O'Donnell Raising More Campaign Funds

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I think that remains to be seen, because I can probably count the number of true small government conservatives in federal office on one hand.

I can't think of any time in recent history where there's been this many potential small government conservatives with a majpr party nomination for a general election.

The only one I trust is Rand, and that's only because of who raised him. The rest will have to prove themselves to me.

We're seeing it, however. Even with Rand. The establishment didn't want him, we know that. But now look what we're seeing. Huckabee's Pac just endorsed him and he's going to come campaign for him. Mitch McConnell is helping Rand.

Well, perhaps they think they can manipulate these new candidates. A lot of people are going to be expecting something from Rand in return for a victory.

That doesn't mean he has to oblige, though. We'll see.

I don't think he'd sell his country out for politics. He was raised better than that. How would he ever be able to face his father again if he did, you know?

I agree with you regarding Rand. I think he'll have his father's "they're supporting me, I'm not supporting them" philosophy.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Well now that she's won the primary the establishment certainly does want her, but only because they want a Republican in that seat. They don't care who it is, so long as they're a Republican.

You and I differ there. The establishment doesn't want real fiscal conservatives, because the status quo has been to continue moving farther left regardless of what party is in office.

Small government conservatism is in no way a real goal of the establishment. The republicans have had a multitude of opportunities to easily accomplish small government solutions across the board, and have barely accomplished any. In fact, they've done the opposite in most cases.

They could have done something about SS. They could have cut the DOE. But they didn't.

The only real small government conservative in 08 was Paul, and you see what they did to him. You watched the other candidates clearly steal his talking points while the media silenced him as much as possible to allow the other candidates to pay them lip service.

The goals of the establishment transcend left and right. There's something bigger.

No fiscal conservatism isn't the goal of the establishment, which is why they fight tooth-and-nail in the primaries to get "moderate" Republicans elected. We saw it in Kentucky with Grayson, and we saw it in Delaware with Castle. However, once the establishment loses the primary, they'll do what they have to do to get whoever the Republican is into office.

Krauthammer on Fox last said essentially the same thing. He went on and on about how she wasn't going to win, gave her odds of 10-1, said it was a big mistake to have done this, Castle was a shoo-in, blah, blah, blah. But when asked if he were to vote in DE, who would he vote for, he replied "I'd vote Republican".

 

[Modbert]

What's your basis for thinking this?

Rand Paul Breaks Campaign Promise, Accepts Money From Senators Who Bailed Out Banks | Blue Wave News

Rand Paul on Abortion - Hit & Run : Reason Magazine

As Ari Armstrong notes on his Free Colorado blog, Paul's anti-abortion stance, unlike his father's, goes beyond overturning Roe v. Wade and letting the states decide the issue. The younger Paul, who describes himself as "100% pro life," says "abortion is taking the life of an innocent human being," "life begins at conception," and "it is the duty of our government to protect this life." Toward that end, he supports "any and all legislation that would end abortion or lead us in the direction of ending abortion," including "a Human Life Amendment and a Life at Conception Act as federal solutions to the abortion issue." A Human Life Amendment would declare all fetuses to be persons with a right to life guaranteed by the 14th Amendment. A Life at Conception Act would seek to accomplish the same goal by statute. Hence either measure, rather than denationalizing the issue and letting states decide how to regulate abortion, would make abortion murder under federal law and render unconstitutional any state laws allowing it.

Addendum: Libertarian Party Vice Chairman Joshua Koch cites Paul's support for a federal abortion ban, along with his opposition to gay marriage and his refusal to call for withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq and Afghanistan, as grounds for running a candidate against him this fall, which he says the party is considering. "We're not going to let Rand determine what a Libertarian stands for," Koch, an erstwhile Paul supporter, told The Washington Post. "I'm here to say Rand does not have the Libertarian ideology."

Rand Paul Leads GOP Kentucky Senate Race as Outsider - TIME

"They thought all along that they could call me a libertarian and hang that label around my neck like an albatross, but I'm not a libertarian," Paul says between Lasik surgeries at his medical office, where his campaign is headquartered, with a few desks crammed between treatment rooms. "

As soon as he got the nomination, he turned his back on the Libertarians faster than the speed of light. He's also already talked about how he's going to Washington to protect Kentucky's Coal interests.

There's also this:

44 - Ron Paul: Rand's his own man on the 'mosque' issue

More and more, Rand is turning away from the ideals of his father and more so towards the Big Establishment Republicans. Reminds me an awful lot of the movie Wall Street.

 

[Paulie]

We're seeing it, however. Even with Rand. The establishment didn't want him, we know that. But now look what we're seeing. Huckabee's Pac just endorsed him and he's going to come campaign for him. Mitch McConnell is helping Rand.

Well, perhaps they think they can manipulate these new candidates. A lot of people are going to be expecting something from Rand in return for a victory.

That doesn't mean he has to oblige, though. We'll see.

I don't think he'd sell his country out for politics. He was raised better than that. How would he ever be able to face his father again if he did, you know?

I agree with you regarding Rand. I think he'll have his father's "they're supporting me, I'm not supporting them" philosophy.

If he doesn't politically pay back all of his support once he gets into office, what's the worst thing that happens? They don't support him for a re-election?

He's already said he'll be a one-term senator and then be done anyway.

He'll owe them NOTHING.

And that's really what it comes down to with the rest of these fresh faces. Either they stay principled, or they sell out to the establishment to keep a seat.

We'll see.

 

[Modbert]

I'll give you Angle and O'Donnell, but you can't deny they weren't the establishment candidates. Now that they've won the establishment is forced to accept them, but you know the Republican establishment didn't want them. The Republican establishment wants more Rob Portman's and less Angle's and O'Donnell's.

As for Rand, I think you're going to be surprised.

They weren't the establishment candidates at first, but they are now. They have embraced the establishment, all three of them.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

$1 Trillion annual deficit and ObamaCare's Eugenicists trumps any and all of these piddling "problems"

 

[PoliticalChic]

I live in NY and will find a way to get some money into her campaign.I want her to get as much help as possible.I don't understand why Rove and the rest would want a Senator that votes with the Democrats on major legislation.The past is just that.I'm not looking for us to find a person that's perfect from the time they are born till the time they die.That person will never exist.I'm interested in what they are willing to do in Washington for the people that elected them.

As a NY'er, I'm thinking of doing the same, but for Joe DioGuardi, as he doesn't have the $1.6 million.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

What's your basis for thinking this?

Rand Paul Breaks Campaign Promise, Accepts Money From Senators Who Bailed Out Banks | Blue Wave News

Rand Paul on Abortion - Hit & Run : Reason Magazine

As Ari Armstrong notes on his Free Colorado blog, Paul's anti-abortion stance, unlike his father's, goes beyond overturning Roe v. Wade and letting the states decide the issue. The younger Paul, who describes himself as "100% pro life," says "abortion is taking the life of an innocent human being," "life begins at conception," and "it is the duty of our government to protect this life." Toward that end, he supports "any and all legislation that would end abortion or lead us in the direction of ending abortion," including "a Human Life Amendment and a Life at Conception Act as federal solutions to the abortion issue." A Human Life Amendment would declare all fetuses to be persons with a right to life guaranteed by the 14th Amendment. A Life at Conception Act would seek to accomplish the same goal by statute. Hence either measure, rather than denationalizing the issue and letting states decide how to regulate abortion, would make abortion murder under federal law and render unconstitutional any state laws allowing it.

Addendum: Libertarian Party Vice Chairman Joshua Koch cites Paul's support for a federal abortion ban, along with his opposition to gay marriage and his refusal to call for withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq and Afghanistan, as grounds for running a candidate against him this fall, which he says the party is considering. "We're not going to let Rand determine what a Libertarian stands for," Koch, an erstwhile Paul supporter, told The Washington Post. "I'm here to say Rand does not have the Libertarian ideology."

Rand Paul Leads GOP Kentucky Senate Race as Outsider - TIME

"They thought all along that they could call me a libertarian and hang that label around my neck like an albatross, but I'm not a libertarian," Paul says between Lasik surgeries at his medical office, where his campaign is headquartered, with a few desks crammed between treatment rooms. "

As soon as he got the nomination, he turned his back on the Libertarians faster than the speed of light. He's also already talked about how he's going to Washington to protect Kentucky's Coal interests.

There's also this:

44 - Ron Paul: Rand's his own man on the 'mosque' issue

More and more, Rand is turning away from the ideals of his father and more so towards the Big Establishment Republicans. Reminds me an awful lot of the movie Wall Street.

If you think those of us who support Rand didn't know that he'd accept the help of the establishment once he won the nomination you're dead wrong. In fact, we were looking forward to his winning and unifying the Republican Party. I'd provide evidence of this, but it would require posting links to another message board. Needless to say, however, we knew it would happen and supported it happening. You can't win a general election as a Republican without the help of the Republican Party.

As for the Kentucky Libertarian Party, note that they're not running a candidate and the Chairman of KYLP came out and said that the Vice-Chair's comments regarding Rand are his personal opinions and not those of the KYLP.

What is un-libertarian about his position on Kentucky coal? He believes the free market is what's in the best interest of Kentucky coal. Sounds like the libertarian position to me.

As for the mosque, and most other issues, Rand is playing politics. No surprise there.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Well, perhaps they think they can manipulate these new candidates. A lot of people are going to be expecting something from Rand in return for a victory.

That doesn't mean he has to oblige, though. We'll see.

I don't think he'd sell his country out for politics. He was raised better than that. How would he ever be able to face his father again if he did, you know?

I agree with you regarding Rand. I think he'll have his father's "they're supporting me, I'm not supporting them" philosophy.

If he doesn't politically pay back all of his support once he gets into office, what's the worst thing that happens? They don't support him for a re-election?

He's already said he'll be a one-term senator and then be done anyway.

He'll owe them NOTHING.

And that's really what it comes down to with the rest of these fresh faces. Either they stay principled, or they sell out to the establishment to keep a seat.

We'll see.

Maybe they won't support his re-election, I don't know. I'm sure he'll have a primary opponent should he run for re-election in 2016.

I never heard him say he'd be a one-term Senator, just that he wouldn't spend his life as a Senator.

 

[Sarah G]

Topple a Republican icon. Clash on TV with a well-known political strategist. Get days of national press attention.

What does all that get you?

If you’re Delaware’s Christine O’Donnell, the new Republican nominee for Senate, it translates into big bucks.

In just the first 48 hours after her stunning upset of Representative Michael N. Castle, Ms. O’Donnell has raised more than $1.3 million, according to an accounting by her campaign’s Web site.

O'Donnell Raising More Campaign Funds - NYTimes.com

And if her website is accurate then she's close to $1.6 million now. I don't support her by any stretch, but that is an impressive amount of money to raise in such a short time. It looks like this race will be more interesting than originally thought.

If you're a teaparty candidate, the message shouldn't be that you are raising a boatload of cash, ya know?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I'll give you Angle and O'Donnell, but you can't deny they weren't the establishment candidates. Now that they've won the establishment is forced to accept them, but you know the Republican establishment didn't want them. The Republican establishment wants more Rob Portman's and less Angle's and O'Donnell's.

As for Rand, I think you're going to be surprised.

They weren't the establishment candidates at first, but they are now. They have embraced the establishment, all three of them.

It's more like the establishment has embraced them, as I've said already.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Topple a Republican icon. Clash on TV with a well-known political strategist. Get days of national press attention.

What does all that get you?

If you’re Delaware’s Christine O’Donnell, the new Republican nominee for Senate, it translates into big bucks.

In just the first 48 hours after her stunning upset of Representative Michael N. Castle, Ms. O’Donnell has raised more than $1.3 million, according to an accounting by her campaign’s Web site.

O'Donnell Raising More Campaign Funds - NYTimes.com

And if her website is accurate then she's close to $1.6 million now. I don't support her by any stretch, but that is an impressive amount of money to raise in such a short time. It looks like this race will be more interesting than originally thought.

If you're a teaparty candidate, the message shouldn't be that you are raising a boatload of cash, ya know?

Why not? Money is a huge part of elections. The difference here is that people are choosing to donate their money to campaigns on their own, whereas government simply steals people's money.

 

[Paulie]

What's your basis for thinking this?

Rand Paul Breaks Campaign Promise, Accepts Money From Senators Who Bailed Out Banks | Blue Wave News

Rand Paul on Abortion - Hit & Run : Reason Magazine





Rand Paul Leads GOP Kentucky Senate Race as Outsider - TIME

"They thought all along that they could call me a libertarian and hang that label around my neck like an albatross, but I'm not a libertarian," Paul says between Lasik surgeries at his medical office, where his campaign is headquartered, with a few desks crammed between treatment rooms. "

As soon as he got the nomination, he turned his back on the Libertarians faster than the speed of light. He's also already talked about how he's going to Washington to protect Kentucky's Coal interests.

There's also this:

44 - Ron Paul: Rand's his own man on the 'mosque' issue

More and more, Rand is turning away from the ideals of his father and more so towards the Big Establishment Republicans. Reminds me an awful lot of the movie Wall Street.

If you think those of us who support Rand didn't know that he'd accept the help of the establishment once he won the nomination you're dead wrong. In fact, we were looking forward to his winning and unifying the Republican Party. I'd provide evidence of this, but it would require posting links to another message board. Needless to say, however, we knew it would happen and supported it happening. You can't win a general election as a Republican without the help of the Republican Party.

This is a great point.

It's not just about bucking the trends and sneaking into congress to try and vote NO on a bunch of shit to fuck with people.

It's about trying to get the party back to its roots. A couple fresh faces coming in and being different than the usual suspects can go a long way towards changing the entire attitude of the party as a whole.

Maybe a couple get in this election, and then by next election it becomes evident who the better candidates are and we get a plethora of fresh faces this time.

It's been Ron's goal for decades now.

 

[Modbert]

If you think those of us who support Rand didn't know that he'd accept the help of the establishment once he won the nomination you're dead wrong. In fact, we were looking forward to his winning and unifying the Republican Party. I'd provide evidence of this, but it would require posting links to another message board. Needless to say, however, we knew it would happen and supported it happening. You can't win a general election as a Republican without the help of the Republican Party.

As for the Kentucky Libertarian Party, note that they're not running a candidate and the Chairman of KYLP came out and said that the Vice-Chair's comments regarding Rand are his personal opinions and not those of the KYLP.

What is un-libertarian about his position on Kentucky coal? He believes the free market is what's in the best interest of Kentucky coal. Sounds like the libertarian position to me.

As for the mosque, and most other issues, Rand is playing politics. No surprise there.

And that is why he is a establishment candidate. Do you have any evidence that Rand Paul is different from a regular Republican establishment candidate outside of who his father is? I mean what real change is he going to bring to Washington?

 

[Charles_Main]

Topple a Republican icon. Clash on TV with a well-known political strategist. Get days of national press attention.

What does all that get you?

If you’re Delaware’s Christine O’Donnell, the new Republican nominee for Senate, it translates into big bucks.

In just the first 48 hours after her stunning upset of Representative Michael N. Castle, Ms. O’Donnell has raised more than $1.3 million, according to an accounting by her campaign’s Web site.

O'Donnell Raising More Campaign Funds - NYTimes.com

And if her website is accurate then she's close to $1.6 million now. I don't support her by any stretch, but that is an impressive amount of money to raise in such a short time. It looks like this race will be more interesting than originally thought.

If you're a teaparty candidate, the message shouldn't be that you are raising a boatload of cash, ya know?

LOL sure. Only you can not win an election with out cash, and if people think you are not raising cash, Your support will suffer. So I guess you are saying if you are a TEA Party candidate. You should screw your chances to win and not raise money

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Rand Paul Breaks Campaign Promise, Accepts Money From Senators Who Bailed Out Banks | Blue Wave News

Rand Paul on Abortion - Hit & Run : Reason Magazine





Rand Paul Leads GOP Kentucky Senate Race as Outsider - TIME



As soon as he got the nomination, he turned his back on the Libertarians faster than the speed of light. He's also already talked about how he's going to Washington to protect Kentucky's Coal interests.

There's also this:

44 - Ron Paul: Rand's his own man on the 'mosque' issue

More and more, Rand is turning away from the ideals of his father and more so towards the Big Establishment Republicans. Reminds me an awful lot of the movie Wall Street.

If you think those of us who support Rand didn't know that he'd accept the help of the establishment once he won the nomination you're dead wrong. In fact, we were looking forward to his winning and unifying the Republican Party. I'd provide evidence of this, but it would require posting links to another message board. Needless to say, however, we knew it would happen and supported it happening. You can't win a general election as a Republican without the help of the Republican Party.

This is a great point.

It's not just about bucking the trends and sneaking into congress to try and vote NO on a bunch of shit to fuck with people.

It's about trying to get the party back to its roots. A couple fresh faces coming in and being different than the usual suspects can go a long way towards changing the entire attitude of the party as a whole.

Maybe a couple get in this election, and then by next election it becomes evident who the better candidates are and we get a plethora of fresh faces this time.

It's been Ron's goal for decades now.

Exactly. We've got some great Congressional candidates running as Republicans, and there's no reason why they should refuse any help from the Republican Party they can get. In fact, that's the point of running as a Republican in the first place. So you have an actual chance of winning an election, and so that you will have the help of the Republican Party should you make it to the general election.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

If you think those of us who support Rand didn't know that he'd accept the help of the establishment once he won the nomination you're dead wrong. In fact, we were looking forward to his winning and unifying the Republican Party. I'd provide evidence of this, but it would require posting links to another message board. Needless to say, however, we knew it would happen and supported it happening. You can't win a general election as a Republican without the help of the Republican Party.

As for the Kentucky Libertarian Party, note that they're not running a candidate and the Chairman of KYLP came out and said that the Vice-Chair's comments regarding Rand are his personal opinions and not those of the KYLP.

What is un-libertarian about his position on Kentucky coal? He believes the free market is what's in the best interest of Kentucky coal. Sounds like the libertarian position to me.

As for the mosque, and most other issues, Rand is playing politics. No surprise there.

And that is why he is a establishment candidate. Do you have any evidence that Rand Paul is different from a regular Republican establishment candidate outside of who his father is? I mean what real change is he going to bring to Washington?

Well I'll allow you to tell me whether you truly believe that Rand Paul and someone like Rob Portman are the same. Rand who believes in official declarations of war, and opposed the Iraq war from the beginning, as opposed to someone like Rob Portman who voted for the war.

 

[Sarah G]

O'Donnell Raising More Campaign Funds - NYTimes.com

And if her website is accurate then she's close to $1.6 million now. I don't support her by any stretch, but that is an impressive amount of money to raise in such a short time. It looks like this race will be more interesting than originally thought.

If you're a teaparty candidate, the message shouldn't be that you are raising a boatload of cash, ya know?

LOL sure. Only you can not win an election with out cash, and if people think you are not raising cash, Your support will suffer. So I guess you are saying if you are a TEA Party candidate. You should screw your chances to win and not raise money

No, they'll just think you're all good.. They don't need to donate.

 

[Modbert]

Well I'll allow you to tell me whether you truly believe that Rand Paul and someone like Rob Portman are the same. Rand who believes in official declarations of war, and opposed the Iraq war from the beginning, as opposed to someone like Rob Portman who voted for the war.

Except that doesn't really answer my question. Rand Paul being opposed to the invasion of the Iraq War sounds nice, but in reality it means zilch since he wasn't around to vote on it. What matters is his position going forward, and I haven't heard him call for a withdrawal from either Iraq or Afghanistan. Sure, I've heard him bash Obama on Afghanistan, but that's what Republicans want to hear. What I would want to know is what he plans to do once in office on that issue.

He certainly has shown himself to be aligned more so with mainstream establishment Republicans than his father on social issues.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Well I'll allow you to tell me whether you truly believe that Rand Paul and someone like Rob Portman are the same. Rand who believes in official declarations of war, and opposed the Iraq war from the beginning, as opposed to someone like Rob Portman who voted for the war.

Except that doesn't really answer my question. Rand Paul being opposed to the invasion of the Iraq War sounds nice, but in reality it means zilch since he wasn't around to vote on it. What matters is his position going forward, and I haven't heard him call for a withdrawal from either Iraq or Afghanistan. Sure, I've heard him bash Obama on Afghanistan, but that's what Republicans want to hear. What I would want to know is what he plans to do once in office on that issue.

He certainly has shown himself to be aligned more so with mainstream establishment Republicans than his father on social issues.

So being openly opposed to a war means zilch?

[youtube]76lb9kAbXr4[/youtube]

Here he specifically says that he would have voted "No" on a declaration of war against Iraq. If he opposed the war then you can safely bet that he would support getting all of our troops out of Iraq.

"Paul says invading Iraq was the wrong thing to do, and while he supported the attack on Afghanistan, he expresses reservations about President Obama's mission for U.S. forces there and speaks about the need to scale back overseas commitments."

Kentucky primary reveals GOP rift on Afghan war | Washington Examiner