So, now we have Rand and Ted. Dare I call it an excellent adventure?

@SoDakCampaigns

So, now Rand Paul joins Ted Cruz on the presidential trail.

What do you think?

Neither one has shown me from the onset what I’m looking for …..yet. But there’s a long campaign season ahead, and lots of things evolve as time goes by.

45 thoughts on “So, now we have Rand and Ted. Dare I call it an excellent adventure?”

  1. I watched a rerun of the announcement on CSPAN this evening. Rand is usually better at speaking off the cuff than he is at delivering prepared speeches, but this one was really good.

    And his wife Kelley is amazing on the stump. The trick may be finding a way to use her without getting upstaged:

    1. Wow. Just noticed that randpaul.com says he’s raised over half a million dollars today.

    1. Do you mean Waco, Texas? Oh, I see; you meant “Whackos”. Perhaps you should get a dictionary so you look foolish only for the content of your posts and not the content and spelling.

      Cruz, Thune, and Paul have a lot more intelligence than you do, I would guess, so be belittled by someone such as yourself probably doesn’t mean a whole lot to them. They have more important fish to fry, such as saving the country from the people you support.

          1. What about Bosworth running for President? If she is found innocent she might run for office again and this time it will be for President. Donations would pour in again! Chad could manage the campaign.

        2. all the palin stories i saw on a web search were the same few days before the iowa conference in January where she did horribly. she’s not a serious candidate in any way shape or form, if ever she was. re: mccain, it’s his senate reelection, fortunately for all involved. so never mind.

    2. I heard that as well. I think it is time for him to hang it up; he already has no credibility anymore, and he is nothing but a cranky old goat, much like Harry Reid.

  4. I like them both. I also like Jeb Bush, Scott Walker. Oh and let’s not forget Marco Rubio. He is a great leader aswell. Going to be a great year to be a Republican.

    1. Do you think these guys are doing a warm up for 2020 since Hillary is going to win this one? Not excited about Hillary but at least these guys will get more exposure for the future being on the 2016 campaign trail.

      1. Why are you handing the scepter to Queen Hillary already? She has done and said so many idiotic, un-American things during her tenure as first lady and Secretary of State that she should in no way be a lock. Don’t throw up your hands to socialism yet-we can still save the country!

    2. What is there to like about Jeb Bush? He is so establishment that he wouldn’t be much better than Hillary or even Joltin’ Joe Biden. I think the country needs a more conservative person at the helm than Bush, and I would pick Cruz, Rubio, Paul, or Walker over Bush any day of the week.

      1. Cruz is gaining momentum. Bush is another squish being been there done that! Time to move on. Nominating Bush would elect gulp….Hillary!

  5. Top tier: Bush, Walker, Paul,

    Second tier needing a break: Rubio, Huckabee

    Third tier needing a miracle: Santorum, Cruz

    1. Paul’s showing he has an organization this week. Pretty impressive start, he’s clearly doing all he can to show he’s a legitimate contender. He obviously learned a few things watching his father’s campaign mistakes. He’s may indeed be a thinker, but, it’s his base that’s his biggest problem. If he can shed the crazies that his father pandered to for decades, he might have a chance. I’m skeptical, politicians always run home when things get tough.

      This makes things interesting for Walker, his nascent organization will have a tough time matching Paul’s launch. He needs to at least break even or it’s already a two-man race.

      1. “If he can shed the crazies”

        That is exactly why the GOP has not produced long-term solutions. They reject those who are right. No pun intended. Now that I reread it, I wished it was intentional. From now on it will be intentional.

        1. i think by ‘crazies’ he meant true libertarians who would make the gop over into themselves rather than be part of a larger political movement. that’s kinda crazy.

  6. Bush guarantees a Hillary presidency unless his Vice is Stellar. Had it not been for his brother turning the Middle East into a Hell hole we would not recognize the name Obama.

    1. Arab spring, red lines, nuclear Iran, Muslim Brotherhood, Isreal sellout, decapitations and what difference does it make… Hell Hole upgrades !

    2. mccain’s race was mccain’s to win, and he never displayed an ear for the music of it, or an instinct for how to win it. romney did his level best, and between gleeful lies put forth by national democrat leaders coupled with a shameful national media ‘covering the coverage’ instead of the issues, he couldn’t prevail.
      if bush is the ultimate candidate, he’ll either show us he’s the man to win it, or he won’t win it. it’s way to early to hinge everything on a crapshoot like ‘v-p choice.’ that kind of thinking lead to sarah palin in the mccain camp instead of other more worthy choices.

  7. best 2 candidates since reagan! Do you realize if jeb or hiliary are elected those 2 families will have ran the country for over 40 years!? Time for a REAL change! Cruz2016!!

    2. I agree; enough with the dynasties; neither Bush was great, and Clinton only didn’t screw things up very badly because he was too busy stuffing Monica under his desk.

      I could go with Paul, Cruz, or Walker, and possibly Rubio, but not Jeb.

      1. I would go with any of those, including Jeb Bush if the opponent is Hillary Clinton. Of the group, I would prefer either Walker or Bush based upon experience. And Bush was actually pretty good in Florida from what I recall. I also would keep an eye on Perry or Pence.

  8. Rand Paul announces candidacy; hours later, large sections of Washington, D.C., lose power.

    Coincidence?

  9. Charlie: I think you are onto something. Walker matches up best against Clinton. Bush matches up best against O’Malley. Think about the Final Four. Does anyone think anyone in the country besides Wisconsin could have beaten Kentucky? Kentucky would have killed Duke. It is all about match-ups of strength and weakness.

    At the same time, your last point is “crazy.” GWB might have driven the car down a wrong road. But you are blaming GWB for BO then deciding since the car is on the wrong road so he drove it over a cliff. That is the point Kelly is making and I agree with it.

    MHS: I think Rand has already done what you fear he must. Rand doesn’t:

    1) Have the conspiracy mentality of his dad,

    2) His libertarianism is prudent, measured and based on information.

    3) Politically he is rational. He doesn’t fight every fight as if it was the end of the world.

    4) Electorally he is rational. He gets organization and money are critical to electoral success. The real “crazies” are those who can’t figure out how to organize and raise money so they just rail against it as “not being fair” or a conspiracy.

    Rand’s biggest problem is Cruz. To a large enough degree their message resonates with the same people. Cruz is going to pull enough who want red meat vs. a more measured discussion. Thus, he runs the risk of falling into the second tier with Rubio and Huckabee and needing Bush or Walker to make a fatal error.

    1. cruz has said he needed to clear out the other conservatives first, consolidate that group and then face the larger base and top tier candidates. rand obviously is who gets elbowed unless he can shove back.

  10. Charlie ,
    Do me a favor & talk to some of the soldiers about the Middle East . Once we accept that all war is hell ask , did they do any good while they were there . There is a reason that so many including my son volunteered for multiple tours & are now so upset about the current situation .

  11. Mike and Troy;
    My comment was meant to bring to light the political problem without any ilk towards the men and women who follow orders engaging in battle. They did a stupendous job. We entered a political arena we could never win with any amount of military might. Bush 41 did not take Saddam out for the exact reason Iraq is in a Hell Hole today. Saddam was killing radicals and controlling the various religious sects with fear and loathing. Powell also knew what would happen but 43 took his opinion and flushed it making Dick Cheney the status quo. We now have a much worse Hell Hole because of the lame attributes Obama played in defending Iraq’s security. America does some truly great things but Nation Building is not one of them.
    For example Bush 43 incorrectly believed for what ever reason that you could place a democracy based upon forgiveness into a country with a tribal mentality based upon revenge. Final thought on this is a question. What did Saddam have to do with 911?
    Republicans and Democrats rewrite history equally well.

  12. Kelly I could not agree with you more but we; America, pushed the referee out of the Middle East and then we expected them to all play nice by our rules. Obama went all in on the craziness thinking that we could “Talk” it over and “They” would automatically switch positions giving credence to diplomacy. It is all insane similar to taming wild dogs. Israel has been left as the only body of logic in the region.

    1. i’m voting republican across the board in the 2016 general. that’s all i know today, and i’m telling you i can find a way to love every single person running in the gop primary. whoever gets the nod will have run the gauntlet of the party voters, delegates and leadership. as a republican, that tells me who the party that i love is putting their hope for the future in and i support that any way i can.

  13. Pull that vote for the three amigos, and don;t forget rocket man Santorum the waco of Pennsylvsania.So we could Have Thune Crus Rand Santorum tight walker Scott Walker, got to love all your top FIVE.

  14. Enquirer 2: “Cruz is gaining momentum. Bush is another squish being been there done that! Time to move on. Nominating Bush would elect gulp….Hillary!”

    I think I heard nearly the same line once from you or someone who often posts similar to you. It went something like this.

    “Nelson is gaining momentum. Rounds is another squish being been there done that! Time to move on. Nominating Rounds would elect gulp….Weiland!”

Comments are closed.