|| By FITSNEWS || As he prepares to jump into the 2016 presidential race, U.S. Senator Rand Paul‘s supporters are making the case that their candidate is the most electable “Republican.”
Specifically, they’re citing several recent polls showing Paul’s national support among GOP voters, his favorability in early voting New Hampshire and his ability to go head-to-head with presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. They’re especially excited about polls showing Paul running neck-and-neck with Clinton in Pennsylvania – a swing state claimed by Democrats in each of the last three presidential elections.
“These polls support the belief that Rand Paul is a different kind of Republican – one who can defeat the Washington Machine and unleash the American Dream,” a statement from the Reinventing a New Direction political action committee (RANDPAC) noted.
Of course to defeat the “Washington Machine,” Paul will first have to defeat the “Republican Machine.” And while he’s well-positioned to win the New Hampshire “Republican” primary, Paul’s candidacy has yet to catch fire in early voting Iowa or South Carolina – where evangelicals and conservative activists wield disproportionate influence.
Can Paul rally Palmetto State conservatives to his brand of libertarian-leaning politics? Or does U.S. Senator Ted Cruz – who stumped in South Carolina last weekend – have the jump on these voters?
RANDPAC isn’t worried about Paul’s ability to win over the base – citing his three straight straw poll victories at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC).
“Rand Paul has won this poll three years in a row, which proves he is capable of rallying the base, while also making the party bigger, better and bolder,” the group stated.
Guess we’ll find out soon enough …
73 comments
”
RAND PAUL TOUTS ELECTABILITY …”
Right out of the ole Willard Romney playbook…
I’m sure he’ll get Willard Romney results too.
No, Romney actually got to run in the actual presidential race. Ol’Curly top won’t survive the primaries as things stand now.
He will if he gets campaign fund from his dad.
Maybe.
Electibility:
Real Clear Politics Averages – General Election
Clinton v Senor Bush the New Hispanic – Clinton up +8
Clinton v New and Improved Rand Paul – Clinton up +7.4
Clinton v Real Deal Marco Rubio – Clinton up +8.5
Clinton v Rapheal La Canadian Cruz – Clinton up +11.4
Seems they all gots the Romney Stank on ’em.
Does her lead double after she’s convicted???…LMAO…
Keep believing your leftwing polls..even her own party is trying to jettison Hillary…Wonder why????…Hahahaha..
You’re not THAT F*#king Stupid are you? (no need to answer)….LMAO…
Jeb should pick Trikki as his VP. She does not know her race/religion/place.
Talk to the hand.
The first time Rand swerves toward that nutjob, Liberal-Tarian – anti-national security, Dope-smoker sect his Dad appeals to – he’s toast…
God I hope he is the GOP’s pick. I can’t wait for all the racist articles he and his Dad have written over the years start to surface. Unfortunately for him the Southern Avenger and their relationship will come back to haunt him like the hypocrite he is.
Your “pick” is Hillary…Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha….
Why not post some of that shit now?
Liberals play CLEAR THE FIELD. They take out contenders because their candidates are so poor.
If they argue ideas or success rate, they have NO CHANCE…
If you look at Congress, and I posted a link not so long ago, the rich are the Democrats, not Republicans. Now if you are talking poor in ideas, well, I “might” agree in many cases.
Why are the Republicans always wanting to give those rich Democrats a tax cut?
Because the guilty demand it ;) (sarcasm alert)
Holy moly – a candidate for President says he can win. That’s some newsworthy stuff right there.
The Holy Moly Rounders … an interesting Texas electric folk/blues band of the sixties.
…
God told him to run.
Rand could be a force to be reckoned with. Not sure about all the campaign laws, but his dad raised a LOT of funds. Regardless of what you might think of Ron Paul, he said EARLY in the election, there were only two candidates on the Republican ticket who had a chance, himself and Romney. Because, they were the only two who had enough money to stay in the game. He was right. Romney beat him.
I am sure he has done fundraising since then, what are the rules on how much he can put into his son’s campaign? I don’t of any, but maybe there are some, maybe he has none left. Haven’t looked at it, but am interested.
He’s likely not comfortable w/ Conservatives. If not, that will be a BIG problem for him…
I think Rand is comfortable. He endorsed Romney. I don’t think he is a kooky as his dad, but might get a portion of his dad’s following. Rand has two parents – I am hopeful his mother played a significant role :)
I’m just saying if he wobbles on Conservatism, I don’t think the base is going to support that AT ALL this time.
We’ve had the FITS Liberal-Tarians twice in a row…and lost to the worst president since Carter, twice…
No room for error. The country cannot take anymore Democrat incompetence and damage.
I don’t think the “base” is going to support anything but hard right. Having said that, I was right up until this point a part of that base. I won’t support hard right, they are unwilling to compromise even if it means losing the country we have fought so hard to gain. I won’t support hard left either.
He doesn’t really wobble, it comes across that way because his did. Thank gawd I am not judged by my parents. He is his own person.
Having said that, I am not behind him at this point. It is too early, but I am interested.
Mmmmmm … My Dad always thought of me as kooky.
Mine did too, and now I am basically the family Matriarch. That damn Kook who was so disagreeable found a way to support much family.
“…where evangelicals and conservative activists wield disproportionate influence…
I’m sorry, in a democratic system like primaries, it is impossible to wield “disproportionate influence” since that’s what elections are all about.
Colonel I respect you, you are one of the few I can have different opinions with that might actually impact my beliefs. In this case – I disagree.
I want to defund both! Take their “disproportionate influence” out of the game and let people make their own decisions v. being persuaded by either side.
Wonder what would happen?
That’s the whole issue – in a straight democracy, whoever gets their voters out wins. Primaries are straight democracies. Regardless of the money involved, any party who can mobilize their base wins. Carter was broke but managed to mobilize his base anyway and he wound up taking the prize, much to our detriment.
Uuuugh, I am sure there were other examples beside Carter where that system worked. I can’t think of one, but good googa mooga, no Carter please.
Besides, that is your job as the historian on this site, name one where it did work so I can agree ;)
Lincoln?
Yikes! Not a good sampling. I don’t entirely blame Nixon, but he went down in history similar to Clinton, but different reasons. I do think Nixon took the fall for some things he was not directly responsible for, similar to negative campaigns one tries to cover up, but on a much larger scale based on my brief memory, without googling Watergate – a cover up for dirty politics. Carter, well….what can I say other than peaNUTS.
Ok – you’ve proven your point today about money and politics, but what about the times they won due to money in a Primaries? Do you believe the internet has changed that in any way? Much easier to collect data and throw funds behind a candidate than those years?
I think the Internet could make money a non issue.
How? By throwing more money?
By reducing the need for money by reducing costs. Develop a real internet presence and skip the TV adds, “utes” don’t watch broadcast TV anyway and Gen Xers don’t either. Mom and Pop are slowly becoming more addicted as well.
Yes, but the fees will go up, there is a narrow margin for such an era and I fear it has already passed.
It might grow with the youth and they might actually start voting, but other than that, I just don’t see it. Yes, Ron Paul raised a lot of money via internet, Newt wishes he had spent more time on internet advertising.
You may be right, I get my news from the internet – I don’t watch it on TV – live on internet, but not tv so much anymore and I am 48, so it “could” happen. Not unlikely those kids on facebook will be more exposed than ever – the question is, will they get out and vote?
Will they get out and vote? Only if they can do it on the internet…
True, but the technology isn’t there – no secure way to do that. I probably know as much about that as you do. We both know it is not feasible right now, probably not in the near future. Too new.
It’s there – the DoD’ s CAC card system is more than secure enough. The drawbacks are privacy, cost (the cards are about $10 a piece) and our natural (and valid) suspicion of programs like this.
I have no suspicion, the government does not have time to waste on crap I might say. They are looking for terrorist – key words, patterns, profiles.
Remember STUXNET? If a uranium plant can be hacked, imagine what could happen to a US election.
Cyber Security is not without fault. We are a leader, but it isn’t safe proof.
CAC is likely more secure than voter ID card and while they may not be penetrated now, they could be in the future. Hackers are always finding new ways to work around or within the system.
May not be a bad idea for next election as long as we don’t announce it :)
RSA Security tokens are what we use in the civilian world. I’ve used one for over ten years and it works well. Google Authenticator is a similar system and you can generate them on your phone (you can do this with RSA as well but it’s more involved. I have my RSA on my phone). As long as you have a robust encryption and authentication system and AES 256 is free and very good, access to an accurate time base (GPS, Internet Time Service, WWV, WWVB) you can synchronize the server algorithm with the client algorithm. Internet voting would likely be more secure and better authenicated than the current system even with requiring voter ID. Suspicion can be reduced by publishing the code used for the system so anyone with the technical ability can audit the code.
for those who do not know what an algorithm is – it’s a Math Weenie program that rocks and varies depending on use. Yes, could work, but only a matter of time before hackers catch up.
You know – someone like Snowden? ;)
It would take years. I’ve worked with encryption AES 256 and the only know attack is brute force and guessing. If you assume:,Every person on the planet owns 10 computers. There are 7 billion people on the planet. Each of these computers can test 1 billion key combinations per second. On average, you can crack the key after testing 50% of the possibilities.
Then the earth’s population can crack one encryption key in 77,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 years!
The keyspace for AES-256 is unimaginable huge. Is it possible that NSA or other state actors have quantum computers and could break codes, yeah sure but they would give their secret (probably the best guarded secret on the planet) by manipulating a public election. By the time hackers catch up we’ll move the goal posts again. DES with a 56 bit key vs AES-256. Diffie-Hellman would allow people to generate their own public and private keys for validation but truthfully most users create bad keys and passwords. Automated keyfobs, phone apps, etc are better solutions IMHO.
It’s about the weakest link in the total system. The best way to break an encryption system is to bribe the companies, individuals, or anyone in the know.
Yes, mathematically there are all kinds of great systems, but always a way to bribe a system.
It is the low tech that gets them. i.e. I have a computer that I don’t want someone looking at me while I type. Easy fix – black tape over the camera.
It is just the mathematics at the system level, but those who are in charge that are most likely to break the system. i.e. what about those “automated keyfobs” – someone knows the code?
With the keyfobs, there are a finite number of codes within a finite range but the number of possibilities is still so great that the effort isn’t worth the reward in most cases. The beauty of CAC cards and key fobs is that having the code alone isn’t sufficient, you usually also have to be collocated with the device and in the case of a CAC card you also have to have a PIN.
I would love it if we could safely vote on the internet, I think more people would likely vote, both young and old.
It would still be a racist, sexist and anti poor people plot to disenfranchised minorities and women since those groups don’t have access to computors
LMAO! Well, maybe they can still go to their designated voting place.
No – that’s not fair, every body else get to vote from home – we must buy them all computers and internet service for life…
Laughing so hard it hurts! I know you are right, no matter what we try to do, someone will not be happy. Choice just isn’t that popular, unless we are paying for someone else’s choices.
“…Choice just isn’t that popular, unless we are paying for someone else’s choices…”
I’d go with “unless someone else is paying for our choice.” If I pay, it’s the cheapest way possible…
I guess we are back to polling locations, that is the cheapest way possible.
Worked for Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln….
The evangelicals and conservatives are the only ones who care enough to show up. Then we are outnumbered in the general by the “independents”.
Look, if he can’t fix his hair problem, he’s not ready for prime time.
Have you seen Hillary’s face???….LMAO….
That woman would scare Slenderman…and he’s one scary MoFo, in his own right…Not to mention the baggage… (:
LOLOLOL this once I will agree with you GT in regard to Hillary.
Hillary’s face reflects her age.
Rand’s hair reflects a lot of primping.
ummm….
https://scontent-sea.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpt1/v/t1.0-9/11130180_10152865428391275_6163199978904358175_n.jpg?oh=c7724ffd87cf6cb0ee815256082ea56a&oe=55A1386A
You sure seem scared…
What color is stupid in your world?
A bright shade of euwe max. LMAO…..
Just don’t tell them what the cake is for and never say where you bought the gun. It’s all good.
Rand Paul just lost my vote. Here is an email:
Since the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973, 55 million abortions have taken place in America.
The question remains, can a civilization endure if it does not respect life?
And the answer to that question is loud and clear.
But I don’t just want to tell you, I want to show you.
So I hope you’ll take a few moments to watch this video about my stand for life and how I will ALWAYS fight to protect the most innocent amongst us.
After you watch the video, I hope you’ll sign your “Right to Life” petition to your Congressman and Senators.
Thank you for your continued support.
In Liberty,
U.S. Senator Rand Paul (R-KY)
P.S. I’ll always fight for life and I hope you’ll take a few moments to watch the video describing my commitment to this most precious cause.
After you watch the video, I hope you’ll sign your “Right to Life” petition to your Congressman and Senators.
Send a message to the D.C. elites that grassroots conservatives are fed up with a status quo that refuses to stand for life.
He has called himself a ‘conservative Catholic’. So, how else would he feel? Just last week, he was quoted as saying there are no gay rights. Even leaving out gay marriage, do his supporters think gays should be discriminated in jobs and housing?
I’ll say it again: Claptrap Libertarianism ideology stops at a woman’s uterus and civil rights for gays…at least, as far as the ‘conservative Catholic’ Pauls are concerned.
Of course, the main issue for his young supporters is legalizing marijuana. Do you think someone can get elected president with the votes of a stoner base?
It is fine with me that he is a Conservative Catholic, but it isn’t fine when he starts pushing his ideology on others.
I’m sorry, but how exactly does this lose your vote?
I used to argue pro-life strongly, because I detest late term abortions, then I read the personhood bill and right then I decided I do not want Roe v. Wade overturned, because if they do, it will go to the other extreme.
I favor limited government and that is what I want to hear, not overturning Roe v. Wade.
And he wants that scary Duck Dynasty loser for a VP? Ha! Ha!