Rand attacking Trump during the debate. discuss.

[timosman]

Starting a separate thread on Rand's Trump attacks.

Was this a good move ? What was he trying to accomplish ? WTF ?

[AuH20]

http://quotes.lifehack.org/media/quotes/quote-Douglas-Horton-desperation-is-like-stealing-from-the-mafia-18220.png

[Brett85]

It was a good idea for Rand to attack Trump IMO, but not a good idea to interrupt and not a good idea to basically be yelling from the debate stage. Rand needs to stay on the attack but do it in a much calmer way next time.

[Jan2017]

It was a good idea for Rand to attack Trump IMO, but not a good idea to interrupt and not a good idea to basically be yelling from the debate stage. Rand needs to stay on the attack but do it in a much calmer way next time.

It was just fine by me . . . maybe not to others, but I liked. Not a timid time - Trump has got the ratings on fire !!

http://i372.photobucket.com/albums/oo161/sunblush/obama_did_it001_zpsoygk9gyl.jpg (http://s372.photobucket.com/user/sunblush/media/obama_did_it001_zpsoygk9gyl.jpg.html)

.

[Dianne]

It was a good idea for Rand to attack Trump IMO, but not a good idea to interrupt and not a good idea to basically be yelling from the debate stage. Rand needs to stay on the attack but do it in a much calmer way next time.

The only problem with that is that the Hillary Clinton network (FOX News), won't ask him a question or give him an opportunity. When you look at the final results, Rand had the least amount of time (just over 4 minutes), of any other candidate on the state. At first, I was horrified when he interjected, but looking back it was probably not a bad move. Rand has to gamble, as he did with the Christie argument.

[samforpaul]

Rand jumping in right off the bat regarding Trump potentially running third party seemed like an almost desperate attempt to gain attention. I remember how RON responded to Santorum when he was interruptive and said, "please don't interrupt".

Rand was rude. Very rude.

[Jan2017]

Rand jumping in right off the bat regarding Trump potentially running third party seemed like an almost desperate attempt to gain attention. I remember how RON responded to Santorum when he was interruptive and said, "please don't interrupt".

Rand was rude. Very rude.

Good - manners and niceties . . .
or flame throwers or your police gunning down University of Colorado student - FUCK YOU LIARS

[Brett85]

The only problem with that is that the Hillary Clinton network (FOX News), won't ask him a question or give him an opportunity. When you look at the final results, Rand had the least amount of time (just over 4 minutes), of any other candidate on the state. At first, I was horrified when he interjected, but looking back it was probably not a bad move. Rand has to gamble, as he did with the Christie argument.

Rand didn't always use up all of his time when he was asked a question. That seems to be part of the reason why he had less speaking time than everyone else.

[Jan2017]

Rand didn't always use up all of his time when he was asked a question. That seems to be part of the reason why he had less speaking time than everyone else.

What a contorted twist of a twist - lol

[dannno]

Rand, unlike Fox, attacked Trump on the right issues - getting people to look at the possibility he is doing this as a favor to or to help Hillary elected, buying politicians and being a single payer healthcare supporter (not being "conservative")

[Brett85]

What a contorted twist of a twist - lol

Why? He never spoke past the buzzer or even spoke until the buzzer when he was asked a question. His response when asked the question about religious liberty was especially short.

[dannno]

Rand jumping in right off the bat regarding Trump potentially running third party seemed like an almost desperate attempt to gain attention. I remember how RON responded to Santorum when he was interruptive and said, "please don't interrupt".

Rand was rude. Very rude.

lol.. rude? Really? Almost everybody up on stage tried to interrupt and get their piece in on something at some point (i.e. Cruz on Israel)

Rand was told to do this by EVERYBODY who gave him advice on how to handle the debate. He knew he would be ignored and marginalized otherwise.

[nikcers]

If trump flames out Rand will be seen as the one that took him down. He keeps using substance to attack him though, that's not going to work on big media types. He needs to appeal to them emotionally in order for people to understand his motives. He keeps saying why are you supporting trump are you guys stupid, he needs to say Trump is dumb he thinks that Mexico can pay for a border wall when we cant even pay for it.

[Carlybee]

Rand jumping in right off the bat regarding Trump potentially running third party seemed like an almost desperate attempt to gain attention. I remember how RON responded to Santorum when he was interruptive and said, "please don't interrupt".

Rand was rude. Very rude.


If one is rude to the King of rude is that like a double negative?

[CPUd]

LOL if Rand stood there patiently until he was called on to answer his 2 questions, this board would be full of threads bagging Rand for not being more aggressive.

[EBounding]

Rand, unlike Fox, attacked Trump on the right issues - getting people to look at the possibility he is doing this as a favor to or to help Hillary elected, buying politicians and being a single payer healthcare supporter (not being "conservative")

And if Fox was really serious about taking him down, they would have asked him:

1) about his Flip-flop on immigration
2) pressed him on single-payer
3) about eminent domain
4) his support for the Obama stimulus
5) pressed him on Abortion (he talked about Iraq instead and gave a non-answer)
6) the "God question"

Of course, it still might not have mattered. Trump could outright say "Ok, I was lying. I really am I democrat and I don't care if Hilary wins or not" and his Followers would applaud and lap it up.

[roho76]

I think it was a perfect opportunity to point out exactly what's wrong with WashDC. I respect Trump only for the reason of being frank about his relationship with special interests and not beating around the bush but I think Rand seized the moment and I appreciated it. I'm sure a lot of others did too.

[notsure]

Yes, it was a great move. Rand is playing the long game. He may even stand a chance at picking up supporters from other camps who have yet to put Trump in his place. I'm sure he also stands a chance at picking up disillusioned Trump supporters. If Rand is the only major candidate going after Trump, and Trump is the media darling, then Rand would be able to catch sail off Trumps' wind and gain more media coverage. It's a good plan.

[r3volution 3.0]

I respect Trump only for the reason of being frank...

Frank? Like, lying and flip-flopping on every issue?

[notsure]

http://i.imgur.com/rsgp8wS.jpg

[Brian4Liberty]

Starting a separate thread on Rand's Trump attacks.

Was this a good move ? What was he trying to accomplish ? WTF ?

With your use of "WTF", it seems you already have an answer to your "questions".

Seems more like an attempt to agitate others to join in.

[cajuncocoa]

Rand jumping in right off the bat regarding Trump potentially running third party seemed like an almost desperate attempt to gain attention. I remember how RON responded to Santorum when he was interruptive and said, "please don't interrupt".

Rand was rude. Very rude.It's politics, not High Tea with the Queen.

[TommyJeff]

Starting a separate thread on Rand's Trump attacks.

Was this a good move ? What was he trying to accomplish ? WTF ?

This was my only critique of Rand in the debate. My initial thougt was that his camp suggested he go on the offensive against trump early. Which he did. But he didnt come out looking good to my eyes. On the other hand he dominated C.C. in their confrontation. He should stick to what he does best and not try to be agreesive or be anything he's not.

[TommyJeff]

LOL if Rand stood there patiently until he was called on to answer his 2 questions, this board would be full of threads bagging Rand for not being more aggressive.

Is there a breakdown showing how many questions each person asked or how much time each person spoke?

[enhanced_deficit]

IMO Rand should not focus on going after Trump, that play should be left to play out itself. Rand has substance, on style he could even emulate Trump a bit and get bit more reckless/fearless in facing/answering attacks. It pays to be bold with some convictions/substabce to back that up with.

Let Trump tear down the establishee types and mow the lawn a bit for now with his abrasive charm.




It was just fine by me . . . maybe not to others, but I liked. Not a timid time - Trump has got the ratings on fire !!

http://i372.photobucket.com/albums/oo161/sunblush/obama_did_it001_zpsoygk9gyl.jpg (http://s372.photobucket.com/user/sunblush/media/obama_did_it001_zpsoygk9gyl.jpg.html)

.

Is the implication here that just TP had prejudices based on skin color?
If so, family pf Mirima Carey, parents of children killed by Obama drones would beg to differ.

http://www.secretsofthefed.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/1383527_587303841330500_287842752_n.jpg


Remember Congress applauded after this.

[cindy25]

Starting a separate thread on Rand's Trump attacks.

Was this a good move ? What was he trying to accomplish ? WTF ?

depends. on the donations to Hillary-fair attack. on past positions-fair attack. Trump not promising to run 3rd party-stupid. because Ron also refused to pledge and did not support McCain or Romney.

goal-air time, sound bites ; in general a good move

[r3volution 3.0]

With your use of "WTF", it seems you already have an answer to your "questions".

Seems more like an attempt to agitate others to join in.

^^this

[RonPaulGeorge&Ringo]

IMO Rand should not focus on going after Trump, that play should be left to play out itself. Rand has substance, on style he could even emulate Trump a bit and get bit more reckless/fearless in facing/answering attacks. It pays to be bold with some convictions/substabce to back that up with.


Don't forget Rand went through this exact same attack (bullshit misogny accusations) a few months ago. Rand meekly protested but he ultimately rolled over and apologized to Megyn Kelley. He has only fallen in the polls since then. Trump has been fearless and indications are he's still moving up.

[notsure]

Don't forget Rand went through this exact same attack (bullshit misogny accusations) a few months ago. Rand meekly protested but he ultimately rolled over and apologized to Megyn Kelley. He has only fallen in the polls since then. Trump has been fearless and indications are he's still moving up.

Rand never had any issues with Megyn Kelly. It was an NBC interviewer, I forget her name, that caused the whole dust-up with Rand and his alleged attitude toward women interviewers. I don't ever remember Rand having to apologize Megyn Kelly. Also I don't ever remember him apologizing about any of that stuff. He said he talks to ignorant male interviewers the same way he talks to ignorant female interviewers.

[AuH20]

Rand never had any issues with Megyn Kelly. It was an NBC interviewer, I forget her name, that caused the whole dust-up with Rand and his alleged attitude toward women interviewers. I don't ever remember Rand having to apologize Megyn Kelly. Also I don't ever remember him apologizing about any of that stuff. He said he talks to ignorant male interviewers the same way he talks to ignorant female interviewers.

Megyn Kelly tried to publicly shame Rand by insinuating that he has an anger issue.

[notsure]

Megyn Kelly tried to publicly shame Rand by insinuating that he has an anger issue.

She asked him the question, which was all the media buzz at the time, but I don't think she ever endorsed the accusation. Watch the interview again, I may be wrong, but I think you're mistaken.

[Ender]

LOL if Rand stood there patiently until he was called on to answer his 2 questions, this board would be full of threads bagging Rand for not being more aggressive.

Exactly- go figure. :rolleyes:

[timosman]

Rand never had any issues with Megyn Kelly. It was an NBC interviewer, I forget her name, that caused the whole dust-up with Rand and his alleged attitude toward women interviewers. I don't ever remember Rand having to apologize Megyn Kelly. Also I don't ever remember him apologizing about any of that stuff. He said he talks to ignorant male interviewers the same way he talks to ignorant female interviewers.

NBC Savannah Guthrie


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64nan21cl8E

[notsure]

Megyn Kelly tried to publicly shame Rand by insinuating that he has an anger issue.

She was actually "running defense" for Rand Paul on the issue. Also, overall, I think Megyn Kelly has been pretty fair to Rand Paul. At least from what I've seen.

http://mediamatters.org/video/2015/04/08/foxs-megyn-kelly-runs-defense-for-rand-pauls-co/203221

Fox's Megyn Kelly Runs Defense For Rand Paul's Controversial Interviews With Women

http://www.businessinsider.com/megyn-kelly-rand-pauls-critics-2015-4

Fox's Megyn Kelly blasts Rand Paul's critics for their 'sexist' defense of female reporters

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/megyn-kelly-rand-pauls-critics-2015-4#ixzz3iNHgxbD8

[timosman]

Just a thought, but wouldn't it be better if Rand refused to take the pledge and took the fifth instead, possibly using this opportunity to remind about other amendments ? Who are we pledging to ? FOX News ? Let's skip the bullshit pledges and get to the questions instead. We have a lot to talk about.

[RonPaulGeorge&Ringo]

Rand never had any issues with Megyn Kelly. It was an NBC interviewer, I forget her name, that caused the whole dust-up with Rand and his alleged attitude toward women interviewers. I don't ever remember Rand having to apologize Megyn Kelly. Also I don't ever remember him apologizing about any of that stuff.

There was an NBC/Today woman and a CNN woman who both asked Rand BS questions that he tried to push back on. Then the mainstream media started attacking Rand for hating women. Then Rand went on Megyn Kelley's show and apologized to her for his ever questioning a woman. That's what happenned. Now you can remember it better next time.

[notsure]

There was an NBC/Today woman and a CNN woman who both asked Rand BS questions that he tried to push back on. Then the mainstream media started attacking Rand for hating women. Then Rand went on Megyn Kelley's show and apologized to her for his ever questioning a woman. That's what happenned. Now you can remember it better next time.

I posted links to the interview above. Your version of the story is false. Rand never said "sorry" or "apologies" once. Megyn Kelly told Rand he has a right to push back on female reporters, the same as men reporters; and Rand also said the people want a candidate that is going to push back against the media. You should re-watch the video again to get the story straight.

[H. E. Panqui]

...rand squealed at trump about not taking the stinking gop loyalty oath...:rolleyes:

...he reminded me of the numbskull zealots who attacked kramer for not wearing the ribbon...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3iV8X8ubGCc

[acptulsa]

...rand squealed at trump about not taking the stinking gop loyalty oath...:rolleyes:

Rand Paul has a right to remind people that when Fox tells them to love Trump, they love Trump, even though when Fox told them to hate Ron Paul for the exact same reasons they did Fox's bidding then too.

And he has a right to find a different way to do it than to look straight at the voters he needs and call them hypocrites and sheep.

[Smitty]

I agree that Rand had to interject himself into the debate in order to get face time. But he needs to fire the advisors who told him that it would be to his advantage to attack Trump.

Nobody else on the stage made that mistake even when the moderators encouraged them to do so.

[AuH20]

I agree that Rand had to interject himself into the debate in order to get face time. But he needs to fire the advisors who told him that it would be to his advantage to attack Trump.

Nobody else on the stage made that mistake even when the moderators encouraged them to do so.

Even Kasich walked around a perfect Trump attack opportunity when the moderators placed it on a tee for him.

[AuH20]

...rand squealed at trump about not taking the stinking gop loyalty oath...:rolleyes:

...he reminded me of the numbskull zealots who attacked kramer for not wearing the ribbon...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3iV8X8ubGCc

When did Rand become the RNC director?

[timosman]

It was a bad idea after all.

[nikcers]

It was a bad idea after all.

Are you saying he is going to lose his re-election?? I think he was counting on the conservative voters taking Rands' side, but he didn't know the sentitments. I think that voters don't like that he is friends with the "enemy" I think thats why Ted Cruz fuck you'd mcconell. I don't think Rand could of fuck you'd him and got re-elected. He would of stayed in the race longer, but he would of had to split a lot of votes with Cruz, and Trump would still have the nomination.

[Rad]

I think Rand did good when he was the adult on stage. Its a shame he tried to blend in (at least that is what it seemed compared to the version of him who campaigned for his dad and that was what Jack Hunter said he was doing). He had enemies who he wanted to blend in with but he was never going to get out of his dad's shadow. He could have really nailed Trump on substantive issues instead of attacking Trump's appeal to people. Trump's appeal is that he is a bully and uncouth. People like the dark triad. Trump is a liar "playing the game." People will follow a bad example like (insert name here), but they will also follow a good one if that person really believes in what they say like Ron Paul. Trump is tapping into people's anger at being betrayed by the ruling class. Whatever your position on immigration you have to admit that the US is economically unfree compared to how it used to be (excluding the issue of discrimination). You have to have a friggin license to cook and sale hot dogs from your vehicle: https://www.food.gov.uk/sites/default/files/multimedia/pdfs/publication/starting-up-booklet.pdf

I think I'm in the minority here that there is a hierarchy of things that need to be done prior to other things. Open borders requires a free economy first. If we want to cut spending we first need to free up the economy, end the empire, and the fed. I think Rand failed to articulate a vision like Trump, was unable to distinguish himself from others very well because he was "playing the game." Trump spoke about the economic issue which to the white working class is the Hispanic working class that is here illegally. He was near indistinguishable in rhetoric regarding foreign policy in comparison to Rand. Ted Cruz had a marvelously fine lunch and he may well be our next Republican president after whoever wins this election and some libertarians will be fine with that. Some will be fine with Trump being elected. People think Trump is not a globalist and they find htat appealing. Rand wanted to fit in or I didn't understand the real Rand from the one who campaigned for his father. If his father's views weren't entirely his then he shouldn't have argued for the ones that weren't. He chose to attack Trump more on character than giving a competing vision from what I saw.

[jmdrake]

Are you saying he is going to lose his re-election?? I think he was counting on the conservative voters taking Rands' side, but he didn't know the sentitments. I think that voters don't like that he is friends with the "enemy" I think thats why Ted Cruz $#@! you'd mcconell. I don't think Rand could of $#@! you'd him and got re-elected. He would of stayed in the race longer, but he would of had to split a lot of votes with Cruz, and Trump would still have the nomination.

I don't think anyone seriously expects Rand to lose re-election. As for McConnell, Rand could and should have stayed neutral. When asked "What do you think about Ted Cruz calling Mitch McConnell a liar" Rand's answer should have been "I respect both men and hope they work out their differences and have nothing further to say on the matter." Instead he chose to take a pot shot at Ted. Sorry but that was just inexplicably stupid on Rand's part.

As for Trump, Rand should have hammered him on imminent domain and being flaky on guns.