Posted on 12/01/2015 7:16:58 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Four years ago, libertarians were an important force in the Republican presidential race. In the campaign for the 2012 nomination, Ron Paul was routinely drawing big crowds on college campuses.
He made a strong third-place showing in Iowa's important first-in-the-nation caucuses. Even though he failed to win the 2012 nomination, his supporters continued to organize, drawing attention to their small-government beliefs and taking over control of much of the Republican Party of Iowa for a time.
Many observers thought so-called "liberty movement" candidates might have an edge in 2016. But for Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, the heir apparent to the liberty movement in Iowa, that hasn't panned out....
(Excerpt) Read more at npr.org ...
I don’t care for the guy, but damn...he got elected Senator. That’s better than his dad did.
Ron Paul was at least consistent.
people are waking up to how nuts the family are.
His father is a wako and so is he ... nuff said.
Talent skips a generation.
That may have something to do with it...
:)
I don't agree with him on foreign policy, but Paul is a guardian of liberty.
I seem to be in the minority and he is not my candidate, but I like Rand as a Senator. I think he brings a perspective on a whole host of issues that should be heard even if I don’t always agree with him. He thinks outside the box and he is willing to stand tall on what he believes.
I expected a bit more out of him in the primaries this year, but in my humble opinion the GOP tent is plenty big enough for him!
B-I-N-G-O
Like him or not, I think this country would be better off with a solid contingent of 15%-20% of its elected officials in the Ron/Rand Paul mold.
I voted for Ron Paul in 1988, and considered myself a proud libertarian. Fast forward to September 11, 2001, and Paul was trying to say the attacks were our fault?! I wasn’t a fan of Reagan during his presidency, but 9/11 turned me into a Reaganite hawk on national defense. I haven’t voted libertarian or contributed a dime to their cause since. Rand has a losing foreign policy stance and does not stand a snowball’s chance of rising above Senator.
I agree. I appreciate independent thinkers who value freedom uber alles and Rand definitely qualifies.
Dear God, I can’t stand the government funded NPR and their soft condescension and false narratives.
Rand Paul is still a young man as politicians go, is running for President (if not in the front) and is considered a leading Republican Senator. And he isn’t successful?
I agree - Rand Paul is one of the few with different ideas and is a real promoter of liberty.
I think Rand decided that the best way to improve on his dad’s success was to cozy up to the right members of the Establishment and play the political game. When he compromised on his principles supporting the likes of McConnell, Ayotte, etc., he lost his dad’s base.
one big plus for ron paul. He is the only politician I have ever heard say that before he votes for a bill the first thing he considers is it constitutional or not.
Good post, but I’d also point out that the workings of the U.S. Senate are very different than the House. It’s much easier to be a principled conservative in the House because gerrymandered districts are easier to defend as a candidate. This is how you end up with some of the most conservative House members representing districts in some very “blue” states.
That’s a good point. Good for him.
Rand snuggled up to the Rino/Gop-e bunch and conservative voters took notice. Ted Cruz infuriated and confounded the Rino/Gop-e bunch and conservative voters took notice as well. Big difference
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.