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 ...
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.
How Viable Is Rand Paul for 2016?
Not very!
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.
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.
Easy, if they don't go home it amnesty, period, no matter what you call it.
He is not viable unless the GOPe and the New York TImes say he is viable. /sarc
Really?
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.
Well then how are we going to round up every illegal and send them home?
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!!!
Second, whether or not the border is secured, which it will not be, allowing people who entered this country illegally to obtain legal status is wrong. These individuals, and their offspring, need to return to their country of origin, and then go through the legal process that has been in place. Why should these people benefit from their illegality, while those who have gone through the legal process be essentially placed in line behind those who have broken our laws?
Sorry, but Rand Paul has lost any support I had for him. He has wimped out, with the result being yet another RINO in D.C.
Yeah, with about 15% of the electorate.
Just ask them to go home or build enough Arpio camps to put them in. They will go home on their own if there is no profit in staying.
If we wanted to round them up we could and you know it. Maybe we could just adopt the immigration policy that Mexico has in place.
I don’t think either Palin or Santorum has a chance in hell of winning the Presidency. Santorum didn’t do very well in the GOP primaries this last time. Did he win even one state?
Of coure Ron Paul, despite lots of hard core supporters, also failed to win one state.
Rand can probably win Kentucky, at least.
Palin might be interesting. Not sure who widespread the sense that she was unfaily made fun of by the press is. My sense is the narrative that has been established for her will be difficult to overcome. If she can’t redefine herself in lots of peoples eyes she is toast.
My sense is that Rand Paul has a slightly better chance then either of them, but probably not as good as some others like Rubio. But he does seem to be doing things to improve his positioning, already. A lot can change in 3 yars.
This is the key point. He never says he supports abortion for rape and incest. He’s waffling on CNN to liberal Blitzer..
So what?
He’s not saying exactly what you want him to say. You’re demanding he says something he doesn’t want to say because the media plays “gotcha!”. He’s too smart to even say “rape” on tv and be the next Mourdock. Get over yourself, his position has not changed.
So we’re going to play this game again?
I am so done with ripping apart conservatives. If a person is truly 90% conservative, they’ve got my support. RP can save this economy. West is awesome. We’ve got lots of good people.
How ‘bout we support ALL of the decent people and not cull them all out until we’re left with another RINO? That would be great.
You read his bill then? Good. That’s settled. You lied.
IOW, you don’t have a better plan than someone who actually does, but who you don’t like.
I get it.
How ‘bout we support ALL of the decent people
I am...the following are decent and I will support....Sarah Palin, Rick Santorum. Two people that you need to get them nominated and we won’t have any issues. Other than that the field is pretty terrible.
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.