Rand Paul 'Is Totally Overrated' For 2016 The Huffington Post | By Alana Horowitz | Posted:11/30/2014 1:06 pm EST Excerpts: "Rand Paul, you're going to want to call your office. Conservative pundit Bill Kristol said that Paul is "totally overrated" as a potential 2016 candidate. "I predict Rand Paul will get fewer votes than his father got in 2012," he said. "He's more dovish than President Obama on foreign policy. Republican voters aren't." Though Kristol has never been a big Rand Paul fan, he is considered to be a likely frontrunner in the next presidential election. A recent Bloomberg poll showed that Paul had the highest approval rating in New Hampshire among rumored 2016 candidates, with 65 percent of likely primary voters in the state had positive views of the Kentucky senator. Even soon-to-be Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said that Paul would have his support should he choose to run. Earlier this month, Paul said that he won't make a decision on 2016 until the spring." read: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/30/bill-kristol-rand-paul-2016_n_6244070.html?cps=gravity ...... IMO: It appears that Rand Paul has an excellent chance to win especially in this vast republican election group that have so many legal problems concerning their ethics, corruption, and moral caliber of the candidate Christie, Perry, Ryan, Cruz, as well as Jeb Bush who has the evil talisman of brother G.W. to surmount, and with this crew, Rand Paul's chances greatly improve ....if only he would stop dressing like a complete dork.
I'm not a big Rand Paul fan but one thing is for sure - Bill Kristol is an oaf. Apparently, AIPAC hasn't been able to wring any more concessions out of Paul.
You never know who will rise to the top but even though Rand Paul may look decent now I doubt he will overshadow Bush or Romney for the nomination. Remember that Paul's father always did extremely well, often leading the pack, through the beginning stages of the nomination process. Not many people saw Obama overtaking Clinton either but he did so its really pointless to try and figure it out now. As for Jeb Bush and his brother, that will not even be a factor and the reason that the left should worry about him is because he is pretty much immune to any attacks on immigration, the hot button issue the democrats are probably going to try and ride in the 2016 election. He completely takes that issue off the table for them.
lol. I know. Rand Paul looks like a complete nerd. I really despise Bill Kristol. He royally screwed up Iraq and he is always smiling and laughing and joking around and thinks his opinion still has some weight.
Neo-Con Warmonger doesnt support Rand Paul... Breaking news.... ( hah) Huffington post thinks this is news?
Nah, they just like it when someone on the right criticizes someone else on the right. But Paul is a grab bag of positions, so he's the type of candidate who looks good at a distance, but all of his positions up close are going to be unacceptable to the typical Republican primary voter. He's more dovish than Obama, but that point hasn't really been made clear. It will be clear in the primaries.
Well, like I said, I'm not a big Rand Paul fan right now, but Bill Kristol will be an oaf forever. He and his ilk have their own special agenda.
Here's what will happen with Rand- 1. He'll run for President. 2. He won't win the GOP Nomination. 3. Paulers will blame it on the "GOP Establishment sabotaging him". 4. Paulers will still vote in lock-step for whoever the 2016 Republican Presidential Nominee is. 5. If the GOP Nominee loses, they'll say "Rand coulda won it" for 3 years until Rand runs again. 6. If the GOP Nominee wins, they'll say "He only won because he stole ideas from Rand". Tah-dah.
http://www.paul.senate.gov/?p=issue&id=12 I'm not seeing a call for open borders. Quite the opposite.
If Rand Paul looks overrated to be a Republican candidate, what does that make Barack Obama? At least Rand Paul has a bit of a resume, where as Obama took no meaningful experience into the White House.
Better or worse than a pant suit hag who's greatest political accomplishments are being the other women, losing $6 billion dollars, and getting Americans killed?
Nah, if he could have started at the beginning, we wouldn't have gone to Iraq. And there wouldn't be an ISIL.
On the contrary, in hindsight Barry "Lightworker" Obama's Alinsky-ite community organizer training has been an invaluable tool in seizing power and holding on to it by any means necessary.
..... True: former Senator Obama was one of the very few that voted against going to war in Iraq along with Hillary Clinton who stated that she thought the war would be illegal, but the country was dancing to the tune of G.W.'s "If you Are Not With Us You Are Against Us" agenda.
I think Democrats have forever lost the ability to criticize a GOP candidate for President's resume or qualifications. Maybe if there is a serious GOP candidate who is as unqualified as Obama...
Actually no. Pbama was not a member of the US Senate when the Iraq war resolution was voted on. You forget he had barely taken office in the Senate when he decided to run for pres. Hillary stated clearly that she had done her homework and arrived at her decision to support the Iraq war resolution after due diligence. These are recent, well-known facts. Perhaps you are giving them both credit for 20/20 hindsight.
How did he screw up Iraq? He's been a magazine editor for quite some time. He doesn't advise anyone on foreign policy issues. He had nothing to do with any decision made concerning Iraq. All he did was comment on it in his magazine or on other media broadcasts.
The wonderful magical Obama voted in the US Senate in 2002! Then he became a US Senator in 2005. Brilliant! Hillary voted FOR the war. She was joined by Joe Biden and John Kerry to name a few. How does living in fantasy land feel?