Mediaboss Marketing

Rand Paul tells theWashington Posts Dave Weigel that Thursdays Republican presidential debate will pit himagainst rivals who want to blow up the world. He has reason to use stark language. After weeks of negative press, single-digit poll numbers, and lackluster fundraising, Senator Paul needs a Giuliani momentsomething that will do for his campaign what a showdown with Americas mayor did for his fathers effort after the first debate of 2007.

In fact, Rand Paul has the opportunity to do much more than his father ever could. But hes missing it: Rands Giuliani moment is the Iran deal, and it calls for action, not words.

Rands support forthe deal would transform the politics of the Republican race at a stroke.He would also risk losing rather than gaining supportwhen the deal was announced, 30 percent of Republicans supported it, and those votes could have been Rands. Polls since then have been mixed and most indicate Republicans oppose the diplomatic effort, evenoverwhelmingly so.

But thats where the Giuliani example is relevant: no pollster or campaign professionalwould have told Ron Paul to stand up to Giuliani like thaton an issue, national security and terrorism, that Giuliani owned and where Republican voters overwhelmingly disagreed with the Texas congressman. But Ron Paul did it anyway, and in so doing he pulled off something political pros usually believe is impossible or irrelevant: he changed voters minds.

He didnt change nearly enough to win a single primary, of course, either in 2008 or in 2012. But Rand Paul starts from a stronger position and higher profile than his father had before that debate. If Rand dared, instead of being yet another single-term senator vying for the nomination, he could overnight become the most important player in the GOPon the biggest foreign-policy issue of the day. Hed get invited to every talk show as the one Republican with the audacity to side with the president to make a deal for peace. Hed be denounced, too, by every neocon outlet. In other words, hed get the full-spectrum attentionthat Donald Trump now commands, knocking himout of the headlines, if not off the top of the polls.

Hed also be a legislative leader, a man Democrats and Republicans alike would have to court ahead of the vote on Iran. The pressure would be extraordinary, but if he stood by his support for the deal, he would have a polarizing and rallying effect, bringing other Republicans aroundhowever many could be brought aroundand shattering the GOPpro-war consensus that the neoconservative media has worked so hard to create.

Rand would perhaps even be in a position to demand legislative concessions from the Democrats and Obama; leadership would also be leverage. That might not be enough to defund Planned Parenthoodbut consider what the public would be presented with if Rand Paul clearly supported the president on issues like Iran and sentencing reform but clearly separated from Obama and the Democrats on abortion and taxes. Hed give all voters something to think about, cutting across the left-right divide that has only meant defeat for Republicans in the last two presidential elections.

Instead, the strategy Rands team have devised for him is much more cautious, and its dividend so far has been dwindling support. But it doesnt matter if a candidate drops into the single digits in the pre-primary season, and even if Rands fundraising could be betterBush, Cruz, and Rubio beat him easily last quarterhes still a top-tier candidate. His playbook is to win on bread-and-butter Republican issues, demonstrating his support for tax cuts by literally cutting through the tax code with a chainsaw, courting Christian conservatives by calling for an end to federal funds for Planned Parenthood, keeping his libertarian supporters on board by opposing the NSAs domestic surveillance, and reaching out to several groups at onceincluding libertarians, Christians, and some liberalswith criminal-justice reform.

His approach to two thorny questionsimmigration and foreign policyhas been in line with this bread-and-butter strategy. Theres a vocal and somewhat large bloc of voters who say they want to restrict immigration, and while they may not tend not to vote in such a way as to prove their commitmentTom Tancredo would have been a force in 2008 if they did, and John McCain would not have been the GOP nomineean appeal to restrict immigration certainly wont lose Rand many primary votes. By contrast, explicit noninterventionist appeals wont win many: there arent legions of foreign-policy voters to begin with, and what few there are in the Republican Party are mostly hawks.

The logic of this play-it-safe strategy is impeccable. But its a logic that works against Rand Paul: after all, if voters want a bread-and-butter Republican, they have better options. Ted Cruz is a better orator, Marco Rubio is more charismatic, Scott Walker has an executive record. Christian conservatives arent going to choose Rand Paul over spiritual kin like Ben Carson and Mike Huckabee just because Rand, like the rest of the field, is antiabortion. (For one thing, the religious right suspects that in his bones Rand Paul is just too libertarian to fight till he bleeds againstsame-sex marriage.) Pauls foreign-policy maneuvering, meanwhile, has the curious effect of leaving him the candidate least liked by hawks but no longer much loved by doves. What his campaign team has devised isactually a winning strategy for Scott Walkeror even Jeb Bush.

Visit link:
Is Rand Paul Missing His Giuliani Moment? | The American ...

Story highlights Paul has been leading the fight in Congress to pull federal funding for Planned Parenthood Paul also touched upon his foreign policy views and Donald Trump

"I support any legislation that will defund Planned Parenthood. But I don't think you start out with your objective to shut down government," Paul told CNN's Jake Tapper in an interview aired Sunday on "State of the Union."

Paul introduced a bill to defund Planned Parenthood this week after the release of videos that accuse the nonprofit of selling fetal tissue.

The number of lawmakers calling for the government to stop giving hundreds of millions of dollars to Planned Parenthood is growing. On Thursday, 18 lawmakers sent a letter to Republican leadership calling for the organization's funding to be tied to spending legislation and vowed not to support any spending bill until the nonprofit no longer receives government funds.

"I mean if President Obama wants to shut down government because he doesn't get funds for Planned Parenthood, that would be President Obama's determination to shut down government," Paul told Tapper.

But with many Americans expressing concern about Planned Parenthood's practices, Paul said the group should no longer receive taxpayer dollars.

"A lot of people, even a lot of pro-choice people, are upset by these videos," Paul said. "I think most Americans don't want their tax dollars going to this. So I think when something is so morally repugnant to so many people, why should tax dollars go to this?"

Paul said funding currently going to Planned Parenthood should go to 9,000 community health centers "that do everything that Planned Parenthood does, but they don't get into abortions."

"I do support a role for government in community health centers. The specific bill, including it in Obamacare, obviously, would make it such that I can't support that particular bill," he said. "But supporting some funding for community health centers, I think, is reasonable. And there are people who do need help."

Paul also touched upon his foreign policy views, which have been criticized by Republicans who frequently call him weak on fighting ISIS. The senator fired back, saying many of his opponents supported the U.S. military entering conflicts that he said have actually helped terrorists.

Read more:
Rand Paul: Shutdown not the goal

Story highlights The most recent national poll conducted by Quinnipiac University found that Trump was well ahead of others in the 16-person field Paul took a longer view of the race and, like many Republicans, ultimately dismissed Trump

"Television works, Wolf," Paul told CNN's Wolf Blitzer. "If you would give some other candidates time from eight in the morning to eight at night all day long for three weeks, I'm guessing some other candidates might rise as well."

The most recent national poll conducted by Quinnipiac University found that Trump was well ahead of others in the 16-person field, with 20% support. Paul is jammed in with the second tier of Republican candidates earning between 4% and 6% support.

Blitzer asked Paul why his support was lagging right now. Paul immediately blamed the free airtime Trump was getting.

RELATED: GOP top tier breaking away, led by Donald Trump, poll finds

"So, for example, while some people are hearing about one candidate all the time, very few people know I've offered a tax code, that you could fill out your taxes on one page (at) 14.5%," Paul said. "So if I had a billion dollars' worth of advertising and every network going gaga over that, I think we could get our (poll numbers) to rise also."

But Paul took a longer view of the race and, like many Republicans, ultimately dismissed Trump.

"But there's going to be time for that," Paul said. "I think this is a temporary loss of sanity, but we're gonna come back to our senses and look for somebody to lead our country at some point."

Here is the original post:
Rand Paul: Media to blame for Donald Trump's surge in polls

Rand Paul, once seen as a top-tier contender, finds his presidential hopes fading fast as he grapples with deep fundraising and organizational problems that have left his campaign badly hobbled.

Interviews with more than a dozen sources close to the Kentucky senator, all of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity, painted a picture of an underfunded and understaffed campaign beaten down by low morale.

Story Continued Below

They described an operation that pitted a cerebral chief strategist against an intense campaign manager who once got into a physical altercation with the candidates bodyguard. And they portrayed an undisciplined politician who wasnt willing to do what it took to win a man who obsessed over trivial matters like flight times, peppered aides with demands for more time off from campaigning and once chose to go on a spring-break jaunt rather than woo a powerful donor.

They sketched a portrait of a candidate who, as he fell further behind in polls, no longer seemed able to break through. Paul, lionized as the most interesting man in politics in a Time magazine cover story last year, was supposed to reinvent the Republican Party with his message of free-market libertarianism, his vision of a restrained foreign policy and his outreach to minorities.

Instead, he has been overshadowed by louder voices like Donald Trumps and better-funded figures like Jeb Bush. His theory of the 2016 primary that Republican voters would reward a candidate who promised fresh ideas and an unconventional approach has not been borne out in reality.

At Pauls campaign headquarters on Capitol Hill, morale has begun to sink. At least one key aide recently departed, and others have had conversations with rival campaigns.

Its such a negative environment, said one Paul aide. Everyone is on edge, and no one is having any fun. They need to recapture some of their positive mojo, and fast.

***

Easily the biggest problem confronting Paul is his fundraising or lack thereof. Paul has taken in just $13 million, a fraction of what all of his major rivals for the Republican nomination have raised and far less than Paul hoped.

More here:
Rand Paul 2016: Inside his campaign's downward spiral ...

This story has been updated.

Matthew Pagano might have found the perfect summer job. It helped to have the right resume: Pagano, 27, got his start at Young Americans for Liberty in central Florida. He left that organization, founded by former Texas congressman Ron Paul, to join Paul's presidential campaign. From there he moved from campaign to campaign, part of a generation of libertarian-minded politicos inspired by Paul and his son, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.). And last month, Pagano became one of 40 full-time organizers in Iowa, working to elect Paul, for $4000 per month.

But Pagano's job isn't with the Paul campaign. It's with Concerned American Voters, a super PAC recently refurbished by YAL president Jeff Frazee and former FreedomWorks president Matt Kibbe, with the explicit goal of winning Iowa for Paul. On Wednesday, the super PAC will announce that it raised $2 million in just a month of existence, despite some static with Paul's preferred America's Liberty PAC. Organizers like Pagano are trying to build a powerful network even before the Paul campaign can execute its plans.

"The main thing is build up a list of defined Rand supporters, and to gather ID on Republicans for the caucuses," Pagano said. "It's a campaign job. You put in 10-hour days, seven days a week. I've been everywhere from Orange City to the Missouri border."

The strategy of Concerned American Voters -- and its complication for the main Paul campaign -- was borne out in this month's FEC reports. While the super PAC cannot coordinate with Paul, it could in theory communicate with America's Liberty PAC. There had been hope of jointly releasing the AL and CAV numbers this week, to reveal a total of $5.1 million in outside money for Paul. Instead, CAV's totals are coming after a spate of negative stories based on what National Journal called "the smallest sum of the 10 Republican super PACs to reveal their fundraising figures so far."

Concerned American Voters is trying to open the wallets of donors who might find those stories... well, concerning. Its FEC report will reveal a donation from Silicon Valley angel investor Scott Banister. Whole Foods founder John Mackey has also reportedly chipped in. Donors are told that Concerned American Voters will avoid any media spending, and use tactics pioneered by insurgent Republican campaigns to wire Iowa in advance of the caucuses. They also assure donors that they will not waste effort on contacting voters already won over by the Paul campaign.

"Theres no such thing as too much grassroots," said Kibbe. "When I was in Nevada for [the annual libertarian conference] Freedomfest I was literally inundated by activists who wanted to help Rand.Im not getting any concerns that Rand isnt worth investing in. I think they want to see the roadmap to victory, andRand is a great field test for the new rules of politics. The old rules were about name ID, about how much money you could raise for establishment bundlers. Insurgent candidates don't need all of that."

The official Paul campaign had not really celebrated the launch of Concerned American Voters. One more super PAC looked, on the surface, like one more place for donors to park money outside of the preferred Paul network. That was before the aligned campaigns for Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) and Gov. Scott Walker (R-Wis.), who also have Iowa in their sights, raised significantly more money. The rebel PAC is now promising to out-organize everyone in the state, with other change to Paul's strategy or messaging. In the last weeks, the ice between official Paulworld and alternative Paulworld has thawed.

"Matt Kibbe and Jeff Frazee have a proven track record in grassroots activism," Paul said in a statement Wednesday. "I have known them both for many years and have always been impressed with their work and their enthusiasm for shared message. Their organization, along with others already working on the outside, will be a great asset in delivering the message of liberty on the ground and online."

Correction: This post originally incorrectly attributed Paul's statement to spokesman Sergio Gor.

Read the rest here:
In Iowa, Rand Pauls unofficial army plans to win the ...