What if the new rules work FOR US?

[Sematary]

I know this is a new thought, but what if they do? What IF Rand Paul is running in 2016, wins Iowa, then New Hampshire, etc... and builds momentum?
The GOP seems to like him and I like the way he votes.
What if the new rules make it possible for him to prevent the establishment from stopping HIM in 2016 instead of the other way around?

Wouldn't that be sweet irony?

Sometimes, in my opinion, you cut your nose off to spite your face.

[wgadget]

All the harder they will work AGAINST that happening.

They have the power to do whatever they want.

Sorry to be so cynical.

[Sematary]

All the harder they will work AGAINST that happening.

They have the power to do whatever they want.

Sorry to be so cynical.

We need to use their own rules against them.

[AlexAmore]

Then they'll pass a rule against curly haired nominations.

[Sematary]

All the harder they will work AGAINST that happening.

They have the power to do whatever they want.

Sorry to be so cynical.

Not to mention that in four more years we will be an even larger part of the party. Maybe by then we will be "they" but without the corruption. Then we can right the ship again.

[Kodaddy]

I think it was pretty obvious that Rubio is the next chosen golden boy. Let rand continue the fight for liberty in the senate.

[presence]

What if the new rules work FOR US?

10 fat men will change the rules again.

[squirekyle]

Then they'll pass a rule against curly haired nominations.

THIS. LOL

[AlexAmore]

I think the trick is we have to have Rand Paul be an extremely obvious frontrunner. We have a few things working for us in this regard:

1. He'll be a great speaker.
2. He's handsome and sadly that's a big deal.
3. He has a great voting record.

4. We have time to prepare.
I'm already talking to my friends about Rand Paul. He's making it easy for me as well with his actions in support for hemp. Gotta be relevant to what your friends are interested in.

[lakefx]

Why are we STILL so hung up on the rules? They weren't followed. They were changed, and they won't be followed.

If the rules mattered, Romney would be disqualified months ago.
If the rules mattered, Ron would have 27 states.
If the rules mattered, Ron would have won the popular vote in Iowa
If the rules mattered, Ron would have won the popular vote in New Hampshire
If the rules mattered, Ron would have won the popular vote in Maine



What rules?

[ShaneEnochs]

If the rules don't change in regard to the grassroots, we're never going to be able to get another one of our people into office. At least not as a Republican.

[The Goat]

Um, didn't they also insert a rule that says they can change the rules BETWEEN conventions by committee?

[minusbear]

Right now we need to continue to focus on fanning the flames between the Tea Party types and the Establishment. That should be the priority. It has worked so far, don't get off message.

[sailingaway]

Are we going to turn to the dark side? We are the ones who believe in the rule of law, due process, and procedural fairness, not to mention representing the people.

[FSP-Rebel]

Right now we need to continue to focus on fanning the flames between the Tea Party types and the Establishment. That should be the priority. It has worked so far, don't get off message.
agreed

[ClydeCoulter]

Are we going to turn to the dark side? We are the ones who believe in the rule of law, due process, and procedural fairness, not to mention representing the people.

You are correct. Now we need people to learn good politics and get out there. Listen to Doug Wead's latest video interview with WeAreChange over and over again (the last half).

[Suzu]

2. He's handsome and sadly that's a big deal.
The saying "handsome is as handsome does" applies here. But he *is* handsome in the physical sense, too - like his dad (actually, a little bit less).

[CPUd]

LOL we could trick them into passing a rule that says candidates are only eligible for the nomination if their parent was a previous candidate for the nomination.

[NoOneButPaul]

That's the great untold story here...

Whatever rules they make we will find a way to use them against them. It doesn't matter how tyrannical they get, we will find a way around them.

[Dr.3D]

10 fat men will change the rules again.
+1

It's pretty hard to win the race when the finish line keeps moving farther away.

[TheTexan]

We need to use their own rules against them.

That isn't a very good high-level strategy. On a tactical level that may work fine, but on a strategic level it will not accomplish anything by itself.

Because as we've seen, when we start using their own rules against them... they just change the rules so we can't.

[hrdman2luv]

I know this is a new thought, but what if they do? What IF Rand Paul is running in 2016, wins Iowa, then New Hampshire, etc... and builds momentum?
The GOP seems to like him and I like the way he votes.
What if the new rules make it possible for him to prevent the establishment from stopping HIM in 2016 instead of the other way around?

Wouldn't that be sweet irony?

Sometimes, in my opinion, you cut your nose off to spite your face.

First off, they aren't going to let anyone that doesn't support the wars become president.
2ndly, If Romney wins, the Romney will be the presidential nominee in 2016. If he loses, then Ryan will be the GOP nominee in 2016.

[affa]

The rules are there to make us jump through hoops. The rules are there to dissuade us. The rules are there to stop us.
And if we start to win anyway? The rules are changed to halt us in our tracks.

Meanwhile, they don't need to follow the rules. They can break the rules in obvious fashion on national television and nobody, but us, even cares.

Even if we had the majority of people at that convention, they would have sat us in the boonies and put mics with their people so that they sounded louder.

How does one generally deal with cheaters?

[affa]

First off, they aren't going to let anyone that doesn't support the wars become president.
2ndly, If Romney wins, the Romney will be the presidential nominee in 2016. If he loses, then Ryan will be the GOP nominee in 2016.

Ryan, Rubio, Christie, Jeb, and a couple others, not to mention 'surprise' media sensations that come out of nowhere (like they did with Palin)...

yea, I don't see why anyone here thinks Rand will be the establishment choice in 2016 when they have so many actual establishment options.

[kathy88]

Elephants are more likely to fly out of my ass than the new rules working for us.

[sirgonzo420]

Then they'll pass a rule against curly haired nominations.

Then Rand could shave his head, and then be able to refer to his opponent as "my long-haired opponent" (à la Hunter S. Thompson).

[presence]

First off, they aren't going to let anyone that doesn't support the wars become president.


^^^^

Period. Wars are mega profit. Mega $$$$$ wins elections.

[AlexAmore]

Then Rand could shave his head, and then be able to refer to his opponent as "my long-haired opponent" (à la Hunter S. Thompson).

ROFL. Oh man that would be good.