Skip to comments.Can Rand Paul Solve The GOP's Minority Voter Problem?
Posted on 04/08/2013 6:46:18 PM PDT by nickbeckusa
Kentucky Senator Rand Paul will attempt to sell the Republican Party to the students of Howard University Wednesday, making his first visit to a historically black university as part of an effort to reach out to youth and minority voters.
As we reported last week, Paul's speech will focus on the history of African Americans within the Republican Party, as well as economic opportunity, school choice, civil liberties, and reforming drug laws issues that Paul believes will resonate with his audience of young, predominantly black students.
"Some of the speech ... will be about economic opportunity, how I think the Republican Party offer more than subsistence," Paul said in an interview with Business Insider Monday. "I want to try to convince folks that we want to offer people jobs by the millions and that our policies would create millions of jobs."
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
The only way you get them is to promise them candy.
Paul completely misses the point. The problem is with severely lacking minority families and in minority churches that preach social justice and hate.
These are people who don’t care about drug laws now other than when they’re proclaiming them to be racist.
I’d support Rand Paul looong before I would even think about supporting Jeb Bush and his trainee Marco Rubio.
I disagree. If true, then the Republican party is doing the right thing by trying to out democrat the democrats as far as politics is concerned.
I believe we can win the minority voter by articulating what Conservatism really is and that the "candy" is opportunity to work hard and become whatever it is you wish to be.
Till they find out he tells Republicans what he is for.
Once they find out that he says he is for tax cuts w spending cuts the party will be over.
Does this mean he is also going to reach out to white voters? If we are going to play this race game then let’s all play it.
Yep ... first he needs to buy and control the content of AP, NBC, MSNBC, CBS, CNN, ABC etc etc and then he might have a shot
Didn't Romney pitch the old "work hard and succeed" idea? Well, he wasn't the best salesman for that - too wealthy and white-bread. Who knows, maybe someone more acceptable to the voters could sell it.
I'm not getting my hopes up, though.
He’s foolish if he thinks drug laws are a big deal with blacks.
I used to buy weed from a guy who spent nearly 25 years in prison on and off for dealing drugs. Today he speaks in local churches about being a man and the need for blacks to stand on their own two feet and be fathers.
When I spoke to him a year or so back about his life today vs then. He said the law scares white folks a lot more than it scares black folks. For him, going to prison was only a slight shift in his life but no big deal and that’s the way it is for much of the black community. He says black males simply don’t see prison as all that much of a punishment and drug laws don’t really matter one way or the other.
LOL! You have to be a conservative before you can articulate conservatism.
What that means is THEY ARE THE INSTITUTION in most of the places where Democrats dominate state or local politics ~ not all, but most!
There's little room in the Republican party with its myriads of smaller coalition partners ~ and since it's an "in for a dime, in for a dollar" deal with the greater part of the AA vote they will be little persuaded by arguments about policies when the binder between them and the Democrats is all about THE POWER!
We have a better chance at spinning off the Union Voters!
John Boehner should not even be Speaker.
They also vote if pushed ~ but with AAs politics is all about the votes ~ by pushing as many people as possible to vote, they are a powerhouse inside Democrat circles.
A good point ~ we probably need to convince some of these yahoos that the Republican party is a coalition of willing partners ~ and if they aren’t willing, go try the other guys.
Mitt made his money the old fashioned way ~ from corporate bank accounts to his bank accounts.
The GOP does not have a “minority voter problem.”
Minorities have a “political principle problem.”
Paul is a Libertarian moron that is only right on 10-15% of the issues. On most things he is a fool. He should not be allowed to call himself a Republican anymore than John McCain should.
Heaven help us when folks speak well of Rand Paul. Shows how far the GOP has sunk in its “leaders” that this person would remotely be considered acceptable.
Something like 40% of Michigan union members supported RTW and I know my neighbor really liked Rick Santorum’s ideas on bringing jobs back to the USA. The neighbor said Santorum spoke about our ridiculous tax structure on manufactured products and the guy on the factory floor understands that it hurts a company.
Mitt Romney did himself no favors when he attacked Santorum for reaching out to the blue collar union crowd. They saw it as an insult.
Makes me tear up hearing you say that... /sarc
What? Based on what position (look at his plank before trotting out the "love the drugs" nonsense...)
I agree. Republicans suck and are a dead political party full of back-stabbing liars.
We can save the Republic or,
We can cater to minority voters who have somehow become convinced the government must take care of them.
Hard to believe that the Republicans once OWNED the African-American vote. That generation, up until the mid 1930's, realized that the Democrats were the party of Segregation and still remembered that the Republicans ended slavery.
Low-info blacks of today actually think that JFK was for civil rights. I'll say one thing for'em, once bought, they stays bought. One distressing turn of events is that the Latinos are driving African-Americans from employment and even taking their welfare goodies. Only one way for the Democrats to make that up ... get more from whitey.
Seems, based on interviews from movie goers of Lincoln, that they believe Lincoln was a democRat. Most Blacks think the founders were a bunch of slave owners. Not true. It would shock them to know who, and how, many were abolitionists - then others who freed their slaves (in many cases - indentured servants) - after their death.
To bad he is alienating the base of the GOP with his “Normalization”(re: Amnesty) of Illegals plan.
He'd delivered on THEIR ISSUE and made good on his promise.
The AA voters erred in imagining the Democrats would continue to care ~ they don't!
But, as I pointed out, the black voters are a full 40% of the effective Democrat off year vote in the places where Democrats dominate politics.
“Rand Paul wins The Washington Times-CPAC 2013 Straw Poll”
Meaningless in that CPAC is a joke. Even when Paul is on the right side of an issue, it is usually for the wrong reason. His libertarian viewpoint warps his reason. He is not a true conservative. His motives ARE NOT conservative, they are Libertarian. While most conservatives will have “libertarian” leanings, they are not driven by the libertarian mindset.
His father was a flake and he is as well.
CPAC was not the primary subject of my post, it was the title of an article. The point was Paul's plank.
It's hardly an accident that Paul finds himself on the right side of a long list of conservative, liberty oriented issues. That's your unsupported opinion verses his record. He's a very intelligent person - (Duke U grad, board certified physician, founded a practice, etc.). I agree his dad had some positions that were out in left field, but Rand is about as solid as they come, and he's very articulate in defending key conservative positions.
Libertarian - yes he has that leaning. Frankly, Republicans as a lot are not much different than any other big-gov statist. They all love government rule over the masses - rules for thee and not for me. I'm sick of ALL statists who think their way is the right one for everyone - backed up by an all powerful army of unelected bureaucrats. If they concentrated on defending liberty, all of the other social ills would start to recede. But no, they want laws on top of laws. Just like the gun grabbers - it's all about the children. Yeah, right.
“If they concentrated on defending liberty, all of the other social ills would start to recede.”
Wrong. IF we concentrated on establishing morality and a moral, God fearing, people then the social ills would(may)start to recede. Liberty...unconstrained by genuiene morality...is just anarchy. What most libertarians call “liberty” is to be “libertine.” No, that is NOT a solution.
Where you have a moral people, then liberty can flourish because the people do not require restraint and are self policing. Our culture has become so hedonistic and immoral that “liberty” cannot properly exist and their be basic safety. However, true morality can only exist where real Christian belief exists. So, the solution is ultimately a religious one....meaning of turning of people to God/Jesus Christ.
Oh, I am NOT suggesting a theocracy....you cannot force anyone to “believe” anything....it has to be between them and God. However, basic morality (in behavior) can be enforced by law.....it works better when it is internal to the people rather than external. This, of course, has to be done very carefully......too many views on want constitutes “morality.” Thus, again a religious/faith awakening is called for.....not something men can produce per se.
Which is what I keep saying. Morality is not government initiated and it isn't ensured by laws. Bottom line is: more laws = more government = more crimes of consequence.
The more government we allow, the less people take responsibility for doing right, the more corruption and regulatory capture we endure, the more large scale crime we see. I'm not talking about someone firing up a dubie at home, I'm talking about the global rape and pillaging of the producers.
Your argument started out in the wrong direction but you circled back around to the answer. Remember Jesus told the the pharisees that all of their laws could be pared down to 2 rules? But Pharisees piled law upon law on the backs of God's people. It didn't make them better people or closer to God. On the contrary, Jesus said the traditions of men actually prevented people from entering the kingdom.
"Senator Rand Paul says America needs a, spiritual cleansing of the people and explains that salvation doesnt come through elected leaders. [snip] Senator Rand Paul: Changing a particular law is not going to make us a better people but that comes from the people themselves. "
“Your argument started out in the wrong direction but you circled back around to the answer. Remember Jesus told the the pharisees that all of their laws could be pared down to 2 rules? But Pharisees piled law upon law on the backs of God’s people. It didn’t make them better people or closer to God. On the contrary, Jesus said the traditions of men actually prevented people from entering the kingdom.”
God istituted government to restrain evil doers. Any government, how poor it may be, is better than no government. Because man is instrinsically flawed they must be restrained. So, it IS necessary to set moral standards by LAW and enforce them. Libertarians are to obtuse to grasp this. It is NOT a perfect solution, but the only one that will remotely work. You CANNOT expect fallen man to do anything other than be selfish.....and it is naive to think “liberty” will bring about an orderly (meaning we all can get along - for the most part) society. Extreme “liberty” only creates chaos.
We are NEVER going to have heaven on earth. Making men “behave” (under penalty of law) in moral ways, will not make them righteous or inwardly moral (and Christians)....but it does set up a environment conducive to them doing so. Scripture is condematory over things like, “every man did what was right in his own eyes.”
The majority of folks living in America today have no grasp of “right and wrong.” To them, right is whatever makes me feel good, wrong is what does not. That is not a people that can be allowed to do whatever they want....that is NOT liberty.
STOP TRYING TO SAY THAT Paul is a morale man or even a wise one - he is fool (less than others - but still a fool). The fool has no problems with homosexuality. That is an example of a behavior that should be suppressed. Paul is not on the right side of that issue....a very key one. That is the flaw of his libertarian viewpoint.
Again, it is a scriptural view that government exits to suppress evil doers....enforce moral behavior. The only real point of proper contention on this issue is who determines what is moral? There is the root problem. One I cannot answer.
BTW - I DO NOT advocate forcing moralty as a means of making person Christian...that is folly as well. However, I know that a “moral” environment is conducive to the free unencumbered spread of Christianity.
There are no Libertarians that I know who advocate the abolition of government. This republic is very specific in delegating to government certain duties derived from the natural rights held by citizens, granted by God, in order to protect their liberty. That's basic civics 101. So let's not keep trotting out that red herring that Libertarians or constitutional conservatives are anarchists.
"STOP TRYING TO SAY THAT Paul is a morale man or even a wise one - he is fool (less than others - but still a fool)."
I'm still waiting for someone to show me how foolish this man is. I should just take your word because... you said so???
His record and plank is documented here: Paul on the issues
You slander and attack the man - how about you back it up with something tangible... i.e. he is a fool because...
- Supports Amendment to prevent same sex marriage. (Aug 2010)
- Opposes same-sex marriage. (Nov 2009)
- Opposes affirmative action. (Aug 2010)
- Life begins at conception. (Jul 2010)
- Opposes federal abortion funding. (Aug 2010)
- Prohibit federal funding for abortion. (May 2011)
Is that a quote from Chairman Mao? Or Dr. Pritchett from Atlas Shrugged?
"Therefore, we must control men in order to force them to be free."Government is run by flawed men. Give them power over people and they want more. Give them resources and they want more. They get more because "it's for the people", "it's for the kids", "it's to ensure freedom". Oddly enough, we get more laws but less liberty and happiness. We get worse results the more we give power to overseers.
Do we need 17,000 pages of health care regs (so far) or 30,000 pages of tax rules? How big is the reach the government? Over 1/2 of our population is taking some form of money from the FedGov or local pols. Is that enough? Do we have enough watchers watching the watchers? It is so out of control that our country has debt and unfunded liabilities of $150 TRILLION and growing, but we take in $3.5 trillion a year and borrow 40% of every dollar. Is that enough rules and regs? We need a few more mandates and we'll all be free then...
It's insane that we are debating the need for more laws, more government, more control. It's going to end, but not well...
“Is that a quote from Chairman Mao? Or Dr. Pritchett from Atlas Shrugged?”
NO. That principle comes from the BIBLE! GOD says man is fallen and sinful. GOD estbablished GOVERNMENT to restrain evil.
A primary example of this is after Noah and his family left the Ark. God clearly stated in Genesis 9:6
“Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in His own image.”
This is a first example of God making mankind responsible for policing himself....AKA “GOVERNMENT.” This goes on through the entire Bible. At the end of the book of Judges in the Bible...the last verse makes a condematory statement about ancient Israel:
Judges 21:25 “In those days there was no king in Israel. Everyone did what was right in his own eyes.”
This WAS NOT a good thing...it was anarchy and chaos. Later in the Book of Daniel it is made clear the GOD sets up and tears down rulers, kingdoms, or nations to suit His purpose...but a purpose is to maintain order and restrain evil.
Daniel 4-25 “...know that the Most High rules the kingdom of men and gives it to whom he will.”
Numerous other examples of this exist THROUGHOUT SCRIPTURE. The most important is found in Paul’s Letter to to the Romans Chapter 13 verses 1-7:
“Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore, whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgement. For rulers are not a terror to good con, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and yu will receive his approval. for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer. Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience. For because of this you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, atttending to this very thing. Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed.”
And further in Paul’s first letter to Timothy in Chapter 2 verses 1-4:
“First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings, be made for all people, for kings and all in high positions, that we may lead a peaceul and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way. Tis is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of truth.”
IF YOU CONTINUE TO ARGUE AGAINST THE INSTITUTION OF “GOVERNMENT”....you ARGUE WITH GOD!
You are so hung up on petty bureaucracies that you fail to acknowledge the central truth and purpose of government as GOD ORDAINED IT.
I see no sense arguing over the abuses of power God has bestowed....since you, and other Libertarians (Libertines) refuse to accept the GOD ORDAINED NECESSITY OF GOVERNMENT. Until that principle is FULLY ACCEPTED WITHOUT RESERVATION, then it is useless to talk with you lot because you are intrinsically GODLESS in your approach.
The fact that you would attribute scriptural precepts to Mao shows how warped your thinking is.
My Baptist forebearers, although presecuted, understood the God ordained reason for Government (the magistrate as they would say). In 1689 a group of these Baptist Churches in England wrote a “Confession of Faith” that described what they believed. Article 24 states:
24. The Civil Magistrate
1. God, the supreme Lord and King of all the world, has ordained civil magistrates to be under Him, over the people, for His own glory and the public good. For this purpose He has armed them with the power of the sword, agement of those that do good, and for the punishment of evil-doers.
2. It is lawful for Christians to accept and carry out the duties of a magistrate when called upon. In the performance of such office they are particularly responsible for maintaining justice and peace by application of the right and beneficial laws of the nation. Also, to maintain justice and peace, they may lawfully (under the New Testament) engage in war if it is just and essential.
3. Because civil magistrates are established by God for the purposes previously defined, we ought to be subject to all their lawful commands as part of our obedience to God, not only to avoid punishment, but for conscience sake. We ought also to make supplications and prayers for rulers and all that are in authority, that under them we may live a quiet and peaceable life, in all godliness and honesty.
Should you care to read more....the link is:
You and I have two very different interpretations of the Bible and our constitution. I will never agree with your assertion that any government is better than one based on Natural Law (God, not granted rights). You said:
"Any government, how poor it may be, is better than no government."You call me a Libertarian. I call myself a Constitutional Conservative. You call me Godless, but I'm saved through grace. You assert that bad government, which exceeds the boundaries of God's Natural Laws (rights protected by limiting government's power) is somehow God's will and we should just acquiesce to the "higher authorities" who work tirelessly to usurp our God-given liberties. I believe in a Constitutional Republic, but it is you who said:
"I see no sense arguing over the abuses of power God has bestowed....since you, and other Libertarians (Libertines) refuse to accept the GOD ORDAINED NECESSITY OF GOVERNMENT. Until that principle is FULLY ACCEPTED WITHOUT RESERVATION, then it is useless to talk with you lot because you are intrinsically GODLESS in your approach."That is my only point of agreement with you - we will never agree on your doctrine of government is God...
You quote scriptures, but it is you who doesn't understand the Bible. God chastised the Israelites for disregarding His rule and wanting the yoke of man's unrestrained government over them like the heathens: Israel Asks for a King - 1 Sam 8: 4 - 22
" 6 But when they said, Give us a king to lead us, this displeased Samuel; so he prayed to the Lord. 7 And the Lord told him: Listen to all that the people are saying to you; it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected me as their king.
18 When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, but the Lord will not answer you in that day.
19 But the people refused to listen to Samuel. No! they said. We want a king over us. 20 Then we will be like all the other nations, with a king to lead us and to go out before us and fight our battles.
"IF YOU CONTINUE TO ARGUE AGAINST THE INSTITUTION OF GOVERNMENT....you ARGUE WITH GOD!"1 Sam 8:19
"19 But the people refused to listen to Samuel. No! they said. We want a king over us. 20 Then we will be like all the other nations, with a king to lead us and to go out before us and fight our battles."That Which Defiles - Traditions of Man
"Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written:Romans 5 - Justification by Faith, not Law
These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. 7 They worship me in vain; their teachings are merely human rules. 8 You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to human traditions.
9 And he continued, You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions! 10 For Moses said, Honor your father and mother,[d] and, Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.[e] 11 But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is Corban (that is, devoted to God) [comment: or for the government] 12 then you no longer let them do anything for their father or mother. 13 Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that.
20 The Law came in so that the transgression would increase; but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, 21 so that, as sin reigned in death, even so grace would reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.Romans 6:14 - under Grace, not Law
14 For sin shall not be master over you, for you are not under law but under grace.John 1:17
For the Law was given through Moses;
grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ.