13 votes

Consensus Rand Paul 2016?

So I know many where disappointed when Rand Endorsed Mitt Romney for president. I myself was... but in the grand scheme of things, was it to gain credibility by the Republican party? As we all know how badly and cheated we where as Ron Paul supporters during the republican primary.. Physically abused, mocked, ridiculed.. I just want to say what if he didn't endorse mitt romney? Would we be ignored by the right wing media, and even the liberal media once again, would the voice of our supporters try to be silenced once again? I honestly believe so. I think he made a hard decision and sure he could have chosen to not endorse, but it would have made is run just as hard as to win as the last times.. I cant complain to much besides that fact. Rand Paul is not Ron Paul, but in the eyes of many he's electable, likable, and not as ''radical'' has his father... But, i can tell you Rand images his fathers message better than anyone we do have to run, to return this country to the future we seek. A free america, once again. With Rand Paul as president, i think i could wake up free of chest pains in the morning.. And our message would be able to spread that much more, and i believe we now have the numbers to win an election. Rand Paul 2016 has my vote and support! Does he have your's?

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Trevor Lyman's picture

Going for the Presidency is

Going for the Presidency is an all or nothing gamble in a rigged game.

It's time to focus on the state level where we have actually already made gains and won elections.

The Presidential Pardon is the only way.

It is the holy grail of forgiveness from man's tax system...

Pardon all business from withholding on wage earners.

Pardon wage earners and non-corporate small businesses from filing (and paying) taxes altogether.

This is the only way to break the grip of the corporate-fascist rackets and save our constitution and way of government.

Rand Paul may be our last chance to achieve this.


metalhed19's picture

Rand Paul needs to run for

Rand Paul needs to run for re-election in the Senate in 16. Forget the Presidency, the MSM will do to him what they did to his dad, and the R's are going to have to figure out how to run against a Santa Clause, they won't win anyway. Stay in the Senate, and try to stuff any unanimous BS like adding Georgia to NATO, then we would have been been fighting Russia for Georgia. Rand did this earlier in the year or late last year? It's on Pat B's site, i never seen it mentioned anywhere else. Stay a rare sane voice in the Senate. The establishment isn't going to help him at all, he'll probably get some speaking gig help with someone like Jim Demint and Mike Lee. We need to look away from the Presidency as a movement, get who we can in the House and keep what few people we have Congress in, and start worrying about County Sheriffs and state legislatures. Just my Gold Standard .02 Cents

*Wisconsin Constitution* Article I, Section 25 "The people have the right to keep and bear arms for security,defense,hunting,recreation or any other law-abiding purpose"

Iron Maiden!

Nice to see we have some Maiden fans on DP!

"I will not submit to authority of man. I'm alive, I'm awake, this is more than I can take." -Jordan Page

I would support him although he did upset me when he endorced Ro

Yes I would, especially if the Judge was his running mate.

Somebody already commented with this link

but it bears repeating:


I'm not a big fan of Judge Nap's conspiracy talk, but the person that brings the liberty movement together, whoever that may be, will be someone that uses his or her campaign as a platform to convey and promote the philosophy of liberty. Rand, good or bad, isn't that person.

I've noticed that he has tried to do that a bit on his youtube page with that 1984 video, presumably because he realizes that he can't count on Ron Paul's supporters as a base from which to launch a 2016 campaign at this point. He may even start referring to himself as part of the liberty movement in his speeches, instead of referring to himself as an ally of the liberty movement, which he almost always has been careful to do, so as not to scare tea partiers and establishment creeps. It really doesn't matter how he steers his message over the next 4 years. He's not the person to bring the liberty movement together.

He'll probably run. He might even get a majority of the liberty movement to "support" him, at least in some sense of the word, but getting the enthusiastic support of 30% of the movement, the unenthusiastic support of 30%, the tacit approval of 20%, and outright rejection by 20%, is not that impressive, when you consider that his father had 95% enthusiastic approval. In fact, I would call those statistics downright splintering. On the other hand, Judge Nap, and others for that matter, have the enthusiastic approval of a vast majority of the liberty movement.


rand is a tea partier and will be very careful NOT to align himself with the liberal "liberty movement".
The liberty movement is nothing Ron Paul and therefor is nothing rand paul.
The liberty movement is the left wing answer to the tea party movement.
which is good, but rand is not stupid enough to let libs in his campaigns like his father was. we need another side to the tea party. thats great!
but the liberty movement must realize it holds very little of both drs. paul important philosophies of gvt.

intervention sometimes.
no right to life mandate in gvt.
pro fair tax, or another similar taxing structure.
tax medical marijuana..
foreign aid sometimes...
"end the fed" was wiped from the "liberty movement" platform and is no longer/never spoken about

etc etc...

rand paul will not be part of the "liberty movement" you describe.
the word "liberty movement" came about when gjtardfest tried to usurp ron pauls rally a week before the rnc.. it was created as the lefts answer to the tea party movement which no lib could EVER get with and wish it were buried.
If you consider yourself a "liberty movement" person- then you are saying you refuse to get with ron paul republicans/tea partiers and refuse to do what ron himself asked you to do.
the liberty movement has no organization and is a red herring just like gjtardfest was and mindless libs will wander after it proclaiming it a new movement because the tea party was "hi jacked" and the libs will forever parrot msnbc spin and talking points on the tea parties.
the tp is the only thing going and it is getting bigger by the day.
we had 39 join after obamas reelection and 20 of them were/are registered dems.
Now we have 285 in our local tea party, and there are 5 local tea parties in our district all standing for different things. none stand for more spending on needless, endless war/humanitarian spending and none stand for abortion.
there are 239 tea parties in texas alone.. some with as little as 50 members in small towns and some as big as 5k.

this is where the real Liberty Movement is, whether the libs here acknowledge it OR NOT!

"OH NO! He has a SON?" Neoconservatives and Liberals EVERYWHERE!

Rand Paul 2016

It would be interesting to know

...how his district feels about him and his actions and job he is doing thus far?

Have not heard much on that front.


i did see a youtube

clip where he spoke in kentucky. a number of people (who looked like hard working salt of the earth types) had questions for him and waited out front, but rand snuck out the back door and was whisked away in a car.

okay okay maybe I was a little hard the young boy Rand!

I have a better idea! . I understand that Dr. Paul recently had dinner with is still very good friend Dennis Kucinich. What if they're planning something there up to something. Forget the Republican Party, the Republican Party is dead. No matter who you run in 2016 the Republicans will lose.

Look at history and my not right. the Republican Party will be lucky to do field a candidate that could win in 2024. The Republican Party is now dead at the doornail.

I know it's real early, but I think the winning ticket could be KucinichPaul. Paul being the most libertarian congressman making a lot making an alliance with Kucinich and most liberal congressman.
I Paul/ Kucinich independent run could actually win. And as a liberal and an occupier I could go for this.

Well we can always dream can't we.Kucinich/Paul 2016.


i give you liberal exhibit A!

Libs have always dreamed of bringing Paul to their side BUT HE WONT CHANGE his beliefs and RP will NEVER share a ticket with dennis kucinich.
ron paul is NOT a Libertarian, he claims himself a "Constitutional conservative", always has, and never once referred to himself as a libertarian(journalists do often) and never has been a part of that party. He will speak to everyone, even john birch, muslim brotherhood, black panthers and kkk. but that doesnt mean he is one of them. He is doing it to educate them, libertarians are no different.
no lib can change that fact and thats where their confusion over RP lies.
he is a conservative and libs hate it.
ron paul is a true libs worst enemy and they are well aware of that fact.

"OH NO! He has a SON?" Neoconservatives and Liberals EVERYWHERE!

Rand Paul 2016

I wouldn't be so sure about that .

and I would counter by saying this, how much of a chance would an independent Paul/Kucinich ticket have to win in 2016. One in 10 chance maybe.

Now think about the odds of the Republican Party taking back POTUS in 2016. One in 100 chance, one in 1000 chance the odds are astronomically high wouldn't you say.

Paul and Kucinich know exactly what their policies are and how they would implement them to where they could cover each other's backs and reach a comparable agreement they could both live with.

Wouldnt you say the odds of Paul Kucinich winning the White House would be higher than the Republican Party taking back the White House?


yes. but ron still would never cave to dennis kucinich priciples they see they constitution differently and ron is smart enough to know dennis holds very little in common with paul when it comes to philosophies. ron would choose a constitioonal scholar, one who has been around gvt and has won legal cases and knows constitutional law- and views it like he does.
after DK sold out in AF 1, I dont think ron really wants anything to do with him.
Ron fought very hard with dennis on blocking obamacare and dennis had the chance to bring it to the floor- and he caved BIG TIME.
It barely floated to the senate. and to prove it harry and the white house were calling it a mandate, so harry did not have to put it back to the house for reconciliation. so they called it a mandate.
then when it went before the supreme court the admin and harry started calling it a tax. they flipped it and no one was the wiser.
Roberts agreed it was a tax and it became law, but did so unconstitutionally when it was not sent back to the house for reconciliation. harry knew it would never pass after the senate put their two cents in.. so they called it a mandate and put it to obamas desk.. all taxes are suppose to originate in the house and must follow proper procedure and go back to the house for reconciliation. the admin, with the help of dennis kucinich passed this tax illegally and dennis had the power to stop them and instead caved and said NOTHING after a ride in AF 1.

"OH NO! He has a SON?" Neoconservatives and Liberals EVERYWHERE!

Rand Paul 2016

Ron Paul ran for president in

Ron Paul ran for president in 1988 on the Libertarian ticket.


he did so because he was begged by them and they showed him the money and support. Ron ended his relationship with the republican party after reagan went against his oath and enlarged gvt but he never actually joined the L party. In 1988 Ron ran as their candidate- nothing more. He did not become Libertarian and in 1996 ron was elected once again to represent district 22 as a republican and has remained a republican ever since.

other then running on the ticket ron has really had no ties to the libertarian party except through certain relationships he has. he has these same relationships with libs, greens, and constitutionalists also, but remains republican.
dont get me wrong, when referred to as a "Libertarian" to his face, Ron never corrects the offender- BUT no one has ever heard nor will they hear ron paul say he is Libertarian or even Libertarian leaning.
what he says is "libertarian, to me- means liberty. and so does Liberal." but thats ALL he says on either subject.
He will never admit or deny anything- hes too sly to alienate followers from these groups but he claims himself a "constitutional conservative" and so does rand.
libs and libertarians have always wanted ron paul but ron does not agree with either of those platforms and ron is abhorrent to est in both those movements!

"OH NO! He has a SON?" Neoconservatives and Liberals EVERYWHERE!

Rand Paul 2016

If he ran on the L ticket

If he ran on the L ticket then that makes him at the time an L.


Paul/Amash 2016!!!!!!!!

I will support Rand. And to

I will support Rand.

And to all the Rand haters...are you going to turn your back on Ron when he endorces his son?

I don't hate Rand. I just won't support him

I won't turn my back on Ron for that.

But I would turn my back on Ron if he would have supported Romney or McCain.

If you support Romney, here are just a few things that you endorse:

Complete noncompliance to The Constitution of The United States
The Patriot Act
The authority to execute US Citizens
The runaway Federal Reserve
The continuation of our illegal undeclared wars
More illegal undeclared wars
Obamney Care
Nation Building
Our policing the world
The New World Order
Our involvement in The United Nations
Big Government
The continuation of us becoming a Police State
Complete support of The Military Industrial Complex
and so on........

As far as I know Rand did not have to support all of this. It appeared that he VOLUNTARILY did this. The only way I could forgive him for this is if I find out that his life or a family members life was threatened to do so. The ONLY way!

Please explain to me just what he could have accomplished for the cause of Liberty by supporting Romney ?????

He would've had ZERO chance

He would've had ZERO chance to win the GOP nomination in 2016 had he not endorsed Romney. He would've been confined to this little 10% base of support in the liberty movement and suffered the same fate that his dad did. Rand isn't that stupid.

you're calling ron paul stupid!

i've heard it all now.


Sure. I would never blindly do what Ron Paul tells me to do.

Any other questions?

That's silly.

That's silly.



honesty, its too early to tie down a name

I really think we need a liberty candidate "debate" so we can hear them discuss their thoughts on the issues. But really, there is no reason to pick a guy and stick with him (or her) until we are MUCH closer the actual election time.

Between now and 2015 there is no reason to focus on the WHO. All that does is gives the opposition plenty of time to assassinate their character. Instead, we need to focus on the upcoming election which will have less media attention and less money invested in our opposition.

We also need to refine the message down to a really simple readable set of statements outlining what liberty is, and how it can be correctly applied to specific points on the issues that are important to everyone in language that is easy to explain and hard to disagree with without looking stupid. Perhaps a dozen or so one sentence statements of our highest priorities, each of which could then have a full page or so explaining exactly what we mean and exactly what we DONT mean in that particular statement.

Forget the debate...

Forget the debate idea. Just look at how Rand wants Uncle Sam to be Israel's bottom boy and that should put an end to this "Rand Paul 2016" nonsense.


who will you be bottoming for in 2016?
Hillary or maybe even.... wait for it...


hillary/big sis 2016???

"OH NO! He has a SON?" Neoconservatives and Liberals EVERYWHERE!

Rand Paul 2016

Please consider.

This is a repost of below, but I felt that this is important:

Ron Paul was able to bring democrats in, not because of economics and social issues, but because of the message of Freedom.

They close their ears to Rand, and most other republicans. This is a reality.

It has been drilled that the young generation is the hope of the future. It is an entire generation that will decide the fate of our Republic. We must bring them on board before they are beholden to the establishment parties.

If Rand does surpass Ron in support, it will be because of the establishment republicans who typically 'fall in line' behind the nominee, not because of the true message, the fight for Liberty, Freedom.

That is why it is imperative to vet and to make sure that we are well represented with that message of Liberty, Freedom. The young generation must take over for all of the right reasons, and not ones of compromise, now and into the future.

Please, consider this, as you vet and make up your minds.

At the risk of sounding preachish, and please forgive me, what would Ron Paul expect, and do.

"What if the American people learn the truth" - Ron Paul

"They close their ears to

"They close their ears to Rand, and most other republicans. This is a reality."

What evidence do you have to back up that claim?

Democrats hate him.

Democrats hate him. Libertarians and Left-Libertarians don't trust him but "like his dad". Republicans like him but "not his dad".

Ventura 2012