http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/08/05/rand_paul_i_didnt_run_from_dreamer_i_was_about_to_do_an_interview.html
Topic: GOP - Rand Paul's Presidential Highlight Reel w/ his Libertarian Twist - page 77. (Read 205816 times)
August 07, 2014, 01:49:05 PM
rand paul ducking the dreamer girl was pretty funny. it's not really a big issue, and maybe what he says is true, but it's pretty funny how he just gets up and leaves once the mexican girl is there
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/08/05/rand_paul_i_didnt_run_from_dreamer_i_was_about_to_do_an_interview.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/08/05/rand_paul_i_didnt_run_from_dreamer_i_was_about_to_do_an_interview.html
August 07, 2014, 01:38:07 PM
rand paul is being called out for going back on his word.. it's already happening, he's getting all this scrutiny and his message is starting to get muddled because he has to appeal to the populous.
http://news.yahoo.com/rand-paul-says-he-never-proposed-ending-aid-to-israel--even-though-he-did-193355206.html?soc_src=mediacontentstory
That's disappointing. Oh, well... maybe Dennis Kucinich will run again. http://news.yahoo.com/rand-paul-says-he-never-proposed-ending-aid-to-israel--even-though-he-did-193355206.html?soc_src=mediacontentstory
(Please, God, don't make me vote Libertarian!)Quote
Rand Paul = Democrats’ Enemy #1
The senator’s broad appeal threatens to weaken Democrats for 2016, and they are going on offense—sending out no less than 10 press releases on his latest trip to Iowa.
Olivia Nuzzi
08.07.14
Democrats fundraise and campaign by exploiting concerns about right-wing extremism. But at least at the moment, what they apparently fear most is the rise of a candidate who could potentially poach enough of their supporters to beat them in 2016.
Rand Paul has not yet formally announced he is running for the Republican nomination. But with a lead in GOP polls and already laying the foundation for the infrastructure of a campaign, the junior senator from Kentucky is considered the early front-runner, one who is transparent about his desire to appeal to a broad range of voters—and that has Democrats worried.
For the 10th time in two years, Paul arrived on Monday in Iowa, where the first presidential caucuses will be held in 17 months, to try out his message on a three-day, multi-city, headline-generating tour.
Over the course of the trip, the Democratic National Committee sent out 10 press releases about Paul’s every move and utterance. “What it can tell you as a political observer is that they recognize what we’re trying to point out, which is Rand is the Republican who has the best chance of keeping and energizing the base while going into their constituencies," a senior aide for Paul told The Daily Beast.
...
“He’s working not to get out of the conservative box but to redefine it,” Simon Rosenberg, president of the New Democrat Network, told The Daily Beast. If Paul gets the nomination, he becomes the effective leader of his party—meaning his redefinition of that conservative box could become the definition, a problem for Democrats, as Paul has a tendency to stake out atypical positions for a conservative and reach across party lines.
...
The senator’s broad appeal threatens to weaken Democrats for 2016, and they are going on offense—sending out no less than 10 press releases on his latest trip to Iowa.
Olivia Nuzzi
08.07.14
Democrats fundraise and campaign by exploiting concerns about right-wing extremism. But at least at the moment, what they apparently fear most is the rise of a candidate who could potentially poach enough of their supporters to beat them in 2016.
Rand Paul has not yet formally announced he is running for the Republican nomination. But with a lead in GOP polls and already laying the foundation for the infrastructure of a campaign, the junior senator from Kentucky is considered the early front-runner, one who is transparent about his desire to appeal to a broad range of voters—and that has Democrats worried.
For the 10th time in two years, Paul arrived on Monday in Iowa, where the first presidential caucuses will be held in 17 months, to try out his message on a three-day, multi-city, headline-generating tour.
Over the course of the trip, the Democratic National Committee sent out 10 press releases about Paul’s every move and utterance. “What it can tell you as a political observer is that they recognize what we’re trying to point out, which is Rand is the Republican who has the best chance of keeping and energizing the base while going into their constituencies," a senior aide for Paul told The Daily Beast.
...
“He’s working not to get out of the conservative box but to redefine it,” Simon Rosenberg, president of the New Democrat Network, told The Daily Beast. If Paul gets the nomination, he becomes the effective leader of his party—meaning his redefinition of that conservative box could become the definition, a problem for Democrats, as Paul has a tendency to stake out atypical positions for a conservative and reach across party lines.
...
More...http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/08/07/rand-paul-democrats-enemy-1.html
August 05, 2014, 10:16:20 AM
rand paul is being called out for going back on his word.. it's already happening, he's getting all this scrutiny and his message is starting to get muddled because he has to appeal to the populous.
http://news.yahoo.com/rand-paul-says-he-never-proposed-ending-aid-to-israel--even-though-he-did-193355206.html?soc_src=mediacontentstory
That's disappointing. Oh, well... maybe Dennis Kucinich will run again. http://news.yahoo.com/rand-paul-says-he-never-proposed-ending-aid-to-israel--even-though-he-did-193355206.html?soc_src=mediacontentstory
(Please, God, don't make me vote Libertarian!) August 05, 2014, 01:09:05 AM
elizabeth warren is now being pressured to run by the kennedys.. she is basically my democrat version of rand paul. i like her quite a bit. imagine a warren vs. paul presidential bid.. that'd be great. http://www.newsmax.com/newswidget/kennedys-pushing-warren-hillary-clinton/2014/08/03/id/586512/?promo_code=13074-1&utm_source=13074The_hill&utm_medium=nmwidget&utm_campaign=widgetphase1
Warren lost all credibility from moderates when it was revealed how much in contributions she took from those big banks she supposedly was supposed to shake a stick at. I find it funny that the big banks that would be so fearful of her vengeance are throwing money at her. Must be because so many of them were jailed by Obama/Holder.
that does sound fishy. but on the other hand, there are probably a lot of people who work for banks/wall street and want to change the status quo, but don't speak up openly.. it's quite a big group of people after all.
it is a bit ridiculous how much obama received from wall street. they knew there was going to be a big fallout, so they probably paid him all of that money for "protection."
August 05, 2014, 01:05:33 AM
elizabeth warren is now being pressured to run by the kennedys.. she is basically my democrat version of rand paul. i like her quite a bit. imagine a warren vs. paul presidential bid.. that'd be great. http://www.newsmax.com/newswidget/kennedys-pushing-warren-hillary-clinton/2014/08/03/id/586512/?promo_code=13074-1&utm_source=13074The_hill&utm_medium=nmwidget&utm_campaign=widgetphase1
Warren lost all credibility from moderates when it was revealed how much in contributions she took from those big banks she supposedly was supposed to shake a stick at. I find it funny that the big banks that would be so fearful of her vengeance are throwing money at her. Must be because so many of them were jailed by Obama/Holder.
August 05, 2014, 12:27:54 AM
rand paul is being called out for going back on his word.. it's already happening, he's getting all this scrutiny and his message is starting to get muddled because he has to appeal to the populous.
http://news.yahoo.com/rand-paul-says-he-never-proposed-ending-aid-to-israel--even-though-he-did-193355206.html?soc_src=mediacontentstory
http://news.yahoo.com/rand-paul-says-he-never-proposed-ending-aid-to-israel--even-though-he-did-193355206.html?soc_src=mediacontentstory
Quote
Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul on Monday denied that he once supported ending federal aid to Israel — an idea he proposed as recently as 2011.
Related Stories
Israel's Iron Dome Huffington Post
Lawmakers try to seal $225M aid package for Israel Associated Press
US Congress approves funding for Israel's Iron Dome AFP
Obama signs funding package for Israel's Iron Dome Associated Press
Congress backs Israel's Iron Dome missile defense Associated Press
“I haven’t really proposed that in the past,” Paul told Yahoo News when asked if he still thought the U.S. should phase out aid to Israel, which has been battling Hamas in Gaza for weeks. “We’ve never had a legislative proposal to do that. You can mistake my position, but then I’ll answer the question. That has not been a position — a legislative position — we have introduced to phase out or get rid of Israel’s aid. That’s the answer to that question. Israel has always been a strong ally of ours and I appreciate that. I voted just this week to give money — more money — to the Iron Dome, so don’t mischaracterize my position on Israel.”
Paul, who was in Omaha campaigning for Nebraska Senate candidate Ben Sasse before a three-day tour of neighboring Iowa, may not like it when reporters bring up his proposal from three years ago to end all U.S. foreign aid — including to Israel. But that was in fact his position.
In 2011, the newly elected Paul proposed a budget that would have cut $500 billion from the federal budget in part by cutting off foreign aid to all countries, including financial grants to Israel. The United States provides about $3 billion to Israel annually, and last week the Senate approved $225 million to help support Israel’s Iron Dome technology, which blocks rocket fire from Gaza. (Paul supported the measure.)
Paul, in his first months in office, however, defended phasing out aid by saying that the U.S. could no longer afford to give cash to other countries.
“I’m not singling out Israel. I support Israel. I want to be known as a friend of Israel, but not with money you don’t have,” Paul said in 2011 during an interview with ABC News. “We can’t just borrow from our kids’ future and give it to countries, even if they are our friends.”
He even pointed to Israel as an example of a nation that doesn’t need foreign aid because of its own wealth.
“I think they’re an important ally, but I also think that their per capita income is greater than probably three-fourths of the rest of the world,” Paul said, also in 2011. “Should we be giving free money or welfare to a wealthy nation? I don’t think so.”
Paul, a possible 2016 presidential contender whom some in the GOP regard as insufficiently pro-Israel, has recently changed his tune on foreign aid to the Jewish state. His budget proposals since 2001 have included aid to Israel.
It’s one thing for a politician to admit that his views have changed on an issue and an entirely other thing to say that he never held the position at all.
Related Stories
Israel's Iron Dome Huffington Post
Lawmakers try to seal $225M aid package for Israel Associated Press
US Congress approves funding for Israel's Iron Dome AFP
Obama signs funding package for Israel's Iron Dome Associated Press
Congress backs Israel's Iron Dome missile defense Associated Press
“I haven’t really proposed that in the past,” Paul told Yahoo News when asked if he still thought the U.S. should phase out aid to Israel, which has been battling Hamas in Gaza for weeks. “We’ve never had a legislative proposal to do that. You can mistake my position, but then I’ll answer the question. That has not been a position — a legislative position — we have introduced to phase out or get rid of Israel’s aid. That’s the answer to that question. Israel has always been a strong ally of ours and I appreciate that. I voted just this week to give money — more money — to the Iron Dome, so don’t mischaracterize my position on Israel.”
Paul, who was in Omaha campaigning for Nebraska Senate candidate Ben Sasse before a three-day tour of neighboring Iowa, may not like it when reporters bring up his proposal from three years ago to end all U.S. foreign aid — including to Israel. But that was in fact his position.
In 2011, the newly elected Paul proposed a budget that would have cut $500 billion from the federal budget in part by cutting off foreign aid to all countries, including financial grants to Israel. The United States provides about $3 billion to Israel annually, and last week the Senate approved $225 million to help support Israel’s Iron Dome technology, which blocks rocket fire from Gaza. (Paul supported the measure.)
Paul, in his first months in office, however, defended phasing out aid by saying that the U.S. could no longer afford to give cash to other countries.
“I’m not singling out Israel. I support Israel. I want to be known as a friend of Israel, but not with money you don’t have,” Paul said in 2011 during an interview with ABC News. “We can’t just borrow from our kids’ future and give it to countries, even if they are our friends.”
He even pointed to Israel as an example of a nation that doesn’t need foreign aid because of its own wealth.
“I think they’re an important ally, but I also think that their per capita income is greater than probably three-fourths of the rest of the world,” Paul said, also in 2011. “Should we be giving free money or welfare to a wealthy nation? I don’t think so.”
Paul, a possible 2016 presidential contender whom some in the GOP regard as insufficiently pro-Israel, has recently changed his tune on foreign aid to the Jewish state. His budget proposals since 2001 have included aid to Israel.
It’s one thing for a politician to admit that his views have changed on an issue and an entirely other thing to say that he never held the position at all.
August 04, 2014, 04:05:23 PM
August 04, 2014, 04:02:38 PM
Quote
Rand Paul, Still Mum, Lays 2016 Groundwork
Senator Hires Experts in Three Key States, Raises Funds Aggressively
By Beth Reinhard and Rebecca Ballhaus
Sen. Rand Paul hasn't said whether he will seek the 2016 GOP presidential nomination. But his aggressive groundwork seems to point to no other outcome.
In recent weeks, the Kentucky Republican announced political hires in quick succession in Iowa, New Hampshire and Michigan— states key to winning his party's nomination. Staffers mention a future campaign headquarters in Louisville and claim an email list of one million supporters, details most potential presidential hopefuls keep quiet. A super PAC launched by backers shortly before the 2012 election offers a repository for big donors.
On Monday, Mr. Paul begins a three-day, 10-stop swing through Iowa, marking his 10th visit in this election cycle to one of the first three states on the traditional nominating calendar. Only Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) has made more trips, at 11.
The early spade work serves an important purpose for Mr. Paul, a 51-year-old tea-party favorite elected to the Senate less than four years ago. As a central figure in a movement at odds with the political establishment and an apostate from his party's muscular stance on foreign policy, Mr. Paul must prove that he has broader national support than his father, former Rep. Ron Paul, a two-time presidential candidate who never won a nominating contest.
"Rand Paul is for real—a 100%, dead-serious contender, and anyone who underestimates him should have his head examined," said Phil Musser, a Republican strategist who advised GOP presidential hopefuls Tim Pawlenty and Mitt Romney but is unaffiliated with any potential 2016 candidates. "He has changed the perception that a Paul could never win the nomination."
...
Senator Hires Experts in Three Key States, Raises Funds Aggressively
By Beth Reinhard and Rebecca Ballhaus
Sen. Rand Paul hasn't said whether he will seek the 2016 GOP presidential nomination. But his aggressive groundwork seems to point to no other outcome.
In recent weeks, the Kentucky Republican announced political hires in quick succession in Iowa, New Hampshire and Michigan— states key to winning his party's nomination. Staffers mention a future campaign headquarters in Louisville and claim an email list of one million supporters, details most potential presidential hopefuls keep quiet. A super PAC launched by backers shortly before the 2012 election offers a repository for big donors.
On Monday, Mr. Paul begins a three-day, 10-stop swing through Iowa, marking his 10th visit in this election cycle to one of the first three states on the traditional nominating calendar. Only Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) has made more trips, at 11.
The early spade work serves an important purpose for Mr. Paul, a 51-year-old tea-party favorite elected to the Senate less than four years ago. As a central figure in a movement at odds with the political establishment and an apostate from his party's muscular stance on foreign policy, Mr. Paul must prove that he has broader national support than his father, former Rep. Ron Paul, a two-time presidential candidate who never won a nominating contest.
"Rand Paul is for real—a 100%, dead-serious contender, and anyone who underestimates him should have his head examined," said Phil Musser, a Republican strategist who advised GOP presidential hopefuls Tim Pawlenty and Mitt Romney but is unaffiliated with any potential 2016 candidates. "He has changed the perception that a Paul could never win the nomination."
...
http://online.wsj.com/articles/rand-paul-still-mum-lays-2016groundwork-1407109404
August 04, 2014, 05:28:11 AM
What a load of shit. He can absolutely buy his way through any "democratic" process at all levels, "win" the presidency with only 2 votes in the whole U.S., issue an executive order for the summary execution of all law-abiding gun owners (the "gun control" final solution), and be completely immune from any real punishment whatsoever, because that's what you get as POTUS.
August 04, 2014, 04:19:29 AM
Fwiw, from a 2013 interview of Bloomberg:
If you’re an executive, can you really rule out running for president in 2016?
Yes. It’s just impossible. I am 100 percent convinced that you cannot in this country win an election unless you are the nominee of one of the two major parties. The second thing I am convinced of is that I could not get through the primary process with either party.
And, incidentally, I think I’ve got a better job than the president’s. He’s got a very tough Congress, and he’s removed from the day-to-day stuff. My job is the day-to-day stuff. That’s what I’m good at—or at least what I think I’m good at. [src]
If you’re an executive, can you really rule out running for president in 2016?
Yes. It’s just impossible. I am 100 percent convinced that you cannot in this country win an election unless you are the nominee of one of the two major parties. The second thing I am convinced of is that I could not get through the primary process with either party.
And, incidentally, I think I’ve got a better job than the president’s. He’s got a very tough Congress, and he’s removed from the day-to-day stuff. My job is the day-to-day stuff. That’s what I’m good at—or at least what I think I’m good at. [src]
August 04, 2014, 12:57:44 AM
my problem with hilary is that she's the same sold same old.. she brokered that secretary of state to pretty much push the U.S. imperialistic agenda forward. i don't think her campaign message would be anything similar to "hope and change," because it's obvious she'll do shit the same way as the US has done before.
The thing is the MSM which consists of all stations from Abc/Nbc/Cbs/Cnn/Msnbc will all glorify whoever the Democrat is. Many of the boobs only get their news from the big 3 Abc/Nbc/Cbs because they're the free stations that everyone gets. True lefties and righties prefer their Msnbc/Cnn and Fox but the extremely low info voters get there's from the former and those stations typically don't give coverage to the likes of a libertarian unless they're too big to ignore. And even then, it's slanted heavily toward the statist flavor. 
August 03, 2014, 10:24:57 PM
Quote
Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., said Hillary Clinton is not "fit to lead the country" Friday, mocking the former secretary of state's comments about her wealth and condemning her response to the September 2012 attack on a U.S. facility in Benghazi.
Paul's scathing words could provide an early look at the arguments he will deploy against Clinton if they both decide to run for president. They came during a speech in Kentucky before a crowd of several hundred GOP activists.
Paul opened his speech by joking that he was losing sleep over Clinton's money problems, according to National Journal.
Paul's scathing words could provide an early look at the arguments he will deploy against Clinton if they both decide to run for president. They came during a speech in Kentucky before a crowd of several hundred GOP activists.
Paul opened his speech by joking that he was losing sleep over Clinton's money problems, according to National Journal.
More...http://www.cbsnews.com/news/sen-rand-paul-hillary-clinton-not-fit-to-lead-the-country/
August 03, 2014, 05:21:24 PM
it'll be interesting to see how this all plays out.. republicans do seem to have a more enthusiastic base, and rand paul, if he's anything like his dad, will have an army of people willing to do a lot of the groundwork.
August 03, 2014, 04:51:01 PM
I think it's funny a state like Iowa is able to have so much influence. 
Seriously, caucus states are great for the rare candidates who have (unpaid) supporters who actually care, because it can take a lot more effort than a simple vote in a primary.
Seriously, caucus states are great for the rare candidates who have (unpaid) supporters who actually care, because it can take a lot more effort than a simple vote in a primary.
You know you're dealing with a Paul supporter if they're frequently checking weather reports around election dates and praying for rain (or better, hail and snow).Very true, and similar for "Liberty candidate" races on non-presidential election years. The (expected) lower turn-out compared with really bad weather can be a huge boost for a candidate with enthusiastic supporters.
August 03, 2014, 04:10:10 PM
my problem with hilary is that she's the same sold same old.. she brokered that secretary of state to pretty much push the U.S. imperialistic agenda forward. i don't think her campaign message would be anything similar to "hope and change," because it's obvious she'll do shit the same way as the US has done before.
August 03, 2014, 02:08:10 PM
Quote
Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., said Hillary Clinton is not "fit to lead the country" Friday, mocking the former secretary of state's comments about her wealth and condemning her response to the September 2012 attack on a U.S. facility in Benghazi.
Paul's scathing words could provide an early look at the arguments he will deploy against Clinton if they both decide to run for president. They came during a speech in Kentucky before a crowd of several hundred GOP activists.
Paul opened his speech by joking that he was losing sleep over Clinton's money problems, according to National Journal.
Paul's scathing words could provide an early look at the arguments he will deploy against Clinton if they both decide to run for president. They came during a speech in Kentucky before a crowd of several hundred GOP activists.
Paul opened his speech by joking that he was losing sleep over Clinton's money problems, according to National Journal.
More...http://www.cbsnews.com/news/sen-rand-paul-hillary-clinton-not-fit-to-lead-the-country/
August 03, 2014, 02:22:00 AM
I'm sure as hell not voting for Clinton. Other than that I am hoping for Rand Paul. I don't always agree with him, but he has the potential to refocus the debate. Right now we've got two fiscally liberal and socially stupid parties. We need some common-sense, and yes, it may sound cliche but that includes reducing the role of government so we can have back our lives.
Clinton is not part of this poll. The poll is only for the GOP nomination for the presidential candidate. The liberals being socially "smart" is really not true, as they give a lot of short term advantages to people, but this comes at the long term costs of fewer opportunities for people today and the people of future generations.
That's why I said that they are both socially stupid. I agree with what you are saying 100%.
August 03, 2014, 12:13:54 AM
I'm sure as hell not voting for Clinton. Other than that I am hoping for Rand Paul. I don't always agree with him, but he has the potential to refocus the debate. Right now we've got two fiscally liberal and socially stupid parties. We need some common-sense, and yes, it may sound cliche but that includes reducing the role of government so we can have back our lives.
Clinton is not part of this poll. The poll is only for the GOP nomination for the presidential candidate. The liberals being socially "smart" is really not true, as they give a lot of short term advantages to people, but this comes at the long term costs of fewer opportunities for people today and the people of future generations.
August 03, 2014, 12:03:59 AM
I'm sure as hell not voting for Clinton. Other than that I am hoping for Rand Paul. I don't always agree with him, but he has the potential to refocus the debate. Right now we've got two fiscally liberal and socially stupid parties. We need some common-sense, and yes, it may sound cliche but that includes reducing the role of government so we can have back our lives.
Clinton is not part of this poll. The poll is only for the GOP nomination for the presidential candidate. The liberals being socially "smart" is really not true, as they give a lot of short term advantages to people, but this comes at the long term costs of fewer opportunities for people today and the people of future generations.
August 02, 2014, 07:53:15 PM
I'm sure as hell not voting for Clinton. Other than that I am hoping for Rand Paul. I don't always agree with him, but he has the potential to refocus the debate. Right now we've got two fiscally liberal and socially stupid parties. We need some common-sense, and yes, it may sound cliche but that includes reducing the role of government so we can have back our lives.
Jump to: