Posted on 09/30/2014 1:52:40 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Sen. Rand Paul's best window for winning the 2016 Republican presidential nomination increasingly looks like it has passed.
A lot can happen over the next 18 months, but the renewed focus on foreign policy -- and more specifically, the Islamic State -- has reminded the Republican Party where its true views on international affairs lie.
And it is decidedly not with non-interventionists like Paul (R-Ky.).
A new poll from CNN/Opinion Research is the best we've seen to date bearing out this point. The poll asks Americans to identify themselves as either hawks or doves -- hawks being someone "who believes that military force should be used frequently to promote U.S. policy" and doves being those who think "the U.S. should rarely or never use military force."
Overall, it's close, with 50 percent picking the doves and 45 percent picking the hawks.
Among Republicans, though, it is decidedly not close. About seven in 10 (69 percent) say they are hawks, while just one-quarter (25 percent) side with the doves. That's nearly three-to-one....
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
The Pauls need to go on a looooooong vacation
Agree, both are as mad as a public toilet rat
Does not look like all that GOPe boot licking did Paul any good.
Rand is a rino, buh bye rand.
I thought that was what their campaigns amounted to.
The odium of the RatPost rises like incense around the herms of Rand and his daddy .....
Disagree with them if you like (and I do), still, the spite and venom of people like this is a huge encomium worthy of inscription on their tombstones.
Actually the libertarian “non-interventionalist” stance (which Paul has backed off from) does not really bother me with respect to ISIS.
There’s no friggin way we need to put boots on the ground, lose 3 thousand or more Ameican lives and spend another trillion dollars just to futilely chase sand monkeys around the desert.
Like we’ve been doing for the last 12 years.
Paul started promoting himself but he seemed incoherent and floundering, over the last two years he has been all over the place, and at times just baffling as he almost spoke in gibberish with his “thousands of exceptions” as reasons for legal abortion, and ignoring “gay marriage” becoming legal for a few years or so, to eventually win the argument?
Just weird stuff.
I hope so.
“There’s no friggin way we need to put boots on the ground”
With the border virtually wide open you won’t need to put boots on the ground overseas to fight them. They will be in your back yard so you can fight them here thanks to Obama’s policies.
Ditto that.
And with the (bleeps) in Washington even too scared to call what happened in Moore, OK a terrorist attack, its very clear that the enemy is within our walls, but the leaders won’t admit it.
Rand Paul supports using the military to destroy ISIS. HE supports arming the Kurds, and working with Arab governments who oppose ISIS. He just doesn’t support training and arming more “moderate” jihadis, and trying to overthrow the one secular government that is actually doing the heavy fighting against ISIS right now (Assad). How is that non-interventionist? How is the GOP-e supporting Obama’s plan to train and equip a puny force of 5,000 jihadis, currently allied with ISIS, to fight ISIS going to work?
Rand Paul’s become acceptably hawkish for a prospective GOP nominee, says … John McCain
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-gop/3209262/posts
Rand Paul supports amnesty.
He can join Marco Rubio in the land of losers.
Screw the base, and you lose.
Please let it be so.
Early on I thought Rand has potential, did not take long to discover he nothing more than a political grifter, just wanting to participate in the grand scam.
The nut doesn’t fall very far from the tree.
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.