Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How Viable Is Rand Paul for 2016?
New York Times ^ | March 20, 2013 | Nate Silver

Posted on 03/20/2013 12:34:58 PM PDT by rightwingintelligentsia

Perhaps no Republican has had a better 2013 than Rand Paul, the Kentucky senator who drew attention and praise for his talking filibuster against the C.I.A. director nominee John Brennan, then last week won the straw poll at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington. Then, on Tuesday, as my colleague Ashley Parker reports, Mr. Paul gave a speech to the United States Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, outlining his plan for immigration reform.

Mr. Paul has been fairly explicit about his potential interest in running for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016, so it is safe to assume that at least some of his actions are colored by his interest in positioning himself for the primaries and caucuses. But oddsmakers continue to list Mr. Paul as something of a long shot, giving him anywhere from 12-to-1 to 28-to-1 odds against winning the nomination.

Is Mr. Paul, in fact, a viable 2016 contender? Or, like his father, Ron Paul, is he someone who might expect to win the enthusiastic support of libertarian-leaning G.O.P. voters but who might otherwise fall well short of winning a plurality or majority of the Republican electorate?

(Excerpt) Read more at fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2016; 2016gopprimary; paul2016; randpaul
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-75 next last
Comment #1 Removed by Moderator

To: rightwingintelligentsia

Rand Paul’s immigration policy is not desired. Sarah Palin with VP Santorum. A total winning ticket!!!!


2 posted on 03/20/2013 12:36:50 PM PDT by napscoordinator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rightwingintelligentsia

not at all viable and in light of the recent headlines we can even avoid a debate on the topic.


3 posted on 03/20/2013 12:38:27 PM PDT by wiggen (The teacher card. When the racism card just won't work.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rightwingintelligentsia

Lets see who things stack up in 2015. For all we know:
1. America as we know it might not exist.
2. We may have Obama as President-for-life.
3. We may well be a province of the Peoples Republic of China.
4. The USA might be broken into several states—Maybe Rand Paul will be President of the Texas Republic?
Lots can happen in the next few months and years.


4 posted on 03/20/2013 12:38:41 PM PDT by Forward the Light Brigade (Into the Jaws of H*ll)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator
Sarah Palin with VP Santorum West. A total winning ticket!!!!

Agreed!

5 posted on 03/20/2013 12:38:52 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rightwingintelligentsia
IMO ... if the media wants him, they'll be able to buffalo the non remembering voters (there will probably be no conservatives at that point .. so the tag is moot).
6 posted on 03/20/2013 12:39:59 PM PDT by knarf (I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but they're true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Windflier; napscoordinator

Santorum with VP West. A total winning ticket!!!!


7 posted on 03/20/2013 12:40:43 PM PDT by Ingtar (Everyone complains about the weather, but only Liberals try to legislate it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Forward the Light Brigade

If number 4 happens, I’ll want Sen. Cruz for that job.


8 posted on 03/20/2013 12:41:17 PM PDT by roostercashews (Having a gun doesn't make you safer, but knowing how to use one does.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

I like Sarah Palin too, but I like Rand Paul. You supported Michelle Bachmann in 2012 whose immigration policy of non-deportation is the same as every body else’s (In that non-deportation equals amnesty). So how can you claim Rand Paul’s policy is ‘not desired’? I respect your opinion, just trying to understand differing standards.


9 posted on 03/20/2013 12:41:57 PM PDT by Perdogg (Sen Ted Cruz is my adoptive Senator)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

No thanks to Santorum.

http://news.yahoo.com/santorum-zimmerman-very-sick-mind-motive-malicious-one-162845818.html


10 posted on 03/20/2013 12:44:13 PM PDT by Gator113 ( ~just keep livin~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: wiggen

Agreed, not viable in the least.


11 posted on 03/20/2013 12:44:28 PM PDT by mgstarr ("Some of us drink because we're not poets." Arthur (1981))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator
Rand Paul’s immigration policy is not desired.

Yeah, because securing the border before doing anything else, as a REQUIREMENT for anything else, is just stupid. /sarc

When your boat is sinking... You plug the hole first. Then you can argue about how to best bail out the water.

12 posted on 03/20/2013 12:47:06 PM PDT by Dead Corpse (I will not comply.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: wiggen

Pro-life, pro-RKBA, pro-property, pro-border security, lower taxes, smaller government.

Yeah... We just HATE him.

Get over yourself.


13 posted on 03/20/2013 12:48:09 PM PDT by Dead Corpse (I will not comply.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

I second the nomination!


14 posted on 03/20/2013 12:48:13 PM PDT by Forty-Niner (The barely bare berry bear formerly known as Ursus Arctos Horribilis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Gator113

Oh stop bashing our next President. Are you going to go through 2016 to 2024 bashing President Santorum at every turn. Sarah would be welcomed as President too....either way the ticket ends up is fine with me. These two are the finest Americans we possibly have. It would be an insult not to have them be our President and Vice President. God Bless future President Santorum (2016-2024) and President Palin (2024-2032)


15 posted on 03/20/2013 12:49:50 PM PDT by napscoordinator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: rightwingintelligentsia

Does anyone who overlaps Religious and Establishment have a grasp on the GOP?


16 posted on 03/20/2013 12:50:23 PM PDT by Ingtar (Everyone complains about the weather, but only Liberals try to legislate it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rightwingintelligentsia

Paul did serious damage to a potential campaign by coming out for the comprehensive immigration crapola (a.k.a., amnesty for illegals).

He was flying high after his filibuster and CPAC speech, only to shoot himself in the wing and sputter out.


17 posted on 03/20/2013 12:52:51 PM PDT by TomGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ingtar

Orrin Hatch would be the closest one.


18 posted on 03/20/2013 12:53:04 PM PDT by Perdogg (Sen Ted Cruz is my adoptive Senator)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy

How are you defining amnesty?


19 posted on 03/20/2013 12:54:47 PM PDT by Perdogg (Sen Ted Cruz is my adoptive Senator)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: rightwingintelligentsia

I hate to be one to farts at a crack party BUT!... O.K. Cocaine..
Voting DIED November 6th 2012....

Not a thing has been done about the voting fraud.. MASSIVE voting fraud..
AND pretty much will NOT be done either..

OK..... one thing has been done... and that IS...
Democrats are now SURE republicans will do NOTHING about it..
WHat do you think will happen in 2014 and 2016?..

Answer; it will be further refined and expanded..
In most place voting was and is totally corrupt..
THOSE places will be expanded.. in “RED” places... especially..

One more thing.. Did I say voting DIED!!!!..
Sorry.. Must repeat yourself when talking to republicans..
They are very S....L.....O....W..... and horribly optimistic..
A SLAPP won’t do it.. they see that as a (( HUG ))...
Go figure...


20 posted on 03/20/2013 12:55:05 PM PDT by hosepipe (This propaganda has been edited to include some fully orbed hyperbole..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

I have and will continue to back Palin.

I will never quit bashing that phony wimp, Saintorum.

http://news.yahoo.com/santorum-zimmerman-very-sick-mind-motive-malicious-one-162845818.html


21 posted on 03/20/2013 12:55:31 PM PDT by Gator113 ( ~just keep livin~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Gator113

meany....lol. Have a good one....we can wait until 2015 to have our Santorum discussions.


22 posted on 03/20/2013 12:58:17 PM PDT by napscoordinator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse; napscoordinator
Pro-life, pro-RKBA, pro-property, pro-border security, lower taxes, smaller government.

Well, with his Amnesty program, his claim to smaller government just went out the window.

Furthermore, with Rand Paul, if you are a baby who was conceived by Rape or Incest, through no fault of your own, you don't have the right to life.
23 posted on 03/20/2013 12:58:20 PM PDT by SoConPubbie (Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator
Rand Paul = AMNESTY

He lost my vote!

24 posted on 03/20/2013 1:06:41 PM PDT by SoldierDad (Proud dad of an Army Soldier who has survived 24 months of Combat deployment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie
Find the “rape and incest” exemption in S.583 that you insist is there.

http://thomas.loc.gov/home/thomas.php

It isn’t.

You are lying.

Again...

25 posted on 03/20/2013 1:18:45 PM PDT by Dead Corpse (I will not comply.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator
Sarah Palin with VP Santorum. A total winning ticket!!!!

I too would love to see that team go all the way.... but they won't.

26 posted on 03/20/2013 1:19:38 PM PDT by ScottinVA (Gun control: Steady firm grip, target within sights, squeeze the trigger slowly...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SoldierDad

Missed that whole “close the border first and then push everyone through the existing process” part did you?

Or are you another one of these who’d prefer to start bailing water and shuffling deck chairs while blowing bigger holes in the boat?


27 posted on 03/20/2013 1:20:14 PM PDT by Dead Corpse (I will not comply.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator; Gator113

Gator,
Thanks for posting that article. Those quotes speak volumes about Santorum.


28 posted on 03/20/2013 1:25:49 PM PDT by bramps (Sarah Palin got more votes in 2008 than Mitt Romney got in 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy; Jane Long; RitaOK; All

Senator Rand Paul: ” - - - I’ve never met a new immigrant looking for a free lunch. - - - “

Then you have never been to a US Border town hospital emergency room entrance and seen the mass of illegal aliens from Mexico lining up for FREE medical treatment for their entire families just brought in from Mexico for their annual check-ups with their English interpreters.

The only way to make the Illegal Alien “Problem” go away is to make the USA as hostile as possible to those who have ALREADY broken our US Border Laws.

For starters:
* Repeal and ABOLISH the Federal Hospital Emergency Room Free Medical Treatment Law;
*Fine all private employers $1, 000 per day per illegal hired;
*Enforce ALL US Border laws;
*Jail in Arpaio-Style Border Outdoor Prison Camps ALL men women and children for 6 months, as required by existing Federal Law, any UNDOCUMENTED people found ANYWHERE in the USA.

The Reagan Amnesty did not work, and the Rand or Rubio Amnesties will also not work.

BTW, the US/Mexican Border is 2, 000 miles long, so that border will NEVER be secure. Spend the money on apprehension and incarceration instead of try to fix the unfixable.

BTW, BTW, the deportation of the 12 MILLION Border Law Breakers from Mexico would solve our current unemployment problem.

It is all about the money, Senator Rand Paul - - - it is all about OUR tax money.


29 posted on 03/20/2013 1:25:56 PM PDT by Graewoulf (Traitor John Roberts' Commune-Style Obama'care' violates U.S. Constitution AND Anti-Trust Law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse; SoldierDad
Missed that whole “close the border first and then push everyone through the existing process” part did you?

The parts we didn't miss was where he is going to "Normalize"(Make them legal, or in other words Amnesty) 2 million illegal Invaders each and every year base on a certification from Congress that the border is clear. Not closing the border, just that the congress, half full of Democrats who already believe the border is secure and another quarter of RINOS who will also state as much, certifying that the border is secure.

You see, much like John McCain, we are finding out with Rand Paul that the devil is definitely in the details, especially when it comes to Comprehensive Immigration Reform which Rand Paul is in favor of.
30 posted on 03/20/2013 1:28:31 PM PDT by SoConPubbie (Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator
As a Republican, I do not see Rand Paul having any viability. As an Independent, he might pull as much as 5% of the vote in the General election.
As the candidate for the Teaparty, probably as much as 15%.
As TeaParty VP candidate, possibly 40+ %. Depending on the top of the ticket.
31 posted on 03/20/2013 1:29:58 PM PDT by Tupelo (Old, Bald, Ugly, Fat and Broke in Arizona)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: All

Don’t think just POTUS....think “team” and foot soldiers. Infrastructure is everything!!!

If you have a game plan, message, mindset and infrastructure, then POTUS becomes an afterthought (philosophical sense)


32 posted on 03/20/2013 1:30:47 PM PDT by Kolath
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie
So... You've seen the bill he is crafting then?

Or is this more pixie dust and ground unicorn horn like your lying claim Rand is for aborting babies conceived of rape and incest?

I'm betting the latter.

33 posted on 03/20/2013 1:30:54 PM PDT by Dead Corpse (I will not comply.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

Rick santorum was my pick for President, after Herman Cain dropped out. But I don’t see Palin running. I wish she would but don’t think she will. I don’t agree with Rand Paul on immigration, but I don’t agree with anyone on immigration. I’m all for an electrified fence with armed guards and deportation on everyone not here legally.
That said, I like his stance on abortion and the whole “dont drone me bro” filibuster really propelled him forward when it comes to my support.


34 posted on 03/20/2013 1:33:07 PM PDT by chae (I was anti-Obama before it was cool)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
Find the “rape and incest” exemption in S.583 that you insist is there.

http://thomas.loc.gov/home/thomas.php

It isn’t.

You are lying.

Again...


OK, so what am I to believe, the text of the bill or the words he is speaking on this issue?
However, during an interview on Tuesday with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, the Kentucky senator seemed to soften his tone when asked about abortion in cases of rape, incest, or when the life of the mother is at risk.

“Just to be precise, if you believe life begins at conception, which I suspect you do, you would have no exceptions for rape, incest, the life of the mother. Is that right?” Blitzer asked.

“What I would say is that there are thousands of exceptions. I’m a physician and every individual case is going to be different,” Sen. Paul responded. “Everything is going to be particular to that individual case and what is going on that mother and the medical circumstances of that mother.”

Paul continued:

"I would say that, after birth, we’ve decided that when life begins, we have decided that we don’t have exceptions for one-day-olds or a six-month-olds. We don’t ask where they came from or how they came into being. But it is more complicated, because the rest of it depends on the definition of when life comes in. So I don’t think it’s as simple as checking a box and saying, “Exceptions” or “No exceptions.”

I’ve been there at the beginning of life. I’ve held one pound babies in my hand that I examined their eyes. I’ve been there at the end of life. There are a lot of decisions made privately by families and their doctors that really won’t, the law won’t apply to. But I think it is important that we not be flippant one way or the other and pigeonhole and say, “Oh, this person doesn’t believe in any sort of discussion between family.”

“I don’t know if there’s a simple way to put me in any category on any of that,” he concluded.

“Well, it sounds like you believe in some exceptions,” Blitzer pressed.

“Well, there is going to be, like I say, thousands of extraneous situations where the life of the mother is involved and other things that are involved,” the senator responded.

“I would say that each individual case would have to be addressed and even if there were eventually a change in the law, let’s say people came more to my way of thinking,” he continued, “there would still be a lot of complicated things the law may not ultimately be able to address in the early stages of pregnancy that would have to be part of what occurs between the physician and the woman and the family.”

35 posted on 03/20/2013 1:33:27 PM PDT by SoConPubbie (Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
Or is this more pixie dust and ground unicorn horn like your lying claim Rand is for aborting babies conceived of rape and incest?

So please read #35 below and show me where he states unequivocally, that for conditions of Rape and Incest, he does not support Abortion?
36 posted on 03/20/2013 1:35:04 PM PDT by SoConPubbie (Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

Says nothing in there about “rape” or “incest”. Nor does his bill.

You are a liar.


37 posted on 03/20/2013 1:35:29 PM PDT by Dead Corpse (I will not comply.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

He’s talking about when carrying a baby any further in term would cause and end to the life of the mother. If he had stated it any other way than he had, then he’d be accused by people like you of wanting women to die.

Again, his legislation extend Right to Life protections already in the Constitution all the way to conception.

If that isn’t good enough for you, you are a friggin’ idiot.


38 posted on 03/20/2013 1:37:07 PM PDT by Dead Corpse (I will not comply.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

I refused to vote for either of the liberals running on top of the ticket in 2012. And, I'm not a libertarian. But I would have voted for Rand Paul against Barack Obama. All things considered, I'd say that makes him a helluva lot more viable than Mitt Romney was.


39 posted on 03/20/2013 1:39:38 PM PDT by so_real ( "The Congress of the United States recommends and approves the Holy Bible for use in all schools.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
Says nothing in there about “rape” or “incest”. Nor does his bill.

You are a liar.


You need to reread that Dead Corpse. He is asked a direct question about Abortion in the case of Incest and Rape and then proceeds to waffle and mumble about how “I don’t know if there’s a simple way to put me in any category on any of that,”

You might want to slow down and read the whole thing before you start throwing around the word "Liar".
40 posted on 03/20/2013 1:42:49 PM PDT by SoConPubbie (Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

I can’t be the only who one who see’s a liability in Rand’s (fake) hair. A stiff wind during the campaign, off flies the ‘piece’, and we’re done.


41 posted on 03/20/2013 1:46:20 PM PDT by bramps (Sarah Palin got more votes in 2008 than Mitt Romney got in 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

How Viable Is Rand Paul for 2016?

Not very!


42 posted on 03/20/2013 1:47:40 PM PDT by SECURE AMERICA (Where can I sign up for the American Revolution 2013 and the Crusades 2013?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

We need a Rubio ticket with Rubio at the top.

Look to the liberal left to parade the most easily defeated candidates and attack the ones who can hurt the Dems the most.

They did it with Romney in 2012.

Rand is a great guy and would make a great VP. But we need an Hispanic NOW to push us over the top. Romney’s BIGGEST mistake in his campaign was NOT picking Rubio.


43 posted on 03/20/2013 1:59:37 PM PDT by ZULU (See: http://gatesofvienna.net/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

I dont think Paul was ever viable. His daddy is nuts and too many paulistas are waaaaaaaaaay out whack jobs.

I didnt think immigration would be the point. I actually thought it would be the Jews/Israel.


44 posted on 03/20/2013 2:11:24 PM PDT by rrrod (at home in Medellin Colombia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg; TomGuy
How are you defining amnesty?

Easy, if they don't go home it amnesty, period, no matter what you call it.

45 posted on 03/20/2013 2:29:26 PM PDT by itsahoot (It is not so much that history repeats, but that human nature does not change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

He is not viable unless the GOPe and the New York TImes say he is viable. /sarc

Really?


46 posted on 03/20/2013 2:31:58 PM PDT by Triple (Socialism denies people the right to the fruits of their labor, and is as abhorrent as slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot

okay, then Michelle Bachmann was in favor of amnesty as well.


47 posted on 03/20/2013 2:32:48 PM PDT by Perdogg (Sen Ted Cruz is my adoptive Senator)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg
okay, then Michelle Bachmann was in favor of amnesty as well.

Afraid so. Even my favorite Sarah Palin waffled a lot on the issue.

No matter how you frame the argument we have been invaded by a non-combat occupation force, and if they stay here the Republic is doomed.

48 posted on 03/20/2013 2:43:26 PM PDT by itsahoot (It is not so much that history repeats, but that human nature does not change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot

Well then how are we going to round up every illegal and send them home?


49 posted on 03/20/2013 2:51:15 PM PDT by Perdogg (Sen Ted Cruz is my adoptive Senator)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Ingtar
Santorum with VP West.

Aaaah don't know about Santorum............if he was the life force of water, he'd be neither hot or cold, just tepid and wet. We need more than just wet!!!

50 posted on 03/20/2013 3:05:13 PM PDT by varon (USA Nationalist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-75 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson