Sen. Rand Paul sought Thursday to nix the notion that his father — three-time presidential candidate Ron Paul — thinks Donald Trump will win the GOP nomination this year.

“At this point, it certainly is realistic,” the elder Paul had said of the prospect of a Trump nomination.

Close

The son denied this means his father, a former Republican congressman from Texas, thinks Trump will win.

“In reality, that’s not what he’s saying at all,” the Kentucky Republican senator said. “He went on to say that the polls are very biased and part of entertainment and he doesn’t really believe the polls at all. But I think he was asked a question if it’s a realistic possibility, and, you know, if you’re realistic, it could happen.”

Rand Paul, who spoke during an appearance on “The Laura Ingraham Show,” said he expects his campaign will shock the political world when Iowans vote on Feb. 1. He is betting that voters will favor his strain of limited government.

“Donald Trump represents a different tradition,” he said. “He thinks that he is smart enough to fix all the problems. So he just wants the power. I’m of a different persuasion. I think that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. And I want a limited presidency.”

Paul on Thursday also advocated for even tougher refugee screening requirements than contained in a bill the Senate failed to pass.

The bill would have required three administration officials to personally affirm that each refugee from war-torn Syria and Iraq would not be a security risk. The House passed the measure last year with a majority large enough that a veto override was a very real possibility. But Democrats on Wednesday prevented the Senate version from coming up for a vote.

Paul, like the rest of the GOP caucus, supported the bill. But he said he would have gone even further to apply stricter scrutiny beyond refugees.

“I would have said, we have a list of 34 countries that we think have radical Islamist movements and that there needs to be just more scrutiny,” he said. “I’m not saying no travel. More scrutiny. So we know who’s coming in.”

Who do you think would win the Presidency?

By completing the poll, you agree to receive emails from LifeZette, occasional offers from our partners and that you've read and agree to our privacy policy and legal statement.

Paul said the United States requires all visitors from high-risk countries to use Global Entry, a pilot program that allows travelers to be pre-screened for expedited entry. That would allow the government to welcome legitimate business travelers while blocking potential terrorists, he said.

[lz_related_box id=”68942″]

The Obama administration, which vociferously opposed the Senate screening bill, has argued that refugees already are subjected to the most rigorous vetting of all people coming to the country.

“Well, if that’s true, then I’m very worried about the student visas that are getting less than refugees, fiancé visas that are getting less than refugees,” Paul said. “So we do have to be careful. The first line of defense is protecting our border. And it doesn’t mean we have no admittance. It just means we have to be more careful.”

Paul had been advocating greater restrictions on travel into the United States long before Obama’s Syrian refugee plan elevated the issue. He noted that two people who entered legally tried to buy Stinger missiles in his hometown of Bowling Green, Kentucky. Their fingerprints were in a database, yet they were allowed to enter anyway.


[lz_radio_ad]

Taking a swipe at Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, a rival for the GOP presidential nomination, Paul noted that he tried to amend an immigration bill in 2013 to provide for stricter scrutiny of refugees and foreign students studying in the United States. The Senate voted it down.

“Rubio decided he would side with (New York Sen. Charles) Schumer,” he said. “They blocked all conservative amendments. But I’ve been pushing this for several years now.”

Another unsuccessful proposal Paul made during that debate would have required Congress to certify each year whether the border was secure as a condition for the main immigration provisions taking effect.

“We can’t trust any administration, Republican or Democrat,” said Paul.

The same goes for trusting either party on spending, he said. The loudest voices for spending increases are Republicans, who want additional military spending badly enough that they are willing to cave to Democratic demands on domestic spending.

“We’ve given up the power of the purse,” he said. “So when we raised the debt ceiling, we busted the budget caps. They went up for military and domestic spending. It’s a right-left, unholy alliance.”