The aftermath...what now?

[Badger Paul]

This is not an "I told you so" post. Having doing nothing for Rand 2016 other than a small contribution, I will not be an asshole to those worked so tirelessly to help the campaign. As much I was starting to get annoyed at the incredible optimism of kbs and PCU and LatinsforPaul in spite of the polling, I understand what they were trying to do. You've got to give yourself a chance to win before you do so and there would have been no chance for victory if they hadn't made a million calls or signed up 1,000 precinct captains and 10,000 Iowa students. I think they were being sincere as far trying to accomplish which give supporters a reason to hope. Even I was starting to wonder if they were right or at least than Rand was going to do better than his polling. Obviously that wasn't the case. I know how much it hurts. Losing in politics is like getting slugged in the gut. It's not like watching your favorite sports team lose. There you can't control what happens on the field, the court, or the ice. In politics you think you have some measure of control.

But as I said before, what I don't want Paul supporters to do is blame themselves or think if they had just made one more phone call or contact it would have made a difference. No, it would not have. After nine years, this point must sink into the Liberty Movement, Paul Movement, Freedom Movement or Whatever-You-Want-To-Call-It-Movement: You cannot organize your way to the Presidency. You can't enthuse your way to the Presidency. All of this, while important, cannot make up for a bad candidate and on that count Rand has to bare the bulk of the responsibility.

For all the talk of Rand being more polished and articulate than Ron and a better campaigner he wound up with fewer votes in a caucus with another record GOP turnout. And there are a litany of reasons why this was. Rather than go through them all and set off endless debate about them, let me give you an example of what I mean. I read a story (and it may have been in the New Yorker, I can't quite remember) Rand was campaigning at a student gathering for him in Des Moines. After he gave his speech, he left. Just up and left. He didn't stick around, didn't talk to people in the room and make the one-on-one connections that all politicians who run for President in Iowa and New Hampshire do to deepen the commitment of their supporters. This has nothing to do with being too busy (and when will Pauls ever learn no one gives a crap if they make every goddamn quorum call or committee vote back in Washington? Enough with this perfect attendance garbage!). It may well be Rand is too much of an introvert and just not comfortable in these situations. I know the feeling, which is why I'm not running for public office higher than county commissioner. But when you do things like that, you leave people cold, like you assume their support because who you are or what you say. As Bill Clinton once famously said "People don't care what you know until they know you care." Rand should have thought about this long and hard before he decided to run for President. He should not have felt obligated to run. He needed to be clear to himself "I'm going to run for President and I'm going to do what it takes to win." I don't think he ever was, at least not until the late fall when he actually did a better job both in debates and on the stump and the campaign ran better. But by then it was too late.

Now on to brass tacks and reality: The campaign is pretty much done. It's just a matter of when they pull the plug (and if you think Rand getting pressure to drop his Presidential campaign now for his Senate re-election and you haven't seen anything yet ). The only chance Rand had was a good showing in Iowa would jumpstart the campaign in New Hampshire and so on and so forth. Not going to happen. So now what after Rand pulls out? Well that's really up to him. First he has to decide whether he wishes to even stay in politics to begin with. Part of me think he wishes he was back in Bowling Green at his practice. He has to decide is this what he wants to do for the rest of his life or much of it. If so, then he'll run for re-election.

And he'll probably win if he does. But this not much of an accomplishment, not like it was in 2010 in the primary. It seems now in Kentucky that Republicans can run trained seals for office and win. So does Rand really want to be company man for the rest of his political career? McConnell's cabana boy? Since I've heard a lot other crazy ideas this morning here's mine: Maybe Rand should run for re-election as a member of the LP? Maybe he can convince Massie and Amash and few others to join him. Wouldn't that be a political bombshell right now if he announced? Wouldn't that get him more attention than fading away in the GOP primaries? The reason I think he should consider this is the fact the top three vote-getters in the Republican Party right now are some of the biggest boobs and non-Freedom candidates in American politics. Libertarians cannot and should not feign indifference to this or believe the GOP is going to be theirs by inheritance someday. They do not have the support inside the party to make a claim on it. Does Rand, after saying he would do everything he could to bring down Trump really wish to run on the same ticket with him this fall? Or someone he despises like Cruz or another neocon Like Rubio? Why not? You want shake things up in U.S. politics, here's a great opportunity. If not, the Rand enjoy kissing McConell's arse from now into the future. How did his endorsement work out by the way?

As for the rest of the Movement and its elected officials, they need to stake stock in their political careers and see where they wish to go. Hopefully if they do run for statewide office it will be a wise choice rather than foolish fling which will only get themselves beat and end their careers. But it falls into their hands now. The cause needs to go beyond the Pauls. This isn't a cult. While they have achieved much in their careers 9certainly we wouldn't be here without them) it's also obvious they're just not capable of making the big jump to the White House. No shame in that but the time for realism needs to set in. As for this community at RPF, its been amazing we've stayed together all these nine years as people come and go, get banned, come back, die and be born again. This isn't a swan song because I'm sure in some bored moment I'll pop my head in, but we all move on as time progresses. No one wants to lose the sense of community and family we've created yet at the same time it's going to be hard without a Presidential candidate as a focal point to keep it together. I hope I'm wrong and I sure hope this doesn't become a militia hub as many will no doubt reject politics in the wake of this election or become a place to entertain the crazy. We have achieved a lot, don't kid yourself on that bit there's still a long way to go. Yet I will tell you this about politics, once the bug gets in you, you don't quite get rid of it. As Hunter Thompson once wrote, "it's better than sex". You'll be back, in some way or form, you'll be back. Myself included.

[jllundqu]

Simple Truth is this:

The campaign did great. The volunteers did great. The Iowa voters suck.... and it clearly does not appear to be Rand's time. The country is on a war footing. Boobus couldn't care less about personal responsibility and individual liberty. They want to kill the brown people and want more free shit. The only difference between the parties is superficial. The only thing that can bring some fire into the liberty cause is a major economic collapse or something similar.

[WQuantrill]

Ultimately, Rand's strategy and rhetoric failed. He was coming off so much goodwill after a successful run as Kentucky's rebel senator and then he just imploded. It wasn't due to a biased media or Trump. The decline was largely self-inflicted. The people were all on-board the Rand Train several months back, but he just didn't excite the masses.

[Badger Paul]

"The only thing that can bring some fire into the liberty cause is a major economic collapse or something similar."

Well, it worked before.

[ThePaleoLibertarian]

The movement needs to learn from this experience, not plug their collective ears and pass the buck. Rand's campaign didn't connect with people, didn't have a consistent message or particularly competent branding. People are going to blame everyone but Rand, and that's going to guarantee that that water continues to be tread, and no progress is made. This is a time to reflect and reevaluate, not time to double down on what hasn't worked. The liberty movement is way too optimistic, and lacks a cynical, realpolitik analysis of political strategy. It's either adapt, or forget the political process entirely.

[wizardwatson]

Ultimately, Rand's strategy and rhetoric failed. He was coming off so much goodwill after a successful run as Kentucky's rebel senator and then he just imploded. It wasn't due to a biased media or Trump. The decline was largely self-inflicted. The people were all on-board the Rand Train several months back, but he just didn't excite the masses.

I'm counting on you and all the "I told you so" crowd to enlighten us all as to the next step if/when Rand does officially drop out. Clearly support for his campaign was an obstacle preventing true grassroots leadership from stepping forward. :rolleyes:

Seriously, the posts saying "I told you! You said I was a troll! We knew this was going to happen!" is laughable.

We knew we had a snowballs chance in hell, and now everyone wants a gold star for consistently reminding us it's too hot for snowballs.

If only we had believed them!

[wizardwatson]

The movement needs to learn from this experience, not plug their collective ears and pass the buck. Rand's campaign didn't connect with people, didn't have a consistent message or particularly competent branding. People are going to blame everyone but Rand, and that's going to guarantee that that water continues to be tread, and no progress is made. This is a time to reflect and reevaluate, not time to double down on what hasn't worked. The liberty movement is way too optimistic, and lacks a cynical, realpolitik analysis of political strategy. It's either adapt, or forget the political process entirely.

The liberty movement is not organized. For three election cycles we've identified with a Paul campaign. That to me has to be the foundation of any strategy going forward. Actually having an organization.

[WQuantrill]

The movement needs to learn from this experience, not plug their collective ears and pass the buck. Rand's campaign didn't connect with people, didn't have a consistent message or particularly competent branding. People are going to blame everyone but Rand, and that's going to guarantee that that water continues to be tread, and no progress is made. This is a time to reflect and reevaluate, not time to double down on what hasn't worked. The liberty movement is way too optimistic, and lacks a cynical, realpolitik analysis of political strategy. It's either adapt, or forget the political process entirely.

The campaign was far too passive thinking that they could eloquently reason with the masses with their niche issues. Paul never really wanted to tap into the national anger because his team was scared what the media would say about him. LOL Say what you want about Ron Paul and his various missteps, but he ran a better campaign than his son has.

[limequat]

We need a pretty face and loads of emotion to front for the ideas. With the Pauls, we're trying to elect the valedictorian to homecoming king.

[thatpeculiarcat]

The liberty movement is way too optimistic, and lacks a cynical, realpolitik analysis of political strategy. It's either adapt, or forget the political process entirely.

Yeah because they all get fucking banned, neg rep'd, and shunned when they start to speak.

The "Rand will win with 27K votes" isn't just optimistic, it is just not looking at reality. We HAD a chance, and it was 2012, and the media manipulation of the election, the fabricated surge of Santorum, and the RNC shenanigans killed our chance. It's over now. The problem that is the United States will never be solved peacefully, through political means. And I think after 3 election cycles of running Paul's, we should know that.

[libertyplz]

Well I'm with Rand until he quits (and even then, I have no one else to vote for), but I do think he needs to work on rebuilding his base of support. Rand at one time had the liberty vote, parts of the conservative base, and part of the anti-establishment base. I think for one reason or another (perhaps in some cases was self-inflicted, while others out of his control) Rand started losing some of his share in the conservative and anti-establishment crowd. Rand had a good amount of support/people who were favorable towards him at places like Breitbart, Redstate, and TheBlaze, but that no longer appears to be the case. I think Perception is a big issue. Somewhere along the line a perception was created that Rand was no longer a viable candidate to much of these people, and his favorables started tanking and many started becoming outright hostile towards Rand. Perceptions are powerful and can lead people to view someone in a light that isn't really consistent with reality. Rand unfortunately got stuck with negative perceptions and hasn't shaken it off yet. That's how I see it anyways. It's nothing that can't be fixed, though will probably take some time, but in the end I'm happy with Rand. He is fighting for liberty and that's all I can ask for.

[CPUd]

Next up is New Hampshire...



Rand Paul had a strong top-five finish by placing ahead of Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, John Kasich, and the last two Iowa Caucus winners tonight. The voters spoke for the first time, and they showed that they believe everyone in our country should have the liberty to make the most of their lives, not just the well-connected and the political establishment.Whether the issue is constitutional government, a balanced budget, a rational foreign policy, or preserving the entire Bill of Rights for all citizens, Rand Paul is the only one standing up for conservatives and liberty-loving Americans.

Tonight's vote reveals that the race for the White House is wide open. Dr. Rand Paul believes his voice is important to the debate, and calls on ABC and the RNC to make sure he is on the stage next weekend in New Hampshire. The results today demand it. "Every election we are told by the party establishment that the times are too dire or risky to try freedom as a solution. They say that the message of liberty and personal responsibility must wait until next election. But tonight, the people of Iowa proved that the time is now. We have never been more hungry for personal freedom and a restrained government. I'm grateful to my supporters here in the Hawkeye state, and I look forward to continuing the fight for liberty in New Hampshire," said Dr. Rand Paul.

[idiom]

Third Party is suicide until a state assembly and governship is won and that state outperforms all 49 other states.

[cornell]

All in all this was a very unusual election. I don't think we should be comparing it to 2012 or even 2008 for that matter. It's simply not a fair comparison and as evidence for that, the prior two first place finishers finished dead last and second to dead last. It just wasn't our year. Even with a perfectly run campaign things may not have been terribly different.

[idiom]

Yeah because they all get fucking banned, neg rep'd, and shunned when they start to speak.

The "Rand will win with 27K votes" isn't just optimistic, it is just not looking at reality. We HAD a chance, and it was 2012, and the media manipulation of the election, the fabricated surge of Santorum, and the RNC shenanigans killed our chance. It's over now. The problem that is the United States will never be solved peacefully, through political means. And I think after 3 election cycles of running Paul's, we should know that.

It won't be solved through a quick fix top down one shot candidate.

[JK/SEA]

geez, one State and its over for you?...

you guys are pathetic.

[LibertyExtremist]

I'm not sure if it's what you meant, but I wouldn't say that people that reject politics are part of the "crazy." That being said, I largely agree with your post. I think we must also recognize that the GOP is nothing more than the "progressive-lite" party. They don't really run on any solutions, rather they run on the promise that they will slightly slow down the movement towards progressivism. At the end of the day, both parties are progressive and the GOP has no real identity. I mean 95% of Iowa voters just voted for more war, more government, and more debt.

[CPUd]

geez, one State and its over for you?...

you guys are pathetic.

Hell no, I'm in as long as Rand is running.

[HarryBrowneLives]

Just before last night's caucus there was a little poll that asked Iowa voters which candidate matches your values? A decent share went to Ben Carson. Nice guy, but I guess "my values" = Lampshade? Houseplant? Unintelligible ramblings?? The guy didn't even speak at a caucus site, more than doubled Rand's vote totals, and left for Florida the same afternoon!

The bottom line is that (even if correct) we are telling people what they don't want to hear. Most people (even in the so called Tea Party) don't really want smaller government. They want to keep their Social Security, Medicade, and student loans for their kids, yet get those Ghetto Queens off welfare . At the same time, they want unlimited resources for the military and a carte blanche mandate to bomb most of the Middle East back to the 11th century - yesterday ... as well as a wall to put up and a task force to round up those Mexicans who moved in down the street, can't speak 'Merican, and are bringing their property values down with their chickens and goats in the backyard. In short, they want a Big Government that will provide their middle class, white, church going, community the free stuff they need while arming them with a force that will carry out their xenophobic lusts to bomb and ban brown people.

With the excitement of Ron's runs in 2008 and 2012 last night's events lead me to believe we were fooled. Ron was the only. lightning rod, option for the angry and disaffected of many stripes at the time ...not a bunch of guys sitting around studying Hayek. Last night, a decent share of those same votes and voters went for Cruz, Trump, and, in part, our millennial, "libertarian", youth vote turned out for Senator Venezuela .

As Harry Browne lamented in his 70's classic How I found Freedom in an Unfree World, politics is a very poor place to find one's freedom.

It is not eloquence. It is not reason. It is force ...and for that all we have to offer is an empty pot.

[squirl22]

Well I'm with Rand until he quits (and even then, I have no one else to vote for),

Yep, me too....He's it for me.

And I had to laugh about the post that said what went down had nothing to do with media bias...puleeese....if he had 24/7 coverage like Trump, had his name mentioned alternately with Trump's like Cruz, or was the establishment choice like Rubio, he would have won..I am amazed he is still standing..for months he's the only one they keep trying to drive out of the race; every interview includes when are you dropping out...I mean, come on, get real...the fact that he beat Bush is a miracle...I'm going to be phone banking as soon as I start getting the NH surveys and I'm sending a donation.

[limequat]

Yep, me too....He's it for me.

And I had to laugh about the post that said what went down had nothing to do with media bias...puleeese....if he had 24/7 coverage like Trump, had his name mentioned alternately with Trump's like Cruz, or was the establishment choice like Rubio, he would have won..I am amazed he is still standing..for months he's the only one they keep trying to drive out of the race; every interview includes when are you dropping out...I mean, come on, get real...the fact that he beat Bush is a miracle...I'm going to be phone banking as soon as I start getting the NH surveys and I'm sending a donation.

Out of rep for Squirl.

[thatpeculiarcat]

geez, one State and its over for you?...

you guys are pathetic.

No no, you're right. He's going to win NH, NV, KY, ME and so on with 73% of the vote.

The fact that he's polling 6th-7th in NH and nationally, and just about every other state, and the fact he only got 9,000 votes in IA is writing on the wall for us.

I'd rather come to terms that we lost now, then have to prolong the agony like the last 2 cycles.

[CPUd]

No no, you're right. He's going to win NH, NV, KY, ME and so on with 73% of the vote.

The fact that he's polling 6th-7th in NH and nationally, and just about every other state, and the fact he only got 9,000 votes in IA is writing on the wall for us.

I'd rather come to terms that we lost now, then have to prolong the agony like the last 2 cycles.

You can do that, but you won't be doing it in Rand's forum while he is still running.

[derek4ever]

Rand has had a bad hand. I think he still has time to straighten the ship and learn from what happened last night. We know rand can win a general election. He's got the right temper. But if he can force the conversation and narrative to be about killing our debt, he can end up coming back. It's 1 loss and we have 55 contests left, he can have a good showing. Rand needs to remember how he did it in 2010 before it's too late. :)

[01000110]

I'm curious to see how he does in NH. Let him decide after that if he wants to continue.

And when/if he goes back to being a great Senator I hope he is a giant pain in the ass for whomever is the next president.

[laissez faire]

I'll be in New Hampshire on Sunday because there is still value and possibility requiring my energy. That said, consider this when you consider strategy:

Suppose Rand received 50,000 votes last night instead of Cruz. Who would they be? Answer, a mix of people voting for very different reasons, from pot legalization to anti-war, to liking curly hair, to Austrian economics, to chemtrail crusading, to Audit the Fed, to having a hot neighbor caucusing for Rand, to wanting a doctor in office and no longer liking Carson, to balancing the budget, to Read the Bills and on and on.

The 'liberty movement' is finally breaking away from the mistaken thinking that has always accompanied it since 2007: that "we win" when 50 million people think like "us." Ron's support came from diverse and often unsophisticated ways of thinking. Stop trying to sell people the whole liberty electronics superstore... just bring people in based on one or two products they need. I don't care why you vote for Rand, just tell me what you're looking for and I tell you how Rand is probably your guy. Joining a movement is not necessary.

[wizardwatson]

I'll be in New Hampshire on Sunday because there is still value and possibility requiring my energy. That said, consider this when you consider strategy:

Suppose Rand received 50,000 votes last night instead of Cruz. Who would they be? Answer, a mix of people voting for very different reasons, from pot legalization to anti-war, to liking curly hair, to Austrian economics, to chemtrail crusading, to Audit the Fed, to having a hot neighbor caucusing for Rand, to wanting a doctor in office and no longer liking Carson, to balancing the budget, to Read the Bills and on and on.

The 'liberty movement' is finally breaking away from the mistaken thinking that has always accompanied it since 2007: that "we win" when 50 million people think like "us." Ron's support came from diverse and often unsophisticated ways of thinking. Stop trying to sell people the whole liberty electronics superstore... just bring people in based on one or two products they need. I don't care why you vote for Rand, just tell me what you're looking for and I tell you how Rand is probably your guy. Joining a movement is not necessary.

Are we always going to have a Ron or a Rand? Doubtful. I think the strategy definitely needs to be about some kind of organization supporting the movement.

You along with many, many others I've read so far today all seem to think refinement of campaign strategy is the key. I would say it is precisely the attempts to bolt the movement onto a campaign that has left many behind.

Electoral politics is the box the movement is trapped in. Instead of people thinking about strategically getting the movement out of the box, most of the "advice" seems to be that we haven't folded ourselves into a small enough unit to make ourselves invisible to the people we are trying to trick into voting for our liberty candidate.

We need an organized movement with metrics for "winning" that are based on things we do instead of things we exercise little control over.

[Krugminator2]

I do think it is important to have a credible liberty running for President. The advertising and exposure is enormous.

The problem is I doubt Rand will run in 2020, which leaves a big hole. People forget Rand raised $25 million between PACS and his campaign in just 2015 for this run. Ron and Rand were outliers in their ability raise money. Massie and Amash really have trouble fundraising. I think Amash is the best message candidate. He has no chance of winning. The only other person who seems plausible is Mark Sanford. But a Mark Sanford run would have a Jim Gilmore feel and he isn't really big on the education part of running even he is great on the issues.

That's why it is so frustrating that people couldn't not see how obviously great Rand is as a candidate. I don't expect someone as good as him to come along in my lifetime but would love to be proven wrong.

[liberty_nc]

I do think it is important to have a credible liberty running for President. The advertising and exposure is enormous.

The problem is I doubt Rand will run in 2020, which leaves a big hole. People forget Rand raised $25 million between PACS and his campaign in just 2015 for this run. Ron and Rand were outliers in their ability raise money. Massie and Amash really have trouble fundraising. I think Amash is the best message candidate. He has no chance of winning. The only other person who seems plausible is Mark Sanford. But a Mark Sanford run would have a Jim Gilmore feel and he isn't really big on the education part of running even he is great on the issues.

That's why it is so frustrating that people couldn't not see how obviously great Rand is as a candidate. I don't expect someone as good as him to come along in my lifetime but would love to be proven wrong.
Well there is another candidate, revolt

[Theocrat]

Simple Truth is this:

The campaign did great. The volunteers did great. The Iowa voters suck.... and it clearly does not appear to be Rand's time. The country is on a war footing. Boobus couldn't care less about personal responsibility and individual liberty. They want to kill the brown people and want more free shit. The only difference between the parties is superficial. The only thing that can bring some fire into the liberty cause is a major economic collapse or something similar.


Well I'm with Rand until he quits (and even then, I have no one else to vote for), but I do think he needs to work on rebuilding his base of support. Rand at one time had the liberty vote, parts of the conservative base, and part of the anti-establishment base. I think for one reason or another (perhaps in some cases was self-inflicted, while others out of his control) Rand started losing some of his share in the conservative and anti-establishment crowd. Rand had a good amount of support/people who were favorable towards him at places like Breitbart, Redstate, and TheBlaze, but that no longer appears to be the case. I think Perception is a big issue. Somewhere along the line a perception was created that Rand was no longer a viable candidate to much of these people, and his favorables started tanking and many started becoming outright hostile towards Rand. Perceptions are powerful and can lead people to view someone in a light that isn't really consistent with reality. Rand unfortunately got stuck with negative perceptions and hasn't shaken it off yet. That's how I see it anyways. It's nothing that can't be fixed, though will probably take some time, but in the end I'm happy with Rand. He is fighting for liberty and that's all I can ask for.


geez, one State and its over for you?...

you guys are pathetic.


Hell no, I'm in as long as Rand is running.


Yep, me too....He's it for me.

And I had to laugh about the post that said what went down had nothing to do with media bias...puleeese....if he had 24/7 coverage like Trump, had his name mentioned alternately with Trump's like Cruz, or was the establishment choice like Rubio, he would have won..I am amazed he is still standing..for months he's the only one they keep trying to drive out of the race; every interview includes when are you dropping out...I mean, come on, get real...the fact that he beat Bush is a miracle...I'm going to be phone banking as soon as I start getting the NH surveys and I'm sending a donation.

I agree with all of the sentiments above. We must continue to "stand with Rand" because he is the only candidate who represents true, Constitutional government and fiscal/monetary conservatism.

Those of you claiming that Sen. Paul's campaign is over, or that he can't win now, or any of the other defeatist arguments we've seen since yesterday have really lost sight of what's at stake here. Sen. Paul's campaign is about his standing as a witness to the entire United States of America that there are still politicians who are not afraid to speak the truth against "American Exceptionalism"; that there are politicians who rightly understand the root causes of our economic system and can provide a path which brings prosperity to all Americans; that there are politicians who don't need to manipulate voters by appealing to emotions but by stating facts and using reason so that the truth is firmly established; that there are politicians who truly care about the next generation's well-being and are fighting to preserve life (in the womb and in sand dunes); that there are politicians who want to actually stop spending money that we don't have and thereby balance the national budget; that there are politicians who are fighting to end regulations which have crippled our economy and have transformed our rights into privileges; and the list goes on.

In short, Sen. Paul is the lone voice "crying in the wilderness" and standing up for the principles which once made America the best republic in history. He is our representative, in the midst of crooks, cronies, commies, and comedians. And if we want a better future for our kids, and if we believe that our principles are worth fighting for (even if the whole world rejects them), then we need to continue standing with Sen. Rand Paul because Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Carson, nor any other candidate will have intelligent and fruitful plans about ending socialized medicine, auditing the Federal Reserve, cutting spending across the board, ceasing to be the world's police, and most importantly, ending the genocide that is known as abortion.

So, what we should not be doing now is bitching, moaning, griping, complaining, weeping, and blame-shifting about Sen. Paul's results. Until Sen. Paul suspends his campaign, we all have work to do in these upcoming states. Our future and our children's futures depend upon it.

[Michael Landon]

Out of rep for Squirl.

I got you covered. :)

- ML

[squirl22]

Out of rep for Squirl.

What does that mean?

[Chieppa1]

I really think Rand's attacks on Trump really hurt him. All it did was make people on the left give him some compliments. He could have been attacking Cruz and Rubio the whole time.

At least right now he would be able to verbally "side" with Trump in the minds of the mindless voters. His path to success is destroying Rubio and Cruz. He can't do that if he spends all this time dropping insults at Trump.

The issue Rand has is that he has to work with these two after the election. His father gave zero fucks about this, but Rand seems to give a crap.

Having Trump on your good side definitely helps. Rand should have never tried to be the candidate that stands for the Republican Party (first debate). He should have pointed out that the success of Trump is because of the failing of Washington. And he was here to fix those problems.

Now he's fighting three camps.

[69360]

I like your running for senate on the LP idea. I don't know if it's possible with ballot deadlines. But if anyone could get elected to the senate for the LP it would be Rand. I don't think he would do it though.

The people arguing that it isn't over in the presidential primary are clinically insane.

[CPUd]

I like your running for senate on the LP idea. I don't know if it's possible with ballot deadlines. But if anyone could get elected to the senate for the LP it would be Rand. I don't think he would do it though.

The people arguing that it isn't over in the presidential primary are clinically insane.

It's over when Rand gets elected POTUS, or when he decides not to. Your behavior in Rand's support forum is shameful, and you should consider whether or not it is going to be worth it for you to keep posting in here.

[Crashland]

It's never over til it's over, but right now I would not bet on Rand even with 100 to 1 odds. I will support him as long as he is still running. As for what happens next, Rand doesn't have much to lose at this point so I'd be fine with him just going scorched earth and use every opportunity to rebuke the GOP and the media and everything else. If he wins re-election to the Senate, then I wouldnt mind seeing him defect from the GOP.

[PhineasFinn]

I'm supporting Rand until he officially suspends his presidential campaign. I predict it may be after the South Carolina primary. If he has the funds to keep going afterwards, more power to him; he'll have my support. However, as much as I don't want to agree with McConnell, I really think he should sure up his senate seat. Having a Paul in Congress is vital for our country, especially since Clinton is likely to win the general election.

[laissez faire]

Are we always going to have a Ron or a Rand? Doubtful. I think the strategy definitely needs to be about some kind of organization supporting the movement.

You along with many, many others I've read so far today all seem to think refinement of campaign strategy is the key. I would say it is precisely the attempts to bolt the movement onto a campaign that has left many behind.

Electoral politics is the box the movement is trapped in. Instead of people thinking about strategically getting the movement out of the box, most of the "advice" seems to be that we haven't folded ourselves into a small enough unit to make ourselves invisible to the people we are trying to trick into voting for our liberty candidate.

We need an organized movement with metrics for "winning" that are based on things we do instead of things we exercise little control over.

A movement with political might is millions of people in agreement on a whole batch of principles. You appear to be doing what so many have done since '07, overestimating the agreement among those who support or have supported Ron, Rand, Gary Johnson, Harry Browne, et al. My post illuminates the opposite, that political might comes, and has come, from the stitching together of many fewer and more basic notions. I'd bet you and I agree on very little, definitely not this:

"We need an organized movement with metrics for "winning" that are based on things we do instead of things we exercise little control over."

Yet we might lock arms at a Rally for Rand or a forum like this.

[Anti Federalist]

The aftermath...what now?

http://i.imgur.com/0utF7.jpg

[AngryCanadian]

It's never over til it's over, but right now I would not bet on Rand even with 100 to 1 odds. I will support him as long as he is still running. As for what happens next, Rand doesn't have much to lose at this point so I'd be fine with him just going scorched earth and use every opportunity to rebuke the GOP and the media and everything else. If he wins re-election to the Senate, then I wouldn't mind seeing him defect from the GOP.

He would have much better chances of being elected as a Democrat he could use his defection to show how the War Party is not tolerant towards the minorities and migrants and only care about starting conflicts.

[revgen]

It's still early and no candidate has really emerged yet as the clear frontrunner. I'm hopeful that he makes it to the ABC Debate. If he can continue to hang on while others like Christie and Kasich drop like flies, his chances will improve.

[CPUd]

I'm supporting Rand until he officially suspends his presidential campaign. I predict it may be after the South Carolina primary. If he has the funds to keep going afterwards, more power to him; he'll have my support. However, as much as I don't want to agree with McConnell, I really think he should sure up his senate seat. Having a Paul in Congress is vital for our country, especially since Clinton is likely to win the general election.

McConnell is not worried about the Senate seat, neither is Rand. He may as well be running unopposed.

[Wilf]

Maybe this movement needs to disband; no one can agree on critical issuses, the politicians that we supported are more likely going to sell out on us. Ron is getting old and Rand is going to get away from politics as soon as his second senate term is finished.

[JK/SEA]

http://i.imgur.com/0utF7.jpg

looks like my last ballot. Will do again if need be... Its called 'principles'....

[JK/SEA]

Maybe this movement needs to disband; no one can agree on critical issuses, the politicians that we supported are more likely going to sell out on us. Ron is getting old and Rand is going to get away from politics as soon as his second senate term is finished.

nah...not while we have people like Amash, Massie in our corner.

[jbauer]

I'll be in New Hampshire on Sunday because there is still value and possibility requiring my energy. That said, consider this when you consider strategy:

Suppose Rand received 50,000 votes last night instead of Cruz. Who would they be? Answer, a mix of people voting for very different reasons, from pot legalization to anti-war, to liking curly hair, to Austrian economics, to chemtrail crusading, to Audit the Fed, to having a hot neighbor caucusing for Rand, to wanting a doctor in office and no longer liking Carson, to balancing the budget, to Read the Bills and on and on.

The 'liberty movement' is finally breaking away from the mistaken thinking that has always accompanied it since 2007: that "we win" when 50 million people think like "us." Ron's support came from diverse and often unsophisticated ways of thinking. Stop trying to sell people the whole liberty electronics superstore... just bring people in based on one or two products they need. I don't care why you vote for Rand, just tell me what you're looking for and I tell you how Rand is probably your guy. Joining a movement is not necessary.

But can't most people find 2 things they can agree with all candidates? Sanders for instances? Less war. Less walstreet?

[jbauer]

No no, you're right. He's going to win NH, NV, KY, ME and so on with 73% of the vote.

The fact that he's polling 6th-7th in NH and nationally, and just about every other state, and the fact he only got 9,000 votes in IA is writing on the wall for us.

I'd rather come to terms that we lost now, then have to prolong the agony like the last 2 cycles.

So I tend to agree. But does it do any good to piss in everyone's Cheerios? There will be more then enough time for that in the future.

[Origanalist]

I got you covered. :)

- ML

And another....

[Origanalist]

What does that mean?

It's this meaningless little thing we give to people when we like their post, once you give somebody a rep you have to give half the fucking forum one before you can give them another.

[jbauer]

He would have much better chances of being elected as a Democrat he could use his defection to show how the War Party is not tolerant towards the minorities and migrants and only care about starting conflicts.
There isn't enough free shit it his pitch. On top of that I don't think he's anywhere near anti war as his father.
Which sucks because then he's not pure enough for some and yet doesn't want to erase all brown people from the earth like most in the gop and north of 50 crowd.

[Origanalist]

There is no aftermath, the fat lady hasn't sung any song. Were one frigging State in, enough with the fucking "Oh my God it's all over bullshit already. Can you please wait until and if we get there? Klamath pissed me off, I had no idea he was just a operative for Cruz. I guess it makes sense now, the only one I remember him going after was Trump.

[WTLaw]

I think for the liberty movement to grow, we need some leaders other than just the Pauls. We need a variety of libertarian approaches. I like the concept of libertarian pragmatism.. Soft libertarians, various shades of libertarianish leaders, in addition to the hardliners like Rockwell, Woods, ect. Thats how you know the movement has really made it, when it is a true spectrum with numbers.


I've given a lot of thought to the left/right paradigm recently, and one thing that especially Rand has pointed out is (to paraphrase) "hey wouldnt it be great if we had social liberals and fiscal conservatives together in a sort of left meets right type dynamic, cutting out the mainstream GOP and Dems..." Well, for a while I treated it as this accident of history that the parties are aligned like that, but on second thought, I think the alignment is either by design, or by some invisible hand like equilibrium it orients itself that way. Can we realign the parties? Probably, but we are going to need a few lucky breaks to get there, and a lot more people.

[Origanalist]

I think for the liberty movement to grow, we need some leaders other than just the Pauls. We need a variety of libertarian approaches. I like the concept of libertarian pragmatism.. Soft libertarians, various shades of libertarianish leaders, in addition to the hardliners like Rockwell, Woods, ect. Thats how you know the movement has really made it, when it is a true spectrum with numbers.


I've given a lot of thought to the left/right paradigm recently, and one thing that especially Rand has pointed out is (to paraphrase) "hey wouldnt it be great if we had social liberals and fiscal conservatives together in a sort of left meets right type dynamic, cutting out the mainstream GOP and Dems..." Well, for a while I treated it as this accident of history that the parties are aligned like that, but on second thought, I think the alignment is either by design, or by some invisible hand like equilibrium it orients itself that way. Can we realign the parties? Probably, but we are going to need a few lucky breaks to get there, and a lot more people.

We have leaders other than the Paul's, however they are the only ones who have ran for president in a major party.

[Patrick Henry]

What is the ground game like in NH? I can't imagine him doing any worse than he did in Iowa. Also Cruz's whole "Armour of Christ" blasphemy won't fly in NH.

[Libertas Aut Mortis]

Now What?

Hmm. Good question.

It really depends on what kind of person you are, and how much you truly believe in what you claim to believe. If you are the kind of guy who prefers an easy out over fighting the good fight...then go ahead and defect to the Statists. I'm sure it's all sunshine, ponies, and most appealing...acceptance. How great would it feel to compromise? Think of the huge support group, the full nights sleep, the ability to watch TV without getting angry.

Giving up would be great. Or, you can bust your ass every single day, in any way you can, and stand up for what is right. You can embrace the cold loneliness of a strangled campaign. You can struggle to keep the flickering flame of liberty lit for ourselves and for future generations. You can be there with us when we lose. Together. Or by some act of God, you can be there with us when we win. Together.

Can you live with yourself knowing that you had the capacity and opportunity to preserve the true American Tradition, but choose comfortable shackles instead? Can you look yourself in the mirror and say "I have surrendered my mind"?

I can't.

[idiom]

I think we are actually winning, big picture. Nearly every candidate on both sides has picked up Ron Paul talking points this go around. We have 3 members in Congress instead of 1 and a lot of allies.

I thing Rand needs to go balls to the wall. He needs to drop a speech like his dad's "what-is" or "imagine" that so challenges the status quo it sets him apart from wanna-be revolutionaries like Trump, Cruz and Sanders.

He need to double down on big issues that are relatable beyond the 2% INTJ End The Fed crowd that makes up the base and this forum.

Make headlines. Call Hillary and Bernie racist for supporting the war on drugs and endless two-faced policies that keep minorities down.

Ron never tried to look sane or fit in, and that how we knew he was the only one.

[Origanalist]

Now What?

Hmm. Good question.

It really depends on what kind of person you are, and how much you truly believe in what you claim to believe. If you are the kind of guy who prefers an easy out over fighting the good fight...then go ahead and defect to the Statists. I'm sure it's all sunshine, ponies, and most appealing...acceptance. How great would it feel to compromise? Think of the huge support group, the full nights sleep, the ability to watch TV without getting angry.

Giving up would be great. Or, you can bust your ass every single day, in any way you can, and stand up for what is right. You can embrace the cold loneliness of a strangled campaign. You can struggle to keep the flickering flame of liberty lit for ourselves and for future generations. You can be there with us when we lose. Together. Or by some act of God, you can be there with us when we win. Together.

Can you live with yourself knowing that you had the capacity and opportunity to preserve the true American Tradition, but choose comfortable shackles instead? Can you look yourself in the mirror and say "I have surrendered my mind"?

I can't.

That's a hell of a post #4 :rolleyes:

http://reactiongifs.me/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/clapping-crowd-applause.gif