Rand Paul - Potential 2016 Presidential Bid

Because people care about drug reform more than entitlements?

 

Well then it looks like my 2016 Republican Primary Vote will be Rand Paul (R).....who I think will ultimately go much further than his dad did in politicis......

....with the possibilities of Rubio, Christie, Ryan, and Jindal for starters....its going to be tough.....
.
.

 

It's simple. I value character qualities over policy. I think America would be better served by honest and consistent individuals in leadership, regardless of whether or not they agree with me on every issue.

The Republicans I like are honest and consistent individuals. Plus, I agree with them on many things. I'm not a one issue voter.

 

The GOP could almost definitely win an election with Christie at the helm, depending on who the Democrat was and who he picked for VP. Jindal and Rubio also could win a genelec.

But Ryan will be another McCain/Romney.

 

"Regardless of whether or not they agree with me on every issue"? Dude, you're a socialist saying you'd vote for someone like Jon Huntsman. You're voting on personality, not issues, in other words. I don't care how nice someone is, I don't want them running the country if they believe in socialism.

 

That's good for you, but I'd rather have a leader who is a good person with bad policy than a bad person with good policy. It's not personality, it's morality and character.

 

:Yawwwwwn: More Empty rhetoric from the Libertarians huh?

"People want freedom". Yes because the GOP and Democrats are taking away peoples freedoms. Of course the GOP want to restrict a woman right to choose.. and treat gays like 2nd class citizens... Ok maybe the GOP. But the us Progressives are following the highly successful formula we have always used. Consumers make the best choice, get out of people personal lives, etc. It has worked for over 80 years so I fail to see why the nation is going to take a fierce right turn just for the sake of being (more?) "free". (Even to this day a libertarian cannot tell me what freedom that have lost)

To that end, there is not guarantee we would be 'more' free under a Libertarian regime. Unchecked Capitalism can get pretty ugly just like unchecked Communism.

 

Rand Paul addresses several of the core problems with the Republican Party today as reflected by other major Republicans have pointed out. Four promenate Republicans address some of the things that the Republican Party needs to address:

Yes, those "illegal" immigrants that are in the United States working hard and contributing to the US economy amnesty so that the can be here legally and we should allow immigration for those that want to come here to work and become Americans as that makes good economic sense. It is good economic policy to allow those that want to work and contribute to the US economy to immigrate here legally. We need to end the quota system, period.

Yes, the Republican Party's positions on abortion and contraceptives has been seen as being anti-women not just by women but by over half of Americans. If someone opposes abortion then they have a Right to never have an abortion. If someone opposes contracption then they have Right to not use contraception. They don't have a Right to impose their predominately religious beliefs on over 1/2 of the American People. They need to drop their authoritarian government agenda to impose their religious beliefs on others.

Russo addresses two key issues. Republican control of the House of Representatives was based upon gerrymandering of political districts and we know that is a fact. Democratic House candidates won more popular votes than House Republican candidates and the only way that the Republican majority can be obtained is by gerrymandering of congressional districts. Additionally the "voter ID" laws, which are addressing a non-issue because voter fraud is not an actual problem, was seen as an attempt to disenfranchise minorities that typically vote for Democrats. It was politically motivated and not motivated by an actual problem with voter fraud as that problem simply doesn't exist.

Russo is also correct that the Republican Party should stop opposing same-sex marriage. It's losing in the Courts because the denial of marriage to same-gender couples really is a violation of the Constitutionally protected Rights. Additionally the tide has turned and the People are now supporting same-sex marriage in more and more States. The voters in three states authorized same-sex marriage and voted down a state constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage in another. The opposition to same-sex marriage by Republicans reflects nothing but religious intolerance that denies equality and violates the Rights of gays and lesbians and the People are becoming more and more aware of that. The Republican Party needs to come out for the civil Rights of gays and lesbians as opposed to trying to impose their religious beliefs under the law.

Just addressing these few items would be a good thing for the Republican Party but they need to go further if they want to become relevant to the political discourse in America in the 21st Century.

http://news.yahoo.com/republican-party-2-0-4-gop-leaders-share-180728560.html

 

I hope you wouldnt vote for this sellout traiter to the american people? the fact he endorced Romney is all the proof in the world that he has been corrupted by power and has gone over to the dark side.he has not only betrayed ron and his mother but has sodl out the american people as well an is a traiter to them also.

 

Certainly Rand Paul's endorsement of Mitt Romney reflected pandering to status quo of the Republican "angry white men" political base but I also believe that people can learn from their mistakes. Even the top leaders of the Republican Party are addressing the fact today that they've built a party based upon racial discrimination and favoritism of the wealthy over all other Americans. They are learning that their "white base" is losing it's dominance in elections as minorities expand their influence and that the continuing favoritism for the wealthy cannot be sustained while the living standard of average Americans continues to deteriorate.

The question is who will lead the Republican Party out of the quagmire of discrimination against average Americans which includes minorities and low and middle income individuals. The question also remains on how far they're willing to reach out to the average American of today. I've seen very little in actual action so far but then it's still November and less than a month since the Republicans were basically whacked in the elections.

 

Say what? Republicans are the people who run on our Constitutional righs to have individual and national liberties and to have small government. Ronald Reagan's statement of "Get big government off our backs" still rings omnipresent up and to today. Btw, Rand Paul will be the Republican's choice for veep while Marco Rubio headlines the top spot; an unbeatable combination for sure.

 

Total bull(*)(*)(*)(*). Neither the Patriot Act or NDAA would have gone through without the push and support of Republicans, so...thanks for that. Having the TSA feel up little kids is on your party's shoulders.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA roflmao

I would not vote for Marco Rubio

 

And what pretell is wrong with the Patriot Act or NDAA? And who exactly is feeling up little kids besides Barney Frank?

I doubt there is any Republican you would vote for. And what is wrong with Rubio?

 

1) The PATRIOT Act gives the government the power to listen in on our phone calls and emails, which is unconstitutional. The NDAA gives the President the power to use the military to arrest and indefinitely detain American citizens without trial, also unconstitutional.

2) The TSA feels up little kids and old ladies.

Rubio is part of the problem. And I'm a leftist socialist and there are plenty of Republicans I would vote for.

 

Other than violating the 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th, and 14th Amendments to the US Constitution? Isn't that enough? Warrantless wire taps and searches, indefinate detentions without criminal indictments, denial of bail, denial of a speedy trial, and denial of equal protection under the law for individuals subjected to the authority and jurisdication of the United States government. Every American that endorses the American ideal that the purpose of our government is to protect the inalienable Rights of the Individual opposes both the Patriot Act and the NDAA because both grossly infringe upon and violate the inalienabe Rights of the Person.

 

I am pretty sure as the patriot act stands today you can only wiretaps foreigners phones and the such.

 

Laughable statement.

 

There's one important lesson to learn from a government that killed an innocent sixteen year old and an American citizen with no trial:

It lies.

 

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment04/

For those that don't understand the usage of words in the US Constitution the word "People" includes anyone subjected to the authority or actions of the United States government and not just to US citizens. When the Constitution addressed citizens, which is a subgroup of people, it specifically uses the word "citizen" such as in the 14th Amendment.

There is absolutely no reason why the FBI and other law inforcement agencies cannot obtain a search warrant from the courts to engage in wiretapping if it believes there is reason to believe that criminal activities are being engaged in. If there is no foundation for believing that criminal activities are being conducted then there is no reason for the wiretap. The courts are very liberal in issuing warrants for wire taps and will do so even if there is minimal grounds for a belief that criminal activities are suspected.

 

He was not targgetted for an attack.

They owned up to it and admitted they did not mean to kill him. Why is it that everyone that calls the Government dishonest and/or liars is lying or dishonest in doing so. And yes leaving out the fact that is was our own Government owned up to it and said it was a mistake and he was not the target of the strike is lying/dishonest

And why even make a law like that (the Patriot act) if your gonna lie about it in the first place?

lol I was gonna lie to begin with I would not make the law so I could lie about a breaking the law. Makes no sense if I was planning to lie. I would just lie.

But that's just me.

I know that was a bit much of a response but me and a friend have been going back and forth on this subject for a while now. I am the anit-conspiracy theorist. I believe their is a logical and reasonable explanation for everything.

 

I don't agree with Rand on the issues as much as I do with his old man, but he is definitely far more electable than Ron was. His voting record matches his rhetoric, which means he is not a corrupt LIAR like Romney and Obama. But he is definitely on the same page as I am, and I will definitely vote for Rand in 2016 if he runs.

As will most libertarians. If Republicans refuse to elect Rand, then they should expect to lose again in 2016.

 

You know Jeb Bush has floated the idea of running?

 

Wrong. If you care enough you can look at the FOIA reports on how often it is used and by whom. They are all on the ACLU website. The Patriot Act was sold as being for the US Justice Department only and only for terrorism, but since then it has been used by LOEs to track drug sales and potential domestic threats.

Start here and then read all the links. There is a FOIA report that shows how often it is used outside the scope it was "sold" as, and you can see from the report by whom. I directed you to a landing page.

 

who calls a kid rand in the first place what the hell kind of name is that

 

Bottom line is....Republicans will continue to lose until they respect the libertarian and Ron Paul following. People like Rush Limbaugh calling them crazy will not help them get that vote. How does Limbaugh and other expect their vote when he is calling them crazy. Republicans need to respect the libertarian party. Republican will never win again because they are split and the division will continue to grow until the government decides to censor the internet.