39 votes

Rand Paul 2016 campaign - who is with me?

Senator Rand Paul is on fire!
It looks to me like he already started his 2016 campaign with successful attacks against his potential opponents.

Liberty patriots activists let's jump-start Rand Paul 2016 presidential campaign - who is with me?

https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/522366_226675287...




Comment viewing options

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

It's not a "lesser of two evils" argument

First, Rand Paul is not an "evil". Second, the commenter is not saying one should support Rand simply because he is electable. He is just stating that Rand is more electable and that is a good thing.

“It is not our part to master all the tides of the world, but to do what is in us for the succour of those years wherein we are set, uprooting the evil in the fields that we know, so that those who live after may have clean earth to till." -J.R.R. Tolkien

Electability...

...shouldn't be our top criterion in choosing a candidate, but obviously it must be taken into account. There's no point in supporting a candidate who has no chance of winning. If you're going to do that, your time and money would be better spent in some other pursuit.

My method for choosing a candidate is to list all the people who are ideologically acceptable, and then choose from among that set the most electable of the bunch. For example, Tom Woods is definitely on the list of ideologically acceptable people, but he's definitely not electable, hence I would exclude him from consideration as a candidate. On the other end of the spectrum, Marco Rubio is definitely electable, but he doesn't get considered because obviously he's totally unacceptable ideologically. Rand is on my list of ideologically acceptable candidates, and I think he is by far the most electable person on that list. Hence, for the time being, I intend to support Rand.

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."

Not me yet

Still watching patiently. A name is a name. It certainly appears hell be the best choice right now though.

Huge Rand supporter from MICH

and local delegate who's whipping votes for an RP-inspired state chair candidate at our upcoming district and state conventions. Todd Cursor, the most recent GOP candidate for state board of ed and was nominated by a decent margin, is taking on current Romney-bot state chair Bobby Shostak. Plus, we have many more alliances and liberty delegates than we did during the last state convention in the fall.

Still on board

despite it all. Last, best hope.

Ventura 2012

We Can do Better than Rand

Supports the Afghanistan war, and Romney. Enough said.

Rand says he would have voted yes on the Afghanistan war

And no to the Iraq war. Same as his father did.

Justin Amash supported Romney too, btw. I don't see anyone here saying he is a traitor (and he's not).

“It is not our part to master all the tides of the world, but to do what is in us for the succour of those years wherein we are set, uprooting the evil in the fields that we know, so that those who live after may have clean earth to till." -J.R.R. Tolkien

hugs*))

"We do not agree. We do not condone. All of this is wrong." -Katniss Everdeen, The Hunger Games

LL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
sometimes LL can suck & sometimes LL rocks!
http://www.dailypaul.com/203008/south-carolina-battle-of-cow...
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

With

who? Honest question.

So did Ron Paul on the Afghan

So did Ron Paul on the Afghan War part... kinda. He wanted to go after Osama

Not sure why this got down voted

because it's true. Just YouTube "Ron Paul supports getting bin laden."

Lima-1, out.

If you don't know your rights, you don't have any.

Not exactly

Ron Paul wanted to go after Bin Laden, true, but he wanted to go after ONLY him. He suggested putting a bounty on his head, for example, if I remember correctly.

RP 2016

RP 2016

Ha - is the R for Ron or Rand?

Or... is that the joke? :)

Randians are taking over some

Randians are taking over some county GOPs in Bama. Bumper stickers are flying out the door. Refreshing after being ostracized.

Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves. - Matthew 10:16

I'm behind Rand

But I greatly respect those who can't get behind him.

I want to thank MN for this whole community. It has great some great people.

Hopefully, we can use this site to a certain extent in notifying people about strategies/events for Rand in the future without alienating the rest of the users.

We just need to be tolerant.

I am (somewhat) with you.

Like many here, I have a few doubts about Rand. With that said, I am still very interested to see him run. I will undoubtedly watch his debates, speeches, and actions to see if he is worth supporting.

Im in.

great pic. Is anyone working on a Rand Paul website?

I'm in

.

He may not be Ron,

but I really think he won't follow through with the NWO/UN/CFR agenda. I don't trust others in government at all. I won't campaign for him, but I will vote for him over anybody that I've heard of so far. I believe it comes down to vote for Rand or let the deterioration continue. I am still leaving my final decision open, in case something changes between now and elections.

Agenda 21, PNAC, CODEX ALIMENTARIUS and UN biodiversity study. Help me understand why I shouldn't think there is a big agenda against the wishes of the masses.

I Am!

Rand Paul 2016!

Check out the first FREE restored name Scriptures at:
www.halleluyahscriptures.com
Praise YHWH!

Yes.

Yes.

“It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds”
-Sam Adams

Don't you think you should

Don't you think you should check over the field of possible upcoming candidates with a little more scrutiny
before you commit to a GOP strategy?

"before you commit to a GOP strategy?"

As opposed to what? A third party strategy? An independent strategy? A Democratic strategy? LOL...can you tell me with a straight face that you think any of those are better options than a GOP strategy? Ron Paul certainly didn't think so, that's why he joined the GOP and encouraged all of us to do the same. Like it or not, it's GOP or bust. We have no viable alternatives.

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."

Yes your other options are

Yes your other options are other newly elected representatives that are not tainted. Rand Paul is not the only option out there in the GOP field of nominees. In your eagerness to annoint Paul the younger, I am suggesting that you vet others within the GOP before you holus bolus follow Rand Paul and his anti-father foreign policy without some critical thinking at least.

That's not what you said

You criticized committing to a "GOP strategy."

But anyway, if you agree that a GOP strategy is the only option, and you want to talk about which person we should support for the GOP nomination, then let's do that. Firstly, you're merely assuming that I (and the other Rand supporters) haven't researched the various candidates. I certainly have (can't speak for anything else, but I assume many others have as well). There are of course plenty of people who are ideologically acceptable who we could support: e.g. Tom Woods or Napolitano. But IMO none of these people are electable except for Rand. I will not donate $1 or spend 1 minute of my time supporting a candidate that I know has absolutely no chance of winning. I would rather spend that time and money supporting C4L or the LvMI or some other similar organization. I will only engage in electoral politics for the purpose of winning F-ing elections! Hence, I'm going to pick an ideologically acceptable candidate who is also electable: that's a short list - Rand.

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."

Winning the presidency...

without first winning the hearts and minds of a critical mass of citizens whose thoughts are focused on liberty, self-reliance and non-interventionism is a fool's errand.

Even with the recent expansions of the power of the executive, the office is still incredibly weak. The president cannot make law. The president's vetoes can be overridden. Constitutionally the president must engage in war if Congress says so. The president's proposed budgets must be approved by Congress.

The presidency right now only seems more powerful because the president is being used as a scapegoat for Congress's actions and the will of the elite global social engineers and their cabal of non-governmental think tanks.

Rand sanitizing his message to appeal to assorted zionists and tea party rabble, who don't share his libertarianim, to gain the office of presidency will only set him up to either be demonized before the election or get him or his loved ones killed once in office.

The zionists in both parties and in Israel are a serious bunch and they mean business. And they are skilled and practiced veterans of political gangsterism and warmongering on a global scale.

If they ALLOW Rand to become president and he is not backed up by a critical mass of the people then his enemies will make sure he is de-fanged and castrated prior to swearing in. Ron spoke about this many times over a period of decades. That job #1 was an awakening and spreading the message of liberty. That job is NOT complete.

Rand's sanitizing act will only serve to confuse and deflate the liberty movement that is looking for honesty and character...

.
~wobbles but doesn't fall down~

I'll try and make myself

I'll try and make myself clearer as I see it. As the GOP stands now with whomever is running the party...I see no hope in its current status especially after all the shenanigans and deceits used against Ron Paul and Ron Paul supporters trying to participate in local state elections. Now that they have lost ...they are looking to redeem themselves looking to favour a very maligned abused group of hard working active and loyal Ron Paul conservatives within the existing GOP. Rand Paul is establishment's hope in persuading RP conservatives to support the GOP as it stands now. What I'm saying is that there are other newly elected conservatives that better represent Ron Paul's legacy. Many see Rand Paul, me included, as a panderer of the existing established GOP to score points for himself. In so doing, he has disavowed his father and his loyal supporters to jump on the band wagon. He voted for the patriot act, He is cozying up to Israel, and has condoned boycot as an act of war. All this adds up to his supporting the existing foreign policy which is in direct opposition to Ron Paul's platform and legacy. You are asking for blind trust in your support of Rand Paul when there are others to have a closer look at. ie Justin Amash. I would also like to know about Jeff Duncan. These guys are fighting an uphill battle and seem more in tune with Ron Paul's legacy including his foreign policy than all the hype being given to Rand. Will Ron Paul endorse anyone? Does Ron Paul endorse Rand?

Nope

He voted for the patriot act

No, he definitely did not vote for the PATRIOT Act! He's tried to amend the PATRIOT to remove section 215, which would strip the government of some of its unconstitutional powers.

All this adds up to his supporting the existing foreign policy

No, it doesn't. It adds up to those specific things you mentioned - nothing more, nothing less. He definitely does not support the current foreign policy. He's vocally opposed the Afghan and Iraq Wars, he's spoken out against starting a war with Iran, and voted against a bill that would have pushed in that direction (he was the only nay in this vote). He wants to cut military spending by several tens of billions, to start with. He's introduced numerous bills to protect civil liberties from the homeland security state: bills requiring judicial review for various activities which the feds now do without any accountability, bills to prevent unconstitutional searches and seizures, a bill to require warrants for the use of drones, etc. He want to eliminate foreign aid, albeit gradually.

You are asking for blind trust in your support of Rand Paul when there are others to have a closer look at. ie Justin Amash.

Amash voted for Iran sanctions too, did you know that?

Rand Paul is establishment's hope in persuading RP conservatives to support the GOP as it stands now.

That's funny. No, Rand is leading the "very maligned abused group" (i.e. us) to victory in the next phase of the R3volution - despite all the resistance from behind.

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."

P.S.

Here's a video of Amash defending his vote on the Iran sanctions bill (H.R. 2105)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUzip_JWoGA

Here's a video of Rand defending his own vote for a different Iran sanctions bill (S.AMDT.1414, an amendment to S.1867, the 2012 NDAA [which Rand voted against]).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3LzzB...!

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."