Nancy Mace: Republican Party Becoming the Party of Rand Paul and Ted Cruz

[FrankRep]

Nancy Mace: Republican Party Becoming the Party of Rand Paul and Ted Cruz (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLOgNY841Yo)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLOgNY841Yo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLOgNY841Yo


Republican Party is Becoming the Party of Rand Paul and Ted Cruz. People see Lindsey Graham as a Dinosaur and has a Neoconservative positions. People are tired of it.



Nancy Mace Will Seek Nomination for US Senate (Against Lindsey Graham)
http://nancymace.org/nancy-mace-first-female-graduate-of-the-citadel-small-business-woman-will-seek-gop-nomination-for-u-s-senate-in-s-c/

[AlexAmore]

If she wins, it will be HUUUUGE!

http://www.focusst.org/forum/attachments/focus-st-appearance/4664d1360562476-led-st-logo-projectors-interest-shut-up-take-my-money.jpg

[helenpaul]

she is getting my support.

[PSYOP]

She looks like she'd sell out in a heartbeat...

[FrankRep]

She looks like she'd sell out in a heartbeat...
Pretty ignorant comment.

[PSYOP]

Pretty ignorant comment.

Can't help myself when money controls 99% of Washington.

[thoughtomator]

She looks like she'd sell out in a heartbeat...

You never know for sure until they are tested. I've been surprised by a few in both directions.

[JK/SEA]

Can't help myself when money controls 99% of Washington.

so the answer is to re-elect Graham....mmmkay....anyone agree with this, raise your hand....

i see one...any others...?

[Anti-Neocon]

For those who prefer Bright over Mace, consider that Mace doesnt hold any position now and we can have Bright hold his State Senate position while Mace takes the US Senate seat. Having as many allies as possible in positions of power is always a good thing.

[FSP-Rebel]

I like her but she sounds like she still needs some polish as she clearly doesn't own the conversation like Rand or Ted does. I am, however, confident that she'd tow the liberty line.

[eleganz]

I like her but she sounds like she still needs some polish as she clearly doesn't own the conversation like Rand or Ted does. I am, however, confident that she'd tow the liberty line.

Cruz is a damn good speaker.

You're right, she does need some polishing though, nothing a few consultants and a few rounds of campaign stops won't fix.

[supermario21]

Cruz is a damn good speaker.

You're right, she does need some polishing though, nothing a few consultants and a few rounds of campaign stops won't fix.


This was an interview with Laura from March. She's given speeches more recently and gotten a lot more comfortable.

[Constitutional Paulicy]

It sure would be nice to see a strong minded female libertarian in our camp.

[twomp]

It sure would be nice to see a strong minded female libertarian in our camp.

And another Senator up there with Paul/Lee.

[PaleoPaul]

Yep. We need a libertarian woman in the Senate. We need to prove to the USA that a libertarian world isn't just a man's world.

[Peace&Freedom]

Mace's military academy graduate status gives her insulation from attack when she criticizes Graham's hawkishness. But does she? Her rhetoric stresses the small biz/small government domestic line, not the endless empire issues Graham is associated with. Will she collect enough money and Tea Party support to knock off the incumbent? Big question mark, and that's being generous.

Without an open seat situation, it's usually like swimming up a waterfall to knock off a statist. Perhaps we can get a Plan B going by also backing the mostly liberty Democrat (Conley) who got 42% against Graham in 2008 to run again. Conley's numbers are very impressive considering he raised only $23,000 to run.

[messana]

I hope she does well enough to warrant a debate with Graham.

I enjoy a good catfight.

[anaconda]

Based upon the OP Ingraham interview audio, Mace appears to be not ready for prime time. She made multiple gaffs, used poorly chosen words at times, and was unsure of facts. On the other hand, these do not preclude her from making perfect votes as a Senator.

And a genuine conservative female who was the first female to graduate from the Citadel could provide a lot of interesting contrast to Lindsey.

Does anyone know what she did in the military?

[FriedChicken]

Based upon the OP Ingraham interview audio, Mace appears to be not ready for prime time. She made multiple gaffs, used poorly chosen words at times, and was unsure of facts. On the other hand, these do not preclude her from making perfect votes as a Senator.

And a genuine conservative female who was the first female to graduate from the Citadel could provide a lot of interesting contrast to Lindsey.

Does anyone know what she did in the military?

Yeah I hear ya.
But I think she did alright. She sounded generous and gave him some compliments when Laura started it but then came back to his record. Could have blasted him harder I suppose but she did an ok job.
Like someone said, this was from March. Hopefully she has her talking points together a little better now.

[FrankRep]

It sure would be nice to see a strong minded female libertarian in our camp.

Nancy Mace is a Constitutionalist, not a libertarian.

[Anti-Neocon]

She looks like she'd sell out in a heartbeat...
How exactly does she look like she'd sell out in a heartbeat?

She sure didn't cave into pressure when she was the first woman to graduate a traditionally all male school. That gives good indication that she's strong willed. How about you? Would you have done the same in her situation?

[Quark]

Nancy Mace is a Constitutionalist, not a libertarian.

I'm not sure about Nancy Mace's position as a libertarian, but being a constitutionalist and being a libertarian are not mutually exclusive. Ron Paul calls himself a consitutionalist quite often, and there is no doubt in my mind about his adherence to libertarian principles of non-aggression and self-ownership.

[jkob]

Mace's military academy graduate status gives her insulation from attack when she criticizes Graham's hawkishness. But does she? Her rhetoric stresses the small biz/small government domestic line, not the endless empire issues Graham is associated with. Will she collect enough money and Tea Party support to knock off the incumbent? Big question mark, and that's being generous.

Without an open seat situation, it's usually like swimming up a waterfall to knock off a statist. Perhaps we can get a Plan B going by also backing the mostly liberty Democrat (Conley) who got 42% against Graham in 2008 to run again. Conley's numbers are very impressive considering he raised only $23,000 to run.


I can't see any way the Dems fall asleep at the wheel again in SC when it comes to nominating a senate candidate.

[Feeding the Abscess]

Yeah I hear ya.
But I think she did alright. She sounded generous and gave him some compliments when Laura started it but then came back to his record. Could have blasted him harder I suppose but she did an ok job.
Like someone said, this was from March. Hopefully she has her talking points together a little better now.

Her announcement speech was rough.

[FrankRep]

I'm not sure about Nancy Mace's position as a libertarian, but being a constitutionalist and being a libertarian are not mutually exclusive.

The term "libertarian" is way too broad and includes open borders, legalize all drugs, gay marriage, and anarchy. Nancy Mace doesn't support those things.

Nancy Mace is a Constitutionalist, not a libertarian.

[compromise]

She's not exactly a triple A candidate like Rand or Cruz, but Mike Lee isn't that great at speaking and he still did okay.

I still would have preferred Bright though.

[Quark]

The term "libertarian" is way too broad and includes open borders, legalize all drugs, gay marriage, and anarchy. Nancy Mace doesn't support those things.

Actually none of these things are requirements for libertarianism. They are some conclusions made from libertarianism (which is a moral philosophy.) http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/libertarianism/


Libertarianism, in the strict sense, is the moral view that agents initially fully own themselves and have certain moral powers to acquire property rights in external things.


Nancy Mace is a Constitutionalist, not a libertarian.

The point of my post was that you made the implication that they are mutually exclusive. I just wanted to express that they are not. One can be a constitutionalist and be a libertarian. It's likely that Nancy Mace isn't a libertarian, of course.

[FrankRep]

Actually none of these things are requirements for libertarianism. They are some conclusions made from libertarianism (which is a moral philosophy.) http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/libertarianism/

The point of my post was that you made the implication that they are mutually exclusive. I just wanted to express that they are not. One can be a constitutionalist and be a libertarian. It's likely that Nancy Mace isn't a libertarian, of course.

My point still stands that the "libertarian" term is way too broad.

[TaftFan]

She's not exactly a triple A candidate like Rand or Cruz, but Mike Lee isn't that great at speaking and he still did okay.

I still would have preferred Bright though.

Mike Lee is a great speaker, he just doesn't have much of a "personality".

[krugminator]

Mike Lee is a great speaker, he just doesn't have much of a "personality".


I agree. Mike Lee is not Rand or Cruz but he is very smart.

I am glad Nancy Mace is running. It sounds like she is great on the issues. It takes courage to throw her hat in the ring. To put it mildly, she really needs to step her game up. Listening to her interview and her kick off speech, I'm underwhelmed.

[Brett85]

The term "libertarian" is way too broad and includes open borders, legalize all drugs, gay marriage, and anarchy. Nancy Mace doesn't support those things.

I don't support any of those things except drug legalization. To me it just seems like drug legalization is the conservative position, since the war on drugs violates principles of fiscal conservatism, free markets, individual liberty, limited government, and everything else conservatives claim to believe in.

[Quark]

My point still stands that the "libertarian" term is way too broad.

No it is as broad as its definition allows it to be. Anybody who believes in self-ownership and the natural logical conclusions (which can include multiple conclusions) made from it is a libertarian. Anybody who doesn't, is not a libertarian. Seems simple enough.

[twomp]

Labels are stupid.

[FrankRep]

No it is as broad as its definition allows it to be. Anybody who believes in self-ownership and the natural logical conclusions (which can include multiple conclusions) made from it is a libertarian. Anybody who doesn't, is not a libertarian. Seems simple enough.
When an anarchist and a Constitutionalist can fit into the definition of a libertarian, the definition is too damn broad. I don't want to be grouped in with the anarchists, therefore, I reject the "libertarian" label and just stick with the term "Constitutionalist."

[PaleoPaul]

When an anarchist and a Constitutionalist can fit into the definition of a libertarian, the definition is too damn broad. I don't want to be grouped in with the anarchists, therefore, I reject the "libertarian" label and just stick with the term "Constitutionalist."
I don't like anarchists being grouped in with the libertarians, trust me. You get dope smokers like Adam Kokesh who try to hijack the brand, which is the reason why I DO call myself a libertarian. I don't want the brand destroyed. ;)

[outspoken]

Nancy Mace is a Constitutionalist, not a libertarian.

To quote Hillary, "What the hell does it matter?!?" I believe getting a female on board the liberty train who isn't nuts is as critical if not more so than getting Rand in the White House. yes, it's that important.

[Peace&Freedom]

I can't see any way the Dems fall asleep at the wheel again in SC when it comes to nominating a senate candidate.

The problem is if the Dems nominate a typical hack liberal, it will give Graham the usual right cover needed to coast to re-election. From the 2008 example, a seriously funded liberty opponent in the election could take that cover away, and win.

[CaptLouAlbano]

When an anarchist and a Constitutionalist can fit into the definition of a libertarian, the definition is too damn broad. I don't want to be grouped in with the anarchists, therefore, I reject the "libertarian" label and just stick with the term "Constitutionalist."

I like Constitutionalist, since I think it is the most accurate title, but have referred to myself as a libertarian-conservative and a libertarian-leaning Republican many times.

[Christian Liberty]

What are Nancy Mace's positions? I don't give a crap whether she's a good speaker. Are her positions more like that of Rand Paul, or more like Ted Cruz? That's what matters more to me.

[CaptLouAlbano]

What are Nancy Mace's positions? I don't give a crap whether she's a good speaker. Are her positions more like that of Rand Paul, or more like Ted Cruz? That's what matters more to me.

http://nancymace.net/

[Peace&Freedom]

When an anarchist and a Constitutionalist can fit into the definition of a libertarian, the definition is too damn broad. I don't want to be grouped in with the anarchists, therefore, I reject the "libertarian" label and just stick with the term "Constitutionalist."

So are you saying Ron Paul, a constitutionalist who embraces much of Rothbard's anarcho-capitialism, is too broadly characterized as a 'Libertarian?'

[FrankRep]

So are you saying Ron Paul, a constitutionalist who embraces much of Rothbard's anarcho-capitialism, is too broadly characterized as a 'Libertarian?'
I'm saying that Ron Paul is the "Champion of the Constitution."

[Christian Liberty]

Specifically on foreign policy. Social policy isn't nearly as important to me.

[Christian Liberty]

She looks pretty solid, but I'd need to look at the specifics with regards to foreign policy. I always have to take a second look when candidates talk about "Radical Islam." Sometimes, like in Rand Paul's case, they can nonetheless separate themselves from hardcore Israel first policy, in other cases they can't.

I'd need to hear her seriously talk about Iran before I'd know if she's truly a liberty candidate or not. Although obviously, like pretty much any Republican, she's better than Graham regardless.

[Brett85]

I doubt if Mace could get away with running as a pure non interventionist in a state like South Carolina. The most she could get away with would probably be to just support limited intervention like Rand does. I don't think she would have a chance to beat Graham running on the pure non interventionist foreign policy that Ron supported, unfortunately.

[FrankRep]

I doubt if Mace could get away with running as a pure non interventionist in a state like South Carolina. The most she could get away with would probably be to just support limited intervention like Rand does. I don't think she would have a chance to beat Graham running on the pure non interventionist foreign policy that Ron supported, unfortunately.
Her best strategy is to Stand With Rand. I agree.

[Bastiat's The Law]

Mace's military academy graduate status gives her insulation from attack when she criticizes Graham's hawkishness. But does she? Her rhetoric stresses the small biz/small government domestic line, not the endless empire issues Graham is associated with. Will she collect enough money and Tea Party support to knock off the incumbent? Big question mark, and that's being generous.

Without an open seat situation, it's usually like swimming up a waterfall to knock off a statist. Perhaps we can get a Plan B going by also backing the mostly liberty Democrat (Conley) who got 42% against Graham in 2008 to run again. Conley's numbers are very impressive considering he raised only $23,000 to run.

Conley is bagging groceries at Safeway. Time to turn the page.

[matt0611]

Sounds pretty good to me.

She has military credentials, seems strong willed, calls Graham out for being a "neo-con" and being too liberal.

I hope she kicks Lindsey's butt.

[alucard13mm]

Sad that having powerful friends + money will give you the definite edge to win elections.

[anaconda]

She's not exactly a triple A candidate like Rand or Cruz, but Mike Lee isn't that great at speaking and he still did okay.

Interesting. I think Mike is an uncommonly fine speaker in the traditional sense. To the average voter he might sound a bit dry and somewhat monotone, however. I can't think of many people that organize their thoughts as clearly and in such a germane fashion. He as great enunciation, knowledge, and a fine vocabulary.

[anaconda]

Nancy Mace is a Constitutionalist, not a libertarian.

Given the monstrous, collectivist tyranny we are embroiled in, a "Constitutionalist" will, by default, usually advocate for policy that moves this beast in a libertarian direction. So I think a lot of people use the two terms a bit interchangeably, if not with perfect distinction.

[FrankRep]

Given the monstrous, collectivist tyranny we are embroiled in, a "Constitutionalist" will, by default, advocate for policy that drives in a libertarian direction. "Do no harm" and "voluntarism" can be seen in most Constitutional positions. It seems even a constitutional position has a very rough time defending a war on drugs, for example.
If you haven't noticed, the Establishment and the Mass Media love to smear the small government, constitutionalists with the "libertarian" label to make them lose support and credibility in the political playing field and it works. Libertarians don't apparently "get this" yet.

On the "war on drugs" no politician wants to sacrifice their political career over such an unpopular idea with the end result being, "Hey kids, it's now legal to do drugs. Have fun!" No, we are facing bigger issues than smoking Marijuana.

[Brett85]

"Hey kids, it's now legal to do drugs. Have fun!" No, we are facing bigger issues than smoking Marijuana.

It wouldn't ever be legal for kids to smoke marijuana, even if marijuana prohibition were ended. It would just be legal for those over 21 to smoke it.

[FrankRep]

It wouldn't ever be legal for kids to smoke marijuana, even if marijuana prohibition were ended. It would just be legal for those over 21 to smoke it.
That sounds pretty anti-libertarian to me: Age Limits? Since when did libertarians support age limits for drugs, alcohol, and cigarettes?

[eleganz]

We just need to keep Lindsey under 50% and take this to a run off. I think the multi pronged attack of Cash, Bright, and Mace might work...

[TaftFan]

It wouldn't ever be legal for kids to smoke marijuana, even if marijuana prohibition were ended. It would just be legal for those over 21 to smoke it.

I would say 18, when you can vote and go in the military.

[Brett85]

That sounds pretty anti-libertarian to me: Age Limits? Since when did libertarians support age limits for drugs, alcohol, and cigarettes?

Ron Paul does. And obviously, that would be a much more libertarian position that complete marijuana prohibition, which is what you support.

[Brett85]

I would say 18, when you can vote and go in the military.

I wouldn't have a problem with that. I'm just saying that if marijuana were legal, the legal age would be 21, regardless of what you or I would want the age to be.

[FrankRep]

That sounds pretty anti-libertarian to me: Age Limits? Since when did libertarians support age limits for drugs, alcohol, and cigarettes?

Ron Paul does. And obviously, that would be a much more libertarian position that complete marijuana prohibition, which is what you support.

I don't support marijuana prohibition, but changing the law is very low on my priority list and no politician wants to touch it for good reason.

[Brett85]

I don't support marijuana prohibition, but changing the law is very low on my priority list and no politician wants to touch it for good reason.

It's important to me from a states' rights perspective. Repealing federal marijuana prohibition is a very important part of restoring the 10th amendment. The issue isn't entirely about marijuana itself.

[Peace&Freedom]

Conley is bagging groceries at Safeway. Time to turn the page.

On a particular candidate, perhaps, but the principle (or election dynamic) remains the same. In a seat held by a strong incumbent with millions to spend, your best bet is to wait for the seat to be vacated, then make a strong run at capturing a primary victory in the dominant party in that district/state. Second best is to 'Tea Party' the incumbent in their next primary, and IF you have the TP folks behind you like mad, perhaps steal a win there.

Mace has no chance against Graham under scenario one, and is a long shot, at best, at scenario two. What I continue to see are partisans for one major party failing to turn the page, when they find a good candidate issue/background wise who has no realistic shot, yet push them as if they do. That's repeating the same low-probability strategy that keeps losing elections. Yes, turn the page, by adopting a higher probability plan that circumvents the two-party paradigm that is locking out liberty candidates.

[CaptLouAlbano]

On a particular candidate, perhaps, but the principle (or election dynamic) remains the same. In a seat held by a strong incumbent with millions to spend, your best bet is to wait for the seat to be vacated, then make a strong run at capturing a primary victory in the dominant party in that district/state. Second best is to 'Tea Party' the incumbent in their next primary, and IF you have the TP folks behind you like mad, perhaps steal a win there.

Mace has no chance against Graham under scenario one, and is a long shot, at best, at scenario two. What I continue to see are partisans for one major party failing to turn the page, when they find a good candidate issue/background wise who has no realistic shot, yet push them as if they do. That's repeating the same low-probability strategy that keeps losing elections. Yes, turn the page, by adopting a higher probability plan that circumvents the two-party paradigm that is locking out liberty candidates.

It's a nice thought, but the SC US Senate seat will go GOP in the general. The best any Dem can do in the general is in the low 40's, in fact that's about the stock number the Dem opponent has gotten in the past 10+ years. The fight here is in the primary.

[Brian4Liberty]

I like her but she sounds like she still needs some polish as she clearly doesn't own the conversation like Rand or Ted does. I am, however, confident that she'd tow the liberty line.


Based upon the OP Ingraham interview audio, Mace appears to be not ready for prime time. She made multiple gaffs, used poorly chosen words at times, and was unsure of facts.
...

She just did an interview on Fox with Cavuto. It appeared as though she had memorized some statements, and it wasn't very smooth. She needs a lot of practice, especially at Q&A interviewing.


We just need to keep Lindsey under 50% and take this to a run off. I think the multi pronged attack of Cash, Bright, and Mace might work...

The run-off is the election. The Primary will just decide who is in the run-off against Graham.

[Feeding the Abscess]

She just did an interview on Fox with Cavuto. It appeared as though she had memorized some statements, and it wasn't very smooth. She needs a lot of practice, especially at Q&A interviewing.



The run-off is the election. The Primary will just decide who is in the run-off against Graham.

Anyone considering running for office should take at least a public speaking class.

[BamaFanNKy]

You guys are bent. I have been around Rand since the early 2000s. He is not that great of a speaker until he had practice. Anyone remember the Maddow debacle or how he says "The Interesting Thing Is...." at the beginning of every sentence including his sandwich order. I am not a fanboy of our Senators. I think all of them have weaknesses. Mace is a threat to the establishment because she's A) A Woman B) A Historical Figure C) Military bases covered D) Small Business owner E) Only 35.

[krugminator]

You guys are bent. I have been around Rand since the early 2000s. He is not that great of a speaker until he had practice. Anyone remember the Maddow debacle or how he says "The Interesting Thing Is...." at the beginning of every sentence including his sandwich order. I am not a fanboy of our Senators. I think all of them have weaknesses. Mace is a threat to the establishment because she's A) A Woman B) A Historical Figure C) Military bases covered D) Small Business owner E) Only 35.

Rand was a significantly (light years really) better speaker in 2007 than Mace is now.

Gary Johnson is a pretty average interview and speaker and he got elected. Mace is going to have improve a lot in a short period of time if she is going to have any chance against a popular, well funded Senator.

[BamaFanNKy]

Rand was a significantly (light years really) better speaker in 2007 than Mace is now.

Gary Johnson is a pretty average interview and speaker and he got elected. Mace is going to have improve a lot in a short period of time if she is going to have any chance against a popular, well funded Senator.

NO. No, he was not. Rand was not a better speaker. Ask his lone campaign staffer back then Chris. He needed so much work. Even with him being 10 years older than Mace is now in 2007. I am one of the original supporters of Rand and so many times I cringed at his botched delivery and the man has yet to learn how to deliver a joke.
That said, Rand spanked ass in 2010. Mace is a solid speaker and much better story teller.

[Pericles]

Based upon the OP Ingraham interview audio, Mace appears to be not ready for prime time. She made multiple gaffs, used poorly chosen words at times, and was unsure of facts. On the other hand, these do not preclude her from making perfect votes as a Senator.

And a genuine conservative female who was the first female to graduate from the Citadel could provide a lot of interesting contrast to Lindsey.

Does anyone know what she did in the military?

Agree with the first paragraph.

If I hear one more time "first woman to graduate from the Citadel" ....... some of us old dinosaurs find that off-putting. You can't go there for the quality of the experience while requiring the institution to fundamentally change, in order to accommodate your desires supported by the federal government that you want to downsize.

Couldn't have done much in the military - wasn't there long enough. which brings me backt to the previous paragraph. Being a Citadel grad is a big thing for the ambitious SC person. ......

[Bastiat's The Law]

On a particular candidate, perhaps, but the principle (or election dynamic) remains the same. In a seat held by a strong incumbent with millions to spend, your best bet is to wait for the seat to be vacated, then make a strong run at capturing a primary victory in the dominant party in that district/state. Second best is to 'Tea Party' the incumbent in their next primary, and IF you have the TP folks behind you like mad, perhaps steal a win there.

Mace has no chance against Graham under scenario one, and is a long shot, at best, at scenario two. What I continue to see are partisans for one major party failing to turn the page, when they find a good candidate issue/background wise who has no realistic shot, yet push them as if they do. That's repeating the same low-probability strategy that keeps losing elections. Yes, turn the page, by adopting a higher probability plan that circumvents the two-party paradigm that is locking out liberty candidates.

The liberty movement cannot exist in the DNC. Individual liberty is the antithesis of what the progressives fundamentally stand for.

[BamaFanNKy]

Agree with the first paragraph.

If I hear one more time "first woman to graduate from the Citadel" ....... some of us old dinosaurs find that off-putting. You can't go there for the quality of the experience while requiring the institution to fundamentally change, in order to accommodate your desires supported by the federal government that you want to downsize.

Couldn't have done much in the military - wasn't there long enough. which brings me backt to the previous paragraph. Being a Citadel grad is a big thing for the ambitious SC person. ......

Honestly, You obviously have done zero research into her. She was known to not ask for special treatment. Women at the time she was there were complaining and dropping out and she remained silent and blazed a trail: http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2002&dat=19970113&id=cqNUAAAAIBAJ&sjid=fjsNAAAAIBAJ&pg=3531,2528199

So, old dinosaurs like you are becoming fossils and dying off. Women vote now and these kind of "First Woman" stories get people elected and admired.

[Bastiat's The Law]

Mace will get better and tighten up her game as she becomes more experienced. This is another reason why I think she should've got in the game much earlier.

[Pericles]

Honestly, You obviously have done zero research into her. She was known to not ask for special treatment. Women at the time she was there were complaining and dropping out and she remained silent and blazed a trail: http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2002&dat=19970113&id=cqNUAAAAIBAJ&sjid=fjsNAAAAIBAJ&pg=3531,2528199

So, old dinosaurs like you are becoming fossils and dying off. Women vote now and these kind of "First Woman" stories get people elected and admired.

The officer ethic is one of selfless service - you accept the missions and tasks entrusted to your care, regardless of your personal preference. It is not a job of what's in it for me, at least until the days of "Be All you can be". Every Army branch (Armor, Infantry, QM, Intel, Finance, etc.) has a Major General as head of the branch - most of the branches in the Army are headed by women today - make of that what you will.

Us old dinosaurs were in the business of winning wars.

[Peace&Freedom]

The liberty movement cannot exist in the DNC. Individual liberty is the antithesis of what the progressives fundamentally stand for.

The liberty movement cannot exist in either the RNC or the DNC. Individual liberty is the antithesis of what the progressives fundamentally stand for, AND the antithesis of what pro-big business, big empire, big government conservatives fundamentally stand for. There is not a dime's worth of difference between the Democratic and Republican leadership. They are both on Team E (statist establishment) while pretending to be on teams D and R, both boxing out real alternatives.

The point is not to "exist" in either big government major party, but to leverage them to more easily get liberty candidates elected. Running against deeply well funded strong incumbents is not the way to get there. Yet the same mistake is being made over and over.

[anaconda]

NO. No, he was not. Rand was not a better speaker. Ask his lone campaign staffer back then Chris. He needed so much work. Even with him being 10 years older than Mace is now in 2007. I am one of the original supporters of Rand and so many times I cringed at his botched delivery and the man has yet to learn how to deliver a joke.
That said, Rand spanked ass in 2010. Mace is a solid speaker and much better story teller.

I thought Rand's speech at Faneuil Hall in 2007 was very good given the audience and purpose:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZYs4cNVKqs

[anaconda]

the man has yet to learn how to deliver a joke.

I thought Rand's material was funny here. And I liked his deadpan delivery. And the fact that he didn't get flustered by the jokes seemingly bombing with the unresponsive crowd was a win in itself. If you can tell a joke that bombs without becoming nervous or self conscious, you've already won most of the battle. Telling bad jokes can be an art in itself. Rand had the strength of character to let himself be part of the brunt of the joke.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfaqTXJWbQ0

[anaconda]

Mace is a solid speaker and much better story teller.

Good to hear. I hope she joins the Wacko Birds in the Senate.

[BamaFanNKy]

I thought Rand's material was funny here. And I liked his deadpan delivery. And the fact that he didn't get flustered by the jokes seemingly bombing with the unresponsive crowd was a win in itself. If you can tell a joke that bombs without becoming nervous or self conscious, you've already won most of the battle. Telling bad jokes can be an art in itself. Rand had the strength of character to let himself be part of the brunt of the joke.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfaqTXJWbQ0

That was his best effort and it still sucked. Remember, I am a Rand cheerleader but he's not funny. He can sneak a line in every once in a while. His best is when he can flip it on an interviewer and make a joke. Speech one liners are awful. I wish Doug Stanhope would work with him since he's at his best when cutting

That said, I won't confirm he was in the Noze Bros. but the stuff written in his time period was funny. If he had anything to do with it, he needs to go back to that style.

[Brett85]

On a particular candidate, perhaps, but the principle (or election dynamic) remains the same. In a seat held by a strong incumbent with millions to spend, your best bet is to wait for the seat to be vacated, then make a strong run at capturing a primary victory in the dominant party in that district/state. Second best is to 'Tea Party' the incumbent in their next primary, and IF you have the TP folks behind you like mad, perhaps steal a win there.

Mace has no chance against Graham under scenario one, and is a long shot, at best, at scenario two. What I continue to see are partisans for one major party failing to turn the page, when they find a good candidate issue/background wise who has no realistic shot, yet push them as if they do. That's repeating the same low-probability strategy that keeps losing elections. Yes, turn the page, by adopting a higher probability plan that circumvents the two-party paradigm that is locking out liberty candidates.

It seems to me like Nancy has a decent chance to win if the conservative outside groups run ads against Graham. Without the help of conservative outside groups she has no chance, but if the Club for Growth, Senate Conservatives Fund etc, spend a lot of money exposing Graham's big government record, that would make Graham's favorability ratings plummet, and could very likely force a runoff. If Nancy could make it to a runoff with Graham, all bets would be off.

[Brett85]

I'm not exactly sure why people are saying that Mace is such a bad speaker. I watched the speech she gave in front of the Republican Liberty Caucus, and I thought she did just fine.

[twomp]

I'm not exactly sure why people are saying that Mace is such a bad speaker. I watched the speech she gave in front of the Republican Liberty Caucus, and I thought she did just fine.

Because the people complaining are "political geniuses" who can obviously do better from the safety of their computer seat. I for one am sick of "polished" speakers. Every time I hear them speak, I feel like I have to check my wallet to see if it's still there.

[Rudeman]

What are Nancy Mace's positions? I don't give a crap whether she's a good speaker. Are her positions more like that of Rand Paul, or more like Ted Cruz? That's what matters more to me.

Either would be significantly better than Lindsey Graham. I know you don't like Ted Cruz but if I told you that you could replace Lindsey Graham with Ted Cruz would you take it? I sure as hell would. If the worst senator we had to deal with was Ted Cruz we'd be in great shape as a country.

[WhistlinDave]

I don't support marijuana prohibition, but changing the law is very low on my priority list and no politician wants to touch it for good reason.

Actually lots of politicians are "touching it." There are several threads here on RPF about the various bills that have been introduced in Congress recently dealing with Federal laws on marijuana, and each of these has several co-sponsors.

With about 50% of Americans now in favor of outright legalization, it won't be much longer before politicians will have to be in favor of legalizing cannabis if they want to keep their jobs. (Just my opinion...)