Jump to content

Rand Paul's Hat is in the ring!


Recommended Posts

Unfortunately Paul has watered down and diluted hia non-interventionist foreign policy, libertarian domestic policy stance, to appease the party's big money donors. Now its hard to differentiate from any of the other knucklehead contenders. Repubes are in the process of handing dems another election because what he's backing off of are issues that would resonate positively voters.

 

You don't understand politics, do you?

 

And why am I responding to you? :wallbash:

Edited by Magox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 69
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I still doubt a true Libertarian will get the final candidacy, it'd be like a true Socialist winning the Democratic candidacy... a little too extreme either way for most Americans to swallow. At the very least he'll make the primaries interesting, and could make a decent running partner for the final candidate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Because my father perceives him to be an isolationist, much like Rand's father. Foreign policy matters to my father and he believes interventionism is a key role for the U.S

 

He's also a very traditional GOP voter, he's not a hard line right winger, doesn't like the thought of what he perceives to be extreme ideas such as abolishing the IRS or VA. He doesn't like the idea of legalizing marijuana. In his view, Rand is too far out there for his taste.

Tell your father I said thank you for his service

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at this bimbo go on the attack. Nice to see the left freaking out. Rand must really bother them.

 

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/04/08/rand-paul-clashes-with-today-host-savannah-guthrie-over-interview-about-foreign-policy/

To be fair, both liberal leaning, and conservative leaning, media tend to talk over the opposite side when interviewing, for obvious reasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He certainly is thin-skinned, and this playing a victim vs the media may work with some in the primaries but certainly wouldn't play well in the general elections. He better get used to it, his positions have morphed and if he can't answer simple and fair questions without getting so easily and outwardly agitated, he better just call it a day because the press is gonna eat him up for lunch.

 

Oh, and I predict that the rest of the field is going to look to take him out early on, there are too many candidates vying for a piece of his pie and considering that many of his positions are perceived to go against typical GOP orthodoxy, specially in the foreign affairs department, I wouldn't be surprised if Rand threatens to take his ball home and pout by threatening to run as a third party candidate. I was talking to my father about this possibility over a year ago, I've seen how testy and thin-skinned he can get and that at some point he's going to realize that the GOP isn't quite ready with some of his views and that he could go on his own out of disillusionment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I voted for his father because he understood that intervensionism has "blowback" which bites us in the A$$ later on just as the Iraq War has spawned ISIS. Just like the CIA staging a coup in Iran in the 1950s led to the 1970s embassy take over.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Kq7XxDLxIw

 

ISIS was spawned a long long time ago, well before anyone on this planet was born. It never left. Having said that, the destabilization of Iraq, Syria and Libya did provide a fertile land, land being the key word for these nut balls to carry out their extremist religious wet dreams.

 

 

 

Interventionism done the wrong way does have it's blow backs, specially the way our political system works. If you are going to intervene and topple these dictators, then you better be prepared for nation building. And if you are going to nation build, then you better be prepared to spend a tremendous amount of money and risk American lives. And considering that the American electorate's temper shifts like figs in the wind, we just aren't equipped to follow through properly with these goals.

 

I'd rather we just not take out any of these dictators and wipe out whatever Jihadist threats that are posed to the U.S

 

You can do both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Damn. I was hoping you wouldn't be this lazy

 

Thanks for the racial slur :D

 

So maybe "spawned" was a strong word.

 

Here's what I was referring to: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/how-saddam-husseins-former-military-officers-and-spies-are-controlling-isis-10156610.html

 

All those officers we fired on the second day of the occupation have to put food on their family somehow.

 

I'd say this qualifies as blowback like Ron talks about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair, both liberal leaning, and conservative leaning, media tend to talk over the opposite side when interviewing, for obvious reasons.

Well it's on now with the sexism thing. I guess you can't even argue with a woman talking head or your sexist. No doubt IF Paul were to run against the pant suit this would be a major talking point.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/04/09/according-to-their-male-defenders-female-interviewers-cant-handle-rand-paul/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Here's what I was referring to: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/how-saddam-husseins-former-military-officers-and-spies-are-controlling-isis-10156610.html

 

All those officers we fired on the second day of the occupation have to put food on their family somehow.

 

 

 

 

So the State dpt was right................ISIS is all about jobs.......................

 

 

11045005_973008869377960_478518169880275

 

 

 

ISIS-jobs-cartoon.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the few things I respect Colin Powell for was his statement that "if you break it, you fix it". Winning all the battles is not necessarily winning the war. We found that out in Vietnam. In World War II we did not leave a vacuum like we did in most wars since. The Marshall Plan and the reconstruction of Japan both physically and with a new form of government that they embraced was reasoned government on our part. Devastating our foes and then leaving them vulnerable to even worse foes is/was phucking idiotic. Anyone remember how the circumstances were in the Middle East in 2008 as compared to today? What changed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting article that seemed to fit here:

 

 


"...Americans sometimes leave a different impression when polled about specific issues. Often, their views are reasonably heterodox and not well represented by a one-dimensional political spectrum.Take two issues that are taken as emblematic of the split between liberal and conservative viewpoints: gay marriage and income inequality. If Krugman is right, you should see few Americans who are in favor of same-sex marriage but oppose government efforts to reduce income inequality, or vice versa.

 

As it turns out, however, there are quite a number of them; about 4 in 10 Americans have “inconsistent” views on these issues."

 

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/there-are-few-libertarians-but-many-americans-have-libertarian-views/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...