TPMDC
Dem Conway Rolls Out General Election Strategy In Kentucky: Rand Paul Is Totally Nuts
KY Sen candidate Rand Paul (R)
Share
Send to a friend!
Democrats appear to have found their plan to defeat Rand Paul -- wind him up and watch him go off the deep end.
Ever since Paul won the right to carry his party's flag on May 18, political types on both sides of the aisle have watched with amusement -- or chagrin -- as Kentucky's Republican nominee for Senate has stuck his foot in his mouth again and again. But less attention has been focused on how the Democratic nominee, state Attorney General Jack Conway, intends to use Paul's, er, unique rhetorical talents to pull off what most still say would be an upset win in the home of Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell.
The TPM Poll Average shows Paul leading Conway 48.8-41.8.
After the Kentucky primaries, Conway hinted at his campaign strategy when he told me that Paul was too extreme for his state, and that his views "are not the views of mainstream Kentuckians." But we hadn't really seen the Rand-is-crazy strategy in action until last week.
Last Thursday's candidate forum in Louisville offered the first look at both men performing on the same stage, at the same time. What emerged from the session was a glimpse at Conway's strategy: attacking Paul's views as extreme, painting Paul as irresponsible and even dangerous -- and then sitting back and waiting for Paul to embarrass himself.
So how exactly does that strategy work in practice? Consider Conway's comments last Thursday on earmarks -- which Paul has says he wants to ban altogether.
We do need earmark reform. But I'm not going to call for an end to all earmarks. What we need is transparency in the earmark process ... You know what?...the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant has been the recipient of earmarks in the past. Our locks, our dams, our bridges have been the recipients of earmarks in the past ... those projects, they mean jobs. And when I go to Washington, I'm going to make sure that those worthwhile projects, that are so important to your communities are looked out for and are adequately represented.
Conway told the crowd that his plan for earmarks -- and other spending problems -- comes down to more "accountability" in government. And that led directly into the Rand Paul-is-too-crazy-for-Kentucky stuff.
"I can tell you what accountability is not. Accountability is not going on national TV and saying it's unAmerican to go after British Petroleum," Conway said. "Accountability is not having a world view where you think that government should basically never touch business whatsoever."
It's a strategy that might seem obvious on its face, but carries with it more than a little risk. After all, Paul didn't sweep the GOP primary by offering ideas that don't fly among a large section of the Republican base. And John McCain didn't defeat President Obama 58-41 in the state in 2008 because a lot of Kentuckians aren't prepared to pull the lever for a Republican when the time comes.
Still, a Conway campaign source told me Friday, the Democrats feel like they have the upper hand in the policy debate, calling Paul's position on earmarks "extremely unrealistic." The source said Conway will appeal to a wide range of voters -- including Republicans -- by talking solutions to the problems Paul is raising that Kentuckians believe are actually possible.
As for the remaining portion of Conway's strategy to this point, waiting for Paul to embarrass himself, things really couldn't be going better for the Democrats up to now, the Conway source said. Paul's comments about BP and the 1964 Civil Rights Act have given Conway ample opportunity to sit back and watch Paul squirm.
But the Republican's ability to shake attacks on his views during the nasty GOP primary was not lost on the Democrats. It's not enough to simply let Paul talk, the Conway source told me. You have to be sure that what you highlight about Paul's past statements gives him no way to "wiggle out" from under it. Though the campaign source wouldn't discuss ad and media strategy for the fall, the source suggested there are lessons learned from the establishment GOP's failed attacks on Paul's more extreme statements will could play a part in Conway's TV ads once the race heats up. Basically, if you're going to use Paul's words against him, make sure you pin him down.
Paul's wiggling skill was apparent in Thursday's forum.
"Boy, it is amazing how sometimes when you get on national TV and try and say something how sometimes they mistake what you're trying to say or misconstrue what you're trying to say," Paul said in response to Conway's attacks on the BP comments. The line is pretty much Paul's standard response when one of his more controversial statements is brought up.
Conway's hoping Paul gets more chances to try out that excuse before all is said and done.
Note: This post has been updated.
Comments (58) | Join the Conversation!
Leave a comment
Follow us!
Most Popular
TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com
TPM Top News
© 2010 TPM Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
maya89
July 12, 2010 9:03 AM
well, I hope I'm wrong, but I think Conway is wasting his time.. I don't see KY voting for a Dem senator no matter what; I think those folks would still rather have a wacko Repug represent them in Washington than a sane Democrat.. but well, again, I hope I'm wrong.. and good luck to Mr. Conway!!!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
July 12, 2010 9:54 AM in reply to maya89
Actually, it's pretty bright. Conway might not convert any Republicans, *but* he may very well discourage some from showing up at the polls and pull the lever for Paul. The result would be the same: greater percentage of votes for Conway.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
acf_ma
July 12, 2010 11:08 AM in reply to maya89
These are the people who the Bush team convinced that a President Gore would be coming into their homes to take their guns away, so a vote for Paul over a Democrat is not too big a leap in imagination.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
fla_kracker
July 12, 2010 2:15 PM in reply to maya89
Was Conway elected as Attorney General or appointed? If elected enough people voted to elect him to that position. If appointed ignore me
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
voreason
July 12, 2010 9:05 AM
"Dem Conway Rolls Out General Election Strategy In Kentucky: Rand Paul Is Totally Nuts"
Rand Paul is totally nuts?
That's not a strategy.
That's a fact.
Whether calling attention to it will help Conway in this election, is more dependent on whether the KY electorate is totally nuts.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Lalo35adm
July 12, 2010 9:09 AM
Translation: "yes, we suck, but Rand sucks even more"...
Desperate times call for desperate measures!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
traitorjoe
July 12, 2010 10:48 AM in reply to Lalo35adm
The strategy is Democrats like Conway are intelligent and reasonable and will keeps jobs and projects going in Kentucky that help the Kentucky economy. Or you can vote for someone irresponsible and ignorant who will harm the economy due his extreme dogma. That's the translation for people with IQs greater than 100.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
commie atheist
July 12, 2010 11:29 AM in reply to Lalo35adm
Yes, having a President McCain would have meant continuing George W. Bush's ruinous policies and plunged the country even further into a depression, and would have put Sarah Palin within a heartbeat of the presidency, but that still would have been better than having a President Obama, who is rumored to be a secret Muslim who wasn't born in the US and is secretly planning to subvert the Constitution, institute Sharia Law, send everyone to communist re-education camps, and put old people to death when they get sick.
You are a pathetic troll.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
traitorjoe
July 12, 2010 11:36 AM in reply to commie atheist
Very observant. Many in the South would rather be unemployed, without health insurance, lose a son or daughter in Afghanistan or Iraq, be denied clean water and healthy air instead of succumb to guv'mint regoolashuns than support Obama who fixes the economy and gives rights and economic power to consumers.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Johnny2Bad
July 12, 2010 6:52 PM in reply to Lalo35adm
Yep...Politicians suck and "they" do suck even more.
So what's yer problem?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
tinsk
July 12, 2010 9:20 AM
If Conway wants to make Paul's policy on earmarks seem out-of-touch, he'll need to hammer home exactly what an earmark is. Most people believe it is pure pork spending secretly added into the budget at the last minute. In a time of anti-spending, the popular belief of what an earmark is could boomerang on Conway.
An earmark is NOT the secretly adding of more and more money to the budget and thus ballooning the deficit. An earmark designates a specific amount of funds ALREADY in the budget and directs that money so that it can ONLY be spent on a specific project such as a bridge or sewerage treatment system or or infrastructure repairs, etc., etc. It is targeted spending of money already approved.
That's why transparency of earmarks is far more critical in the process. Bringing home Federal money for a community is not a bad thing. Bringing home Federal money that is secretly funneled to a project where the Senator/Congressman has an interest in cronyism, is a bad thing.
Conway needs to emphasize and educate that earmarks are not inherently bad. And without them, states like Kentucky may lose much needed Federal investment money.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
It's Pat
July 12, 2010 9:35 AM in reply to tinsk
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
George C
July 12, 2010 10:00 AM in reply to It's Pat
Why doesn't he say something like, "Rand Paul will make sure Kentucky doesn't get anymore projects we need"? Conway's way of putting it sounds a tad abstract.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JADAMS
July 12, 2010 11:48 AM in reply to George C
EXACTLY CORRECT GEORGE C.
People don't have a clue or ANY interest in the process so strip out the inside baseball speak and dumb it down.
"Without XXXXX adding the earmark for the Paducah Plant that money would have never come."
"Without XXXX adding an earmark for the XXXXX, that money would have never come."
"And the change I want in earmarks that that EVERY ONE of them must carry the name of the person who added it. If someone is adding a stupid earmark, such as studying the sex life of a strawberry, the voters MUST know that BUT without the ability to earmark money for worthwhile projects such as Paducah, our locks, dams, etc., Kentucky is going to be left in the dust of the big states."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
calbearinillinois
July 12, 2010 12:03 PM in reply to JADAMS
You were doing well right up until you insulted the idea of earmarks for science (like the strawberry comment). I hate it when McCain tries to belittle any earmarks that have to do with zoology or biology, as if basic science isn't a) exactly the sort of public good government funds should be used for b) a way for the the government to ensure (under Bayh-Dole) that if any useful products come from such research it will be commercialized for the public good.
If you want to complain about them, stick with the vanity projects like the parks and bridges bearing Congressmen's names, or the efforts to circumvent the desires of the Administration and military to ensure a weapons plant stays in business. Studying the DNA of grizzlies is important if we want to preserve the species.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
July 12, 2010 4:58 PM in reply to calbearinillinois
Thank you! It's easy to make very valid and necesary scientific projects sound outlandish, because the studies, and consequently their titles, tend to be narrowly focused, and the titles therefore don't give a good sense of the overarching goals to which the study contributes.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
EnnuiDivine
July 12, 2010 9:47 AM in reply to tinsk
Exactly. It can be argued that it's the duty of Congressmen and Senators to steer Federal money to valid interests in his or her state. These people are elected to represent the best interests of their constituents and a major part of doing so is through earmarking legit projects.
It's when every 3rd public building in WV was named after Robert Byrd (or Judd Gregg in NH, Pete Domenici in NM, et.al.) that serious efforts for earmark transparency are needed.
Paul's brand of pseudo-libertarian populist rhetoric played the primary voters for the ill-educated fools they are. It's better suited for Wyoming than Kentucky, which, like most states in the region, is dependent on Federal support.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jeffgee
July 12, 2010 10:02 AM in reply to tinsk
In Maverick McCain's and $arah Palin's definition, earmarks are what Other People's districts get. When funds come to their states, it's because their states deserve them.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
tinsk
July 12, 2010 10:29 AM in reply to jeffgee
In McCain's defense (can't believe I'm saying that) he had always shown great restraint from earmarks. However, it had more to do with the odor and stigma of corruption associated with the past earmark secrecy process as earmarks were directed to Senator/Congressmen pet projects of donors and supporters. That's a bad thing.
But to say that a specific amount of the funds available in a Federal Highway expenditure is "earmarked" and can only be used for a specific needed project (and not simply go into a State's general treasury to be spent on something else), as long as the process is open and honest, can be a very good thing.
The argument as to whether the original hypothetical Highway Bill should have been as big as it may have been, is a whole other argument to be had. But once it is approved, targeting some of the funds a state will receive does not have to be a bad thing.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
blkblt
July 12, 2010 11:03 AM in reply to tinsk
It's tough to boil that down to a 6 or 8 word answer. The voters need to be able to understand what your saying in less time than it takes them to change the channel.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nick
July 12, 2010 3:35 PM in reply to tinsk
You are so right about EARMARKS not adding to the spending yet the folks here in Delaware who get their info from a brain fried Junkie (RUSH) think that Congressman Castle who turned down over 3 million dollars for our state is lowering the cost of government. GO FIGURE>
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rhallnj
July 12, 2010 9:23 AM
I'd like to see some examination of Paul's views on Iran's nuclear program. He is cool with the idea of Iran having nukes, I believe.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AJM
July 12, 2010 9:30 AM
Geez, talk about going with the obvious! Thing is, often works. :D
If I were doing it, I'd make Rand Paul's excuse the tag line to every blooper. Show clips of him committing a list of gaffes and ad him whining about being misunderstood at the end. Show the same clips with the whine after each one. Show the whine and follow it the bloopers. End every ad with there he goes again. Or with a question as to when Rand Paul is going to take responsibility for his own statements.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Informed Citizen
July 12, 2010 9:32 AM
Good luck with that "strtegy" It will only work if there are enough thinking people in Kentucky to actually process the message. Unfortunately, Kentucky, while a geographically beautiful state is an intellectual wasteland and a lost cause for Democrats especially progressive thinking Democrats.
Remember this is the state that made moonshine into a multi-billion dollar industry (i.e. only Bonded Bourbon can be made in Kentucky everything else is just whiskey) From those roots, a "damn the gov'm'nt and their 'revenooers' attitude is in their DNA.
This is the state that gave us that towering statesman Jim (I'm almost as batshit crazy as Michelle Bachmann) Bunning - whose only real claim to fame was past MLB glory - and that glorious "leader" (ha ha) Mitch (turtle man) McConnell.
Pointing out that Kentuckians are crazy to support Rand Paul is a little like pointing out Alabamans were racists for supporting George Wallace.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Signalman
July 12, 2010 9:41 AM in reply to Informed Citizen
Just FYI, African-Americans voted in significant numbers for Wallace in the 1982 gubernatorial election.
And having been 'raised up' in Alabama, I feel confident in saying that one can't spell 'gubernatorial' without 'goober.'
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
conniptionfit
July 12, 2010 9:33 AM
It's a pretty risky strategy, depending on average Kentucky voters to be smart enough (and paying enough attention) to figure out the Paul is full of extremist bs.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Owen
July 12, 2010 9:45 AM
"_____ Is Totally Nuts" is a good strategy for dealing with most of this year's far right candidates.
And in 2012 it will probably be the overarching theme for Democrats and whatever moderate Republicans are left. Things may not look great now, but by 2012 Obama and other moderates will be the only folks who kept their heads while much of the country lost theirs in 2009-2010.
Many people voted for Obama in 2008 because they wanted something to change radically, but they weren't necessarily sure what (and they all certainly didn't agree on how). The economy is still in trouble and there's no quick solutions for it, Afghanistan, Gitmo, the Gulf Oil spill, Israel-Palestine, the federal debt, or health care.
The folks who want radical change on both the left and the right may win the day in November (with the far right picking up Congressional seats and the far left's strategy of "a pox on both houses" giving the Dems a pox), but by 2012, when the lack of genuine solutions from either camp becomes apparent, "_____ is totally nuts" will fit the bill for all moderates.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CityGuy
July 12, 2010 9:48 AM in reply to Owen
In your guts you know they're nuts!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Owen
July 12, 2010 9:52 AM in reply to Owen
PS - The folks who wanted radical change with Obama in 2008 have been disappointed, but Obama ran as a moderate so it's unclear why they thought he'd be otherwise. It's as if they were influenced by the Fox "News" narrative about Obama without realizing it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Libertyluvrz
July 12, 2010 12:20 PM in reply to Owen
Excellent observation!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Harry Truman
July 12, 2010 9:54 AM
Democrats have been using this strategy since they tried to keep Pat Brown in office in 1966 and instead began Ronald Reagan's trek to the presidency. It only works when the nuts in power and their policies are failing. When they are not in power to an alarming number of people who vote it sounds like common sense. Jokes aside, just how smart (i.e. moderate) are Kentucky voters. If we have learned anything in the last 16 years it should be that Southern voters will, in greater proportion to the rest of the country, vote lunatics into public office. (My state is not immune. Pennsylvania gave Rick Santorum two terms before kicking his butt out in the 2006 landslide. There was plenty of warning of who and what he was, but he cruised in his two elections against candidates who spent their time calling his what he is— a nut.)
Calling Paul nuts does not offer something to vote for, and risks alienating too many voters who see some sense in what he says. Highight the stupid things he says, but explain how you are going to get Kentuck'y 19th century economy into the 21st.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
valgal
July 12, 2010 10:09 AM
The thing that I believe will hurt Jack the most here in KY is his pro-choice stance. Other than that, frankly he is pretty well liked around the state and has done an excellent job as attorney general. I agree he must do more than just say Paul is too nuts for KY, because well, parts of KY can be pretty nuts. All Rand is doing is saying Jack is too liberal for Ky so tit for tat there. When Jack said that Rand Paul is more about a national movement than what's best for KY and that is a better way of putting it. The Fancy Farm Picnic in August should be interesting and we'll be able to get a good feel for the race after that. Eastern Ky has a huge problem with prescription drug abuse and Rand said he would get rid of a federal program called UNITE that the beloved Eastern KY congressman, Hal Rogers,R- Somerset, helped put together that helps fight this problem. Basically Rand said it is a local problem and should be handled locally. Some local officials from E. KY who heard this at the recent debate took that note back home and I doubt it will sit well the folks down there.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
July 12, 2010 10:16 AM in reply to valgal
Nobody votes on abortion when the economy is in the crapper.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Owen
July 12, 2010 10:22 AM in reply to FreeRider
Not true. Many voters in some areas won't even consider voting for someone they disagree with on abortion.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
July 12, 2010 10:28 AM in reply to Owen
There will always be single issue voters who are never in play for Democrats regardless of the economy.
The "swing voters" who actually decide the elections don't vote on social issues when the economy is bad.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
afisher
July 12, 2010 10:10 AM
Does anyone want to explain how Rand's statement that the poor is this country are better off than other countries should make the voters think: Oh yeah, I want this guy as a Senator so he can make me feel good about the poverty in KY?
http://theygaveusarepublic.com/diary/6105/rand-paul-american-poor-are-lucky
Maybe the voter's will interpret this as "HE" will make it better by giving Big Business more freedom to screw them!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreemanW
July 12, 2010 10:52 AM
After twelve years of having the Reprobates controlling the Congress and eight long years of the Reprobates controlling the White House; after all the damage and havoc they have dumped upon this country, the government, the working class, the environment and the world, that the Democrats should have to campaign (ever again) at all is a sad statement about the intelligence of the voter in the U.S.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dave Adams
July 12, 2010 11:03 AM
Not only is it a great tagline, but to quote a Republican Attorney I know, "It has the advantage of being true".
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ronbyers
July 12, 2010 11:17 AM
If you watched the forum the other night you saw Conway take Paul apart. Before we give up on Conway or Kentucky remember Conway has won state wide before. He has lots of Republican friends. He knows how to keep the race local. That's what he is doing. He is telling people that he, Conway, will be a senator from and for Kentucky and not a senator for and from Fox News. In short Conway has learned the lesson that all politics is local. I am not sure Paul even begins to understand what that means. My guess is this is a toss up. If things continue the way they are going look for Conway to pull away in the last weeks.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Yash
July 12, 2010 11:38 AM in reply to ronbyers
The problem for Rand Paul (and it seems, so many other Republicans) is the exact opposite, that instead of running a campaign to highlight how he'll help Kentuckians, he's trying to build himself into a national personality like Sarah Palin or Michele Bachmann, who make their fortune off of controversial statements made on Fox News and at fundraising dinners. I'm not totally convinced that Conway can pull it off, but it's certainly not impossible, and defeating Paul (and Sharron Angle in NV) would be a death knell for the abhorrent tea party movement.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
tinsk
July 12, 2010 12:41 PM in reply to Yash
Throw Rubio (R-FL) in that mix and it will be a perfect trifecta.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
July 12, 2010 11:18 AM
How dare the media use Rand Paul's own words against him? It's just not fair. Republicans are allowed by law and custom to be as stupid and unrealistic as they wish to be. The same can't be said about Democrats. They must be willing to shut up and never point out Republican lunacy or they will have to leave the country.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Jim
July 12, 2010 11:30 AM
I think Conway supporters (perhaps dressed as Paul supporters) should blockade all the handicapped parking spots in business parking lots. For according to Paul's ideology, that is the gov't doling out "special rights" to people who were in "accidents". Indeed it is putting the boot on the necks of business owners to provide a certain number of spaces for handicapped people. Let the free market decide where people should park. And if Home Depot wants to charge a little extra for the privilege of parking closer, well that is the price of freedom. Don't "tread" on me
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
sailingaway
July 12, 2010 11:32 AM
Yeah, that forum was hilarious. Conway started by saying he was a fiscal conservative then proceded to favor every pork barrel project favored by the political machine audiance there, particularly when opposed by Paul, including ramped up spending on the federal drug war, you name it. But Jack has always been flexible that way: compare his favoring the Iraq war and the Patriot Act in 2002 to his positions today... but unlike many, he says he is both things at once on budget cutting. I think it is because he has never put any thought into cutting the budget, really, at all.
How can people pretend Rand Paul isn't mainstream when he is leading in the polls? It is just optimistic name calling. The very definition of the word refutes them.
Here is Rand's speech in Frankfort yesterday. How much do you disagree with? http://www.courier-journal.com/section/videoNetwork#/Latest+C%2DJ/Rand+Paul+talks+at+Frankfort%2C+Ky.%2C+Tea+Party+festival/46203188001/45162394001/111449326001
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
sabatia
July 12, 2010 5:37 PM in reply to sailingaway
I watched the Paul piece you linked. My response: In addition to being a Reactionary nutbag, Rand Paul is a typical political lyin' weasel as well--and a little "I'm a victim" whiner too.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
alfredo
July 12, 2010 11:44 AM
Too crazy for Kentucky? Jim Bunning got reelected, same goes for Ernie Fletcher and Geoff Davis. Charlie Manson would stand a good chance if he had an (R) after his name.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Shoryland
July 12, 2010 12:07 PM
It all depends on what kind of crazy.
Crazy as in Dueling Banjos crazy? Nah, that would actually help Paul.
But crazy as in fancy-pants, city-slicker intellectual crazy? That might work. It's worked before. And it certainly applies to Paul.
But Conway's going to have to roll up his sleeves and go hardcore populist.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
johnpdeever
July 12, 2010 1:17 PM
No!
Whether or not earmarks are inherently bad, the Paducah plant ***IS*** inherently bad, people! Here in Ohio, its sister plant in Portsmouth, now closed, polluted the environment and poisoned to death many of its workers in the decades-long manufacture of nuclear weapons.
Aside from the larger argument, Paducah et al. are NOT a government investment we should be wanting Democrats to make!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
RKT
July 12, 2010 1:19 PM
The GOP dream ticket:
Palin as President
Bachman as Vice President
Paul as Court Jester,
Cheney as social director.
Roger Ailes to ensure no actual news gets through (which will make it easier to control the minds of the crew
A single, sensible, responsible Republican to maintan political balance -- perhaps Paul Ryan.
Small team of Blacks, Latinos, and Asians (West and East) to prvide racial and ethnic diverrsity, amnd to provie right-win talk radio asomethin to vociferously complain about.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ibsteve2u
July 12, 2010 1:31 PM
"Rand Paul is a total nutjob" as a strategy?
I wouldn't be so worried about the future of my country if the Democratic - or Independent - strategists had shown any ability to hit any ball other than a fat one thrown right down the middle.
Like Rand Paul.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Ajay
July 12, 2010 3:17 PM
I must be negative but I just dont him loosing. We are talking about Kentucky here afterall. Same goes for Angle in NV. These states in general are clueless.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Unionman
July 12, 2010 3:39 PM
Don't sell Kentuckians short when it comes to irrational, racist and just plain stupid behavior. Hopefully my commonwealth fellows will vote this year from a reasoned and researched position in the Senate race, instead of their general manner; a gut reaction. I know how racist Kentuckians are as a general rule. Rand Paul has all but said he is also a racist, in a capitalist sort of way.
You would think that if one candidate demonstrated his worthiness and capabilities were superior to his opponent this would have some sway in their votes. Nah, what matters in KY is a senator's ability at showmanship as he promises to eradicate socialism (those privatized income sources the tea baggers tells the politically ignorant, the govt wants to eliminate SS, Medicad, ADC etc. are fighting words especially if you explain their genesis and status) and put that uppity president obama in his place. A successful candidate will be one who engages in public tantrums, cleverly crafted calls for sedition etc., in general a do nothing positive senator but always negative conservative politician, will win out unless they take this election as serious as they mean to protect their govt checks.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Chris
July 12, 2010 6:46 PM
Rand Paul is just one of the of the extremists of the Republican Party along with Sharron Angle, Joe Barton, Michelle Bachman and Sarah Palin. If the Democrat's put a package together well, they could promote the Republican Party as a bunch of extremists.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
MBH
July 12, 2010 8:14 PM
I'm not convinced that a Paul victory is a bad thing. Paul is nothing but an articulation of the axiomatic beliefs that run the Republican Party. I say, let's invite those ideas into the open. Hell, Paul would be an excellent Senate Minority Leader in the coming years. Let that man hold on to the microphone.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Boona
July 12, 2010 8:22 PM
Extending wars, carte blanche to assassinate US citizens, support for the ironically named patriot act, lack of basic economic understanding, bailing out BP (Liability Caps are Bailouts once they reach the max), lying about job creation (census mess), increased spending, hidden ACTA talks, the recent Internet kill switch etc etc etc
Rand Paul comes along with the simple message that maybe more government isn't the solution. Maybe having all that centralized power has too many moral hazards. Maybe we've given up too many of our freedoms for perceived security. Maybe it's time to reflect on the net effect of our current government before we blindly decide that it should have more power.
The readers here sound intelligent and intelligent people know that the media tend to present views in a superficial way. Why not look into it a little more before attacking the man? Maybe there is more to it that the media would have you know. It's just an idea.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
HappyTim
July 12, 2010 8:57 PM
Watching to see if Rand Paul destroys his own campaign seems like decent strategy at this point. In a tough cycle, "Not Rand Paul" might sell better than "Generic Democrat".
If his numbers don't slump as voters learn more about him, there's always October for a new strategy.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
July 12, 2010 10:15 PM
This sounds like more of RahmBo 'Dreaming the impossible dream...' I think both he and his boss are gonna get reamed this Fall. And won't the DNC look kinda stupid wearing all that egg if a true Moran like Paul waltzes to a win because President 'Corporate Stooge' thinks he really can bamboozle us with an endless series of speeches followed by dysfunctional and useless 'legislation'.
See it would never do to stop spending 100 Billion a year to subjugate a country whose GDP in 14 Billion per annum. Nor would it do to reinstate Glass-Steagall as it only worked for seventy years. And of course we can't have folks subjecting the Banksters to 'moral hazard' with mortgage write downs. Nope we just gotta keep on keepin' on with 'Change you can believe in...'
Excuse me...
...I need to puke.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
July 13, 2010 12:51 AM
IMO the main reason McCain carried Kentucky was racism and ignorance.
At least with Conway it won't be a racial issue.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?