-4 votes

What do those that don't like Rand Paul suggest happen?

There has been a lot of commenting and posting on Rand Paul as of late, and many people seem to be diametrically opposed to their opinions on Rand. Some see him as a "strategist" for pandering to the neo-con crowd, and hope that he comes to his senses when given more political power. It's working, as seen in the recent "favoriteability" ratings being positive among neo-cons and the older crowd Hannity-watching neo-con crowd. It's working, at least from the point of view that more people like him than his father.

The problem with this is that Rand is compromising the one thing that Ron Paul's people begged for. That of course, is the foreign policy.

Those that don't like Rand Paul and call him a neo-con (and even if it's disingenuous, it's still an accurate description of his voting record in some regards). He compromises on foreign policy, won't speak of Bilderberg anymore, and is doing many that his supporters voted him to be against.

My question is this, to anyone that doesn't like Rand Paul and are disgusted at what he's doing:

What do you suggest happen?

If Rand Paul could do something to bring us 'back to his side', what would it be? In your best scenario, what would you like to see happen, if it could?

Would it be to adopt Ron Paul's foreign policy? Would it be "be exactly like his dad's voting record?" And it it was, how would you suggest we bring the message of Liberty to the older crowd, who will eventually become older people on medicare, who will never vote to take it away?

Should we abandon even trying to influence the 35 year and older crowd?

I'm curious---I am still thinking about the whole situation, so I have not opinion yet. I'm curious to hear yours.

Comment viewing options

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

Rand should stick to

Rand should stick to principle. A NO vote rings louder than a pandering yes vote these days.

Stick to principle. Refuse to compromise the Constitution. It is the oath.

That will earn respect.

Don't endorse the establishment. Don't be guilty by association. Call them what they are and call it like it is.

No one cares about the politics anymore. Now is his chance to start acting like one of us instead of one of them.

Too little, too late

He's shown what he's made of.

An Ashley Judd challenge to Rand Paul's seat could be a serious


Kentucky leans very conservative, but it is hard to compete with an attractive actress with high name recognition when the ignorant populace is doing the voting.

Rand better make sure he can defend all aspects of his record if he wants to remain a Senator, much less run for POTUS.

I actually don't dislike Rand...

...but either way I think the key from now on is working locally. For some that might be easier, for others harder. Here in Philly, the vote was over 85% for Obama... goddamn.

Simple Facts and Plain Arguments
A common sense take on politics and current events.



"Short term you can vote a president, or long term you can continue to grow an historic movement. Once complacency sets in, by compromise or otherwise, an entire generation of youth can once again be lost. We can not afford that. We must build this movement carefully, and upon principle."


This I think is where we are "divided". Some of look to the long view and others are gimmy now. Changing the nation is the goal, or at least enough of the nation so that we may win.

I once saw civil war as an inevitable thing but not so much anymore.. I see my brothers and sisters in Liberty going after local and state positions.. I see states stepping up through nullification's. I see a lot of Liberty waves being made.

We cannot afford to strive for instant gratification in the form of weak representation. It must be a principled, Constitutional message if you expect it to last and be productive when it comes to getting our goals met and I mean truly met.

Rand is a fine fellow but he's not exactly the right move I don't think. If we prop him up as a Liberty candidate, they'll rip to shreds our supposed principles and before long, we'll be seen as no more than the next political party, instead of a liberating movement.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.


No- but thanks.
I think most here will be listening to rand and not you.
but thanks.

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

Rand Paul 2016

rp4pres Clearly Has a Grasp...

...of the liberty-situation that seems to be lacking in you and those of your ilk.

I won't be listening to Lil' Rand nor to his brigade of apologists, sycophants and minions, here. I will be watching what he does though.

I do listen, however, to people who espouse unwavering liberty-principle, integrity, constitutionalism and a rejection of establishment chicanery.

But thanks.

Keep telling yourself that as you nod off into dreamland


Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

I am 63 and my wife is 54. We both supported Ron Paul...

So, I do not think it fair you lump us into one group.

I am more concerned with Rand's lack of character than any of his positions, including foreign policy. Rand would have to demonstrate he has the moral courage to seriously take on the GOP establishment AND repudiate some of the things he has done, particularly his support and campaigning for Mitt Romney. That is unlikely to happen.

No, he's not going to

No, he's not going to repudiate a campaign promise that he made to voters in Kentucky back in 2010.

he was pro-pot

early in that campaign. as soon as he was challenged he caved. the medical pot advocates quickly wrote him off, but hey maybe he'll change his mind again: whichever way the wind blows. typical politician, too bad.


rand is NOT PRO POT.
pls get your facts str8 and stop confusing other libs more then they all ready are.

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

Rand Paul 2016

He did not make a campaign

He did not make a campaign promise to endorse Romney BEFORE the convention on the radio show of a man who led the charge to smear his dad as a racist. He did not promise to be MIA at the crucial state conventions.


They want him to become a pro choice liberal democrat like they do his father.

but sadly for them, WONT EVER happen.

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

Rand Paul 2016

both ron paul & gary johnson

feel it should be a state by state issue. works for me.


gj's 5 seconds are over and his name should never even be on the same line as RP's

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

Rand Paul 2016

like here?

"I think Gary Johnson is wonderful, and doing a great job..."
-Ron Paul


In 30 years Ron Paul has NEVER once uttered GJ's name in public.
He was asked a question ONE TIME during a presidential run, and he answered as a gentleman as always.
He was ASKED a QUESTION."what do you think of GJ?"

Pauls response was provoked and not said of his own accord so give it up and shut up, lib.
Ron Paul NEVER once shared the stage with fairie johnson, and HE NEVER will-
keep going lib.
Is that all youve got?
Paul says one mention of fairie J BECAUSE he was ASKED-
and libs cling to it as the statement and endorsement of the year!lol
Typical LIBTARD.

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

Rand Paul 2016

of course you realize

that name calling shows a lack of confidence in your argument?
no, you probably don't.


I dont know anything else to call you and refer to all libtards as libtards.

dispute the facts.
ron NEVER once mention fairies name of his own accord.
and further when paulfest was formed, ron ran the opposite way and created his own sunshine rally-on a shoe string budget and did so immediately without delay!lol
Ron made his own rally the next day.

case closed

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

Rand Paul 2016

Here is some fuel for the fire.

From what I surmise, Rand is not Austrian, he is Keynesian.

I know that this may be pushing things hard, but I feel it in my heart and my soul that once Ron begins speaking, he will be churning out an entire generation of Austrian thinkers. We must back Ron Paul's efforts by promoting this mentality [Austrian] in office positions.

This movement must continue to grow!

"It does not take a majority to prevail... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." - Samuel Adams

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

I like Rand Paul. Not as

I like Rand Paul. Not as much as his father, but I do like Rand.

What I suggest happen... in 2016... Judge Andrew Napolitano for POTUS and Rand Paul as his VP.


I'd like to trust him but can't

I would love to be able to wholeheartedly support Rand, I just think, with history as a guide that the party will change him before he changes the party. Has he done or said anything besides the Facebook page about the purge of conservatives? He isn't the worst but he strikes me a just another politician. Not someone that I would take Autotrain to see.


Time Will Tell

us what to think and do. Not gonna hold my breath on Rand though. Won't matter anyway if the rats running the show keep doing so. They just make it up as they go. As for the 35+ crowd. Not gonna hold my breath with them either. Concentrate on the youth. That's what Ron Paul knows!



There are many staunch liberty advocates who are in the 'over 35' crowd. I am one of them.

I will even let you in on a little secret, I was a liberty advocate and constitutionalist before I ever even heard of Ron Paul, let alone Lil' Rand Paul. Dr. Paul even seemed to discount (by not mentioning) those who are not college-kiddies and youth. I get the whole 'youth is our future' thingy, but many of us who have been in this fight for longer than most of you have been alive, have plenty left to see accomplished and plenty of liberty-fight remaining.

Liberty advocacy and constitutionalism was not birthed by Dr. Paul and it will not die with him gone. None of this is about 'a man', it is about ideals, principles, an ethic and a philosophy. 'Cult of Person', regardless of who that person is, is anathema to advancing liberty and constitutionalism.

That lesson is seemingly unknown to many here...Just so you know.

Personally, I see a goodly portion of this vaunted 'youth movement' as being very shallow in depth related to liberty-principles and as actually being more attuned to much of what the collectivist-left espouses and stands for, than individualist-constitutionalists.

This is evidenced by a seemingly endless line of commentary posted in various threads, here on the DP and elsewhere.

We should be working NOW to

We should be working NOW to make sure that our elections are honest! It doesn't matter who runs if we can't get an honest election. Its going to take at least these four years to make sure that we can eliminate the election fraud. If we'd had an honest election, Ron Paul would probably be getting sworn in Jan. 20th.

Blessings )o(

I agree 100%

Without a legitimate voting system it is all for not. If the American people don't truly have a voice in the future of this country or ability to change it by will of the citizenry then we will be faced with one final last option.



"The greatest mystery of all is truth." - Me, 2009


Other than those already onboard, there is little hope for my generation.

It will be the youth, an entire generation, that Ron Paul has plans for. They will ensure that voting is held with utmost integrity.

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

I 100% agree as well.

2014 needs to be the year of exposing the voting problem so we can fix it. (see my post here for ideas on how)

As far as rand goes, here is what he should do.

He needs to decide what True North is FOR HIM, just like his father did. And he needs to VOTE True North, consistently, and he needs to share his thoughts, philosophy, and reasons. He needs to PROVE that he is whomever he says he is. And he needs to do that for AT LEAST 10 YEARS.

Once he has 10 years of consistency around a philosophy that he considers True North, then we can measure him against his own standards. And we can measure his standards against the standard of true liberty.

If he stands for Liberty, everyone on this forum will probably get behind him. If he doesn't.... there is no other strategy other than to try to get the republican establishment to like him instead of us.

If he can do both, more power to him, and all the better for us. Is that possible? If he thinks it is, he's more than welcome to pursue that path.