Why Rand Paul can beat Hillary Clinton

March 9, 2014

Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky may be the only Republican who can beat Hillary Clinton for president in 2016.  He is the only Republican who beats her head to head in battleground states.

Paul decisively won last Saturday’s CPAC straw poll with 31%, his neo-Libertarian sidekick, Senator Ted Cruz, was second at 11%.  Jeb Bush and the Karl Rove faction of the party registered 1%.  According to a recent column in The Washington Post, Rand Paul is now leading the Republican field.  This is showing up in some recent presidential preference polls. It is puzzling to many political pundits.
Polls don’t usually mean much this early in an election cycle. It’s usually all about name recognition. Former Secretary of State and former First Lady, Hillary Clinton obviously leads among Democrats, with Vice President Joe Biden trailing far behind.  In the GOP contest, former Governor and FOX television star, Mike Huckabee polls well, so does former governor Jeb Bush and so does former vice presidential candidate, Sarah Palin.  All the other candidates who ran for president last time register small numbers too.  But why Rand Paul?
Yes, his father, former congressman, Ron Paul, ran for president three times but in a career that spanned a whole generation he never led the GOP in a national poll. 

Part of the reason lies in the fact that, if he wins the nomination, Senator Rand Paul will be the first GOP nominee since Ronald Reagan to lead a political Movement.  In this case, the “Constitutional Movement”, which includes conservatives, libertarians and others across the whole left to right spectrum. In fact, it represents more than a movement it represents a new political re-alignment, the first of its kind in several generations.  
During most of our lifetime the debate was about the role of government in the lives of the people.  Liberals wanted a “liberal” use of government involvement, conservatives wanted a “conservative” use of government, relying more on free markets.  But the point of reference was always the role of government in meeting peoples needs, it was in relation to that point that one was liberal or conservative.
The U.S. Constitution was a factor, but mostly over the issue of the Second Amendment and in understanding the politics of the Cold War where conservatives were actually more liberal about spending for defense and liberals more conservative.  Conservatives said providing a common national defense is Constitutional. Liberals said all of this military spending was robbing the poor of this country and hurting our own people.
Liberals accused conservatives about not caring for the poor.  Conservatives accused liberals about being soft on communism and flirting with national destruction.
In the past, candidates were touted as liberal or conservative but only Reagan and Goldwater were considered to be actual leaders of an ideological Movement than transcended their party.  Liberal Movement leaders?  FDR?  Later, Adlai Stevenson?  Hubert Humphrey?  Maybe?  But not really.  All were successful politicians but too involved in the Democrat Party process to have the ideological purity of a movement leader.
Today the old liberal – conservative argument is almost obsolete.  The end of the Cold War has been a big factor.  There is no life and death struggle about left and right.  We have settled on a range of responsibilities that government should be able to assume and are now quibbling over details. “You said I could keep my own doctor, you’re a liar.”
Foreign observers can hardly tell a difference between Republicans and Democrats.  It is the Red team versus the Blue team, not really much of contest over ideas. Just a contest over power between two societies. Oh, it is passionate, like all internecine conflicts. And the public is emotionally invested, like they are with their favorite college football team. They may shed real tears or not eat for days if their side loses.
A good illustration of how irrelevant the philosophical argument has become was the recent presidency of George W. Bush.  In his last year in office, facing a worldwide depression, this Republican president nationalized American banks.  It took Socialist President Francois Mitterrand to do that in France.  And yet we call George W. Bush a “conservative Republican.” Meanwhile, liberal Democrats build no statues to him and conservatives still defend him.  It’s two teams with bitter past histories.  Liberals never applaud conservatives when they do something liberal, such as George  H.W. Bush extending the first White House invitations to Gay activists.  And conservatives never applaud a liberal, like John Kennedy or Bill Clinton, for doing something conservative, like balancing the budget
The Constitutional Movement represents a new realignment of the political landscape.  It includes a variety of voters from the left to the right and everything in between.
The argument is less about liberal and conservative and more about getting back to the Constitution. It is about ending corruption.  The special deals.  It is less about left and right or even, up and down, the rich and the poor, and more about in and out. Insiders are seen to be gaming the system, taxes, Wall Street, the regulatory agencies, banking.  There is great cynicism about this and even despair.  It’s as if only suckers depend on a free marketplace.  The American dream is over.
It is not lost on many that the rich got richer and the poor got poorer on a massive scale under Barack Obama.
While many poor people and certainly all people of color celebrate the rise of Obama, now that he is passing, some on the left are wanting to get serious about doing what they thought a person of such humble origins would do, namely, reform the system. Stop the looting.  End the cycle of corruption.
Hillary – as a woman – represents a dynamic cultural moment and that will be hard to resist.  The media will be transfixed by the idea of a woman following an African American into the White House.  But no one seriously believes that this woman, who in 1979 miraculously turned a $1,000 commodities investment into $100,000 within ten months, is going to do anything about reversing the corrupt system that has clogged our economic arteries. She can only win a Red-Blue contest.  It will only be an argument about who gets the power and which insiders get the taxpayers’ money.
If 2016 become a contest of significant ideas on how to end the corruption Rand Paul will win.  He is the only candidate who has any.

(Clip from 2012, when Rand Paul was stopped by the TSA.)


70 Responses to Why Rand Paul can beat Hillary Clinton

  1. tex2 says:

    Rand will be left in the dust once the actual campaign starts.

  2. Buzz Brunson says:

    Thanks !!!


  3. […] only has Rand Paul dominated the Neo-Conservative Karl Rove wing of the GOP at CPAC (again), he will dominate Hillary in 2016. Why? Because the Left/Right paradigm is dying, and Democrats still have two more years to figure […]

  4. Jim says:

    Is that Doug with Neoconfederate Judge Nap? You really hurt your credibility as a historian hanging around that guy, Doug. Watch as he offends African Americans on the Daily Show:

  5. Gary says:

    “Senator Rand Paul is the first candidate since Ronald Reagan to lead a political Movement.”

    So, Ron Paul didn’t lead the Liberty Movement?!
    You’re utterly shameless.

  6. Bethany says:

    I haven’t been here in two years, and tex2 is still here. lol. He’s still on the road to damascus. You’ll be blinded by light one of these days tex2. Unless this is a son, tex2, jr.

    • tex2 says:

      I have been here for FAR longer than 2 years. Go to the top of the page and do a search for Amway. As far as the road I’m on, you misspelled it. The correct name is damn-Amway. LOL I have already seen the light, now others are as well. You wouldn’t believe how many of us there are, Bethany. LOL

  7. Aaron says:

    I got to say that it is absolutely hilarious to read the comments on here. It’s hard to believe that the same ingenious people that gave us Mitt and John actually think they have the credibility to proclaim Rand Paul a looser. The problem for people of their ilk is that people like myself aren’t going to sit back and let them tell us how to think. We have been there and done that.
    These short sighted people can’t see the obvious. It is very clear that Rand has cross over appeal. There is no doubt that Rand will win a minimum of 20% of the democratic vote. He will appeal to demographics that cannot be touched by any other republican contender. For similar reasons he will win 90% of independent vote. People will who never even considered voting will be coming out of the wood work to vote for this guy. The only thing that is up in the air is.. …Will brainwashed main stream republicans support our guy? I think most will if given a choose between Hillary and Rand. Our destiny is finally in our hands. All we have to do is be smart enough to see it.

    • tex2 says:

      Talk about a “looser.” The correct spelling is “loser,” Aaron. LOL A rock would win 20% of the Democrats right now. I wasn’t excited about John or Mitt, but we didn’t fall for Ron in 2008 and 2012, what possibly makes you think we will vote for Rand in 2014? LOL Besides, neither Hillary or Rand have even announced they are running yet. LOL

      • Aaron says:

        While your playing Captin grammar – those of us that value freedom and prosperity will continue to pull people like you out of the closet – one by one. No….we won’t get all of you…..but we will get enough. As for Rand not running yet……why is it you can speculate and then trash him….but when I speculate it’s out of line? As for Ron….in my mind Ron was always a fring player. Sure I liked his positions…..but he just didn’t have the complete package necessary to win on a national level. Sometimes ideas have to be digested. Ron did the early work. Those of us that gave to Ron knew we were giving so he could spread his messege. Mission completed. The stage is set for Rand Paul.
        Btw ….I have just typed this in about 30 seconds from my phone ….so my apologies for bad grammar.

      • tex2 says:

        Nice comeback, except a misspelling isn’t grammar, it’s a misspelling. Also, the work is “Captain,” so you did it AGAIN!!! LOL Also, the word is “you’re,” not “your.” Please, tell me, why should I pay attention to anybody who can’t spell these simple words? What’s your REAL name….Captin Looser? LOL We aren’t in a closet, you Paultilians have your heads up your butts, that’s why you think WE are in a dark closet. LOL Where did I speculate in my previous remark? Also, I didn’t complain about YOU speculating, I just noted a FACT he hasn’t announced he is running. What is a “fring?” Do you mean fringe? LOL That makes FOUR! LOL I think BOTH of them are “fring.” LOL By the way, if you want to come off as ignorant and uneducated, and therefore representative of a Paultilian supporter, keep sending messages on your phone without proof reading them. Okay, Captin Fring Looser? LOL LOL LOL

      • Jim says:

        “It is very clear that Rand has cross over appeal.”??

        “People will who never even considered voting will be coming out of the wood work to vote for this guy.” ???
        You guys said the same thing about Ron in 2008 and again in 2012. Unfortunately Dougie will convince you these same lies during the next few years. Yes lies,-Ron got roughly 10% of the party’s vote at the RNC and even less in write in votes during the actual election despite the fact he was on every news show and talk show including the Tonight Show and followers like yourself spamming every conceivable internet comment section on the web. All to keep the money flooding into Doug and Paul family member’s pockets. Go to the FEC website and pull Ron Paul 2012 financial statements.Nearly 2 years after the last balloon dropped at the RNC and family members are STILL on the payroll, paid off the surplus $2.5 million Ron ended the election cycle with thanks in no small part to Doug continuing to convincing Paulites Ron had the nomination sewn up in the 11th hour of August (“send in more money!”) despite the fact, as he admitted in an interview with Democracy Now, that he knew Romney had the thing clinched back in April.
        Even Rand himself knows he will not win, which is why he is trying desperately to change the laws of his state so he can run twice on the KY ballot to keep his Senate seat.


  8. Ryan T. Beckner says:

    “Also, the work is “Captain,” so you did it AGAIN!!! LOL” -Tex2

    Looks like you fucked up your spelling as well, you lousy ass cunt.

  9. Surfisher says:

    This is the concise, and most accurate, dissection of our current politics!

    Pay attention — or lose our Nation!

    Save our Free Republic, by returning us back to the US Constitution, as Rand Paul strives — or end it forever as Hitlery Clinton wants!


  10. tex2 says:

    Just like the “victories” with Rand’s daddy in 2008 and 2012! LOL

  11. Surfisher says:

    Doug — I hope you write a book on the 2012 GOP election travesty!

    The Ron Paul TRUTH Experiment in 2012 showed that while all Real Americans wanted him to win, THOSE that control The Party did not — so TO STOP Ron Paul, the RNC had his supporters fingers broken (Louisiana), the AC turned off in Arizona (whereby his delegates cooked in the heat, stoically waiting, to no avail to have a final vote counted), the lights turned off in several other venues when Ron Paul supporters stood firm, delegates from many States he won overturned, and a multitude of CRIMINAL Actions that the RNC perpetrated against Ron Paul — BECAUSE HE SPOKE THE TRUTH!

    All these reprehensible, and in many cases criminal actions, have been recorded for posterity. And I hope Doug Wead, or someone else, would write a book detailing how the 2012 Election exposed US as nothing but another Banana Republic — where party corruption is the rule!

    Rand Paul has learned this lesson — and is SPOT ON on what’s needed to get elected!

    • tex2 says:

      Why don’t YOU write the book? It will keep you off of here, and that’s a good thing. LOL

    • Jim says:

      Maybe Doug can write how the campaign knew back in March that Romney was going to win but rubes like Surfisher were told otherwise to keep the money rolling into Paul family members pockets. Here’s a snapshot of ‘Ron Paul 2012″ FEC disclosures for 2013, with Ronnie’s brother Wayne and his daughter Lori Pyeatt still raking in the dough over a year after the RNC:


      Face it Surfisher. You got tricked. Hoodwinked. Bamboozled. The only Liberty Movement was the liberation of hard earned Federal Reserve Notes from the wallets of fools into the pockets of Ron Paul’s family members and associates.

      • tex2 says:

        Thanks, Jim. Now Surfisher has an idea for another couple of chapters! LOL

      • Jim says:

        Well ‘supposedly’ that leftover money was supposed to go to help fund ‘liberty candidates’ but the only political contribution listed is to a PAC that (surprise) Ronnie’s daughter works for and hey, wait, looks like Ronnie’ s been dipping in too ($2,534). Really not sure of the legality of that one. I know working with local candidates they cannot under no circumstances absolutely not spend any leftover campaign funds on themselves.

  12. Surfisher says:

    Funny stuff — best is: “Obama’s dog walks him”…
    and: *The only “man” in that photo is Whoopi Goldberg (left)*…plus lots more:


  13. Surfisher says:

    Rand Paul will garner nearly ALL of Ron Paul’s supporters votes — for they are educated enough to know that the apple does not fall far from the tree!

    Let me phrase this another way (to see it from a different and more accurate perspective): Ron Paul supporters won many states by delegates (only to be ILLEGALLY overturned by the Neo-Con controlled RNC), therefore, know they were cheated!

    For whom do you think they’ll vote in near unison — Ron Paul’s son, Rand, or a propped up another Neo-Con …?!

    Add to this that when the time comes, Ron Paul will be stomping for his son, Rand! And this becomes an unbeatable combination!!!

    The one thing Real Americans need to worry about is keeping the Paul’s alive! For the Bilderberg Gang wants them otherwise — and we all know what happened to JFK when he decided that America must no longer be ruled by Secret Organizations and special groups (like AIPAC — the Jewish Lobby that determines who is fit to be elected in USA ACCORDING TO THEM)!

    Bilderberg wants Ron Paul dead:

    JFK Secret Society Speech— The speech that killed John F Kennedy:

    AIPAC — the American International Jewish Lobby that determines who gets to be elected in USA ACCORDING TO THEM — or more concisely stated: AIPAC — is now defacto the “Voice of America”: (pause at 2.24 — priceless pics of owned John McCain, Hitlery Clinton, Barry Hussein Sotero-Obama, Joe Biden and Lieberman make this cameo, not shown are nearly 80% of the rest of our elected by AIPAC officials):

    LMAO — absolute the BEST and MOST COMICAL (until it shows the innocent children killed by Israel, to whom we give FREE Militrary Aid in the billions of dollars) SAD EXPOSURE of how the Terrorist State of Israel gets to have their way in USA!!!!!!!!!

    30 pieces of silver to buy them ‘Americans’ Reps… — priceless!

    Unless Rand Paul (or someone like him) gets elected as the next US President — kiss our Free Republic goodbye, FOREVER — and call US Israel’s little puppets, where we beg for crumbs from their International Banksters to avoid starvation!

    • Jim says:

      That’s some funny stuff Surfisher: “Rand Paul will garner nearly ALL of Ron Paul’s supporters votes.”:
      Funniest thing I read all day.
      What happened to all those write in voters? All the stealth delegates? The truth is they didn’t exist.

      Thanks for the laughs!

  14. tex2 says:

    The good news is all of the Paul’s supporters WOULD fit on one airplane! LOL

    I predict the Republicans will be more ready for any stunts that Rand’s supporters try to pull this time around, and sonny-boy will be less influential via his his daddy’s rabble-rousers were in 2012. LOL

  15. Surfisher says:

    More good news (off topic): Kathleen Sebelius, whom Rand Paul called to resign for her incompetence (and her complicity) in bringing on the UNCONSTITUTIONAL economic disaster that is Obamacare — will follow Rand Paul’s call and is resigning!

    Another Liberal Scumbag down the drain…!

    What an utter embarrassment to Barrack Hussein Obama!

    His chosen, Sebelius, failed to deliver the 7,000,000 YOUNG Bodies needed to prop up Obamacare, instead (even with several more months of extending the “dead line”) only 7.5 million Americans have bought into it — and the majority of these are the old and decrepit. MSM touts it as a “success” — when the reality is that WAY LESS than 1 million are the Young Blood — when 7 million Youngsters were needed to make this Ponze Scheme work. Total Obama DISASTER, that MSM is WILLFULLY IGNORING!

    No wonder Kathleen Sebelius is scurrying to go underground by resigning — such liberal scumbags are distancing themselves from Obama ALREADY, so they can escape the stigma of such an association, hoping to win some office once he’s done!

    LOL — no such luck for you, Kathleen Sebelius, you’ve been forever pegged!

    • tex2 says:

      I’m sure Rand was a huge part of her decision….NOT! LOL

      It’s amazing how clueless Surfisher is when it comes to his delusional logic. Rand Paul 2016! And Ron can be his VP (very personable)! LOL

  16. Go Navy1 says:

    I’d like to address Tex2 and Jim as I simply cannot take this anymore…

    I am a recently retired 20-year veteran of the US Navy now working for the government as a civilian (again with the Navy LOL!!!). I hold an MBA and several notable certifications in my industry, so, please forgive me if I make a spelling mistake as you have so poignantly pointed out in several prior posts.

    I love my country and I love the American resolve. I also love the freedom we have to say what we feel and have safety in our unrelenting pursuit of happiness.

    I am a strong supporter of Ron Paul (and his son) for a number of reasons. Primarily, Ron Paul is the first politician who, never once, changed his beliefs at any point in 30 years. Go back and check. The very least you can do is acknowledge that since there is not a single politician you support that can claim that. Your aingst with him seems to be the way he handled his campaign. Whatever, I get that. I gave to the “money bombs” and later wondered why. The “Grassroots” movement amuses you and you feel compelled to stir the flames. Whatever. It is your right.

    But I want to make something very clear. Please, voice your beliefs but you need respect others amigo.

    Will Rand win? Not in this system as it is now. Do I wish he would win? Hell yes! I hope one day, for my kids, that we will recognize what has happened to this country. What we were. Where we are going. And realize that there is no real separation between the Republicans and Democrats anymore.

    Forgive me for being a Libertarian. But, that is my right and I have a right to voice it just as you have done so in many posts before.

    Dave (USN Retired!!!! Thank goodness for that!) Someone else has the watch!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: