Discussion: Rand Paul's Tax Policy Page Bizarrely Disappears From Campaign Website

Discussion for article #235138

Probably just a false flag operation. //


Logic and common sense would say; “Pack it up Randal and save yourself the money, trouble and embarrassment.”

But the writers at SNL are saying:“Run Rand Run!!!”


I actually support a flat tax…so long as it is on all money a person, business or corporation earns, no loopholes, no deductions, no moving to tax shelters, no accounting tricks to move money over seas.

Of course, Rand Paul doesn’t support that. He supports making sure that the US government becomes just like Kansas’.


SamE LIbtard CONSPIracY that HACked HIS weBSITE, speLLED edUCAtion WRONG and lOADEd alL thOSE crazY avaTArs.


Watched the You Tube skit. It’s basically the same ole, same ole – Cut Taxes. " … will be the largest tax cut in American history." Dude, how do you plan on paying for the expansion of the military and the war on Iran you are now supporting? Could it be your numbers do not/cannot come close to adding up at all, much less in the five years you suggested – and that is why your Tax Policy Page has disappeared? If so, be a real man, a serious candidate and admit you need to revisit your budgeting and what is and is not realistic. If you did that, lots of potential supporters might take you more seriously.


They shouldn’t ever take him seriously after reading Josh’s latest post about him. What a whacko.


What a stunning surprise that a brilliant plan to raise taxes on the bottom 60-70% of wage earners and cut taxes on the 1% would go down the memory hole a couple of days after he declares his candidacy. I would have thought it would have vanished at least a couple of weeks, if not months, earlier.

It’s almost as if he’s a total boob who thinks beating a Democrat in Kentucky in a wave year equips him to run a competent presidential campaign.


TPM Headline Writer Bizarrely Used Bizarrely To Describe the Page’s Removal

I’d save “bizarre” for some of Rand’s positions still posted on the site, such as:
As President of the United States, I will work to balance our budget and only spend what comes in.


Stock repub response is “cut taxes”. It’s a reflex you see. Generally the result of cutting taxes is less revenue for the government and therefore a higher deficit. As in Bush’s tax cut for the wealthy resulting in a $750 billion hole in the budget in 2008. Or we could use Sam Brownback’s Kansas as an example. Less revenue means things like public schools suffer as a result. Which is fine by republicans.


Isn’t it cute how they think something they put on the internet can be removed later and nobody else has a copy.


If we’d had a balanced budget amendment in 1942 we’d all be speaking German.


Yeah, that’s the ticket. And then those same hackers added this to Rand Paul online store, which is totally not fair and an existential threat to liberty and the free market and stuff:


“stand with Rand in official campaign flip flops”

Now that’s some genius level trolling.


The only thing Rand has done since announcing his candidacy is that he is really, really, really bad at this whole campaigning thing.


Breaking: Rand Paul quits the Presidential campaign saying “Because I love America, in this time of war, I feel I have to stand aside for our party and our country.”

1 Like

Hey, it’s like is said above: it is bizarre. It’s bizarre he didn’t scrub it off his website long before he announced.


It is hard to know what his plan is from a cached front page, but according to the facts listed there:

17% flat tax, no tax on dividends, interest, capital gains, etc.
Social Security payroll tax exemption for low and middle incomes

And budget projection for 2015:

3.3 trillion revenue
32% from payroll taxes
46% from individual income taxes
So a 17% flat tax would give a tax cut of approximately

3.3*.32*.17/.145 - 3.3*.46, or about 280 billion dollars. Does the other 400 billion come from corporate taxes? Well, that would be almost the entire corporate tax burden. Or is the 400 billion coming from the payroll tax exemption? One wonders how he would make that up, or whether this is part of his attacking Social Security.

So, maybe the numbers add up, but it would assuredly be embarrassing to try to explain them.


I love seeing them try to rebrand Supplyside economics over and over again. How does that go again…um trying the same thing over and over again in hope of a different result is…


Almost as stupid as the Cruz campaign not locking down the domain names of every possible variation on “Ted Cruz”.
It might have been excusable in 1995; it’s not today.


Back up the truck.

1 Like