Your question number 1- He's a pretty boy. Question number 2- Please don't waste my tax dollars. So being as you are a "big fan", then are you saying you would vote for him for president? FCC.
No...not at all. Obama clearly showed experience is relative.
You ever followed a political race before? Democrats start yelling, "you hypocrites thought inexperience was a disqualifier 8 years ago!" Republicans yell back, "you hypocrites thought inexperience was fine 8 years ago!" Continue ad nauseam. In the end few people make their decision based on it.
Executive experience, absolutely not. But I'm not one that thinks a president must have been a governor or something. All in all, Rand Paul will have more experience in a federal elected position than Obama (6 years compared to 4), but less overall elected experience (6 years compared to 12 years). Obama had a background in constitutional law, which matters to some people, matters not to some, and being in law may be seen as a negative to some. Likewise, community involvement and serving on the board of various organizations was seen by many as positive leadership experience, meaningless to some, and a negative by others. Paul has less "relevant" education, but is a small business owner who ran his own medical practice and founded a clinic to serve those who couldn't afford eye surgery. In all, you can probably conclude that Paul is less experienced than Obama, but I would also conclude that I don't know how much that does or will matter in an election.
TankedCat hit EVERYTHING on the head with that longwinded post. No way I'm reading that.
At least he voted for something he believed in. My personal pet peeve is when someone is so blinded by their party lines that they would vote for anyone......as long as it indentifies with their party.
Rand already breaks from libertarian ideas on abortion, believing in a right to life that begins at conception and seeking an end to abortion. He dances around the issue of marijuana, supporting medical use and reducing criminal penalties for possession, but not legalization. He likewise dances around same sex marriage by simply saying it's a state issue and that the federal government could rework the tax code to where it doesn't pay attention to marriage (which ignores all the other ways marriage matters with respect to the federal government).
Rand saw what speaking plainly about injecting libertarian policy to evangelical republicans did to his father's campaign.
The Christians are easily duped by the (R)'s. I mean, the Democrat voters are lemmings as well, but the Christians are more easily duped because they try to see the good in everybody, much to their chagrin about 1 year into every Republican presidency. I guarantee there are going to be people who vote R because they think their candidate will overturn Roe v Wade.
his personal property ideas would be a big hurdle to overcome. He'd lose the minority vote if he couldn't address it and clear it up early on.
The irony is if R v W was ever overturned there would still be just as many abortions. They would just be more expensive, less safe and you might have to travel longer distances to get one.
LOL
