Very encouraging and I agree with him wholeheartedly.Originally Posted by RoyGBiv
Very encouraging and I agree with him wholeheartedly.
When Rand spoke out against requiring ID to vote he showed he is not that much different than the others.
So, you think his filibuster and views on the NSA are part of the status quo?
#RESIST
It will be interesting to watch how Rand attempts to court (or at least not draw the ire of) the NeoCon faction of the GOP.
It wasn't so much speaking against voter ID laws as leaving it up to the states to decide. His intentions are clear; he wants to bring more minorities over to the Republican side and many feel offended by voter ID laws.
http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/Rand.../13/id/571162/“I know about voter fraud and that there have to be rules and states have the ability to do it,” Paul said. “But I’ve also said Republicans should be emphasizing the good things we’re trying to do to try to help minorities vote instead of the things many minorities feel is directed at them, rightly or wrongly. … So I do object to overemphasizing something that is turning people off.”
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/0...#ixzz36d7u0ZKy
Sen. Rand Paul says he does not oppose the Republican Party's push for voter ID laws but doesn't think they should be over-emphasized.
The New York Times published a headline on Friday saying, "Paul Diverges From His Party Over Voter ID," but Paul said Tuesday that he was taken out of context.
Appearing on Fox News Channel's "On the Record with Greta Van Susteren," Paul, a Kentucky Republican, said he was saying that Republicans shouldn't make voter ID a primary issue in this year's elections. The GOP should take note that many black voters fear that voter ID is actually an attempt to suppress minority voting, he said.
"We're not trying to do that. In fact, I'm trying to restore voting rights for minorities who I think have unfairly had their voting rights taken away," Paul said. He pointed to his own efforts, along with those of the NAACP, to restore voting rights to minorities who have been convicted of non-violent crimes.
"There was a time in our past when the vote was suppressed," Paul said, noting that it was mostly Democrats who were guilty.
"But, for some reason, they think Republicans are part of this historical suppression of African-American votes. They think this is just another ploy," he said.
Republicans should acknowledge that perception in their attempt to reach more minority voters, he said.
Paul said he is keenly aware that voter fraud exists. His own father, former Texas Rep. Ron Paul, once lost an election by 200 votes in a contest in which 200,000 votes were cast, he said. About 3,000 of those votes were found to be illegal, he added.
"So, I'm very aware of voter fraud and don't think it's that unreasonable to show your driver's license."
He's going to struggle with this one if he thinks that he can deemphasize voter id to pacify the left or attract minorities. The left does not care if a particular position is a central part of the platform or deemphasized. They will use it to their advantage just like they used abortion against Romney (which was also "deemphasized"). Also, a neutral stance on voter id is not going to win over minorities and Paul has absolutely zero chance of winning over any significant portion of the free shit Army.
Paul would be much better off sticking to a conservative social agenda while maintaining a libertarian flavor on foreign policy issues. This is a great way for him to distinguish himself from the likes of Cruz and the rest of the mainstream GOP. In other words, he can be the choice for those who favor fiscal responsibility, free markets, and a very limited global foot print. He is doomed as soon as he starts trying to be everything to everybody.
I like my rifles like my women - short, light, fast, brown, and suppressed.
I think he plays the game to his benefit. His views are more in line with mine than most in DC but at the same time he will switch in a second if he thinks it benefits him. How many seconds did it take him to to come out against Bundy when the racist hack job came out ? He did not waste any time investigating if it was true or the context of the statements.
I'm in agreement and think those are some of his most positive attributes.
I think this is exactly the opposite of a winning strategy.
A libertarian social policy (keep the government out of my bedroom and my cell phone) and a slightly-hawkish foreign policy (reduced payments to foreign governments and a strong military, used judiciously).
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." - Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776
I misread Sensei's reply but can't edit it. I'm in agreement with you here, but I also think that there's a lot of people who want to be ruled and have no concept of personal freedom.
Reply With Quote