This has to be Rand Paul's presidential bid op-ed....

[Stephen]

Thought I'd bring this thread back from the dead with some interesting analysis.

[jc000]

If anything, this article reinforces my belief that millennials suck.

[Tamara]

Thought I'd bring this thread back from the dead with some interesting analysis.

The college age vote swings Liberal? No! When did that happen? /sarc

[jc000]

I don't think the democrats have a lock on anything, including the youth vote. I remember the one bright spot about the VA governor's election was that super con Ken Cuccinelli won the 18-24 vote: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/1...ers-99568.html.

IF Rand Paul can win over enough Ron Paul supporters AND be the premiere GOP candidate, he will be very well-positioned for 2016. But that's a big IF and AND.

[Stephen]

The college age vote swings Liberal? No! When did that happen? /sarc

There's been a lot of talk from Paul supporters about making inroads with young voters. He's supposed to have a lot of appeal there that most Rs don't, but apparently that's not the case. I think the results here are surprising to a lot of people. One way or another, I think Republicans are going to have to make progress with some traditionally liberal voting demographics if they ever want to re-take the White House. I think its worth discussing if Paul is a guy who can do that.

[NerdAlert]

As a "millennial" or gen y ( I'm 28) I can honestly say that a lot of us are not as liberal slanted as some people think. Many in my generation see the writing on the wall and would vote for someone with the right stance and campaign savvy. Look at what our options have been the last two elections and tell me, being a young person, who would YOU have voted for? McCain? I abstained. Romney, I only voted for him because of the disaster that was Obama's first term. I would vote for Rand before I would vote for almost anyone else on the ticket because he seems, I don't know, genuine. He has convictions that he seems to stick to. Much like candidate Obama he seems to be good at articulating his views. I think he would eat Hillary alive in a debate. Just my .02.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk and real words.

[RoyGBiv]

I think he would eat Hillary alive in a debate.

Only if Candy Crowley is not the moderator.

[JHC]

As a "millennial" or gen y ( I'm 28) I can honestly say that a lot of us are not as liberal slanted as some people think. Many in my generation see the writing on the wall and would vote for someone with the right stance and campaign savvy. Look at what our options have been the last two elections and tell me, being a young person, who would YOU have voted for? McCain? I abstained. Romney, I only voted for him because of the disaster that was Obama's first term. I would vote for Rand before I would vote for almost anyone else on the ticket because he seems, I don't know, genuine. He has convictions that he seems to stick to. Much like candidate Obama he seems to be good at articulating his views. I think he would eat Hillary alive in a debate. Just my .02.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk and real words.

You're doing this all wrong! But you should have happier choices coming up.

There is no virtue in enabling the worse of two evils by being too good to vote for lesser of the two evils! Romney is not my idea of ideological perfection but he is one bull stud of an executive that could get things done. Gigantic mistake by voters that did not recognize this.

I do not ascribe all blame to candidates as most punditry does. I actually think the majority of the blame belongs to the voters or non-voters.

[MDS]

There is no virtue in enabling the worse of two evils by being too good to vote for lesser of the two evils!

There most certainly is! Besides the slow consistent progress towards solutions that might actually help; in other words, even if it were true that voting for Good can only foster the worst Evil, which is certainly not true. But if it were:

If we're going to hell in a hand-basket I'd rather get it over with so we can start rebuilding. If my three alternatives are life, quick death, or slow death, I'm voting for life. Otherwise, give me the "worst" evil, a quick clean death, to go down fighting with my ballot in my hands.

[JHC]

There most certainly is! Besides the slow consistent progress towards solutions that might actually help; in other words, even if it were true that voting for Good can only foster the worst Evil, which is certainly not true. But if it were:

If we're going to hell in a hand-basket I'd rather get it over with so we can start rebuilding. If my three alternatives are life, quick death, or slow death, I'm voting for life. Otherwise, give me the "worst" evil, a quick clean death, to go down fighting with my ballot in my hands.

That is totally mistaken IMO. What that did was ruin millions of lives since 2009 - driven out of the workforce. Families shattered. That didn't have to happen. This economy should be booming. It could be booming.