
OK, I’ve done your work for you. What’s your point?
No one is running in the primary against Collins. Libertarians are mad at Rand for not endorsing the Democrat, who is an anti-NSA ACLU type.
SELLOUT!!
Got anything to dispute it?
Idiot.
Just in.. or has been if if you pay attention... HE IS NOT GOING TO CUT GOVT.... he is just the same horse of another color as the other RINOS in Congress.
And then instead of having an argument and evidence, you want me to disprove it?
Why does it look like you're just going along with much of the FR party line here without thinking for yourself? Not much different than mindless establishment party politics which is KILLING this country.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.