36 votes

"Why Rand Paul will win the 2016 primaries, and the presidency"

The Daily Caller:

You have probably seen all of the ridiculous speculating about the GOP nomination in 2016. This is still speculating, but my sincere hope is you don’t think it’s ridiculous too.

Kentucky Senator Rand Paul is laying the foundation for his presidential bid in concrete and steel.

First, forget about Jeb Bush unless you want to hand Hillary eight years in the White House. The latest Rasmussen poll shows her leading Jeb in a general election 47 percent to 33. His name is Bush and to the general public the specifics of how smart he is doesn’t matter one iota.

Then there’s Ted Cruz, he’s nothing but a hack. There’s no substance to what he says. He only cares about adulation and applause. When he speaks, it’s contrived and inauthentic. Matt Lewis’s recent piece on Ted Cruz’ strategy illustrated this, pointing out that Ted Cruz is trying to get close to Paul, while sticking to the mainstream GOP foreign policy to not seem to far out there.

Even before Chris Christie’s troubles with the George Washington Bridge and being exposed at the very least for hiring a petty, inept staff he was a poor fit for the Republican party base. His disdain for the second amendment is a major obstacle. Governor Christie has done nothing to restore the gun rights of the people of New Jersey and doesn’t care to. Whether intentional or not, Christie helped Barack Obama get re-elected through his endorsements and photo ops after Hurricane Sandy. In a recent interview with S.E. Cupp on CNN, Glenn Beck said Christie was “a fat nightmare.” Judge for yourself whether he was proven right.

At CPAC, Texas Governor and bad George W. Bush caricature Rick Perry gave a raucous speech that resembled a Southern Baptist preacher rather than a politician. It got big applause, but had nothing but platitudes and researched crowd-pleasing lines written by spin doctors. If you have the delusion that Perry could somehow gain fifty IQ points and be ready to stand on stage to debate men of great intellect, you’re sorely mistaken.

Rand Paul relies on his philosophy and personal convictions. It’s the reason that every single time you hear him speak it sounds more authentic. This cannot be taught, and much of it probably comes from his father. Senator Paul tells you what you need to hear, not always what you want to hear.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/10/why-rand-paul-will-win-the...

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

Rose colored crystal ball

The article makes the absurd claim that no other candidate can talk about spending cuts. They will all claim to have been first to suggest slashing x or y and slice the most out of x or y budget by twisting the numbers. Paul's proposed reductions were truly the deepest but he will have 15 opponents that will successfully obscure that fact.

The article makes 2 good points on Rand's work that can appeal to women.

The major omission from this writer is forgetting that Rand's negatives are low today compared to where they'll be next year after a whole cadre of opponents tries to brand him as dangerously weak on defense, inexperienced at governing, part of an out of the mainstream movement.

Critical to Rand Paul's success will be the Campaign's (and the grassroots) EFFECTIVE defense of him. Effective defense is different than passionate defense.

10-15 million more voters need to believe in non-interventionism (liberty) at home and abroad to change America. Minds changed on Syria. Minds changing on privacy. "Printing money" is part of the dialogue. Win minds through focus, strategy.

So I have been a critic of

So I have been a critic of Rand Paul and that has been because I want to really like the guy, but he stays just establishment enough with positions, he turn me off.

Many have proposed that Rand is playing political Judo, and that may be. Therefore I am giving him a pass and reserving my official judgement of the man until after he gets the party nomination. If he gets that nomination and doesn't start sounding exactly like his papa, he will not be electable on a national level, and I will mock the rest of you that continue to wait for him to change.

I have now cut Rand the slack so many here request.

Spot on, seth

Ron Paul's 2012 campaign missed the boat on a lot of levels, and one of them was RP's failure to be blunt on even MORE issues than he was. For example, the Second Amendment was practically ignored throughout the campaign. That was one issue which he really could have distinguished himself from the hacks during the debates and awakened and galvenized the conservative Republican primary voter.

But I digress. Yes, people want to hear this message, despite what the Propaganda Organs would have us believe. I agree with you and Tom Woods (and others). When Ron Paul was being stifled with little air time during some of the debates, he should have used the one or two minute closing statement to look straight into the camera, and concisely state to the public what has been done to them, and how they can get out of it. Once Rand gets the nomination, all the Mass Media's horsemen, and all the Collectivist Party's men, won't be able to stifle that message. He needs to take advantage of it, unless he wants to go the way of Mitt.

"Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it." -- Joseph Goebbels

If he gets that nomination

If he gets that nomination and doesn't start sounding exactly like his papa, he will not be electable on a national level

Are you serious or delusional?

I loved Ron but you saw what they did to him. He was not electable, even if that was a self fulfilling prophecy it was one they can pull off again if anyone is as outspoken as Ron.

Picking his battles isn't something he's going to stop doing after he's nominated or elected.

They shut Ron out and kept

They shut Ron out and kept his message away from the general public. Ron's message was a turn on, not a turn off. Ron never got the platform to be heard by the general public on a regular basis.

If Rand picks his battles to get the party nomination down to a two way race with a democrat, hillary, and starts talking about industrialized hemp, shutting down military bases overseas, and slashing the defense budget, he will lose the republican neocon base, but win over the independents, and a lot of registered democrats.

If Rand keeps his mouth shut as much as possible about detailed economic plans, and pulls the rug out from hillary on domestic/foreign policy, he could win. Sounding too republican is the surest way to lose an election with the trending demographics in America.

When it comes to the economy, Rand should speak in very broad terms, and shut the hell up or change the subject. The public will not get economics, and freak out that he is taking away the welfare people survive with.

They shut Ron out and kept

They shut Ron out and kept his message away from the general public by showing the general public true facts about Ron's beliefs. They used context to strengthen their message, and of course they did lie a bit, but for the most part America just wasn't ready for some of the things Ron Paul had to say, and that closed them off to the rest.

Regardless of political climate, when has a president ever won their election by being completely honest and open about everything they ever intended to do or support or believe?

Although I don't think this country can be saved, it will take many different angles both in and out of politics if there is any hope for redemption, so I'm going to fight hard for every inch we can take.

He stays just estaBlishment

He stays just estaBlishment enough to not be shut out ........ I guess some people dont see between the lines

I am fine with him staying

I am fine with him staying just establishment enough to get his party's nomination, but after he has it I want to start hearing him sound like his dad in debates.

I think once he gets in hes

I think once he gets in hes going to go all liberty on there ass.


And you believe this on the basis of his previous treachery against his OWN FATHER??? Yeah, he's got your back, LOL!!!!!


Treachery against his own father? You don't think Ron and Rand talked it out before he endorsed Romney?(I assume that's what's you're referring to)If you aren't aware of how close these two are, then you should research more. Ron Paul is very intelligent, so it Rand, they know how to look at the future goal and move the pieces to have it come about. Endorsing Romney was the right thing to do if Rand was to gain steam in the GOP. Rand would never disrespect his father and Ron knows this. He could have stayed with Ron and not endorsed Romney, and stayed as a senator taking the back seat, speaking up here and there, but he made inroads with that endorsement. I bet it was Ron's suggestion


And they called

YOU up and explained this "strategy" where Rand ditched his own father for a Neocon RINO candidate??? What a load of crap.

And they called

YOU up and explained this "strategy" where Rand ditched his own father for a Neocon RINO candidate??? What a load of crap.

For real... it would be nice to have a Trojan horse for LIBERTY

for a change! (instead of the regular criminal infiltrations we get with politicians in our government)....

What would the Founders do?

Ok, but the nomination really means nothing...

Wouldn't it make sense to wait until after he wins the Presidency, before you give up on the (alleged) strategy?
It's the Oval Office that matters.

THEN he needs to start IMPLEMENTING the values of liberty and reversing the tyranny. If he doesn't do that, THEN it's a problem and would be time to call him out. (He'd have a bad experience if he betrayed his base in office and was left out-in-the-political-cold with the MSM wolves and no back-up.)
The whole strategy is about WINNING the ELECTION, not the GOP nomination. So he needs to toe-the-line throughout the general election. It will be the MSM that is his main opponent afterall.

Let me expand on that...
The "Message" isn't enough. Many Americans have already "gotten the message". Those loyal to Liberty need to take back the seats of power and authority, from the corrupt elitists and infiltrators. If that means playing by Sun Tsu's Art of War, which is really the Art of Deception, then that's what must be done to regain the Executive Branch, the largest and most out-of-control branch of the federal government. After all, that's what they have done to America, so they're getting a taste of their own medicine.

If Rand becomes President and stabs us in the back, then we end up with another puppet, with the same policies... So how would that be any different than anything we've had, or would get if Rand didn't run? Would he be worse than Hillary? I think betting on Ron Paul's son, is the best bet we have. Plus, we'd have some pull over him as President, as his base.

If you disagree I mean no disrespect but I must ask you honestly... Do you have a better plan or idea, or better candidate?

Are you a POT or a PET - Person Embracing Tyranny?

I could think of several better Presidents than Rand Paul.

None of those people have a fraction of a chance though, with the general population having such low IQs.

Rand knows how to speak in soundbites and memes that the average dumb dumb can halfway grasp. I guess you could say he is fluent in hillbilly.

I could probably think of a better POTUS imho, as well...

But as you said they don't have a fraction of the chance. So they are poor candidates. Time may change that. Candidates like TMOT are showing that normal people can jump start campaigns now, and gain name recognition, a following, and a political base.

I don't think it's fair, accurate, or respectful though to refer to Rand Paul supporters as "your average dumb dumb"... and "hillbilly"...

Maybe it's that the "average dumb dumb" that can't grasp what Rand is doing? Whether it be his principles, or his political strategy? Which may be why the "average dumb dumb" still doesn't know what's going on, and how to reverse it, and we keep getting lousy candidates and corrupt representatives in office.

Are you a POT or a PET - Person Embracing Tyranny?

That wasn't an insult

That wasn't an insult intended towards Rand Paul supporters in general. I meant to convey the point that Rand is able to distill things down well, to simplistic enough concepts to grasp that other liberty candidates might not make simple enough for some.

The best thing to do is look

The best thing to do is look at how he votes.

He already made the big vote

where it COUNTED. He was Romney's bitch, and a GOP toady controlled opp. So sad for Ron.

tasmlab's picture

Philosophy will beat empty platitudes???

I'm paraphrasing, but the author asserts that people will be more responsive to philosophy and tough news over promises and platitudes.

On what planet?

Currently consuming: Gatto: "Underground history of education..", FDR; Wii U; NEP Football

Maybe you're right..maybe not

I do admire your conviction and optimism..or tenacity.
Couple of thoughts:
The pathetic inevitability of the corrupted RNC nomination - Jeb Bush.
Hillary Clinton Oldschool - Self-inflicted gunshot wounds to both feet.
A winning strategy of the Democrats - Trot out Michelle Obama.
Rand Raul's [Republican] perception - A loose cannon.
BO - Orders another reem of EO forms.
Plan B that nobody wants to talk about - A 3rd party.

"Hell is empty, and all the devils are here" (Shakespeare)
RP 2012~ Intellectual Revolution.

I agree with Michael Nystrom.

It is very unlikely he will be nominated. Even if he were it would be because he has moved into the neo-con camp with regard to the American Empire. There was something he said in the Chris Wallace interview that I believe revealed his heart on this issue. It was along the lines that even if Russia "annexed" Crimea that would give "us" the rest of Ukraine. In other words he supports the actions of the global cabal in capturing countries to exploit their natural resources and their people through their corporate and banking machinations.

He is far from being a non-interventionist even though Ted Cruz is painting him as such in order no doubt to polish his credentials with the libertarian non-interventionists. Let us not forget that Rand and his dad endorsed Ted Cruz in 2012 so there is a history there. Maybe they see themselves (Rand and Ted) as a tag team for the Presidency.

In any event there is a long time to go before 2016 and much will happen in the world before then that may well make all these speculations fruitless.

"Jesus answered them: 'Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin. The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son remains forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.'" (John 8:34-36)

I totally agree with

you about not just Ted Cruz, but the right wing media is playing Rand as soft of foreign policy, when he is neocom lite. The problem I have is he is helping the globalist conquest agenda, instead of calling out their meddling like Ron Paul has done in his Texas Straight Talk recording. 'So what happened in Ukraine? The US government and media claims that the US must save Ukrainian democracy from an invading Russian army that is threatening the country’s sovereignty. But in reality the crisis was instigated in part by US meddling. Remember the intercepted telephone call in which two senior Obama Administration officials discussed plans to replace the elected government in Ukraine with US puppets? That is exactly what happened. Is that not a violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty? Is that what democracy is all about?

The Obama Administration’s policy toward Ukraine is hypocritical. The overthrow of the government in Kiev by violent street protests was called a triumph of democracy, but when the elected parliament in autonomous Crimea voted last week to hold a referendum to decide its future, President Obama condemned it as a violation of international law. What about the principle of self-determination, which is also enshrined in international law?'

I believe Benson is pushing him to take this route, making him believe he must do so to keep the evangelical support. However, he will need more than their support to win the nomination and the general election, he will need the majority of independents who are against our interventionist foreign policy. If he starts speaking the 'truth' on foreign policy, and plays it smart, he could also get many progressives to vote for him, especially if the warmonger Hillary is the Dem nominee. I can't support somebody who helps forment the globalist plan of world empire, instead of standing up for what's best for America!

I agree with

a lot of the writers points. Rand is a very good politician and he is pretty damn clean.

Hitlery's biggest problem isn't going to be the GOP nominee, her problem will be trying to win over 51% with ObombaCare hanging around her neck.

Is Hitlery going to support repeal of the Democraps beloved health care law that they worked nearly a hundred years to get passed?

Don't think so.

"trying to win over 51% with ObombaCare hanging around her neck"

She will receive thunderous applause when she brilliantly talks about the "flaws of obamacare" and slams single-payer down everybody's throat.

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

Michael Nystrom's picture

Doubt it

But whatever. I'm down for watching the fight for position.

The only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance. - Alan Watts

same here

it's the new professional wrestling, and the state, like the wrestling federation always wins.

With Acting...

With acting as bad as a daytime soap opera, but nevertheless popcorn worthy.

WGRR DB - rEVOLutionary talk for revolutionary times. Listen LIVE!