WaPo: Is Rand Paul going mainstream, or vice versa?

[Poll_Blind]

Is Rand Paul going mainstream, or vice versa?

Rand Paul seems to be crossing over to the mainstream — or maybe it’s the other way around.

When Kentucky’s junior senator arrived in Washington just over two years ago, he appeared destined to inhabit the role of perpetual outlier. But now, he’s in the mix on just about everything that is happening, and is talked about as a credible Republican presidential contender in 2016.

--snip--

Part of his new relevance comes from the sudden prominence of a set of issues on which Paul has been a somewhat lonely voice in the Republican Party.

There is fresh attention to privacy, amid revelations about the government’s aggressive surveillance programs; renewed mistrust of the Internal Revenue Service, in the wake of its admissions of improperly targeting conservative groups for scrutiny; and heightened anxiety about foreign entanglement, as the prospect of deeper U.S. military involvement in Syria looms.

Dear Democratic Party...I'm begging ya, here...PLEASE DO NOT LET A FUCK LIKE RAND PAUL BE THE FACE OF/STANDARD-BEARER FOR THE FIGHT FOR PRIVACY, GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT OR HESITANCE IN FOREIGN ENTANGLEMENTS.

Just don't. These are issues we should own as a party, but it seems like too many Democrats are disowning those issues, along with protections for Social Security, etc.

Do not let some fucking crazy son-of-a-fucking-crazy dude be the champion of these issues. We need to get on message and be at the forefront of those issues. Pro privacy rights, pro governmental oversight and anti-Imperialism: These are things people should think of the Democratic Party first for, not second.

PB

[quinnox]

1. its pathetic, isn't it, that we have to look to a guy like this to defend civil liberties

I can only think of two Democrats, and who aren't very prominent, who seem to also have a problem with all this spying business - Wyden and Udall. But they don't get the kind of attention that Paul gets. Where are the famous Dems that are speaking against this, and why are they going along with Bush's Patriot Act??

[Orsino]

6. Yes. In one or two tiny ways, Paul sounds better than most Dems.

However, he's also a corrupt and cowardly liar on an epic scale, so we have no business taking him seriously.

None.

At all.

[quinnox]

9. there is a big opportunity for a political Democrat to take the civil liberties ball and run with it

They would be a star, and get a lot of media attention and interviews. And it would be nice to see its not only a right wing libertarian like Paul out there talking about this.

[sabrina 1]

13. Well there's a few, Ron Wyden, Jerry Adler, Alan Grayson, and Scott. John Conyers has also

expressed concerns over it. Sanchez, not very prominent yet, but if she continues to stand up for civil literties she will be.

It is only pathetic that a Republican is now the champion of civil rights in this country, it means that young people and independents who normally vote democratic, but are seriously upset over these issues, will, and already are, beginning to see him as an alternative.

[karynnj]

17. Is Jerry Adler really Jerrald Nadler ?

Is Sanchez - rep Loretta Sanchez?

It is too bad that Feingold is no longer in the Senate as he has those creds and would have the gravitas needed. I think it likely could be Wyden and/or Merkley.

I agree with you that this isue should not be conceded to the Republicans - but it is the Libertarians who are likely the least conflicted on this. They are horrible on many other issues.

[MindPilot]

2. Totally agree. It is why a lot of otherwise solid Dem voters will stay home.

If it comes down to a choice between voting for a whacko who supports the ideals or a party-liner who doesn't, the party-liner who doesn't is gonna lose.

[n2doc]

3. Ran is a con artist

He is good at telling people what they want to hear. He is not your friend or champion, however, and will sell you out for 1 penny if someone offers it to him, grinning all the while.

[Poll_Blind]

12. I have no doubt of that, I mean figuratively as the perceived "champion" of those issues. nt

PB

[sabrina 1]

14. Otoh, he won because of what he was saying, about our foreign policies and about civil liberties

and you would have to be willing to lie to say he isn't still talking about those issues and still voting accordingly.

It won't work to just call him names, will it? It didn't last time. Maybe we Dems should stop acting like Republicans and resorting to personal attacks rather than DEMONSTRATING that WE are the Party that will defend Civil Liberties and end our horrible foreign policies.

But keep on saying 'fuck Paul' as the only response to those who are considering him as an alternative, and I wonder how many minds that will change.

Our party has to get the Third Way/Party that has attached itself to the party, out of this party. They have a party that is better suited to them, those warmongers and SS Privateers and supporters of Bush's surveillance policies. Otherwise calling everyone names who dares to point that they are on the wrong track right now, will ensure a victory for someone no Democrat would want in the WH.

Keep trashing democrats also and see what happens. Frankly we are sick to death of the defense of Bush policies, of Republicans being installed in positions of power AFTER we threw them out. And a lot of people, including those who despite their disappointment, still voted for Dems and helped them win the Senate and the WH again, may just have had enough by the next election.

Put the blame where it belongs. It is not the voters who are to blame.

[galileoreloaded]

4. bingo. lead, follow, or get out of the way. nt

[graham4anything]

5. He is part and parcel of BushPaulfamilyinc and Rand would instantly take the VP from Jeb.

Ron Paul was in a parallel district to Tom DeLay and never did anything to hurt the republican party.

In fact, all Ron and Rand have done is to cynically attempt to cull democratic voters who must be blind
to the fact that the two are psynchophants of George Wallace and David Duke.

Anyone old enough knows all about Ron Paul's racist literature.

and the bushfamily have always exploited race and religion(who can forget what their stooges called
Mike Dukakis.

Rand Paul is NOT against war, NOT against drones, NOT for spending.
Rand Paul is 100% for anything Jeb Bush is for.
Ron and Rand Paul both would have voted for Robert Bork, Sam Alito and Antoin Scalia.
They would not have voted for Sonia or Elana.

RON PAUL VOTED TO IMPEACH BILL CLINTON.
Ron Paul is a republican and never renounced that.
Rand Paul is a republican and never renounces it.
Rand is just acting stealthly to spew the same views.
He was better coached than Ron.

Ron Paul is against spending, except in his own district, same as he would do in Iran in a NYC minute

And RAND PAUL IS 100% AGAINST ABORTION

[winter is coming]

7. Considering the clown car we saw last year, being a "credible Republican contender"

isn't anything to write home about.

[Poll_Blind]

16. They're clowns, I can't disagree about that. But almost 61 million people wanted them at...

...the circus in 2012 so I don't discount them entirely.

PB

[allin99]

8. Obama shoulda come out and said, 'glad you guys..

are finally on *our* side' what are we gonna do about it. Then the pubs woulda shut their mouths completely or they would had to follow the prez's lead. He shoulda done that instead of defending it.

[disidoro01]

10. Laughing

my butt off! Democratic establishment has become the party of Wall Street, the Party of perpetual foreign wars, the Party of Big Brother and the antithesis of constitutional rights. Rand is a nut but the narrative is changing in that Paul is seen as standing up for the average person.
If folks don't like it, tell the president to start prosecuting bankers, that would be a good start.
Sound off all you want on Paul but the longer you are mute on current abuses, the stronger the support will be for changing out the Democratic old guard.

[Progressive dog]

11. The name that must not be mentioned

Just subscribe to his "main stream" beliefs but vote democratic. That doesn't work for me. I do not choose to be part of an anti-government political party, what would be the point? Rand Paul is far beyond anti-government, he's anti-reality. He can own his bat crap craziness as far as I'm concerned.

[Hydra]

15. If he ever got in power I'm sure it would be more of the same

But this mythical "undecided" middle section of the country that we supposedly have to veer dead Right to capture will probably go for this. After all, you have the unabashedly evil and the apologetic evil to vote for otherwise.

I'm probably overwording this- in plain terms, this is a sign that our party has stolen our voice.

[AlinPA]

18. It's early, but it's starting to look like he and Cruz are the GOP favorites. Any republican with a

hint of being a tiny bit moderate (yes, even Rubio with the immigration issue) does not have a chance if they are thinking of running for president. Teabaggers control the GOP now and they control the US House as well as the Senate with their filibuster there.