How electable is Rand Paul?

I am absolutely honest here.
Rand Paul is the most interesting semi-electable candidate we have IMO. Do you think he is capable winning the nomination? If so, do you think he is able to beat Hilary? I honestly think Republicans can't win with a Jeb Bush or Chris Christie. He is appealing to young people or at least more so than Clinton.
I prefer to vote for him.

 

I definitely think he is electable. He is more than capable of winning the nomination and beating Hillary. He's got fresh ideas and, as has been established in other threads, is not like his dad. I'm interested to see what he does in this campaign. He's not my first choice, but he'd be a good choice.

 

Another Freshman Senator?

Not sure any of these guys with so little political experience in building coalitions in government are the way to go.
Governors have a little more executive experience.

 

He has a hard road ahead of him. He will need to find a balance between being far right enough to satisfy the main GOP base so he is able to get the nomination, and far left enough to satisfy libertarians and moderate liberals so he is able to gain the upperhand against the Democrat in the general. But he is probably one of the few electable candidates the GOP has put up...he can do it. If he plays his cards right, he could probably be our next President.

 

It definitely won't be easy, but he is the type of candidate that can do it.

 

What is his position on the Burdens on Commerce that are our alleged Wars on crime, drugs, poverty, and terror?

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MViANyXOnk4

 

I"m all for him, but i doubt that he can get much more than 5% of the vote, so he's not going to get the nomination, not even close. He'd have to do a Ross Perot sort of independent run to have a real shot at the White House. Too many sheeple and ticks out there for a real, principled statesman and leader to have any general appeal.

 

Very Electable and the best thing for Rand is that he will have people like Ted Cruz and Ben Carson in the primaries making him look moderate.
I think Paul would offer the best contrast to Hillary 2016. Sure, he would potentially alienate some conservative voters. Let's vote for Rand.

 

I will wait until he gets back with Stuart.

 

I find both Paul and Rubio to be appealing although I am not 100% sure if they have national appeal. The next 7 - 12 months will be a interesting time indeed for politics. As far as Hillary goes she is already well on her way to self destructing, the Dems have a real problem on their hands with that narrow bench they have found themselves with

 

The fat cats control the duopoly, and Carrot Top Adelson will not permit Randy to be nominated, no matter how much he now panders to the establishment.

 

I think he would have a better shot in the general than in the primary.

 

no one person can block someone who is very popular. If that were true, Obama would never have seen the White House, cause you can bet Hilary was calling in all the favors she COULD.

 

Yes he is. Paul is very good at debates and public speaking and can win over votes when the debates roll around. He's still polling well nationally, but he has a particular advantage - he does the best in general election swing states, and he is doing extremely well in key early GOP states. States like Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, etc. In 2012 Santorum was a joke, but his win in Iowa springboarded him. Giuliani, who at one point pulled in nearly 50% in polls, couldn't recover from losing the first few states. It's a very, very weird psychological effect, but it works. Ron Paul nearly won Iowa and New Hampshire (within a couple points both times), and Rand Paul is poised to perform similarly or better. If he can win Iowa and New Hampshire he'll be in great shape to win the nomination, and he has a fair shot of winning both.

General election: he polls the best in swing states, and you have to remember that the early general election polls heavily favor the better known candidate. If he's this close already (early polls actually have him winning about a third of the swing states, to include states Obama won), expect him to do even better in the general election. It actually looks pretty good for him.

 

Rand Paul seems somewhat electable.

But I think if he pushes too hard on his abortion stance that personhood starts at conception he's going to loose the general election, if he makes it that far.

Otherwise I'd generally agree with him.

 

Hopefully very electable. Libertarian is like moderate plus.

 

Repeat after me.

Ted Cruz.

Scott Walker.

Those are the only two names you need to concern yourself with.

 

Nobody gets elected in this country without pledging allegiance to Israel and supporting a huge military budget here. It doesn't appear that Rand want to do either of those.

 

What keeps going through my mind is the insanity definition......and how most will likely vote for the same old potatoes and expect different results <sigh>

For those who know what I mean, I'll spare the repetition and the additional beating of the proverbial dead horse

 

interesting, but not electable
he does not know how to handle the media and comes across as petulant

 

I think that we'll be really lucky if 'bama doesnt suffer a head wound and miraculously recover. I"d love for Rand to win, but it's doubtful. I don't think that he'll be able to implement much of what he wants to do. I really think that they'll poison him if he tries.

 

I've always been a fan of his father, but he's too old to be relevant at this point. But in recent weeks, Rand has proven himself to be a religious nutter, so while he MIGHT win the primary (I don't think so, but can't rule it out), I don't think he'd win the general if his opponent was a canine.

 

well, she IS a beech

 

Bernie Sanders Shreds Rand Paul By Unmasking His Great Libertarian Fraud

He’s a legitimate candidate, certainly. Basically, after you get through the nuances of a Rand Paul, or a Ted Cruz, or a Jeb Bush, kind of their views are pretty much the same. That is tax breaks for millionaires, more spending for the military, cuts in Social Security/Medicare, and Medicaid, taking as much money as you can from billionaires. It’s kind of their agenda.

Host Larry Wilmore asked if Paul was legitimate by being different from that. Sanders answered, “No. His difference that is the Republican DNA. It’s to make the rich richer while everyone else becomes poorer…His nuances are civil liberties, where he has taken some good positions, and I agree with him on that.”

After other panelists suggested that Paul should reach out to women and gays in the same way that he has reached out to African-Americans, Sanders explained why that will never happen, “The problem he has is that it is hard to reach out to women when you are anti-choice. It’s hard to reach out to the gay community when you don’t support gay marriage.”

Bernie Sanders exposed Sen. Paul as being the same old kind of Republican. Beneath Paul’s rhetoric about liberty and freedom is a candidate who is a pro-billionaire corporatist who believes that the wealthy are entitled to more freedom, and that the same freedoms that he talks about with such reverence don’t apply to women and gays.

Sen. Sanders hit on all of the major contradictions that make Rand Paul an unelectable fraud. Paul may hold a few good positions, but the core of his ideology is solidly Republican, and not any different from his fellow GOP candidates.

http://www.politicususa.com/2015/04...d-paul-unmasking-great-libertarian-fraud.html