Robby Wells Calls Out Senator Rand Paul In New Video

2016 independent presidential candidate Robby Wells calls out Senator Rand Paul in his new video, mainly over Paul’s “betrayal” of his father. The video is below:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1THJtI04yE

20 thoughts on “Robby Wells Calls Out Senator Rand Paul In New Video

  1. Krzysztof Lesiak Post author

    “Make no mistake, I’m in this thing to win.” – Robby Wells

    If I ever get a chance to interview this dude on my radio show, oh boy. He’s going to have the toughest interview of his life.

    Also two things:

    1) He’s not going to win. 1,000,000% chance the winner of the 2016 presidential race will be a Democrip or Rebloodlican. (See Jesse Ventura’s book).

    2) He’s not even going to win the Constitution Party nomination if he seeks it… unless all of his fans become CP members and take over the 2016 convention.

    I don’t understand why so many really great, honorable people have jumped on his bandwagon? Can anyone tell me what they see in this guy that’s so great?

    Also, RAND DID NOT SELL OUT HIS FATHER. He endorsed Romney on June 5th, AFTER it became mathematically impossible for Ron Paul to win the GOP nod and he pretty much conceded anyway. And he endorsed him for purely political purposes. His politics are good (with some occasional bad moves, to be sure, like the Iran sanctions).

    If Rand runs in 2016, I’m backing him all the way. I just got my free RP 2016 bumper sticker in the mail today. He’s not going to win the nomination, because the owners of this country (and planet) won’t let him win… but the better he does the better for the Liberty Movement. Just my two cents.

  2. Krzysztof Lesiak Post author

    Just so everyone knows, Wells was my pick for the 2012 CP nod. In fact, almost the entire Illinois delegation supported him.

    However, I’ve become very, very, very skeptical of him.

  3. Rod Stern

    ” in 2016, I’m backing him all the way.”

    I hope you don’t get so caught up in it that you don’t back third party candidates until after the Republican convention. Getting an early start to build momentum is essential for third parties and independents.

  4. Krzysztof Lesiak Post author

    @4

    Oh, I’ll be backing a third party candidate well before the Republican Party nomination process even begins. I know that Rand Paul’s chances of victory are extremely slim. My choice for the CP nod in 2016 is Darrell Castle, who’s indicated he’s interested in running.

    There’s only one announced candidate for the LP nomination in 2016, Darryl W. Perry – however, he is someone I can definitively get behind. I really enjoyed interviewing him, and I think he’s great on the issues, and is really principled as well (see his letter to the FEC).

  5. Rod Stern

    Well, Castle will be an improvement over Goode, and I think he has a good shot at the nomination. I like Perry, but I really doubt the Libertarians will nominate him.

  6. Krzysztof Lesiak Post author

    If Johnson runs again in 2016, he will win. But I hope it won’t be on the first ballot. There has to be more than token opposition to him. I like Johnson and I supported him in 2012…but he shouldn’t be the face of the LP and I don’t think he deserves their nomination a second time in a row. After all, Roger Stone was on his team… enough said. And $1.3 million in campaign debt makes no sense for a libertarian candidate preaching fiscal responsibility!

  7. Rod Stern

    “If Johnson runs again in 2016, he will win. ”

    Depends on who else runs. If it’s a field of unknowns then yes. If it’s e.g. Napolitano, Beck, Ventura, or someone else well known (regardless whether good or bad), not necessarily.

    ” After all, Roger Stone was on his team…”

    Supposedly they have had a falling out, although a bunch of Stone cronies are still on Johnson’s team.

    ” And $1.3 million in campaign debt makes no sense for a libertarian candidate preaching fiscal responsibility!”

    The campaign manager says it was an accounting gimmick and there is no actual debt. Depends on who you believe.

  8. Joshua Fauver

    I don’t believe Darrel will be an improvement upon Goode. Darrel will do the C.P no real favors. The guy makes Ben Stein seem charismatic for one.

  9. Rod Stern

    I’ve seen him speak, and he wasn’t bad. Goode is just embarrassing, and sucks on the issues, such as drug prohibition and medicare among others. I don’t trust his partial conversion on foreign policy, either.

  10. Joshua Fauver

    Isn’t bad? The guy is monotone for one, and softer spoken than any human being I’ve ever heard. Even with a microphone at the convention in Baltimore he was just hard to hear. He won’t excite anyone, I mean no one. Darrel may be better on the issues than Goode was, but he represents what the C.P is, a bunch of grey headed white men. At the convention in Baltimore there were maybe 5 women, the other 45 people in attendance were white grey headed men. There average voter age is in the 60’s. In that regard, Darrel will not be doing the party any favors as their candidate. Expect lower voter turnouts than 2012 if he gets the nomination.

  11. Oranje Mike

    Mr. Wells should focus on his campaign not on Rand Paul. It’s been chic to dump on Rand these past few days despite the fact that his views on drones have not changed as anyone who actually listened to his filibuster instead of the selected bits would know.

  12. Rod Stern

    Actually, he’s smart to try to snap at Rand Paul’s heels. After all, how else will he get noticed?

  13. Rod Stern

    “He endorsed Romney on June 5th, AFTER it became mathematically impossible for Ron Paul to win the GOP nod and he pretty much conceded anyway.”

    Ron Paul did not concede (not even pretty much). There was discussion of this here at the time IIRC. There was really no reason to endorse Romney, or anyone else for that matter. Rand Paul could have kept his endorsement to himself. Given who he endorsed, that would have been best. As for “mathematically impossible,” delegate allocation is a multi-step/level process – the media’s running estimates of delegate totals notwithstanding. Most of that process had not taken place in most states by June.

  14. Krzysztof Lesiak Post author

    I’m not saying I agree with the Rand endorsement, because I obviously don’t. What I am saying is this: Ron Paul’s campaign manager, Jesse Benton (fucking traitor) announced in May that active campaign operations were suspended, misinterpreted by many in the media that he was bowing out. And it was mathemtatically impossible for Ron to win.

    In the grand scheme of things, Rand’s endorsement doesn’t matter. He stated many months before the nomination battle that he would endorse whoever won the party’s nomination. Given Ron’s endorsement of Chuck Baldwin in 2008, he wanted to show that he was a loyal Republican. An endorsement of a third party candidate would’ve have come back to bite him in the ass in 2016.

    But again, I want to emphasize that I vehemently disagree with Rand’s endorsement of Romney, even though I understand why he did it.

  15. Rod Stern

    “And it was mathemtatically impossible for Ron to win.”

    Not mathematically, only practically. But actions of Benton and Rand didn’t help. Ron Paul would have lost anyway, but he would have gotten more press without Benton and Rand undermining his campaign from within.

    ” He stated many months before the nomination battle that he would endorse whoever won the party’s nomination.”

    Then he should have waited for when the nomination was official, or better yet stayed out of it in the first place. Ron Paul didn’t endorse anyone and Rand Paul didn’t have to either.

    ” An endorsement of a third party candidate would’ve have come back to bite him in the ass in 2016.”

    Agreed. He could have just stayed quiet instead. Or at least waited until September.

  16. mARS

    Holy crap. If I didn’t know better, I’d assume this was supposed to be a parody.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *