Lion of the Blogosphere

Rand Paul drops out

I guess I was wrong about him staying on until the bitter end. I must have had him confused with his father.

I predict this votes will go mostly to Ted Cruz, so this is bad news for Trump.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

February 3, 2016 at 10:09 am

Posted in Politics

35 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. He occasionally says interesting things, like he wants to ban Muslims from entering the country. He then says stuff like we shouldn’t be the “lily white” party, partaking in casual anti-white bigotry. Republican voters didn’t find that charming.


    February 3, 2016 at 10:19 am

    • The wave of Islamophobia is very prole to say the least!


      February 3, 2016 at 12:20 pm

      • “The wave of Islamophobia is very prole to say the least!”

        Problem? The proles seems to be right on this one. Every country with a large Muslim population seems to be having tremendous problems with assimilation. Are there any exceptions?


        February 3, 2016 at 1:56 pm

      • The United States, Canada and Spain are few of those exceptions.

        Given the fact that both France and Britain were former colonial aggressors in the Middle East — hence the problems of personal vendetta, similar to our black underclass with their beef of slavery and segregation.


        February 3, 2016 at 2:12 pm

      • As always your comments are ridiculous and you use the word “prole” for anything you dislike JS.
        “The United States, Canada and Spain are few of those exceptions.” (on problems with muslims)
        1. Spain had to deal with a 9-11 type attack a few years ago, and you tell me they have no problems with their moros/muslims? 191 deaths and 1800 wounded.
        2. Another muslim jihadist (born and raised in Canada) wanted to kill the canadian prime minister in october 2014

        Daniel Gonzalez Buitrago

        February 3, 2016 at 5:50 pm

      • Spain had to deal with a 9-11 attack for one specific reason. It joined the Anglo-Prole-World of meddling in the Middle East, and since learn a good lesson of staying out.

        Terrorists specifically directing their vendetta against elites – not an issue for the average citizen.


        February 3, 2016 at 8:37 pm

      • Singapore has a high Muslim population.


        February 4, 2016 at 7:17 am

      • Every single western nation has “meddled” in the Middle East in some form or another, and Islamic radicals tend to define “meddling” in the broadest possible terms, drawing generously from conspiracy theories when hard evidence does not exist. Islamic radicals have taken and killed hostages from Japan, South Korea, and all the nordic countries that barely have foreign policies at all. The biggest myth of the left and the isolationist right is that Muslims are rational about their “grievances” and can be appeased out of them.


        February 4, 2016 at 10:40 am

      • @ Shep – So why is Spain able to integrate its large Muslim population post-Madrid bombings, where the French, Germans and Norwegians have struggled repeatedly? Conversely, Spain doesn’t care much for sub-saharan blacks like the French and Germans who intermarry with them in large numbers. And simple answer is clear — one’s priorities.


        February 4, 2016 at 11:24 am

      • And Spain’s supremacy as a Euro nation is obvious!


        February 4, 2016 at 11:26 am

  2. I respect that Rand is realistic and practical in his decision making. He is a sensible man. That is why he will never make it to the White House. Both he and his father have been trying to tell people the truth for a generation, but they are truths that the people don’t wish to hear. The electorate says that they want their politicians to be honest, but they really don’t. They want their leaders to lie to them and tell them what they want to hear. Such are the perils of democracy.


    February 3, 2016 at 10:29 am

  3. He was still running? What votes?


    February 3, 2016 at 10:32 am

  4. Scanning the comments and forums on the Rand Paul sites, it seems like his supporters are split evenly between Trump/Cruz/No One. Paultards that care more about foreign policy favor Trump. Paultards that care more about domestic Civil Liberties favor Cruz. Also remember that Paultards are more atheist than typical for a Republican and Cruz’s holy roller routine is a big turnoff. And Paul doesn’t seem to like Cruz personally, so he probably isn’t going to be in any rush to endorse.


    February 3, 2016 at 10:46 am

    • These people aren’t following politics closely at all.

      If you are really a libertarian, there is no reason to support Cruz at all. He is basically the last candidate Paul supporters should move to, and that includes the two Democrats, and Christie, who Paul kept getting into arguments with. He is a neocon on foreign policy and a religious right authoritarian on domestic policy. OK, he will try to cut taxes on the wealthy, but so will every other remaining Republican candidate (except maybe, ironically, Trump).

      By every metric, Rand Paul ran a less impressive campaign than did his father four years ago, or even compared to his father’s third party run in 1988. His father stayed in the race because no one else had his unique combination of strong civil liberties -quasi isolationist foreign policy -less government regulation positions in the primaries.

      The libertarians should really be moving to support, you know, the actual Libertarian Party candidate. But if they really have to keep playing Republican politics, they should be getting behind whoever is best positioned to keep Cruz from getting the nomination.


      February 3, 2016 at 1:39 pm

      • @Ed You are 180 degress wrong. Rand Paul and Ted Cruz have nearly identical voting records and nearly identical policy positions. You’re falling for the idjut bait by buying into their different media personas. Cruz wisely plays up his evangelical, Bible quotin’, gun shootin’, preacher’s son from Texas identity while Paul plays up the egghead, know-it-all, atheistic, hyper-rationalist losertarian identity. Guess which one more voters identify with?

        While the later appeals to people like me, I’m also smart enough to know that I since my identity group is about 2% of the population, I’d be better off focusing on policy and votes rather than media personas.



        February 3, 2016 at 11:38 pm

      • Except that Paul is “pro-life” and not atheistic.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        February 4, 2016 at 2:09 am

    • On foreign policy, Trump is the only one close to Rand Paul’s views, so that part makes sense. And Paul took some nice shots on Rubio on foreign policy and immigration, which was welcome.

      But I hope the lesson other GOP candidates draw from this is the folly of Paul’s warmed-over Kempism. The GOP base isn’t big on more enterprise zones for ghettoes and soft-on-crime policies.

      Dave Pinsen

      February 3, 2016 at 6:39 pm

      • Seriously? Trump is a protectionist big on “winning” trade deals. Paul is a free trade guy who understands that even unilateral free trade is a good deal.

        I do agree that Paul’s Kempism is a disaster. I’m all for abolishing the FDA and decriminalizing drugs but let’s not kid ourselves and pretend that the prisons are full of non-violent, misunderstood youts who got caught with one joint or that the police are the biggest problem facing inner cities.



        February 3, 2016 at 11:43 pm

  5. I don’t know. Trump is the most dovish Republican left in the field. If the Rand Paul supporters are mostly anti-war types with a healthy dislike of the Washington elite, then it seems to me that Trump could be their 2nd choice. I am hoping that Trump picks Rand Paul as his VP candidate for this very reason, though Paul’s vicious anti-Trump rhetoric over the past 2 weeks probably scuttles that notion.

    Great Again

    February 3, 2016 at 11:04 am

    • “Trump is the most dovish Republican left in the field”

      Eh? Trump just said yesterday he was going to bomb the shit out of people.

      Paul’s problem is that he is trying to be non-interventionist in an ISIS year. That just doesnt play.
      He did have the best looking of the candidates wives though.

      Lion of the Turambar

      February 3, 2016 at 2:00 pm

      • Paul’s problem is that he is trying to be non-interventionist in an ISIS year. That just doesnt play.

        I think it could play if you pointed out that:

        1) ISIS was spawned by our previous interventions.

        2) ISIS has no means of attacking us from the Middle East. They only way they can attack us is via sympathizers in the US.

        3) Therefore, we should let any ISIS sympathizer who wants to go to ISIS-land go, and not let them come back; further, we should implement a temporary moratorium on Muslim immigration until ISIS and Al Qaeda and similar terrorist movements have disappeared.

        Dave Pinsen

        February 3, 2016 at 7:07 pm

  6. You mean potheads and blacks with a felony conviction are going to Cruz? Didn’t see that coming

    Mike Street Station

    February 3, 2016 at 11:37 am

  7. I passed the following comment on to trans-partisan Libertarian Program, the international facebook of pro-Libertarians in public office.

    “Rand Paul made the fatal error of viciously ridiculing the L/libertarians he asked for support, not to mention his anti-libertarian positions. The Libertarian International head, Michael Gilson, pointed this out to the about 4 million libertarian-interested/center US voters on his d-base, and reminded them of the recommended deadlock strategy voting progressive for president but conservative for House. Paul’s support plummeted 75% in the next few weeks.

    The Libertarians command the center which determines most elections. While they forgive they never, ever, forget, especially if you lack basic political sense to say nice stuff about the people you want to bat for you. Trump, Clinton and Sanders have the sense not to piss off the pro-libertarians among their supporters and try to address some of their issues, but Rand Paul doesn’t.

    My understanding was that in NH (which is a pro-libertarian stronghold, 10% of the legislature identifies as such in all three parties) many Free state and pro-libertarian local activists made clear they would support anyone but him and go public. Paul had to bow out, though the clueless media still calls him a ‘libertarian’ leader.”


    February 3, 2016 at 12:08 pm

    • Rand Paul isn’t a libertarians. Libertarians are pro-choice. Paul is a paleo-conservative.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      February 3, 2016 at 12:13 pm

      • Murray Rothbard, who was Ron Paul’s mentor, considered himself to be a paleolibertarian. Paleolibertarians tend to seek inspiration from the Old Right, while other libertarians (like the Reason Magazine crowd) are more socially liberal.

        Lewis Medlock

        February 3, 2016 at 1:12 pm

      • Or perhaps paleo-libertarian.


        February 3, 2016 at 1:19 pm

      • Rand Paul may have run for Senate as a Paleoconservative, but for his Presidential run he adopted the tone of a Cosmotarian, which was really odd. Even among libertarians, Cosmotarian aren’t that popular. Among GOP voters, they are positively despised and his poll numbers reflected that. Trump’s essentially Paleoconservative foriegn policy and willingness to attack the establishment has gained him a lot of support among former Ron Paul voters. Trump did a better job running as an “electable” version of Ron Paul than his own son did.


        February 3, 2016 at 5:02 pm

      • Yes he is. Would you say the same thing about Ron Paul who is also pro-life?

        Abortion isn’t a clear-cut libertarian issue. When does a human being become a person entitled to protection under the law? I don’t know how a poll of libertarians would break out, but it’s not a clear-cut libertarian issue like drug legalization or cutting the government from 40% of GDP back down to 5%.

        The U.S. used to be extremely libertarian with total government spending at all levels at around 5% of GDP for the first 140 years or so. Did you see the ad from the late 1800’s for a cough medicine that included alcohol, cannibis and opium? That’s why paleo-conservatives are so libertarian. Hell, Milton Friedman, the ultimate libertarian frequently talked about how awesome the 19th century was in terms of economic, technological and scientific progress.


        February 3, 2016 at 11:55 pm

      • It probably worked a lot better than Robitussin.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        February 4, 2016 at 2:11 am

  8. The typical Ron Paul supporter chose Trump over Rand long ago, which is why Rand hasn’t been in the double digits for a long time. The people who stayed with Rand are simply hysterical crazy people. They aren’t going to support anyone.


    February 3, 2016 at 12:10 pm

    • This is me.

      I was a rabid Ron Paul fan for a few years, and when it looked like he wasn’t going anywhere it woke me up from libertarianism. Now I like Trump.


      February 3, 2016 at 12:24 pm

  9. The one Rand Paul supporter I know said he isn’t voting for anyone now, which I guess means in the general election as well. BTW, in response to T, he in no way seems hysterical or crazy.


    February 3, 2016 at 12:29 pm

  10. I think you are right about Rand’s votes going to Cruz. Rand lost 2/3 of his father’s voters, and I think they went for trump already. The die hardship still supporting the guy may go for Cruz.


    Cruz is a giant fraud.

    He says he’ll stand up to the lobbyists and won’t take money from lobbyists… Biggest contributors and donor are lobbyists.

    Says he’ll build the wall… But only 40 miles of it.

    Says he will stand up to the Washington establishment… Coordinates with Mitch McConnell’s SuperPAC.

    Claims to run an honorable campaign… Encourages dirty tricks at the Iowa caucuses.


    Lion, what say you? Is he too creepy to win an election. I think about a general election with Cruz, and I think his ceiling is Mitt Romney pus better turnout among evangelicals (who didn’t like Mormonism). But the swing states Obama won don’t have big evangelical populations! And, he almost certainly does worse among moderates and women.

    Is Cruz == 100 point electoral vote blowout loss or worse?


    February 3, 2016 at 4:46 pm

    • Cruz is the best bet libertarians will have for a long time in this country. Any conservative or libertarian who poses a real threat to the establishment will be slimed as stupid, slimy, evil, etc. That’s why a lightweight with no brains and no balls like Rubio won’t end well. Cruz generates serious passion from his supporters.


      February 4, 2016 at 12:02 am

      • Cruz has a reputation for being steady and serious in his ideology, but he seems just as grasping and all-over-the-place as any other opportunistic politician. The only difference is Cruz exclusively panders to the right, so the “flip flopping” is less obvious than someone like Romney or Kerry who pivots from right to left.

        Cruz has repeatedly characterized Marco Rubio as being from the “neocon” wing of the party who wants to bomb everyone. When speaking to a certain crowd, he plays up his opposition to the Iraq war and some of the thoughtless interventions of the “Obama-Clinton foreign policy.” But then, when speaking to other crowds, he mentions how he wants to bomb the middle east until the sand “glows in the dark” and bemoans the supposed Obama military cuts that have left our country unable to bend the rest of the world to our iron will.


        February 4, 2016 at 2:20 pm

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: