Skip to comments.Rand Paul: GOP must ‘evolve and adapt’
Posted on 01/20/2013 2:01:28 PM PST by JohnPDuncan
Sen. Rand Paul said on Sunday that he will make a decision on a 2016 presidential run within two years and plans to be a force in the refashioning the Republican party regardless of whether he seeks the Oval Office.
We will continue to pursue and, you know, try to make that decision over the next two years or so, the Kentucky Republican told WABC Radios Aaron Klein when asked about a potential White House bid.
In the meantime, Paul said, he will try to be part of the national debate and added that he hopes to play a major role in directing the future of the Republican Party.
Paul added that there are major areas of concern for the party, noting we are not popular and we have not been competitive out in California, on the West Coast, or in New England.
And his particular brand of conservatism could play well in those regions and with other voters who may not currently identify with the Republican Party, Paul said.
So we think a little more of a libertarian Republican, someone who is a strict Constitutionalist, but also believes in a strong, defensive military but not necessarily in an overly aggressive or bellicose lets get involved in everybodys civil war military, I think that has more appeal to independents and some people who have given up in the Republican Party, Paul said.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
N00bs posting polital sources haz a distinct odor.
Adaptation is HARD.
Does the GOP really hafta?
Dying, on the other hand, is easy.
All that is necessary, is to cast overboard every principle, every moral directive, and every obligation you now have, and without the burden, plunging into the depths follows almost naturally.
Go toward the light....
Which turns out to be the yawning gates of Hades.
Try again, Ron
Yikes, I give up.
Stand against the enemy or die.
Stand for freedom and the constitution or die.
Distinguish yourself clearly or die.
Lose the RINOs or die.
Win or die.
LOL...Lord have mercy!
Rand has already hinted at amnesty. No thanks. I’d rather have the slow death than the total invasion.
He would represent a real change. The establishment would hate him but so would the Santorum types who want to regulate vice and what goes on in people’s bedrooms. I think the libertarian leaners are an untapped voter resource.
Exploit the natural anti-Gov’t stance of the Anarchist.
Play to the self centered core of the Libertarian.
The anarchist will become the extreme right with a certain appeal to the more moderate Libertarian.
Anarchy with guardrails.
The guardrails are the moral fiber, our Constitution and the inherent virtue of man.
This pulls the progressive concepts full circle, as to turn its logic, based on uncertainty, into focus to be defined.
Rand posted this on his facebook where I got it.
He said this with it:
“Some believe the GOP must become more liberal or moderate. I disagree. Returning to the Constitution and the Founding Fathers’ vision of liberty, in both our domestic and foreign policy, can bring more people into the party.”
IOW: Game over, man! Game OVER!
"Hudson, just deal with it, because we need you and I'm sick of your bullsh*t."
I swear, there are a lot of Hudsons on the right. Get a grip. For starters, keep a clear head, look around you, and begin perceiving that there's good cause to have more faith in your fellow Americans. If you think Americans are stupid pushovers and children, move to France. If you think Americans are, on the whole, good, moral, productive people who like to be self-directed and would if they could, then you're on the RIGHT side.
This is just stupid. Geeze, grow up and stop spouting this kind of ridiculous stuff that makes conservatives sound unhinged.
There will be a presidential election in 2016 and Obama won't be on the ballot. Besides, why would the left want a "dictator" when they are winning elections anyway. Soft tyranny works so much better.
I’ll take Rand Paul any day over the current crop of GOP-E losers that the Republican Party is planning to foist on us (again) in 2016, if Obama has not abolished both that election and the 22nd Amendment by Executive Order by then.
Yes. Rand is right.
I don't like being told what to do or think by conservative authoritarians any more than I like being told what to do or think by liberal authoritarians.
Heh...they were pretty much demanding one last week, but I guess you missed those stories.
Make no mistake, what is being talked about here is conservatives dropping the social issues.
I agree. That said, our biggest problem (as a political alternative to socio/communism) is that half of us WANT to go along to get along and are willing to compromise.
And I mean voters calling themselves ‘conservative’, not politicians.
Look through my post history. While you may not agree with my positions in any/all cases, it’s the people I argue with and the rationales they are using that I am talking about.
They WANT compromise. Their positions on the issues are nothing BUT compromise. Yet they bitch about the GOP compromising and support them when the chips are down. Compromise and all.
Until we define who and what we believe and get rid of the enemy within, we go nowhere. Some say that if we do that we reduce our numbers and enter obscurity. My reply to that is “We are there now”. And until we change course, IE dump the people who insist on holding us on the plantation, we will stay there.
That is actually a very powerful point you just made.
Let me repeat it:
By standing down last election and handing the nomination to Romney once he had it, there was no seek-and-destroy mission on the right. Sure there was a strong campaign but most everyone came out of it just fine.
Romney lost. Fair and square. Romney was nominated. Had the entire party lined up behind him. No Palin. No distractions at all.
And he lost.
That is a very important lesson to have learned. Romney and the so-called moderate Republicans, do not win.
The GOP learned a number of lessons last time, but the one which has been visited the least, is what of Sarah Palin.
We shall certainly see.
Obama is acting as an imperial president, but that is not the same thing as there being no election in 2016 and Obama remaining in office past his second term.
The executive branch quite often tries to usurp the authority of the other branches of government. This isn’t a new phenomenon and doesn’t mean elections have ended and Hussein will be dictator.
Hmmm, then why is your source linked to Politico, a left wing propaganda rag?
If it's on his FB page, why not link that?
That said, I like his pov on somethings, but my patience with amnesty supporters is over.
No solutions will come from DC.
DC is the problem.
Nothing other than higher taxes and less freedom will come from Washington.
Time to stop looking to the political class in DC for solutions to the problems they have created.
If Rand Paul and the GOP and the communist faction Democrats really want to help us citizen tax payers outside the Beltway, they all ought to commit suicide.
Power pushes, maybe, usurpation, no.
Always defending obama, curious.
Fight for your social issue of choice at the state and local level.
That is what I mean when I say we still have Willard's and Tokyo Rove's people around.
They did not and wouldn't not except Sarah again.
It's either that or GOP loses in perpetuity and Conservatives seek another path separate from them.
Rand would have a tough time just getting renominated for the Senate in 2016, but I will vote for him if he is the presidential nominee.
Bump, bump, freaking BUMP to your outstanding post!
Washington is in need of a massive, dare I say, DOUCHE!
Maybe you missed it, but she was part of the establishment ticket that lost to Obama the first time. And people don’t like her with the exception of her little cargo cult.
OK we seem to recall that race, somewhat differently.
The irony is Rand is hugely social conservative, he just thinks the Feds shouldn’t be involved.
He is against abortion with no exceptions
And he said he wouldn’t vote to legalize drugs in his state but he doesn’t want it to be a federal issue.
He is socially conservative at the state level!
If he was Governor of Kentucky he would behave differently as President of the United States.
It’s kind of like having a split personality.
Her little cargo cult still would like to know which of her positions offends the PDSers so...
Or are we back to just parroting the MSNBC party line?
Let me guess, dope supporter, gay marriage supporter, abortion supporter.
How is support for abortion ‘libertarian?’ You’re killing people who would otherwise exist.
I have no problem with any of her positions except for foreign wars. Its not her policy, but her unelectability at the national level. She might make a great Alaska Senator one day. Nothing more.
Exactly so - the assumption is that by being full on pro-abort, pro-gay marriage and pro-dope that this will lead to the salvation of the Republican party.
Seen it. I also don’t believe that ‘libertarians’ are even interested in passing spending cuts either. If you’re willing to compromise on social issues, then what’s stopping you from compromising on spending issues too?
Let me guess ‘cargo cult’, eh? Kerry/Obama/Obama?
All state and local issues. Those are all under the purview of the FedGov now. How’s that working out for ya?
Now reduce your statement to it’s core and give this serious thought.... You largely agree with her positions. Not all, but no pol is perfect. Her included.
So why is she unelectable? The throngs of people that show up every time she makes a public appearance is a bit more than a cargo cult. In fact, she dwarfs the oh so popular Obama in people showing up to her events.
That indicates the MSM polls and spin are just that. Spin.
Is she REALLY unpopular? If people agree with/share her views/policies, are they all really so shallow as to dismiss her as a candidate?
If that’s true then we are a bunch of morons that deserve whatever the GOP throws out there.
No, defending sanity. Conservatives do not need to be associated with a bunch of unhinged silliness and stupid conspiracy theories (like the ones you push about Sandy Hook).
Politico aren’t completely a left-wing propaganda rag, at least not openly.
I agree they’re very left leaning but it’s not Daily Kos is it? they’re a legitimate news source.
Although I have emailed their “journalists” repeatedly because of them parroting the Democrat Party line on the debt “default”. I asked them to explain how default is possible when interest on the debt is 30bn a month and revenues are 200bn. They blocked my email lol and now when I email some of their journalists it bounces back... but they did run an article where Republicans pointed this out.
So I do find them left leaning but somewhat fair.
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.