Rand Paul Endorses Romney

CH156378CH156378 Posts: 1,539
edited June 2012 in A Moving Train
It is nice to see Republicans coming together after the hard fought nomination process.



http://slatest.slate.com/posts/2012/06/ ... _bid_.html
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    of course he endorses romney.

    if i were his old man i would disown him...

    but rand is going to do whatever is going to help him politically...
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    sooo ... what are the Ron Paul folks here thoughts on this?
  • Jason PJason P Posts: 19,156
    "My first choice had always been my father," the younger Paul said of his father, Ron, during a Fox News interview with Sean Hannity. "But now that the nominating process is over, tonight I'm happy to announce that I'm going to be supporting Gov. Mitt Romney."
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • mikepegg44mikepegg44 Posts: 3,353
    polaris_x wrote:
    sooo ... what are the Ron Paul folks here thoughts on this?


    Rand is not Ron

    but in the end, Gimmie is right, he is playing politics. Something that Ron was never that good at...

    In his recent speech at the Texas convention he said (I am paraphrasing) Uniting the party is a good thing. But what good is it to unite around the wrong principles, he then references no child left behind, etc...good stuff.
    I know that Rand is more "liberty" minded than most, but he will have to build up some serious credentials to garner the rapid support his old man has...We shall see. I know a lot of local and state level GOP committees have Ron Paul minded folks on the boards and other things so we shall see where that takes the party in the next few years. I was certainly more of the mind to leave the party than change it from the inside, but we shall see if his plan works out in the end.

    I am not sure how supporting Mitt is a good thing for Rand, saying nothing gives Mitt about the same support as he has today. Saying something like this on the day his father was speaking at the Texas convention, was poor timing and probably made people hold even more firm to the idea that Romney will not get their vote. He won't get mine, but that isn't because of Rand...

    All I can really hope for is that Rand is compromising now so he doesn't have to later when he has more power...but we have all seen how a little compromise turns into very little back bone in the end
    that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
    It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
    - Joe Rogan
  • pjl44pjl44 Posts: 9,827
    polaris_x wrote:
    sooo ... what are the Ron Paul folks here thoughts on this?

    Bummed
  • peacefrompaulpeacefrompaul Posts: 25,293
    Screw Rand Paul, he is not his father at all.
  • VINNY GOOMBAVINNY GOOMBA Posts: 1,818
    This is terrible news, and poorly timed on Rand's part. That said, he is NOT his father-- as far as politicians go, he's the closest we'll get to Ron, but far enough away that I don't care nearly as much to push him as I do Ron. I would vote for him at present, but that may change over time as he may turn out to be just like all of the rest of the gang in Washington. I would be much more disappointed by a Ron Paul endorsement of Romney than Rand. The campaign was very serious about getting the nomination out-right through the first half dozen primaries. When the numbers weren't there, they focused on a strategy of collecting delegates to achieve the nomination at the convention. But they didn't have the numbers yet again. What they have accomplished is changing the party leadership at the state level in many states, and are changing the Republican party from within, and have effectively changed the political dialog in this country. We'll see if it has any real effect later on. I think there are some serious politics being played here, and Rand has bigger aspirations than his promise to serve only 2 terms in the Senate.
  • unsungunsung I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
    I've talked to a couple of higher ups on Ron's side; Rand might be just playing politics.

    When Obama beats Romney this year then it's anyone's game in 2016. The GOP establishment won't be able to say Rand was against the nominee in 2012. Rand will beat Hillary in 2016 because the country will finally be sick of the debt that is piling up.
  • CosmoCosmo Posts: 12,225
    Question: Ron Paul has been a Congresman since 1997... does that make him a 'Career Politician'?
    If Term Limits were in place, Paul would have been ousted in 2009.
    ...
    That I why I don't like Term Limits. I believe we ALREADY HAVE Term Lmits... it's called 'The Ballot Booth'.
    The politicians are not the problem regarding 'Career Politicians'... WE, the VOTERS, are the problem.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • fifefife Posts: 3,327
    unsung wrote:
    I've talked to a couple of higher ups on Ron's side; Rand might be just playing politics.

    When Obama beats Romney this year then it's anyone's game in 2016. The GOP establishment won't be able to say Rand was against the nominee in 2012. Rand will beat Hillary in 2016 because the country will finally be sick of the debt that is piling up.

    To be honest I don't see Rand going against Hillary in 2016. I don't think Rand will be close to a nomination and there is no way Hillary will be either.
  • mikepegg44mikepegg44 Posts: 3,353
    Cosmo wrote:
    Question: Ron Paul has been a Congresman since 1997... does that make him a 'Career Politician'?
    If Term Limits were in place, Paul would have been ousted in 2009.
    ...
    That I why I don't like Term Limits. I believe we ALREADY HAVE Term Lmits... it's called 'The Ballot Booth'.
    The politicians are not the problem regarding 'Career Politicians'... WE, the VOTERS, are the problem.


    Elections are not term limits. they have a distinct advantage for the incumbent. While Americans are certainly the part of the problem mostly because they don't pay attention or seem to care about "selling out", it is a much larger problem to have people grow fat and complacent while on the tax payers free ride mainly because of their incumbency. Politics isn't supposed to be a career, it is supposed to be a temporary position.
    He is an example of someone who is a career politician in that he has been in office for many years. But all in all, I would rather sacrifice a few Ron Pauls and Kucinichs(?) in order to weed out the Strom Thurmonds and Byrds and all too many others. it is sad when a legislator gets re-elected because he supports a business leader or union through their votes who then in turn gets money for a re-election bid that is successful because of name recognition and money.
    It won't solve all the problems, but it is a start.
    by the way, he has supported term limits for 20+ years or more and introduced the first bill in the modern age many years ago calling for them, and has supported every bill that has come along since if I am remembering correctly...
    I don't know what this has to do with the tea in china, but it is my two cents anyway.
    that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
    It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
    - Joe Rogan
  • CosmoCosmo Posts: 12,225
    mikepegg44 wrote:
    Cosmo wrote:
    Question: Ron Paul has been a Congresman since 1997... does that make him a 'Career Politician'?
    If Term Limits were in place, Paul would have been ousted in 2009.
    ...
    That I why I don't like Term Limits. I believe we ALREADY HAVE Term Lmits... it's called 'The Ballot Booth'.
    The politicians are not the problem regarding 'Career Politicians'... WE, the VOTERS, are the problem.


    Elections are not term limits. they have a distinct advantage for the incumbent. While Americans are certainly the part of the problem mostly because they don't pay attention or seem to care about "selling out", it is a much larger problem to have people grow fat and complacent while on the tax payers free ride mainly because of their incumbency. Politics isn't supposed to be a career, it is supposed to be a temporary position.
    He is an example of someone who is a career politician in that he has been in office for many years. But all in all, I would rather sacrifice a few Ron Pauls and Kucinichs(?) in order to weed out the Strom Thurmonds and Byrds and all too many others. it is sad when a legislator gets re-elected because he supports a business leader or union through their votes who then in turn gets money for a re-election bid that is successful because of name recognition and money.
    It won't solve all the problems, but it is a start.
    by the way, he has supported term limits for 20+ years or more and introduced the first bill in the modern age many years ago calling for them, and has supported every bill that has come along since if I am remembering correctly...
    I don't know what this has to do with the tea in china, but it is my two cents anyway.
    ...
    I'm just sayin'... there's a reason WHY Strom Thurman and Ted Kennedy were in office for a fucking century... the Americans that voted them in based upon name recognition... or because they were doing such a great job in office.
    Fix the voter... fix the problem.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    Cosmo wrote:
    ..
    I'm just sayin'... there's a reason WHY Strom Thurman and Ted Kennedy were in office for a fucking century... the Americans that voted them in based upon name recognition... or because they were doing such a great job in office.
    Fix the voter... fix the problem.

    who's gonna fix the voter!? ... the majority of politicians who would most be affected by an informed public? ... doubt it ...
  • pandorapandora Posts: 21,855
    In the defense of the voters ...
    do most think it even makes a difference which party or who gets in anymore?

    Can someone please dream up a new government, this one is not working.

    And of course Rand Paul endorses his party's candidate, of course he is playing politics
    and of course this is exactly what his father wants. He wants for him what he himself never had,
    like all good parents do. President Rand Paul, of course.
  • CosmoCosmo Posts: 12,225
    polaris_x wrote:
    Cosmo wrote:
    ..
    I'm just sayin'... there's a reason WHY Strom Thurman and Ted Kennedy were in office for a fucking century... the Americans that voted them in based upon name recognition... or because they were doing such a great job in office.
    Fix the voter... fix the problem.

    who's gonna fix the voter!? ... the majority of politicians who would most be affected by an informed public? ... doubt it ...
    ...
    The VOTERS need to fix themselves.
    Here's a start...
    If you are voting for someone, just because you've heard of his name before... DON'T FUCKING VOTE.
    If you are voting for someone, just because of the 'D' or 'R' next to his name... DON'T FUCKING VOTE.
    If you are voting for someone, just because someone on television or radio or your church told you to vote for them... DON'T FUCKING VOTE.
    The Constitution forces our representatives to report their voting records. Look up what your representative is doing to you, instead of for you.
    If you are too lazy to inform yourself... DON'T FUCKING VOTE.
    It's not a game... it's not a popularity contest... it is YOUR GOVERNMENT that is deciding on what is best for you. It is tough to criticise assholes in Washington... when WE are the fucking IDIOTS who HIRE THEM!!!
    Vote SMART. Or don't vote.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • pandorapandora Posts: 21,855
    Cosmo wrote:
    polaris_x wrote:
    Cosmo wrote:
    ..
    I'm just sayin'... there's a reason WHY Strom Thurman and Ted Kennedy were in office for a fucking century... the Americans that voted them in based upon name recognition... or because they were doing such a great job in office.
    Fix the voter... fix the problem.

    who's gonna fix the voter!? ... the majority of politicians who would most be affected by an informed public? ... doubt it ...
    ...
    The VOTERS need to fix themselves.
    Here's a start...
    If you are voting for someone, just because you've heard of his name before... DON'T FUCKING VOTE.
    If you are voting for someone, just because of the 'D' or 'R' next to his name... DON'T FUCKING VOTE.
    If you are voting for someone, just because someone on television or radio or your church told you to vote for them... DON'T FUCKING VOTE.
    The Constitution forces our representatives to report their voting records. Look up what your representative is doing to you, instead of for you.
    If you are too lazy to inform yourself... DON'T FUCKING VOTE.
    It's not a game... it's not a popularity contest... it is YOUR GOVERNMENT that is deciding on what is best for you. It is tough to criticise assholes in Washington... when WE are the fucking IDIOTS who HIRE THEM!!!
    Vote SMART. Or don't vote.

    One way or another people can, will and should use their vote. To tell them not to,
    well what can I say to that ... it's massively superior.

    Even if someone is not up to speed on all that goes on in Washington
    doesn't mean they unable to choose their representatives and their President.
    It is their right, whether informed to the point you think they should be, or not.

    And it is popularity when it comes to the office of the President.
    Why they are chosen to be a candidate for the post, to draw in crowds for their
    party, be charismatic and very fine speech givers...
    to rally the country of both parties and bring us together in times of need.
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    Cosmo wrote:
    ..
    The VOTERS need to fix themselves.
    Here's a start...
    If you are voting for someone, just because you've heard of his name before... DON'T FUCKING VOTE.
    If you are voting for someone, just because of the 'D' or 'R' next to his name... DON'T FUCKING VOTE.
    If you are voting for someone, just because someone on television or radio or your church told you to vote for them... DON'T FUCKING VOTE.
    The Constitution forces our representatives to report their voting records. Look up what your representative is doing to you, instead of for you.
    If you are too lazy to inform yourself... DON'T FUCKING VOTE.
    It's not a game... it's not a popularity contest... it is YOUR GOVERNMENT that is deciding on what is best for you. It is tough to criticise assholes in Washington... when WE are the fucking IDIOTS who HIRE THEM!!!
    Vote SMART. Or don't vote.

    this is a populace that watches a show called jersey shore and continue to eat bad processed food like it's going out of style ... how can you possibly give people any credit in being able to think critically!? ...
  • pandorapandora Posts: 21,855
    Now we got two does that make it a complex? ;)

    Voting is a crap shoot ...
    the voter is picking between crap that smells the same. Any apathy that is being found
    is multiplying at a high rate of speed and with it is coming the rightful disillusionment
    that goes with being screwed.

    Let people bury themselves in Jersey Shore, they can relate,
    get lost in other's lives, it's not much different than a band fan club really
    and certainly no different than those who talk big but do small, no difference at all.
  • CosmoCosmo Posts: 12,225
    polaris_x wrote:
    Cosmo wrote:
    this is a populace that watches a show called jersey shore and continue to eat bad processed food like it's going out of style ... how can you possibly give people any credit in being able to think critically!? ...
    ...
    This is WHY we get the crappy government we deserve. Because of mindless voting. This is the kind of stuff that will get one of the Kardashians into office.
    We get the Government WE DESERVE... because people cannot differentiate voting for 'American Idol' and voting for American Representatives. They think its a popularity contest... it is not. It is government, not entertainment.
    We shouldn't complain... we get exactly what we deserve.
    ...
    Politicians wet dream? An uninformed voting public that they can easily charm with their bullshit.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • pandorapandora Posts: 21,855
    Oh the American people can distinguish between voting for AI
    and voting for their representatives...
    one makes them happy, relieves stress instead of causing more,
    makes them laugh and actually gives a bit of hope for the future.
    Above all else brings some success and dreams fulfilled to somebody.

    It seems people like to blame our governments antics on the voters
    when it comes down to the fact everyone has a right to vote...
    well if they are an American that is. The rest just watch I guess.

    But if you don't have much to pick from, informed or otherwise,
    the outcome remains the same ...

    in my opinion the pool of politicians is tainted with an agenda not our own.
  • Jason PJason P Posts: 19,156
    I don't think voting can change much because the current political system is too entrenched. If we could enact term limits, it would help thaw things out, but the old guard in congress isn't going to allow too much to change.

    Obama was the first presidential candidate that made people think "holy shit, this guy might actually be able to change things!". But I think anyone that went into a coma in 2008 and just woke up a few days ago would be able to walk around and see much that is different. Obama plays by the rules of the old guard. He has to so he can survive politically.
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • CosmoCosmo Posts: 12,225
    Jason P wrote:
    I don't think voting can change much because the current political system is too entrenched. If we could enact term limits, it would help thaw things out, but the old guard in congress isn't going to allow too much to change.

    Obama was the first presidential candidate that made people think "holy shit, this guy might actually be able to change things!". But I think anyone that went into a coma in 2008 and just woke up a few days ago would be able to walk around and see much that is different. Obama plays by the rules of the old guard. He has to so he can survive politically.
    ...
    Here's the thing about 'Term Limits'.
    Are we okay if we hired someone to work for us and they did a great job and we are completely happy with their work... but, the law says they can only work for us for 8 years?
    After that, we have to hire someone new to continue the work he was doing. And we are stuck with that person for 4 years.
    ...
    Probably not.
    This is how we get a Ron Paul for a total of 22 years of service. The other side is... this is how we get Strom Thurman or Ted Kennedy.
    We have the power of theConstitution in our hands to hire, re-hire or fire people in Government... it's call the 'Ballot Box'. I think we need to arm ourselves with knowledge of what the people we are hiring to do things FOR, are actually doing TO us.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • Jason PJason P Posts: 19,156
    Cosmo wrote:
    ...
    Here's the thing about 'Term Limits'.
    Are we okay if we hired someone to work for us and they did a great job and we are completely happy with their work... but, the law says they can only work for us for 8 years?
    After that, we have to hire someone new to continue the work he was doing. And we are stuck with that person for 4 years.
    ...
    I'm willing to take that trade-off, especially if it can reset the current stagnation. And it has worked well with the presidency, so why wouldn't it work in congress?
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • CosmoCosmo Posts: 12,225
    Jason P wrote:
    Cosmo wrote:
    ...
    Here's the thing about 'Term Limits'.
    Are we okay if we hired someone to work for us and they did a great job and we are completely happy with their work... but, the law says they can only work for us for 8 years?
    After that, we have to hire someone new to continue the work he was doing. And we are stuck with that person for 4 years.
    ...
    I'm willing to take that trade-off, especially if it can reset the current stagnation. And it has worked well with the presidency, so why wouldn't it work in congress?
    ...
    Yeah, i see the Pros... I'm just pointing out that there are also some Cons in the equation.
    The other Con is that Term Limits will result in the only continuity in our government will be lobbyists. President, Senators and Congressmen will come and go, lobbyists will stay and gain even more power.
    ...
    Just sayin' it's a double edged sword and regret what we'd wished for.
    And we... as voters... have the power. We just don't use it. It's not that we can't... more because we won't.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • Jason PJason P Posts: 19,156
    Cosmo wrote:
    ...
    Yeah, i see the Pros... I'm just pointing out that there are also some Cons in the equation.
    The other Con is that Term Limits will result in the only continuity in our government will be lobbyists. President, Senators and Congressmen will come and go, lobbyists will stay and gain even more power.
    ...
    Just sayin' it's a double edged sword and regret what we'd wished for.
    And we... as voters... have the power. We just don't use it. It's not that we can't... more because we won't.
    I see the lobbies losing some traction, but I could be wrong. If a lobby is in Jon Boehner's pocket, then that lobby wields a lot of power over the entire GOP field. Chances are that the lobby was in Boehner's pocket long before he became speaker of the House. And John had to play the game to get to the point of power he currently has.

    With an eight year window, the chances of corruption significantly decrease as the field constantly resets itself. You don't have the high lords twisting the arms of incoming freshman. The way it stands, if you don't learn how to play ball early on, your stay in Washington will be a short one.

    If you only have a 4-8 year window, I think you will see elected leaders making more rational decisions instead of following the party line.

    That's my take.
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • CosmoCosmo Posts: 12,225
    Jason P wrote:
    I see the lobbies losing some traction, but I could be wrong. If a lobby is in Jon Boehner's pocket, then that lobby wields a lot of power over the entire GOP field. Chances are that the lobby was in Boehner's pocket long before he became speaker of the House. And John had to play the game to get to the point of power he currently has.

    With an eight year window, the chances of corruption significantly decrease as the field constantly resets itself. You don't have the high lords twisting the arms of incoming freshman. The way it stands, if you don't learn how to play ball early on, your stay in Washington will be a short one.

    If you only have a 4-8 year window, I think you will see elected leaders making more rational decisions instead of following the party line.

    That's my take.
    ...
    Point taken.
    The other thing is that the money is still there for the taking. Makes as much as you can in your 8 years and retire early.
    Or move to another district or state and run for that representative's office. As long as dumb-ass voters will vote based upon name recognition... they will get elected.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
Sign In or Register to comment.