He certainly isn't as obstinate as his father was...
But I'm not ready to put Rand in the same category with Mitch just yet.
Not every politician who disappoints me is literally Hitler. I have more independent thought than that.
No one will ever be able to assume my support because of my skin color, gender, hair style, favorite submachinegun, or any other identity politics frivolity.
Likewise, I will not write off people who appear to be genuinely well intentioned simply because they failed to do exactly what I want in every instance.
I have watched Rand make very courageous stands on unpopular points that no one else would defend. He has earned my respect for that.
I'm not ready to follow him blindly, but he's better than about 98% of the DC politicians of my lifetime.
I've sort of come to realize that up at that high level of government is not where fraud should be dealt with. The fraud was administered on the level of precincts, not at the level of the federal government. At that high level, anything one might try gets caught up in bureacracy, and just generates noise.
People here were turning to the federal government, the most unreliable part of the State, hoping that our interests would be represented. If the fraud were to have been fixed, there were 0 instances that it would be fixed at the federal level. 'Stop the Steal' was dead when the judges ruled 'no standing'. For people like Rand Paul to try and fix fraud would mean tearing the already flimsy federal government apart.
So, you believe Rand chose to vote to certify, not because he believed there was no fraud, but because there was no good outcome to voting otherwise, and it could potentially make the situation worse.
Without knowing everything he would have known in those circumstances, it becomes very difficult to judge whether I think he did the right thing there. A flaming middle finger to the establishment would have been nice, but not at any cost.
Not every politician who disappoints me is literally Hitler.
While this is true, with no voting integrity, we might as well have Idi Amin, Saddam Hussein, Adolf Hitler or Stalin running for office.
We have zero representation of the voters in the oval office. What we have is a deep state plant. Rand might as well be smoking Meth with Hunter Biden if he doesn't care about election integrity. Everything will fall to the wayside, if that isn't restored. Everything
He certainly isn't as obstinate as his father was...
But I'm not ready to put Rand in the same category with Mitch just yet.
Not every politician who disappoints me is literally Hitler. I have more independent thought than that.
No one will ever be able to assume my support because of my skin color, gender, hair style, favorite submachinegun, or any other identity politics frivolity.
Likewise, I will not write off people who appear to be genuinely well intentioned simply because they failed to do exactly what I want in every instance.
I have watched Rand make very courageous stands on unpopular points that no one else would defend. He has earned my respect for that.
I'm not ready to follow him blindly, but he's better than about 98% of the DC politicians of my lifetime.
Finally some critical thinking
He alone named He That Cannot Be Named. And he did it on the Senate floor. Earned my respect with that.
He's demonstrated brass knockers on more than one occasion...
Which is part of why his certification vote is so confusing. I'd like to hear his side of that story in a private setting...
I've sort of come to realize that up at that high level of government is not where fraud should be dealt with. The fraud was administered on the level of precincts, not at the level of the federal government. At that high level, anything one might try gets caught up in bureacracy, and just generates noise.
People here were turning to the federal government, the most unreliable part of the State, hoping that our interests would be represented. If the fraud were to have been fixed, there were 0 instances that it would be fixed at the federal level. 'Stop the Steal' was dead when the judges ruled 'no standing'. For people like Rand Paul to try and fix fraud would mean tearing the already flimsy federal government apart.
They swore to uphold the constitution. Then the didn't uphold the constitution. That's all I need to know.
And what would it have cost Rand to side with Trump on election fraud? Nothing at all.
Sure, you can argue it would accomplish nothing to side with Trump but nonetheless, it would have been the right thing to do
That is a well reasoned analysis.
So, you believe Rand chose to vote to certify, not because he believed there was no fraud, but because there was no good outcome to voting otherwise, and it could potentially make the situation worse.
Without knowing everything he would have known in those circumstances, it becomes very difficult to judge whether I think he did the right thing there. A flaming middle finger to the establishment would have been nice, but not at any cost.
Who's that? Jinping?
While this is true, with no voting integrity, we might as well have Idi Amin, Saddam Hussein, Adolf Hitler or Stalin running for office.
We have zero representation of the voters in the oval office. What we have is a deep state plant. Rand might as well be smoking Meth with Hunter Biden if he doesn't care about election integrity. Everything will fall to the wayside, if that isn't restored. Everything
No one else in DC?
I hope you realize how low that bar is
I really like Rand. He's easily top 5 in the Senate as far as principled and honest politicians go (but it's obviously a short list).