More Rand Paul: I wholeheartedly endorse Susan Collins for reelection in Maine

posted at 8:01 pm on April 28, 2014 by Allahpundit

Via Dan Riehl, people are going nuts over this in the Headlines thread but I don’t know why. He’s not endorsing her over some tea-party primary opponent. She has no primary opponent. He’s endorsing her over the Democrat in the race, Shenna Bellows (whose civil-libertarian cred from working at the ACLU evidently gave Paul no pause).

Even Jim DeMint, who once said he’d rather have 30 principled conservatives in the Senate than a 60-seat majority of RINOs, saw fit to endorse Scott Brown on the eve of his big special election upset in 2010. If Rand can hold an extra Senate seat for the GOP in 2014 by nudging Maine tea partiers to pull the lever for Collins, what’s the harm?

Q: You’re going to join U.S. Sen. Susan Collins for a state party fundraiser today. She’s defended National Security Agency spying programs you oppose, and she’s also running against a Democrat, Shenna Bellows, who comes pretty close to sharing your views on that and other privacy issues. Do you support her, despite disagreement on many of those issues?

A: I wholeheartedly endorse Senator Collins for re-election. I think she’s doing a great job for Maine and for the country. … I don’t really know, exactly, what her position is on the NSA; you’d have to ask her about that.

I just know my position, but I think we’re a big political party. There’s room for not-entire agreement on every issue.

So why are grassroots righties annoyed? Here’s a representative comment from Headlines:

Well, since Collins is running unopposed on the Republican side, it’s logical for Paul to support her over her democrat opponent. However, this is less about “GOP unity” than it is about Rand Paul being desperate to publicly secure his position within the GOP establishment ranks – Republicans would have supported Collins without Rand Paul’s endorsement, so, it’s all pretty meaningless as far as the Maine election goes.

Rand Paul wants to make that everyone knows that he has shifted from the conservative side, to the establishment side – and his ‘wholehearted’ support for Collins is just one more box checked.

Yeah, the “wholehearted” Collins endorsement is interesting mainly as a temperature check on how Paul’s effort to mainstream-ize himself before 2016 is going. Nearly every GOP candidate has a problem with either the establishment or with grassroots conservatives. (The only major contender I can think of who really doesn’t is Scott Walker.) Paul’s problem, needless to say, is with the establishment, who think he’s too dovish, too much like dad, and just too anti-status quo to be a safe pick, so he’s been at pains lately to try to solve it. At some point, between endorsing Mitch McConnell and shifting to a hawkish posture on Russia and running away from Cliven Bundy and making status-quo noises on abortion and ObamaCare, he risks pandering a bit too much to the donor class and thereby irritating his base of righties and libertarians. Backing Collins so effusively when he could have demurred with a simple “I always support Republicans over Democrats” might have been the last straw, definitive proof that he’s “over-correcting.” Bad enough that he’d back McConnell, tea-party enemy number one for the moment, over a grassroots favorite, but to cheer on someone who voted for the stimulus? C’mon.

The risk here isn’t that righties won’t forgive him. He’s already hard at work on a remedial pander, floating a bill to cut foreign aid to the Palestinians unless they recognize Israel’s right to exist. The risk is that he’s putting himself at a disadvantage against Cruz in the battle for tea-party hearts and minds while not reaping any concomitant benefits among the establishmentarians he’s trying to impress. Paul doesn’t expect to win their votes; all he wants is for them to see him as an acceptable nominee, sufficiently status-quo that they won’t unite to destroy him if he pulls an upset in Iowa or New Hampshire. He even met with Romney’s donor network recently, the creme de la creme of the GOP donor class, to make nice. How’s it going so far? You tell me:

The darkest secret in the big money world of the Republican coastal elite is that the most palatable alternative to a nominee such as Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas or Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky would be Clinton, a familiar face on Wall Street following her tenure as a New York senator with relatively moderate views on taxation and financial regulation.

“If it turns out to be Jeb versus Hillary we would love that and either outcome would be fine,” one top Republican-leaning Wall Street lawyer said over lunch in midtown Manhattan last week. “We could live with either one. Jeb versus Joe Biden would also be fine. It’s Rand Paul or Ted Cruz versus someone like Elizabeth Warren that would be everybody’s worst nightmare.”…

Ted Cruz, whose wife works at Goldman Sachs, is viewed negatively by many in the industry for his support of last year’s government shutdown and scorched earth approach to political battle. Cruz fired up an activist gathering in New Hampshire earlier this month with the kind of provocative populist message that makes bankers very nervous. “The rich and powerful, those who walk the corridors of power, are getting fat and happy,” Cruz thundered. At the same event, Paul argued that the GOP “cannot be the party of fat cats, rich people and Wall Street.”

As a wise man recently said, the first duty of establishmentarians is to the establishment, meaning that stopping Paul (or Cruz) will almost certainly take precedence for rich Republicans in 2016 over stopping Hillary. I guess, in theory, with enough pandering Rand could convince them that he’s marginally better than her, but how much pandering could he realistically do before convincing his grassroots fans that he’s sold out and would be as disappointing to righties as president as Obama was to hardcore lefties? Maybe there’s no way out of this bind.


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

JohnGalt23 on April 28, 2014 at 9:37 PM

Some pastels are acceptable, but not to the exclusion of bold conservatives. Exactly how many times do the Republican have to lose for you to consider that a moderate might not be the answer?

Cindy Munford on April 28, 2014 at 9:41 PM

He didn’t need to endorse anyone. Thousands of candidates run every year and never get endorsements from EVERY person on the hill. He could have quietly declined, especially given the way Collins became McCain’s mini-me during the filibusters of both Paul and Cruz.

melle1228 on April 28, 2014 at 9:37 PM

He went to ME’s GOP convention. At their invitation. The senior senator from their state is a member of the GOP, and likely was in the room at the time (I haven’t seen the videotape).

And he endorsed her. Like a good Republican should do for a fellow Republican.

He endorsed her wholeheartedly. Like a good Republican should do for a fellow Republican.

I heard enough shiite about Ron Paul not endorsing the GOP nominee for POTUS (when our nominee was John Fuc**ng McCain!!!??!!) that any criticism of someone actually endorsing a GOP candidate simply rings false…

JohnGalt23 on April 28, 2014 at 9:42 PM

astonerii on April 28, 2014 at 9:35 PM

Never ever vote for a Democrat.

Ever.

Vote third party if you can’t stand the GOP, but don’t vote Democrat.

Pincher Martin on April 28, 2014 at 9:43 PM

The decline of a once great christian nation is totally queer in its outworking.

Murphy9 on April 28, 2014 at 9:43 PM

Some pastels are acceptable, but not to the exclusion of bold conservatives. Exactly how many times do the Republican have to lose for you to consider that a moderate might not be the answer?

Cindy Munford on April 28, 2014 at 9:41 PM

Who is this theoretical “bold conservative” that is being excluded?

The choice isn’t between Susan Collins and a “bold conservative”. The choice is between Susan Collins and a Democrat…

JohnGalt23 on April 28, 2014 at 9:44 PM

bw222 on April 28, 2014 at 9:41 PM

I think he is just testing the waters. I have nothing against him, in fact I like him. But I don’t see myself throwing my support to any short term senator for president. We have some truly lovely and accomplished governors that, for me, will fit the bill better. Except for Christie.

Cindy Munford on April 28, 2014 at 9:44 PM

JohnGalt23 on April 28, 2014 at 9:44 PM

I’m talking about for president. I don’t care about Sen. Collins.

Cindy Munford on April 28, 2014 at 9:45 PM

. I guess, in theory, with enough pandering Rand could convince them that he’s marginally better than her, but how much pandering could he realistically do before convincing his grassroots fans that he’s sold out and would be as disappointing to righties as president as Obama was to hardcore lefties? Maybe there’s no way out of this bind.

What Paul is doing comes across as pandering. He is obviously changing his line for different audiences. In this environment, how does this build trust?

Now it could be Cruz is also feeding lines. However, if true, he comes across as consistent. Which I think is the reason his wife’s involvement in Goldman Sachs, and donations therefrom are now being fed to the news sites.

A bit late, what? Politics is timing. Confucious say: wise politician save motel photos until it too late to refute, or when opponent getting desperate.

It is early for the capos to get out the blackjacks. Shows we are in for one ugly smelly primary

Aint the NSA wonderful. They probably have recordings on everyone.

entagor on April 28, 2014 at 9:45 PM

Of course, Galt doesn’t tell you that D’Amato ran against incumbent Republican Senator Jacob Javits in the 1980 Republican Primary, so Reagan had good reason to both like D’Amato and to think him a major improvement over the previous liberal Republican senator from New York.

Pincher Martin on April 28, 2014 at 9:41 PM

And AFAIK, Reagan didn’t endorse D’Amato over Javits, until D’Amato secured the GOP nomination.

If you bothered to check the link, you’d know the article was from D’Amato’s 1986 campaign.

When, IIRC, he was endorsing gays in the military…

JohnGalt23 on April 28, 2014 at 9:46 PM

He went to ME’s GOP convention. At their invitation. The senior senator from their state is a member of the GOP, and likely was in the room at the time (I haven’t seen the videotape).

And he endorsed her. Like a good Republican should do for a fellow Republican.

He endorsed her wholeheartedly. Like a good Republican should do for a fellow Republican.

I heard enough shiite about Ron Paul not endorsing the GOP nominee for POTUS (when our nominee was John Fuc**ng McCain!!!??!!) that any criticism of someone actually endorsing a GOP candidate simply rings false…

JohnGalt23 on April 28, 2014 at 9:42 PM

You mean he couldn’t decline the invitation due to a prior engagement?

melle1228 on April 28, 2014 at 9:47 PM

In primaries, I would prefer that out of state party members stay out of the process. Once the people have spoken, I expect all party members to get on board. Gov. Romney was wonderful about that.

Cindy Munford on April 28, 2014 at 9:48 PM

And AFAIK, Reagan didn’t endorse D’Amato over Javits, until D’Amato secured the GOP nomination.

Since Javits ran as a “Liberal” in the 1980 general election, I’m pretty sure you’re wrong.

If you bothered to check the link, you’d know the article was from D’Amato’s 1986 campaign.

When, IIRC, he was endorsing gays in the military…

Gays in the military was so far from a reality in 1986 that I seriously doubt anyone thought D’Amato’s stance had any national political implications at all.

Of course in hindsight…

Pincher Martin on April 28, 2014 at 9:50 PM

You mean he couldn’t decline the invitation due to a prior engagement?

melle1228 on April 28, 2014 at 9:47 PM

Good Republicans help Republican party organizations whenever they can.

Especially Republicans that want to carry the Republican Party standard. Or do you think potential GOP nominees should make a habit of blowing off state GOP invitations…?

JohnGalt23 on April 28, 2014 at 9:52 PM

Galt,

Sorry but I didn’t catch your qualification at the end of this sentence.

And AFAIK, Reagan didn’t endorse D’Amato over Javits, until D’Amato secured the GOP nomination.

So you might be right. I doubt it, but it’s possible.

Pincher Martin on April 28, 2014 at 9:53 PM

melle1228 on April 28, 2014 at 9:47 PM

I don’t have any problem with him going since she was unopposed. The article made it sound like it was part fund raiser and he probably brought in some bucks that they normally wouldn’t have gotten. I just think he needs to have his eyes wide open about the unlikelihood of reciprocity.

Cindy Munford on April 28, 2014 at 9:53 PM

Since Javits ran as a “Liberal” in the 1980 general election, I’m pretty sure you’re wrong.

Pincher Martin on April 28, 2014 at 9:50 PM

Javits ran against D’Amato in the GOP primary. And, once again, AFAIK, Reagan didn’t endorse D’Amato until that primary was over, and Al had secured the nomination. And then he endorsed his fellow Republican candidate.

Just like a good Republican should…

JohnGalt23 on April 28, 2014 at 9:54 PM

JohnGalt23 on April 28, 2014 at 9:52 PM

But only by invitation, no personal initiative?

Cindy Munford on April 28, 2014 at 9:55 PM

Good Republicans help Republican party organizations whenever they can.

Especially Republicans that want to carry the Republican Party standard. Or do you think potential GOP nominees should make a habit of blowing off state GOP invitations…?

JohnGalt23 on April 28, 2014 at 9:52 PM

For conservatives the Republican party is a tool. If it is beyond repair, it is time to get rid of it. Having people who want to claim to represent conservatives going out of their way to endorse liberals effectively makes them a less useful tool. It is not Republican squat for me any more. That ended with McCain and TARP and Romney. I came back for the Tea party, but once that light stopped shining and Romney won the nomination, I changed my registration to unaffiliated at my next opportune moment.
Rand Paul is certainly on a roll lately though. He is showing that he is more liberal than libertarian.

astonerii on April 28, 2014 at 9:57 PM

But only by invitation, no personal initiative?

Cindy Munford on April 28, 2014 at 9:55 PM

Are you complaining that Rand Paul hasn’t taken enough initiative to help the GOP?

He certainly campaigned for Romney as our nominee. I’m certain he went to FL to campaign in the special election there.

What more, pray tell, would you like him to do…?

JohnGalt23 on April 28, 2014 at 9:59 PM

Guess Rand couldn’t say “Since the only other choice is a fascist Dem, I whole heartedly support Susan Collins”. Guess I’m glad he recognizes ACLU is only about civil liberties when it advances the fascist Dem agenda.

Charm on April 28, 2014 at 10:00 PM

For conservatives the Republican party is a tool. If it is beyond repair, it is time to get rid of it.

astonerii on April 28, 2014 at 9:57 PM

Then go. The exits are clearly marked.

But you will do us Republicans the good favor of leaving internal Republican party matters, like the choosing of nominees, to Republicans, right…?

JohnGalt23 on April 28, 2014 at 10:00 PM

JohnGalt23 on April 28, 2014 at 9:52 PM

Oh, no, you’re absolutely right. Rand Paul knew exactly what he was doing when he endorsed Susan Collins. He knew of the conflict between Conservatives and Establishment Republicans, and he has made it relatively plain that his support is shifting. How much it shifts remains to be seen.

But you can’t blame people for questioning to what extent he is willing to sacrifice principle for the sake of political expediency and ambition when he is saddling up with the Kings and Queens of political expediency.

You can’t blame people for questioning to what extent they can depend on and rely on Rand.

Now, Rand had a rough row to hoe because of his dad, and if he really had been thinking straight, he would have given himself at least one more term in office before taking the ambitious road to a potential Presidency. He really needed that time for people to overcome the association between Ron and Rand and to develop confidence in who Rand is and what he stands for.

That can’t be done now, because he’s bouncing around all over the place on his political positions.

lineholder on April 28, 2014 at 10:00 PM

JohnGalt23 on April 28, 2014 at 9:59 PM

No I am referring,again, to the gubernatorial race in Virginia. I won’t ever complain about Republicans supporting Republicans after the primary.

Cindy Munford on April 28, 2014 at 10:02 PM

lineholder on April 28, 2014 at 10:00 PM

The funny thing is that Sen. Collins, herself, would probably hold his dad against him.

Cindy Munford on April 28, 2014 at 10:04 PM

No I am referring,again, to the gubernatorial race in Virginia. I won’t ever complain about Republicans supporting Republicans after the primary.

Cindy Munford on April 28, 2014 at 10:02 PM

You mean like Rand Paul stumping for Cuccinelli?

So, Rand Paul showed Susan Collins, his fellow Republican, the same courtesy he showed Ken Cuccinelli, his fellow Republican.

What’s the problem…?

JohnGalt23 on April 28, 2014 at 10:06 PM

JohnGalt23 on April 28, 2014 at 10:00 PM

You call one voter Romney voter a liar and completely ignore the lack of support for candidates from established members of the party and still try to come off as some kind of gatekeeper. Interesting.

Cindy Munford on April 28, 2014 at 10:07 PM

Cindy Munford on April 28, 2014 at 10:04 PM

Oh, I don’t doubt that. No love lost between those two from what I hear.

lineholder on April 28, 2014 at 10:07 PM

JohnGalt23 on April 28, 2014 at 10:06 PM

lineholder on April 28, 2014 at 10:08 PM

JohnGalt23 on April 28, 2014 at 10:06 PM

Oh my God, you have to be putting me on. I am not doubting that Sen. Paul is a good Republican but is Sen. Collins.

Cindy Munford on April 28, 2014 at 10:08 PM

JohnGalt23 on April 28, 2014 at 10:06 PM

The problem is that Rand’s actions in this instance are not being committed in a vacuum. They are part of a pattern of behavior.

lineholder on April 28, 2014 at 10:10 PM

I guess, in theory, with enough pandering Rand could convince them that he’s marginally better than her, but how much pandering could he realistically do before convincing his grassroots fans that he’s sold out and would be as disappointing to righties as president as Obama was to hardcore lefties? Maybe there’s no way out of this bind.

I don’t like Rand Paul, but surely we are tolerant enough that if he can find a formula to unite both the establishment and the Tea Party, we can all vote for him. At some point we have to deal with the reality that well over 45% of the population would vote for the worst socialist scum imaginable, like say our current president. Everyone just needs to moderate enough to win in 2016.

thuja on April 28, 2014 at 10:12 PM

Oh my God, you have to be putting me on. I am not doubting that Sen. Paul is a good Republican but is Sen. Collins.

Cindy Munford on April 28, 2014 at 10:08 PM

Has she supported Mitch McConnell over Harry Reid? Was she there for GWB’s initiatives, the good, bad, and the ugly? Did she support Roberts and Alito to the SCOTUS?

She has, AFAICT, gotten her arse in line when the GOP required it of her. Now, you are suggesting the GOP not return the favor.

Poor form. Very poor form…

JohnGalt23 on April 28, 2014 at 10:14 PM

The problem is that Rand’s actions in this instance are not being committed in a vacuum. They are part of a pattern of behavior.

lineholder on April 28, 2014 at 10:10 PM

A pattern of supporting fellow Republicans…?

JohnGalt23 on April 28, 2014 at 10:15 PM

Everyone just needs to moderate enough to win in 2016.

thuja on April 28, 2014 at 10:12 PM

Yeah, because that’s worked every time the Republicans have tried it.

Cindy Munford on April 28, 2014 at 10:16 PM

JohnGalt23 on April 28, 2014 at 10:14 PM

I am aware that you are purposely misunderstanding me and misconstruing my comments. What would I expect from someone who calls another person a liar over his own vote?

Cindy Munford on April 28, 2014 at 10:17 PM

Then go. The exits are clearly marked.

But you will do us Republicans the good favor of leaving internal Republican party matters, like the choosing of nominees, to Republicans, right…?

JohnGalt23 on April 28, 2014 at 10:00 PM

You read about as well as you think. This below was in the post you quoted from.

I changed my registration to unaffiliated at my next opportune moment.

astonerii on April 28, 2014 at 9:57 PM

If the only thing you care about is the letter after the name of your tyrants, a vote for anyone with an (R) is good for you. It is how the nation gets to where it is today where the President can arbitrarily change laws, arbitrarily enforce laws, target political enemies with the Alphabet agencies, kill American citizens with a drone with no due process, spy on Americans’ phone calls, spy on their internet usage all of which is extra constitutional.

Because the (R)s are looking forward to doing exactly what Obama does when they get power. Thus they will not reign him in any meaningful way.

astonerii on April 28, 2014 at 10:21 PM

Yeah, because that’s worked every time the Republicans have tried it.

Cindy Munford on April 28, 2014 at 10:16 PM

It has worked in numerous Senate election, and it worked in the 2000 and 2004 presidential election, though I may be less than pleased with GWB. At least, he was better than Gore or Kerry.

thuja on April 28, 2014 at 10:21 PM

What would I expect from someone who calls another person a liar over his own vote?

Cindy Munford on April 28, 2014 at 10:17 PM

Should I post astonerii’s comments on supporting Obama over Romney through the primary, contrasted with his claim to have voted Romney?

It is rather amusing, as well as shedding light on just who is a “liar” regarding their support for the candidate of the GOP. But as I said, the hypocrisy and histrionics are just a little bit embarrassing …

JohnGalt23 on April 28, 2014 at 10:23 PM

thuja on April 28, 2014 at 10:21 PM

Yes, it works a lot better in regional type elections. For the presidential election, I hope some of our excellent governors will shine. I don’t know any of them that would qualify as flame throwers.

Cindy Munford on April 28, 2014 at 10:24 PM

I don’t like Rand Paul, but surely we are tolerant enough that if he can find a formula to unite both the establishment and the Tea Party, we can all vote for him. At some point we have to deal with the reality that well over 45% of the population would vote for the worst socialist scum imaginable, like say our current president. Everyone just needs to moderate enough to win in 2016.

thuja on April 28, 2014 at 10:12 PM

Win what? Amnesty? I’ll pass. Paul has next to Romney’s chance of earning my vote in 2016. While significantly better than Romney I am not willing to compromise on Amnesty. Rand Paul is all for increasing the importation of socialists to this nation, starting with the creation of a permanent new voting class for the Democrats. No dice.

astonerii on April 28, 2014 at 10:25 PM

JohnGalt23 on April 28, 2014 at 10:23 PM

And I think your decision on which members of the party that are worthy of support and which aren’t is more than a little hypocritical. And while I realize that emotions and text are hard, any histrionics implied are projections of your own, I don’t do emotional.

Cindy Munford on April 28, 2014 at 10:27 PM

If the only thing you care about is the letter after the name of your tyrants, a vote for anyone with an (R) is good for you. It is how the nation gets to where it is today where the President can arbitrarily change laws, arbitrarily enforce laws, target political enemies with the Alphabet agencies, kill American citizens with a drone with no due process, spy on Americans’ phone calls, spy on their internet usage all of which is extra constitutional.

astonerii on April 28, 2014 at 10:21 PM

And you would turn your back on someone for supporting someone in opposition to someone who would support that POTUS unquestioningly.

Which makes you part of the problem.

Oh, and…

I changed my registration to unaffiliated at my next opportune moment.

astonerii on April 28, 2014 at 9:57 PM

So remind me again why we should give a tinker’s dam about what you think about the GOP nomination process?

Republican Party for Republicans…

JohnGalt23 on April 28, 2014 at 10:27 PM

Republican Party for Republicans…

JohnGalt23 on April 28, 2014 at 10:27 PM

Except when it isn’t.

Cindy Munford on April 28, 2014 at 10:29 PM

Should I post astonerii’s comments on supporting Obama over Romney through the primary, contrasted with his claim to have voted Romney?

It is rather amusing, as well as shedding light on just who is a “liar” regarding their support for the candidate of the GOP. But as I said, the hypocrisy and histrionics are just a little bit embarrassing …

JohnGalt23 on April 28, 2014 at 10:23 PM

I changed my mind about 3 weeks before the election and stated my reasoning. So you should post that too if you are an honest person looking to be reputable. Like I said up the chain here, feel free to post them, I already admitted it is true that I said I was going to vote Romney as the blogosphere betrayed all things conservative to make Romney the nominee.
Of course, the truth is that you are not an honest person and do not want to be truly reputable, you just want to win your fights using any underhanded tool you can grasp. Ad Hominem style. Well, I can take your assaults just fine and still come out well enough.

astonerii on April 28, 2014 at 10:29 PM

And while I realize that emotions and text are hard, any histrionics implied are projections of your own, I don’t do emotional.

Cindy Munford on April 28, 2014 at 10:27 PM

That’s okay. Astonerii has you more than covered…

JohnGalt23 on April 28, 2014 at 10:31 PM

If the only thing you care about is the letter after the name of your tyrants, a vote for anyone with an (R) is good for you. It is how the nation gets to where it is today where the President can arbitrarily change laws, arbitrarily enforce laws, target political enemies with the Alphabet agencies, kill American citizens with a drone with no due process, spy on Americans’ phone calls, spy on their internet usage all of which is extra constitutional.

astonerii on April 28, 2014 at 10:21 PM

And you would turn your back on someone for supporting someone in opposition to someone who would support that POTUS unquestioningly.

Which makes you part of the problem.

Oh, and…

Yeah, because she is part of the problem with the Republican party that leaves it in its current state. Like I just said, the Republican party is looking forward to using all those extra constitutional actions for their own tyranny and they will do it. The party needs to be cleaned up from the inside, and the start of that is getting rid of People like Susan who have thwarted conservative actions for decades even when we had majorities. The nation will never return towards a constitutional government until we get rid of the liberals that infest the party.

I changed my registration to unaffiliated at my next opportune moment.

astonerii on April 28, 2014 at 9:57 PM

So remind me again why we should give a tinker’s dam about what you think about the GOP nomination process?

Republican Party for Republicans…

JohnGalt23 on April 28, 2014 at 10:27 PM

You should care, I am not the only one leaving. I left already, but my vote is earnable. Others are still willing to take one or two more insults from the likes of your side, and they they will be gone as well. If you honestly want to win elections, your desire to not have anyone be part of your party betrays that thought.

astonerii on April 28, 2014 at 10:36 PM

JohnGalt23 on April 28, 2014 at 10:31 PM

Yes, just imagine being called a liar about something about which no one else would have a clue. And why in the world could anyone be upset over the selective choice of their own words to make someone else,s incorrect assumptions? Yeah, he’s crazy.

Cindy Munford on April 28, 2014 at 10:39 PM

There was a point where I may have voted for him. Not any more…..

crosshugger on April 28, 2014 at 10:41 PM

crosshugger on April 28, 2014 at 10:41 PM

Don’t feel bad, when the nominees are really in the thick of it, John Galt23 will throw Rand Paul under the bus so fast it will make your head spin. He’s just warming up his jerk mode for the real fight to come.

Cindy Munford on April 28, 2014 at 10:46 PM

Win what? Amnesty? I’ll pass. Paul has next to Romney’s chance of earning my vote in 2016. While significantly better than Romney I am not willing to compromise on Amnesty. Rand Paul is all for increasing the importation of socialists to this nation, starting with the creation of a permanent new voting class for the Democrats. No dice.

astonerii on April 28, 2014 at 10:25 PM

My values are the same as yours. If you can convince me there is a winning strategy, I will fight with you. I just don’t do suicide missions.

thuja on April 28, 2014 at 10:47 PM

JohnGalt23 on April 28, 2014 at 10:15 PM

That’s hard to say. At this point, it does appear that it could be a developing pattern of selling out his principle for the sake of political expediency in gaining the favor of Establishment Republican donors.

We’ll just have to wait and see.

If that’s what he’s doing, then he’s definitely done it by choice, and why you think Conservatives should respect or trust just another sell-out is beyond me.

lineholder on April 28, 2014 at 10:56 PM

Maybe it’s because I live in Illinois that I am so sensitive to Mark Kirk’s butt-boy voting record, but I always think of him as the worst GOP Senator since Spector.

But “Shaky” Collins is actually worse.

Kirk’s 12 year rating is 57%, with a 44 in 2013 (no rating in 2012 after his disastrous stroke).

Collins hasn’t hit 30% in two years. That’s right — 28% in 2013 and 20% in 2012. Which means she has voted with the Harry Reid Demonrats more than 70% of the time for two years.

Her 17 year rating is 47 — a net win for forces of liberalism and big government. She is the GOP’s answer to the Stupidest Woman in the Senate, Patty Murray. Hey, but Rand Paul is apparently a big fan, I guess because 20 is better than 0, or something.

Jaibones on April 28, 2014 at 10:57 PM

Jaibones on April 28, 2014 at 10:57 PM

Hey, she has an R behind her name so shut up.////

Cindy Munford on April 28, 2014 at 11:01 PM

My values are the same as yours. If you can convince me there is a winning strategy, I will fight with you. I just don’t do suicide missions.

thuja on April 28, 2014 at 10:47 PM

My plan? I’m just an engineer. My plan right now is to vote for the conservative. Note, I no longer simply vote for the most conservative. Clinton is more conservative than Obama. If none show up, well, at this point I do not much think there is any hope. Especially with the V7_sport and JohnGalts of the party.
Just like the Alphabet soups, the educational system and pretty much every other bureaucracy, the Republican party has been taken over by people who only care about the institution and could care less about the mission.
The people who exhibit party first in this way are in fact the enemy. They refuse to even acknowledge the mission let alone allow it to be accomplished.

astonerii on April 28, 2014 at 11:06 PM

John Galt writes,

Javits ran against D’Amato in the GOP primary. And, once again, AFAIK, Reagan didn’t endorse D’Amato until that primary was over, and Al had secured the nomination. And then he endorsed his fellow Republican candidate.

Just like a good Republican should…

But you don’t know that. You’re just guessing and then building an assumption on that guess.

And since Javits was claiming to support Reagan’s nomination that year, Reagan’s camp might have felt that it was an unnecessary fight for their national candidate to get involved in. D’Amato, on the other hand, had no problem using Reagan against Javits, and to my knowledge Reagan’s camp never told him to stop doing so.

Ask Ford how happy he was with Reagan’s support in 1976 after the GOP primaries were over.

Pincher Martin on April 28, 2014 at 11:11 PM

Ask Ford how happy he was with Reagan’s support in 1976 after the GOP primaries were over.

Pincher Martin on April 28, 2014 at 11:11 PM

I cried as I watched that convention.

Cindy Munford on April 28, 2014 at 11:22 PM

I cried as I watched that convention.

So did Ford.

Pincher Martin on April 28, 2014 at 11:26 PM

Pincher Martin on April 28, 2014 at 11:26 PM

It’s also where I found that Barry Goldwater wasn’t the be all to end all.

Cindy Munford on April 28, 2014 at 11:32 PM

I wholeheartedly have lost any respect I had for this douchebag…

Doomsday on April 28, 2014 at 11:35 PM

Doomsday on April 28, 2014 at 11:35 PM

He’s just trying to be a team player. On a team that hates him.

Cindy Munford on April 28, 2014 at 11:39 PM

He’s just trying to be a team player. On a team that hates him.

Cindy Munford on April 28, 2014 at 11:39 PM

…he has a good heart…but he’s turning me off!

KOOLAID2 on April 29, 2014 at 12:09 AM

Does anyone really think Rand Paul is a RINO? Hes simply trying to be a team player and get in good with the “establishment”.

Jack_Burton on April 29, 2014 at 12:16 AM

KOOLAID2 on April 29, 2014 at 12:09 AM

I think he is trying to be everything to everybody, that can’t work for long.

Cindy Munford on April 29, 2014 at 12:28 AM

Jack_Burton on April 29, 2014 at 12:16 AM

Of course he’s not a RINO but do you honestly think the establishment is ever going to look past his father? Fair or not, between his father and the Tea Party support, he will never get their support.

Cindy Munford on April 29, 2014 at 12:30 AM

Of course he’s not a RINO but do you honestly think the establishment is ever going to look past his father? Fair or not, between his father and the Tea Party support, he will never get their support.

Cindy Munford on April 29, 2014 at 12:30 AM

Exactly right. No matter how hard he tries they would rather lose to Hillary than see him win. Sad but true.

Jack_Burton on April 29, 2014 at 1:40 AM

There seems to be a troubling tendency among die-hard Tea Party conservatives to view winning elections with a bilious eye, predicated on the assumption that success in politics is by definition a form of corruption and any concession, even one made ever so gingerly, to attracting votes is an instant deal breaker. This is a recipe for perpetual failure. And at the risk of sounding like a Demoncrap, we DO live in a pluralistic society in which differing viewpoints are theoretically given each their fair share of the sunlight.

jbspry on April 29, 2014 at 2:19 AM

I still can’t figure out Maine. Why it’s blue with two rino chicks as Senators.
Isn’t it like 4:1 men there? Bunch of lumberjacks?

It’s bot Vermont. ….is it?

wolly4321 on April 28, 2014 at 9:29 PM

Maine is actually easy to figure out. Most of the population are typical NE liberals living along the coast. Much of the inland Forests were sold in 1000 acre “fiefdoms” (I believe that was how the old timer locals described it) to rich New Yorkers and M@ssh0les.

In short, it’s a miracle the senators are republican at all. It’s a problem I am sure many here will fix though. Their eventual replacements will be far more like Warren.

And, Cindy, what to h3ll is an “extreme moderate”? Those two are “damage control” republicans, and should be thought of as such.

And, Cindy Munford

WryTrvllr on April 29, 2014 at 5:31 AM

And, Cindy Munford

WryTrvllr on April 29, 2014 at 5:31 AM

No further questions your honor. Just a slow, NSA certified, computer.

WryTrvllr on April 29, 2014 at 5:34 AM

jbspry on April 29, 2014 at 2:19 AM

Interesting that you would see the Tea Party as the ones who stifle differences. I need more information on why you feel that is the case.

Cindy Munford on April 29, 2014 at 5:55 AM

WryTrvllr on April 29, 2014 at 5:31 AM

You know, the never rock the boat type.

Cindy Munford on April 29, 2014 at 5:55 AM

Well, at least he’s just endorsing a fellow Republican and not teaming up with liberals like Schumer on an immigration bill like Rubio did. He will need support from the RNC to be a candidate, but I hope he doesn’t sell his soul.

lea on April 29, 2014 at 7:08 AM

Well, at least he’s just endorsing a fellow Republican and not teaming up with liberals like Schumer on an immigration bill like Rubio did. He will need support from the RNC to be a candidate, but I hope he doesn’t sell his soul.

lea on April 29, 2014 at 7:08 AM

People keep saying Collins is a Republican. Outside of voting the correct way on ObamaCare, I see little that has her following supposed Republican principles. And if seeing to it that Collins is elected just so McConnell can be majority leader, that’s a classic case of “meh” for me.

Bitter Clinger on April 29, 2014 at 7:32 AM

Strike two Senator Paul.

casaler on April 29, 2014 at 9:11 AM

This guy is becoming quite the little pr*ck. But he’s not stupid.

rrpjr on April 29, 2014 at 9:40 AM

I never liked him or his pop.

neyney on April 29, 2014 at 9:49 AM

Don’t feel bad, when the nominees are really in the thick of it, John Galt23 will throw Rand Paul under the bus so fast it will make your head spin. He’s just warming up his jerk mode for the real fight to come.

Cindy Munford on April 28, 2014 at 10:46 PM

Ever place money on such things…?

JohnGalt23 on April 29, 2014 at 9:55 AM

People keep saying Collins is a Republican. Outside of voting the correct way on ObamaCare, I see little that has her following supposed Republican principles. And if seeing to it that Collins is elected just so McConnell can be majority leader, that’s a classic case of “meh” for me.

Bitter Clinger on April 29, 2014 at 7:32 AM

That right there is Loserspeak…

JohnGalt23 on April 29, 2014 at 9:56 AM

He’s just trying to be a team player. On a team that hates him.

Cindy Munford on April 28, 2014 at 11:39 PM

I’ll point out he won their straw poll. In a crowd that nearly defines “establishment”. Now, I’ll grant you showing up counts for something. But for an establishment that hates him, they sure are showing him a lot of love…

JohnGalt23 on April 29, 2014 at 9:59 AM

Bukley Rule

“support the MOST conservative candidate”

C-Low on April 29, 2014 at 10:05 AM

The Abortion Barbie of the Northeast. Republicrat and most annoying voice in America……..

Hening on April 29, 2014 at 10:06 AM

This guy is becoming quite the little pr*ck. But he’s not stupid.

rrpjr on April 29, 2014 at 9:40 AM

Quite the little pr!ck. For endorsing a fellow Republican. At her own state party’s convention, that he graciously accepted an invitation to. An invitation extended with equal grace, I am sure.

Tell me, when this man is our nominee for POTUS, will you expect him to blow off his fellow Republicans with the same abandon, so as to avoid being a pr!ck…?

JohnGalt23 on April 29, 2014 at 10:06 AM

Is Allahpundid gay?

celtic warrior on April 29, 2014 at 10:42 AM

Yes, supporting Collins against the Democrat is a no-brainer but Rand Paul has displayed a disquieting ability to “forget” his principles in his quest for the Presidency. He is not to be trusted.

searcher on April 29, 2014 at 10:56 AM

This guy is such a weasel the way he sucks up to the establishment. I have little respect for him anymore. If he becomes our nominee, I will not vote for him due to his embrace of amnesty. That is where I draw the line.

KickandSwimMom on April 29, 2014 at 10:58 AM

Is Allahpundid gay?

celtic warrior on April 29, 2014 at 10:42 AM

I don’t know, but he is definitely a Pajama Boy.

Wigglesworth on April 29, 2014 at 10:59 AM

I’ll point out he won their straw poll. In a crowd that nearly defines “establishment”.

A straw poll is meaningless. Just ask Michele Bachmann.

The crowd that voted for Rand doesn’t nearly define “establishment. ” They define “perpetual losers.” Maine’s GOP caucus nearly voted two years ago for Ron Paul, for God’s sakes. That’s Ron, not Rand. You think the straw poll is made up of a better class of people?

Maine’s GOP is probably a lot like the decrepit party structure in many states without a serious mainstream opposition party. An outlier Republican (or Democrat) can win a state office by posing as the local anti-establishment figure, but God forbid if they try to get too cozy with the national GOP (or Democratic) mainstream.

Rand is merely taking advantage of the good will and political structure that his father left him in the state in order to pose as a national figure. It won’t work. He’s never going to be president.

Pincher Martin on April 29, 2014 at 11:02 AM

JohnGalt23 on April 29, 2014 at 10:06 AM

My opinion. You’re free to maintain he’s not a pr*ck. And no, not based on this one lone event. He’s made a series of nasty jabs lately as well as a number of foolish foreign policy remarks. But as I said, he’s not stupid. He’s playing the same old game you need to play to run for President with some new and inventive twists. But it boils down to the same thing in the end — marginalizing conservatism.

rrpjr on April 29, 2014 at 12:04 PM

If only the Rs were worth a thought…if only

Schadenfreude on April 29, 2014 at 12:22 PM

Better to endorse Collins than her likely opponent.

Can’t believe people are making a big deal out of this.

Collins is polling at 60% with the next closest, a dem challenger at 20 something percent.

There are other motives at play here with the controversy of a Republican Senator supporting the only Republican in a race.

Those who oppose amnesty should think about what happens if the Dem picks up this seat. Is it more likely we get a deal on immigration we don’t like with a Dem or with Collins?

If you all are saying that the Dem is more conservative than Collins, I would understand the criticism of Paul’s endorsement. Absent that, I don’t see what all the fuss is about.

Was Paul supposed to endorse the Dem challenger or just not do anything? Those seem to be the only other choices here.

airupthere on April 29, 2014 at 12:26 PM

Those who oppose amnesty should think about what happens if the Dem picks up this seat. Is it more likely we get a deal on immigration we don’t like with a Dem or with Collins?

airupthere on April 29, 2014 at 12:26 PM

The fact that I have to actually really think hard about that tells me all I need to know. Collins is an amnesty advocate and so is the Dem. There is no difference in how they would vote.

KickandSwimMom on April 29, 2014 at 12:44 PM

Even Jim DeMint, who once said he’d rather have 30 principled conservatives in the Senate than a 60-seat majority of RINOs, saw fit to endorse Scott Brown on the eve of his big special election upset in 2010.

Which Republican didn’t stand behind Scott Brown BEFORE the Kennedy seat election? That’s the best you can do AP? Scott Brown was a mystery to be before the election. We even watched Brown’s commencement speech with joy. It wasn’t until he said his favorite senator was John McCain that I realized what a disaster Brown was going to be.

Rand Paul feels he needs to inject himself into everything. Once he came out in favor of amnesty while talking down the Texans, it was over for me with Rand. When Rand attacked Ted Nugent for speaking his mind, it was really over with me for Rand indefinitely. Rand Paul can stay in Kentucky where he belongs and be a senator, nothing more.

CommieJuice on April 29, 2014 at 12:55 PM

CommieJuice on April 29, 2014 at 12:55 PM

Yeah, the Scott Brown election was essentially a stop ObamaCare election.

And Rand Paul is lost in a pinball machine. Where’s he going to bounce next?

INC on April 29, 2014 at 1:55 PM

The fact that I have to actually really think hard about that tells me all I need to know. Collins is an amnesty advocate and so is the Dem. There is no difference in how they would vote.

KickandSwimMom on April 29, 2014 at 12:44 PM

To the greater point of this whole supposed controversy then. If there is no difference in how they would vote, why does it matter that Rand Paul endorsed Susan Collins in this one specific race? It isn’t like there is a conservative alternative.

airupthere on April 29, 2014 at 2:25 PM

While I like Rand Paul, I’m not a huge Paul-2016 proponent but HA’s coverage is interesting.

Since April 1st there have been 18 posts on this website tagged with Rand Paul as opposed to 7 for Ted Cruz during the same time frame.

It seems that more energy is being spent attempting to knock down Rand Paul than is being spent promoting anything Cruz has to offer.

And I actually like Cruz more than Paul at the moment. The difference just strikes me as illustrative of us eating our own instead of simply supporting a better candidate.

airupthere on April 29, 2014 at 2:29 PM

Since April 1st there have been 18 posts on this website tagged with Rand Paul as opposed to 7 for Ted Cruz during the same time frame.

It seems that more energy is being spent attempting to knock down Rand Paul than is being spent promoting anything Cruz has to offer.

airupthere on April 29, 2014 at 2:29 PM

You are correct about the slim coverage of Cruz, and not just on HA

I have the opposite opinion of the reason for this promotion of a brand. IMHO when HA starts pushing Rand Paul, for instance, it is because they are trying of get people to improve their opinion of him, by constant arguments in favor of the subject, promoted by persistent posters who talk like precinct captains

In advertising, repetition builds brand recognition. The more familiar a brand name, the more likely it will gain positives, in absence of utter scandal.

The GOP top goes out of its way to ignore Cruz, so deep is the hatred for Cruz talking cuts in line, and getting camera time by being, IMHO, light years smarter than them. As far as HA, there is a wistful desire by some of those running the site to defend the Libertarian, and a huge distaste for the anti amnesty, anti gay marriage, moralist membership.

Not moderators per se, but others would certainly like to cleanse that bloodline in HA before the primary candidates begin their debates. Especially if they hoped to incorporate HA in special interaction on those debates. It is tricky, to herd out the mustangs when you need mares.

Many HA contributors are impressive talkers. That makes them a problem
… and they are fighters I love to read – hey astonerii, Munford et al

entagor on April 29, 2014 at 7:33 PM

Better to endorse Collins than her likely opponent.

Can’t believe people are making a big deal out of this.

Collins is polling at 60% with the next closest, a dem challenger at 20 something percent.

There are other motives at play here with the controversy of a Republican Senator supporting the only Republican in a race.

Those who oppose amnesty should think about what happens if the Dem picks up this seat. Is it more likely we get a deal on immigration we don’t like with a Dem or with Collins?

If you all are saying that the Dem is more conservative than Collins, I would understand the criticism of Paul’s endorsement. Absent that, I don’t see what all the fuss is about.

Was Paul supposed to endorse the Dem challenger or just not do anything? Those seem to be the only other choices here.

airupthere on April 29, 2014 at 12:26 PM

Senator Joe Miller (AK) would disagree with you.

WryTrvllr on April 30, 2014 at 12:20 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3