FCS Football | Message Board | News
https://championshipsubdivision.com/forums/
https://championshipsubdivision.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=15528
UNHWildCats wrote:Rand Paul easily wins the GOP nomination in the Kentucky Senate race.
Good for Kentucky, Good for America!youngterrier wrote:WOOHOO RAND!!!!!
PAUL/PAUL 2012
jk
kalm wrote:Sorry, but out of principle, I can't support anyone with the name of Rand.
Well if they do that then maybe they will get in touch with your everyday republicans positions.dbackjon wrote:Just wait until the Republicans figure out Paul's positions
Methinks you have never done any research on his positions....Ursus A. Horribilis wrote:Well if they do that then maybe they will get in touch with your everyday republicans positions.dbackjon wrote:Just wait until the Republicans figure out Paul's positions
Term limitsdbackjon wrote:Methinks you have never done any research on his positions....Ursus A. Horribilis wrote: Well if they do that then maybe they will get in touch with your everyday republicans positions.
Methinks you haven't either.dbackjon wrote:Methinks you have never done any research on his positions....Ursus A. Horribilis wrote: Well if they do that then maybe they will get in touch with your everyday republicans positions.
I have read it...Baldy wrote:Methinks you haven't either.dbackjon wrote:
Methinks you have never done any research on his positions....
Pro 2nd amendment
Pro-Life
Anti-Obamacare
Pro Homeschooling
Anti IMF
Anti UN
Anti WTO
Pro Tax Cuts
Anti Bailouts
On almost every issue, Rand Paul is on the opposite side of so-called "Progressives".
He's anti-politician is what he is.Baldy wrote:Methinks you haven't either.dbackjon wrote:
Methinks you have never done any research on his positions....
Pro 2nd amendment
Pro-Life
Anti-Obamacare
Pro Homeschooling
Anti IMF
Anti UN
Anti WTO
Pro Tax Cuts
Anti Bailouts
On almost every issue, Rand Paul is on the opposite side of so-called "Progressives".
You are way off base on that one, sorry.danefan wrote:Baldy wrote: Methinks you haven't either.
Pro 2nd amendment
Pro-Life
Anti-Obamacare
Pro Homeschooling
Anti IMF
Anti UN
Anti WTO
Pro Tax Cuts
Anti Bailouts
On almost every issue, Rand Paul is on the opposite side of so-called "Progressives".
He's the opposite of most Republicans on the fiscal and foreign policy issues as well.
You assume people registered Republican support the Republican politicians in office now. The Tea Party seems to suggest otherwise, as OL FU indicated above.Baldy wrote:You are way off base on that one, sorry.danefan wrote:
He's the opposite of most Republicans on the fiscal and foreign policy issues as well.
If that were the case, he wouldn't have gotten 65% of the REPUBLICAN vote.
No, it is you who is assuming that registered Republicans are supporting the Republicans in office now. The landscape is changing right in front of our eyes. I am the one who said that you can chalk up Paul's victory to the Tea Party supporters. Look at Charlie Crist, a sitting Republican governor who had to switch to an independent because a MORE conservative anti-Republican establishment virtually unknown candidate was lapping him in the polls. Look at John McCain, the posterchild for the Republican establishment. The Republican nominee for President just 2 short years ago has had to take a massive leap to the RIGHT and is struggling just to win a Republican primary in his HOME state. Bob Bennett was a big supporter of TARP and the bailouts of AIG, GM, and Chrysler, and that alone sent him packing.danefan wrote:You assume people registered Republican support the Republican politicians in office now. The Tea Party seems to suggest otherwise, as OL FU indicated above.Baldy wrote: You are way off base on that one, sorry.
If that were the case, he wouldn't have gotten 65% of the REPUBLICAN vote.
The vast majority of Republicans in office now are:
Pro-Big Govenrment (bailouts, etc..)
Pro-UN
Pro-WTO
Pro-Israel
Pro-Afghanistan
Pro-Un-balanced budget
And on and on and on.
Rand is the opposite of that.
The Republican party is full of politicians that come down on the conservative side of social issues only. And despite their votes against Obamacare, most of them supported a very similar structure for years (before of course it was introduced by a Dem president).
).Late back to this party but I don't think you know what is bothering the majority of the republican mindset out there. A lot on the Democratic side want to point to the shiny spots like Religion. That ain't it from what I see. It's a win if the party is moving away from that as far I see it.dbackjon wrote:Methinks you have never done any research on his positions....Ursus A. Horribilis wrote: Well if they do that then maybe they will get in touch with your everyday republicans positions.
If the election was a national election that kind of a strategy would certainly work. But plenty of people in Kentucky readily identify with the fiscally restrained part of the Tea Party movement and would probably greatly resent the insinuation that their affiliation with that line of thinking automatically tars them as racist and, as you say, "dumm-ass rednecks". You can't really win a campaign by ridiculing the actual people who also just so happen to be voters.OSBF wrote:Much traction will be gained from his association with the tea baggers. There will be many ads on TV and in print featuring tea bag rallies with posters with the "N" word on them. There will be sound bites too numerous to count from interviews with dumm-ass rednecks at tea bag rallies. He will be framed up as a radical extremist and his oponet will try to be as centered as he can be.
I'd love to work on a campaign opposite this guy. You could have a PR field day.
Your analysis is quite correct, GF.GannonFan wrote:If the election was a national election that kind of a strategy would certainly work. But plenty of people in Kentucky readily identify with the fiscally restrained part of the Tea Party movement and would probably greatly resent the insinuation that their affiliation with that line of thinking automatically tars them as racist and, as you say, "dumm-ass rednecks". You can't really win a campaign by ridiculing the actual people who also just so happen to be voters.OSBF wrote:Much traction will be gained from his association with the tea baggers. There will be many ads on TV and in print featuring tea bag rallies with posters with the "N" word on them. There will be sound bites too numerous to count from interviews with dumm-ass rednecks at tea bag rallies. He will be framed up as a radical extremist and his oponet will try to be as centered as he can be.
I'd love to work on a campaign opposite this guy. You could have a PR field day.
You win Louisville and the other civilized metropolitan areas and you win the state. You take the dumm-ass redneck vote out of the equation entirely.GannonFan wrote:If the election was a national election that kind of a strategy would certainly work. But plenty of people in Kentucky readily identify with the fiscally restrained part of the Tea Party movement and would probably greatly resent the insinuation that their affiliation with that line of thinking automatically tars them as racist and, as you say, "dumm-ass rednecks". You can't really win a campaign by ridiculing the actual people who also just so happen to be voters.OSBF wrote:Much traction will be gained from his association with the tea baggers. There will be many ads on TV and in print featuring tea bag rallies with posters with the "N" word on them. There will be sound bites too numerous to count from interviews with dumm-ass rednecks at tea bag rallies. He will be framed up as a radical extremist and his oponet will try to be as centered as he can be.
I'd love to work on a campaign opposite this guy. You could have a PR field day.
Baldy, we're saying the same thing. Rand (and Ron for that matter) Paul are the anti Ruplublican and Dem Pols. In other words, they're anti-politicians.Baldy wrote:No, it is you who is assuming that registered Republicans are supporting the Republicans in office now. The landscape is changing right in front of our eyes. I am the one who said that you can chalk up Paul's victory to the Tea Party supporters. Look at Charlie Crist, a sitting Republican governor who had to switch to an independent because a MORE conservative anti-Republican establishment virtually unknown candidate was lapping him in the polls. Look at John McCain, the posterchild for the Republican establishment. The Republican nominee for President just 2 short years ago has had to take a massive leap to the RIGHT and is struggling just to win a Republican primary in his HOME state. Bob Bennett was a big supporter of TARP and the bailouts of AIG, GM, and Chrysler, and that alone sent him packing.danefan wrote:
You assume people registered Republican support the Republican politicians in office now. The Tea Party seems to suggest otherwise, as OL FU indicated above.
The vast majority of Republicans in office now are:
Pro-Big Govenrment (bailouts, etc..)
Pro-UN
Pro-WTO
Pro-Israel
Pro-Afghanistan
Pro-Un-balanced budget
And on and on and on.
Rand is the opposite of that.
The Republican party is full of politicians that come down on the conservative side of social issues only. And despite their votes against Obamacare, most of them supported a very similar structure for years (before of course it was introduced by a Dem president).
The majority of Republicans are against the entrenched D.C. Republican establishment. If you don't believe me, just ask McCain, Bennett, Grayson, or Christ (others will join them very soon
Dead on. That is one of the appeals, and to look at the "shiny spots" like OSBF and others have is hilarious.danefan wrote:Baldy, we're saying the same thing. Rand (and Ron for that matter) Paul are the anti Ruplublican and Dem Pols. In other words, they're anti-politicians.Baldy wrote: No, it is you who is assuming that registered Republicans are supporting the Republicans in office now. The landscape is changing right in front of our eyes. I am the one who said that you can chalk up Paul's victory to the Tea Party supporters. Look at Charlie Crist, a sitting Republican governor who had to switch to an independent because a MORE conservative anti-Republican establishment virtually unknown candidate was lapping him in the polls. Look at John McCain, the posterchild for the Republican establishment. The Republican nominee for President just 2 short years ago has had to take a massive leap to the RIGHT and is struggling just to win a Republican primary in his HOME state. Bob Bennett was a big supporter of TARP and the bailouts of AIG, GM, and Chrysler, and that alone sent him packing.
The majority of Republicans are against the entrenched D.C. Republican establishment. If you don't believe me, just ask McCain, Bennett, Grayson, or Christ (others will join them very soon