By spending millions, Rand says, Republicans are being anything but conservative. Republicans claim that the budget needs to be shrunk, but they continually leave the military budget untouched. In addition, regardless of his other views, I think that his moderate foreign policy discussion made sense in attempting to solve the Syrian crisis with the cooperation of the Russian government while dismissing Clinton's no fly zone idea as reckless.
In regards to Trump, he could not stop talking about China and its involvement with the recently published TPP. His entire platform this debate was "China this" and "China that," especially in regard to the new piece of legislation. Paul directly addressed the moderators about this tirade, stating that China was not even a part of this deal, revealing Trump as extremely uninformed.
The entire debate, Paul did a good job distancing himself from the big-government Republicans, distinguishing a unique role in the race. I think that he showed that with every week, huge swings in the polls can result. Who do you think will emerge in the future? Is it possible for Bush, Kasich, or even Christie to make a big recovery like Paul? Do you agree with any of Paul's policies?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/rand-paul-gop-debate-milwaukee_5642dbbbe4b060377346ef28
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/kass/ct-republican-presidential-debate-wrap-kass-met-1112-20151112-column.html
3 comments:
Paul did distinguish himself as a strong speaker in the last debate, pinpointing many of the other candidates weakness and effectively calling into question the entire platform of many Republican candidates. However, I see it as unlikely that Paul or any of the other less favored candidates will emerge in the future as strong candidates. Paul has extreme views that make it difficult for him to earn votes. While some Republicans may agree that government needs to be smaller, Paul takes this to a new level. Senator Rand Paul calls for the shut down of the Department of Education and a complete end to foreign aid. He also believes that marriage should be taken out of the hands of the government. Another interesting point for Paul is that in April he called for a $190 billion increase in Pentagon spending, but is now criticizing other Republicans who are promoting increased military spending. The candidate who wins the Republican nomination has a huge advantage and it is unlikely that the Republicans will vote for someone with such isolationist policies. I see it far more likely that a candidate such as Bush with more centrist and moderate views may be able to make a comeback in the upcoming debates. I do not agree with any of Paul's policies although some of them were well said. His belief that the United States can back out of foreign affairs after decades of policing the world is naive and frankly illogical. Additionally, his request for a shutdown of the Department of Education is concerning. Paul may have had a strong debate but his extremist policies are unlikely to grant him a win in the long run.
Senator Paul's eloquent presentation and level head during this last debate bode well in establishing him as an intelligent and well informed candidate. However, like Gwen, I think that ultimately he will not be winning the Republican nomination; the ticket is much more likely to go to a candidate such as Bush. Nonetheless, I do think this debate will help him in the poles and make him be seen as more of a serious candidate than he has been in the past. Although some of his views are extreme, as Gwen explained he suggestion to drastically shrink the government yet spend $190 billion on the Pentagon, other views of his make him more appealing to moderate voters. Paul stated earlier in the campaign that he is in full support of the pro-life movement, however that he also did not enter this race to just discuss issues such as abortion. This can lead one to believe that, on social issues, he is more likely to sway his stance as he is not nearly as concerned with them as he is with the debt the country is in. Because of this he may appeal to more moderate voters. Additionally, Paul's tactic is to appeal to as many voters as possible; he is working to include college students and African Americans in his coalition. This will either help him greatly or be his downfall because if he tries to appeal to everyone he runs the risk on contradicting himself and may loose all legitimacy. Already contradictions in his policy have been revealed, both in spending as Gwen pointed out and additionally in foreign policy. Paul was ambitions enough to say that he would like to end all foreign aide however went back to make an exception for Israel. While Paul will undoubtedly rise in the polls because of this recent debate, it is highly unlikely for him to win the Republican nomination because of his inconsistent statements due to trying to appeal to such a diverse group of voters.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/rand-paul.html
During the past Republican debate, Rand Paul did a strong job of separating himself from the other Republican candidates. Rand Paul has always had different social views from his fellow Republicans. In the last debate, he called out the other candidates who were trying to spend too much money on certain issues such as immigration. Having always sided with the Tea Party, Paul is incredibly against excessive government spending. He told the other candidates that these policies were far from the typical conservative mentality. This is very interesting because it is rather true however, social issues are completely taking over the campaigns this year so by Rand Paul saying that candidates should ignore social issues is certainly not helping his campaign. But, Rand Paul has ran a few times in the past and usually uses presidential elections as a platform for him to get some of his points across, knowing that he has an incredibly slim chance at winning the Presidency. He has always stayed true to his opinions, which I respect. I agree with Mia that he does not have a legit shot of winning so, by taking a risk like this he is proving a point he believes in to millions of Americans. With all that being said, if Paul were to win the Republican nomination, he would make for a very unusual debate in the sense that he has the ability to appeal to voters of all parties.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/rand-paul.html
Post a Comment