Randslide

[UNHWildCats]

Rand Paul easily wins the GOP nomination in the Kentucky Senate race.

[Bronco]

If you want to watch the Pennsylvania returns...only 7 districts reporting so far.

http://www.electionreturns.state.pa.us/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[houndawg]

Rand Paul easily wins the GOP nomination in the Kentucky Senate race.

Mitch McConnell better get some of those unlimited campaign contributions from his corporate masters pronto.

[youngterrier]

WOOHOO RAND!!!!!
PAUL/PAUL 2012
jk

[kalm]

Sorry, but out of principle, I can't support anyone with the name of Rand.

[native]

WOOHOO RAND!!!!!
PAUL/PAUL 2012
jk

Good for Kentucky, Good for America!

[Baldy]

Chalk one up for the Tea Party folks.

[Ivytalk]

Sorry, but out of principle, I can't support anyone with the name of Rand.

What about his twin sister, Ayn Paul?

[dbackjon]

Just wait until the Republicans figure out Paul's positions

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

Just wait until the Republicans figure out Paul's positions

Well if they do that then maybe they will get in touch with your everyday republicans positions.

[dbackjon]

Just wait until the Republicans figure out Paul's positions

Well if they do that then maybe they will get in touch with your everyday republicans positions.

Methinks you have never done any research on his positions....

[GSUhooligan]

Well if they do that then maybe they will get in touch with your everyday republicans positions.

Methinks you have never done any research on his positions....

Term limits
Balanced budget
Pay as you go

Yeah, those are real radical positions.

[Baldy]

Well if they do that then maybe they will get in touch with your everyday republicans positions.

Methinks you have never done any research on his positions....

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", and on the same side as most Republicans.

[dbackjon]

Methinks you have never done any research on his positions....

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".

I have read it...

[danefan]

Methinks you have never done any research on his positions....

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 anti-politician is what he is.

He's the opposite of most Republicans on the fiscal and foreign policy issues as well.

[Baldy]

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 are way off base on that one, sorry.
If that were the case, he wouldn't have gotten 65% of the REPUBLICAN vote.

[danefan]

He's the opposite of most Republicans on the fiscal and foreign policy issues as well.

You are way off base on that one, sorry.
If that were the case, he wouldn't have gotten 65% of the REPUBLICAN vote.

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).

[Baldy]

You are way off base on that one, sorry.
If that were the case, he wouldn't have gotten 65% of the REPUBLICAN vote.

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).

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 ).

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

Well if they do that then maybe they will get in touch with your everyday republicans positions.

Methinks you have never done any research on his positions....

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.

It is also probably likely that what youthinks about the everyday guy that considers himself a Republican is misrepresented in your own view.

[OSBF]

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.

[GannonFan]

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.

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.

[native]

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.

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.

Your analysis is quite correct, GF.

...and OSBF, us conks would be delighted if you would work on a dem campaign opposite a fiscal conservative.

Pleeeeaaaaaase?

[OSBF]

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.

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.

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.

[danefan]

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).

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 ).

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.

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

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 ).

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.

Dead on. That is one of the appeals, and to look at the "shiny spots" like OSBF and others have is hilarious.