To be honest, there are so many sides to look at this thing. First of all, do we really think that anyone Obama nominated is going to be anything other than an interventionist? Come on, really? With that in mind, you think you need to vote, "No."
On the other hand you have those who say you have to vote yes because he is "better" than a lot of people...probably better than the average GOP nominee would be. True...but does that mean that just because you are better, you should get a yes vote? If so, we are right back to why we should have voted for ROmney...or voted for Obama. (Of course, I don't think that way so I voted for neither.)
Then, you could think that if Rand is going to vote "no" it shows how principled he is...how he couldn't support based on anything but principle...but then you are back to why he supported Romney.
To me...a no vote by most is just a ploy to appease the war hawks on the right...but a yes vote would be to stick it to the establishment....so I don't know what to think...except to go back to the basics and think things through principally and vote "no" since he really is like 95% of the rest of them, an interventionist.
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here: