Does anyone remember Rand Paul?

I remember when Randy was the ideological darling of the "Let's make government very puny!" crowd, and I was amenable to his foreign policy philosophy myself (although folks who put themselves in ideological straightjackets of any sort invariably become constricted if not paralyzed by their fetishes.)

Recalling how the crowd that was so wee wee'd up over Obama's nationalized RomneyCare nominated the one dude in the nation who would have appeared absurd attacking him for it, Randy, by contrast, had the bona fides to savage Hillary Clinton for the biggest blunder of her extensive political career - going along with Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld's two-trillion dollar, fraudulently-hyped, bloody Iraq fiasco.

Then, The Great Flatu latched on to savaging Hillary Clinton for the biggest blunder of her extensive political career - going along with Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld's two-trillion dollar, fraudulently-hyped, bloody Iraq fiasco.

Since then, Randy seems to have wandered off somewhere.

Questions arose: "Is he guzzling warm Blatz with Rudy Giuliani and Fred Thompson, the trio clad in strappy yellowed t-shirts and oversized boxers in a Motel 6 of unspecified locale?"

Now, like a report of another Elvis sighting, rumours appear on the highly suspect Breitbart:

Thanks for checking in, Randy. Looks like you're living large.

We'll let Ron know your okay, sorta.

 

I guess Donald Trump stole his thunder.

 

I live in NH and had planned to vote for Paul in the GOP primary but it's now clear he has no shot. I'm torn between Cruz, Fiorina and Carson. I could never vote for the others.

 

Libertarians are closer ideologically to Republicans than Democrats. Even so, they have a tough time attracting a large number of Republicans.

 

Libertarians are closer to Democrats in regard to governmental intrusion - such as their opposition to politicians dictating private reproductive decisions or surrendering to the State the right to kill its citizens.

Social issues prevent out-of-the-wallet-and-into-the-womb Repubs from going the libertarian route.

How soon will Randy throw in the towel?

His last-ditch chance would be in competing with The Great Flatu as an entertainer.

I would advise him to quickly refine a spot-on Gilbert Gottfried delivery, and just as Bush's brother tried billing himself as "JEB !", promote himself as "The Amazing Randi."


.

 

..along with big mouth lying bully Chris Christie's...LOL

 

Randy Paul claims he's not dead!

Rand Paul Claims He's Still in the Presidential Race​

Once the darling of enthusiasts of bonsai governance, the incredible shrinking campaign is at least consistent:

"I'm for a puny government, piddling international influence, a measly constituent support system, diminutive aspirations, and an itty-bitty band of supporters.​

.

.

.

​

.

.


.

 

Is Rand Paul they guy who washed his face in a frying pan and combed his hair with a wagonwheel?

He is just as mythological a candidate if he isn't.

 

Rand is Ron Paul's kid. He's a Libertarian. Unfortunately the populous isn't quite ready for that yet...moving in that direction...but it's going to take a little more time.

 

Libertarians are social liberals, fiscal conservatives, government minimalists, and lean isolationist. They starkly contrast the other parties. Their moral liberalism doesn't make them popular with the GOP and their fiscal and limited government ideals don't win dems.

 

The janitor stole his thunder...... It is hard to steal something, though... when you never had it to start with.

 

... and it always will.

Ideological confections aside, pragmatism endures, and what demonstrably works best is the paradigm of first-world nations - democratic, regulated capitalism with conscientious social welfare systems.

Aynrandistan has only worked in fiction.

 

Have you read Ayn Rand? Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged are good books. Her prescience is amazing.

 

I came close to Rand Paul's positions though one political quiz said I agreed with Huckabee on more issues.

Rand Paul still has a couple of million to stay in the race with. It's not much, but enough to make a statement IF he has something to say on the issues.

Since I'm not in agreement with ANY of the candidates on either side, I wonder if even the Libertarians would welcome me. Being pro-life is probably disqualifies me as a potential Libertarian.

In any event, if Rand Paul has a point to make that is different from the other candidates, I wish he'd make it.

Carson can't stay awake; Rubio will never carry the Secure the border lobby; Trump is a Democrat posing as a Republican; Christie is a lard XXX liberal; Bush's own mother once quipped we don't need another Bush in the White House. So, who do you think would do the best job, in not Rand Paul?

 

Yeah but V for Vendetta and John Galt are so bad ass.

 

Ron Paul sets the bar. Even though he is spot on, he isn't a smooth talker and epic fails at political prowess. Rand is better, but I'm guessing he is in for namesake...so people will remember him in years to come. The only way he could win now would be to compromise his content, primciple, and character. Amd being Ron Paul's kid, I don't think he'll do it. Waiting for him is wise. On another decade America will be hungry for the liberation his leadership could mean.

 

PS- the Paul's avoid any firm stance on abortion like the plague. They eloquently handle it by asseting it is a local, state issue.

 

Libertarians advocate minimalist government, as do small government conservatives. Libertarians abhor cradle to grave care supported by liberal Democrats.

This is basic stuff. If you don't know this, you don't belong on this board.

 

True. As an airy-fairy notion, libertarianism has legs - especially for adolescent males vamped by Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum and her potboiler fairy tales.



In the real world, not so good.

 

Obviously, just as minimalist governance means less intrusion by politicians into the womb, and less willingness to surrender to the State the power to kill its citizens.

Those are among the issues that differentiate ideological libertarians from both mainstream Republicans and Democrats.

 

Let's not get too silly here. Everyone is inherently ideological, some have more structured beliefs than others, but at the end of the day we're all governed by personal ideology, confirmation biases, etc.

In fact, pretending you're not like the rest of us is the tightest straightjacket around!

They're tired of the move from state to national governance. Let's be real, most Republicans are not serious about states' rights, so I suppose it'd be more accurate to say that they're tired of not being represented in government, regardless of the level that occurs, and their beliefs make their state the most likely candidate to have policy which is representative of their views.

As for Obamacare, they're tired of the gradual creep of government and the ratchet effect. They've seen too many areas of their lives seized by the state, never to be returned: automobiles which were once generic and relatively easy to work on are now highly regulated and therefore proprietary, acts like the NFA and 68'GCA tarnished the near complete lack of regulation and broad constitutional carry in place until the mid 19th century, education was once operated privately without state interference, etc, etc.

They know they're never going to get any of these things reversed, simply because of how government functions: once they seize a sector of society, they will never return it. They are therefore grasping at straws when it comes to any new regulation which is proposed: they want to prevent the gradual creep of national government into every area of their lives.

Hillary is the most pro-establishment war hawk imaginable. She's right up there with John McCain and Andrew bloody Jackson. Why Republicans generally seem to hate her for this I will never know, but it makes sense why Rand would. He (in theory) takes a Jeffersonian classical liberal attitude towards foreign policy.

Rand is clearly struggling with the realities of politics. His party is not socially laissez-faire, neither are they interested in non-interventionism and an end to entangling alliances + war fueled welfare. He therefore has to completely sacrifice his views to reach office.

It was different for Ron - you can run for Congress without completely selling your soul to the powers at be because the electorate is small. Running for President is a whole different ball game: you have to compromise your beliefs to the same majority which has nationalized so many sectors of society. Ron rarely did that and so had no hope in hell of getting the nomination. Rand has, and so has at least something resembling a chance.

That said, I agree he seems to have dropped off recently. Perhaps he has run out of money, perhaps he is unable to handle selling his soul to Uncle Sam. Who knows. To be honest, as a libertarian myself I haven't ever had much enthusiasm for him. That enthusiasm is the biggest strength any libertarian candidate has.

 

Ironic how his Libertarianism is destroying his own campaign. When you oppose "big government" you have no credibility when it comes to asking to be put in charge of "big government". I guess he never thought this through or wondered why his father's campaigns never appealed to the electorate at large.

 

Randy underscores why even his half-baked libertarianism will forever remain an airy-fairy notion.

It works magnificently - until it comes up against reality.

One need only look at the theocratic/libertarian TP "experiment in Sammy Brownback's once highly-touted Red State Model, Kansas.

It has been a disaster.

 

I'm a Rand Paul supporter, I definitely believe he's the best candidate overall by a fair margin but it's clear his campaign is struggling right now for momentum.

 

Excellent post.

Even as a weak-kneed libertarian, Randy underscored that the ideology works as an abstract theory, not as a practicable approach to governance.

Gary Johnson has been a far superior proponent in my opinion and, consequently, has gotten nowhere in the realm of political reality.