You can be sure we’ll get some uncomfortable debates if Rand Paul stands-up and deals with foreign and national-security policy. His entrance into the presidential race is a shot across the bow of the war party. Hopefully they’ll have to answer to someone other than Hillary.
Janet Hook writes in the Wall Street Journal:
His entrance in the race also sets up a sharper foreign-policy debate between the candidates, with Mr. Paul taking a more cautious position than many of his would-be competitors. Florida Sen. Marco Rubio and others more openly espouse intervention and the use of force in hot spots abroad than Mr. Paul does, and they oppose Mr. Obama’s opening of diplomatic relations with Cuba, which Mr. Paul endorsed.
After his campaign launch, Mr. Paul set off on a tour of early-voting states that could give him some traction for a long nomination battle: Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada, energetic bastions of support for his father, libertarian icon and former Texas Rep. Ron Paul, when he ran for the GOP presidential nomination in 2012.
One test of Mr. Paul’s candidacy will be how he handles questions about foreign and national-security policy, a central concern for many of his followers, who were galvanized by the antiwar views of Mr. Paul’s father in the past.
Latest posts by E.J. Smith - Your Survival Guy (see all)
- The Bloomberg-led Anti-Gun Movement Could Backfire at the Polls - January 24, 2020
- Democrats Are Unknowingly Working for Team Trump - January 23, 2020
- Virginia is for (Gun) Lovers - January 22, 2020