[Video] Rand Paul: Government Shutdown Strategy Was a ‘Dumb Idea’

[FrankRep]

Rand Paul: Government Shutdown Strategy Was a ‘Dumb Idea’ (http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/364279/rand-paul-government-shutdown-strategy-was-dumb-idea-nro-staff)


National Review
November 18, 2013



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=deyyK4M_-mk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=deyyK4M_-mk


Sen. Rand Paul (R., Ky.) called the government shutdown strategy to prevent raising the debt ceiling a dumb idea Monday night.

“Shutting down the government was a dumb idea,” Paul said on Special Report. “Even though it did appear as if I was participating in it, I said it was a dumb idea.”

Paul justified his vote against raising the debt ceiling because what he termed a “conundrum.”

“Unconditionally raising the debt ceiling, nobody at home wants me to vote for that, and I can’t vote for that. But the conundrum is, if I don’t, we do approach these deadlines,” Paul said.

Paul predicted that Democrats would resist putting conditions on raising the debt ceiling, but did tell: this Charles Krauthammer that if the Senate was tied and he was the deciding vote, he would vote against raising the debt ceiling unconditionally because it was “what everybody in Kentucky wants.”

[WD-NY]

Uh... can someone help me understand why Rand 1.) attempted to distance himself from Lee, Cruz and the shut-down strategy and 2.) insulted shut down supporters by describing the strategy as "DUMB" (which is the most offensive of all 'alinsky' tactics used against tea party/conservative republicans by RHINOs, Establishment and Liberal Elites).

Seriously, what the heck was Rand thinking with this response?

:confused:

[dinosaur]

Uh... can someone help me understand why

He navigated a lot of tricky questions very well in this interview. This is the one gotcha moment I guess.

[Rudeman]

Uh... can someone help me understand why Rand 1.) attempted to distance himself from Lee, Cruz and the shut-down strategy and 2.) insulted shut down supporters by describing the strategy as "DUMB" (which is the most offensive of all 'alinsky' tactics used against tea party/conservative republicans by RHINOs, Establishment and Liberal Elites).

Seriously, what the heck was Rand thinking with this response?

:confused:

Well lets see, he said it was dumb during the shutdown, and Ted Cruz agreed that it was dumb. Of course both blame the Dems/Obama for the shutdown.

Find me one quote or clip where Cruz or Lee said they were happy there was a shutdown or that they wanted a shutdown.

[jtstellar]

that phrase cuts both ways..

if it is dumb idea for republicans then it means it's equally dumb if democrats want to shut down the government over their own agenda.. he's done this turn around jab many times on mass media who would like to frame the shutdown all on gop's fault.

[familydog]

Why was it dumb? The federal workers got their paid vacation and Obamacare has totally reversed any negative polling for Republicans as a result of the shutdown. We don't know, it could turn out a great move. Obama screamed that Obamacare is the law and shouldn't be changed, therefore the shutdown is just politics. Now, Obama and the Democrats want to change the law. Talk about a great campaign strategy for Republicans.

[Brian4Liberty]

Rand didn't need to use the word "dumb". The point was easy to make without that. Getting too cozy on that show is dangerous.

[SilentBull]

Uh... can someone help me understand why Rand 1.) attempted to distance himself from Lee, Cruz and the shut-down strategy and 2.) insulted shut down supporters by describing the strategy as "DUMB" (which is the most offensive of all 'alinsky' tactics used against tea party/conservative republicans by RHINOs, Establishment and Liberal Elites).

Seriously, what the heck was Rand thinking with this response?

:confused:

Umm. Maybe it's because the shut down was very very unpopular with Americans and he is going to be running to be their president?

[WD-NY]

61 comments. Almost all negative. **see quotes below for examples**

A massive unforced error imo.

He seriously couldn't have been more insulting to grassroots conservatives & tea partiers who totally reject the RHINO/MSM FUD (spin) that offering to fund everything except Obamacare = wanting to shut down the govn't and hurt the economy/their party/etc. To them, it was Obama and the DEM's *refusal* to negotiate on any aspect of Obamacare that caused the shutdown. They weren't being "extreme"... Obama & the DEMs were! They didn't want a govn't shutdown... the DEMS and RHINOs did.

Right or wrong, this is how they see things... so again, there were a dozen ways for Rand to respond to that question, but calling the strategy "dumb" is something only the most hated RHINOs would say (e.g. McCain, Graham, etc.)

What bugs/concerns me most though is that this wasn't the first time Rand has openly undercut Cruz & Lee (and by extension, everyone who supported their strategy) when asked about the shut down.

As I've written before, it's perfectly understandable for Rand to be bothered/irked a bit by the attention/interest being showered on Cruz & Lee as a result of what in many ways was a selfish/self-serving stunt (insomuch that while the filibuster/shutdown benefited Cruz/Lee, it hurt the GOP). What's not understandable (or politically advantageous) is allowing such feelings/insecurities to color his talking points and responses to questions from reporters.

If Rand wants to win in 2016, his responses to questions about the shutdown, Cruz, Christie and/or anyone/anything else who rubs him the wrong way need to be derived from the same sharp headspace as his responses to issues that don't rub him the wrong way (e.g. drones, war, civil liberties, privacy, drugs, etc.).

Easier said than done of course, but if he honestly wants to win (and I believe that he does), he should working hard on this and other areas where room for improvement exists (e.g. to improve his executive abilities, he should be working with a "CEO Coach"...just like a lot of new, inexperienced CEOs of major companies do (http://libertybusiness.wordpress.com/2012/05/31/mark-zuckerberg-likes-coaching-6/)).



There are about a dozen good ways to talk about the Obama government shutdown. Ceding that the shutdown was a bad "Republican idea" is about the worst way possible.


I didn't realize there was a "government shutdown strategy." I thought the government shut down because the President and Congressional Democrats refused to negotiate on the CR bill.


Rand seems to be getting lost in his ambition to run for president. He's coming off as unprincipled and all over the map. Ted Cruz seems to be the one who has it all together principally.


The gov't shutdown was a good idea - to show the GOP is fully and consistently against Obamacare ... especially now that Obamacare is crashing an burning. Let's focus our arguments against Democrats and Obamacare. Does no one care about Reagan's 11th Commandment anymore?


shutting down the gov't was a great idea ... it showed no catastrophies happen when gov't is downsized ... it showed the petty spitefulness that progressives like Pres. obama will stoop to .... it showed that ideology is more important to career politicians than what their constituents want .... if Rand Paul truely thinks it was a dumb idea,then maybe millions of americans need to reconsider his value to the future of the republic


This seems to be a recurring problem with Paul. He straddles the line between the establishment, and being an independent leader that stands for what is right and just. He even is borrowing a page from Barry's playbook by being a part of the 'dumb strategy' to defund Obamacare. What a ridiculous thing to say!


Well it wasn't the Republican's that shut down the Government, it was Obama and the Democrats. Seems to me the Republican's funded everything BUT Obama care, and the president REFUSED to negotiate. We have to stop believing the media spin. And now as it turns out, Sen. Cruz was correct at trying to unfund Obama Care, it's a disaster, there's even Democrats that are agreeing with him, after the disaster of the Roll Out.


I don't call him (Rand) a Rino, because he's not. But what I do say about Rand Paul whom I like, that it does show a flaw in his character. He would like to put an end to the competition of Ted Cruz and wiggle his way out. Not a good sign.

Update - ugh. :o


OutsideTheBeltway - Rand Paul: Government Shutdown I Was Totally Behind With My Floor Votes Was a 'Dumb' Idea (http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/rand-paul-government-shutdown-i-was-totally-behind-with-my-floor-votes-was-a-dumb-idea/)
DailyCaller - Rand Paul: Shutdown was ‘dumb idea,’ even though it did appear as if I was participating in it (http://dailycaller.com/2013/11/19/rand-paul-shutdown-was-dumb-idea-even-though-it-did-appear-as-if-i-was-participating-in-it)
RedState - Rand Paul on Shutdown (http://www.redstate.com/joesquire/2013/11/19/rand-paul-on-the-government-shutdown/)
WashingtonPost - Rand Paul: Shutdown was ‘dumb idea,’ but I’d vote the same way again (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/11/19/rand-paul-shutdown-was-dumb-idea-but-id-vote-the-same-way-again/)

402785110430584832
402855760537059328

[dinosaur]

It had nothing to do with feelings, or insecurities, or even Ted Cruz, WD-NY. The use of the word dumb was a mistake, but Rand said it was a bad idea from the start and he was right.

[acptulsa]

Why was it dumb? The federal workers got their paid vacation and Obamacare has totally reversed any negative polling for Republicans as a result of the shutdown. We don't know, it could turn out a great move. Obama screamed that Obamacare is the law and shouldn't be changed, therefore the shutdown is just politics. Now, Obama and the Democrats want to change the law. Talk about a great campaign strategy for Republicans.

I guess he was talking about a different shutdown, because the government was back up and running by the time the debt ceiling came back up for a vote in October. That shutdown was over Obamacare, and I personally think it might have been the best idea ever.

After all, the liberals and the media are much like the Soviets--they will revise history to make themselves look good every chance they get. If we say libertarian Republicans were against Obamacare, they might deny it. But if we say libertarian Republicans were so determined to fight Obamacare that they shut down the government over it, they can't deny it because that will jog people's memories.

[EBounding]

"Bad strategy" would have been a much better way of putting it. Oh well...

[serenityrick]

Ugh.

I love Rand Paul. I really do... And you don't necessarily have to agree with Lee and Cruz's actions but to call it dumb is.. ridiculous. And as one of the comments above said; Paul lately is coming off really unprincipled. He seems to be playing the Washington "game" more than standing up for what's right.

I know a LOT of people here don't like Cruz.. but I fucking love that a politician for ONCE actually stood up and did the right thing and now, especially in the wake of this absolute cluster-fuck of Obamacare, looked to be one of the only ones trying to stop this from happening to the Country. The only other time I can say that is Rand himself with the Drones and basic civil liberties.

It's especially odd that Rand would say this after supporting Cruz in his 'filibuster'.. he was right there helping take the load of his shoulders by taking some of the floor time and voicing his concerns as well.. To call the strategy "dumb" in a clear effort to try and peel away some independents or democrats may cost him.

I'm still a supporter of Rand, don't get me wrong... but I am really not comfortable with how he's playing this. Too many times "principled" constitutionalists got to Washington and decided to 'play the game' and ended up... well.. just like Mitch McConnel and John McCain. I don't think Rand will turn out the same way but it does irk me.

Just stand on your principles, Rand. You can try and play the political game in other ways (like writing articles for Breitbart and going on every talkshow you can), but comments like the ones in the video are slightly disturbing. But maybe it's just me.

[Brett85]

Well, this is basically like saying the sky is blue. It was a dumb idea. The Republicans didn't get a single concession from the White House throughout the time the government was shut down. Not one. So of course it was a dumb idea in light of the fact that it failed, that they didn't get President Obama to give an inch. On the other hand, I do agree with those who said that he shouldn't have used the word "dumb" and should've said that it was a "bad idea," or a "bad strategy," or something like that.

[WD-NY]

Ugh.

I love Rand Paul. I really do... And you don't necessarily have to agree with Lee and Cruz's actions but to call it dumb is.. ridiculous. And as one of the comments above said; Paul lately is coming off really unprincipled. He seems to be playing the Washington "game" more than standing up for what's right.

I know a LOT of people here don't like Cruz.. but I fucking love that a politician for ONCE actually stood up and did the right thing and now, especially in the wake of this absolute cluster-fuck of Obamacare, looked to be one of the only ones trying to stop this from happening to the Country. The only other time I can say that is Rand himself with the Drones and basic civil liberties.

It's especially odd that Rand would say this after supporting Cruz in his 'filibuster'.. he was right there helping take the load of his shoulders by taking some of the floor time and voicing his concerns as well.. To call the strategy "dumb" in a clear effort to try and peel away some independents or democrats may cost him.

I'm still a supporter of Rand, don't get me wrong... but I am really not comfortable with how he's playing this. Too many times "principled" constitutionalists got to Washington and decided to 'play the game' and ended up... well.. just like Mitch McConnell and John McCain. I don't think Rand will turn out the same way but it does irk me.

Just stand on your principles, Rand. You can try and play the political game in other ways (like writing articles for Breitbart and going on every talkshow you can), but comments like the ones in the video are slightly disturbing. But maybe it's just me.

Well said and I agree on the main -

Where I would differ though is with the notion that this and other recent totally out-of-character gaffes comments from Rand are the result of some "strategic" yet "unprincipled" strategy (where unprincipled = purposely or knowingly trying to play the game and/or make nice with establishment & RHINO republicans in hopes of winning them over).

On the contrary, I honestly think these petty, small-ball, self-focused, shortsighted, disloyal and uncharitable statements (towards Cruz, Lee & the mass of conservatives who supported their strategy/effort) come from Rand feeling both vexed and a bit insecure over the rise of Cruz and the manner in which he rose (which was via a divisive, in some ways dishonest, and politically self-serving filibuster) and how his rise has the potential to spoil his ability to be the GOP nominee in 2016 (because, again, Rand needs Cruz/tea-party to beat the Establishment candidate... and while Cruz can't win period, he can spoil for Rand if he sells out to Establishment).

That's why Rand needs to quit throwing Cruz & Lee's effort under the bus and start making more supportive and/or less negative comments.

That said, even if my reasoning is closer to the truth of why Rand keeps making these comments, yours is the one that *all* on-the-fence voters will (rightfully) take (not only because the press will never spin away dumb-headed/weak-sounding statements by Rand like they do for Obama and will for Clinton, but also because they're still undecided and so open to another candidate who defends his positions without insulting their intelligence or questioning their motives... like Rick Perry did with his "I don't think you have a heart" response when challenged on providing free tuition to illegal immigrants (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCXC-Vb7z1U)).

Which is why I wrote earlier that i hope that TEAM Rand are actively bringing in serious professionals to work with him (and key members of his staff!) on areas like this where there's still a lot of room for improvement.

Last but not least, I know chalking up these gaffes to Rand's 'inner voice' overriding his 'Frank Luntz Focus Group Voice (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aKQlaeFdIQ)' is giving him a massive, obamabot-level, pass benefit of the doubt (since neither I nor anyone has any idea what Rand is thinking and/or feeling about the people and issues he's asked to comment on), but I will say that writing this out helped me to remember that:

Rand = HUMAN
It isn't fair (or remotely realistic) to expect him to be in-the-zone, on-message and emotionally unbothered/unfazed every single day given the stakes and level of the game he's playing (re: POTUS) and ruthlessness of the opposition set against him.

But again, if you take Rand's comments on their face (rather than chalk them up to Rand wearing his emotions/insecurities on his sleeve), then reactions like this are both perfectly fair and logically sound (via http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/364279/rand-paul-government-shutdown-strategy-was-dumb-idea-nro-staff#comments)

Rand reminds me so much of his dad, he has some great ideas but he is his own worst enemy. If I remember correctly, it was Harry Reid who was responsible for shutting down the Government. If Ted Cruz would have had the support of his party when he needed it, maybe, just maybe, we wouldn't be in the mess we are in today. It is sad and pathetic how they called him wacko and a terrorist then for saying what he was saying and now they are saying the same exact things he was saying, but you don't hear any of them saying he was right or apologizing, they just regurgitate his warnings as their own ideas now. People like Ted Cruz are the future of DC, the voters see what he did and we will send more to DC like him. The old days of GOP politics are coming to an end.

[Brett85]

Shutting down the government to defund Obamacare appealed to about 15-20% of the electorate according to the polls. Rand is smart enough to realize that you can't win a general election with only that small percentage of people, and probably couldn't even win the GOP primary with only those people.

[serenityrick]

Shutting down the government to defund Obamacare appealed to about 15-20% of the electorate according to the polls. Rand is smart enough to realize that you can't win a general election with only that small percentage of people, and probably couldn't even win the GOP primary with only those people.

To take that position means you're agreeing with the progressives that said it was Ted Cruz and Mike Lee who shut down the government though..

With that said, I understand what you're saying.. the truth in this case (or many cases) doesn't matter since the narrative in the media will always be that of a progressive one.. and all it takes is for uninformed voters to hear over and over and over again that it was Cruz who shut down the government despite the fact that the only way the government shuts down is if Harry Reid doesn't bring the House bill to a vote.. or for Obama to agree with it.

But whatever, that's in the past.. and frankly, I think most people have forgotten about the shutdown already.

I just vehemently disagree with the notion that just because something is hard or nigh impossible, that it shouldn't be done. There was no way, given the current political climate, that Cruz was going to win. And there's no way to discern whether or not he was being self-serving (I personally thought he was being completely genuine).. but again, I'm glad someone in Washington stood on principle. Whether it was for selfish purposes or not.. it was REALLY refreshing to see. I actually felt like I had a voice speaking for me in Washington for once (well, twice.. again, Rand is the only other politician I can say that about)

With that said, having two genuine small government politicians running in 2016 in Rand and Cruz is going to be problematic because their biggest enemy, other then both of them stealing voters from eachother, will be the GOP, and NOT the DNC. Karl Rove is going to be pumping MILLIONS into stopping Rand (and Cruz if he runs).. the GOP will do everything they can to make sure Bush or Christie (and perhaps even Rubio) is the nominee.

The BEST case scenario is Cruz sitting it out and giving Paul 100% of his support. If that were to happen, I would bet money on Rand Paul winning in 2016. If they both run then it's a total crap shoot.
Rand has the best chance though.. if he can emulate that focus group video he'll grab nearly all the independents I think, some democrats, probably a record turnout of Republican voters, ALL of the tea party and nearly all of the libertarian/3rd party voters. I think it would be a massive landslide. The hardest part will be the primary though and not the general election.

Sorry, kind of rambled on there

[WD-NY]

Shutting down the government to defund Obamacare appealed to about 15-20% of the electorate according to the polls. Rand is smart enough to realize that you can't win a general election with only that small percentage of people, and probably couldn't even win the GOP primary with only those people.

Correct, you can't win the general or the GOP primary with only the tea party 15-20% (which is why Cruz is in the weaker position vs Rand... because it's far easier for Rand to win the support of that 15-20% because most have him as their #2 pick for president). But you also can't win the general or the GOP primary without them (because w/o them, Christie wins the GOP primary, but loses the general).

At present, Rand is the only 2016 candidate who currently appeals to all factions (save Neocons) within the Republic Party (re: tea party, conservative, moderate and even some establishment)

Known knowns:
[1] Cruz is first pick of the tea party & conservative grassroots, but does not appeal to moderates.
[2] Rand is the second pick of the tea party & conservative grassroots and does appeal to moderates.
[3] Christie is the first (and only) pick of moderates, RHINOs, neocons and the establishment.
[4] Rand is the only candidate who lock up the conservative + tea party base yet still appeal to a sizable minority of moderate Republicans (not to mention Regan Democrats, young people, libertarians, anti-war Dems, civil-liberty Dems, anti-drug war Dems & minorities, etc.)
[5] The establishment will only support/run 1 candidate (re: Christie).
[6] The establishment (and the media) will do everything they can to ensure at least 2 candidates compete for the conservative & tea party vote #DivideAndConquer

Known unknowns:
[7] If tea party & conservative base rally behind a single candidate early (re: before Super Tuesday), and that candidate can win over even a minor percentage of moderate Republicans, that candidate will win.
[8] If Cruz doesn't get behind Rand, but instead makes it a 3 man race (between himself, Rand & Christie), Christie will win.
[9] If Cruz gets behind Rand early, Rand will be the GOP nominee

[WD-NY]

To take that position means you're agreeing with the progressives that said it was Ted Cruz and Mike Lee who shut down the government though..

With that said, I understand what you're saying.. the truth in this case (or many cases) doesn't matter since the narrative in the media will always be that of a progressive one.. and all it takes is for uninformed voters to hear over and over and over again that it was Cruz who shut down the government despite the fact that the only way the government shuts down is if Harry Reid doesn't bring the House bill to a vote.. or for Obama to agree with it.

Spot on.


I just vehemently disagree with the notion that just because something is hard or nigh impossible, that it shouldn't be done. There was no way, given the current political climate, that Cruz was going to win. And there's no way to discern whether or not he was being self-serving (I personally thought he was being completely genuine).. but again, I'm glad someone in Washington stood on principle. Whether it was for selfish purposes or not.. it was REALLY refreshing to see. I actually felt like I had a voice speaking for me in Washington for once (well, twice.. again, Rand is the only other politician I can say that about)

I think he was being genuine too (Cruz, like Ron & Rand, is a true believer in the superiority of conservative ideas/theory/philosophy), but get the feeling that Rand does not (for understandable, yet on their face, petty, erroneous and ignoble reasons) - which is why Rand's statements continue to irk me so much. They're just completely out of character!


With that said, having two genuine small government politicians running in 2016 in Rand and Cruz is going to be problematic because their biggest enemy, other then both of them stealing voters from eachother, will be the GOP, and NOT the DNC. Karl Rove is going to be pumping MILLIONS into stopping Rand (and Cruz if he runs).. the GOP will do everything they can to make sure Bush or Christie (and perhaps even Rubio) is the nominee.
Yep



The BEST case scenario is Cruz sitting it out and giving Paul 100% of his support. If that were to happen, I would bet money on Rand Paul winning in 2016. If they both run then it's a total crap shoot.
Rand has the best chance though.. if he can emulate that focus group video he'll grab nearly all the independents I think, some democrats, probably a record turnout of Republican voters, ALL of the tea party and nearly all of the libertarian/3rd party voters. I think it would be a massive landslide. The hardest part will be the primary though and not the general election.

This x100. If Rand is the GOP nominee, the general will be a Regan-level landslide. That's why the MSM, GOP & DEM establishment will all do everything to keep another conservative in (if not Cruz, I'm sure they'll find another patsy to play the part).

Rand just needs to get his mojo back. Someone should have him re-watch all of his Frank Luntz focus groups :cool:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXfNeUI2f3Q

[Brett85]

To take that position means you're agreeing with the progressives that said it was Ted Cruz and Mike Lee who shut down the government though..

With that said, I understand what you're saying.. the truth in this case (or many cases) doesn't matter since the narrative in the media will always be that of a progressive one.. and all it takes is for uninformed voters to hear over and over and over again that it was Cruz who shut down the government despite the fact that the only way the government shuts down is if Harry Reid doesn't bring the House bill to a vote.. or for Obama to agree with it.

Right, I'm just saying that the media will always make it look like the Republicans are to blame for government shutdowns, so strategically it's probably good to not have a government shutdown. I mean, you can go too far in the other direction where you just give President Obama and the Democrats everything they want as well, and I certainly don't support that either. But, the solution has to be somewhere in the middle, to fight for principle but to do it in a way that can be successful. And, in this particular case it just seems like in retrospect, it would've been a better strategy to just sit back and let Obamacare fall apart on its own.

[acptulsa]

Shutting down the government to defund Obamacare appealed to about 15-20% of the electorate according to the polls. Rand is smart enough to realize that you can't win a general election with only that small percentage of people, and probably couldn't even win the GOP primary with only those people.

That's as may be. But if you were to ask again today (which, of course, the pollsters will not do) I strongly suspect that, in light of massive failures and in light of certain revelations that were lied about, and therefore could only come to light when the 'system' came on line, much, much more than twenty percent of the electorate are now wishing that the shutdown had nipped Obamacare in the bud.

Shutting down the government was much, much less of an issue than shutting down the United States' entire health care system will be.

[jjdoyle]

You can use questions like this to attack opponents on the other side, and build your base, not possibly insult them.

What you say is important, but how you say it is even more important.