Rand Paul is desperate, He won't be in the debate tonight, so his new plan is to make absurd statements to gain attention.
Rand told host Chris Hayes on MSNBC’s “All In." that the GOP is at risk of turning into “the old white man’s party.
“I think it’s important that the Republican Party not be seen as a party that’s not welcoming and that [doesn’t] want new people,” he said.
“I’ve said we need to be a party that has, you know, [people] with earrings, without earrings, with tattoos, without tattoos, black, white, brown, rich [and] poor,” Rand said. "If anything, one of the faults of the Republican Party is we’re not diverse enough.
“When we become the old white man’s party — which we’ve been kind of headed towards for a while — we’re never going to win another election.”
This is really getting tiresome.
Rand's dumb strategy of cozying up to the establishment and Al Sharpton has gotten him nowhere, so now it seems he wants to ditch his establishment ties and stick with the Rev. Al crowd, the tattoo crowd and all 3 of his black and brown supporters. This, of course, is idiotic.
Rand's father delivered into his hands the anti-establishment crowd. Instead of building on that, he's talking lefty inclusiveness babble and attempting to reach people who are interested in government handouts, not liberty. When has Al Sharpton ever said anything about liberty? When has the Black Lives Matter crowd ever called for freedom? Do they think Rand matters? What the hell is he doing?
No one that potentially would vote for Rand is interested in "inclusiveness". They are interested in freedom. Why isn't Rand talking about that? That's what the Republican Party is missing, more freedom advocates.
I am surprised he has lasted this long with his flip-flopping and unwillingness to advance the advocacy for freedom that his father started,
Right now, Rand sounds even more boring than John Kasich and he has done zero for the libertarian movement. Sad.
I doubt that during his entire campaign he has caused one person to google: "libertarianism."
He has, when all is said and done, been a negative for the cause of liberty. At this point, from a libertarian perspective, given how he operates, it really doesn't matter if he holds on to his Senate seat or not.