Skip to comments.Chris Matthews: Rand Paul Will Be Republican Presidential Nominee in 2016
Posted on 08/08/2013 9:28:34 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
MSNBC's Chris Matthews made a bold prediction on Wednesday's Hardball.
"The hard-right is going to take over the Republican Party in 2016 and the nomination is going to Rand Paul" (video follows with transcript and commentary):
CHRIS MATTHEWS: Let me finish tonight with this. I’ve been offering a prediction of late. Let me nail it down now. I believe the Republican Party is going to go hard-right in 2016. It’s going to run someone from the growing hard-right wing of the Party, something it hasn't done since 1980. And here's the thinking which works equally well for the Democrats.
Parties as you've noticed face a conflict every four years. Should they run someone who represents their strongest passions right or left, or do they run someone who appeals to the middle? Most of the time they head to the middle. And this is what Republicans did most successfully in 1952 when after 20 years of FDR and Harry Truman, they wanted back in the White House. They ran the General who received the Nazi surrender. And guess what? They won. In 1956 and ’60, they stuck to the middle with Ike the second time, and then with Richard Nixon.
In '64 the right said it was its turn and blew the roof off the Cow Palace in San Francisco mocking Republican moderates and liberals like New York Governor Nelson Rockefeller. Then getting killed with Barry Goldwater running against Lyndon Johnson.
The Democrats ran moderates in ’60 and ’64 and ’68, but then went wild in '72 and ran anti-Vietnam warrior George McGovern of South Dakota. That's the year the Democrats got killed.
And so then the pendulum goes. The party bases get pushed aside for several elections and finally build up like steam much like a volcano and come roaring to the surface. Obama won in 2008 over Hillary Clinton because the opponents of the Iraq war had had it with the party leaders who played it safe and backed the war.
I believe the Republican base will do the same in 2016. They put up with George Bush the first, put up with Bob Dole, were deeply disappointed with the big-spending George W, and last year again by Mitt Romney, and are now going to come loaded for bear for the race for 2016.
So I predict the hard-right is going to take over the Republican Party in 2016 and the nomination is going to Rand Paul. You watch. This is what I do for a living.
I'm quite sure there are a lot of conservatives that hope Matthews is right for a change.
“The Democrats ran moderates in 60 and 64 and 68”
That is so much cr@p.
Maybe JFK was a “moderate” Maybe.
But LBJ and Humphrey were both HUGE Nanny State lefties.
What? it won’t be Chris Christie?
But its his turn!
No, it will be Palin/Paul
(If I have anything to say about it)
for 16 years of conservative bliss
Well... we could do worse than Rand...we already have done worse..Much worse...
(With apologies to Ted Cruz who I admire greatly - could be a great president if we are willing to look the other way on the Constitutional requirements for the Presidency).
Rand to the rescue?
OK with me.
Which would be like the hard-right taking over the Democrat party, same thing, which means no way in hell - which is why we need a new party.
How does Matthews know this? Did he get a tingle up his leg or something?
RE: Well... we could do worse than Rand...we already have done worse..Much worse...
I don’t know.... replace the name “Rand Paul” with “Marco Rubio” and we get a huge number of FReepers shouting “Traitor” !!
But I don’t read that word being posted in this thread at all.
Doesn’t anybody realize that Rand Paul is sympathetic to some form of amnesty as well?
How does he explain Reagan? He wasn’t moderate.
“We are in serious trouble...all troops target Rand Paul”
That would be just fine with me.
There’s no need to look the other way.
Any presidential eligibility questions we may have had are now gone. The issue has been settled. Constitutionally settled.
Hundreds of lower courts have decided Obama is a Natural Born Citizen. The SCOTUS validated that by not reviewing it.
What else is there to say? Except...
Cruz/Whoever - 2016.
We would finally be heading in the right direction again, toward the health and prosperity that are our birthrights when we honor our founding documents and follow our Judeo-Christian philosophy and heritage.
Old Sarge: Chrissy Tingles can paint herself magenta and hurl her arse from the center span of the Verrazano Narrows before I ever listen to what she has to say!
Based on their recent record, the Republicans might nominate Hillary Clinton.
Or they might as well.
For once I agree with Chrissy and hope he’s right.
That would get my vote.
Otherwise, I don’t see anyone else testing the GOP waters who I would vote for.
The MSM and neocons are going to DESTROY Rand Paul. If he makes a serious run there will be stories about him eating Jewish babies at Klan rallies. They’ve already started. They tried in Kentucky ... but he survived there. He’s going to be a distant memory by 2016.
No complaints from me. Probably #2 on my wish list. Just below Palin.
Make Canadian born Cruz your nomination and you'll see what else there is to say.
I definitely won't vote for him to be President, not unless we are having another Revolution because the Constitution is truly dead.
But...he's definitely eligible for Senate leader! And, he'd do a lot of good for the Constitution and the nation he claims as his home in that position.
The choice is: use him for what he is eligible for or sacrifice him and your integrity.
I say Bob Dole. And for the gender gap - Bush. Barbara Bush.
I could live with that, but I have a feeling the GOPe will foist Chrispie or Jeb on us.
Creeps like Matthews have no clue what “hard-right” means. In order for anyone to be “hard-right” they would have to side by side on the political spectrum with hadr-left. In other words a socialist statist.
No tingles for you, Matthews?
we’re better off w/obama; then no sane man can deny/project the truth away !!!!!
Semper Watching !!!!!!
I'm trying to think of the last moderate Democrat that ran for President.
2008, 2012 - Baraq. Communist.
2004 - John F'n Kerry. Traitor, socialist.
2000 - Algore. Environmentalist whacko.
1992, 2006 - Bill Xlinton. Wholly owned subsidiary of the Chinese Communist Party.
1988 - Mike Dukakis. Inconsequential liberal.
1984 - Walter Mondale. Vice-President to the second-worst President since Reconstruction. Reliable liberal stooge.
1976, 1980 - Jimmy Carter. Anti-Semite, liberal.
1972 - George McGovern. See 1976 without the anti-Semitism.
1968 - Hubert Humphrey. Today, he'd be a Republican.
What was that about going toward the middle again, Chris?
I definitely won’t vote for him to be President....
Oh you’ll vote for him all right. In a choice of Cruz over Hillary - you’ll pick Cruz.
Or you’ll be like a lot of trolls that vote 3rd party or some other silly tactic that essentially hands the election over to the libs.
In the last election he predicted George Allen.
“”The hard-right is going to take over the Republican Party in 2016 and the nomination is going to Rand Paul”
I’ll take ‘Things that don’t go together’ for $500 Alex.
He has strong and growing support from young people. Most of whom I doubt are registered to vote in GOP primaries.
Friends don’t let friends vote for Liberaltarian idiots.
I am curious. If Cruz is not natural born, when was he naturalized?
A vast improvement over 2008 and 2012
If it’s Hillary v. NJFatboy in Nov 2016, I’m writing in Putin.....
Did you miss LBJ?
He was the one who started the GREAT SOCIETY and the WAR ON POVERTY. Legacies that we’re still paying for today.
Fortunately, the settled law (whether you agree with it or not) permits Cruz to be president.
“Which would be like the hard-right taking over the Democrat party, same thing, which means no way in hell - which is why we need a new party.”
Without a new party there will be coservative voter division once again regarding the few conservatives candidates, which will play out perfectly for Karl and the GOPe to push Rubio or some other such democrat on us.
1964 - LBJ - holy crap. 1960 - John F. Kennedy - today, he'd be a Republican too.
What else is there to say?
Obama has a US birth certificate.
Cruz has a Canadian birth certificate.
Other than that, their cases are exactly the same.
I did that with the ineligible McCain and I won't be making that mistake again. I hate my self for that weakness and for violating my integrity and that of my country. So much for my Pledge of Allegiance all those years.
You don't stand on principles by violating them, fix the Constitution by breaking it or beat the libs by out-liberaling them.
If you want to waste an asset like Speaker Cruz and the many years he could be of service as Senate leader, to instead run him for something he isn't eligible for, and might only be in office for four to eight years, you're far more of a "troll" than I.
You know that the demonrats will challenge someone born in Canada as not being an NBC, since that's not even as close as obama's official story.
And, they'd be right.
I'm not sure "settled law" is the correct term but I don't disagree with the sentiment. The courts just don't want to mess with this issue. Maybe that makes it "settled".
And I repeat. Cruz would make a fine President. I would vote for him in heartbeat.
“I believe the Republican Party is going to go hard-right in 2016.”
Romney was a Hard Right candidate to the likes of Chrissy “Tingly Legs” Mathews.....
Rand Paul is more of a Libertarian Limited Government type.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.