Rand attacking Trump during the debate. discuss.

[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.

[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

[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/2015/0...auls-co/203221

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

http://www.businessinsider.com/megyn...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...#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 bull$#@! 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...

...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...

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...

...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 $#@! 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.

[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/defaul...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.