Mediaboss Marketing

Story highlights Sen. Rand Paul has six events on Wednesday in the important primary state of New Hampshire The Kentucky Republican also did a round of no-holds-barred interviews where he criticized potential opponents 2016 hopefuls have been making increasingly public steps toward running including Jeb Bush and Mitt Romney

It's his first time to the Granite State since he made a two-day swing in October to campaign for Scott Brown, and his fifth visit to the state in the past year.

But this time there's no hiding under the guise of a 2014 surrogate. The Kentucky Republican, who's likely running for president, is roaring to get started as Mitt Romney, Jeb Bush and Chris Christie also make big pre-campaign moves.

Look no further than the blunt criticism Paul offered of his potential rivals on the eve of his New Hampshire trip. In an interview with Politico, Paul knocked Bush as a "Big Government Republican" and argued that Romney already "had his chance."

RELATED: Jeb Bush heads to California fundraisers, some hosted by former Romney donors

In a separate interview with the conservative outlet The Daily Signal, Paul further pounced on Romney for considering a third presidential run, saying the former Massachusetts governor failed to "attract a big enough constituency to win" and that "it's time for some fresh blood."

It was only a few days ago that his top political adviser, Doug Stafford, reacted to the Romney news by telling reporters: "As Senator Paul has said previously, the more the merrier."

Guess not.

In New Hampshire Wednesday, Paul started by meeting with local elected officials for breakfast in Manchester at Murphy's Diner, a local hot spot known for its Captain Crunch French Toast.

Later in the day he attends what's billed as a "Second Amendment Supporter Event" at the Londonderry Fish & Game Club, before touring the Founders Academy, a public charter school in Manchester.

See original here:
In full 2016 mode, Rand Paul starts New Hampshire blitz ...

A funny thing happened last week. As it was becoming even clearer that Jeb Bush would run for president in 2016, a story appeared on the conservative Breitbart.com. It quoted Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) dismissing Bush as a "moderate" and suggesting his support forCommon Core education standards is a deal-breaker in a Republicanprimary.

Paul suggestively questioned "whether (Republicans)want Common Core, whether they want more spending, more taxes, whether they want a candidate who will not pledge to not raise taxes."

It was hissecond thinly veiled attack on Bush in less than amonth. In mid-December, when Bushannounced he would "actively explore" a bid, Paul's PAC took out Google adsfor those who searched for Bush's name. The ads said,Join a movement working to shrink government. Not grow it," and "We need leaders who will stand against common core."

These are notisolated incidents. More than just about any major contender for president in 2016, Paul has signaled a willingness to mix it up. And plenty of folks are only so happy to oblige -- even baiting Paul to hit back.

In fact, with the 2016 campaign not even officially started, Paul hasalready tangled with most of the major 2016 contenders on at least one issue or another. In summary:

Bush: See above

Marco Rubio: He called the Florida senator an "isolationist" for supporting the Cuba embargo and being opposed todiplomatic relations.

Chris Christie: The two argued repeatedly about privacy concerns versus national security, with Paul eventuallycalling New Jersey's governorthe "King of Bacon."

Ted Cruz: After Cruz said his own foreign policy was more Reagan-esque than Paul's, Paul wrote an op-eddenouncing the Texas senator,saying he misrepresentedReagan's legacy (without actually naming Cruz).

Rick Perry: The Texas governorspotlighted Paulin a foreign policy op-edagainst isolationism -- a term Paul rejects -- and Paul fought back with his own op-ed,saying "apparently (Perry's)new glasses havent altered his perception of the world, or allowed him to see it any more clearly."

Here is the original post:
A list of the many 2016 candidates Rand Paul has (already ...

This article originally appeared on Slate.

MANCHESTER, New Hampshire--Rand Paul loves the free market, and in a one-day five-stop New Hampshire tour, the Kentucky senator dispensed his praise for it like water from an aspergillum. At Murphy's Diner, when the morning hour matched the temperature on the street, he said the free market was the solution to shrinking the budget and strengthening the economy. At lunchtime, in the Quonset hut of the Londonderry Fish and Game Club, he preached to the standing-room-only crowd about "the freedom to own things." In the library at the Founders Academy, a charter school with rules for proper behavior written on a yellow sheet on the wall and volumes of Shakespeare stacked like sandbags, he argued that market competition among states should replace Common Core education standards.

Play Video

As Sen. Rand Paul continues to build a campaign base for a possible 2016 presidential bid, the politician reacted to a possible GOP rival in Mitt...

So of course he has a free market answer to the growing size of the Republican presidential field. "The more the merrier," he said as we talked in the "primary room," across the hall from the Manchester mayor's office at City Hall where the walls are decorated with buttons, yard signs, and newspapers from previous elections. (A placard in the room reads, "Assume that cameras and audio are always recording," which is good advice--and nearly encapsulates Paul's view of government surveillance).

It's good for the voters to have choices, says Paul, and it seems like Republican voters have more every day. Mitt Romney is seriously considering a run. Former three-term New York Gov. George Pataki just visited New Hampshire to see if anyone remembers him. South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham is making soundings. It's getting to be the case that the R next to a politician's name stands for "Running for president." "I saw in the paper recently they listed who might run for the Republican primary," said Paul. "It was like the whole page."

Play Video

Republican Congressman Paul Ryan says he won't be running for president in 2016, but Mitt Romney says he is considering running again. If he does...

But Paul isn't just being ideologically consistent when he says, "More the merrier." He's happy to see the others split the vote. On the establishment side of the party, Mitt Romney, Jeb Bush, and Chris Christie will fight for the share of voters who want a pragmatist with executive experience. Social conservatives will splinter between Rick Santorum, Ted Cruz, and Mike Huckabee. Paul will have relatively less competition for the libertarian conservatives of the kind who supported his father in the state in 2012, when Rep. Ron Paul came in second to Mitt Romney with 23 percent of the vote.

But the son is not the father. To make that clear he has said his father will not be campaigning with him. Sen. Paul's foreign policy views are less confrontational and isolationist than his father's are, and he is running a more traditional campaign, assembling constituency groups, not just relying on tribal loyalism. At Murphy's, Paul talked to small government legislators, at the gun club it was Second Amendment enthusiasts, and at Founders it was education activists. You could almost see the chart on which the careful constituent tending had been mapped out.

Read more:
John Dickerson: Rand Paul in the land of the free

Washington Rand Paul took a pretty sharp dig at possible/probable 2016 rival Mitt Romney on Wednesday. In an interview with the NH Journal, Senator Paul noted that this would be Mr. Romneys third try at the Oval Office if he runs, and then said, When you do the same thing and expect a different result, its sort of what Einstein said, that the definition of insanity is to do the same thing over and over again and expect a different result.

Thats right, Paul pretty much flat-out said that Romney would be bonkers to mount another presidential campaign.

Should he have said this? We think not.

Yes, its not far from what lots of Republicans are saying about Romneys surprise interest in 2016. But technically speaking, its inaccurate. Trying something three times and expecting a different result is not the definition of insanity. If it were, everybody who is certain that they know their Netflix password, and that it will work this time if he or she just types it in harder, or more carefully, would be certifiable.

Thats millions of people.

Also, Einstein probably never said this. Like lots of stuff on the Internet, this is a quote that seems vaguely wise and is attributed to a famous person to give it extra power, but nobody really knows where it came from. Ben Franklin didnt say it, either. Neither did Mark Twain.

But this is carping. The real reason Paul should not have resorted to this faux-Einstein chestnut is that its quite likely he (Paul) would benefit if Romney ran. He should be encouraging Mitt to get the gang back together. He should be offering to endorse Romney, or even run the sign-up papers down to the FEC if Romney has to stay home to wait for the car elevator repairman.

Why would Paul be better off with Romney re-redux? Long story short, Romney and Jeb Bush split the GOP establishments votes, money, and endorsements. Paul sticks with his own identifiable, libertarian niche. Hes a unique figure in the race, points out Thursdays Wall Street Journal.

As the field of potential Republican presidential candidates grows, few stand to benefit from the added competition as much as Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, write the WSJs Janet Hook and Patrick OConnor.

In particular, Romney could siphon support from Mr. Bush in the early-primary state of New Hampshire, where the former Massachusetts governor maintains a summer home. The Granite State is also fertile ground for Pauls brand of libertarianism, meaning that he could pull off a surprise win or a strong second in the event of a Romney-Bush clash.

More:
Rand Paul calls Romney 2016 bid 'insanity.' Counterproductive? (+video)

"Over half of the people on disability are either anxious or their back hurts," said Paul, who is an ophthalmologist. "Everybody in this room knows somebody who's gaming the system."

In full 2016 mode, Rand Paul starts New Hampshire blitz

Those are some pretty hefty accusations that feed into the standard conservative line that social security is another mismanaged, abused and bloated government program. And of course, Democrats didn't skip a beat in going after him for the comments.

But let's dig into Paul's claims.

Are more than half the people receiving disability checks from the government cashing in on back pain and anxiety?

Paul may have gotten a little bit carried away with all this talk of government waste and abuse when he got into the disability figures.

The share of back pain and anxiety sufferers doesn't crack 50%, not even when you lump in the broader categories of "mood disorders" --14% of disability beneficiaries -- and "musculoskeletal system and connective tissue" diseases, which account for 29% of total beneficiaries.

You can even add in the 4.9% of people receiving disability checks for "injuries" and you still don't reach Paul's 50% threshold.

How common are back pain and anxiety anyway?

Back pain is a pretty pervasive issue in the U.S. In fact, it's the leading cause of disability in Americans under 45 years old according to the National Center for Health Statistics. And 26 million Americans aged 20 to 64 experience frequent back pain -- that's just more than 8% of the U.S. population.

See the article here:
Fact-checking Rand Paul's disability claims