.jpg)
Rand Paul gave his acceptance speech at a private country club in Kentucky. AP Photo
Conservatives were haling the primary victory of Rand Paul as a sign that the Tea Party now has some real political muscle. However, Democrats have an entirely different viewpoint on Paul's primary win. For Democrats, Paul's nomination is an opening to possibly take what before was seen as an "unwinnable" U.S. Senate seat in Kentucky. The primary elections ultimately mean very little if a party ends up losing the general election. Here is the evidence some Democrats point to in support of their argument.
- Paul has already began making some rookie mistakes in his fist political campaign. Paul decided to give his acceptance speech at a private country club in Kentucky. The setting hardly reflected the kind of grassroots, populist message Paul will want to run on in the general election. Democrats seized on the story and Paul was forced to defend his choice location by referencing Tiger Woods. Paul's argument seemed to go something like "Tiger Woods made golf/country clubs non-exclusive so it is acceptable for me to give my acceptance speech there." This is probably the last time that Paul wants to use Tiger Woods as an example to be followed.
- Democrats also believe that Paul's extreme beliefs will make him too conservative even for normal conservatives. Paul has already said that he is in favor of repealing the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Under Paul's reasoning, discrimination should be addressed by local governments not federal government. I am sure Mississippi would have loved to be in charge of their own civil rights legislation in the 1960's and beyond. In addition, Paul has proposed Medicare recipients be force dto pay a $2,000 deductible before receiving benefits. Those kind of proposals will surely not go over well with the elderly population. Paul is already beginning to walk back some of these beliefs, but in doing so he risks being seen as just another politician who can not be trusted.
- Finally, Democrats actually outnumber Republicans in Kentucky by 600,000. Many, including me, assumed Republicans dominated the state, but, in fact, people like Senator Mitch McConnell (R) have won there by convincing conservative Democrats to vote for them. The problem for Republicans is, Paul's viewpoints may actually turn off these conservative Democrats. This is probably why Senator McConnell actually supported Paul's challenger in the race before the primary election. The Democrats have nominated a man named Jack Conway who has won in Kentucky state-wide elections before based on a conservative Democrat platform. Paul may get the Tea Party vote, but it is doubtful he will win if Conway takes the conservative Democrats in the state.
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Comments
Dims take KY because of Paul's win . . . . Bank of America is giving away free $$$$ just for asking, Nobama belongs to john birch society, and jeramiah wright will be elected pope someday!!!!
He NEVER said he would REPEAL the law. He was asked about the law for some odd reason, and is kept being asked, on how he would vote in 1964.
BUT THE YEAR IS 2010! They would rather focus on hypothetical (they are hypothetical, its 2010) than current issues. It disgusts me that this is where we are. Let's not talk issues, let's smear him as a racist! :\
Democrats have very little chance to win in Kentucky, as Rand Paul has stated. Even with the Bush legacy behind him John McCain managed to beat Obama in KY during the presidential campaign. Even Hillary Clinton beat Obama in KY during the democratic primaries.
You liberals dont get it do you? All of you are whistling past the graveyard. The tea party represents most the independants who are tired of fiscal irresponsibility in both parties, and republicans and democrats who feel thier party has abandoned them.
The tea party represents what the silent American majority really wants: control on immigration, control on spending, no to government ownership of companies/bailouts/stimulus. Calling them racist (the typical way for liberals to silence dissent to thier policy) hasn't worked.
Rand Paul is the beginning of what is to come, and the end of big government liberalism. Obamas policies have been attempted in europe in places like Greece, that are now bankrupt.
As Maddow put it, the issue is very relevant for those who got beaten fighting for the right to sit on a "private" lunch counter.
Comments like this show our country has made almost no progress at all and that if a radical like Paul wins, Washington, Jefferson etc. will be turning in their graves.
Linda,
Get over yourself. The racist comments were obviously made by a progressive provocateur. The left are the ones trying to get people of ALL races fighting with each other. The reason they despise the Tea Party is that they(the establishment) can't exist if the people band together to 'out' their criminal behavior.
BTW, Rand Paul is a constitutional libertarian. Exactly who the forefathers would have wanted in government.
I believe the Nigro poster who stated his comments exemplify the view of Paul and the tea party advocates, but, remember his father felt opposed civil war
Mitch: I do sleep at times, and when I do it is impossible to delete comments no matter how racist they are. Don't blame me for some idiot's racist comment. I don't know whether he was real or not. I can tell you that from some of the emails I receive many of the people who don't like me are very much racist, and I delete their comments all the time.
How would the following scenario play out to ACLU-supporting liberals?
A group of hooded/robed Klansmen decide to eat lunch everyday at a diner owned by a black family in a predominantly black neighborhood.The diner is usually frequented by mostly local black patrons that create 99% of the profits of the diner.
The Klansmen don't cause any trouble with the other diners, but their presence causes unease amongst the other diners.
After the third day all of the black patrons of the diner decide to stop eating there just because they don't want to eat with the Klansmen.
The owners of the diner cannot force the Klansmen to leave their establishment because the Klansmen have every right to eat there.
Are the owners of the diner in a better position if they have the right to ask the Klansmen to leave the diner, so that black diners return and the establishment turns a profit, or is it better that the owners of the diner are forced to continue serving the Klansmen until they go broke?
... the owners post a sign forbidding hoods in their establishment, so the Kowardly Klansmen have to reveal their identities.
And things take their natural course from there....
Imagine what the cooks would do to their food!!
The 'Blue Bird of Happiness 'MAY' fly up my nose'.
He!! MAY freeze over.
Witt's dreams 'MAY' come true.
And that 'wall' could be built to keep us 'in'! YIPPEEE!
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!