Tndeer Logo

Page all of 3 123>
Topic Options
#3042098 - 11/20/12 12:28 PM I’m interested in 2016 bid
Encore Eye Candy
10 Point


Registered: 08/29/00
Posts: 4593
Loc: 2 Chron. 7:14: Refs signature

Offline
Rand Paul interested in 2016 Run for president
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/elec...ed-in-2016-bid/
_________________________
VA Scandal = Obama Care future scandal

Top
#3042542 - 11/20/12 06:06 PM Re: I’m interested in 2016 bid [Re: Encore Eye Candy]
Encore Eye Candy
10 Point


Registered: 08/29/00
Posts: 4593
Loc: 2 Chron. 7:14: Refs signature

Offline
I'll Bite: He has a snowball chance........................
_________________________
VA Scandal = Obama Care future scandal

Top
#3042618 - 11/20/12 06:41 PM Re: I’m interested in 2016 bid [Re: Encore Eye Candy]
preds1
12 Point


Registered: 10/16/09
Posts: 6305
Loc: Sumner County

Offline
I like what he has to say up to now. Will have to see what he campaigns on and how he presents himself in a presidential role if it comes to it.

I'd have no problem pulling the lever for him.
_________________________

http://youtu.be/pqICP295APA

Top
#3043373 - 11/21/12 09:12 AM Re: I’m interested in 2016 bid [Re: preds1]
TNDeerGuy
12 Point


Registered: 11/28/06
Posts: 6048
Loc: Old Hickory/Mt.Juliet, TN

Offline
I potentially would have no problem pulling the lever for him, from the little I know of him now—he appears to be vastly different from his naive, dangerous father.
_________________________


Top
#3043408 - 11/21/12 09:35 AM Re: I’m interested in 2016 bid [Re: TNDeerGuy]
de novo
10 Point


Registered: 07/21/08
Posts: 4030
Loc: Middle TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: TNDeerGuy
I potentially would have no problem pulling the lever for him, from the little I know of him now—he appears to be vastly different from his naive, dangerous father.


Please point out those vast differences with your vast knowledge.
_________________________
“Reality is what continues to exist whether you believe in it or not.” 

“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.”

Top
#3043521 - 11/21/12 10:54 AM Re: I’m interested in 2016 bid [Re: de novo]
Wildcat
Non-Typical


Registered: 06/10/00
Posts: 42098
Loc: Western Ky.

Offline
TNDeerGuy is right. He's not like his father at all. What some people are hoping for is a "dynasty". The sad thing is all cults are based on a dynadty to keep them alive.
_________________________
Obama, “the very danger the Constitution was designed to avoid." Liberal law professor Jonathan Turley.




Top
#3043553 - 11/21/12 11:17 AM Re: I’m interested in 2016 bid [Re: Wildcat]
Pic IN the Casa
14 Point


Registered: 03/18/11
Posts: 9445
Loc: TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: Wildcat
TNDeerGuy is right. He's not like his father at all. What some people are hoping for is a "dynasty". The sad thing is all cults are based on a dynadty to keep them alive.


Yep. Look at how the dems wallow over the Kennedys and Clintons.
_________________________
Tolerance now means OBEY!!!!


Top
#3043631 - 11/21/12 12:23 PM Re: I’m interested in 2016 bid [Re: de novo]
TNDeerGuy
12 Point


Registered: 11/28/06
Posts: 6048
Loc: Old Hickory/Mt.Juliet, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: de novo
 Originally Posted By: TNDeerGuy
I potentially would have no problem pulling the lever for him, from the little I know of him now—he appears to be vastly different from his naive, dangerous father.


Please point out those vast differences with your vast knowledge.


Okay, smarty-pants—unlike his father, he has supported having troops in foreign lands, like Afghanistan and foreign strategic bases, and he supports increasing the percentage of budgeted money spent within the Pentagon and the DOD—two things his father was extremely vocally against—that alone is a VAST difference, especially considering the subject! He also is not a narrow-minded, isolationist like his father. Keep in mind he is just a Senator from a State that I do not live in, so I do not know, nor did I ever claim to have vast knowledge of the man—as you claim. However, I/we may have to give him a very serious look into his past and future statements. You can put your Ron Paul flag away and stop waving it around—he is gone and isn't coming back....thank God! \:\)
_________________________


Top
#3043642 - 11/21/12 12:32 PM Re: I’m interested in 2016 bid [Re: TNDeerGuy]
Wildcat
Non-Typical


Registered: 06/10/00
Posts: 42098
Loc: Western Ky.

Offline
Well I for one can say he's MY SENATOR. Not only did I vote for him twice, once in the primary and the other in the general election, but I have met and talked to him at several fund raiser dinners in KY. He's not the same as his father.

I'll say this, I would never vote for Ron Paul and have said the reasons several times on here but I WILL vote for Ryan Paul if he does run for President. There IS that much difference.
_________________________
Obama, “the very danger the Constitution was designed to avoid." Liberal law professor Jonathan Turley.




Top
#3043725 - 11/21/12 02:05 PM Re: I’m interested in 2016 bid [Re: Wildcat]
preds1
12 Point


Registered: 10/16/09
Posts: 6305
Loc: Sumner County

Offline
Rand himself has said he has some different views than his dad.
He was speaking/campaigning for him during the primaries and didn't go into specifics regarding the subject.
_________________________

http://youtu.be/pqICP295APA

Top
#3043953 - 11/21/12 05:23 PM Re: I’m interested in 2016 bid [Re: TNDeerGuy]
de novo
10 Point


Registered: 07/21/08
Posts: 4030
Loc: Middle TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: TNDeerGuy
 Originally Posted By: de novo
 Originally Posted By: TNDeerGuy
I potentially would have no problem pulling the lever for him, from the little I know of him now—he appears to be vastly different from his naive, dangerous father.


Please point out those vast differences with your vast knowledge.


Okay, smarty-pants—unlike his father, he has supported having troops in foreign lands, like Afghanistan and foreign strategic bases, and he supports increasing the percentage of budgeted money spent within the Pentagon and the DOD—two things his father was extremely vocally against—that alone is a VAST difference, especially considering the subject! He also is not a narrow-minded, isolationist like his father. Keep in mind he is just a Senator from a State that I do not live in, so I do not know, nor did I ever claim to have vast knowledge of the man—as you claim. However, I/we may have to give him a very serious look into his past and future statements. You can put your Ron Paul flag away and stop waving it around—he is gone and isn't coming back....thank God! \:\)


It is incredibly naive to criticize and mock his father while stating your support for him. Rand wholehearetedly endorsed and campaigned for his dad. Should he decide to run for president in 2016, his father will play a big role in his campaign as well as his father's current supporters.

I don't care why you consider supporting Rand. If it makes you feel better to support him believing he is vastly different than his father then so be it.

Below is an article Rand authored in October explaining his differences with not Ron Paul but Mitt Romney's neoconservative foreign policy. This also contradicts much of your previous assertion.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/10/opinion/rand-paul-romney-foreign-policy/index.html

At times, I have been encouraged by Romney's foreign policy. I agree with his call to end the war in Afghanistan sooner rather than later and with his skepticism of, and call for reform in, foreign aid, but I am a bit dismayed by his foreign policy speech Monday, titled "Mantle of Leadership."

Romney chose to criticize President Obama for seeking to cut a bloated Defense Department and for not being bellicose enough in the Middle East, two assertions with which I cannot agree.

Defense and war spending has grown 137% since 2001. That kind of growth is not sustainable.

While I would always stand up for America and preserve our ability to defend ourselves, a less aggressive foreign policy along with an audit of the Pentagon could save tens of billions of dollars each year without sacrificing our defense. To dismiss either idea is to miss the very compromise that will enable us to balance our budget. That compromise would be for conservatives to admit that not every dollar spent on the military is sacred or well-spent and for liberals to admit that not every dollar spent on domestic entitlements and welfare is necessary.

In North Africa and the Middle East, our problem has not been a lack of intervention. In the past 10 years we have fought two full wars there, and bombed or sent troops into several others...
_________________________
“Reality is what continues to exist whether you believe in it or not.” 

“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.”

Top
#3043967 - 11/21/12 05:40 PM Re: I’m interested in 2016 bid [Re: Encore Eye Candy]
Wildcat
Non-Typical


Registered: 06/10/00
Posts: 42098
Loc: Western Ky.

Offline
The word neoconservative is a catch word used by the "only true conservative cult". They look down their noses to ALL OTHER CONSERVATIVES. They are a big reason Ron Paul could never get enough supporters to win.

They are also the ones that stayed home and did not vote for either Mccain or Romney.
_________________________
Obama, “the very danger the Constitution was designed to avoid." Liberal law professor Jonathan Turley.




Top
#3043968 - 11/21/12 05:40 PM Re: I’m interested in 2016 bid [Re: de novo]
TNDeerGuy
12 Point


Registered: 11/28/06
Posts: 6048
Loc: Old Hickory/Mt.Juliet, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: de novo
 Originally Posted By: TNDeerGuy
 Originally Posted By: de novo
 Originally Posted By: TNDeerGuy
I potentially would have no problem pulling the lever for him, from the little I know of him now—he appears to be vastly different from his naive, dangerous father.


Please point out those vast differences with your vast knowledge.


Okay, smarty-pants—unlike his father, he has supported having troops in foreign lands, like Afghanistan and foreign strategic bases, and he supports increasing the percentage of budgeted money spent within the Pentagon and the DOD—two things his father was extremely vocally against—that alone is a VAST difference, especially considering the subject! He also is not a narrow-minded, isolationist like his father. Keep in mind he is just a Senator from a State that I do not live in, so I do not know, nor did I ever claim to have vast knowledge of the man—as you claim. However, I/we may have to give him a very serious look into his past and future statements. You can put your Ron Paul flag away and stop waving it around—he is gone and isn't coming back....thank God! \:\)


It is incredibly naive to criticize and mock his father while stating your support for him. Rand wholehearetedly endorsed and campaigned for his dad. Should he decide to run for president in 2016, his father will play a big role in his campaign as well as his father's current supporters.

I don't care why you consider supporting Rand. If it makes you feel better to support him believing he is vastly different than his father then so be it.

Below is an article Rand authored in October explaining his differences with not Ron Paul but Mitt Romney's neoconservative foreign policy. This also contradicts much of your previous assertion.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/10/opinion/rand-paul-romney-foreign-policy/index.html

At times, I have been encouraged by Romney's foreign policy. I agree with his call to end the war in Afghanistan sooner rather than later and with his skepticism of, and call for reform in, foreign aid, but I am a bit dismayed by his foreign policy speech Monday, titled "Mantle of Leadership."

Romney chose to criticize President Obama for seeking to cut a bloated Defense Department and for not being bellicose enough in the Middle East, two assertions with which I cannot agree.

Defense and war spending has grown 137% since 2001. That kind of growth is not sustainable.

While I would always stand up for America and preserve our ability to defend ourselves, a less aggressive foreign policy along with an audit of the Pentagon could save tens of billions of dollars each year without sacrificing our defense. To dismiss either idea is to miss the very compromise that will enable us to balance our budget. That compromise would be for conservatives to admit that not every dollar spent on the military is sacred or well-spent and for liberals to admit that not every dollar spent on domestic entitlements and welfare is necessary.

In North Africa and the Middle East, our problem has not been a lack of intervention. In the past 10 years we have fought two full wars there, and bombed or sent troops into several others...




I don't care, why you care if I consider supporting him or not—you started this "discussion" with me. Spin it however you wish, I took the information from statements he made in 2010, and based on those views/statements he made they ARE different from his Father's narrow-minded, naive policy of strict isolationism. As far as the views on spending, I have no problem cutting defense spending in areas that could be cut without sacrificing needed tools—the same goes with domestic spending, of which he has spoken of before. What's wrong with being fiscally responsible, is it an area that you don't understand? I am not going to feed your trolling efforts, so back under the bridge you go!
_________________________


Top
#3044327 - 11/21/12 09:20 PM Re: I’m interested in 2016 bid [Re: TNDeerGuy]
de novo
10 Point


Registered: 07/21/08
Posts: 4030
Loc: Middle TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: TNDeerGuy




I don't care, why you care if I consider supporting him or not—you started this "discussion" with me. Spin it however you wish, I took the information from statements he made in 2010, and based on those views/statements he made they ARE different from his Father's narrow-minded, naive policy of strict isolationism. As far as the views on spending, I have no problem cutting defense spending in areas that could be cut without sacrificing needed tools—the same goes with domestic spending, of which he has spoken of before. What's wrong with being fiscally responsible, is it an area that you don't understand? I am not going to feed your trolling efforts, so back under the bridge you go!


Based on your 2010 information, which 2012 Republican Presidential candidate do you think is most in line with Rand Paul's views?

Fiscal responsibility was never a point of contention in our "discussion" until you used it as your straw man.
I have many posts on here you won't find one opposing fiscal responsibility. The "discussion" started with a totally inaccurate comparison of the two Paul's record. Are they identical? No. But anyone doing a wee bit of research would say it's a stretch to classify them as vastly different.

I linked an op-ed piece he authored in October 2012, you're basing it on something you think you heard in 2010.

By all accounts Rand will be a candidate in 2016 espousing fiscal responsibility, wise foreign policy, liberty at home, and state's rights. Hopefully, some more Republicans will choose to support this type of candidate this time.
_________________________
“Reality is what continues to exist whether you believe in it or not.” 

“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.”

Top
#3044351 - 11/21/12 09:33 PM Re: I’m interested in 2016 bid [Re: Wildcat]
de novo
10 Point


Registered: 07/21/08
Posts: 4030
Loc: Middle TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: Wildcat
TNDeerGuy is right. He's not like his father at all. What some people are hoping for is a "dynasty". The sad thing is all cults are based on a dynadty to keep them alive.


Cult based on a dynasty? Where do you get this from? Jim Jones Dynasty? The Charlie Manson dynasty?


Below are the top ten American cults. Not many dynasties?

http://listverse.com/2007/09/15/top-10-cults/

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=na...ed+on+a+dynasty


This is at least the third time I've posted the definition of neoconservative but it's been around a while. Neocons tend to be fiscally conservative, socially liberal or indifferent, and love to send our troops overseas to fight wars. I first heard the term many years ago by Pat Buchanan long before Ron Paul's last two Presidential runs. Great examples are Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Wolfowitz

Neoconservatism is a right-wing branch of American liberalism that espouse political individualism and a qualified endorsement of free markets.It has also been described as a variant of conservatism which advocates the assertive promotion of democracy and United States national interest in international affairs including through military means. Neoconservatism (or new conservatism) is rooted in a group of former liberals, who in the late 1960s, began to embrace nationalism and interventionism in opposition to the rise of the USSR and moved significantly to the right of the spectrum.The term "neoconservative" (sometimes shortened to "neocon") was initially used in the 1930s, to describe American liberals who criticized communists for following a path closer to Soviet communism.Neoconservatives have been especially influential in the formulation of foreign and military policy, particularly in the administrations of Presidents Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and George W. Bush . In the George W. Bush administration, neoconservative officials in the Pentagon and the Department of State helped to plan and promote the Iraq War.
_________________________
“Reality is what continues to exist whether you believe in it or not.” 

“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.”

Top
#3044363 - 11/21/12 09:42 PM Re: I’m interested in 2016 bid [Re: de novo]
Wildcat
Non-Typical


Registered: 06/10/00
Posts: 42098
Loc: Western Ky.

Offline
 Originally Posted By: de novo
 Originally Posted By: Wildcat
TNDeerGuy is right. He's not like his father at all. What some people are hoping for is a "dynasty". The sad thing is all cults are based on a dynadty to keep them alive.


Cult based on a dynasty? Where do you get this from? Jim Jones Dynasty? The Charlie Manson dynasty?


Below are the top ten American cults. Not many dynasties?

http://listverse.com/2007/09/15/top-10-cults/

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=na...ed+on+a+dynasty


This is at least the third time I've posted the definition of neoconservative but it's been around a while. Neocons tend to be fiscally conservative, socially liberal or indifferent, and love to send our troops overseas to fight wars. I first heard the term many years ago by Pat Buchanan long before Ron Paul's last two Presidential runs. Great examples are Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Wolfowitz

Neoconservatism is a right-wing branch of American liberalism that espouse political individualism and a qualified endorsement of free markets.It has also been described as a variant of conservatism which advocates the assertive promotion of democracy and United States national interest in international affairs including through military means. Neoconservatism (or new conservatism) is rooted in a group of former liberals, who in the late 1960s, began to embrace nationalism and interventionism in opposition to the rise of the USSR and moved significantly to the right of the spectrum.The term "neoconservative" (sometimes shortened to "neocon") was initially used in the 1930s, to describe American liberals who criticized communists for following a path closer to Soviet communism.Neoconservatives have been especially influential in the formulation of foreign and military policy, particularly in the administrations of Presidents Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and George W. Bush . In the George W. Bush administration, neoconservative officials in the Pentagon and the Department of State helped to plan and promote the Iraq War.


The problem with the Ron Paul cult is that they took over the word "neoconservative" and USED it to describe ALL OTHER CONSERVATIVES since the Ron Paul cult was the "ONLY TRUE CONSERVATIVES". Don't beleive me?? Just look at the last years posts right here on TnDeer. Once the "ONLY TRUE CONSERVATIVES" were called out on it then hid behind the dictionary meaning of the word but we ALL read what they posted before. So YES THEY DID use the word to describe ALL OTHER CONSERVATIVES.

They are also the very people that killed any chance Ron Paul had of ever winning the White House. By being the "ONLY TRUE CONSERVATIVES" they could never pull in any of the other conservatives, ANY other conservatives became "neoconservatives".


Ron Paul RETIRES Dec 31, 2012. They HAVE to have a dynasty in his son to keep going otherwise they are a cult without anybody to support. When they are not the same man and not the same views then the cult dissolves. No wonder he didn't want to look at the worlds cults.
_________________________
Obama, “the very danger the Constitution was designed to avoid." Liberal law professor Jonathan Turley.




Top
#3044432 - 11/21/12 11:15 PM Re: I’m interested in 2016 bid [Re: de novo]
TNDeerGuy
12 Point


Registered: 11/28/06
Posts: 6048
Loc: Old Hickory/Mt.Juliet, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: de novo
 Originally Posted By: TNDeerGuy




I don't care, why you care if I consider supporting him or not—you started this "discussion" with me. Spin it however you wish, I took the information from statements he made in 2010, and based on those views/statements he made they ARE different from his Father's narrow-minded, naive policy of strict isolationism. As far as the views on spending, I have no problem cutting defense spending in areas that could be cut without sacrificing needed tools—the same goes with domestic spending, of which he has spoken of before. What's wrong with being fiscally responsible, is it an area that you don't understand? I am not going to feed your trolling efforts, so back under the bridge you go!


Based on your 2010 information, which 2012 Republican Presidential candidate do you think is most in line with Rand Paul's views?

Fiscal responsibility was never a point of contention in our "discussion" until you used it as your straw man.
I have many posts on here you won't find one opposing fiscal responsibility. The "discussion" started with a totally inaccurate comparison of the two Paul's record. Are they identical? No. But anyone doing a wee bit of research would say it's a stretch to classify them as vastly different.

I linked an op-ed piece he authored in October 2012, you're basing it on something you think you heard in 2010.

By all accounts Rand will be a candidate in 2016 espousing fiscal responsibility, wise foreign policy, liberty at home, and state's rights. Hopefully, some more Republicans will choose to support this type of candidate this time.





Listen dude, it is obvious you enjoy bloviating just to make yourself feel good. Uhhhh....one is a strict isolationist and the other one isn't—yeah, most normal people, that don't believe in cults would call that vastly different, especially when it has to do with such an extremely important subject such as foreign policies! By the way, don't tell me what I have heard/read—I didn't think I heard it in 2010, I know I read it this morning http://rt.com/usa/news/rand-paul-foreign-policy/ and it was from 2011 (I messed up the date). Don't go criticizing me on their differences, I merely pointed them out—which obviously you don't like, and you can't deal with the fact that the two do hold two different views, which I will stick with the fact that they ARE vast——

"His father, Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) favors withdrawal of all US troops from Iraq and Afghanistan.

“Get the troops out of Afghanistan and end that war that has helped us and hasn't helped anyone in the Middle East,” said Ron Paul during the first Republican primary debate.

But unlike his father, the younger Paul is not proposing immediate withdrawal of US troops, and said he supports increasing the percentage of America’s budget spent on the Pentagon—despite an 81 percent increase in defense spending since 2001."


I don't think anyone in this thread, including myself, has said anything about NOT supporting him—quite the contrary in fact. Most of us have simply said that we would consider it as long as he does not hold the same views of naivety and isolationism as his father. We are not going to fall at his feet like 12 year-old, tongue-wagging girls on the front row of a Justin Bieber concert just because of whom his father is. We will judge him and potentially pull the lever for him based on merit, actions and nothing more.
_________________________


Top
#3044543 - 11/22/12 06:32 AM Re: I’m interested in 2016 bid [Re: TNDeerGuy]
Dale3
8 Point


Registered: 09/14/03
Posts: 1307
Loc: Live in Mt.Juliet ,Hunt Jackso...

Offline
WOW, this thread shows Rand Paul might as well forget it, if his dads (kool-aid cult like)supporters, support him, they will turn everyone off like they did for his dad.
Not all of Ron Paul supporters fall into this group, but WAY to many were, and hurt him as much if not more than he hurt himself.

Rand Paul DONE! what a shame.
NEXT!


Edited by Dale3 (11/22/12 06:35 AM)

Top
#3044590 - 11/22/12 07:47 AM Re: I’m interested in 2016 bid [Re: Dale3]
TNDeerGuy
12 Point


Registered: 11/28/06
Posts: 6048
Loc: Old Hickory/Mt.Juliet, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: Dale3
WOW, this thread shows Rand Paul might as well forget it, if his dads (kool-aid cult like)supporters, support him, they will turn everyone off like they did for his dad.
Not all of Ron Paul supporters fall into this group, but WAY to many were, and hurt him as much if not more than he hurt himself.

Rand Paul DONE! what a shame.
NEXT!

Nah, he still has a chance--too many of us are actually are able to discern for ourselves whether or not he is a man worthy of our vote based on his actions--past and present, and not be a flag-waving fanboy for a candidate because it is cool.....that its what got us in this mess we are in now.
_________________________


Top
#3044824 - 11/22/12 11:06 AM Re: I’m interested in 2016 bid [Re: TNDeerGuy]
Dale3
8 Point


Registered: 09/14/03
Posts: 1307
Loc: Live in Mt.Juliet ,Hunt Jackso...

Offline
 Originally Posted By: TNDeerGuy
 Originally Posted By: Dale3
WOW, this thread shows Rand Paul might as well forget it, if his dads (kool-aid cult like)supporters, support him, they will turn everyone off like they did for his dad.
Not all of Ron Paul supporters fall into this group, but WAY to many were, and hurt him as much if not more than he hurt himself.

Rand Paul DONE! what a shame.
NEXT!

that got us into this mess
Nah, he still has a chance--too many of us are actually are able to discern for ourselves whether or not he is a man worthy of our vote based on his actions--past and present, and not be a flag-waving fanboy for a candidate because it is cool.....that its what got us in this mess we are in now.


Theres no dout about it, many Ron Paul supporters turned people off about Ron Paul as much or more than he did himself.
It was anyone BUT Romney who we had shoved down our throats, another flip flopping moderate to support. Dont recall many if any flag waving fan boys for Romney around here.

Nah, Rand really has no chance at all if the kool-aid drinking Ron supporters show up for him. The only ones who dont see it or admit it are the ones who were the turn offs. Everyone one else saw it. They never got it when Ron ran, and looks like they still dont. It was the talk anywhere and everywhere and they ignored it, claimed it was not so, when it was slappin them in the face
Those kool-aid drinkers if they really want Rand to win need to sit in corner and keep thier mouths shut. No running around all over internet with thier rubish and showing up at others ralley's making fools of themselves.
I had thought Rand could be a good choice in 2016, but i hadnt thought until this thread about the Ron Pauly culters ruining it for him.
I like Rand due to the fact he's not like his father in the areas that matter. The worse thing that could happen to Ran is for them to show up, act like they did for his father and make him out to be the second coming of his father, it will be game over for him.
He got zero chance i see now, if his fathers supporters who turned so many off for him, show up and do the same.
People will like Rand, but his fathers cult like supporters will turn them off and the GOP elite will be against him and he will come up short in primarys.


Edited by Dale3 (11/22/12 12:59 PM)

Top
#3045395 - 11/22/12 09:52 PM Re: I’m interested in 2016 bid [Re: TNDeerGuy]
de novo
10 Point


Registered: 07/21/08
Posts: 4030
Loc: Middle TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: TNDeerGuy



Listen dude, it is obvious you enjoy bloviating just to make yourself feel good. Uhhhh....one is a strict isolationist and the other one isn't—yeah, most normal people, that don't believe in cults would call that vastly different, especially when it has to do with such an extremely important subject such as foreign policies! By the way, don't tell me what I have heard/read—I didn't think I heard it in 2010, I know I read it this morning http://rt.com/usa/news/rand-paul-foreign-policy/ and it was from 2011 (I messed up the date). Don't go criticizing me on their differences, I merely pointed them out—which obviously you don't like, and you can't deal with the fact that the two do hold two different views, which I will stick with the fact that they ARE vast——

[i]"His father, Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) favors withdrawal of all US troops from Iraq and Afghanistan.


I don't think anyone in this thread, including myself, has said anything about NOT supporting him—quite the contrary in fact. Most of us have simply said that we would consider it as long as he does not hold the same views of naivety and isolationism as his father. We are not going to fall at his feet like 12 year-old, tongue-wagging girls on the front row of a Justin Bieber concert just because of whom his father is. We will judge him and potentially pull the lever for him based on merit, actions and nothing more.


We have had some spirited debates on this forum about policy since the 2012 Republican primary began to heat up. The majority of regulars on here are informed and passionate about their positions. A handful bring very little substance to the board. We can debate facts and policies for pages and pages but your continued names, trolling comments, insults, and strange Justin Bieber reference bring very little to any debate.


Our "discussion", which has now filled two pages, began with a factually inaccurate statement. You either are uninformed about Ron Paul's foreign policy (nonintervention), Rand Paul's foreign policy (nonintervention), or the definition of the word vastly. In the link you provided you conveniently left out all the quotes attributed to Rand.


“We're out of money. Our foreign policy, an expansionist foreign policy, will end. Whether you agree with me or not it will end, because we are out of money,” Paul said. “By and large foreign policy has been bipartisan, with very little dissent in our country. That's why I am unusual and called names—anyone who brings up less intervention is called an isolationist,” Paul said.
Paul also said President Barack Obama is “not very different” than former President George W. Bush. The Senator from Kentucky has proposed ending America’s $30 billion in aid to Israel. He called the United Nations a quote “forum for dictators.”
“When I prioritize spending, I think national defense is a constitutional function of government, so I think that it would have a priority for me over all other spending really,” he said.


Below is a statement on Rand's position that is worded in a more accurate and better way.
 Originally Posted By: preds1
Rand himself has said he has some different views than his dad.
He was speaking/campaigning for him during the primaries and didn't go into specifics regarding the subject.
_________________________
“Reality is what continues to exist whether you believe in it or not.” 

“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.”

Top
#3045467 - 11/23/12 12:12 AM Re: I’m interested in 2016 bid [Re: de novo]
TNDeerGuy
12 Point


Registered: 11/28/06
Posts: 6048
Loc: Old Hickory/Mt.Juliet, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: de novo
 Originally Posted By: TNDeerGuy



Listen dude, it is obvious you enjoy bloviating just to make yourself feel good. Uhhhh....one is a strict isolationist and the other one isn't—yeah, most normal people, that don't believe in cults would call that vastly different, especially when it has to do with such an extremely important subject such as foreign policies! By the way, don't tell me what I have heard/read—I didn't think I heard it in 2010, I know I read it this morning http://rt.com/usa/news/rand-paul-foreign-policy/ and it was from 2011 (I messed up the date). Don't go criticizing me on their differences, I merely pointed them out—which obviously you don't like, and you can't deal with the fact that the two do hold two different views, which I will stick with the fact that they ARE vast——

[i]"His father, Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) favors withdrawal of all US troops from Iraq and Afghanistan.


I don't think anyone in this thread, including myself, has said anything about NOT supporting him—quite the contrary in fact. Most of us have simply said that we would consider it as long as he does not hold the same views of naivety and isolationism as his father. We are not going to fall at his feet like 12 year-old, tongue-wagging girls on the front row of a Justin Bieber concert just because of whom his father is. We will judge him and potentially pull the lever for him based on merit, actions and nothing more.


We have had some spirited debates on this forum about policy since the 2012 Republican primary began to heat up. The majority of regulars on here are informed and passionate about their positions. A handful bring very little substance to the board. We can debate facts and policies for pages and pages but your continued names, trolling comments, insults, and strange Justin Bieber reference bring very little to any debate.


Our "discussion", which has now filled two pages, began with a factually inaccurate statement. You either are uninformed about Ron Paul's foreign policy (nonintervention), Rand Paul's foreign policy (nonintervention), or the definition of the word vastly. In the link you provided you conveniently left out all the quotes attributed to Rand.


“We're out of money. Our foreign policy, an expansionist foreign policy, will end. Whether you agree with me or not it will end, because we are out of money,” Paul said. “By and large foreign policy has been bipartisan, with very little dissent in our country. That's why I am unusual and called names—anyone who brings up less intervention is called an isolationist,” Paul said.
Paul also said President Barack Obama is “not very different” than former President George W. Bush. The Senator from Kentucky has proposed ending America’s $30 billion in aid to Israel. He called the United Nations a quote “forum for dictators.”
“When I prioritize spending, I think national defense is a constitutional function of government, so I think that it would have a priority for me over all other spending really,” he said.


Below is a statement on Rand's position that is worded in a more accurate and better way.
 Originally Posted By: preds1
Rand himself has said he has some different views than his dad.
He was speaking/campaigning for him during the primaries and didn't go into specifics regarding the subject.



Listen bud, you believe what you want to, and I'll do the same for myself and come to my own conclusions based on information that is before me—is that okay for you? I'm no longer going to argue the difference between the two with you and I don't need someone like you to tell me what is fact, nor fiction—I have the ability to completely differentiate between the two.
_________________________


Top
Page all of 3 123>


Moderator:  Crappie Luck, Tennessee Todd, RUGER, Unicam, stretch, Cuttin Caller, Bobby G, Kimber45 
Hop to:
Top Posters
4105266
RUGER
86723
Deer Assassin
65056
BSK
60881
Crappie Luck
51376
spitndrum
Newest Members
JPG3, red arrow, ICUFLY, east_tn_gk, cruiser sailor
13210 Registered Users
Who's Online
9 registered (Backstrapcrazy, Beekeeper, levergunner, Zulu, BamaProud, 1 good shot) and 36 anonymous users online.
Forum Stats
13210 Members
42 Forums
91627 Topics
1070949 Posts

Max Online: 788 @ 11/11/13 08:06 PM
Moon Phase
CURRENT MOON
August
Su M Tu W Th F Sa
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31
Forum Donations
The TnDeer.Com Deer Talk Forum is for Tennessee Deer Hunters by Tennessee Deer Hunters. If you enjoy using our Talk Forum and would like to contribute to help in it's up-keep. Just submit your contribution by clicking on the DONATE button below and paying with PayPal or a major credit card. Any amount is much appreciated. Thanks for your support!

TN Burn Safe

Generated in 0.084 seconds in which 0.001 seconds were spent on a total of 14 queries. Zlib compression enabled.