Why do leftists hate Rand Paul more than any other candidate?

[randomname]

Them hating Ron Paul I can understand, as he was much more extreme and the exact opposite of any an all of their stances, but what is it about Rand that is so revolting to left wingers compared to establishment republicans?

[LawnWake]

Because he's seen as a threat to their ideology.

Don't just think that only leftists are like that. Rapid partisanship is common all across the board. Just look at most discussions online; who do communists/libertarian socialists/etc hate the most? Anarcho-capitalists. Who do anarcho-capitalists hate the most? Communists/libertarian socialists/etc. People are ridiculous like that. Rather than focus on the real issue or the people with any real power; statists. They just hate each other for not being like them. Even though it's neither the libertarian socialists or the anarcho-capitalists who are responsible for bombing people overseas or putting the tyrants in charge.

[69360]

Ron and Rand aren't far apart on issues. People here are just nitpicky.

The left probably fears Rand because he puts their hypocrisy on display.

[Brian4Liberty]

Leftists don't like Rand Paul because he represents true opposition to their precious big mommy government.

[Krugminator2]

There is a very easy answer. Despite all of the talk about civil liberties, freedom of speech, etc, the common thread and the only issue that is important to ALL people the left is their desire to have government redistribute a bigger share of the pie "to make life more equal." They are a collection of victim groups. That is the only thing that binds guilty white liberals, unions, environmentalists, minorities, single women, college professors and trial lawyers.


It is intellectually incoherent to say you respect the rights of individuals yet have no respect for property rights. That contradiction is impossible to refute, and I think a lot of people understand their inconsistency on some level. So a response when people don't have an argument is to get red in the face.

[acptulsa]

There is a very easy answer. Despite all of the talk about civil liberties, freedom of speech, etc, the common thread and the only issue that is important to ALL people the left is their desire to have government redistribute a bigger share of the pie "to make life more equal." They are a collection of victim groups. That is the only thing that binds guilty white liberals, unions, environmentalists, minorities, single women, college professors and trial lawyers.


It is intellectually incoherent to say you respect the rights of individuals yet have no respect for property rights. That contradiction is impossible to refute, and I think a lot of people understand their inconsistency on some level. So a response when people don't have an argument is to get red in the face.

On the one hand, this.

On the other hand, who says they do? msnbc? Mother Jones? All the Official Cheerleaders and Sheep Herders?

What does, for example, Ted Rall say about Rand Paul?

If you were trying to convince a bunch of liberals that you could micromismanage the whole world perfectly, but merely wanted the bribe money, why wouldn't you concentrate on trashing the guy who says, you people can do it better yourselves and I'll let you?

[orenbus]

I'd agree with the idea he's a threat to their established ideology, but it's because of the influence of MSM on their though process that reinforces fear and lines of attack over and over again that has the biggest impact on their dislike of Rand Paul vs. other established candidates, the devil they know.

Because libertarian leaning concepts tend to ask tough questions of the establishment it's something that threatens the status quo. Incremental change can be acceptable, but to many change that has widespread impacts that result in paradigm shifts (such as on foreign policy, economic, social) isn't something most people are ready to buy into therefore it's perceived as threatening and something that should be smothered out before it grows.

Also being pro-life is a non starter for many women in the U.S. and will auto generate hate on the left.

[Ronin Truth]

Probably because Rand is nowhere near commie enough for them.

[KCIndy]

Leftists don't like Rand Paul because he represents true opposition to their precious big mommy government.

Thread winner, IMHO.

Even statists and left wingers know that mainstream Republicans don't really want smaller government. They just continue to grow government in different directions.

Of all the candidates in the field, Rand - even if he's not "pure" enough for many libertarians - is the only person who is actually likely to shrink government in ANY way, shape or form.

[georgiaboy]

In addition to some of the good points above, Rand is also the biggest threat to any potential Dem nominee for 2016, precisely because he can pull some of their constituencies away due to his positions.

So yeah, the left hates him because he's the biggest threat to their team's 2016 electoral hopes. If they were honest about it, they'd see that many of his positions and record are better than those of their blue team candidates, and vote accordingly. Heaven forbid.

[randomname]

well if you have a candidate who is hated by central bankers, oligarchs, lobbyists, neocons/globalists, spies, journalists and assorted leftists alike (ie statists of all sorts), you just know it's a good one eh

unfortunately these are exactly the people whose support you need in order to win an election...

[Cdn_for_liberty]

the left who were screaming about the "evil bankers" on Wall Street will be bitching about the Audit The Fed bill.

[philipped]

Thread winner, IMHO.

Even statists and left wingers know that mainstream Republicans don't really want smaller government. They just continue to grow government in different directions.

Of all the candidates in the field, Rand - even if he's not "pure" enough for many libertarians - is the only person who is actually likely to shrink government in ANY way, shape or form.

It really comes down to this tbh.

[56ktarget]

Where did this nonsense come from? We agree with Rand about 30% of the time, but the rest of Republicans less than 0% of the time.

[Spikender]

Where did this nonsense come from? We agree with Rand about 30% of the time, but the rest of Republicans less than 0% of the time.

You can speak for all left-leaning folks?

Or is this just how you feel?

[H. E. Panqui]

...REPUBLICRATS, PLEASE CEASE WITH THE MINDLESS, GD FOOL, 'LEFT-RIGHT' DICHOTOMY..

...(republicrat munchkins have their heads so stuffed full of $hit there is no room for any reality)

[randomname]

Where did this nonsense come from? We agree with Rand about 30% of the time, but the rest of Republicans less than 0% of the time.

vitriol spewed by left wing twitterers/pundits/"journalists"

[Todd]

Leftists don't like Rand Paul because he represents true opposition to their precious big mommy government.

This....^ and I think the media outlets leftists adhere to have pretty much tied him to the Tea party. They also are pure Hillary disciples and cant stand it when he attacks her for any responsibility she may have in Benghazi.

Just read any number of "Salon" articles about Rand and you'll get a picture of what they think of Libertarian ideas.

[otherone]

The left wholeheartedly believes that the solution to any communal problem is through government. The left sees government as the only bulwark against victimization, especially by monied interests. Even with issues like legal marijuana, the left sees as taking advantage of society's most vulnerable...children, the poor and minorities.
Rand is outspoken in his distrust of government as a solution, and they HATE him for it.

[jmdrake]

Them hating Ron Paul I can understand, as he was much more extreme and the exact opposite of any an all of their stances, but what is it about Rand that is so revolting to left wingers compared to establishment republicans?

They actually hate Rand more than Ron because Rand could actually win. And both Rand and Ron stood to pull from leftist constituencies. It's about power, not ideals. A John McCain or Jeb Bush strengthens the power of the wing power brokers because they can be better cast as "the enemy." But what do you say to your black constituents that you've kept in line all these years when they find out your republican opponent wants to end the wars and give you back your right to vote even if you have a drug felony?

[jmdrake]

Where did this nonsense come from? We agree with Rand about 30% of the time, but the rest of Republicans less than 0% of the time.

So you've missed the leftists attacking Rand on trivial crap like the fact that he didn't graduate college even though he went on to complete medical school? These same leftists aren't covering Bill Clinton being caught up in a child sex abuse scandal. Why is that?

Edit: And I guess that's my point. Rand get's hated on by liberals for the silliest stuff when Rand actual represents things that liberals claim to support.

[TheFlash]

Rand is a threat to them .

[AuH20]

Rand is a threat to them .

How many government departments have the Republican Party closed since Calvin Coolidge? Therein lies your answer.

[acptulsa]

Where did this nonsense come from? We agree with Rand about 30% of the time, but the rest of Republicans less than 0% of the time.

Which, to those of us who can comprehend the language, is exactly why randomname is confused by the level of vitriol the progblogs are heaping on Rand Paul, to the exclusion of all those people they 'agree with 0% of the time'.

Care to explain that? Or are you incapable of anything but irrelevant drive-by distractions?

...REPUBLICRATS, PLEASE CEASE WITH THE MINDLESS, GD FOOL, 'LEFT-RIGHT' DICHOTOMY..

...(republicrat munchkins have their heads so stuffed full of $hit there is no room for any reality)

Why can't you confine your ceaseless redundancy to your own thread? Or do you really think this fact-free, insulting and anything-but-subtle screed is helping the Team Blue Republicrats realize that all this vitriol is designed to keep them from looking outside the Republicrat false choice?

Your words say, 'Escape the false paradigm!' but your tone says, 'Everyone who has rejected the false paradigm is a substance-free raving semi-literate you want no part of!'

[jmdrake]

Which, to those of us who can comprehend the language, is exactly why randomname is confused by the level of vitriol the progblogs are heaping on Rand Paul, to the exclusion of all those people they 'agree with 0% of the time'.

Care to explain that? Or are you incapable of anything but irrelevant drive-by distractions?

^This! Notice that nobody on the left criticized Rand Paul until he actually won the GOP Senate primary. Nobody. Had Rand Paul lost Rachel Madcow would have had him on to console him and commiserate how bad the "mean ole' GOP" had treated him.

[AuH20]

^This! Notice that nobody on the left criticized Rand Paul until he actually won the GOP Senate primary. Nobody. Had Rand Paul lost Rachel Madcow would have had him on to console him and commiserate how bad the "mean ole' GOP" had treated him.

Wasn't Rand Paul a semi-regular guest on Maddow's show until THE INTERVIEW (after he won)?

[jmdrake]

Wasn't Rand Paul a semi-regular guest on Maddow's show until THE INTERVIEW (after he won)?

Yep. In fact, if I recall correctly, he announced his candidacy on the Madcow show. He really got blindsided by that one.

[H. E. Panqui]

actuptulsa writes: Why can't you confine your ceaseless redundancy to your own thread? Or do you really think this fact-free, insulting and anything-but-subtle screed is helping the Team Blue Republicrats realize that all this vitriol is designed to keep them from looking outside the Republicrat false choice?

Your words say, 'Escape the false paradigm!' but your tone says, 'Everyone who has rejected the false paradigm is a substance-free raving semi-literate you want no part of!'



(lol!...i have less than 200 posts and you are pushing 40,000...and i am 'ceaselessly redundant'

(..!good grief, these republicrats are deluded!..

[thoughtomator]

Rand walks the walk on issue after issue where the lefties have been merely talking the talk for half a century, and he hits them right at the core of their self-images.

For example, while Rand talks about genuine prison reform, the lefties have been politically capitalizing on the brokenness of the system since MLK without actually doing a damn thing about it.

Rand is a real threat to their coalition. The anti-war faction still exists, bound and gagged and stuffed in the dungeon as it may be, and when they learn of Rand they defect to him. Same with blacks concerned with criminal justice disparities and police abuses that are mostly directed at them. Without these pieces of their coalition, they don't have electoral viability - and these are just some of the factions that Rand threatens to peel off from them.

And while they're staring in the face of a Hillary Clinton nomination, warmongering corporatist hypocrite cubed that she is, they are not terribly happy to begin with and are going to have severe trouble pulling their coalition together.

[acptulsa]

actuptulsa writes: Why can't you confine your ceaseless redundancy to your own thread? Or do you really think this fact-free, insulting and anything-but-subtle screed is helping the Team Blue Republicrats realize that all this vitriol is designed to keep them from looking outside the Republicrat false choice?

Your words say, 'Escape the false paradigm!' but your tone says, 'Everyone who has rejected the false paradigm is a substance-free raving semi-literate you want no part of!'



(lol!...i have less than 200 posts and you are pushing 40,000...and i am 'ceaselessly redundant'

(..!good grief, these republicrats are deluded!..

You should really look up the word 'redundant' some time.

You might just compare its definition to the definition of 'prolific', too, just for reference.

Unless you like being perceived as similar in both ignorance and willingness to lie and misrepresent as those pundits who insist on equating a desire to see government do less with a desire to see poor people starve in the streets.

If you want to prove to us you really aren't ignorant, the best way to do it is to post stuff that actually isn't ignorant.