Rand Paul as VP?

[Grumpier Than Thou]

Well?

[All Along The Watchtower]

He adds nothing to the ticket.

[Jacobtm]

Would be a great way to embarrass Republicans in general.

[Brandon H]

As I mentioned previously, if no candidate has a majority of delegates at the convention, this might be one of the few ways to get Ron Paul's delegates.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

As I mentioned previously, if no candidate has a majority of delegates at the convention, this might be one of the few ways to get Ron Paul's delegates.

That ain't gonna happen, and even if it did, a Romney/Gingrich or Gingrich/Romney ticket would be the likely result depending on who had more delegates.

[Oakvale]

What would be the point? He's from a safe Republican state and has the charisma of a dead fish.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

He put Kentucky in play in 2010, and his views are too far-out for the establishment. No.

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

He put Kentucky in play in 2010, and his views are too far-out for the establishment. No.

He won Kentucky by 10% compared to the previous election, where the Republican won Kentucky by 1%. That's the opposite of "put in play".

Anyhow, a lot of those southern states are very Republican nationally but evenly mixed in statewide elections (eg. West Virginia)

I see no particular reason why Rand Paul would be made a VP. He's a one term senator who, while certainly being popular with far-right commentators and tea partiers, doesn't add much unless he ran with a moderate. The only reasonable situation with a Paul VP in 2012 (2016 is a very different story) would be Ron Paul bargaining with another candidate in a brokered convention.

[Keystone Phil]

So Daddy is going to sweep to victory in all of the primaries and caucuses after the rEVOLution then pick his son as his running mate? Won't that look somewhat bad, Paultards?

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

So Daddy is going to sweep to victory in all of the primaries and caucuses after the rEVOLution then pick his son as his running mate? Won't that look somewhat bad, Paultards?

That would (A) be pretty damn funny and (B) be silly.

Still, Paul/Paul vs Obama/Biden would be fun if only to see the media coverage.

[Oakvale]

He put Kentucky in play in 2010, and his views are too far-out for the establishment. No.

He won Kentucky by 10% compared to the previous election, where the Republican won Kentucky by 1%. That's the opposite of "put in play".

Anyhow, a lot of those southern states are very Republican nationally but evenly mixed in statewide elections (eg. West Virginia)

I see no particular reason why Rand Paul would be made a VP. He's a one term senator who, while certainly being popular with far-right commentators and tea partiers, doesn't add much unless he ran with a moderate. The only reasonable situation with a Paul VP in 2012 (2016 is a very different story) would be Ron Paul bargaining with another candidate in a brokered convention.

Ugh, Paul's primary win made the Kentucky Senate race competitive, which it shouldn't have been, and wouldn't have been if the less... weird candidate had been nominated. If Conway hadn't blown his chances with that silly ad he might even have won, or at least made it close.

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

He put Kentucky in play in 2010, and his views are too far-out for the establishment. No.

He won Kentucky by 10% compared to the previous election, where the Republican won Kentucky by 1%. That's the opposite of "put in play".

Anyhow, a lot of those southern states are very Republican nationally but evenly mixed in statewide elections (eg. West Virginia)

I see no particular reason why Rand Paul would be made a VP. He's a one term senator who, while certainly being popular with far-right commentators and tea partiers, doesn't add much unless he ran with a moderate. The only reasonable situation with a Paul VP in 2012 (2016 is a very different story) would be Ron Paul bargaining with another candidate in a brokered convention.

Ugh, Paul's primary win made the Kentucky Senate race competitive, which it shouldn't have been, and wouldn't have been if the less... weird candidate had been nominated. If Conway hadn't blown his chances with that silly ad he might even have won, or at least made it close.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Again, the Republican in 2004 won by 1%

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No. Proof?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Even before Conway started getting stupid with the Aqua Buddah, Rand was winning almost every poll by more than the Republican in 2004 won by.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

It depends on who the nominee is, but in Romney, Newt, and certainly in Paul's case, its a no.

[Zarn]

It depends on who the nominee is, but in Romney, Newt, and certainly in Paul's case, its a no.

So you think Cain should pick Rand?

I think if any of them would get an advantage from it, it would be Romney.

[Oakvale]

Again, the Republican in 2004 won by 1%

The Republican in question being Jim Bunning. So, uh...

A 10-point win would hardly be shabby, normally, but for the Republican (after Conway's stupid ad) in a Republican state, it's pretty underwhelming considering the national political climate, no? Grayson or some other mostly inoffensive GOPer would have won a small landslide.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Again, you can't reasonably compare the, er, controversial Jim Bunning to a normal Republican. I mean, for all Paul's flaws he doesn't have Alzheimer's, so I think that'd give him an edge as a candidate.

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, going back in time...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Kentucky,_1998

Bunning wins by 0.6%

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Kentucky,_1992

The Democrat wins by nearly 30% (!!!)

Nope, in statewide elections the Republicans certainly aren't that overpowering in Kentucky. A 10% win is pretty good, and I still see no proof that Grayson would have done better.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

the jmfcst's...they say, "No!"

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Not a chance in hell... he makes the top of the ticket look credible and stable... wait a second

[Mercenary]

Huntsman/Paul




But, no. Maybe in 2016, but now is too soon.