-3 votes

Did y'all expect Rand Paul to write his father in?

First of all, let me say that I despise Sean Hannity and am disappointed that Rand decided to endorse Romney before the convention. He should have waited until AFTER the convention to see if his father's delegates could pull off an upset.

But, that brings me to my second point. After coming home from work and hearing a clean-cut, intelligent, young black man who generally despises people with an entitlement mindset brag about how he voted for Barrack in 2008 and how Barrack is going to win again this year and then say the only thing good about Romney is Romney-care, I get on the Daily Paul and see Ron Paul supporters pitching a fit like a bunch of immature three-year olds because Rand Paul endorsed Romney. Did any of you REALLY think Rand was going to NOT endorse Romney if Romney became the GOP nominee? I know. Romney is NOT the GOP nominee yet. But, did any of you really think that after August Rand would NOT endorse and vote for Romney?

I'm just curious if anyone here is really so naive that he thought Rand was going to sit this election out, vote for a third party candidate, or write his father in in November. If you did expect Rand to support the Republican nominee, then at least put your anger at him in perspective.

If that is the case, you should be mad at him NOT for endorsing Romney, but for doing so while his father has not officially dropped out of the race yet. Those of you who would have called him a traitor for endorsing the GOP nominee in September need to realize Rand Paul is a Republican!!!



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

modern patriots united?

modern patriots united?

No he didn't

He generally endorsed voting outside the two party system and appeared with Nader and the Constitution and Green party nominees, giving a verbal nod to the Libertarian as well.

Actually, yes he did. Ron

Actually, yes he did. Ron Paul specifically endorsed Chuck Baldwin in 2008.

What we have here

is a battle between logic and emotion.

naturally i am hamstrung in the middle of understanding.

BUT I'M NOT GIVING UP.

Be brave, be brave, the Myan pilot needs no aeroplane.

Rand Paul...

Rand Paul has become just another politician that I will never take seriously.

RickStone

It's sad you feel that way.

Our country has always been run by politicians and always will be run by politicians. Patriots can choose to put up with a lot of bull crap and participate in the political process, or they can become a political hermit and let their country go to pot. We have 100 Senators. Name two that are better than Rand Paul. I can't.

You do have a point here

Rand is still the best Senator, in my opinion - despite his decision to endorse Romney (which absolutely disgusted me!) However, I will NOT support Romney even if Rand were VP. I'll write in Dr. Paul! I'm not convinced that Romney is going to be influenced by Rand; I'm more worried about Rand being influenced by Romney. If this is Rand's strategy, it is a dangerous one as he risks alienating his base (too late?). I can only hope he knows what he's doing.

Some things to consider

I understand anger towards Rand for endorsing Romney so soon. What angers me is Ron Paul supporters getting mad that Rand endorsed Romney at all. Those that do have no sense of strategy. If Rand were to endorse a third party candidate like Johnson or Goode, he would lose his seat. If Rand were to endorse no one and secretly write in his father, he would lose his Senate seat. Many in this movement don't realize the power that people like Levin and Limbaugh wield. All they'd have to do is say the word and their million dollar buddies and hundreds of thousands of listener voters in KY would see to it that Rand is defeated in 2016. Some wouldn't mind Rand losing if he "stuck to his principles". But, not endorsing Romney and making hundreds of thousands of Ron Paul supporters happy isn't worth Rand Paul getting kicked out of the Senate and a warmongering Neocon taking his place.

Listen Dixie

We have seen exactly how the GOP strategy works. It stole the election from Ron Paul.

"endorsing Romney and making hundreds of thousands of Ron Paul supporters happy isn't worth Rand Paul getting kicked out of the Senate and a warmongering Neocon taking his place"

Gee I thought it was the Ron Paul supporters that put Rand in the Senate? I always thought that keeping your base supporters happy is how you win elections, unless of course votes no longer matter and the powers that be rig the voting process so ya you better make sure you keep those in power happy. I guess I am naive in thinking that is exactly what this grass roots movement is attempting to change.

You mean... Rand would "lose

You mean... Rand would "lose his seat" like Ron Paul lost his seat after endorsing Chuck Baldwin for president?

There's a big difference in

being an incumbent Congressman in a small district that your family has lived in for over forty years and in which you've served for ten terms and being a freshman Senator. Plus, there's the presidential aspirations to consider. Many Republicans wouldn't vote for Ron because they believed he was unloyal to their party. In order to become president, you've got to get a good chunk of the partisan sheep vote.

It'd be nice if...

Rand would come out and address his fans, just to let them know what his strategy is. Of course it's only been a day so maybe he will. In a CNN interview today he sounded as if he's willing to compromise; to be a good team player. This is what worries me. Maybe he's making the right "political decision" by backing Romney, but I just hope he understands who Romney really is. I also hope he understand that RP supporters will NOT (for the most part) back Romney even with Rand's blessings; that's just the reality of the situation. Again, I can only hope he knows what he's doing.

So Dixie...

Are you now voting for Romney because of Rand's endorsement of him?

And just to answer your question. I did not expect Rand to do anything, but I certainly thought he would at least stand firm on the side of his father's 30+ years of defending the Constitution.

I don't know who I'm voting for president yet.

I haven't made up my mind, only I know it won't be Obama. Rand's endorsement has nothing to do with my decision, although it makes me think Romney might be coming around on some of the issues Rand mentioned he discussed with him.

Romney is establishment.

Establishment doesn't learn. They follow orders.

Reagan was establishment and I would have voted

for him. If Romney comes around on enough issues that Ron Paul stands for he has a chance of winning me over.

Reagan didn't really become

Reagan didn't really become fully establishment until after he was president for a few years.

deacon's picture

why did he have to endorse him at all?

Ron Paul stated him and Rmoney have no common ground
then rand says the exact opposite
Ron Paul and romney have as much in common as night and day
deacon

If we deny truth before your very eyes,then the rest of what we have to say,is of little consequence

Yes, I expected him to do

Yes, I expected him to do this. There is a conservative/liberty movement in the GOP that he is protecting and looking out for. And yup I suspected it was probably coming very soon because Rand looked like death warmed over on TV the other day...he made a tough decision, and probably knows he can no longer depend on our support after this. He still has mine.

Yup I was hoping he would wait until after the convention too. But then again, seeing as we are now at the point of being physically threatened and injured at conventions, what do you suppose would happen if we actually pull off an upset? Or what if Ron won't endorse Romney, what happens to our new people in the party? Somebody has to ease tensions somehow, and Rand did it. Perhaps that's why he did it on Hannity too, for a huge audience to see, and not quietly.

There is a middle ground

There is a middle ground between writing Ron in, and going on national TV and endorsing Romney. He EASILY could have chosen that middle ground. Hannity didn't hold a gun to his head to get him on the show. Based on what happened on the show, you can bet every last penny that you have that Rand was the one who initiated that interview, not Hannity.

Rand was eventually going to endorse

the Republican nominee. If Santorum had won, Rand would have eventually endorsed Santorum, if Gingrich had won, same there. Did you really ever expect him NOT to back the GOP nominee?

I'm writing in Ron Paul...

Why should it be hard for Rand? It's easy to spell. It's not just the fact that he endorsed Romney. He never defended his dad while talking to Hannity. He should have refused to appear on his show for the way Hannity treated the good doctor and the lies he spewed about him. A lot of us have given a lot of time and effort helping his dad, and he just doesn't seem to care.

"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds."-Samuel Adams
http://brushfiresinthemind.blogspot.com/

Why should it be so hard for Rand?

Let me spell this out to you. If Rand Paul didn't support Romney and vote for ROmney and campaign for Romney, Rand Paul would lose his Senate seat if Romney lost.

How could you possibly know

How could you possibly know that? Did Ron Paul lose his congressional seat after not endorsing McCain?

Good

I hope Rand DOES lose his Senate seat. He told us all along he would support the Republican nominee, so no surprise there (along with no surprise that he doesn't have the character, integrity or principles of his father.) It's that the endorsement came BEFORE Romney is the nominee and he did it on Hannity's program. Hannity is the enemy. As far as I'm concerned, this was a personal betrayal of his father, and that's part of what I said when I was asked why I was unsubscribing from C4L. I don't care how he votes - if he's going to put politics ahead of principle, he needs to be gone. We'll find someone else we can support.

No King but Jesus, no President but Ron Paul

WHO are we going to support? Name one

person that has ANY chance of winning a Senate race and would be better than Rand Paul?. You think it would be good if Rand lost his Senate seat, but, who would Kentucky replace him with? Ron Paul's Congressional district is about to be taken over by a pro-war on terror Neocon. If Rand lost his Senate seat, he would be replaced by a pro-war on terror Neocon. Is that what you want? Would you rather Kentucky have a Bush/Kristol/Cheney-style Neocon instead of Rand Paul? Just because a Paleoconservative gets elected from a particular district or state doesn't mean that district or state is necessarily Paleoconservative. The proof is that Texas District 14 which Ron Paul has occupied since the 70s is fixing to be occupied by a Neocon.

I don't care

I don't care who replaces him as long as he is gone. He's sold out and he needs to be replaced. It's the same thing with the Presidential election in November. If Ron Paul isn't the nominee from the GOP, then I want Obama re-elected. We need an obvious target in the White House. If Romney is elected, all the so-called conservatives will go back to sleep with a big "Whew - that was close." All they care about is replacing Obama. They don't care if the replacement is as bad or worse than Obama. It happened with Reagan and Bush and it will happen if Romney is elected.

Besides, the Republicans need to be taught a lesson. If you won't support a true constitutionalist, then you are going to lose.

And if you are so concerned about neocons, how can you support Rand Paul when Rand Paul is supporting a neocon for President?

When we have an obvious one-worlder, globalist, totalitarian in the White House, we can educate people and use the tenth amendment movement, etc, to turn things around. When we have a one-worlder, globalist, totalitarian in the White House masquerading as a conservative (Reagan, Bush, Romney) it's so much harder to wake people up to the principles of liberty and the reality of tyranny (instead of personality worship.)

Rand is a compromiser and needs to go.

No King but Jesus, no President but Ron Paul

You're mixing two totally different issues.

I understand where you're coming from on wanting to force the Republican Party to nominate a Constitutionalist every time or lose the general election, although I personally disagree with that strategy. If Rand Paul were "taught a lesson" and lost his Senate seat, he wouldn't be replaced by an Obama or a Democrat at all for that matter. He would be replaced by another Republican. How would Rand Paul being replaced by a Neocon Republican advance the cause of liberty? I'll save you the response. - It would not.

Ummm... up a notch

He's talking about PRESIDENT, not senator.

As in, If Obama is PRESIDENT again, then there is a chance to still wake up republicans and teach THEM a lesson that if they don't support a constitutionalist, they are going to lose (election....).

But if Romney is PRESIDENT, they (republicans) will go back to sleep thinking "we won" just because "their guy" got in and it will be harder to bring them around.

Did you REALLY not get this from reading the post? Read again.

deacon's picture

why would rand

lose his senate seat for not endorsing
a republican of any name?
seems by the posts here most are mad that he did
and that just might lose his seat anyways
deacon

If we deny truth before your very eyes,then the rest of what we have to say,is of little consequence