Skip to comments.Two Of The GOP's Top Presidential Prospects Are Engaged In A Very Public Feud
Posted on 03/10/2014 4:35:26 PM PDT by Mariner
On Saturday, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul won the presidential straw poll at the Conservative Political Action Conference by a landslide for the second consecutive year. Conservative firebrand Texas Sen. Ted Cruz came in second, but he actually gained the most ground of any candidate year-over-year.
On Sunday, Cruz began making a play to draw foreign policy distinctions between himself and Paul, both of whom are considered two of the GOP's top presidential prospects.
"I'm a big fan of Rand Paul. He and I are good friends," Cruz said on ABC's "This Week" Sunday. "I don't agree with him on foreign policy. I think U.S. leadership is critical in the world. And I agree with him that we should be very reluctant to deploy military force abroad. But I think there is a vital role, just as Ronald Reagan did. ... The United States has a responsibility to defend our values."
Cruz's comments came two days after Paul thrilled the CPAC audience by blasting President Barack Obama's drone policy. However, Paul didn't mention the preeminent ongoing geopolitical conflict the crisis in Ukraine.
Paul's noninterventionist views on foreign policy have attracted a libertarian-leaning crowd. In the CPAC straw poll, 57 percent of respondents, when asked about the U.S.'s "role in the world," identified with this statement: "N early 70 years after the end of World War II, it's time for our European, Asian and other allies to provide for their own defense."
Only 37 percent, on the other hand, agreed with this statement: " As the world's only superpower, the U.S. needs to continue to bear the responsibility of protecting our allies in Europe, Asia and other parts of the world."
(Excerpt) Read more at finance.yahoo.com ...
Personally, I don't think the US Military should be used to "defend our values". That's what we did in Kosovo and Libya...darn near in Syria. I think that's both silly and dangerous.
I believe we should focus instead on defending our critical interests.
Our fighting men and women are tiring. We're running out of money. We need to come home and regroup...replace equipment. Rest. Train. Introduce new equipment and tactics. Build, Build Build.
Our critical, strategic interests will be at stake soon enough.
Unlike what the press thinks, I believe that public discourse is a GOOD thing
Winning the CPAC straw poll is not much better than winning some online poll. CPAC skews young and libertarian, of course Rand Paul and his father are going to win there. Nature abhors a vacuum, if the United States isn’t the leader, Russia, China or the Caliphate will step in and lead the world.
So, this was about Ted Cruz and whoever....
I don’t think American troops should be used to defend the interests of multinational corporations and global bankers.
Nobody, including me, gives any credence to that silly poll. I watching what each of them says, does and writes.
I have a disconnect with Paul on immigration , and Cruz makes me uneasy with the slight aroma of Neo Con.
But I think both of them have the courage of their convictions.
Sometimes that can be our interests too. We need to be careful to make our own decisions as a people.
Sometimes our interest can overlap with those guys.
But, to your point, they are often divergent.
We are required to help our allies if we have a treaty. I have absolutely no problems with that.
Agreed. Every time and without equivocation.
Me neither. Although I have never heard Rand Paul speak, I have heard he is superior to Cruz. Although I would love to see Cruz get the nomination, I could be happy enough with Paul. I do think Paul has a better shot at the nomination. There are a lot of young people who are big fans of his father.
I do, but its a mistake to let communists, Saudi royals, and Muslim Brotherhood decide what those interests are.
Fair enough, and I certainly agree about open debate. And it’s still early in the game, so everyone knows these polls are meaningless for any other purpose than chatter.
But the dilemma will be how to avoid a repeat of the circular firing squad where conservatives, liberatarians, and moderate “Reagan Democrat types” who are sick and tires of Obama and his brand of “hopey changey” will sacrifice the good for the sake of the perfect. Some are going to jump on every Rand Paul thread with anti-libertarian hatred and some are going to maintain that Ted Cruz isn’t eligible to be POTUS right up to election day.
We need to remember who the real enemy is, and to bear the Buckley Rule in mind and get behind “the most conservative candidate THAT CAN WIN”.
Russia, China or the Caliphate will step in and lead the world.
The only reason the US has slipped is that our enemies, mostly domestic, have steamrolled over the Constitution that was engineered to keep us above and beyond the rule of man.
“”Back in Kentucky, McConnells campaign literature reflects the support of Paul with a prominently placed Rand Paul endorsed seal on direct mailing sent out this month.””
Yeah, that's disgusting.
To the extant that they benefit, they should foot the bill and send their children to die.
I like Paul and Cruz, and it’s okay that they aren’t identical.
Either one would be light years better than the last two options we have had for POTUS.
That said, you would do well to listen to both Paul and Cruz. They are both intellectually superior to anyone we have had in the WH in many years.
They are also both very articulate.
I don’t think anyone (in the primary or general election) can match Cruz in a debate.
This is another GOPe versus conservative battle, there is nothing new to this.
The rinos/libertarians against conservatism.
I thought the last primary cycles was healthy.
Granted, Romney was NOT my man, but he was no Dole or McCain either.
We need to debate early...and hell, I would support the GOP Contenders announcing, and having debates in 40 Holiday Inns across the country over the next two years...before the Primaries.