I think RINO is one of the most asinine terms in our political speech today, as if there's unquestionably one specific mold of Republican and any divergence outside of that neatly defined mold...REGARDLESS of whether it's an ideological divergence or simply a policy divergence...suggest they're something out.
Even if he was a "RINO", you mistakenly assume that I vote for people based singularly off their party and not on myraid of reasons from ideological views, level of pragmatism, policy views, experience, trust, etc.
Oh look, another of the asinine words used in political discourse today. Yes, Rand Paul has a Tea Partier mindset on many issues and a libertarian mindset on some issues as well. That's not a negative in my mind. Using 3rd grader level debate by using childish names for the opposition and utilizing cherry picked signage that has no actual tangible purpose in an honest debate and is simply there to belittle and mock a large swatch of people based on the actions of a singular individual hardly changes my views on that.
I can go back to the run up of 2008 I believe where I was suggesting that I'd be estatic to see a "Ron Paul-esque" candidate who was in a more charismatic shell and who tempered their views with a bit more realism and pragmatism than Ron did. Rand, in many ways, fits that bill.
My state of Michigan has an open primary and I would be thrilled to no end to vote for Paul for the GOP nomination in 2016 should that eventually happen. If I can play even a small part in a 2016 Democratic landslide that makes even Goldwater in 64 look minor by comparison I would be very very happy.
Paul, the latter, is not a true republican, once people understand that, they'll be better informed. In the truest sense of the word, he is a R.I.N.O. because he doesn't have views consistent with the republican party, his views are more to the right of most republicans, more extremist.
The latest from the right-wing in denying which party they are and who they vote for.Even if he was a "RINO", you mistakenly assume that I vote for people based singularly off their party and not on myraid of reasons from ideological views, level of pragmatism, policy views, experience, trust, etc.
Invented by the asinine teabaggers themselves, with teabags hanging from their hats .Oh look, another of the asinine words used in political discourse today.
I have never seen anyone refer to someone as a "RINO" because they are too economically rightist.
While it's a term with little meaning enough as is, and frequently misapplied, you are applying it in a manner entirely opposite to its usage.
Not at all.
Republican In Name Only
Rand Paul has extremist views on social and economic issues. As witnessed by most Americans who watch MSM.
I don't view the tea party as republicans, which is what Paul represents. Some libertarians like him, some dislike him. I doubt he'll receive a GOP nomination though, his views are too extremist.
Paul, the latter, is not a true republican, once people understand that, they'll be better informed. In the truest sense of the word, he is a R.I.N.O. because he doesn't have views consistent with the republican party, his views are more to the right of most republicans, more extremist.
You don't seem to get it.
Tea Party folks are the ones that call the establishment folks RINOs. They're often correct to do so.
Paul, the latter, is not a true republican, once people understand that, they'll be better informed. In the truest sense of the word, he is a R.I.N.O. because he doesn't have views consistent with the republican party, his views are more to the right of most republicans, more extremist.
And the establishment GOPs like Boehner call traitors like Snowden "traitors", who Rand Paulites defend .
Never seen anything about Snowden that indicates traitorous behavior - breaking his word, yes, but it's hard to decide what's more lawful, keeping government secrets for the sake of keeping that confidentiality promise, or letting the public know when the government itself is breaking the law?
The public should know, because the government should stop. We should make them stop. We can't make them stop if we don't even now they're doing it.
The latest from the right-wing in denying which party they are and who they vote for.
Invented by the asinine teabaggers themselves, with teabags hanging from their hats .
Do you think Putin knows any of Snowden's secrets?
I don't view the tea party as republicans
I'll wait until the Illinois primary before making that decision.
Rand Paul is clearly the "alternative" choice in the GOP to the Elite/Neo-Con governors who were invited to the Adelson primary.
Adelson clearly runs the GOP at this moment and wants a governor to run against Mrs. Clinton .
I appreciate the time and effort you put into your posts, including the first one to me I've not responded to yet.The reality is that there are two major parties in this nation that have any legitimate chance of succeeding on a national stage;
whuttttttttt?What?
Meanwhile. can Adelson get all the candidates to coalesce around one elite/neo-con.I suspect Ted Cruz would also see himself as the same type of alternative. And I suspect there will be others from the far right wing who see themselves as personally appointed and anointed by God to carry His Sword into battle for the Soul and Heart of Freedom.
The only thing Ted Cruz is capable of doing is screwing up a wet dream.
If he gets into the Iowa through Florida primaries, he splits the TEA/Libertarian vote with Paul and whichever others from that ilk run.
Meanwhile. can Adelson get all the candidates to coalesce around one elite/neo-con.
My pick at this time is Gov. Kasich, but these things change daily .
While you're absolutely free to have that opinion, understand it's just a factually incorrect opinion.
There are members of the Tea Party movement that are registered as Republicans. They are, factually and unquestionably, "republicans". The members of the tea party caucus are individuals who won elections as a Republican, are endorsed by the Republican party, are in congress as "Republicans". They are absolutely Republicans.
You're free to have the opinion they aren't Republicans, but that opinion is actually factually incorrect.
Now, an opinion that they're Republican's in name only is not necessarily factually incorrect, but that is basically a subjective notion as opposed to an objective one like "they're not republicans". However, I'd be interesting to know what the exact criteria is to be a "Republican" as I would think it'd be rather difficult to deem someone a Republican in name only unless there was some kind of clear definition as to what a Republican is.
I do not think Adelson has a prayer of containing the next batch of GOP candidates. I foresee the next GOP presidential primary highlighting the split in the Republican party and I think it will be a bloodbath of Tea Party versus establishment Republicans. It should be very interesting to watch.
A lot of people want to see him on the GOP ticket in 2016. I'd vote for him in a heartbeat - just wondering how everyone else leans in regards to Paul...
Poll soon to follow.
A lot of people want to see him on the GOP ticket in 2016. I'd vote for him in a heartbeat - just wondering how everyone else leans in regards to Paul...
Poll soon to follow.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?