I had a thought-provoking strategy idea today

[AJ Antimony]

First, let me make it clear that I am in no way suggesting this idea as a good one and that I'm only bringing it up for a simple discussion.

Basically I looked at the situation Rand put himself in: he has the ENTIRE Democratic left attacking his comments (which are not really that bad after reading/hearing them a few times) and he has a surprising number of neocons defending him on the right.

In what feels like a matter of minutes, it feels like Rand pissed off liberals regarding the CRA, the oil spill, and the minimum wage. As a result, his campaign has decided to completely stop the national interviews, at least for the time being.

While most MSM stories on Rand have been attacking him, it seems like more are emerging that understand where he's coming from... that he's a libertarian trying to tell a new message to an old crowd while also trying to get the old crowd to elect him.

So after seeing some understanding, sorta supportive articles about Rand, a thought crossed my mind: What if instead of canceling future interviews, Rand booked a ton more? What if instead of backing off his libertarian beliefs, he embraced them? What if instead of nixing the CRA-like comments, he made more of them (obviously only when asked)? Seeing the entire left attack such comments and seeing the right defend such comments, it sorta feels like if Rand were to completely embrace his beliefs and defend them proudly, he could actually get the entire country (or more accurately, the people in the MSM) discussing and thinking about REAL libertarianism, in a Barry Goldwater sorta way and sorta turn the spectrum from simply R vs. D into freedom vs. complete statism.

I mean, by backing off everything the last few days, it seems like he's letting the left win. Rand used to always talk about abolishing the DOE, but I saw some article that says he is even backing off that. Furthermore, I figure with all the ammunition Rand has given the left this week, giving them more won't necessarily hurt. I know that even with all these comments, Rand is still favored to win fairly easily in November, but that's not what I'm concerned about. I'm just concerned about pride and what it means to back off comments and let the left win the battle.

So anyway I guess you can boil down my rambling to a simple question: Do you think Rand should back off his comments, or come out embracing and defending them? Again, this is just meant for discussion, we all know what the campaign is going to do.

[nayjevin]

I just think he's picking his battles. I don't know if it's being done wisely, but he won in a Randslide. We actually have objective information that what he is doing is:

1. Getting him closer to a Senate seat
2. Giving him massive exposure
3. Causing media to focus on more liberty-oriented subjects than before his campaign
4. Causing the GOP establishment to embrace ideas that seemed impossible just a few years ago

If those are good things, then Rand is doing good things.

[thomas-in-ky]

Seems to me he made the right move to cancel MTP. Apart from the forged transcript, they have no real 5 second sound bite on the CRA or ADA issue. His answers were worded such that they have to play at least 20 seconds of them for a coherent point. Without Rand Paul live in front of them, they're left to parse and re-parse what he said. And each time they do, there's a chance that a thinking person is listening, and we score one for liberty.

Someone (probably an Obama voter, but someone who voted for me) posted on my face book:

Thomas please tell me you have changed your mind about Rand Paul now. I am so disappointed in him. I have people with disabilities in my family and people of races. He has blown it for the republicans now.

I responded:

I support Rand Paul. He is not racist, nor discriminatory to disabled people. His point (which is being twisted by the media) is that gov't is too intrusive in private lives, and some of the well meaning legislation is poorly written. Please judge the man by his actions (see below). Our government is truly broken, and the establishment does not want Rand Paul because he will reform gov't.
and

Carmichael, Alicia (2006-06-18). "Lions Club marks 75th anniversary". Bowling Green Daily News. . Retrieved 2009-04-04. "A few years ago, the club financed operations for two Guatemalan boys who came to this country blind and left seeing, thanks to the surgeries by Noon Lions Club member Dr. Rand Paul, who heads the Southern Kentucky Eye Clinic, Nahm said."

[american.swan]

I'm leaning toward this strategy. Especially since they have to play 20 seconds to get anything out of what he's saying. There's no sound bite.

[JohnEngland]

Rand is changing the national debate. Glenn Beck has talked about the Overton Window (he's also written a book called that, but that's another issue!).

The Overton Window is a political idea in which one changes the nature of public debate by expressing an idea that seems outside the mainstream, with the result that the national debate is pulled towards the outsider's idea. It's what the left has done over the decades, to make big government more and more acceptable, and with Rand talking about private property rights on the national stage, public debate will be shifting that way.

[Carole]

Might be America is too PC for that these days.

In principle I agree with what you are saying, but he needs to stick to his message and not give up valuable time rehashing the 60's. He made his POV clear by saying he agreed with 9 out of 10 points of the CRA, but would like to have modified the one point on personal property rights. On whole , he said he would have voted for it.

It is a red herring to distract from the real issues. Liberals do not want to discuss issues; they want to demonize and marginalize and smear, because they have losing issues and arguments.

Civil rights ranks 0.03 in Kentucky in importance as an issue.

[AJ Antimony]

So it sounds like you guys agree that he's doing the right thing by backing off his core libertarian views?

[MsDoodahs]

I just think he's picking his battles. I don't know if it's being done wisely, but he won in a Randslide. We actually have objective information that what he is doing is:

1. Getting him closer to a Senate seat
2. Giving him massive exposure
3. Causing media to focus on more liberty-oriented subjects than before his campaign
4. Causing the GOP establishment to embrace ideas that seemed impossible just a few years ago

If those are good things, then Rand is doing good things.

I think all of those are good things. :)

[Brett85]

So it sounds like you guys agree that he's doing the right thing by backing off his core libertarian views?

Rand shouldn't be discussing anything that he won't be voting on in the Senate. It's just a distraction from the real issues.

[TheFlashlight.org]

OP, it's a fine line to tread but it ain't a bad sentiment.

In the last several days, Rand has galvanized the entire GOP behind him, educated on libertarian philosophy, and been a media sensation superstar. I mean, who's his opponent again? I forgot.

It's like whatever current teen tart is constantly getting in the news for not wearing underwear or whatever, people just chuckle, some analyze, some condemn, and the power of celebrity continues....

[TheFlashlight.org]

But there is such thing as overexposure and people get sick of you. This is a good cool down period. Things could've spun out of control.