A Rand Paul nomination could be a game changer

[Z_California]

The eventual Democratic nominee will be clobbered in a general election if she doesn't get on the correct side of these issues:

Civil Liberties and the Surveillance State
War and National Security
Oppressive Sentencing Laws
Cannabis Decriminalization

Paul will benefit from significantly more crossover voters than ANY Democratic nominee - the Racist/Redneck wing of the GOP will not vote D period. A lot of progressives will vote for Paul if these are "their" issues.

To beat Rand Paul, we will need a nominee from the Democratic wing of the party.

[MohRokTah]

1. So now we're at RandPAulUnderground?

So many people posting how great Rand Paul is.

[Z_California]

23. Never said he was "great"

I have written proof of that.

He's just on the correct side of several issues and that could pose a problem for the Corporate Democratic plan.

[hifiguy]

47. That much is true.

Your second sentence cannot be argued with. It is a fact

That does not make Rand Paul any less of a dangerous idiot, but it is time to reject any "Democrat" who sucks up to Wall Street and embraces the MIC war machine. We should always nominate ONLY candidates who represent the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party.

[Vincardog]

127. We should always nominate ONLY candidates who represent the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party.

[wyldwolf]

64. I've noticed a few low post count DUers pushing Rand Paul this week

[Z_California]

75. I've noticed a lot of DU'ers with low reading comprehension

It's chilling how intelligent progressives completely ignore the point of the post and simply attack at the mere mention of the name. I've been called a Paulite and a Right-Winger, been reminded of terms of service, etc.

Are we only allowed to toot some party line here or are we allowed to come up with original thoughts? The "Thought Police" seem to rule the roost here.

[wyldwolf]

78. Speak of the devil!

[betterdemsonly]

80. Back when there were real moderators it was easier to have intelligent conversations

on liberal messageboards. They actually enforced rules rather than mob preferences. It has really hurt things. Unfortunately the liberal community hasn't found any non-mob moderated outlets.

[LondonReign2]

93. The problem is, by their own admission those responders

aren't progressives. They mock the term, in fact. They've moved so far right that they want Obama, who is said that his economic policies are "mainstream '80's Republican", to be succeeded by someone further to his right.

Take heart, they are a small but screechy minority.

[samsingh]

106. no liberal will believe that rand paul is for peace and individual rights

he is a war monger as much as bush. he does not support rights of the individual except where they are consistent with repug talking points - progun, no healthcare, no charity to those in need.

his father is even more disgusting.

[Warpy]

86. You just proved the "So" rule

that says any post that begins with "so" is a strawman post.

The OP said nothing of the sort. It said that anybody who wants to beat Paul had better come down on the correct side of those issues. Another business as usual, crush the middle class some more, warmongering hypocrite is going to engender apathy among Democratic voters and will not win the Presidency.

And that would be tragic. We'd get another Roberts on the court, at best.

[CTyankee]

2. Oh, I don't know...once HRC gets through with him on a woman's right to choose, we'll see...

plenty of women voters will get turned off FAST.

[betterdemsonly]

8. Young women who are prochoice as a single issue but they aren't the majority of voters.

Why cut things so close? It would be easier to win with a candidate that wasn't right wing on foreign policy, civil liberties and economic issues. Why make abortion the deciding factor when we wouldn't have to with another candidate?

[CTyankee]

18. I don't agree that the pro choice view necessarily makes a voter "single issue."

Women have had this right for a long time and having the prospect of it being revoked would seem very extreme to them. And then there's the larger issue of birth control. 99% of Americans have practiced birth control. If they are threatened with a denial of the birth control method they use and like because of RW anti-choice ideology, there will be a strong backlash.

If HRC paints a picture of a retrograde anti-choice SCOTUS on women's issues (including pay equity) there will be a huge ruckus made by LOTS of women.

If Rand Paul is to win the candidacy of his party in 2016, he may just have his hands tied on a number of issues that he just isn't talking about right now. But rest assured they WILL be talked about in the campaign.

[woo me with science]

88. Women and minorities can't afford more corporate rule.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5438435

I don't know how the Third Way anticipates being able to protect values of racial and gender equality by running candidates whose policies are dismantling the very economic and democratic systems that make it possible for them to be empowered.

197. I just can't wait to see the status of women and minorities in this country when we are all working for Third World wages, Hillary's trade agreements have ramped up corporate power and the ability of corporations to override our laws and protections, and dissent in the new corporate America has been crushed.

[wyldwolf]

67. ok, once African Americans get through with him on voting rights..

[betterdemsonly]

72. Frankly his pitch to them on demilitarizing the police and ending drug wars

has gotten a good reception in the black media, particularly black men. What is so scarey is that I see the right evolving to create new coalitions, where as the dems are stuck in the 90s mode of hippy punching.

[pnwmom]

105. Economic issues are most important to most people and Rand Paul fails miserably. n/t

[betterdemsonly]

3. You are about the be mobbed for pointing out this simple truth

Du bigwigs kill messengers!

[MohRokTah]

4. .

You really have this thing about Rand Paul.

[betterdemsonly]

10. I don't like dlcers

and don't want the nominee to be one.

[MohRokTah]

17. The DLC folded years ago. There is no DLC. eom

[betterdemsonly]

26. There is the New Democrats and the Third Way

They are all the same, and their politicians are still here and they haven't changed. Hillary was one of em.

[MohRokTah]

32. So you don't like JAmes Clyburn?

You don't like Joaquin Castro?

You have something against Debbie Wasserman-Schultz?

Sounds like you have a problem with DEMOCRATS to me.

[betterdemsonly]

39. If they are dlc conservadems I most likely do

I don't have a problem with liberal dems like Warren, Teachout, Sanders or Harkin. I fight their nomination at every opportunity in favor or liberal dems. I think they hurt our country and our party.

[MohRokTah]

43. So I'm right. You have a problem with James Clyburn.

Damn.

Just Damn.

And you have a problem with the Castro brothers?

Damn.

Just Damn.

[JustAnotherGen]

19. This kid and the op are cracking me up!

They really think this 41 year old affluent black woman is going to vote for this little tool?

Look up thread - obviously an older male - because no way are young women giving up their inherent right to privacy.

No abortion?

Then no legalization of any drugs that these punks what to smoke, snort, pop, drop, or shoot up.

It's only fair.

[Z_California]

30. You are missing the point

He wouldn't need 41 year old affluent black women to vote for him. He just needs enough crossover voters (ie: 5-6%) who value these issues above all others. There are plenty of them.

I am not campaigning for Rand Paul, I would never vote for ANY Republican. I'm just pointing out a serious problem if he's nominated.

[pnwmom]

107. You're not going to find enough women progressives who won't vomit at the idea of a Paul presidency.

On bread and butter issues alone he's a non-starter.

[JustAnotherGen]

120. +1000

You also have a very angry black population ready to inflict pain on the right any which way we can.

They will enter a valley of comeuppance if the select this man.

I was at a party Saturday night - ooooh - the Democratic Party has anger this November. All they need in 2016 is to point out we will have a guy who pals around with domestic terrorists (Klan) in the WH and that will get folks to the polls.

Paul's pot heads will get high and forget to go vote.

[pnwmom]

122. I hadn't thought of that.

The death of Michael Brown may be stirring a sleeping giant. Once people realize their collective power . . . .

[JustAnotherGen]

119. Ha ha ha!

Good luck getting tat 22 year old white woman to vote for him when he tells her he and his ilk will give her all the pot she wants - but in return her ovaries are his.

And the kid in question - he's appealing to Democrats. I betcha I can knock on doors and get those young women to vote for our team if I remind them that sex is better when sober and the Democratic candidate doesn't want to take her birth control away.

[MohRokTah]

37. I know.

Totally cracks me up.

[KamaAina]

6. "bigwigs" in a thread about the Rug Doctor himself!

[MohRokTah]

12. I know.

[wyldwolf]

69. the only problem is, it isn't anywhere close to the simply truth... unless...

[monmouth3]

5. I keep thinking Paul Ryan will be the annointed one. I hope...lol...n/t

[Gothmog]

82. I agree

Rand Paul would be a very weak general election candidate

[woo me with science]

7. Absolutely the truth,

and very likely the corporate plan.

The resident Third Way will not like this OP.

[Comrade Grumpy]

9. I wonder how much he appeals to young people without strong party loyalties.

The candidate of "end the wars and end the drug war" might garner some support, especially from potential voters who don't understand the entirety of his platform.

[hifiguy]

49. That's the real danger when you look at his potential candidacy

from a left perspective. Those are very popular positions with people who won't understand he intends to send them to debtors' prison a few years down the road when they can't find a job to pay their ridiculously onerous student loans.

[FSogol]

11. Fuck Rand Paul

[woo me with science]

16. Unfortunately, that won't be a very effective debate response

when the Republican candidate is campaigning on ending the drug wars and spying and warmongering, and we have a Democratic candidate with a record complicit in all of them.

[FSogol]

33. Dream on. Rand Paul will never be taken seriously as a candidate*.

He'll get a 2-4 weeks of being the GOP front runner before he self destructs. Notice how in the last election that each GOP clown had a couple of weeks of attention before the GOP mainstream went safe and picked the unlikable Romney?


* Despite all the message board work of his followers rubes.

[woo me with science]

58. The corporate Third Way presence here has been ranting about libertarians nearly nonstop for months,

yourself included.

Now, however, when some begin to point out that Rand Paul could be a threat, and that running Hillary against him would result in a wet dream matchup for the corporate elite, Libertarians suddenly become irrelevant and not worth talking about.

I find that fascinating.

[hifiguy]

63. The Turd Way

is corporate fascism lite with a happy-face mask on. Same shit, slightly different trappings.

[woo me with science]

94. Indeed.

A lot of predictable complaining happens when Democrats mention the Third Way.

There is a desperate wish to have people perceive it as an epithet instead of a sorely needed reminder to pay attention to how corporate money and corporate infiltration have corrupted our party's messaging and direction.

We can't allow monied interests to shove Hillary down our throats.

Why the Third Way would love a race between Hillary Clinton and Rand Paul
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025437196

When the DLC connections to the Koch Bros. became well known, they just rebranded the infiltration
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4165556

When you hear "Third Way", think INVESTMENT BANKERS
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024127432

GOP Donors and K Street Fuel Third Way’s Advice for the Democratic Party
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101680116

The Rightwing Koch Brothers fund the DLC
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x498414

Same companies behind the GOP are behind the DLC
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1481121

[FSogol]

68. I knew you'd trot out "third way" sooner or later. Kind of telling that when DU lashes out at

libertarians and their dishonest views/statements, our fringe left crowd, that never met a Democrat they liked, gets concerned.

While I would vote for HRC in the general election, it is doubtful I would vote for her in the primary. How that makes me third way is something you'll have to work harder to explain.

My position is that Rand Paul is incapable of being elected. I'll add that his supporters are some of the biggest, most immature bunch of rubes I have ever encountered and that includes the Larouches. All the rat fucking in the world will not change these facts.

[BainsBane]

148. The Democratic Party doesn't have a candidate

You might, but Democrats do not. Some have erected a bête noire that they invoke to justify their politics of narcissism.

Here are some debate points. Paul supports slashing the corporate tax rate in half, repealing regulation of business and the environment, banning abortion and gay marriage, and repealing the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Act. He wants the end of all public healthcare so that it is entirely under corporate control. www.ontheissues.org/senate/Rand_Paul.htm

He is a homophobe, a racist, and a misogynist and will be supported by right-wingers who share his contempt for the majority of Americans. He will be promoted by those who share his view that the business elite are over regulated and that the rights of privileged white men of means are all that matter. But hey, it's all about your pot stash. Why worry about anything as trivial as other human beings?

I have no doubt he will be supported by the same people who regularly promote the interests of the privileged few over the many. It is perfectly in keeping with their reverence for great men and hostility toward everyone else.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

13. ROFL/NT

[woo me with science]

21. Another great debate response for Democrats...

You see the problem here.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

35. I would literally bet my kidney Rand Paul never becomes president./NT

[Cali_Democrat]

14. Your concern is noted, however...

I don't think the GOP is ready to nominate someone who doesn't want to bomb the shit out of every country on earth.

[betterdemsonly]

22. and if we didn't nominate a war hawk it would be an advantage against

a mad bomber republican, and a peacenik republican wouldn't have any advantage over us with peace and civil liberties voters.

[Savannahmann]

149. Then the election comes down to which War Hawk to elect?

Hillary's rhetoric over the last three weeks has been slightly to the right of the Kaiser regarding interventionist bombs. So to get this straight, our plan is to out war the GOP in the hopes we can win the election and fund a huge Military Industrial Intelligence Conspiracy and show the world how enlightened Democrats can be.

The first event is the Iowa Caucus as you know. A bunch of people go into a house and start debating who the house should cast their votes for. It's an all or nothing deal. The candidate who wins, gets the whole house, or nothing. The GOP leadership has little effect. The best you can do is make sure every house holding the GOP caucus has a few of your people there armed with talking points.

Then Senator Obama won despite consistently losing in the polls in 2007 because he followed this prescription. Get a few supporters there and be leaders for the room of people.

Everyone expected it to be a fight between Howard Dean and Hillary.

Are you saying Rand can't organize his people as effectively? If he wins Iowa, then the big money donors will start pumping money into his campaign. The reason is this way they get some influence, because they know they'll get nothing with the Democrats. Koch Brothers will start working to get Rand elected. Throw in some of the others, like the Walton's and you have a lot of money flowing in.

I know it can work, because we saw it with President Obama during 2008. A come from behind campaign where he went from broke, to flush quick.

The question is going to be one of winnable for both sides. We've already seen the discussions here. We can't even consider the move to nominate Warren because she can't win, or it's a grand strategy from the GOP to divide the party.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025247689

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12651206

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025249249

If our campaign strategy is who can out conservative the other, the GOP wins.

[Stellar]

15. I thought the sign on the left said Democratic Underground..

why the f**k are we still talking about that S.O.B.?

[woo me with science]

25. Because we want a stronger candidate?

Because we don't want to settle for a corporatist war hawk who will cede these important issues to a Republican?

[Stellar]

31. OK, I'm just so tired of hearing about Rand Paul...

Sorry.

[woo me with science]

45. I understand. IMO we have to talk about it,

to try to avoid letting the corporatists in our party put us in this terrible situation.

Did you see that the right-wing propaganda machine is starting to line up behind Paul?

Rush Limbaugh Stands With Rand Paul: 'The Neocons Are Paranoid'
The most popular conservative demagogue in America signals that hawkish foreign-policy dogma may be losing its hold on the GOP.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/03/rush-limbaugh-stands-with-rand-paul-the-neocons-are-paranoid/273938/

And Rand Paul has been courting the most conservative wing of the party (i.e., primary voters):

Rand Paul wins the first day of right-wing confab
http://www.salon.com/2013/03/14/rand_paul_wins_the_first_day_of_cpac/

The warm reception for Paul’s anti-interventionist foreign policy ideas is a stark contrast to the CPACs of years past, when neoconservatives ruled the day, like when Dick Cheney had a keynote spot just two years ago. Supporters of Ron Paul heckled the former vice president from the audience, but now one of their own is on the stage and getting only love from the crowd....

It could happen, and if corporate Dems get their way and run Hillary, we're screwed. Democrats...all of us...need a better candidate.


.

[Cali_Democrat]

51. I know you're very concerned if "corporate Dems get their way and run Hillary"

but I don't think we know how it will play out until late next year.

Your concern, however, is noted.

[woo me with science]

60. Was there a point here, other than being annoyed that we are talking about it now?

As I pointed out above, I think it's important to talk about it now, while there is still time to keep the corporatists from putting us in this terrible situation.

Did you see that the right-wing propaganda machine is starting to line up behind Paul?

Rush Limbaugh Stands With Rand Paul: 'The Neocons Are Paranoid'
The most popular conservative demagogue in America signals that hawkish foreign-policy dogma may be losing its hold on the GOP.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/03/rush-limbaugh-stands-with-rand-paul-the-neocons-are-paranoid/273938/

And Rand Paul has been courting the most conservative wing of the party (i.e., primary voters):

Rand Paul wins the first day of right-wing confab
http://www.salon.com/2013/03/14/rand_paul_wins_the_first_day_of_cpac/

The warm reception for Paul’s anti-interventionist foreign policy ideas is a stark contrast to the CPACs of years past, when neoconservatives ruled the day, like when Dick Cheney had a keynote spot just two years ago. Supporters of Ron Paul heckled the former vice president from the audience, but now one of their own is on the stage and getting only love from the crowd....

It could happen, and if corporate Dems get their way and run Hillary, we're screwed. Democrats...all of us...need a better candidate.

This is important. I don't want to be stuck in a situation where the *Republican* is running as the anti-war, anti-spying, anti-drug war candidate, and the *Democrat* is on the other side.

.

[Cali_Democrat]

62. You think I'm annoyed by people expressing 'concern' about the Dem nominee facing Rand Paul?

You don't know me very well...

[Stellar]

61. I'll tell you what...

I'll let you guys talk about him...I'm through for today. ANYBODY that Rush Limbaugh is behind means very little to me. Again, sorry.

[woo me with science]

77. I think every DUer would agree with you on that,

which is why we can't let this happen.

Have a good day.

[JustAnotherGen]

27. I dunno

Now we have two Paulites here.

If they were really true liberals - then they would be supporting a Warren or Sanders (Independent) candidacy.

Note - I'm not Hillary, Warren or Sanders - I'd like to wait until after 2014 mid terms then take a look at the candidates.

But noting these two posters and how aggresive they are - I'm more inclined to think they are just here to take our eyes off the ball of the House in November. At this point - I think anyone talking about 2016 seriously doesn't really care about getting members of the Democratic Party elected.

Or pushing forward even a few inches what was started in 2006 - when we took back the House then lost it in 2010. I think with a Democratic House - Reid will punch, punch, punch like he used to do in the ring. He's getting older - and he knows it's now or never. We gotta give him a Democratic House to work with.

[FSogol]

36. Only 2? It must be Rand Fucking Paul Day on DU. Hope the admins are paying attention.

[betterdemsonly]

41. What they really should pay attention to

is people who substitute accusations and smearing for debate, but that would require real moderators.

[FSogol]

46. Required reading?

Terms of Service

By registering a Democratic Underground account, you agree to abide by these terms. A single violation of any of these terms could result in your posting privileges being revoked without warning.

The Democratic Underground Administrators have a great deal of confidence in our system of citizen jurors and software tools, but we are well aware that trolls are constantly on the lookout for new ways to cause trouble and therefore on rare occasions it may necessary for us to revoke a member's posting privileges for reasons that are not covered by these Terms of Service. Because of this necessity, we retain the right to revoke any member's posting privileges at any time for any reason.
Don't be a wingnut (right-wing or extreme-fringe).

Democratic Underground is an online community for politically liberal people who understand the importance of working within the system to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of political office. Teabaggers, Neo-cons, Dittoheads, Paulites, Freepers, Birthers, and right-wingers in general are not welcome here. Neither are certain extreme-fringe left-wingers, including advocates of violent political/social change, hard-line communists, terrorist-apologists, America-haters, kooks, crackpots, LaRouchies, and the like.
Vote for Democrats.

Winning elections is important — therefore, advocating in favor of Republican nominees or in favor of third-party spoiler candidates that could split the vote and throw an election to our conservative opponents is never permitted on Democratic Underground. But that does not mean that DU members are required to always be completely supportive of Democrats. During the ups-and-downs of politics and policy-making, it is perfectly normal to have mixed feelings about the Democratic officials we worked hard to help elect. When we are not in the heat of election season, members are permitted to post strong criticism or disappointment with our Democratic elected officials, or to express ambivalence about voting for them. In Democratic primaries, members may support whomever they choose. But when general election season begins, DU members must support Democratic nominees (EXCEPT in rare cases where were a non-Democrat is most likely to defeat the conservative alternative, or where there is no possibility of splitting the liberal vote and inadvertently throwing the election to the conservative alternative). For presidential contests, election season begins when both major-party nominees become clear. For non-presidential contests, election season begins on Labor Day. Everyone here on DU needs to work together to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of American government. If you are bashing, trashing, undermining, or depressing turnout for our candidates during election season, we'll assume you are rooting for the other side.

[betterdemsonly]

48. Except pointing out that Paul could attract propeace liberals from the dem

is not advocating for his election. It is a smear to say so. Also, people aren't obligated to not criticize dems, particularly in primaries.

[FSogol]

56. Rand Paul thinks civil rights are a mistake & the free school lunch program for poor kids is evil

Zero liberals will vote for him. Rand Paul is not Pro-peace no matter how many times you make the claim here.

[betterdemsonly]

59. The fact that he would cut school lunch doesn't mean he is not anti-intervention

not all liberals are specifically interested in School lunch.

[PeaceNikki]

66. Calling an isolationist "anti-intervention" is like calling a Klan member "pro-Anglo culture" it's a

total misrepresentation.

[betterdemsonly]

76. Many anti-interventionists would prefer someone who keeps them out of a war with Iran

even if he is isolationist.

[PeaceNikki]

81. "many" are fucking stupid if they feel that way.

[betterdemsonly]

85. Losing some liberal pet causes may be deemed as worth it to prevent

unecessary death. Nothing stupid there. Just a different preference than yours.

[PeaceNikki]

91. Clarify yourself. Are you saying you prefer Rand Paul over Clinton? And... "liberal pet causes"???

Like civil rights, immigration, women's rights, taxes, education, the economy, etc?

Losing on all of those (and more!) is 'worth it' to you? Yeah, that is fucking stupid. To me and every liberal with a brain.

Or are you just speaking for 'a friend'?

[FSogol]

92. and does that "friend" commune with Aquabuddha?

[betterdemsonly]

95. NO I am reflecting the view of many voters

Why can't you get it through you head that we are worried about her position losing voters so we think she is a bad candidate.

[PeaceNikki]

96. OOOoooo, I see. Where do you get your info? Are you a political analyst?

You just seem to have so much deep insight into these mythical liberals who would vote for (Rand or Ron) Paul. I've never met one myself. Everyone I have ever met who has anything positive to say about them is a teabagger. Or Dennis Kucinich. Who I never met, but did speak with on the phone once.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

141. Looks like betterdems is unpeeling like an onion

[A-Schwarzenegger]

142. & Flagged...

[FSogol]

70. The free lunch program is a major liberal cause. Those that are against it are not liberals. n/t

[betterdemsonly]

73. Being against war in the middle east is a major liberal cause too

Civil Liberties are liberal causes. You will lose liberals who care about those issues. If you think one issue is a litmus test, you are really silly, and probably not going to win much.

[FSogol]

74. "you are really silly, and probably not going to win much," says the guy promoting Rand Paul in

dozens of posts today.



PS: too much, not to much
PSS: Zero liberals will vote for Rand Paul.

[betterdemsonly]

99. This is why people complain about your reading comprehesion

You just can't debate in good faith. You have to accuse people of anterior motives, as if you can read minds. That is a real turnoff, and if this site were truly moderated it woudn't be allowed.

[FSogol]

101. People complain about my reading comprehension? Do tell.

I won't waste my time debating Paulites, but I will continue to mock them.



As for my awesome mind reading powers, if someone posts 10 messages about motorcycles, am I wrong to suspect they are interested in motorcycles?

[A-Schwarzenegger]

137. You just won a mini-vacation. Enjoy it.

[Z_California]

65. What's your point?

I am a politically liberal person (Here's my Twitter handle if you want proof: @Johnzahorik).

I understand the importance of working within the system to elect more Democrats. It's kind of the whole point of my post.

I'm not a Pualite or Right-Winger.

So again, what's your point? Anyone who utters the name Rand Paul is a right-winger and should be thrown out of your neighborhood? Open your mind up a little.

[Cha]

130. NO Pauities. Written right there in black and white for all of DU to see and absorb.

Democratic Underground is an online community for politically liberal people who understand the importance of working within the system to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of political office. Teabaggers, Neo-cons, Dittoheads, Paulites, Freepers, Birthers, and right-wingers in general are not welcome here. Neither are certain extreme-fringe left-wingers, including advocates of violent political/social change, hard-line communists, terrorist-apologists, America-haters, kooks, crackpots, LaRouchies, and the like.
Vote for Democrats.

Thanks FSogol

[Z_California]

53. It's alarming to me

My OP does not endorse Rand Paul and I'm not a fucking "Paulite". He's a lunatic with extremely dangerous positions on most issues. Unfortunately, most voters are ignorant and make their choices based on 30 second TV spots and a few issues they care about.

I just posted a simple reality and rather than debate that reality you attack the messenger. Why not discuss the points because if the political realities aren't considered when you're choosing your candidate, you may wish later that you hadn't buried your head in the sand.

[clarice]

109. I'm curious, are there certain people we cannot post about?

I looked everywhere and couldn't find it in the forum guidelines.

[JustAnotherGen]

118. Those were the only two I saw

Onthis thread. The disruptors will out themselves eventually.

Truthfully I much more enjoy watching Democratic Party Members fight it out over Warren V Clinton and leave this tool to the IndieTeaPublicans. They can fight over this idiot and Perry and Rubio.

Idiots Are Us should be the 2016 Republican Platform. They've got the right people for it!

[Stellar]

50. Agreed! I'd like us to take back the House too and

I want a liberal democrat that can beat Hillary in 2016, or forced to vote for her if there is no one else. I don't want to see or hear the name Rand Paul HERE!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

20. There are sites where you can bet on this stuff.

Might as well get some skin in the game.


ROFL

[winter is coming]

24. Rand Paul is a shallow ass unlikely to make it to the end of the primary season unscathed.

Also, he's on the wrong side of a hugely important issue... income inequality.

[betterdemsonly]

28. What has Hillary ever done to lesson income inequality

She is the Senator from Walmart. Supports free trade. Support Wallstreet banks. If you want someone who is a clear improvement on income inequality you nominate Sanders or Warren.

[winter is coming]

40. I don't see Hillary getting the nomination, either. n/t

[betterdemsonly]

44. Well that's good!

Who do you have in mind?

I would also like to see Greyson run.

[winter is coming]

52. I'm willing to consider anyone who's not a corporatist. n/t

[pnwmom]

108. She had a very solid progressive record in the Senate, where the liberal State of New York

was very pleased with her representation.

[trumad]

29. And here they come...

[zappaman]

34. Was there a memo this weekend for the PaulBots to span Democratic forums?

Sure seems like it.

[FSogol]

38. +1 n/t

[pampango]

42. Not sure the GOP has shown a tendency to nominate "game changers". They call themselves conservative

for a reason. I sure would not bet any of my hard-earned money that Paul will emerge as the republican candidate.

He will help make the early republican debates (few though they may be this time around) very entertaining. Of course, their early debates are always fun with each of them trying to "out-tea party" the others at that point.

Hypothetically he might be right on 5 or 6 issues but he is wrong on 100 others. I would hope that any Democratic candidate can exploit a republican candidate with that bad a good policy-bad policy ratio.

Of course, if his ego is big enough he might decide to go third party. That would be a treat.

[Loki]

54. Rand Paul doesn't have an original idea in his head.

He's lied, he plagiarized too many times to count, he created his own board to certify his medical degree in Kentucky. Yes, just let anyone board certify themselves in any specialty they want. He's never met a government idea that he liked/didn't like in any given month. He is an old style charlatan and his whole ideology is built upon sand.

[gratuitous]

55. I sense you're very concerned

The chances that Rand Paul will be the Republican nominee for President in 2016 are about as good as Pat Robertson's chances. If you really must be concerned about something, may I suggest you be concerned about a herd of rogue rhinoceroses overrunning Scandinavia?

[brooklynite]

57. You seriously believe that the AVERAGE voter...

(not political activists and certainly not DU members) are riled up about sentencing guidelines and pot?

[Blue_Tires]

71. Did I miss something? Is Rand Paul on the 'right' side of those issues?

Because for all his talk, he's doing jack shit in the Senate about them...

[Gothmog]

79. Rand Paul has no chance of being the GOP nominee

The GOP donor class hates Rand Paul and the donor class controls the nomination process. The best that Paul can do is get 20% of the vote in a GOP primary.

The people who think that Paul will be the nominee really are underestimating the hatred that the GOP donor class has for Paul and his daddy

[Z_California]

90. I hope you're right (nt)

[Gothmog]

100. The GOP donor class hates Rand Paul and his daddy

The only way that Rand Paul will be the nominee will be despite the best efforts of the GOP donor class. The GOP donor class usually control the nomination process and the recent changes made to the procedures would tend to lessen the ability of Rand Paul to be the nominee over the objections of the GOP donor class

[Rex]

83. Not even close, he will NEVER be POTUS...EVER.

He won't get a single Democratic vote...sorry kids, but that dog don't hunt.

[Drunken Irishman]

84. If progressives vote for Paul, they're not progressive.

They're libertarians masquerading around as progressives - and that's a big difference.

My guess is that you're right. There are many progressives who don't give a flying fuck about issues that don't impact 'em. They're generally white, male and affluent enough to not worry about economic matters. So, they'll puff their chests at supporting a woman's right to choose, gay rights, racial equality and economic mobility - but will readily throw those groups under the bus to feel better about their vote.

Paul might be the most reactionist presidential candidate to have a chance at the nomination in a long, long time. If progressives can't see that, well fuck 'em.

[betterdemsonly]

89. Well if you piss on their issues you are throwing them under the bus

You can't bitch about it really. You need voters and not all voters have the same priorities.

[Drunken Irishman]

97. And if they're voting for Paul, they can't call themselves progressives.

It's that simple. They can twist themselves into a pretzel to try to rationalize a vote for Paul, who is a candidate that advances some of the most right-wing social rhetoric we've ever experienced from a mainstream candidate, but it won't change the fact they're proving they AREN'T progressive.

Any person who votes for Rand Paul is telling blacks, gays and women to go fuck themselves. If you vote for Paul, I can only assume you're anti-gay, anti-woman and a racist.

[betterdemsonly]

98. Hillary is not a progressive either and doesn't claim to be

Does that mean people who vote for her aren't progressive? You are trying to establish your own arbitrary rules on voter behavior as if it matters.

[Drunken Irishman]

111. Hillary is infinity more progressive than Paul.

And I say that as someone who really isn't a fan of hers.

[cbdo2007]

103. You need "non-progressive" votes to win national elections.

[freshwest]

145. +1,000

[bowens43]

87. LOL! You think that a Democrat, Liberal or Progressive would vote for that nutjob???? Really?

[NCTraveler]

102. If one is to the left of Rush Limpballs and votes for Rand.

They are simply dumbfucks. Where the hell did all this Rand shit come from? By the way, there is absolutely nothing progressive about the stance he takes on those issues. Seems many here are truly too limited in thinking ability to figure that out.

[upaloopa]

104. Paul has so many negatives he'd never get nominated.

You can list a handful of issues that libertarians have in common with liberals but that handful is all there is!

[LanternWaste]

110. He's a statistical outlier (at best) in the GOP primaries.

He's a statistical outlier (at best) in the GOP primaries.

Nominal case scenario: he receives 3-11% of the GOP nominee vote. Gov. Perry out-polls him... even after last week's indictment.

[Comrade Grumpy]

113. Real Clear Politics poll of polls has him about even with Bush and Christie at the top of the pack.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_republican_presidential_nomination-3823.html

Christie 11.5%

Bush 10.8%

Paul 10.3%

[LanternWaste]

115. Quinnipac, Deutsche Welle and NHK have him at the bottom.

Quinnipac, Deutsche Welle and NHK have him at the bottom. Which is where he is... and which is where he'll stay. He's a buffoon, and people recognize him as one.

[tazkcmo]

112. Puff puff

pass pass. You gotta be high.

[MFM008]

114. really?

wont happen especially with his extremist views on other issues.
I for one would N E V E R vote for a member of the gop/tea baggers.

[War Horse]

116. Well played, but

A Rand Paul nomination would lead to sunshine is the best disinfectant. The media will fall over themselves. It's the only thing they are good at.

[BainsBane]

117. The ideas you lay out indicate complete unfamiliarity with the American public

Not everyone has money. People care about jobs , and their daily lives, and prospects for their children. That you think people online who think like you are reflected of any sizable portion of the American public demonstrates precisely why the people that complain the most have made themselves politically irrelevant. Cannabis legalization, How fucking bourgeois can you get? State are dealing with as it is.

Rand is popular because right-wingers like a right-winger. If they don't support Paul they will support another right-winger because he will lower their taxes and shares their antipathy toward the vast majority of the American public who are white men.

[War Horse]

121. The GOP will never nominate Paul

I can see that even here from Norway. I sure hope they do, though...
Does this kind of trolling ever work?

[MineralMan]

123. It could also be a win for the Democratic candidate.

Bring it, please, and btw: FRP!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

124. OP should go here.Hill is even money. You can get 22-1 odds on The Rug Doctor

http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/us-politics/us-presidential-election-2016/winner

[Z_California]

125. This will be my last word on this thread

I find it interesting that some of you consider yourself "progressives". Most progressives I know are open minded and enjoy discussing issues in an intellectually honest way. Those who ignore your point, raise straw man "issues", resort to name calling and other intellectually dishonest tactics remind me more of the rednecks I run into every day who describe themselves as "conservative".

Progressives are open minded, forward thinking, pragmatic, fair, and respectful. Something that some VERY active members of this message board are NOT. A progressive is NOT close minded, short sighted, afraid of new ideas, arrogant, and does not resort to ad hominem attacks.

For those of you who pounce on those who dare bring up uncomfortable subjects, if you're looking for the troll, look in the mirror.

Hope you don't chase everyone out of the tent...

[muriel_volestrangler]

133. That's a crappy "last word" - 'some of you consider yourself "progressives"'

It's not that it's "uncomfortable" - people just think you're wrong about this.

[betterdemsonly]

136. When the moderation is bad bullies come out to play

and that is definately what has happened all day.

[gollygee]

126. Civil liberties, eh?

Whose civil liberties are those? Not women's.

[DemocraticWing]

128. They only care about one type of liberty...

The liberty of white, straight men to maintain their institutional advantages over the rest of us.

[Cha]

131. Not Gays.. Not Blacks. Since Rand Paul is a sanctimonious racist piece of shit.

napkinz http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5442425

thank you, gollygee

[sheshe2]

144. Oh my~ just look at who rec'd this Cha. eom

[freshwest]

146. Indeed. Not Mr. "National Personhood' Rand Paul...

Note the 4 must be's in the OP does not include any rights for women. Nothing to see here, folks.

[Warren DeMontague]

129. Any Democratic candidate interested in the future should get out ahead on pot legalization.

Unfortunately, the east coast beltway party poop-bahs haven't figured it out yet, and still think "tough on drugs" sells--

just like talking about Jesus and the Bible instead of taking actual positions on issues, is the way to win elections.

Look at Gavin Newsom. There is someone in our party who is not afraid to LEAD.

[muriel_volestrangler]

132. But polls show that he does about the same as Christie, Bush or others against Hillary

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh16gen.htm

It seems he's not a game-changer at all.

[Man from Pickens]

134. Can you suggest some names please

I'm not terribly familiar with who is who in national politics. Can you tell me the names of some Democrats who may run for President and have good positions on those issues?

[ozone_man]

135. Bernie Sanders!

He's running as a Democrat. A real progressive. He stands for the good issues that the OP has mentioned about Rand Paul, and the good issues of Hillary Clinton, women's issues, health care, social security. More than that he is for regulating Wall Street, and corporations (they are not people), unlike Hillary Clinton-Sachs, breaking up too big to fail banks...

[Man from Pickens]

139. That is a good suggestion

I have heard good things about Sanders but thought he wasn't a Democrat any more. I like also that he's not into bombing foreign countries, I'm real tired of that and it doesn't seem to have done any good.

Is he the only one or do we have additional choices?

[spanone]

138. horse....manure.

[Vattel]

140. Paul is way better than Clinton on tose issues

[Half-Century Man]

143. A Rand Paul Nomination indacates a brain derangment.

[LloydS of New London]

147. Like Sarah Palin?