Rand Paul: Hillary's 'War Hawk' Policies Led to Benghazi And Rise Of ISIS...

[aaronleland]

He's saying Hillary created both? I think he and you need rebooting on that message.

Where did I say that Paul said that?

 

[Avorysuds]

Rand Paul is already pretending he's the GOP nominee running against Hillary Clinton for president.

I think he needs to slow down a bit.

Let me help you with this...

Rand Paul is already beating Hillary for President in polling so you wish he would slow down a bit.... I base this on the fact that Hillary clearly considers herself the Dem's nom and yet you say nothing. Because you're a mindless hypocrite that hates anything not far left.

 

[Avorysuds]

Ran Paul proves why libertarians will never occupy the WHite House, with an analysis that combines the worst of liberal hate-America-ism with a gross misdiagnosis of the situation.
Bye Bye, Rand.

There are 3 reasons Rand will no be President but I can't remember all 3 reasosns so I'll just keep my mouth shut before making an ass out of my self...

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Hillary is another warmonger who will continue the same failed interventionist foreign policies as Bush and Obama, which is why the woody so many Democrats have over her potential candidacy is so steeped in irony.

 

[Avorysuds]

Oh, I think Hillary is no shoe in, and she'd a lousy campaigner who can't speak off the cuff. But, surprisingly, I agree with Rabbi on this. Paul is probably the easiest goper for her to go up against. He says crazy stuff, and the one thing Hill offers is a left of center tried and true technocrat.

I think you underestimate America's war weariness. In 2008 Obama ran on being the only candidate to oppose the Iraq war, and won.

Adelson's gonna bury Randian Paul. But, possibly more importantly, if the GOP tries to run a candidate who wants to leave ISIS and al queda in peace, we'll never elect another goper.

I'm ok with that... No more Progressives calling themselves conservatives in the white house.

 

[Avorysuds]

Hillary is another warmonger who will continue the same failed interventionist foreign policies as Bush and Obama, which is why the woody so many Democrats have over her potential candidacy is so steeped in irony.

What did TM always say? Party over country? Not a single protest over Obama's wars or the fact that he spends more than Bush on military.

 

[The Rabbi]

Ran Paul proves why libertarians will never occupy the WHite House, with an analysis that combines the worst of liberal hate-America-ism with a gross misdiagnosis of the situation.
Bye Bye, Rand.

Which essentially means that the GOP won't occupy it for at least another 10 years, either, because it currently has no candidate with the credentials to beat HIllary.

Yeah, count on that. Hillary is being reviled by the leftists in her own party and will be thrown over for Warren, much as she was thrown over for Obama. Most of the GOP guys looking at running would handily beat Warren, who is a typical elitist socialist.

I'm not "count(ing) on that", because I am not a Democrat.

But no, most of the GOP guys currently in the hunt would have nightmares running against her, because people in this great country see the GOP as a bunch of old white men.

I said it back in 2008, and I'll say it again: unless the GOP can find a solid minority candidate like J.C. Watts to run on its ticket, it has no chance of ever winning the White House again. Ever.

The GOP doesnt need to play the policitics of racial pandering. They need solid candidates who can motivate the base to get out and vote.

 

[shart_attack]

Ran Paul proves why libertarians will never occupy the WHite House, with an analysis that combines the worst of liberal hate-America-ism with a gross misdiagnosis of the situation.
Bye Bye, Rand.

Which essentially means that the GOP won't occupy it for at least another 10 years, either, because it currently has no candidate with the credentials to beat HIllary.

Yeah, count on that. Hillary is being reviled by the leftists in her own party and will be thrown over for Warren, much as she was thrown over for Obama. Most of the GOP guys looking at running would handily beat Warren, who is a typical elitist socialist.

I'm not "count(ing) on that", because I am not a Democrat.

But no, most of the GOP guys currently in the hunt would have nightmares running against her, because people in this great country see the GOP as a bunch of old white men.

I said it back in 2008, and I'll say it again: unless the GOP can find a solid minority candidate like J.C. Watts to run on its ticket, it has no chance of ever winning the White House again. Ever.

The GOP doesnt need to play the policitics of racial pandering. They need solid candidates who can motivate the base to get out and vote.

The two things—playing to the politics of racial pandering and showcasing strong candidates who can motivate the base to get out and vote—are not necessarily mutually exclusive, you know.

 

[rdean]

I thought it was Obama's fault because Bush and the Republicans left everything peaceful, happy and stable.

 

[shart_attack]

I thought it was Obama's fault because Bush and the Republicans left everything peaceful, happy and stable.

I thought it was Bush's fault, because that's the only thing your ilk ever says every time King Obama faces yet another domestic or international crisis.

 

[Darkwind]

Looks to Me that Rand Paul's team figures that Hillary will be the Democrat nominee and he's begun the war.

 

[The Rabbi]

Looks to Me that Rand Paul's team figures that Hillary will be the Democrat nominee and he's begun the war.

She's considered the front runner, even now. So it makes sense to start targeting her. Notice whenever some GOP poll gets play the libholes on here suddenly start threads with how terrible he/she is. When their prospects dim that goes away. What was the last Bobby Jindal hate thread you saw?

 

[bendog]

Ran Paul proves why libertarians will never occupy the WHite House, with an analysis that combines the worst of liberal hate-America-ism with a gross misdiagnosis of the situation.
Bye Bye, Rand.

Which essentially means that the GOP won't occupy it for at least another 10 years, either, because it currently has no candidate with the credentials to beat HIllary.

Yeah, count on that. Hillary is being reviled by the leftists in her own party and will be thrown over for Warren, much as she was thrown over for Obama. Most of the GOP guys looking at running would handily beat Warren, who is a typical elitist socialist.

I'm not "count(ing) on that", because I am not a Democrat.

But no, most of the GOP guys currently in the hunt would have nightmares running against her, because people in this great country see the GOP as a bunch of old white men.

I said it back in 2008, and I'll say it again: unless the GOP can find a solid minority candidate like J.C. Watts to run on its ticket, it has no chance of ever winning the White House again. Ever.

The GOP doesnt need to play the policitics of racial pandering. They need solid candidates who can motivate the base to get out and vote.

OMG, we agree again. Though I'm not sure we'd agree on candidates or policy. It wouldn't matter if the gop ran a woman or a latino if those demographics viewed gop policy as hostile to their interests. But, I don't see why a guy like Rick Snyder would be poison with non-white males.

 

[paulitician]

I only skimmed through the article, so did Paul mention the GOP's war hawk policies as well? I like Paul, but if he singled out Hillary I would have to disagree with that.

He has in the past. That's why many in his own Party despise him.