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 Radio’s 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 everybody’s 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 ...
I have to remember to look up the use of ‘chump” as a ‘winning’ debate strategy sometime. Sure seems effective.../s
I will not waste time and energy supporting someone who has ZERO chance of winning. That’s quite different from saying win at all costs. I believe in the minimizing the damage over accepting a tyrant.
Yes they are a left wing propaganda rag and no, they are not a legitimate news source, unless you’re a liberal.
So winning is what matters most. Put whatever spin on it you like.
[ How about the GOP powers-that-be adapt themselves to the conservatives for a change? ]
Not all conservatives are conservatives.. seems that going conservative is going leftist-lite..
Must mean there are many liberal conservatives..
There may even be some conservative marxists.. aka Colon Bowel..
Looks like if America stopped dead.. it would still not be “right” two times a day..
Question; What could go wrong in that scenario?..
Answer; EVERYTHING..
They've done a good job of it so far - leaving a weak and unattractive party for many true conservatives.
You know what the big social issues we're talking about here. Primarily abortion and gay marriage. The social conservative wing of the party wants the Federal government to do everything in it's power to limit or stop those things. That is more than just opposing Roe or fighting for a Marriage amendment to the constitution. There is a lot of stuff that government agencies can do administratively and the executive branch can do through EO's to fight these 2 battles. They aren't make or break but they are little battles in the overall war. And there are other social issues, many social conservatives would like far more done about online obscenity (porn), restrictions on games/movies/music for certain age groups, etc. Heck just listen to the Huckabee/Santorum wing of the party and you'll know where a sizable chunk of conservatives stand. For these people, the social issues are their primary thing. They think winning the culture war IS the primary battle.
There is a big division right now among conservatives. I think it is clear that the younger generations are far more libertine and the future of the Republican party is probably to jettison some social issues and public order laws from the forefront, but I just want to be real clear about what we're talking about. Socon's aren't stupid, when they hear Rand and others talking about a more "libertarian" Republican party, they know what that means - and they are going to fight about it. And at least right now, the right in this country can't win without them - so tread carefully.
The libertarian wing is going to have to give ground too. This isolationist foreign/defense policy just isn't going to sell among most conservatives. Abandoning Israel isn't acceptable to most of the base. And this loony talk that comes from the Ron Paul wing isn't going to fly either. We don't want truthers, people who think Bradley Manning is a hero and patriot, and assorted crazies that Paul would never disown.
I know Rand is trying to thread the needle and be more of a compromise candidate, we'll have to see if he is successful. I am certainly open to supporting Rand and compromising with libertarianish conservatives to form a unified opposition. But I have to tell you, I am suspicious Rand is more like his father than he lets on and I think Ron Paul is loon on many issues.
“I think it is clear that the younger generations are far more libertine and the future of the Republican party is probably to jettison some social issues”
The problem in a nutshell. A party that does not believe in it’s own platform.
Good Lord, read the comments here, I would assume we're all on the same side yet we're fighting over what a " conservative is"?
Come on people, wake up, don't let trolls divide us.
There is more fighting here over petty differences then thing we can unite on to save this Country, it really is pitiful to watch.
When people define conservative as accepting of abortion et all, I don’t see who we ARE on the same team. Shouldn’t we either work from the same playbook?
Edit: Rather work from...
I think your wrong as I have stated, Rand Paul is as socially conservative as they come. He is against abortion with no exceptions and supports a Life at Conception Act, he’s a christian conservative but he just thinks you dont want to look for the Feds for solutions, look to your own church and state.
He is also for a strong national defense - as authorized in the constitution but he rejects overseas spending. Bring that money home and spend it here or give it back through tax cuts. That doesn’t mean weak defense. Rand has said he supports missile defense for cities and states and may support building one rather than worrying about other countries security.
I'm not really sure about you're question, but her bad press is because the media don't like her. Not only do they not like her, they hate the people she represents. Same reason as so many other conservatives or traditional people get chewed up and spit out by the MSM. They consider Palin a laughing stock, a rural country bumpkin, and she will always be a target for them.
Look, it isn't fair, but that's what she'd have to overcome to be a serious presidential candidate. A media that is out to ridicule and destroy her. It's not just her, lots of conservatives face the same thing. Palin gets it worse in some cases because she's a woman - and we all know the left hates conservatives that they believe should be "victims".
Saying that does not make her a viable general election candidate. She just didn't make the kind of choices that seem to lead to that possibility. Palin had a golden opportunity to run in 2012 and opted out, probably because she is smart enough to know she couldn't win.
The problem with the Libertarian view of a “strong defense” is that it fails to recognize the simple fact that America is at war and we are under attack daily throughout the world.
We simply do not have the option of bringing troops home and retreating to within our borders unless you want to fight radical Islam here.
I agree with most all of that. So we have a choice. Either accept their script or not. If we do, then don’t be shocked when they continue to repeat it with every conservative that gains any traction. If we don’t, then we stand for what we claim we believe in and will fight for it.
I agree that she could have done things differently. But I maintain that it is just as likely she didn’t run exactly because people won’t stand behind her/their claimed beliefs, as any other reason. And it would seem, more likely to me.
Norm, I respect your posts and enjoy reading them.
I was addressing more the tearing apart of candidates that may have various viewpoints that are minor in comparison to major Constitutional conflicts, IOW, they are politicians trying to win (get elected).
None was more evident than this last primary season.
I'll say one thing for the dipcrats, they stay together, we don't.
We stand for principle, they stand for an agenda and will accomplish it by any means necessary, we on the other hand have to learn how to fight the war.
IMO, we're losing.
No, what I said was quite a bit different. But it’s true that if you back a sure fire loser, you won’t get anywhere.
One? You're just finished questioning the "official" Sandy Hook story repeatedly on other threads. You're all over the idiotic "NBC Admitted: No ‘Assault Rifle’ Used in Newtown Shooting" and "TODAY SHOW - NO "ASSAULT WEAPONS" USED IN SANDY HOOK MASSACRE" conspiracy threads. The thread titles are misleading and stupid considering the stories originated during the initial confusion and have long ago been shown to be inaccurate. But there you are repeatedly playing conspiracy theorist and "questioning" the official story.
You're a Sandy Hook conspiracy theorists. You're pretty clear with this comment:
Lot's of un answered questions on this case as far as I am concerned....and it doesn't help when you have to question the veracity of every new "fact" that gets released. I don't trust them as far as I can spit.
And again:
The bottom line is that is all we have here, is what the media says so we're left to pick and choose exactly what to believe. At this point, it's all hearsay, most of which is conflicting, and no hard evidence.
You're just wrong. Your advancing conspiracy theories. There is plenty of evidence. There is plenty of dead people. It's not all hearsay. Most of it isn't any more conflicting than any other news story initially is. There is plenty of hard evidence. What you said here is bunk. It total garbage.
Fortunately folks like Uncle Chip and others are around to debunk the Sandy Hook conspiracy nonsense you're spewing.
Agreed. I’m pro-life too, but even if we did have a Human Life Amendment, the Feds would screw it up just like everything else. Get aggressively anti-abortion laws passed at the states. It’s the only thing that works.
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.