Is everything Rand is doing getting unprecedented coverage?

[devil21]

I don't mean just by the media. I mean more by the grassroots. Every stance or vote Rand takes is being scrutinized beyond belief. Is this fair?

Discuss.

[CaptUSA]

Double-edged sword, I suppose. If they weren't covering him, we'd be complaining about that.

I'd say it's a good thing. Should he decide not to run for President (which is incredibly unlikely) he will have at least raised the profile of libertarian principles to mainstream conversations.

You will always have people in the liberty movement shooting ourselves in the foot. It's what has always happened with the LP. We are all very individualistic and we all tend to see things our own way. When someone says or does something that may not fit with our own very unique shade of gray, we don't like it. But if we could just all understand that liberty is about each one of us being able to express our ideas and work towards our own goals, then we'll all be further ahead. If Rand's with you 95% of the way, spend your time on that 95% instead of the other 5%.

Still, how exciting is it to see small government views being express on Sunday talk shows?! I've lived a long life and have never seen it like this!

[RonPaulFanInGA]

The media is going to be scrutinizing Paul, Rubio, Christie, Clinton and everyone else they think will be a 2016 contender.

[LibertyEagle]

The media is going to be scrutinizing Paul, Rubio, Christie, Clinton and everyone else they think will be a 2016 contender.

No, they don't scrutinize candidates equally. You know that. If they did, Obama would never have been President.

[acptulsa]

I find it refreshing to see Americans scrutinize their politicians. I find it more refreshing to see one stand up to the scrutiny as well as Rand Paul does, too.

[Matt Collins]

It'll build his name recognition, this will make it easier for the campaign in 2016. Hopefully they won't build his negatives too.

[acptulsa]

It'll build his name recognition, this will make it easier for the campaign in 2016. Hopefully they won't build his negatives too.

His positives are his negatives. It all depends on whether you value liberty or not.

Unless you're intimating that he's got shady dealings in his past...

[Southerner]

No, they don't scrutinize candidates equally. You know that. If they did, Obama would never have been President.

THAT!^

[July]

The grassroots fret over every move, because we don't know what he is going to do/say next. He's not like Ron, where he had a long record and his stances were fairly well known amongst supporters. It's both exciting and nerve-wracking.

[paulbot24]

Almost as nerve-wracking as watching the twits at CNBC interview Ron on fiscal/economic issues and get snippy when they have no idea what he is talking about and just cut him and say they've run out of time. They usually conclude with "Always a pleasure, Dr. Paul" which is hilarious when you consider how uncomfortable they always look when they say it.

[Occam's Banana]

The grassroots fret over every move, because we don't know what he is going to do/say next. He's not like Ron, where he had a long record and his stances were fairly well known amongst supporters. It's both exciting and nerve-wracking.

Au contraire - there was just as much fretting going on with respect to Ron as there is with Rand. Every time Ron lit the fuse on another truth bomb (during the debates, for example), there were plenty of people who were certain the sky was falling (even to the point, as I recall, that someone angrily suggested Ron should just shoot himself in the head and be done with it).

So there was a lot of "we don't know what he is going to do/say next" when it came to Ron.

If anything - and for better or worse - Rand is much less exciting and nerve-wracking than Ron ever was.

[July]

Au contraire - there was just as much fretting going on with respect to Ron as there is with Rand. Every time Ron lit the fuse on another truth bomb (during the debates, for example), there were plenty of people who were certain the sky was falling (even to the point, as I recall, that someone angrily suggested Ron should just shoot himself in the head and be done with it).

So there was a lot of "we don't know what he is going to do/say next" when it came to Ron.

If anything - and for better or worse - Rand is much less exciting and nerve-wracking than Ron ever was.

To be sure there was a lot of fretting over Ron, and especially over his campaigns. I just meant, Ron has had more years in congress, and he's had more votes, speeches, books, articles, etc, up to this point, so there's a sense of knowing Ron's positions better and what his style/rhetoric is like. Less so with Rand, and the question was why there seems to be even more scrutiny over him.

Beyond that, I think grassroots are just growing more and more skeptical of politicians in general, and for good reason. You get burned enough times and trust won't come easy.

[Matt Collins]

His positives are his negatives. It all depends on whether you value liberty or not.Huh? :confused: this makes no sense.


You do realize the liberty movement isn't big or strong enough to get him elected on his own, right? That means coalitions have to be built and he has to reach outside of the liberty movement if he is to get elected.

[devil21]

bump

Seems to me that Rand can't issue a single statement or take a single vote without it being nitpicked into oblivion.

[Bruehound]

If you agree with Rand on 95% of his issues then when you engage others in conversation, spend 95% of the time pointing out your agreements and why. Then you can spend 5% of your conversations talking about those areas of disagreement. Sound fair?

[Working Poor]

Because liberty is so tied to getting rid of the fed and the banks choke hold over our economy a liberty candidate will have a very difficult time getting past being called a racist you are politically speaking a racist because you want freedom. Until we can over come being classified as racist we will never win potus.

[Mr.NoSmile]

I honestly think it'd do Paul some good of McConnell came out and publicly supported him. Being vocal about Paul would throw a wrench in the idea that the Republicans, as splintered and divided as they are now, will all just unite behind Rubio because he's the candidate who can bring in minority votes.

At the same time, though, Paul would do himself some good if he managed to show how he could bring in those votes and appeal to them. Let's face it, he, Rubio and the other senators who voted no on the Violence Against Women Act are and still will be blasted for that, regardless of their reason.

[TheGrinch]

bump

Seems to me that Rand can't issue a single statement or take a single vote without it being nitpicked into oblivion.

There's no doubt we're all paying attention to what he says and does, but there have been plenty of polls here that have suggested that the Rand bashers are a vocal minority.

Most are at worst in the "wait and see" camp.

[acptulsa]

Huh? :confused: this makes no sense.

You do realize the liberty movement isn't big or strong enough to get him elected on his own, right? That means coalitions have to be built and he has to reach outside of the liberty movement if he is to get elected.

What doesn't make sense? If you don't value liberty, the fact that Obama's a Marxist is a positive. If you do, that fact is a negative. Right?

And is he reaching outside the liberty movement by compromising or is he reaching outside the liberty movement with his innovative marketing? The one is certainly 'building coalitions'; the other could arguably be more akin to 'recruitment'.

[jbauer]

No, they don't scrutinize candidates equally. You know that. If they did, Obama would never have been President.

Thats because Obama pretty much didn't exist until 2007.

[devil21]

seems like a good time for a bump

I doubt any politician is having his ass probed and words parsed as closely as Rand is.

[devil21]

bump

[Warlord]

Thats because Obama pretty much didn't exist until 2007.

That was a neat trick they played there. Obama the 'anti-war' candidate lol.