Sunday, May 11, 2014

Here We Go from Politico: GOP Leaders Reconsider Rand Paul

I have said it before and I say it again, the closer we get to the 2016 presidential primaries, the more Rand Paul will move toward the establishment with regard t his positions. It is getting so bad that even the establishment is recognizing that he is one of them.

Politico writes:
 Not that long ago, most Republican leaders saw Rand Paul as the head of an important faction who, like his father, ultimately had no shot at becoming the party’s presidential nominee.
Now the question is no longer whether Paul can win the nomination, but whether he can win a general election.

The shift follows a year in which the Kentucky senator has barnstormed the country, trying to expand the party’s base beyond older, white voters and attract a following beyond than the libertarian devotees of his father, Ron Paul. Although the job is far from complete, Paul has made undeniable progress, judging from interviews with more than 30 Republican National Committee members meeting...this week.

That he has struck a chord with this crowd is all the more telling because it is heavy with GOP establishment-types who tend to prefer mainstream candidates.

“I don’t see how anyone could say it’s not possible he’d win the nomination,” Texas GOP chairman Steve Munisteri said. “His mission is to convince people of what his coalition would be in November” 2016...

Missouri Chairman Ed Martin said Paul quickly sold out the party’s Lincoln Day dinner in Springfield. Martin was amazed at how it was not just 500 libertarian true-believers who filled a ballroom, but people from every wing of the party.

“He’s a mainstream candidate,” Martin said. “A big question for 2016 is who can draw new people in. Rand has an attraction …

Republican leader say the 2016 primary season calendar could favor Paul, especially the first four states.

Iowa holds caucuses that are likely to be friendlier to Paul than a primary. And in New Hampshire, Paul could benefit from the strong following there for his father...

RNC committeeman Louis Pope, who chaired Romney’s campaign in Maryland, said Paul is likely to be in the final three, in large part because he would corner the libertarian bloc while building on it. “He’s broader than ‘the libertarian candidate.’” Pope said. ”I do see him going further in the process.”...

Paul has been trying to show he’s more of a team player than his father, who never fully endorsed Romney, including after some moves questioned by the establishment.
For instance, he campaigned on Monday in North Carolina for tea party favorite Greg Brannon against establishment-backed Thom Tillis in the GOP Senate primary.
Republican national leaders feared Paul’s last-minute trip could keep Tillis under the 40 percent threshold needed to avoid a runoff.
But once Tillis cleared the threshold, Paul quickly released a statement urging Republicans to unite behind the nominee. This is not the kind of thing Ron Paul would have done.
When I think about Rand Paul, I think about what Ayn Rand said about Friedrich Hayek:
In one letter Rand wrote, "As an example of our most pernicious enemy, I would name Hayek. That one is real poison."  (from The Ayn Rand Cult p.334)
While I don't consider Hayek "real poison," I understand her concern. Like Murray Rothbard, she knew that Hayek was muddying the libertarian message, with his leaks from principle. (SEE: 48 Non-Libertarian Positions Held By Friedrich Hayek). Though Hayek did make some important observations that help advance libertarian understanding, he was not consistent.

Rand Paul is much worse. He is not advancing the libertarian message in any important way. He is always muddying libertarian principle. Mainstream media is taking advantage of this. They portray him as a libertarian, when his positions to the degree they can be pinned down, and that is difficult because of the way he offers opposing opinions on different days (SEE: Rand Paul Equals Barack Obama), are often very far from libertarian principle. Anyone being introduced to libertarianism because of  Rand is getting a very distorted view of what libertarianism is. Further, as he moves toward the establishment, his positions are becoming more of those of a technocrat for the state, rather than that of a libertarian who hates the state (SEE: The Anatomy of the State). It is the opposite of what a libertarian should be doing when running for office. A libertarian running for office should focus on educating the public about libertarianism, not in gaining office. This is what Ron Paul did, it is not what Rand is doing. (SEE: How to Run for Office Like Ron Paul)

1 comment:

  1. Tuckerites creating their own virtual reality, here at Libertapedia:

    "Jeffrey Tucker is editorial vice president of the Ludwig von Mises Institute. He has said, "After Rothbard, I seriously doubt that minarchism has a future in libertarian thought. The anarchism in Austrian ranks is nearly 100% — but the anarchism can exist within a Hayekian, Misesian, Lachmannian, Kirznerian, or even Chicagoite theoretical structure. To be a libertarian anarchist does not necessary mean you are a Rothbardian in all respects, and to be a Rothbardian does not imply unwillingness to learn from others."[

    So you can be a Chicagoite but not a minarchist of the Misesean variety and yet you can also be a Misesean.

    I call BS on this whole business and on Libertapedia too...