Posted on 04/07/2015 10:28:47 AM PDT by gwgn02
As he pulls together his expected presidential campaign in Iowa and New Hampshire, Sen. Rand Paul is confronted by defections from an unexpected quarter: the die-hard idealists whose energy powered his father’s campaigns. That network of committed supporters was expected to convey to Paul, the natural successor to Ron Paul’s libertarian movement, providing him with a plug-and-play ground organization in the make-or-break early voting states. But instead of embracing the Kentucky senator, many of those grass-roots activists are turning their backs on him, disillusioned by the younger Paul’s concessions to mainstream politics. Story Continued Below One of the most prominent defectors is Drew Ivers, chairman of Ron Paul’s 2012 Iowa campaign, who says he will not endorse Rand Paul for president. On Tuesday, three members of Iowa’s Ron Paul-aligned Liberty movement — state Sen. Jason Shultz and former Iowa Republican Party central committee members Chad Steenhoek and Joel Kurtinitis — announced the same, adding that they will support Texas Sen. Ted Cruz. Ivers said he does not plan to endorse any candidate. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, center, accompanied by Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., left, and Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, right, express their frustration after the Senate passed a bill to fund the government, but stripped it of the defund 'Obamacare' language as crafted by House Republicans, Friday, Sept. 27, 2013, on Capitol Hill in Washington. The Republican-controlled House and the Democrat-controlled Senate are at an impasse as Congress continues to struggle over how to prevent a possible shutdown of the federal government when it runs out of money in three days. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
We are ALL “political operatives”, imho.
The column explains where Rand Paul was on the day of Ted Cruz’ filibuster speech. It was not where he was obligated to be. Libertarians noticed, in droves.
The column explains where Ted Cruz and Mike Lee were when Rand Paul filibustered. It was where they were not obligated to be, but for principle.
This column is an informed opinion based on some facts— facts that are important for all of us to know. Knowledge is power.
I thought we all knew that.
That’s funny. I think the very same thing about the perpetually and oddly unsmiling Rand Paul. Just something about his vacuous facial performance, and regardless of his several more favorable political remarks.
Very good answer, I’ll use that one!
anyone dismissing Cruz’s chances is very politically naive.
like President Reagan, Cruz’s principled positions inspire people and he will be able to build a broad coalition of support.
Don’t argue with an idiot. They’ll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
Rand limply supported Ted’s filibuster and sold out to McConnell. He seems to want it too bad.
Good tactic. Playing on their emotions is a significant component. It can activate their brains to consider the previously inconsiderable.
“REALLY? You REALLY think the government can do ANYTHING right?”
“Of COURSE I’m voting for CRUZ. Who did you think? HILLARY? SERIOUSLY?”
Liberty, without violence, has but one more chance.... and that is Ted Cruz.
LOL.
Has anyone noticed that attributing to our favorite candidate a certain victory, a perch on angels wings in sure flight, a certain commanded destiny, and projecting some imagined FEAR onto other contenders and political opposition has nearly always landed Freepers in the ash heap of history, on most all previous occasions.
Not all, but most. It has been kind of embarrassing. Our favorites have been long banned to the butt of jokes, out of the political business, rarely even into any lasting TV punditry, relegated to blogs and cogs, and generally used as some low bar standard to whom current contenders can be negatively linked, negatively compared and smeared.
Ted Cruz has the best chance of all previous conservative contenders for many, many reasons, and stands heads above them all on conservative political savy.
He has not survived or performed by overworking platitudes and red meat, and so far he has not dissolved into any hint of resentment, grudges, or any display of bitterness over the predictable and imperfect treatment by the media. He shows up and seemingly invites it, with confidence, and seemingly enjoys it. Right up to his well timed strike to their frontal lobe.
He doesn’t seem to be even challenged, never mind feeling threatened, by the media rubes. That is, he finds debating with them, child’s play.
We are just lucky to have him on our side. Is he a shoe-in? Absolutely not. It’s quite premature to say that anyone, anywhere, “fears” him.
Yet. :)
“But we must. My technique is ask them questions. “The United States defeated Germany, Italy, and Japan in less time than it took 0bama to build a website that didn’t work for 0bamacare. Why do you trust government to solve your problems?” “
Thanks for the idea - that’s a great tactic - I can’t wait to try it on some of the people in my life :)
Let’s hope that we can all be inspired to nudge a few people awake this time around.
Their brains have been rendered inoperative. If liberals try to think about their programs, their brains will explode.
We have to turn their emotions to reason.
Pat Paulsen ? ... Just joking....
Rand is race baiting already. Like we need more years of hate whitey race baiting; especially in support of violent criminals.
Ping!
His behavior during Netanyahu’s speech was a real turnoff, too. Also, I think he looks like a spoiled Daddy’s boy.
CRUZ or LOSE!...Voters disillusioned by the younger Paul’s concessions to mainstream politics.....
Well...there you have it!
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.