Politico reports:
As he pulls together his expected presidential campaign in Iowa and New Hampshire, Rand Paul is confronted by defections from an unexpected quarter: the die-hard idealists whose energy powered his father’s campaigns.
That network of committed supporters was expected to convey to Rand Paul, the natural successor to Ron Paul’s libertarian movement, providing him with a plug-and-play ground organization in the make-or-break early voting states. But instead of embracing the Kentucky senator, many of those grassroots activists are turning their backs on him, disillusioned by the younger Paul’s concessions to mainstream politics.
One of the most prominent defectors is Drew Ivers, chairman of Ron Paul’s 2012 Iowa campaign, who says he will not endorse Rand Paul for president. On Tuesday, three members of Iowa’s Ron Paul-aligned Liberty movement — state Sen. Jason Shultz and former Iowa Republican Party central committee members Chad Steenhoek and Joel Kurtinitis — announced the same, adding that they will support Texas Sen. Ted Cruz. Ivers said he does not plan to endorse any candidate...
Ivers, who had dinner with Rand Paul in August, said the Kentucky senator has abandoned many of the stances that made Ivers loyal to his father.
“He’s moderating on most of them, not taking a real clear stance on a number of them,” said Ivers. “The strategy of sending a blended message is one that has risk.”...
In New Hampshire, with its more moderate brand of conservatism, Paul faces similar challenges. New Hampshire Rep. Bill O’Brien, a former state House speaker, said he’s seen a number of Ron Paul supporters gravitating towards Cruz. Aaron Day, a leader of the Free State movement, which seeks to enact libertarian principles in New Hampshire, says members of the movement are showing markedly less enthusiasm for Rand Paul than they showed for his father.
The problem with some Ron Paul supporters choosing Cruz is that he is way more sympathetic to neocon policies than Rand!
ReplyDeleteExactly, Unknown!
DeleteFurthermore, Rand's defense plan proposes much less spending than all the other Senators and presidential candidates, but Rand's spending proposal would be offset by spending cuts to things like foreign aide.
I'd much rather have a Rand Paul deciding if we go to war than a Ted Cruz or the other candidates! especial over Hilary! That's why i still say Rand Paul 2016!
It's obvious Rand is playing the game to win, but we know deep down he would actually keep us out of wars more than any other candidates. If people like Robert Wenzel keep bashing Rand you'll have people vote for Cruz instead who is clearly worse and will put is to war with Iran.
Check out the Rare story about this: http://rare.us/story/rand-paul-just-trolled-the-hell-out-of-cruz-and-rubio-on-the-defense-budget/
Oh puhleez, you are none going to save Rand from people gaining the perspective that he will do anything to gain power. It is obvious he would sell out every libertarian principle his father stands for.
Delete"I'd much rather have a Rand Paul deciding if we go to war.."
Delete"but we know deep down he would actually keep us out of wars more than any other candidates."
Who the hell waltzes in and begins using the words 'we' and 'us?' You speak for no one but your Rand Paul leg-humping self.
Rand Paul is a shapeshifter; An entity that will assume any form necessary to achieve a desired objective.
As for that trash article at Rare, that's what desperate minions do when they desperately seek to justify the guy.
"The problem with some Ron Paul supporters choosing Cruz is that he is way more sympathetic to neocon policies than Rand!"
DeleteThey're idiots for choosing either one. Tweedledee and Tweedledum.
"the die-hard idealists whose energy powered his father’s campaigns."
ReplyDeleteAnd Politico identifies them as:
"Drew Ivers, state Sen. Jason Shultz and former Iowa Republican Party central committee members Chad Steenhoek and Joel Kurtinitis "
Politico is so clueless. There are no " die-hard idealists whose energy powered his father’s campaigns" in Randy's camp, and probably never have been. Randy's supporters are paid political consultants, GOP committee members and dimwitted tea partiers. They are few in number and unlikely to even stick with him through a primary.
The idea that there's even a single "Ron Paul supporter" who would piss on Cruz if he was on fire is laughable.
If you are looking for adherence to libertarian principles like Ron Paul, Cruz certainly isn't your guy!
ReplyDeleteNo, but neither is Rand. There s no difference.
DeleteThere is a difference. A huge difference. Look at their latest and compare: http://rare.us/story/rand-paul-just-trolled-the-hell-out-of-cruz-and-rubio-on-the-defense-budget/
Delete"There is a difference. A huge difference. Look at their latest and compare: http://rare.us/story/rand-paul-just-trolled-the-hell-out-of-cruz-and-rubio-on-the-defense-budget/"
DeleteYeah, yeah. The "lesser of the two evils" bullshit. My choice is "none of the above".
"three members of Iowa’s Ron Paul-aligned Liberty movement — state Sen. Jason Shultz and former Iowa Republican Party central committee members Chad Steenhoek and Joel Kurtinitis — announced the same, adding that they will support Texas Sen. Ted Cruz"
ReplyDeleteThis reveals these folks have no idea what's really going on. If they truly understood, they'd vote for Ron Paul's endorsed candidate NOTA '16. Don't vote folks, don't give them the illusion of consent.
" Don't vote folks, don't give them the illusion of consent."
DeleteExcellent advice. As Clyde Wilson once wrote, maybe voting isn't actually evil, but it's at least an act of general cluelessness like chewing gum.