Yep, Rand Paul’s already building a 50-state presidential organization

posted at 4:01 pm on March 27, 2014 by Allahpundit

You knew that, though, even if you didn’t formally “know” it. No American politician, Hillary included, has been clearer about his intentions in 2016 than Paul. CNN remembers him talking about running for president as far back as November 2012, just weeks after the last election. That reminds me of something a friend who works in Democratic politics once told me, that Obama had someone in Iowa quietly sniffing around about 2008 from virtually the day he was elected to the Senate in 2004. I didn’t peg Rand initially as someone who had his heart set on the presidency, but maybe I misjudged. Maybe, after watching his dad catch fire with libertarians in ’08 and fizzle with the rest of the party, he sensed an opportunity for a truer libertarian/conservative hybrid candidate. Paul père bequeathed him a network in Iowa and New Hampshire; if, Rand may have thought, he could build on that by reaching further towards the mainstream than his old man was willing to, he could be a legit contender in the early states and then for the nomination. It could be that his Senate run, a la Obama’s, was always just a stepping stone in taking his ideological vision to a bigger stage.

The only thing that could dissuade him, I think, is if he ends up having a legal problem in Kentucky that bars him from running for president and reelection to the Senate simultaneously. The state senate just passed a bill that would let him run for both but the Democratic-controlled house could block it, leaving the prohibition in effect. Paul has grounds for a legal challenge, but who knows what a judge will do. If he’s forced to choose between running for president and Senate, I suppose he might pass on the former in the name of building a bigger resume as a legislator. In that case, though, he’ll have problems running in 2020 — he’d face either a Democratic incumbent or be blocked by a Republican president — and he may worry that the “libertarian moment” the country’s having right now will have passed by then. Probably he’d run for president and forget the Senate in 2016 if made to pick.

Rand Paul’s nationwide organization, which counts more than 200 people, includes new backers who have previously funded more traditional Republicans, along with longtime libertarian activists. Paul, of Kentucky, has also been courting Wall Street titans and Silicon Valley entrepreneurs who donated to the presidential campaigns of George W. Bush and Mitt Romney, attending elite conclaves in Utah and elsewhere along with other GOP hopefuls…

At the Romney retreat last year in Park City, Utah, Paul gained some fans among the GOP elite. Though few pledged to back him should he run for president, they did warm up to him.

“Going in, people weren’t sure. Most of them didn’t know him,” recalled Ron Kaufman, a Romney confidant. “But they had these one-on-one meetings with him and came away saying he’s a sharp guy. They were still in the grieving stage, not ready to think about 2016, but their opinion of him increased rather dramatically.”…

The decision to swiftly expand and announce Paul’s national political infrastructure — which will be fully unveiled this spring — comes after reports describing Paul’s operation as unready to compete nationally

[Nate] Morris, previously a fundraiser for George W. Bush, has served as Paul’s guide as the freshman senator has navigated steakhouse dinners and tony receptions with Wall Street and Silicon Valley leaders.

That bit in boldface helps explain why this is being leaked now. Paul, more so than other candidates because of his pedigree, wants to show the GOP establishment that he’s serious about the nomination, not just running a vanity candidacy to ventilate the libertarian viewpoint a la Ron. That’s why he endorsed Mitch McConnell, the tea party’s public enemy number one, and has refused to budge despite grumbles from conservatives. His top priority is getting Republicans with deep pockets to take him seriously and one way to do that is by helping out an establishment guy they trust. Likewise, Paul has special reasons to start gladhanding GOP movers and shakers early, when the primary campaign is still more than a year away. With the possible exception of Ted Cruz, he’s the only guy in the field who’s running three different primary races. Everyone else is running the first two — the “invisible primary,” where candidates try to recruit millionaire donors and campaign talent, and then of course the early-state primaries in Iowa and New Hampshire. If Paul wins those, though, and suddenly looks to be a heavy favorite to take the nomination, he’ll face one last “primary” — i.e., convincing the GOP establishment not to coalesce behind some alternative candidate like Rubio or Scott Walker in the name of stopping the kooky libertarian. The more millionaire hands he shakes now, the more likely it is that they’ll find him acceptable enough not to try to block him if he jumps out to a big lead in February 2016. He’d like their support, but if he can’t have it, he’ll settle for their indifference. It’s no coincidence, needless to say, that backslapping with donors is happening at the same time Paul’s hawkish side is suddenly emerging in high-profile op-eds. It’s all about reassurance.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

I do wish he’d run for Governor of Kentucky first…. Rand Paul is like Obama, beyond talking a good talk, what has he actually DONE?

JFKY on March 27, 2014 at 4:07 PM

good

rob verdi on March 27, 2014 at 4:10 PM

How much of this is just Ron Paul campaign leftovers?

Pork-Chop on March 27, 2014 at 4:10 PM

… what has he actually DONE?

JFKY on March 27, 2014 at 4:07 PM

Because it’s so hard to google “Rand Paul”.

M240H on March 27, 2014 at 4:12 PM

If Rand makes it to the WH, will Ron move in to watch the dogs and kiddies?

BobMbx on March 27, 2014 at 4:12 PM

As long as he doens’t do what his dad did and accuse us of killing 100,000 1,000,000 innocent Iraqis (based on a very unscientific poll), he’s got my vote.

DethMetalCookieMonst on March 27, 2014 at 4:13 PM

I will hold my nose and vote for him!

gerrym51 on March 27, 2014 at 4:13 PM

Rand Paul is like Obama, beyond talking a good talk, what has he actually DONE?

JFKY on March 27, 2014 at 4:07 PM

He, along with a handful of other wildcats, have stood up to this POTUS, in our darkest hours, and have helped turn the tide. They have demonstrated leadership, something that, in case you weren’t paying attention, has been sorely lacking in the GOP.

I could give a damn about legislation at this point. I want to see someone capable of moving the party in a winning direction. And we’re seeing examples of that day by day coming from Sen Paul…

JohnGalt23 on March 27, 2014 at 4:14 PM

Oh, and he better not appear on that nutter Alex Jones’ radio show.

DethMetalCookieMonst on March 27, 2014 at 4:14 PM

Good!

gophergirl on March 27, 2014 at 4:16 PM

I’m glad to see someone knows how to organize.

crankyoldlady on March 27, 2014 at 4:18 PM

I find that I like Rand Paul a lot. Mostly because he really seems to get under the skin of establishment Republicans.

I also find that I have many disagreements with Rand Paul. But he tends to err on the side of liberty. Which is a good thing. I hope he does well.

Baggi on March 27, 2014 at 4:18 PM

So, M24H & Galt, like Hillary he’s DONE NOTHING? You mean he stood against the POTUS , like Barack “stood” against Booosh on the war & the Debt Ceiling… in other words gave a speech that sounded good, but did nothing?

Look I kind of like Rand Paul, but he’s run nothing, done nothing… you know kinda like the current incompetent? So pardon me if I think I’d prefer the imperfect Perry or Palin or the rhetorically gifted, but accomplishment-challenged Paul.

Now were he to run for Governor, we’d get to see him act, and make appointments, work with a legislature, you know actually govern, as opposed to TALKING about governing.

JFKY on March 27, 2014 at 4:19 PM

Rand is too radical. If the GOP picks him to run for President, he will fall in the gutter along with McLame and Romney.

Christie for President!!

timberline on March 27, 2014 at 4:20 PM

We could do a hell of a lot worse…..

..but at the end of the day I think the Republican
Primary voters are looking for a true Conservative.
Yes, Rand has a lot of Libertarian support…and I don’t think
that will fade….BUT, I do believe the PRIMARY voter is
looking for a CONSERVATIVE. Two terms of a clueless Leftist
Jackazz will bring this out in the populace…

IF one of these two decides to run, it’s all over.

Ted Cruz or Sarah Palin.

ToddPA on March 27, 2014 at 4:20 PM

“I do wish he’d run for Governor of Kentucky first…. Rand Paul is like Obama, beyond talking a good talk, what has he actually DONE?”

What has any Republican, especially those favored by the Establishment, ever done?

Another Libertarian on March 27, 2014 at 4:20 PM

How much of this is just Ron Paul campaign leftovers?

Pork-Chop on March 27, 2014 at 4:10 PM

Like father, like son. You can believe the media’s going to pound it like a steak in need of tenderizing.

gryphon202 on March 27, 2014 at 4:20 PM

As long as he doens’t do what his dad did and accuse us of killing 100,000 1,000,000 innocent Iraqis (based on a very unscientific poll), he’s got my vote.

What’s a better estimate of how many Iraqis were killed?

Another Libertarian on March 27, 2014 at 4:21 PM

What has any Republican, especially those favored by the Establishment, ever done?

Another Libertarian on March 27, 2014 at 4:20 PM

Republicans have run against Democrats and been the not-Democrat choice since 1860. That ought to be enough, you moronic cretin!

/AmericanConservativeVoter

gryphon202 on March 27, 2014 at 4:21 PM

No question his libertarian movement is the future of the GOP, the only question left is if he will be the standard bearer.

Tater Salad on March 27, 2014 at 4:22 PM

As a member of the minority party in the Senate – his hands are kind of tied in terms of engagement with the Senate & the White House. So he’s taking ideas to the people. That’s doing something to me.

22044 on March 27, 2014 at 4:22 PM

Another Libertarian, you mean Scott Walker or Palin or Perry have done NOTHING? *WOW*. Who knew? Heck, he’s not my cup of tea but Mitch Daniels or even Gary Johnson have done nothing?

JFKY on March 27, 2014 at 4:24 PM

What’s a better estimate of how many Iraqis were killed?

Another Libertarian on March 27, 2014 at 4:21 PM

Anythings better then basing it on a “study” where people were asked how many people they knew that were killed in Iraq (and BTW, also hated how Ron Paul blamed ALL the deaths taht happened on us and not on the terrorists/insurgence/enemy).

DethMetalCookieMonst on March 27, 2014 at 4:26 PM

Another Libertarian, red herring… but the “study” in question actually had a 95% Confidence Interval ranging from ~6,000-~600,000 so please note that the “real” number might have been quite low.

Also, IF this is the Rand Paul fan-base left-over Paul-bots, he’s doomed…

JFKY on March 27, 2014 at 4:26 PM

I like Rand Paul, but I still would prefer a Governor with some actual accomplishments. It would be nice to have something substantive to offer the electorate in 2016. Yes, Romney was a former Governor, but since he didn’t get much done(aside from Romneycare which he did NOT want to discuss) during his single term in office, his campaign was built entirely around his business background which was too easily demonized. Scott Walker is still my top choice(assuming he actually wants to run).

Doughboy on March 27, 2014 at 4:26 PM

Another Libertarian, you mean Scott Walker or Palin or Perry have done NOTHING? *WOW*. Who knew? Heck, he’s not my cup of tea but Mitch Daniels or even Gary Johnson have done nothing?

JFKY on March 27, 2014 at 4:24 PM

Scott Walker and Sarah Palin have by far been the most successful governors by any objective measure in recent memory. This makes me think that neither of them are interested in prostituting themselves for the presidency, as they have both shown themselves to be individuals of principle and character.

gryphon202 on March 27, 2014 at 4:26 PM

Above all else, I think we need someone who’s
“Severely Conservative”.

ToddPA on March 27, 2014 at 4:28 PM

Scott Walker and Sarah Palin have by far been the most successful governors by any objective measure in recent memory. This makes me think that neither of them are interested in prostituting themselves for the presidency, as they have both shown themselves to be individuals of principle and character.

gryphon202 on March 27, 2014 at 4:26 PM

Scott walker yes, but Sarah Palin’s successes as governor????

Tater Salad on March 27, 2014 at 4:28 PM

Above all else, I think we need someone who’s
“Severely Conservative”.

ToddPA on March 27, 2014 at 4:28 PM

Romney/[whoever] ’16!

gryphon202 on March 27, 2014 at 4:29 PM

Above all else, I think we need someone who’s
“Severely Conservative”.

ToddPA on March 27, 2014 at 4:28 PM

By definition, the most conservative person would be the most libertarian.

Tater Salad on March 27, 2014 at 4:30 PM

I also find that I have many disagreements with Rand Paul. But he tends to err on the side of liberty. Which is a good thing. I hope he does well.

Baggi on March 27, 2014 at 4:18 PM

I like him too, for those reasons.

However, I am painfully aware that nothing I can say or do has any effect on who wins the GOP nomination, so this discussion is academic for me.

juliesa on March 27, 2014 at 4:30 PM

Paul is cozy with the establishment now so I think we could see a RINO/Liberal-tarian ticket.

Wigglesworth on March 27, 2014 at 4:30 PM

Rand Paul is also willing to side with the establishment and support illegal alien amnesty.

VIDEO: Rand Paul shows his contempt for amnesty opponents:
http://youtu.be/pxQjlS7JwMo

bluegill on March 27, 2014 at 4:31 PM

Scott walker yes, but Sarah Palin’s successes as governor????

Tater Salad on March 27, 2014 at 4:28 PM

She left the state better than she found it, Tater. She reconnoitered her state’s oil interests and modified them to the benefit of the citizenry, she took on the Alaska chapter of the Corrupt Bastards Club, and took steps to ensure that the Alaska state budget would function in the black under the stewardship of her lieutenant governor. It saddens me to think what she could have accomplished had she not been forced out.

gryphon202 on March 27, 2014 at 4:32 PM

If he wins the nomination, he’s got my vote but during the primary I’ll be looking for a reasonably acceptable governor.

Occams Stubble on March 27, 2014 at 4:32 PM

Above all else, I think we need someone who’s
“Severely Conservative”.

ToddPA on March 27, 2014 at 4:28 PM

Squishies and libs probably can’t handle castrating pigs. So by default, nut cutters are conservative.

BobMbx on March 27, 2014 at 4:34 PM

Occam’s Stubble sums it up for me… Primary, not too likely, General, sure….

JFKY on March 27, 2014 at 4:36 PM

What’s a better estimate of how many Iraqis were killed?

Another Libertarian on March 27, 2014 at 4:21 PM

Anything is better than the debunked and politicized Lancet survey, with is an outlier among the other counts. Iraqbodycount puts total civilian and military deaths at 186,000, and other counts show similar estimates. 1,000,000 is 10x too high.

juliesa on March 27, 2014 at 4:37 PM

JohnGalt23 on March 27, 2014 at 4:14 PM

Turned what tide? Only active opposition to the tide was Ted Cruz. And then, all of the progressive republicans and libertarians said he ruined the momentum by “causing an unnecessary government shutdown”.

hawkdriver on March 27, 2014 at 4:38 PM

I’m glad to hear it. I like the way the slate is shaping up. I think that we’ll have several decent candidates to choose from this time around.

MJBrutus on March 27, 2014 at 4:38 PM

He seems like an excellent choice at this point. Certainly would be a vast improvement over Romney and Maverick.

cat_owner on March 27, 2014 at 4:39 PM

Scott walker yes, but Sarah Palin’s successes as governor????

Tater Salad on March 27, 2014 at 4:28 PM

I’ll simply accept your veiled swipe at her….

She packed a hell of a lot into her short term…yeah, I know
Come on, you know you are just dying to type it….

Now for some historical perspective….in 2008 John McCain
needed a counter weight to his Senatoral Presidential
Nomination…yes, picking a woman would “possibly” steal
some of the Female vote. But his top benchmark was this;

“I want a Republican Governor who has a good approval rating.
I’m a member of Congress.”
Governor Palin had the Highest approval rating of all 50 Governors.
THAT, more than anything else sealed the deal of him picking her.

You ask what her accomplishments were? Please. Do some research.

ToddPA on March 27, 2014 at 4:42 PM

Rand’s trying to get people to commit early because of Cruz and company.

And if he has to choose between Senate or Presidential run, he goes Prez.

budfox on March 27, 2014 at 4:42 PM

Too early for me to form an opinion on Rand Paul.

I was impressed with his recent speech at Berkeley, though. He targeted young voters with his anti-NSA surveillance message and it resonated. Shrewd.

MichaelGabriel on March 27, 2014 at 4:45 PM

What difference does it make? Resistance is futile and the fix is in according to HotAir writers. May as well just vote for the democrat.

xblade on March 27, 2014 at 4:46 PM

I’m glad to hear it. I like the way the slate is shaping up. I think that we’ll have several decent candidates to choose from this time around.

MJBrutus on March 27, 2014 at 4:38 PM

You said the same thing in ’12. I think we’ll lose this time around. I think we’ll wonder what went wrong this time around.

/LatherRinseRepeat

gryphon202 on March 27, 2014 at 4:46 PM

Guys we can’t support Rand Paul. We have to support someone who is electable, someone who can attract moderates and independents and even some democrats. Someone who won’t repel minorities like bug spray does to mosquitos.

Someone like Jon Hunstamn or Chris Christie. These people will attract people from all ends of the political spectrum.

Rand Paul is too crazy, too extreme to support anyone but the most hardcore conservatives, and he will lose in a landslide.

We need someone like Jeb Bush, who understands that immigration reform will stop the demographic trends and causing so many Hispanics to support the democrats. With immigration reform we can help bring over Hispanics and allow them to take another look at the GOP.

We need someone like Jon Huntsman who understands that climate change is a real threat. Someone who will break the stereotype that Republicans are anti-science and anti-intellectual.

We need someone like Chris Christie who understands that we need common sense gun control. Most people support gun restrictions so we can’t continue to be the party of extremist gun nuts that repels independents and moderates. He will help change our image.

We need someone like Rob Portman, who understands that gay marriage is inevitable and is about equality and letting people love who they love. We need a candidate who embraces homosexuals, bisexuals, transsexuals, to help rid the GOP of its image that it hates gays. We need a candidate like Portman to take us into the 21st century on gay marriage.

This is who we need. We need a nominee who is willing to work with the other side and find common sense solutions and get things done, not draw lines in the sand to protect their “purism” and appeal to only the most extreme conservative groups and talk radio.

And lastly we need people who can read. If you can’t read, then you aren’t seeing this last paragraph where I say everything I typed above is a total joke, but is a preview of articles we are about to see from establishment operatives on who to nominate for president. Do not fall for their propaganda, which will look like the BS I typed above, like we did in 2008 and 2012 and nominating moderates that alienate the base because they are “electable”.

tcufrog on March 27, 2014 at 4:48 PM

Maybe he will actually play to win, unlike John “Songbird” McCain.

antisense on March 27, 2014 at 4:48 PM

gryphon202 on March 27, 2014 at 4:46 PM

No, no I did not. But I don’t expect you to be honest, so no news here. At the start of ’12 I said that Mitt was the only acceptable (once Daniels dropped out and T-Paw proved he was not viable) choice among a truly sad crowd.

MJBrutus on March 27, 2014 at 4:51 PM

What’s a better estimate of how many Iraqis were killed?

Another Libertarian

Even if we accept the bogus number as accurate, it is still bald faced lie to say America killed all of them. And for that, Ron Paul is a pos. Pimping for Cynthia McKinney doesn’t make him a genius either.

xblade on March 27, 2014 at 4:52 PM

Scott Walker and Sarah Palin have by far been the most successful governors by any objective measure in recent memory.

gryphon202 on March 27, 2014 at 4:26 PM

Really? Where I come from, one of the yardsticks of success for a governor is reelection…

JohnGalt23 on March 27, 2014 at 4:56 PM

Maybe he will actually play to win, unlike John “Songbird” McCain.

antisense on March 27, 2014 at 4:48 PM

Or Mitt Romney, who, according to his son, had no interest in being president.

Pork-Chop on March 27, 2014 at 4:57 PM

Another Libertarian

Even if we accept the bogus number as accurate, it is still bald faced lie to say America killed all of them. And for that, Ron Paul is a pos. Pimping for Cynthia McKinney doesn’t make him a genius either.

xblade on March 27, 2014 at 4:52 PM

Without a doubt. His radio speech compared the US Military to insurgents and terrorists with his China in Texas analogy. Ostensibly accused us of war crimes.

hawkdriver on March 27, 2014 at 4:57 PM

Scott Walker and Sarah Palin have by far been the most successful governors by any objective measure in recent memory.

gryphon202 on March 27, 2014 at 4:26 PM

Really? Where I come from, one of the yardsticks of success for a governor is reelection…

JohnGalt23 on March 27, 2014 at 4:56 PM

One metric of many, true. In Palin’s case we simply can never know what would have happened had she tried to run, though we can make a pretty good guess. As far as Walker goes, he was put through the ringer, came out the other side, and made Wisconsin solvent on a timetable and in a manner that few Republican governors could do if they wanted to.

gryphon202 on March 27, 2014 at 5:00 PM

So John Galt producing budget surpluses don’t count? Only reelection? And I’ll bet you %50 that Walker, if not running for POTUS, wins reelection.

JFKY on March 27, 2014 at 5:01 PM

tcufrog on March 27, 2014 at 4:48 PM

You are right about the excuses we will get from the establishment regarding “electable” candidates. We found out how “electable” the last two nominees were.

cat_owner on March 27, 2014 at 5:02 PM

Turned what tide? Only active opposition to the tide was Ted Cruz. And then, all of the progressive republicans and libertarians said he ruined the momentum by “causing an unnecessary government shutdown”.

hawkdriver on March 27, 2014 at 4:38 PM

Cruz is amongst thr few who has shown leadership. No doubt.

And yeah, the tide has turned. Try to think back where we were one year ago. The party and the movement were dispirited. Our candidate recruitment was for shiite. The Rats were kicking our arse in fundraising. We had no hope for a decent field or turnout program. We had just suffered an arse kicking.

And I think it started with Rand Paul’s filibuster. He slapped the Administration around a bit.

And lived to tell the tale.

And Cruz, Lee, and some of the House have followed suit. With pretty good results, I think. The Right is ascendant. We’re successfully sowing doubt about the efficacy of big government, helped in part, no doubt, by the monumental failures of our opponents.

But these things don’t happen on their own, and they don’t happen in a vacuum…

JohnGalt23 on March 27, 2014 at 5:05 PM

As far as Walker goes, he was put through the ringer, came out the other side, and made Wisconsin solvent on a timetable and in a manner that few Republican governors could do if they wanted to.

gryphon202 on March 27, 2014 at 5:00 PM

Walker was pretty scrappy. I would love to see a respectful, balanced debate amongst Paul, Cruz and Walker.

hawkdriver on March 27, 2014 at 5:07 PM

So John Galt producing budget surpluses don’t count? Only reelection? And I’ll bet you %50 that Walker, if not running for POTUS, wins reelection.

JFKY on March 27, 2014 at 5:01 PM

A candidate for POTUS is, de facto, also the leader of the party. He or she needs, IMHO, to be able to demonstrate an ability to organize a party, and rally them to victory at the top of the ticket, as often as they can. Senators only have to do so every six years, so the pressure is a little less on them to perform. But bailing on the office is hardly demonstrating that ability.

Ask Rick Perry. I have an enormous amount of faith in him, if only for his ability to win statewide, big time, three times.

And BTW, I think Walker will win, which puts him in the sweepstakes. I just question his rhetorical ability. Which is, of course, a mater for another day…

JohnGalt23 on March 27, 2014 at 5:10 PM

As far as Walker goes, he was put through the ringer, came out the other side, and made Wisconsin solvent on a timetable and in a manner that few Republican governors could do if they wanted to.

gryphon202 on March 27, 2014 at 5:00 PM

Walker accomplished a mighty feat. Would that he and a GOP majority might roll back more public unions and strike at the heart of the Dem mob. Worst thing JFK did.

rhombus on March 27, 2014 at 5:10 PM

Anythings better then basing it on a “study” where people were asked how many people they knew that were killed in Iraq (and BTW, also hated how Ron Paul blamed ALL the deaths taht happened on us and not on the terrorists/insurgence/enemy).

The point being that American soldiers were sent in, people in Iraq were killed, and nobody here really knows the real story. I don’t know how many people were killed, you don’t know how many people were killed, and there’s no real way for any of us to know anything. I don’t know about you, but I don’t like a government that has this much secrecy organic to everything it does.

And for what? What exactly was the American military doing in Iraq? Did it help us in any way? Whose interests did it serve to destroy all that infrastructure and make Iraq even worse than it was? What about Afghanistan? What the hell is the deal there after 13 years? When does this BS end?

People were killed by American soldiers. This used to require some kind of explanation to the public other than “It’s for the best, trust us.”

A just government does not keep these kinds of secrets from the people that live under it.

Another Libertarian on March 27, 2014 at 5:11 PM

Walker was pretty scrappy. I would love to see a respectful, balanced debate amongst Paul, Cruz and Walker.

hawkdriver on March 27, 2014 at 5:07 PM

Between those three, I don’t think you’d get any other kind of debate. As long as they didn’t have to suffer a stark-raving liberal to moderate.

gryphon202 on March 27, 2014 at 5:11 PM

So John Galt “success” is reelection…. so you admit accomplishment mean nothing and that Paul is NOT a success, he hasn’t been reelected & may not be…
Please be consistent in your idol worship.

JFKY on March 27, 2014 at 5:11 PM

Gee Another Libertarian, how many people were killed in WWII? Or the Holocaust? We have a pretty good guess, & we have a pretty good guess in Iraq…. just own it, you’re a Raymond-phile who opposed the Iraq War. The number of dead, per se, has NOTHING to do with the morality or justice of any war….

JFKY on March 27, 2014 at 5:14 PM

Rand is a very talented politician and I love how he is reaching out to young voters and minorities.

Name one republican who has done that?

If we don’t win a larger minority voters, GOP will never sit in the oval office. It’s done. Might be too late anyway…

Rand can get the youth vote…VP choice…we need a young charismatic Hispanic at the top of the ticket. A winning ticket. Democrats will lose sleep….who do they have? Clinton? Booker? Some old white washed up white man?
White man won’t win the WH in 2016..train left the station in 2012

Redford on March 27, 2014 at 5:15 PM

People were killed by American soldiers. This used to require some kind of explanation to the public other than “It’s for the best, trust us.”

A just government does not keep these kinds of secrets from the people that live under it.

Another Libertarian on March 27, 2014 at 5:11 PM

Shit, son. You ought to start applying Occam’s Razor to your political analysis. I ain’t as worried about government secrets as I am about what I know to be true.

gryphon202 on March 27, 2014 at 5:16 PM

Yep, Rand Paul’s already building a 50-state presidential organization

Of course he is – what else has a member of Congress got to do?

jake-the-goose on March 27, 2014 at 5:18 PM

Redford on March 27, 2014 at 5:15 PM

You made a whole bunch of great points. Well said.

jake-the-goose on March 27, 2014 at 5:19 PM

So John Galt “success” is reelection…. so you admit accomplishment mean nothing and that Paul is NOT a success, he hasn’t been reelected & may not be…
Please be consistent in your idol worship.

JFKY on March 27, 2014 at 5:11 PM

apparently, though really not surprisingly, you had a little trouble reading my original post. So, I’ll repeat it, with highlights, for those reading a little slowly today:

Really? Where I come from, one of the yardsticks of success for a governor is reelection

Now, did the highlights do the job, or shall I type a little more slowly…

JohnGalt23 on March 27, 2014 at 4:56 PM

JohnGalt23 on March 27, 2014 at 5:20 PM

The number of dead, per se, has NOTHING to do with the morality or justice of any war….

JFKY on March 27, 2014 at 5:14 PM

You know what does, though. Going to war based on truth, or falsity.

So, where are the pictures of the WMD’s…?

JohnGalt23 on March 27, 2014 at 5:21 PM

Of course he is – what else has a member of Congress got to do?

jake-the-goose on March 27, 2014 at 5:18 PM

If all every member of Congress did was build 50 state POTUS organizations, the nation would be in better shape…

JohnGalt23 on March 27, 2014 at 5:23 PM

It’d be nice if he had some executive experience, but with that said, I’d have no problem supporting him. May the best man (or woman) win!

GOPRanknFile on March 27, 2014 at 5:26 PM

John Galt, Saddam had WMD PROGRAMS…. and it’s not a lie if you believe it to be true or do you have any evidence that the CIA, MI-6, the BND knew and/or told their leaders that Saddam had no WMD programs or devices… if not, then I guess we were WRONG, not lying…

JFKY on March 27, 2014 at 5:26 PM

I didn’t peg Rand initially as someone who had his heart set on the presidency, but maybe I misjudged.

posted at 4:01 pm on March 27, 2014 by Allahpundit

Nah, he just wants the fundraising $$ like his dad. We have many election cycles of Rand Paul running for president to look forward to.

sauldalinsky on March 27, 2014 at 5:26 PM

If all every member of Congress did was build 50 state POTUS organizations, the nation would be in better shape…

JohnGalt23 on March 27, 2014 at 5:23 PM

I cannot (today) endorse any member of Congress – their all talkers – all the time.

jake-the-goose on March 27, 2014 at 5:27 PM

It’d be nice if he had some executive experience, but with that said, I’d have no problem supporting him. May the best man (or woman) win!

GOPRanknFile on March 27, 2014 at 5:26 PM

This

jake-the-goose on March 27, 2014 at 5:27 PM

John Galt, Saddam had WMD PROGRAMS…

JFKY on March 27, 2014 at 5:26 PM

Which explains George W Bush’s take on them…

JohnGalt23 on March 27, 2014 at 5:28 PM

Oh whilst we’re at it Galt, WMD were only one of 23 causus belli, IIRC. But please let’s re-litigate that war… by all means your side lost those arguments then, you’ll lose them NOW… with the added bonus of demonstrating that much of Paul’s support are the tag-ends of his father’s goofy followers.

JFKY on March 27, 2014 at 5:29 PM

JohnGalt23 on March 27, 2014 at 5:05 PM

Those are all great points John but I think the “big” turn is more people just really starting to see how bad the ACA is and how inept it makes these clowns look. Otherwise even lefties are mad at the NSA spying. I even have a leftist niece who just “just” admitted the way obama is handling foreign affairs, Syria and the Ukraine, have her rethinking his creds.

I’m not taking anything away from Paul, I just think we need to be realistic about what happened this years and last last so we know where to concentrate. Hit them on the ACA, foreign affairs and NSA. All of them. Unified voices.

hawkdriver on March 27, 2014 at 5:31 PM

hawkdriver on March 27, 2014 at 5:31 PM

Yeh – that’s well said

jake-the-goose on March 27, 2014 at 5:33 PM

So basically Galt and Another Libertarian show why I really am leery of Paul…. his cult-followers…. and his lack of experience, but Hey he’s gonna Audit the Fed or some such…

John Galt you sound like an Obama Cultist… what he’s GONNA do, or how evil Booooosh was, but no discussion of your guy’s accomplishment… which, like Obama is understandable as he, like Obama, has NO “Accomplishment.”. Mind you Medical School is a bit more of an accomplishment than a JD, but beyond Med School and running a practice, and running ONE campaign, what has Paul done?

I keep saying I like Paul, I’m just hoping for a candidate with more actual experience…. He’d have that experience if he were to run for Governor. But, I guess he’s the ONLY man who can save the Republic or some such, so we can’t be bothered with any of that clap-trap.

JFKY on March 27, 2014 at 5:35 PM

JFKY on March 27, 2014 at 5:14 PM

You know what does, though. Going to war based on truth, or falsity.

So, where are the pictures of the WMD’s…?

JohnGalt23 on March 27, 2014 at 5:21 PM

They were in Halabja for a while. Long enough to kill a few thousand. Do you deny they had them? Even if that were the only reason for war, do you really assert they never had WMDs?

This whole WMD argument just turns into a gross mischaracterization and straw man circle jerk.

hawkdriver on March 27, 2014 at 5:35 PM

I keep saying I like Paul, I’m just hoping for a candidate with more actual experience…. He’d have that experience if he were to run for Governor.

JFKY on March 27, 2014 at 5:35 PM

My hope – Scott Walker – what he has done in WI. is incredible !!!

jake-the-goose on March 27, 2014 at 5:37 PM

Saddam Hussein used chemical weapons on the Kurds. Are chemical weapons no longer considered WMDs?

gryphon202 on March 27, 2014 at 5:37 PM

Saddam Hussein used chemical weapons on the Kurds. Are chemical weapons no longer considered WMDs?

gryphon202 on March 27, 2014 at 5:37 PM

I guess if they’re not, then the mustard and nerve gas he used on the Iranians doesn’t count either.

hawkdriver on March 27, 2014 at 5:40 PM

Oh whilst we’re at it Galt, WMD were only one of 23 causus belli, IIRC. But please let’s re-litigate that war… by all means your side lost those arguments then, you’ll lose them NOW… with the added bonus of demonstrating that much of Paul’s support are the tag-ends of his father’s goofy followers.

JFKY on March 27, 2014 at 5:29 PM

First of all, if you want to have another vote on our involvement in Iraq, be my guest. You won’t like the results, I am sure.

Second, you were the one who brought up “the morality or justice of any war”. Pretty tough to do with a straight face while recalling the WMD casus belli…

JohnGalt23 on March 27, 2014 at 5:42 PM

Saddam Hussein used chemical weapons on the Kurds. Are chemical weapons no longer considered WMDs?

gryphon202 on March 27, 2014 at 5:37 PM

So, there were chemical weapons found after the invasion?

Pictures…?

JohnGalt23 on March 27, 2014 at 5:43 PM

JFKY on March 27, 2014 at 5:35 PM

My hope – Scott Walker – what he has done in WI. is incredible !!!

jake-the-goose on March 27, 2014 at 5:37 PM

I like Walker too. I’ve tried like a mofo to sort through what his no-crap stance is on Illegal Aliens before I take anything for the gospel.

The great thing about him is he is a very well known commodity under pressure. Dudes got balls of steel.

hawkdriver on March 27, 2014 at 5:44 PM

I guess if they’re not, then the mustard and nerve gas he used on the Iranians doesn’t count either.

hawkdriver on March 27, 2014 at 5:40 PM

And here I was going to say something about us only taking 15 years to getting around to righting a wrong that wasn’t ours to right.

And you go ahead and make me bump it back to 20 years…

JohnGalt23 on March 27, 2014 at 5:45 PM

I like Walker too. I’ve tried like a mofo to sort through what his no-crap stance is on Illegal Aliens before I take anything for the gospel.

The great thing about him is he is a very well known commodity under pressure. Dudes got balls of steel.

hawkdriver on March 27, 2014 at 5:44 PM

I’ll say this about him… he did in WI what Kasich couldn’t do in even more friendly OH. That’s gotta say something…

JohnGalt23 on March 27, 2014 at 5:46 PM

So, there were chemical weapons found after the invasion?

Pictures…?

JohnGalt23 on March 27, 2014 at 5:43 PM

I believe the argument against the war went along the lines of “Saddam doesn’t have weapons of mass destruction.” And this was after the people that used that line voted in favor of invasion, AFTER Saddam used chemical weapons on the Kurds.

You know what I really think? I think in the lead-up to the authorization of force, we dicked around so much that we gave Saddam time to move his shit to Syria. But you’re right. We’ll never know for sure one way or the other — though you sound pretty sure yourself.

gryphon202 on March 27, 2014 at 5:46 PM

…better…than what we got!

KOOLAID2 on March 27, 2014 at 5:48 PM

gryphon202 on March 27, 2014 at 5:37 PM

So, there were chemical weapons found after the invasion?

Pictures…?

JohnGalt23 on March 27, 2014 at 5:43 PM

How long did the dithering UN give him to move, hide, destroy? If there were none, why the Iraqi fight inspections every step of the way.

Dude, your WMD is a dodge debate point and not worthy of honest discussion points amongst fellow Conservatives. You ignore the fact, every other notable US leader and leaders from around the world was on record with statements asserting their opinion that he indeed had them.

WMDs were not the only reasons so it’s a canard anyway. The Iraqis were in constant violation of UN sanctions and violating the tenets of the Northern and Southern Watch No-Fly zones and provoked Coalition aircraft in those zones with direct fire weapons and missiles.

hawkdriver on March 27, 2014 at 5:52 PM

John Galt you are sounding more and more Obama-like… it’s about Boooosh and The War…. and as usual you ignore the other listed causes in the AUMF…of which WMD were ONE item…. and please explain how the replacement of Saddam was either illegal or immoral… I’ll wait.

JFKY on March 27, 2014 at 5:54 PM

No question his libertarian movement is the future of the GOP, the only question left is if he will be the standard bearer.

Tater Salad on March 27, 2014 at 4:22 PM

As a member of the minority party in the Senate – his hands are kind of tied in terms of engagement with the Senate & the White House. So he’s taking ideas to the people. That’s doing something to me.

22044 on March 27, 2014 at 4:22 PM

I agree that the libertarian movement is the future of the GOP;
I like that Rand Paul wants to move “social” issues to the states
instead of the feds; he articulates his viewpoints on lefty news
shows, speaks in the den of the enemy (lefty liberals) and comes
out “smelling like a rose”.

I also like that he is forthright about putting together an organization instead of running around in circles on a bus!

Rand Paul will give you his opinion, then tell you why and/or how
he came to that opinion. I believe he also gives back to the feds
unused office funds from the running of his senate office.

There is a lot to like about the guy. He is who he says he is and
I can’t say that about a lot of politicians. His dad, however,
creeps me out. I wish he would stay in the background with duct
tape across his mouth.

Amjean on March 27, 2014 at 5:55 PM

And please John Galt in between discussing Booooshes lies you can get around to pointing out what Paul has actually ACCOMPLISHED in DC? No bills, no bills heard in committee, he’s never appointed a single person, negotiated anything, so why is he preferable to any other candidate? Speeches… yeah had 6 years of that already.

JFKY on March 27, 2014 at 5:57 PM

“OK, guys, rent me the biggest water fountain in the state and get me one of those big head-shop Buddhas to prop up a ‘Paul for President’ poster next to it.”

Knott Buyinit on March 27, 2014 at 5:57 PM

Won’t get my vote in a presidential primary. He’s great for KY and he should stay there for a while. No way I would give him control of US foreign policy, though. He has a lot of his dad’s wacko nutcase voter base behind him, though.

I’d rather see Walker or Martinez or just about anyone else.

crosspatch on March 27, 2014 at 6:01 PM

President Paul, er, Senator Paul should sit down with some Romney folks and float the idea of making Mitt Treasury Secretary. That might be a good way of locking up some more donors.

Punchenko on March 27, 2014 at 6:03 PM

Go for it Rand! :-)

Jack_Burton on March 27, 2014 at 6:03 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3