Chris Matthews: Rand Paul will be the Republican nominee in 2016

[jct74]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Wc__YNGcyE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Wc__YNGcyE

[torchbearer]

he is creating a false narrative to control the limits of his viewers thinking.

[PaleoPaul]

LOL, he talked about 1980! Guess he forgot what happened that year!

[cajuncocoa]

I wouldn't worry about Tweety. His viewers would rather stick pins in their eyes than vote for any Republican.

[Cleaner44]

Rand Paul will be the Republican nominee in 2016. Let there be no doubt about it.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g93mz_eZ5N4

[torchbearer]

Rand Paul will be the Republican nominee in 2016. Let there be no doubt about it.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g93mz_eZ5N4

um, fuk yeh.

[Sola_Fide]

Really gutsy pick there Chris...

[Carlybee]

Code for "Attack"!

[JCDenton0451]

His track record in predicting the Republican nominee is not particularly good.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/chris-matthews-real-time-michele-bachmann/

[torchbearer]

His track record in predicting the Republican nominee is not particularly good.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/chris-matthews-real-time-michele-bachmann/

trust him, this is what he does for a living.

[mad cow]

LOL, he talked about 1980! Guess he forgot what happened that year!

Heh,he kind of ignored the 8 Reagan years there,didn't he?
I think Rand Paul gives him a leg-thrill factor of -42.7.

[torchbearer]

Heh,he kind of ignored the 8 Reagan years there,didn't he?
I think Rand Paul gives him a leg-thrill factor of -42.7.

+1 for the -42.7 factor.
hope that neg gets bigger as time goes on.

[BuddyRey]

LOL! I love how he oh-so-conveniently ignored the many, many times when moderate, wishy-washy Republicans got trounced in the general election too. Thomas E. Dewey, Bob Dole, MITT ROMNEY, anyone?

[eleganz]

trust him, this is what he does for a living.


lmao...!

[mad cow]

LOL! I love how he oh-so-conveniently ignored the many, many times when moderate, wishy-washy Republicans got trounced in the general election too. Thomas E. Dewey, Bob Dole, MITT ROMNEY, anyone?

Heh,he didn't bring up John McCain either.And LBJ was a moderate?Watta joke!

[anaconda]

LOL, he talked about 1980! Guess he forgot what happened that year!

To be fair, he suggests that the base "moving from the center" is why Obama received the nomination over Hillary in 2008.

[anaconda]

I'm getting nervous about these main stream media talking points as of late (O'Reilly's poll front and center with Rand's popularity, etc.). I think the establishment may be setting Rand up, perhaps with the intention of pulling the plug on the economy.

[fr33]

"the hard right"

We hard, yo.

[anaconda]

Code for "Attack"!

Could backfire by motivating more in the GOP base to coalesce behind Rand.

[torchbearer]

"the hard right"

We hard, yo.

no limit soldiers.

[liveandletlive]

Chrissy is ready for war. This guy is gonna pull out all the stops to defame Rand.

[anaconda]

"the hard right"

We hard, yo.

World peace, civil liberties, and sound money are now "hard right." Not "conservative," mind you. But "hard right."

[KingNothing]

Could backfire by motivating more in the GOP base to coalesce behind Rand.

This isn't code. It isn't something that will backfire. There is no nefarious, global, plot to keep Rand down. These people are idiots who do nothing more than report which way the wind blows. Right now, the wind is blowing in our direction and the media sees it. We should embrace it. And air of inevitability is why Romney won the nomination. It certainly can't hurt us if this became a narrative with Rand.

[KingNothing]

World peace, civil liberties, and sound money are now "hard right." Not "conservative," mind you. But "hard right."

No one else in either major party really supports policies in line with the goals you described above. In some respects, we ARE hard right. In others, we are hard left. In matters of principle, we leave little room for nuance.

[anaconda]

No one else in either major party really supports policies in line with the goals you described above. In some respects, we ARE hard right. In others, we are hard left. In matters of principle, we leave little room for nuance.

Good points. May I add that, based upon what you say, Rand could actually be viewed, by some, as a "centrist" candidate because he brings policies that cross traditional party lines?

[torchbearer]

World peace, civil liberties, and sound money are now "hard right." Not "conservative," mind you. But "hard right."

EXTREME!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[JCDenton0451]

Outside the mainstream.

[torchbearer]

Outside the mainstream.

fringe

[T.hill]

Heh,he didn't bring up John McCain either.And LB
J was a moderate?Watta joke!

What's prob more difficult is naming the moderate republicans who won the presidency.

I really don't count W in 2000 because he didn't campaign as a moderate. So your left with what Nixon. Bush 2004, and maybe bush the 1st?

[mad cow]

Definitely,Bush #1.I'll give him that one.

[T.hill]

Heh,he didn't bring up John McCain eit
her.And LBJ was a moderate?Watta joke!


What's prob more difficult is naming the moderate republicans who won the presidency.

I really don't count W in 2000 because he didn't campaign as a moderate. So your left with what Nixon. Bush 2004, and maybe bush the 1st?

And Nixon probably won more due to his time as vp during the very popular Eisenhower administration than anything.

Nixon was more of a be anything you want candidate than a moderate anyways.

[CaptLouAlbano]

The only people that pay attention to Matthews are the hard left. They DO NOT want Rand to win the nomination and will do everything in their power to make sure it does not happen. They want Christie. Why? Because Christie is a progressive and if the GOP nominee wins the general (which is basically a 50/50 shot given that a handful of states tip it one way or another), they won't move backwards with their agenda. Rand on the other hand, will begin to undo all that they have accomplished over the last 100 years. Rand winning the nomination is their worst nightmare, so Matthews is sending out signals to his followers to go at Rand hard. Racist, isolationist, extremist - you'll hear this a lot.

[Rudeman]

And Nixon probably won more due to his time as vp during the very popular Eisenhower administration than anything.

Nixon was more of a be anything you want candidate than a moderate anyways.

You could also say Bush #1 got carried by the Reagan coattails.

[trey4sports]

this is good for Rand. He is assuming the role of favorite. Last time around I'd have killed for Ron to even be considered in the top-tier. Even thought Chris is painting Rand in a negative light the fact that he is already being called THE front-runner is great news.

[thoughtomator]

Rand will be the nominee. Everyone who hasn't figured that out is waiting to have it figured out for them.

[ronaldo23]

The only people that pay attention to Matthews are the hard left. They DO NOT want Rand to win the nomination and will do everything in their power to make sure it does not happen. They want Christie. Why? Because Christie is a progressive and if the GOP nominee wins the general (which is basically a 50/50 shot given that a handful of states tip it one way or another), they won't move backwards with their agenda. Rand on the other hand, will begin to undo all that they have accomplished over the last 100 years. Rand winning the nomination is their worst nightmare, so Matthews is sending out signals to his followers to go at Rand hard. Racist, isolationist, extremist - you'll hear this a lot.

I agree, but I think they want Rand to lose for different reasons. They know that Rand holds the positions on many issues that true progressives "should hold", ie on civil liberties, non-intervention foreign policy, the drug war, defense of the 4th amendment. This scares them to death that a Republican would actually run a national election with this platform over a democrat like Hilary who is actually closer to Bush/Obama neoconservatism on most issues.

That's the real reason for such vitriol towards Rand, because his core platform is on the right side of many of their causes.

[J_White]

I'm getting nervous about these main stream media talking points as of late (O'Reilly's poll front and center with Rand's popularity, etc.). I think the establishment may be setting Rand up, perhaps with the intention of pulling the plug on the economy.

exactly my thoughts.
if they think they can't stop him, they would do some nasty things and blame those "freedom loving isolationist" Libertarians !

[Bastiat's The Law]

The only people that pay attention to Matthews are the hard left. They DO NOT want Rand to win the nomination and will do everything in their power to make sure it does not happen. They want Christie. Why? Because Christie is a progressive and if the GOP nominee wins the general (which is basically a 50/50 shot given that a handful of states tip it one way or another), they won't move backwards with their agenda. Rand on the other hand, will begin to undo all that they have accomplished over the last 100 years. Rand winning the nomination is their worst nightmare, so Matthews is sending out signals to his followers to go at Rand hard. Racist, isolationist, extremist - you'll hear this a lot.
This is spot on assessment. That was Matthews telling progressives to man their battle stations.

[Bastiat's The Law]

I agree, but I think they want Rand to lose for different reasons. They know that Rand holds the positions on many issues that true progressives "should hold", ie on civil liberties, non-intervention foreign policy, the drug war, defense of the 4th amendment. This scares them to death that a Republican would actually run a national election with this platform over a democrat like Hilary who is actually closer to Bush/Obama neoconservatism on most issues.

That's the real reason for such vitriol towards Rand, because his core platform is on the right side of many of their causes.

It would tantamount to a polar shift. Rand's election could fundamentally change this country and those type of scenarios rarely happen ever, especially far-reaching change which embraces liberty and has the potential to educate tens, if not, hundreds of millions of people on the virtues of it. Rand Paul might be the most transformative figure of the 21st century. Bank on it.

[anaconda]

No one else in either major party really supports policies in line with the goals you described above. In some respects, we ARE hard right. In others, we are hard left. In matters of principle, we leave little room for nuance.

The following link is to a good comment at the Daily Paul. It makes sense to realize Rand is positioned more vertically upward in the political identity spectrum chart. This person identifies Rand as "Upper Center" in the political spectrum.

http://www.dailypaul.com/comment/3161666

http://explorersfoundation.org/images/nolan_chart.png

[CaptLouAlbano]

I agree, but I think they want Rand to lose for different reasons. They know that Rand holds the positions on many issues that true progressives "should hold", ie on civil liberties, non-intervention foreign policy, the drug war, defense of the 4th amendment. This scares them to death that a Republican would actually run a national election with this platform over a democrat like Hilary who is actually closer to Bush/Obama neoconservatism on most issues.

That's the real reason for such vitriol towards Rand, because his core platform is on the right side of many of their causes.

Not to argue with you, but progressives are on the wrong side of all those issues that you mentioned and always were. There may be a few Democrats who depart from the progressive ideology on those issues from time to time (eg. Wyden on civil liberties), but by definition progressives do not take a libertarian position on any issue. In fact, interventionist FP is known as Wilsonian FP, Wilson was a progressive Democrat.

[radiofriendly]

Ball so hard record labels wanna sign me
Life is a race and everybody's behind me


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tQvHbxRoMg

[Todd]

he is creating a false narrative to control the limits of his viewers thinking.




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRPr_Lf5NKI

[Dary]

So Rand is hard right now. Hmmm.... I wonder what that makes me.:confused::rolleyes:

[KEEF]

So Rand is hard right now. Hmmm.... I wonder what that makes me.:confused::rolleyes:
So extreme that you are totally off the spectrum;)

[neoreactionary]

So Rand is hard right now. Hmmm.... I wonder what that makes me.:confused::rolleyes:

http://i1.sndcdn.com/artworks-000046174818-iyon9r-original.jpg?5ffe3cd

[AuH20]

Hard right is the accurate term. Conservatives and libertarians are fellow travelers, with the libertarians wanting to go abit further than their conservative brethren.

[georgiaboy]

I agree with OP title. :)

[eleganz]

The only people that pay attention to Matthews are the hard left. They DO NOT want Rand to win the nomination and will do everything in their power to make sure it does not happen. They want Christie. Why? Because Christie is a progressive and if the GOP nominee wins the general (which is basically a 50/50 shot given that a handful of states tip it one way or another), they won't move backwards with their agenda. Rand on the other hand, will begin to undo all that they have accomplished over the last 100 years. Rand winning the nomination is their worst nightmare, so Matthews is sending out signals to his followers to go at Rand hard. Racist, isolationist, extremist - you'll hear this a lot.

I disagree.

Leftists are purely retarded, many of them actually want Rand to win because they truly believe that his libertarian and racist "misgivings" will default the win to the democratic nominee.

[neoreactionary]

So Rand is hard right now. Hmmm.... I wonder what that makes me.:confused::rolleyes:

http://wherewhywhen.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/stronger-erection.png

[WD-NY]

This comment on the HotAir post is a bullseye imo:

http://hotair.com/archives/2013/08/08/chris-matthews-take-my-word-for-it-rand-paul-will-be-the-gop-nominee-in-2016/


"I’m surprised he named Paul rather than Ted Cruz as the ideologue whose moment in the sun he thinks is coming, just because Cruz seems to loom larger in Matthews’s imagination as the embodiment of all that’s foul about the tea party. If you’re looking to accuse your opponents of embracing an extremist ogre in their choice of nominee, why not name a guy whom you’ve called a “terrorist” instead of Rand Paul?"That’s not Matthews. I watched the guy from his CNBC days. This was old-school Hardball, not current prog delusionals.

This wasn’t a takedown of the “far right” via electing Rand. Matthews is looking at how Rand leveraged Christie and how Maher backed Rand.

That’s about a half-dozen times Paul has done that in a year. Paul understands how to approach issues while keeping your core issues and arguments intact.

Matthews knows that is going to appeal to wide swath of people and Christie does not have the cache to get the base to hear him out. Like Rubio, it’s not what they did, it’s how they went about it.

The keys point is the opening.
“I believe the Republican party is going to go hard-right in 2016. It’s going to someone from the growing hard-right wing of the party, something it hasn’t done since 1980″.


That’s not a slam at the right, it’s a warning from Matthews to the Dems. He’s saying if this guy can clip Obama’s real veep, Christie, then Hillary’s a clay pigeon.
Matthews should know. He was with Carter.

[CaptLouAlbano]

I disagree.

Leftists are purely retarded, many of them actually want Rand to win because they truly believe that his libertarian and racist "misgivings" will default the win to the democratic nominee.

If that is the case, then the left will go soft on Rand in the primary. I don't foresee that occurring.

[anaconda]

Hard right is the accurate term.

How about "top right center?"

http://explorersfoundation.org/images/nolan_chart.png

[satchelmcqueen]

well at least there is 1 major guy with some pull that says rand IS electable by calling it for him. this cant hurt i dont think.

[philipped]

How does anyone see this as a bad thing? It only shows that the Liberty movement is bubbling like NOTHING Before and people are putting their money on Rand. LETSGETIT.