August 22, 2015 is a critical date for Rand Paul

[David_42]

You've stated you support a women's right to have an abortion, so why the heck would you support Paul? -.-

Because I am not a one issue voter

Obviously, but he literally wants to.. Well, look for yourself: Summary of S. 583 (113th): A bill to implement equal protection under the 14th article of amendment to ... - GovTrack.us
If a candidate supports something that involves restricting someone's freedom to control their own bodies.. It's not a simple thing with "one issue"

The odds of abortion being outlawed in my lifetime are barely passed 0%

I just can't bring myself to support someone who claims to defend liberty and wants to essentially ban morning after pills.

Prolife Rand Paul to college students: ‘I am not opposed to the morning-after pill’ - The College Fix

"
But then one woman stood up and asked Paul whether he is opposed to Plan B, commonly known as the morning-after pill. Paul, whostates on his website that “I am 100% pro-life” and introduced the Life at Conception Act in 2013 that essentially extends Constitutional rights to the unborn, was visibly stumped at first by the question.

The Republican senator from Kentucky ended up answering the question in the negative, telling the woman: “I am not opposed to birth control.” After a long pause, he added: “That’s basically what Plan B is. Plan B is taking two birth control pills in the morning and two in the evening, and I am not opposed to that.”
"
So, he's a hypocritical moron?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Because I am not a one issue voter

Obviously, but he literally wants to.. Well, look for yourself: Summary of S. 583 (113th): A bill to implement equal protection under the 14th article of amendment to ... - GovTrack.us
If a candidate supports something that involves restricting someone's freedom to control their own bodies.. It's not a simple thing with "one issue"

The odds of abortion being outlawed in my lifetime are barely passed 0%

I just can't bring myself to support someone who claims to defend liberty and wants to essentially ban morning after pills.

Prolife Rand Paul to college students: ‘I am not opposed to the morning-after pill’ - The College Fix

"
But then one woman stood up and asked Paul whether he is opposed to Plan B, commonly known as the morning-after pill. Paul, whostates on his website that “I am 100% pro-life” and introduced the Life at Conception Act in 2013 that essentially extends Constitutional rights to the unborn, was visibly stumped at first by the question.

The Republican senator from Kentucky ended up answering the question in the negative, telling the woman: “I am not opposed to birth control.” After a long pause, he added: “That’s basically what Plan B is. Plan B is taking two birth control pills in the morning and two in the evening, and I am not opposed to that.”
"
So, he's a hypocritical moron?

Plan B is not an abortion.

 

[David_42]

Obviously, but he literally wants to.. Well, look for yourself: Summary of S. 583 (113th): A bill to implement equal protection under the 14th article of amendment to ... - GovTrack.us
If a candidate supports something that involves restricting someone's freedom to control their own bodies.. It's not a simple thing with "one issue"

The odds of abortion being outlawed in my lifetime are barely passed 0%

I just can't bring myself to support someone who claims to defend liberty and wants to essentially ban morning after pills.

Prolife Rand Paul to college students: ‘I am not opposed to the morning-after pill’ - The College Fix

"
But then one woman stood up and asked Paul whether he is opposed to Plan B, commonly known as the morning-after pill. Paul, whostates on his website that “I am 100% pro-life” and introduced the Life at Conception Act in 2013 that essentially extends Constitutional rights to the unborn, was visibly stumped at first by the question.

The Republican senator from Kentucky ended up answering the question in the negative, telling the woman: “I am not opposed to birth control.” After a long pause, he added: “That’s basically what Plan B is. Plan B is taking two birth control pills in the morning and two in the evening, and I am not opposed to that.”
"
So, he's a hypocritical moron?

Plan B is not an abortion.

According to the ACTION he supported, it would be classified as murder. He's a typical pro lifer, an idiot.

 

[Statistikhengst]

As promised, it is August 22nd, and I am back.

Rand Paul's Presidential Campaign May Have Just Been Saved

Indeed, the Republican Party of Kentucky is splitting the primary process into two dates and made the decision just hours ago:

The Kentucky Republican Presidential CAUCUSES will be held on Saturday, March 5th, 2016. On this date, Rand Paul's name will be on the ballot for the Presidential caucuses.

The Kentucky PRIMARIES for everything else (including the Democratic Presidential Primary, to the best of my knowledge) will be on Tuesday, May 17th, 2016. On this date, Rand Paul's name will be on the ballot for the Republican Senatorial primary.

There is more: the caucus will NOT be WTA:

But most committee members said their vote was motivated not by Paul's candidacy, but by a desire to make Kentucky a player in presidential politics. That's why Republicans crafted the caucus to appeal to as many of the 17 declared Republican candidates as possible. The plan calls for Kentucky's delegates to be split proportionally rather than "winner takes all," and candidates only need to get 5 percent of the vote to qualify for delegates. That's a threshold much lower than other primary states.

I think it's fair to say that the Kentucky GOP just threw Rand Paul a lifeline, which he gratefully took. I would also think that this definitely means that he will be in the race until at least this date, maybe to the end, who knows for sure...

And this is not entirely out of the goodness of their hearts, the KY GOP, for there is also:

...an amendment that requires Paul to transfer $250,000 to the Republican Party of Kentucky by Sept. 18. If the money is not transferred by that date, the caucus will be canceled and revert back to the primary.

So, Paul is essentially paying, in part, to get a presidential caucus in his home-state.

I am researching this right now, but to my knowledge, this is the first time that this kind of thing has ever happened.

Derideo_Te
AceRothstein
Mertex
Nyvin
Grandma

I think Kentucky was pretty well aware that Rand Paul doesn't have a chance in hell to win the Presidential nomination and they didn't want to take a chance and leave the Senate space open for a Democrat to take it. It's going to be tough for him to campaign for President and let his Senatorial campaign go by the wayside, so they may still end up losing it.

Rand Paul bedeviled by Kentucky law

Hmmmm, dunno about that.

Usually, making a presidential run, even a failed one, burnishes a sitting Senator's or Governor's credentials and pretty much guarantees a re-election for the lesser seat than that of President of the USA. Even in the case of a D landslide in 2016, which is entirely possible, Paul could still retain his seat. Also, the statistical workup on 1st term senators winning at least a second term shows that well over 95% of them have been successfully re-elected. The strain of re-election usually comes after the 3rd term (18 years).

 

[Statistikhengst]

I like Rand Paul and he is my choice for president, but being realistic, it looks like his momentum is gone. He should probably just stick to his Senate reelection.

You've stated you support a women's right to have an abortion, so why the heck would you support Paul? -.-

Because I am not a one issue voter

Neither am I. Well said.

 

[Statistikhengst]

I like Rand Paul and he is my choice for president, but being realistic, it looks like his momentum is gone. He should probably just stick to his Senate reelection.

You've stated you support a women's right to have an abortion, so why the heck would you support Paul? -.-

Because I am not a one issue voter

Obviously, but he literally wants to.. Well, look for yourself: Summary of S. 583 (113th): A bill to implement equal protection under the 14th article of amendment to ... - GovTrack.us
If a candidate supports something that involves restricting someone's freedom to control their own bodies.. It's not a simple thing with "one issue"

Except opposing abortion is about saving another person's body, namely the baby. Abortionists want to save the baby so Planned parenthood can dismember it for cash.
As for Paul, a non-issue thread about a non-event.

No, the thread has some valuable information in it. You just have to be smart enough to realize it.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Part of the issue here is that, because of Federalism and the fact that the specific nuts-and-bolts of electioneering were not laid out in the US Constitution, each state gets to decide on stuff like this. Connecticut has no law like the KY law that states that a person's name can only be for one office on a primary ballot, hence, Joe Lieberman's Senate and Vice-Presidential run in 2000 was at no extra cost to the residents of Connecticut. Ditto for Vice President Biden in nearby Delaware, for in 2008 he also ran for the Vice-Presidency (and won!!) and also won another term as Senator from Delaware.

I am not saying that one state has a better system than another, but it is not uniform in any way at all, and really, elections should be uniformly regulated, uniformly executed, free, open and fair.

 

[The Rabbi]

I like Rand Paul and he is my choice for president, but being realistic, it looks like his momentum is gone. He should probably just stick to his Senate reelection.

You've stated you support a women's right to have an abortion, so why the heck would you support Paul? -.-

Because I am not a one issue voter

Obviously, but he literally wants to.. Well, look for yourself: Summary of S. 583 (113th): A bill to implement equal protection under the 14th article of amendment to ... - GovTrack.us
If a candidate supports something that involves restricting someone's freedom to control their own bodies.. It's not a simple thing with "one issue"

Except opposing abortion is about saving another person's body, namely the baby. Abortionists want to save the baby so Planned parenthood can dismember it for cash.
As for Paul, a non-issue thread about a non-event.

No, the thread has some valuable information in it. You just have to be smart enough to realize it.

OK please lay out the "valuable information."

 

[B. Kidd]

Rand Paul became road-kill when his PAC heads got indicted (thanks, Dad!). Hill-Beast is too; she just doesn't know it yet.

 

[Statistikhengst]

You've stated you support a women's right to have an abortion, so why the heck would you support Paul? -.-

Because I am not a one issue voter

Obviously, but he literally wants to.. Well, look for yourself: Summary of S. 583 (113th): A bill to implement equal protection under the 14th article of amendment to ... - GovTrack.us
If a candidate supports something that involves restricting someone's freedom to control their own bodies.. It's not a simple thing with "one issue"

Except opposing abortion is about saving another person's body, namely the baby. Abortionists want to save the baby so Planned parenthood can dismember it for cash.
As for Paul, a non-issue thread about a non-event.

No, the thread has some valuable information in it. You just have to be smart enough to realize it.

OK please lay out the "valuable information."

Sure, for your extremely weak mind, I will do this. Just let me know if any of the words are too long for you or you cannot spell them out:

Rand Paul is a declared presidential candidate and a declared senatorial candidate from KY. KY law does not allow his name to be on the same ballot for more than one office in the same election, so, had the GOP not changed its primary organization for 2016 by changing the date for the Republican process for selecting whom it thinks should be the nominee for president (which is what Primaries at the presidential level are there for, nöööö?), this would have meant that Paul would have had to give up either being on the presidential ballot for the primary or give up being on the Senatorial ballot for the primary.

This means that for now, this problem for Paul have been solved. Should he become the Republican presidential nominee in Summer, 2016, then he would likely have to give up his Senate run.

That is newsworthy, it is current and it is relevant. That makes it quite valuable information. If your trolling mind cannot understand that, that's not my problem.

Better luck to you next time.

 

[kaz]

His Libertarian roots are showing. Individual rights and all, as long as he's the individual getting those rights.

He's going to lose both elections.

Paul will lose in Kentucky? You are delusional

 

[The Rabbi]

Because I am not a one issue voter

Obviously, but he literally wants to.. Well, look for yourself: Summary of S. 583 (113th): A bill to implement equal protection under the 14th article of amendment to ... - GovTrack.us
If a candidate supports something that involves restricting someone's freedom to control their own bodies.. It's not a simple thing with "one issue"

Except opposing abortion is about saving another person's body, namely the baby. Abortionists want to save the baby so Planned parenthood can dismember it for cash.
As for Paul, a non-issue thread about a non-event.

No, the thread has some valuable information in it. You just have to be smart enough to realize it.

OK please lay out the "valuable information."

Sure, for your extremely weak mind, I will do this. Just let me know if any of the words are too long for you or you cannot spell them out:

Rand Paul is a declared presidential candidate and a declared senatorial candidate from KY. KY law does not allow his name to be on the same ballot for more than one office in the same election, so, had the GOP not changed its primary organization for 2016 by changing the date for the Republican process for selecting whom it thinks should be the nominee for president (which is what Primaries at the presidential level are there for, nöööö?), this would have meant that Paul would have had to give up either being on the presidential ballot for the primary or give up being on the Senatorial ballot for the primary.

This means that for now, this problem for Paul have been solved. Should he become the Republican presidential nominee in Summer, 2016, then he would likely have to give up his Senate run.

That is newsworthy, it is current and it is relevant. That makes it quite valuable information. If your trolling mind cannot understand that, that's not my problem.

Better luck to you next time.

OK so this is a non problem that has been solved and therefore irrelevant.
Thanks for cluttering the internet just a little bit more.

And here's where you run away from the argument, as you did in the thread on black on black violence.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Obviously, but he literally wants to.. Well, look for yourself: Summary of S. 583 (113th): A bill to implement equal protection under the 14th article of amendment to ... - GovTrack.us
If a candidate supports something that involves restricting someone's freedom to control their own bodies.. It's not a simple thing with "one issue"

Except opposing abortion is about saving another person's body, namely the baby. Abortionists want to save the baby so Planned parenthood can dismember it for cash.
As for Paul, a non-issue thread about a non-event.

No, the thread has some valuable information in it. You just have to be smart enough to realize it.

OK please lay out the "valuable information."

Sure, for your extremely weak mind, I will do this. Just let me know if any of the words are too long for you or you cannot spell them out:

Rand Paul is a declared presidential candidate and a declared senatorial candidate from KY. KY law does not allow his name to be on the same ballot for more than one office in the same election, so, had the GOP not changed its primary organization for 2016 by changing the date for the Republican process for selecting whom it thinks should be the nominee for president (which is what Primaries at the presidential level are there for, nöööö?), this would have meant that Paul would have had to give up either being on the presidential ballot for the primary or give up being on the Senatorial ballot for the primary.

This means that for now, this problem for Paul have been solved. Should he become the Republican presidential nominee in Summer, 2016, then he would likely have to give up his Senate run.

That is newsworthy, it is current and it is relevant. That makes it quite valuable information. If your trolling mind cannot understand that, that's not my problem.

Better luck to you next time.

OK so this is a non problem that has been solved and therefore irrelevant.
Thanks for cluttering the internet just a little bit more.

And here's where you run away from the argument, as you did in the thread on black on black violence.

No. You just lied. It would have been a major problem for Rand Paul had it not been solved. So, no, it's not a "non-problem".

You only write what you write because you are a truly disgusting troll with a heart and soul as black as soot.

Had a Conservative made this thread, you would not be writing the way you did. Your hyperpartisanship clouds what little judgement you possess to the point where you cannot see beyond your nose.

As for the black on black violence comment, again, you have lied.

You lie a lot.

And your predictions are often very faulty.

Is there anything in the world that you are good at?

 

[The Rabbi]

Except opposing abortion is about saving another person's body, namely the baby. Abortionists want to save the baby so Planned parenthood can dismember it for cash.
As for Paul, a non-issue thread about a non-event.

No, the thread has some valuable information in it. You just have to be smart enough to realize it.

OK please lay out the "valuable information."

Sure, for your extremely weak mind, I will do this. Just let me know if any of the words are too long for you or you cannot spell them out:

Rand Paul is a declared presidential candidate and a declared senatorial candidate from KY. KY law does not allow his name to be on the same ballot for more than one office in the same election, so, had the GOP not changed its primary organization for 2016 by changing the date for the Republican process for selecting whom it thinks should be the nominee for president (which is what Primaries at the presidential level are there for, nöööö?), this would have meant that Paul would have had to give up either being on the presidential ballot for the primary or give up being on the Senatorial ballot for the primary.

This means that for now, this problem for Paul have been solved. Should he become the Republican presidential nominee in Summer, 2016, then he would likely have to give up his Senate run.

That is newsworthy, it is current and it is relevant. That makes it quite valuable information. If your trolling mind cannot understand that, that's not my problem.

Better luck to you next time.

OK so this is a non problem that has been solved and therefore irrelevant.
Thanks for cluttering the internet just a little bit more.

And here's where you run away from the argument, as you did in the thread on black on black violence.

No. You just lied. It would have been a major problem for Rand Paul had it not been solved. So, no, it's not a "non-problem".

You only write what you write because you are a truly disgusting troll with a heart and soul as black as soot.

Had a Conservative made this thread, you would not be writing the way you did. Your hyperpartisanship clouds what little judgement you possess to the point where you cannot see beyond your nose.

As for the black on black violence comment, again, you have lied.

You lie a lot.

And your predictions are often very faulty.

Is there anything in the world that you are good at?

If Rand Paul had not filed to be on the ballot in every state it would have been a huge problem.
If Rand Paul had not followed federal election law it would have been a huge problem.
But those things didnt happen and neither did this.
Again, a worthless thread by the most consistently partisan and stupid hack on this site with nothing original to contribute.

 

[Statistikhengst]

No, the thread has some valuable information in it. You just have to be smart enough to realize it.

OK please lay out the "valuable information."

Sure, for your extremely weak mind, I will do this. Just let me know if any of the words are too long for you or you cannot spell them out:

Rand Paul is a declared presidential candidate and a declared senatorial candidate from KY. KY law does not allow his name to be on the same ballot for more than one office in the same election, so, had the GOP not changed its primary organization for 2016 by changing the date for the Republican process for selecting whom it thinks should be the nominee for president (which is what Primaries at the presidential level are there for, nöööö?), this would have meant that Paul would have had to give up either being on the presidential ballot for the primary or give up being on the Senatorial ballot for the primary.

This means that for now, this problem for Paul have been solved. Should he become the Republican presidential nominee in Summer, 2016, then he would likely have to give up his Senate run.

That is newsworthy, it is current and it is relevant. That makes it quite valuable information. If your trolling mind cannot understand that, that's not my problem.

Better luck to you next time.

OK so this is a non problem that has been solved and therefore irrelevant.
Thanks for cluttering the internet just a little bit more.

And here's where you run away from the argument, as you did in the thread on black on black violence.

No. You just lied. It would have been a major problem for Rand Paul had it not been solved. So, no, it's not a "non-problem".

You only write what you write because you are a truly disgusting troll with a heart and soul as black as soot.

Had a Conservative made this thread, you would not be writing the way you did. Your hyperpartisanship clouds what little judgement you possess to the point where you cannot see beyond your nose.

As for the black on black violence comment, again, you have lied.

You lie a lot.

And your predictions are often very faulty.

Is there anything in the world that you are good at?

If Rand Paul had not filed to be on the ballot in every state it would have been a huge problem.
If Rand Paul had not followed federal election law it would have been a huge problem.
But those things didnt happen and neither did this.
Again, a worthless thread by the most consistently partisan and stupid hack on this site with nothing original to contribute.

So, you missed the point. This is not about any other state in the Union other than Kentucky.

Are you brain-damaged?

Yes, I think you are, you dottering old fool.

 

[The Rabbi]

OK please lay out the "valuable information."

Sure, for your extremely weak mind, I will do this. Just let me know if any of the words are too long for you or you cannot spell them out:

Rand Paul is a declared presidential candidate and a declared senatorial candidate from KY. KY law does not allow his name to be on the same ballot for more than one office in the same election, so, had the GOP not changed its primary organization for 2016 by changing the date for the Republican process for selecting whom it thinks should be the nominee for president (which is what Primaries at the presidential level are there for, nöööö?), this would have meant that Paul would have had to give up either being on the presidential ballot for the primary or give up being on the Senatorial ballot for the primary.

This means that for now, this problem for Paul have been solved. Should he become the Republican presidential nominee in Summer, 2016, then he would likely have to give up his Senate run.

That is newsworthy, it is current and it is relevant. That makes it quite valuable information. If your trolling mind cannot understand that, that's not my problem.

Better luck to you next time.

OK so this is a non problem that has been solved and therefore irrelevant.
Thanks for cluttering the internet just a little bit more.

And here's where you run away from the argument, as you did in the thread on black on black violence.

No. You just lied. It would have been a major problem for Rand Paul had it not been solved. So, no, it's not a "non-problem".

You only write what you write because you are a truly disgusting troll with a heart and soul as black as soot.

Had a Conservative made this thread, you would not be writing the way you did. Your hyperpartisanship clouds what little judgement you possess to the point where you cannot see beyond your nose.

As for the black on black violence comment, again, you have lied.

You lie a lot.

And your predictions are often very faulty.

Is there anything in the world that you are good at?

If Rand Paul had not filed to be on the ballot in every state it would have been a huge problem.
If Rand Paul had not followed federal election law it would have been a huge problem.
But those things didnt happen and neither did this.
Again, a worthless thread by the most consistently partisan and stupid hack on this site with nothing original to contribute.

So, you missed the point. This is not about any other state in the Union other than Kentucky.

Are you brain-damaged?

Yes, I think you are, you dottering old fool.

Wow, Rand Paul represents KY in the Senate! Thank you, Capt Obvious! Any other pearls of wisdom to bestow? Did you know that Bernie Sanders is NOT a Democrat? It's true!

 

[Statistikhengst]

Sure, for your extremely weak mind, I will do this. Just let me know if any of the words are too long for you or you cannot spell them out:

Rand Paul is a declared presidential candidate and a declared senatorial candidate from KY. KY law does not allow his name to be on the same ballot for more than one office in the same election, so, had the GOP not changed its primary organization for 2016 by changing the date for the Republican process for selecting whom it thinks should be the nominee for president (which is what Primaries at the presidential level are there for, nöööö?), this would have meant that Paul would have had to give up either being on the presidential ballot for the primary or give up being on the Senatorial ballot for the primary.

This means that for now, this problem for Paul have been solved. Should he become the Republican presidential nominee in Summer, 2016, then he would likely have to give up his Senate run.

That is newsworthy, it is current and it is relevant. That makes it quite valuable information. If your trolling mind cannot understand that, that's not my problem.

Better luck to you next time.

OK so this is a non problem that has been solved and therefore irrelevant.
Thanks for cluttering the internet just a little bit more.

And here's where you run away from the argument, as you did in the thread on black on black violence.

No. You just lied. It would have been a major problem for Rand Paul had it not been solved. So, no, it's not a "non-problem".

You only write what you write because you are a truly disgusting troll with a heart and soul as black as soot.

Had a Conservative made this thread, you would not be writing the way you did. Your hyperpartisanship clouds what little judgement you possess to the point where you cannot see beyond your nose.

As for the black on black violence comment, again, you have lied.

You lie a lot.

And your predictions are often very faulty.

Is there anything in the world that you are good at?

If Rand Paul had not filed to be on the ballot in every state it would have been a huge problem.
If Rand Paul had not followed federal election law it would have been a huge problem.
But those things didnt happen and neither did this.
Again, a worthless thread by the most consistently partisan and stupid hack on this site with nothing original to contribute.

So, you missed the point. This is not about any other state in the Union other than Kentucky.

Are you brain-damaged?

Yes, I think you are, you dottering old fool.

Wow, Rand Paul represents KY in the Senate! Thank you, Capt Obvious! Any other pearls of wisdom to bestow? Did you know that Bernie Sanders is NOT a Democrat? It's true!

So, you still missed the point of the OP - it was clearly laid out for sane people to understand - and all you are doing it trolling for all it is worth.

Fortunately for me, everyone in USMB gets to read this exchange.

Is English your 3rd or 4th language?

 

[The Rabbi]

OK so this is a non problem that has been solved and therefore irrelevant.
Thanks for cluttering the internet just a little bit more.

And here's where you run away from the argument, as you did in the thread on black on black violence.

No. You just lied. It would have been a major problem for Rand Paul had it not been solved. So, no, it's not a "non-problem".

You only write what you write because you are a truly disgusting troll with a heart and soul as black as soot.

Had a Conservative made this thread, you would not be writing the way you did. Your hyperpartisanship clouds what little judgement you possess to the point where you cannot see beyond your nose.

As for the black on black violence comment, again, you have lied.

You lie a lot.

And your predictions are often very faulty.

Is there anything in the world that you are good at?

If Rand Paul had not filed to be on the ballot in every state it would have been a huge problem.
If Rand Paul had not followed federal election law it would have been a huge problem.
But those things didnt happen and neither did this.
Again, a worthless thread by the most consistently partisan and stupid hack on this site with nothing original to contribute.

So, you missed the point. This is not about any other state in the Union other than Kentucky.

Are you brain-damaged?

Yes, I think you are, you dottering old fool.

Wow, Rand Paul represents KY in the Senate! Thank you, Capt Obvious! Any other pearls of wisdom to bestow? Did you know that Bernie Sanders is NOT a Democrat? It's true!

So, you still missed the point of the OP - it was clearly laid out for sane people to understand - and all you are doing it trolling for all it is worth.

Fortunately for me, everyone in USMB gets to read this exchange.

Is English your 3rd or 4th language?

We've already determined many times that you cannot understand English. SO it isnt me. Therefore it must be you, posting the most obvious trivia and expecting to be hailed as some sort of Einstein. I guess to the small minded small things are big.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Meaningful update:

Rand Paul meets payment deadline for Kentucky caucus - CNNPolitics.com