Results 1 to 26 of 26

Thread: Sen. Rand Paul Still Not Going to Endorse Anyone

  1. #1



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Good. Endorsing someone can only hurt him, as we have seen before.
    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    It's a balance between appeasing his supporters, appeasing the deep state and reaching his own goals.
    ~Resident Badgiraffe




  4. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by William Tell View Post
    Good. Endorsing someone can only hurt him, as we have seen before.
    Yes but he will support the nominee. His dad would never do that. I miss Ron Paul.

  5. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Warlord View Post
    Yes but he will support the nominee. His dad would never do that. I miss Ron Paul.
    But yet his dad endorsed every incumbent Republican in the state of Texas.

  6. #5
    A little late to be having an attack of principles, but, still, good for him.

  7. #6
    Kennedy hammers him on this in this recent interview. He implies he only supports the nominee because establishment candidates have to endorse him if he is the nominee. This is why Rand Paul was endorsed by Chris Christie for Senate.

  8. #7
    but not for president Brett, that's an important distinction. And guess what? He won't be endorsing Trump. Ron has so much integrity

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Warlord View Post
    but not for president Brett, that's an important distinction. And guess what? He won't be endorsing Trump. Ron has so much integrity
    Why is endorsing someone for President and endorsing someone for Congress an important distinction?



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Brett85 View Post
    Why is endorsing someone for President and endorsing someone for Congress an important distinction?
    Good question. Almost everyone views the presidency as some extra big prize with different rules. I don't think there's a rational explanation for it, people just think that way. Mainstream voters will let their presidential candidates get away with more, many purist voters expect more from their presidential candidates than they do of Congressional candidates or whatever. Maybe because they know more of the specific evil things about presidential candidates than those in other races?

    Or that's the way it seems anyway.
    Last edited by William Tell; 03-11-2016 at 02:29 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    It's a balance between appeasing his supporters, appeasing the deep state and reaching his own goals.
    ~Resident Badgiraffe




  12. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Warlord View Post
    but not for president Brett, that's an important distinction. And guess what? He won't be endorsing Trump. Ron has so much integrity
    Ron doesn't have any more elections to win.
    I dont think that there will be any curtailing of Donald Trump as president, he said. "He controls the media, he controls the sentiment [and] he controls everybody. Hes the one who will resort to executive orders more so than [President] Obama ever used them." - Ron Paul

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by CPUd View Post
    Ron doesn't have any more elections to win.
    Ron snubbed Romney in 2012 and every nominee before then. I dont think he has endorsed a single nominee since Reagan and it never hurt him. He also regretted the Reagan endorsement and quit congress because of it

  14. #12
    I almost want him to endorse Cruz. The Donald must be stopped.

  15. #13
    Good. Hopefully they will ask him everyday through the election cycle so that he can get some face time.

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by brandon View Post
    I almost want him to endorse Cruz. The Donald must be stopped.
    Voting for Cruz to stop Donald is like voting for Donald to stop Hillary.

    There are other alternatives.

  17. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by phill4paul View Post
    Voting for Cruz to stop Donald is like voting for Donald to stop Hillary.

    There are other alternatives.
    As far as winning the republican nomination I see 3 choices, and only 2 of them are realistic. Donald could be the worst thing to ever happen to this country.

  18. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by brandon View Post
    As far as winning the republican nomination I see 3 choices, and only 2 of them are realistic. Donald could be the worst thing to ever happen to this country.
    So your goal in the Liberty movement is to vote for the winning GOP candidate? Even if they are also status-quo establishment?



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by phill4paul View Post
    So your goal in the Liberty movement is to vote for the winning GOP candidate? Even if they are also status-quo establishment?
    I don't have a goal for the liberty movement per say. I don't think much of a liberty movement even still exists honestly.

    I just don't want what Donalds selling. I feel like we all would be a lot better off without him as president.

  21. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by William Tell View Post
    Good. Endorsing someone can only hurt him, as we have seen before.
    Or, Rand can use it as a bargaining chip. If Trump approaches him (as he has other former candidates) he can repeat his position, and suggest he could reconsider only if offered a chance to actively participate in steering Trump's campaign in a more coherent and pro-liberty direction---say, made the head of Trump's foreign policy advisory team, or running mate, etc. Endorsing him in that context would only help Rand, towards a future run.
    -----Peace & Freedom, John Clifton-----
    Blog: https://electclifton.wordpress.com/2...lism-on-purge/

  22. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by brandon View Post
    I don't have a goal for the liberty movement per say. I don't think much of a liberty movement even still exists honestly.

    I just don't want what Donalds selling. I feel like we all would be a lot better off without him as president.

    Well Rand doesn't need to endorse one scumbag to stop another.
    Thee (God) alone will we serve and from Thee alone will we seek help

  23. #20
    xxxxx
    Last edited by Voluntarist; 07-23-2018 at 07:51 PM.
    Here at RPF, we don't promote every conspiracy theory - merely the ones we've been made aware of. If there's anything that Ron Paul followers know, it's that bad things don't just happen; bad things require dark and insidious forces acting in concert and in secret to make them happen.

  24. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Peace&Freedom View Post
    Or, Rand can use it as a bargaining chip. If Trump approaches him (as he has other former candidates) he can repeat his position, and suggest he could reconsider only if offered a chance to actively participate in steering Trump's campaign in a more coherent and pro-liberty direction---say, made the head of Trump's foreign policy advisory team, or running mate, etc. Endorsing him in that context would only help Rand, towards a future run.
    Lol, Rand would lose all the base he had left at the end of this run. Rand is a hero for calling out Trump as the worthless POS he is.
    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    It's a balance between appeasing his supporters, appeasing the deep state and reaching his own goals.
    ~Resident Badgiraffe




  25. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Brett85 View Post
    Why is endorsing someone for President and endorsing someone for Congress an important distinction?
    Because the someone in this case is Canadian-born Ted Cruz. Cruz is eligible to serve in the U.S. Senate, but not in the Presidency. Only a hardcore traitorous anti-American scumbag would endorse Cruz for the Presidency.

    Hope this helps.

  26. #23
    Supporting Member
    North Carolina



    Posts
    2,946
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Quote Originally Posted by Warlord View Post
    Ron snubbed Romney in 2012 and every nominee before then. I dont think he has endorsed a single nominee since Reagan and it never hurt him. He also regretted the Reagan endorsement and quit congress because of it
    Ron didn't go after Romney in the debates. That spoke louder than any token endorsement.
    Equality is a false god.

    Armatissimi e Liberissimi

  27. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by William Tell View Post
    Lol, Rand would lose all the base he had left at the end of this run. Rand is a hero for calling out Trump as the worthless POS he is.
    Why is this the only place that thinks we can get into the White House, by avoiding gaining the confidence or support of most voters? Rand can't ever become President based only on the liberty base, even if he hadn't lessoned it. He or whomever an eventual successful national liberty candidate turns out to be, has to build a winning coalition.

    Rand becoming Vice President, or put in a large position in the next Administration, would be helpful towards that end. If engaging or creating alliances with trends, demographics and voting blocs that aren't libertarian is something the liberty base can't live with, it simply means that base is not serious about winning, ever.

    Quote Originally Posted by Voluntarist View Post
    If Trump approaches Rand, Rand won't be the one setting conditions. Any part of the Rand following that could be brought to the Trump court, are already in the Trump court without Rand's influence.
    It's not about our 5% base and beating up the other candidates, it's about attracting more voters to us. It's about connecting with them, not insulting them by bashing everything about the candidates who do connect with them. It's not about the Rand following, it's about reaching beyond the following to show the liberty approach engages the concerns of most voters. The inability of Rand (or much of the following) to do that is why his candidacy did not get a winning coalition of voters on his side.
    Last edited by Peace&Freedom; 03-11-2016 at 09:40 PM.
    -----Peace & Freedom, John Clifton-----
    Blog: https://electclifton.wordpress.com/2...lism-on-purge/



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by RonPaulGeorge&Ringo View Post
    Because the someone in this case is Canadian-born Ted Cruz. Cruz is eligible to serve in the U.S. Senate, but not in the Presidency. Only a hardcore traitorous anti-American scumbag would endorse Cruz for the Presidency.

    Hope this helps.
    Judge Napolitano has said that he believes that Cruz is eligible to run for President. I guess he's a "traitorous anti-American scumbag" as well.

  30. #26
    Supporting Member
    Colorado



    Posts
    5,429
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Good- even after the nominee is decided at convention -
    GOP voters in Kentucky need to re-elect the Senator that gave back nearly a couple $million back to the US Treasury from
    the budget they all allotted him.

    Good job Kentucky.


    .



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •