Name your stakes. I'll bet you any amount you like that Rand Paul is not even the 2016 GOP Nominee....much less becoming President in 2017.
I'm not bragging or making predictions, just making note of electoral trends. Although his polling does bode well.
Hypothetically (not opening a PayPal account yet ) Would you bet $1000 on Rand Paul becoming the GOP Nominee? Would you bet $100 on it? Would you bet $20 on it? $5?
I did. His "clarification"....un-needed if he meant what he said and said what he meant. Unfortunately for Randal Howard "Rand" Paul ...this is becoming a pattern. His appeals to minorities...or his appeals to libertarians....or his appeals to those who oppose more foreign intervention.... and then quickly "clarifyng" what he "really mant" when he catchs heat from his own Party or from the Right. 1. Try to appeal to minorities, agreeing Voter ID is offensive.....back off quickly because the GOP and Right support Voter ID. 2. Try to appeal to libertarians on drug policy.....throw out an anti-abortion bill to the Social Cons to try to not lose them. 3. Talk about less foreign intervention and even cutting foreign aid......quickly fly to Israel to kiss the ring of Netanyahu. His dad was more honest....Ron would do the first....eschew the second. S'why he was an iconoclast and beloved by his followers, but lost ......Rand's trying to WIN, something his Dad couldn't do, while simultaneously trying to BE his Dad....and a good loyal Republican. That's why I'll bet any amount of money against his Nomination....the GOP Base doesn't trust him. Rightfully so. They saw Ron as a "fool, but an honest fool" (to quote Gandalf)....they see "Ron Junior" as the son who wants to pretend he is his Dad, but not so much as to be the multiple defeated man his father was for the GOP Nomination. BTW, doesn't take much extrapolation to guess...you were a big RON Paul fan back in the day, weren't you?
Paul flip-flops so much he has to prepare his gaffes (for Monday) and his walk-backs (for Thursday) at the same time, hoping all the while there will be enough people who missed the original gaffe. He's like a fresh-caught walleye on a hot metal pier.
Why would that be the case? A clarification is issued, not because you didn't mean what you said, but because other people may have misinterpreted you. A flip-flop is changing your position to the exact opposite one, which Rand Paul did not do. It's really no more complicated than that. I was a big fan of his message, and still am.
I don't know how a Clinton vs Paul campaign would go. Would he stick to economic issues or would he go off on social and anti drone stuff. I think I would rather watch Warren vs Paul. I just don't think Paul would be able to handle Clinton.
Actually, I like Rand Paul in a lot of respects and I don't even mind flip-floppers when new info comes to light. His flip-flopping is more like trial-ballooning, tho, indicating a lack of purpose.
But what has he flip-flopped on? Typically, a flip-flop refers to the reversal of a position, not clarifying political rhetoric.
