Rand is his dad

[William Tell]

Deal with it.

[Dr.3D]

Nothing to deal with here. I always knew that.

[dannno]

Same goal, different strategy.

[helmuth_hubener]

I feel like he is having a change of strategy as of late. Getting into the Zeitgeist, if you will. Personally, I approve of the adjustment.

[timosman]

They no longer can $#@! with him.

[fr33]

But what will it accomplish? Do y'all ever apply hindsight to it? Remove emotions of giving The Man the finger. Rand should literally adopt his dad's strategy since education is all that's been accomplished. But tweak that strategy some because it's great if you're someone like Jesse Benton and make a few hundred grand off our donations, while there is almost nothing politically or in terms of halting the power of the state that has been done.

[Jesse James]

if Rand becomes his dad he won't be reelected.

[eleganz]

But what will it accomplish? Do y'all ever apply hindsight to it? Remove emotions of giving The Man the finger. Rand should literally adopt his dad's strategy since education is all that's been accomplished. But tweak that strategy some because it's great if you're someone like Jesse Benton and make a few hundred grand off our donations, while there is almost nothing politically or in terms of halting the power of the state that has been done.

You're missing the entire point. Why aren't you missing the point?

What Rand just accomplished, although a victory in a small battle in the grand scheme, but could very well lead to Ryan and Preibus losing their posts. Rand is playing in a game that is far from 'giving the man the finger'. Rand used 'The Art of the Deal' against Trump publicly without causing conflict with the President.

He's doing just fine, something much different than what Ron was capable of but keeping the heart of some of the things Ron wanted to do.

[timosman]

Concrete shoes, cyanide, TNT.

[merkelstan]

I don't agree. Rand should be using his seat to teach liberty and the high road. If the Senate were 50% Paulians then horse-trading / deal-making might be a reasonable tactic.

His wussiness was on full display during the primaries, and was the reason nobody at all supported him.

[Tywysog Cymru]

I don't agree. Rand should be using his seat to teach liberty and the high road. If the Senate were 50% Paulians then horse-trading / deal-making might be a reasonable tactic.

His wussiness was on full display during the primaries, and was the reason nobody at all supported him.

He was stabbed in the back by people within the liberty movement. They jumped on the Trump train because he was louder than Rand and was getting more media attention.

[angelatc]

I don't agree. Rand should be using his seat to teach liberty and the high road. If the Senate were 50% Paulians then horse-trading / deal-making might be a reasonable tactic.

His wussiness was on full display during the primaries, and was the reason nobody at all supported him.

Screw that education crap. The purpose of politics isn't education.

[anaconda]

But what will it accomplish? Do y'all ever apply hindsight to it? Remove emotions of giving The Man the finger. Rand should literally adopt his dad's strategy since education is all that's been accomplished. But tweak that strategy some because it's great if you're someone like Jesse Benton and make a few hundred grand off our donations, while there is almost nothing politically or in terms of halting the power of the state that has been done.

I give the liberty movement a somewhat higher score. The reason there hasn't been more sweeping change has much to do with the fact that there are only about 5 liberty legislators out of 535. The monkey wrench that these 5 have managed to through into the gears of the machine is remarkable.

[eleganz]

I don't agree. Rand should be using his seat to teach liberty and the high road. If the Senate were 50% Paulians then horse-trading / deal-making might be a reasonable tactic.

His wussiness was on full display during the primaries, and was the reason nobody at all supported him.

Another one of those; "Rand should've been more like Trump" idiots.

There was plenty of support for Rand, he was top tier in fundraising and started off his campaign at the top, then came Trump. I see you're new here but know your sht before you make ridiculous statements.

[William Tell]

I don't agree. Rand should be using his seat to teach liberty and the high road. If the Senate were 50% Paulians then horse-trading / deal-making might be a reasonable tactic.

His wussiness was on full display during the primaries, and was the reason nobody at all supported him.

Neg repped. I supported him, who did you support?

[Peace&Freedom]

Another one of those; "Rand should've been more like Trump" idiots.

There was plenty of support for Rand, he was top tier in fundraising and started off his campaign at the top, then came Trump. I see you're new here but know your sht before you make ridiculous statements.

The poster was referring to the finish line, not the starting gate. No matter how strong a candidate looks at the beginning, the point is did they do what they needed to do to WIN the race, and defeat the opposition? Whoever the nominee was going to be had to build a winning vote coalition, and circumvent obstacles blocking them from succeeding. Trump accomplished this, Rand did not.

Pointing out the obvious is not idiocy, nor is it asking that Rand "become more like Trump." It's simply to suggest that our candidates also build a winning vote coalition, and circumvent obstacles blocking them from succeeding. Those factors are not unique to Trump. Rand should have done those things become a more successful candidate, period.

[Dr.3D]

Neg repped. I supported him, who did you support?

Yes, I supported him too. Guess I'm nobody too.

[eleganz]

The poster was referring to the finish line, not the starting gate. No matter how strong a candidate looks at the beginning, the point is did they do what they needed to do to WIN the race, and defeat the opposition? Whoever the nominee was going to be had to build a winning vote coalition, and circumvent obstacles blocking them from succeeding. Trump accomplished this, Rand did not.

Pointing out the obvious is not idiocy, nor is it asking that Rand "become more like Trump." It's simply to suggest that our candidates also build a winning vote coalition, and circumvent obstacles blocking them from succeeding. Those factors are not unique to Trump. Rand should have done those things become a more successful candidate, period.

What did he point out that was so obvious?

You wanted Rand to build better and bigger coalitions while the person you're seemingly defending wanted Rand to be more of an extreme balls to the walls candidate. You guys aren't even on the same page of this argument.

[fr33]

Screw that education crap. The purpose of politics isn't education.

So far all we've done is educate some people. We've made no difference whatsoever politically. The best thing Rand has done was his filibuster against govt surveillance. The movement has suffered and faded into obscurity because he did not adopt his father's "Dr. No" voting stance.

[Krugminator2]

So far all we've done is educate some people. We've made no difference whatsoever politically. The best thing Rand has done was his filibuster against govt surveillance. The movement has suffered and faded into obscurity because he did not adopt his father's "Dr. No" voting stance.

There were about 4 liberty people in Congress in 2007 and that's if you stretch and count someone like Jeff Flake. There are about 30 now and those people basically froze Obama the last 6 years.

Ron wasn't that great. Rand isn't that bad. Their voting records are almost identical.

[merkelstan]

No, not more like Trump. More like Ron.

"We ALWAYS lose with deal-making." - Ron Paul

[fr33]

There were about 4 liberty people in Congress in 2007 and that's if you stretch and count someone like Jeff Flake. There are about 30 now and those people basically froze Obama the last 6 years.

Ron wasn't that great. Rand isn't that bad. Their voting records are almost identical.

Please name them. I can count on one hand the liberty people.

[jmdrake]

The ultimate success of Rand's current strategy will be measured by what Obamacare looks like this time next year.

[PierzStyx]

Screw that education crap. The purpose of politics isn't education.

And this is why the Progressives will always win. They control education and teach people to think like them. Because all these libertarians don't understand how to actually win the long term war. As Ron Paul recognizes, education is the only way to win.

[helmuth_hubener]

And this is why the Progressives will always win. They control education and teach people to think like them. Because all these libertarians don't understand how to actually win the long term war. As Ron Paul recognizes, education is the only way to win.

The Long Game is, indeed the way to win.

There is more to it than education, though. Far more. To win, to even begin to compete, we need to go far deeper. The other side is.

[timosman]

And this is why the Progressives will always win. They control education and teach people to think like them. Because all these libertarians don't understand how to actually win the long term war. As Ron Paul recognizes, education is the only way to win.

[PierzStyx]

Deal with it.

Except facts say otherwise.

Here are some areas where they differ, even if slightly:

Russia: After Russia invaded Ukraine last year, Rand Paul called for sanctions against the invading nation. Ron Paul warned against that, saying it could sink the U.S. dollar.

The NSA: Ron Paul wants the National Security Agency eliminated. Rand Paul says he's more interested in reining it in.

NSA leaker Edward Snowden: Rand Paul thinks Edward Snowden should receive a light punishment—such as a few years in prison--for leaking classified information about the NSA to the press. Ron Paul wants to give him clemency.

The Islamic State: Rand Paul called for Congress to vote on a resolution to give the president power to fight ISIS. Ron Paul says it would be "foolish" for the U.S. to wage war on the militant group.

War on Drugs: Both men have wanted to move away from the status quo. While Ron advocates for full legalization of all drugs, Rand Paul has taken a less ambitious approach, favoring modest steps toward decriminalization. He's also sponsored bills in Congress to open the door to medical marijuana and supported measures to lower or eliminate penalties on non-violent drug users.

Youth outreach: Both men regularly speak on college campuses. Ron Paul held many standing-room rallies with students, and Rand Paul has similar appeal. Rand Paul has also made it a point to take his message to minority communities, including several visits to historically black colleges.

http : // www.cnn.com /2015/04/06/politics/election-2016-ron-paul-rand-paul-differences/

Iran

During his campaign for Senate, Rand Paul said it was “reckless” to take “nuclear weapons off the table in certain circumstances” regarding Iran. He has also couched his subsequent support for sanctions by saying “a nuclear Iran would be a threat on a global scale.”

Ron Paul has said there was no evidence Iran was building a weapon with its nuclear program. The elder Paul also rhetorically asked, “Why wouldn’t Iran want a nuclear weapon” when so many of its neighbors have them. It was an indication that, although Ron Paul opposes nuclear weapons, he does not consider a nuclear Iran a threat to the US.

War on Drugs

Ron Paul has said the war on drugs has been a “failure” comparable to the prohibition of alcohol. He has also supported a general de-criminalization of narcotics on a federal level.

During his 2010 campaign, Rand Paul favored states rights regarding drug prohibition while also telling an evangelical Christian group in Iowa earlier this year that he “does not support the legalization of drugs like marijuana.”

More recently, the younger Paul came out against mandatory minimum sentencing for drug possession. He also called for the restoration of voting rights for felons, an important issue in the drug war.


Income Tax

Since at least his 2008 run for president, Ron Paul famously said that the national income tax should be “repealed and replaced with nothing.” Rand Paul as recently as this summer advocated for the “Fair Tax” with a rate of 17 percent for individuals and supports eliminating “most” of the Internal Revenue Service.

http s:// ivn.us/ 2013/09/30/8-ways-rand-paul-is-different-from-ron-paul/

Climate Change

On the issue of climate change, Ron Paul is a virulent denier. He has flatly dismissed the science behind global warming, having called it "the greatest hoax I think that has been around for many, many years." The 52-year-old Kentucky senator, on the other hand, seems like he is refreshingly realistic about climate change — he was one of 15 GOP senators who voted this year for an amendment that stated climate change was real, and he has suggested that he was open to carbon dioxide emission regulations.

Drone Strikes

In line with his non-interventionist views, Ron Paul sharply opposes airstrikes against ISIS, blasting some Republicans, including his son, for supporting President Obama's airstrikes against the militant group. Rand Paul voted for U.S. strikes in Syria and continued to support it, despite evidence that they weren't working.

https://www.bustle.com/articles/7474...agree-on-quite

The difference between Ron Paul and Rand Paul boils down to one character trait: principle. Ron Paul has it. Rand Paul does not.

This becomes increasingly evident the longer Rand Paul attempts to position himself as the Republican candidate for President.

Ron Paul ran for the Republican nomination twice and as the Libertarian candidate once. In that time, he always told the truth, regardless of the audience and the consequences. Ron Paul had a principle that he stood by day in and day out. At the heart of that principle was liberty.

Rand Paul has none. He shows day in and day out that he will say and do anything to get elected. He has even gone so far as to throw his father’s friends under the bus and has stood by as his political operatives pushed his father off a cliff in an article in The New Yorker.

In the article, Rand disavowed ever knowing Walter Block, a libertarian icon who has been repeatedly smeared by the mainstream media, including The New York Times. The New Yorker article quotes a Rand Paul aide (likely Jesse Benton, who is quoted elsewhere in the article) as believing Ron Paul was undercutting Rand’s campaign, remarking sarcastically: “It’s good to see that the old man is still out there speaking his mind.”

Benton (who is married to Ron Paul’s granddaughter and served as his political director in the 2012 campaign) said this about Ron Paul to The New Yorker, “Ron was always content to tell the truth as best he understood it, and he saw that as the point of his politics. Rand is the guy who is committed to winning.”

Even if it means betraying everything his father has stood for and turning his back on the principle of liberty his father has so long espoused.

In other words: Ron Paul is a statesman; Rand Paul is a politician.

http://personalliberty.com/differenc...aul-rand-paul/

[Todd]

And this is why the Progressives will always win. They control education and teach people to think like them. Because all these libertarians don't understand how to actually win the long term war. As Ron Paul recognizes, education is the only way to win.

I agree, but it's more like Progressive indoctrination. They haven't taught people "how" to think.

[PierzStyx]

I agree, but it's more like Progressive indoctrination. They haven't taught people "how" to think.

Sure they have. They have taught people how to think like a Leftist. Is it political indoctrination? Sure enough. It is still a way to think. It just isn't critical thinking.

[ds21089]

Why did Rand cosponsor S.J. Res 34 to sell our private info to companies? I never imagined he'd do such a thing. I have no defense for his case when confronted by people bringing this up.