Ron Paul Lost. Stop Telling Rand to be More Like Him.

[SilentBull]

Some are claiming, based on current national polls, that Rand's strategy isn't working, and that his problem is that he needs to be more like Ron so he can fire up the libertarian base that was so enthusiastic in 2008 and 2012.

That base is not enough to win elections, and no, Ron Paul was not doing better than Rand at this point. Rand has way more money than Ron did, and the establishment has not been able to create the perception that Rand is not a serious candidate and is a "kook." Rand also has way more friends within the party than Ron did, and this matters!

Although they tried to ignore him in the debate and will continue to try, the truth is more non-libertarian republicans view Rand favorably than did his dad. This will be important as other candidates start dropping out.

National polls don't mean anything right now. The only reason they matter now is because there are so many candidates and they are being used to exclude some of them from the debates. Using national polls as proof that Rand's campaign is failing is just not fair. Even Iowa and New Hampshire polls don't mean that much right now. Ron was still in single digits in Iowa weeks before the caucus. When the polling companies' reputation was on the line, Ron shot up to 25% in the polls.

It is so ridiculous to suggest that Rand needs to change his strategy to one that has already failed, twice.

[fisharmor]

Ok, so, based on all your criteria and goals, I'll just go ahead and back Jeb Bush then.

[Carlybee]

We've already been told he doesn't need the libertarian base. Thanks for reminding us.

[phill4paul]

Ok, so, based on all your criteria and goals, I'll just go ahead and back Jeb Bush then.

Lol.

[SilentBull]

Ok, so, based on all your criteria and goals, I'll just go ahead and back Jeb Bush then.

Right, because Jeb Bush has introduced the biggest tax cut in American history, has fought to end the Patriot Act, has fought to audit the Fed, and has fought to make republicans understand that we don't have to get involved in every war, and that we need criminal justice reform. You are brilliant.

[Jan2017]

Ron Paul won 191 delegates to how many for anybuddy else - won four or five states right ?

If Rand does not want to be like his Dad, maybe then somebody in this here room would do ya' ok ?



.

[cajuncocoa]

[acptulsa]

Furthermore, one of the things that held Ron back was the perception that he was honest, but ineffective. Because he is in the Senate, and the Senate is not only a smaller group but has possibilities the House does not (like filibusters), Rand has been effective.

Whether it is ridiculous to suggest he quits doing what has The Establishment so scared depends. Are you an anti-federalist or a federalist in drag? By their fruits do I know them.

[Warlord]

It's frustrating Rand is low in the polls but lets not forget he is viewed favourably by a lot more than his Dad ever managed. Logikal speaks the truth.

[NewRightLibertarian]

Rand hasn't even come close to his father's level of support within the party. Some genius strategy. Bet it was conjured up by the folks responsible for the political bribery scandal.

[ItsTime]

The biggest problem Rand has now is he does not have a "seat". He will never be accepted by the cronies in the GOP and him trying is pushing away liberty people.

[acptulsa]

Rand hasn't even come close to his father's level of support within the party. Some genius strategy. Bet it was conjured up by the folks responsible for the political bribery scandal.

Whose polls are you depending on for this tidbit?

And who does have the support within the party that Ron managed in a race with less than half as many candidates in it? Rubio? No. Bush? Hardly.

The Bush dynasty can't do it, and we're being told we should give up because Rand hasn't done it. With Iowa five months away. Just because there's a sucker born every minute doesn't mean they all wound up here.

[Carlybee]

Rand hasn't even come close to his father's level of support within the party. Some genius strategy. Bet it was conjured up by the folks responsible for the political bribery scandal.

It's a marathon, not a sprint.

[Carlybee]

Double post

[Mr.NoSmile]

Rand hasn't even come close to his father's level of support within the party. Some genius strategy. Bet it was conjured up by the folks responsible for the political bribery scandal.

I must have missed the support that his father had when the RNC wouldn't even say his name during the roll call. Very strong support there, I see.

[fisharmor]

Right, because Jeb Bush has introduced the biggest tax cut in American history, has fought to end the Patriot Act, has fought to audit the Fed, and has fought to make republicans understand that we don't have to get involved in every war, and that we need criminal justice reform. You are brilliant.

Well look, if you want to talk issues, then fine, let's talk issues, and we'll get dragged into the same argument you and your buddies are badly losing with libertarians.

You don't want to bring that up, though - obviously, since the whole point of this thread is to say (yet again) that libertarians just need to $#@! off.

You have a choice: either stop bringing up the issues and avoid the softballs Rand has been throwing (and logically get to the point where we're all supporting Jeb) or bring them up and run into the brick wall of Rand's inconsistency.
You don't get to hang out in the middle ground. Not with the people who think consistency means something.

[SilentBull]

Well look, if you want to talk issues, then fine, let's talk issues, and we'll get dragged into the same argument you and your buddies are badly losing with libertarians.

You don't want to bring that up, though - obviously, since the whole point of this thread is to say (yet again) that libertarians just need to $#@! off.

You have a choice: either stop bringing up the issues and avoid the softballs Rand has been throwing (and logically get to the point where we're all supporting Jeb) or bring them up and run into the brick wall of Rand's inconsistency.
You don't get to hang out in the middle ground. Not with the people who think consistency means something.

Is that supposed to be a response to what I said, cause you're not making sense. I did just mention issues where Rand has shown how close he is to Ron's views, as Ron has said himself!

And who is telling libertarians to "$#@! off?" What I'm telling libertarians is to understand that the vast majority of voters simply do not have the mental capacity to think as logically as true libertarians do. They need to be dealt with differently. Most voters simply do not care about Austrian economics so you have to speak to them differently.

How you can compare Jeb to Rand is beyond me and anyone with common sense.

[Chieppa1]

I fault Ron Paul 0%. America 100%.

[Jan2017]

Whose polls are you depending on for this tidbit?

And who does have the support within the party that Ron managed in a race with less than half as many candidates in it? Rubio? No. Bush? Hardly.

The Bush dynasty can't do it, and we're being told we should give up because Rand hasn't done it. With Iowa five months away. Just because there's a sucker born every minute doesn't mean they all wound up here.

Yep, and consider Ron Paul only tied with Romney in 2012 GOP Convention for Colorado 13 to 13 . . .

I'll betcha Rand wins Colorado something bigger than his Dad did . . .
jus' sayin'

[brandon]

Winning the election is mostly irrelevant and wasn't Ron Paul's goal. The important thing is educating people and changing their minds so that we can have a long term change in the way people view government. Sneaking one guy into power through some trojan horse campaign is pretty worthless. He wont actually be able to accomplish anything when congress and public opinion are both against him.

[dannno]

Ron was still in single digits in Iowa weeks before the caucus. When the polling companies' reputation was on the line, Ron shot up to 25% in the polls.

In other words, the previous polls were rigged against him.

[SilentBull]

Winning the election is mostly irrelevant and wasn't Ron Paul's goal. The important thing is educating people and changing their minds so that we can have a long term change in the way people view government. Sneaking one guy into power through some trojan horse campaign is pretty worthless. He wont actually be able to accomplish everything when congress and public opinion are both against him.

So you think you can get a majority of voters to care about Austrian Economics? Good luck with that.

[Jan2017]

In other words, the previous polls were rigged against him.

Polls have a limited use . . . they do not poll on college campuses much - if at all -

[hells_unicorn]

There is a bit too much reality in the OP for some people to handle, but it is what it is. People don't seem to fully understand why Rand attacked Trump right off the bat during the debate, that was done precisely to up his credentials with the standard GOP base, who are wary of having a 3rd party spoiler giving us another Clinton. Likewise, there is an unhealthy "Ron Paul Cult" demeanor in some of Rand's detractors that needs to be brought out and dealt with, and I think Brandon's post on here kind of underscores that point, as if "the pulpit" isn't the perfect place to educate the ignorant and a president can't do this once elected.

Those of us who are trying to get Rand nominated are fighting a 2 or 3 front battle depending on how you look at it. One side is the fanatical Lew Rockwell ring who thinks that anything less but verbatim anarcho-capitalist rhetoric 24/7 is heresy, and another side of suckers who will think that immigration is the only issue on the agenda and will ignore EVERY OTHER ISSUE in the name of supporting Trump. There's a 3rd group in the GOP establishment, but there's not a heck of a lot of them on this forum, the other 2 groups is another story.

[TheTexan]

Some are claiming, based on current national polls, that Rand's strategy isn't working, and that his problem is that he needs to be more like Ron

I agree, that would be a bad move. Rand should be more like someone who is winning in the polls, like Trump

[Jan2017]

I agree, that would be a bad move. Rand should be more like someone who is winning in the polls, like Trump

I disagree.

[fisharmor]

What I'm telling libertarians is to understand that the vast majority of voters simply do not have the mental capacity to think as logically as true libertarians do.

Oh, we already got that from your OP.

[fisharmor]

So you think you can get a majority of voters to care about Austrian Economics? Good luck with that.

If it doesn't happen it won't be because anyone, you know, tried.

[Sam I am]

I disagree.

I think that he was being a bit sarcastic, but Trump supporters do exist on this forum, so you never know.

[Sam I am]

What I'm telling libertarians is to understand that the vast majority of voters simply do not have the mental capacity to think as logically as true libertarians do.

I'm going to go off on a bit of a tangent here, but if that is your actual opinion, then you ought to venture outside the echo chamber.

The assumption that libertarians are just more logical than everyone else is a wrong assumption. There are many many non-libertarians who are just as logical or even more logical then the mean-average libertarian.

A lot of people just don't value freedom as highly as a libertarian would, and many people are content with a limited set of freedoms so long as they're allowed to live a comfortable life.

If you just assume that everyone you disagree with is not being logical, then you usually don't actually understand their position. And furthermore, when you don't understand your opponent's position, you probably don't understand your own as well.