Sen. Rand Paul ready to 'explore' 2012 bid if...

[itshappening]

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said Thursday he intends to "explore" a run for president in 2012 should his father, Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), decide against another campaign.

"He has not made his mind up," Paul said of his father at a Thursday appearance in Kentucky. "If he does not run, I have not ruled it out, and I will think about it."

Earlier in the day, Paul told a Kentucky radio station that if the Texas congressman doesn't run, "then I think there are options open and we will explore those options."

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/...lore-2012-bid-

[ItsTime]

A little late to start exploring? But maybe this is a bad sign that Ron wont run.

[PatriotOne]

The more and more I think about it, the more it makes sense. If RP passes the torch to his son, I am ready to support Rand whole heartedly

[ItsTime]

^Same here.

[Aratus]

i'm happy either way! if neither run, we need
to somehow herding cats find a consensus or
at least an online agreement to be very nice
to each other if people here go threeways or
fiveways almost all across the political map!!!

[LudwigVonMisoSoup]

As I've alluded to on other posts here, Rand really is our best chance for 2012. The experience thing can't be lobbed his way because Obama, too, only had a few years in the senate before his run. Rand has the support of all of us Ron Paul supporters as well as a number of neocon radio hosts (Hannity, Dennis Miller, Levin, Igraham, etc.). There are also a good number of progressives who respect his views on the Patriot Act, Iraq War, etc. This is setting up to be a very interesting election cycle.

[roho76]

I'm having a hard time disagreeing with this idea.

Ron is where he needs to be. Grilling the FED on a regular basis.

Rand is uniting the republicans and they will vote for him in the primary where NeoCons will not vote for Ron.

If Ron doesn't run than Rand had better or at least Gary Johnson. I need someone with principal to vote for. I can't vote for Bob Barr and cool as chuck Baldwin is I'd like someone who can actually win.

[Wren]

As I've alluded to on other posts here, Rand really is our best chance for 2012. The experience thing can't be lobbed his way because Obama, too, only had a few years in the senate before his run. Rand has the support of all of us Ron Paul supporters as well as a number of neocon radio hosts (Hannity, Dennis Miller, Levin, Igraham, etc.). There are also a good number of progressives who respect his views on the Patriot Act, Iraq War, etc. This is setting up to be a very interesting election cycle.

A few years in the senate vs. the few months Rand has been in office are not really comparable. I'd still prefer if his dad ran, it's still way too early for rand to consider a shot at the presidency. Personally, I think he's just flirting with the idea so that it garners media attention and support for Ron. He's written an entire book designed for the average conservative but packaged in a way that lays out his father's policies.

[Aratus]

its seminally like barry goldwater's concience of a conservative

[sailingaway]

A few years in the senate vs. the few months Rand has been in office are not really comparable. I'd still prefer if his dad ran, it's still way too early for rand to consider a shot at the presidency. Personally, I think he's just flirting with the idea so that it garners media attention and support for Ron. He's written an entire book designed for the average conservative but packaged in a way that lays out his father's policies.

Me too. Those really pushing Rand over Ron mostly (but not all) are also pushing Gary Johnson. It seems like some subset just wants Ron to quit sucking the oxygen out of the room.

However, if Ron decides not to run -- on his own, not because he's pushed into it, I would be disappointed, but would back Rand in that circumstance if he chose to run. I'm not really sure it is in RAND's best interest to run, but that would be his choice, at that point.

[FrankRep]

Paul / Paul 2012!

[Agorism]

I'm fine with either, but I'm hoping Rand will call a vote for a declaration of war with Libya.

[gls]

Rand should run and win. He strikes the perfect balance between principle and pragmatism, and the country is ready for his message. Ron's forte is running educational campaigns, and he has done an excellent job of spreading a philosophically consistent message of liberty. But that is no longer enough; America desperately needs a president who truly believes in the power of freedom in the White House in 2013, and I honestly think Rand has what it takes to get there.

[AuH20]

Me too. Those really pushing Rand over Ron mostly (but not all) are also pushing Gary Johnson. It seems like some subset just wants Ron to quit sucking the oxygen out of the room.

However, if Ron decides not to run -- on his own, not because he's pushed into it, I would be disappointed, but would back Rand in that circumstance if he chose to run. I'm not really sure it is in RAND's best interest to run, but that would be his choice, at that point.

I think it's more attributable to the fact that the electoral dynamics have changed. Brand identity is at an all-time high and Rand is coming off a roaring upset in which he took out the Republican establishment candidate and then the democratic choice. Ride the momentum. The opposition will go back to the well dredging up Aqua Buddha, the Civil Rights Act, appearances on the Alex Jones Show & whatever they can twist and contort to their narrow agenda. But it's not going to stick. Even some members of the hardened opposition have regretfully admitted that Rand is likeable and well-spoken. This genuineness will go a long way in warding off attacks.

[FrankRep]

Glenn Beck: Rand Paul may be one of the only politicians I agree with and trust [8/14/09]
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...-trust-8-14-09

[Liberty_Mike]

Rand Paul is the $#@! and I really hope he runs for president, but not in 2012. I think he needs to focus on reforming the Senate right now, and Ron should still plan on running. Plus, Rand could be the first US Senator to endorse Ron Paul for president! Maybe Mike Lee would follow?

[Slutter McGee]

Ron is hitting 8 to 12% in most polls. whereas in 2007 he was at 0 percent. Although I still think that Rand has a better shot politically at becoming president, I would still like Ron to run. Rand may be able to play the political game, but Ron can play the fundraising game. Personally, I would like to see Ron try again, with better chances than last time, and increase the fundraising base even more for a potential Rand run in 2016.

Granted, I am just an armchair campaign manager, but just my thoughts.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[nate895]

I really don't think anyone besides Ron Paul is truly viable this go around. Rand hasn't even been in the Senate long enough to memorize everyone's name, let alone make a serious case for President. Johnson could make a better case, but he's boring and is defined by his marijuana stance, so he cannot break out in the so-con crowd. Ron Paul has the same position as Johnson, but it doesn't define him and he makes a better argument for it.

[Matt Collins]

As I've alluded to on other posts here, Rand really is our best chance for 2012. The experience thing can't be lobbed his way because Obama, too, only had a few years in the senate before his run.

The Republicans would say: "we have an inexperienced President now, and look where that has gotten us, do we really want to go down the same path by electing another noob?"

[One Last Battle!]

Honestly, I am okay with either. However, I STRONGLY prefer Ron to Rand for the following reasons:

-This is almost certainly Ron's last chance to run for president. Rand is pretty much open for the next twenty years or so, whereas Ron is going to be way to old to run in 2016.

-Ron pushes his issues to the forefront, unlike Rand. Rand has a better chance at getting support of regular Republicans, but Ron is superior at educating the public and bringing about change in public opinion (look at 2008; Ron Paul started the fad of opposing the fed that regular Americans and even Anonymous are now supporting, despite the media's attempt to push the blame onto the free market as they always do). Honestly, I would prefer Ron trying and failing in 2012 but pushing American public opinion far into the libertarian direction for 2016 than Rand running and succeeding but being unable to do much due to Statism being too strong in congress/senate for him to oppose.

-Rand has only been senator for less than one term. He needs a bit more experience to brag about to the public before jumping to the presidency.

In terms of electability, that last issue is the only one that makes Rand less electable. He is a superb orator, and he is good at not going too deep into issues (like Ron Paul is apt to do at times). Plus, he can appear to be a run of the mill conservative or neocon when he wants without compromising his principles, as he has long since proven his libertarian-ness (fooling quite a few people on this forum).

[Agorism]

Rand could easily lose the grass roots base of his father if he wasn't careful though in which case his campaign would be dead in the water. For instance if a Fox News debate asked him if he thought Libya was an impeachable offense and he said not yet (with Ron already saying it was), I could imagine the base leaving him.

Just saying..

[AuH20]

Ron is hitting 8 to 12% in most polls. whereas in 2007 he was at 0 percent. Although I still think that Rand has a better shot politically at becoming president, I would still like Ron to run. Rand may be able to play the political game, but Ron can play the fundraising game. Personally, I would like to see Ron try again, with better chances than last time, and increase the fundraising base even more for a potential Rand run in 2016.

Granted, I am just an armchair campaign manager, but just my thoughts.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

Rand can double Ron's numbers at minimum by himself. Then it depends what Palin does. Palin could probably bump him up 6 to 8 percent if she defers to him. The field is so weak that Rand stands out like a superstar for making principled stands. The 500 billion cut budget proposal was not only a by-product of Rand's inherent beliefs but a potentially brilliant campaign strategy. It sets up the narrative that he isn't your daddy's republican. The grassroots is starving for a leader to lead the rebellion against the Republican establishment. These people are aching for a fight.

[gls]

Ron is hitting 8 to 12% in most polls. whereas in 2007 he was at 0 percent. Although I still think that Rand has a better shot politically at becoming president, I would still like Ron to run. Rand may be able to play the political game, but Ron can play the fundraising game. Personally, I would like to see Ron try again, with better chances than last time, and increase the fundraising base even more for a potential Rand run in 2016.

Granted, I am just an armchair campaign manager, but just my thoughts.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

But will Ron run to win? I think it's safe to say that last time he didn't.

[Joey Fuller]

aww crap...

What am I going to do with all these Ron Paul 2012 stickers?
http://www.tennesseesonsofliberty.co...-packages.html

I would be happy either way... but I hope ole Ron gives it one more shot.

[Liberty_Mike]

By the way, some classic Rand Paul footage on Ron's campaign trail in 2007!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRS-bhMUQos

[civusamericanus]

Ron is hitting 8 to 12% in most polls. whereas in 2007 he was at 0 percent. Although I still think that Rand has a better shot politically at becoming president, I would still like Ron to run. Rand may be able to play the political game, but Ron can play the fundraising game. Personally, I would like to see Ron try again, with better chances than last time, and increase the fundraising base even more for a potential Rand run in 2016.

Granted, I am just an armchair campaign manager, but just my thoughts.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

I think Ron Paul's time has come. He has an obvious better chance this time, and the fact many uninformed people will simply confuse Ron-For-Rand, and support Ron simply because they think it's Rand. When Rand goes out giving speeches for his dad, his picture will be up on the MSM headlines just like Ron. The confusion is going to work in Ron's favor, since his son essentially carries the same message.

Running Rand instead of Ron in 2012, would likely be a mistake, although I'd support Rand, I think it's too soon in the public eye to elect a first term senator whom will have less than 2 years exp. by the time he could take the Pres. office.

As for Ron picking his son for VP, I think that is a logical move and the excitement of a father/son pick would be interesting. God forbide, anything would happen to Ron if he were elected, but having Rand as backup VP, would sure make us liberty minded people much more comfortable.

Setting the record book for the 1st father as President with 1st son as Vice President, would be an interesting achievment!

[nate895]

Rand can double Ron's numbers at minimum by himself. Then it depends what Palin does. Palin could probably bump him up 6 to 8 percent if she defers to him. The field is so weak that Rand stands out like a superstar for making principled stands. The 500 billion cut budget proposal was not only a by-product of Rand's inherent beliefs but a potentially brilliant campaign strategy. It sets up the narrative that he isn't your daddy's republican. The grassroots is starving for a leader to lead the rebellion against the establishment.

In six years, I can see this if Ron doesn't take off this year. Rand cannot make a serious case this year. While "experience" should not be as important as voters make it out to be, that does not change the fact that it is important to them and Rand has practically zero. This would be especially important in the GE. Obama has proven himself to be an ineffectual leader, which will be a huge advantage for the GOP side if they nominate anyone besides Palin or Rand, so it will effect the campaign all the way through.

If Ron doesn't run and win this year, Rand can make a great case in 2016 or 2020. That's when we should use him.

[TheTyke]

But will Ron run to win? I think it's safe to say that last time he didn't.

Exactly, that's what makes this so difficult to decide and weigh.

Rand got me excited right at the beginning by evenly declaring that he was running to win. That's why many of us put everything into electing him. He has more appeal with standard Republicans, he is "something new," and is well positioned as the most conservative candidate, and would definitely have tea party support. The "inexperience" thing will be a big attack used on him, but folks will attack Ron for the opposite problem.

I love Ron's principles and honesty, but I also want the same fire out of him! In the infamous Stephenopolis interview, when asked what the point of running was, Ron was like "Uhm, well, to win... is one.. is the..." and to this day he doesn't seem assured/confident, and that's one thing voters are looking for. But he does inspire more enthusiasm from the base, and has "experience" which will be used as an argument against Rand.

I'd support either, but it's not easy to determine who'd have the best chances. If Ron would adopt some of Rand's rhetoric and confidence, I think he'd be a real challenger... I just wonder if he will.

[acptulsa]

And if Ron does run and win, and decides he has had enough after four years, we get three terms.

And if he lasts eight years, we get sixteen.

[AuH20]

So DeMint is not running. Who the hell could anyone seriously vote for? Who is a disaffected conservative going to vote for after repeatedly taking the knife out of their back, after each election cycle? Palin is a glorified cheerleader. Huckabee is a Christian socialist. Romney is too enamored with the CFR. Newt is an immoral weasel. Gary Johnson makes me want to go to sleep when I hear him.