Getty Images
Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) ran three unsuccessful presidential campaigns, and as he retires from Congress after a lengthy career, it appears unlikely he'll run for a fourth time.
But Paul fans can take some solace in the fact that his son appears likely to follow in his father's footsteps.
"I'm not going to deny that I'm interested," Sen. Paul tells ABC's Jonathan Karl about his presidential aspirations. While Paul is quick to add that he isn't ready to make a decision about a presidential bid yet, he is not hesitant to say that the Republican Party needs a new message.
"I think we have to go a different direction because we're just not winning and we have to think about some different ideas," says the senator.
Paul says there are ways the GOP can become more competitive in regions of the country that typically swing blue in national races, such as the West Coast and New England, while expanding its appeal among different groups of people, like Hispanics and young people.
The Kentucky Republican believes he can appeal to Latino voters by opposing aggressive deportation policies, and can reach out to the youth vote by allowing states to make marijuana use legal. I suspect his party's demographic challenges are more complex, but he's obviously free to give it a shot.
In the larger context, though, the next question is whether the freshman senator, two years into his only experience in public office, deserves to be taken seriously as a candidate for national office.
Opinions vary on Ron Paul's seriousness as a national candidate, but I suspect most neutral observers would agree that the congressman didn't fully expect to get elected, but rather, sought a larger platform to present his unique perspective while reaching a national audience. I'm sure he would have liked to be president, but during his campaigns, I imagine he knew all along electoral success was unlikely, and it was probably seen as a secondary concern.
Similarly, I suspect Rand Paul doesn't actually believe he'll be taking the oath of office in January 2017 as the nation's next president, but rather, he too wants to keep the Paul message alive on the national stage.
Then again, when Rand Paul launched his Senate bid, his campaign was hard to take seriously -- he was a self-accredited ophthalmologist with no background in government and limited knowledge of Kentucky -- right up until he easily won both the primary and general election.
Leave a Comment:
Keep throwing the crazies at the wall, there.
One just might stick.
Aqua Buddha for President!
/snark
Hey, I find it "interesting" too! And, I'm at least as likely to be elected. Bwahahahaha!
The trouble with ignorance is that it picks up confidence as it goes along.
- Arnold H. Glasow
;-)
Oh crap! Make me puke.
The sad truth is he would be an improvement over the candidates they have had in the last fifty years or so.
the next question is whether the freshman senator, two years into his only experience in public office, deserves to be taken seriously as a candidate for national office.
Too stupid to realize exactly how stupid he is.
Well, testing the media waters for public reaction for a run at 2016 is certainly far better than working on those boring critical issues back at the office.
No wonder they only have time to read 3-page bills...
No peace for citizens.
Will his people rough up reporters and citizens who disagree with his views, like they did in his previous campaign?
The interesting thing about Libertarians ( which Rand and his father Ron both are ) is that once upon a time they were Pro-Choice, Pro Gay Rights and promoters of religious tolerance.
But as their ranks became increasingly filled out by fat, white, gun toting homophobic, racist, women haters . . . .they evolved into the Tea Party.
Neither Rand or Ron Paul will cop to this reverse-evolution in the Libertarian Party but it is non the less true.
Rand Paul is a radical Neo-Con who serves the fringes of society.
See you're making a fundamental mistake here. Libertarians do not believe in Pro-Gay positions as a group. They just believe the Government shouldn't be dealing with any thing even similar to civil rights and that happens to swipe the Government defining marriage.
It's perfectly acceptable Libertarian philosophy to believe that LBGTQ people are worthless people not deserving of life, the Government just shouldn't be dealing with it. The private sector could totally deal with it though by just refusing as a whole to do business with LBGTQ people and they can all die then and that would be fine. It's the difference between Liberals and Libertarians.
I beg your pardon but you are not correct.
Nope. That's exactly what Libertarians hold. If you can't do civil rights legislation because it forces people to do business against their will and forces people to violate their principles and beliefs, then you can in fact have the possibility exist that the entire private sector does no business with who or what ever group is the social pariah of the people who run the private sector.
Libertarianism holds on it's own no social judgements and allows it's participants to react socially and economically as they wish. It holds and allows for Government to exist in the tiniest smallest ways possible or not at all. And it holds that a person's life and liberty are inviolable, but that is a double edged sword. You have the right to live and buy goods, but other people have the right not to sell them to you, or sell and rent you land or space to live.
Libertarianism allows for a complete war of attrition against anyone for any reason. So they can't go out and just kill lynch you. But they can effectively exclude you from society and kill you that way.
It's those reasons that Libertarianism doesn't work above the village level and is a failed governmental philosophy.
Beahmont,
Nice post. Sounds like a tribal society.
Hope, has beahmont been hitting the tea again. He sounds like he is talking about the reps that vote against their own self interest. He only thinks he knows stuff. But he does not.
Thankful Mom-3182614: You might want to read before commenting. I'm writing about how Libertarianism is a failed Governmental philosophy. I am not a Libertarian. And you'd know that if you actually read either post.
I am in fact writing about a large number of Republicans, and I do in fact know 'stuff.' Do I know everything, not even close. But I do know a fair bit about the various governmental and economic philosophies and ideologies of the human species.
I would appreciate if you could just take your hate and confirmation bias and replace them with reading comprehension.
Tom51: It's a far more complex system of rules then tribalism, but the middle and late stages end up having the function and effect of a simple tribal structure. Libertarianism is infinitely corruptible because it's good function requires that all participants be good people to function correctly but can not correct for truly bad people bent on abusing they system.
What gets me about Libertarianism is how it's OK to be an a$$hole as long as you own a business. Wanna discriminate? Just own a business.
It's as if the private businesses are sacred cows. Looney tunes.
Folks get to those businesses on public roads. Those businesses use public law and public courts. They exist in a marketplace that is kept open by public armed forces protecting our country.
I'd like to see those sacred cows try to exist in North Korea or Somalia. they wouldn't last a day.
favedave: Yep. That about sums it up.
Rand wants to get on the clown car before the seats fill up.
He likes riding shotgun.
If you're in the back seat, you wind up feeling woozy and don't want to ride anymore when the road gets bumpy.
Is it his turn?
Hooray! Curb stomps all around!!!
Republicans in Kentucky (who are in the majority) vote for any Republican on the ticket, regardless of experience or qualifications... that's how Rand Paul got elected; how else do you expect a turtle, excuse me, turkey, like Mitch McConnell keeps getting re-elected? I assure you, it's not his good looks.
The Kentucky Republican believes he can appeal to Latino voters by opposing aggressive deportation policies, and can reach out to the youth vote by allowing states to make marijuana use legal.
Uh-huh. I understand. Free stuff.
What an ego. Isn't there some sort of self proclaimed test he will take that confirms he has a license to be president? It worked to be an ophthalmologist. The stupid will hopefully take a break from voting and get rid of this clown. The only reason he got to be a senator was name recognition...certainly not his stand on issues which most of his supporters don't even know...ask one.
Well, he wouldn't be the first first-term senator to be elected president. Yes, I know, he's no Barack Obama, but I wouldn't decline to take him seriously just because of his relative inexperience.
When he comes up for Senate reelection, can we get a serious candidate to run against him? If not, why not? Yes, I know, red state, but tell that to Heidi Heitkamp and Joe Donnelly.
Obama had more experience - consider his time in the legislature.
Gee, didn't we just get rid of the father, and now the son - don't these idiots get the message that they need not apply?!? Just be happy you're in Congress Rand, from what I've seen it's not as though you are the sharpest tack in the bunch...
Are there supposed to be dynasties in Congress and the White House? Can we stop the trend, now?
Any sycophant of Ayn Rand has no business doing the business of the people! Rand Paul is a danger to our nation! -Kevo
RuPaul first, then Rand.
RuPaul for President!
and First Lady!
<.< >.> o.o O.o O.O
Shantay, you stay!
Rand Paul for President? Oh please. His stated comments about civil rights alone ought to disqualify him for re-election, let alone the presidency. He has to realize that, unlike his board certification that he created for himself, he cannot create a voter majority while he is being groomed for the head writer of crazy GOP political talking points. No, the GOP didn't learn anything with Obama's win and will continue to espouse stupid stuff. They're history.
Boy, they DO breed 'em strange, down in DeliveranceLand!
Bush...Romney...Rand. Another step down.
Here is Rand's voting record for kicks...
Idiots in expensive suits are still idiots.
Is he as crazy for Coco Puffs, and his daddy?
John McCain should realise after 4 years, rotting sour grapes do not make a good wine but simply a disgustingly horrible smelly mess
That makes it just whine.
We 'uns of da south like muscadine wine. So I can relate to a bad wine.
Question for Kentuckians -- Would Ashley Judd have a chance against McConnell? (I note that Mitch only won with 53% in 2008).
Just what the GOP needs... More crazies...
What I dislike most is this "we have to do such and such to appeal to this or that group" etc. This means right up front the candidate cannot be trusted because they have no true character. I want a candidate who believes certain things and identifies himself as one who stands for these things in the west as well as in the south...or wherever and whoever he or she is with. Then I know who this person is and what he stands for and don't feel I'm being catered to (like Romney tried to do).
This person can negotiate and compromise on certain issues but not to get himself elected but to govern with others who hold different opinions.
So stop acting like your something you're not just to win an election. Being phony and catering to whoever you're trying to please is the height of hypocrisy...and the press should call you out on it everytime.
CONTEST!!!
Who would Rand Paul take as a running mate?
Oooh man, I hope it's Allen West.
Is this going to be the theme for a horror film?
I think a Paul/Palin ticket would be niffty!
Full employment for comedians!
Sen. Paul's interest in the presidency is like my interest in neurosurgery: if not for the sheer terror evoked by the idea of someone having a thought of engaging in work for which they're completely unqualified, not notable at all.
Excuse me, but...
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard in weeks. Next you're going to tell me that Michele Bachmann is going to run for President, and the GOP will take her seriously.
Wait... Nevermind.
**cue looney toons music**
At your service.....
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=youtube+looney+tunes&mid=DB5974F76A237A3ECAAADB5974F76A237A3ECAAA&view=detail&FORM=VIRE7
Since Palin hit the scene, all it takes is shaving one's legs to qualify for higher office. (I must purge this image of Paul immediately).