Rand’s endorsement of self

Sen. Rand Paul had to know his endorsement of Mitt Romney would carry little weight with supporters of his father’s Presidential campaign, especially those of a more libertarian mindset or those with no long-standing loyalties to the GOP . Then again maybe that’s the idea.

Not that Rand wouldn’t eventually endorse the GOP nominee whoever it was as a party member and sitting U.S. Senator. What surprised many Paulities was how soon and how enthusiastic he was about it and he how plans actively campaign for Romney in the fall. In so doing he will be on the record supporting the foreign policy platform of the Romney campaign which is diametrically opposed to the things his father beliefs in and ran his campaign’s on. Indeed, some may wonder if Ron Paul so far can’t bring himself to make such an endorsement, then why is Rand so eager?

Obviously a lot of this has to do with Rand’s ambitions for 2016. He wants to be seen as a party man, of mainstreaming the Paul movement inside the party. Indeed the charge is out there that the Paul 2012 campaign had a tactical alliance with the Romney campaign to refrain from attacking each other, an insurance policy which guranteed even if Paul lost he would not be shut out of the GOP convention in 2012 unlike 2008 and his supporters would find a place inside the party. Recent events in Louisiana and Massachusetts lends some weight to these theories. 

But this process was happening already and didn’t require kow-towing to the Romney campaign. Paul supporters have already taken over several state parties this election cycle and their influence has grown steadily in five years. The fact many of these supporters are under the age of 45 means inevitably the future of the GOP belongs to the movement centered around Paul regardless what happens in 2012 or even 2016 for that matter. There’s no need to do anything more for Romney outside of a profunctionary endorsement and there’s certainly nothing Romney would be willing to offer (Rand will not be the Vice-Presidential nominee), short of jettisoning his entire foreign policy advisory staff and promising that neither John Bolton or Joe Lieberman will ever be in a Romney cabinet to make the endorsement a meaningful one for Ron Paul’s supporters to move into Romney’s camp enthusiastically. He can’t deliver, so why pay? Being a vice-presidential nominee on a losing ticket would badly damage Rand’s chances in 2016 and the brutal reality is a  Romney victory would be a disaster for Paul supporters as the first thing the Romney and the RNC will do is to regain control over GOP state parties they’ve lost to the Paulites.

Ultimately this endorsement has everything to do with Rand and how he perceives his political future. And it’s my guess he and those around him who helped him win his Senate campaign in 2010 (like Jesse Benton for example, Rona Paul’s son-in-law and 2012 campaign manager) sees that future without the grassroots supporters which basically created the Paul movement from scratch back in 2007. After all, his Senate campaign was not exactly a grassroots operation. It was professionally run outfit with help from GOP operatives, many of whom now work for Romney. They can easily work for Rand four years from now. One gets the sense Rand and his inner-team wish to rid themselves of people they can’t control, that they believe embarrass them and whom they view as fanatics, unwilling to play the political game.

That’s fine, Rand can do what he wishes. He can even mow Mitt’s lawn if he thinks it will make him more popular with the in-crowd. But he should remember a lot of ordinary people willingly sacrificed their money and their time to create a movement without which Rand would not be where he is today. If he thinks he’s beyond such supporters then he can find someone else to make phone calls for him. Of course, they have robots now which do those sort of things don’t they?

delicious | digg | reddit | facebook | technorati | stumbleupon | chatintamil

20 thoughts on “Rand’s endorsement of self

  1. RedPhillips

    I don’t know what Rand thinks he is accomplishing. No Ron Paul supporter who wasn’t going to support Romney is going to now with Rand’s endorsement, but all the Ron supporters who had doubts about Rand are now going to be crowing, “See, I told you so.”

  2. TRY

    “The fact many of these supporters are under the age of 45 means inevitably the future of the GOP belongs to the movement centered around Paul regardless what happens in 2012 or even 2016 for that matter.”

    If immigration isn’t fixed there is no future for the GOP.

  3. RedPhillips

    BTW, all the 2016 talk about Rand seems to assume Romney is going to lose. I think Romney is probably going to win, so Rand may have sold his soul for no imminent reason anyway.

  4. Matt Weber

    Rand is trying to mainstream Paulism and prove that he isn’t a crank. What I wonder is why there is so much speculation about the VP. The position is so unimportant that in the past it was given to the runner-up.

  5. C Bowen (Hawthorne)

    Kentucky’s coal producers were punished severely by the Obama natural gas/oil interests; I am sure Rand acted in the interest of his people. Border states are what they are, for always.

    I am going to pass on speculating too much, but one was hoping for a more inspiring syntax.

    TRY;

    Immigration could be fixed tomorrow, and the demographic fate is still sealed–that line needs to be updated from The 1973 Edition of the Conservative Political Lexicon.

  6. Augustinian

    As a Kentuckian, I’m somewher between dismayed and disturbed by Rand’s endorsement. Yes, he could’ve (should’ve?) waited and given a rather perfunctory endorsement. Nothing to gain, indeed …

  7. Dylan Hales

    The bad part wasn’t the endorsement itself which was inevitable. It was his nodding in approval as Hannity lied about the stark differences between Romney and Obama on “Obamacare” and his statement that Romney was “mature” on foreign policy. Not even a drug addicted, lunatic believes Romney is anywhere near Ron Paul on foreign policy, which means either Rand is now a fervent devotee of the American imperial order, he is profoundly mentally retarded, or he is a serial lying fraud. I see no fourth option

  8. C Bowen (Hawthorne)

    Mr. Hales;

    Why not ‘he got a good deal’, perhaps for his people? Lets not be naive about politics, democratic politics. None of this stuff means anything–Hannity? Please.

    I retain a bit of faith that Ron and Carol Paul raised their children as best they could, that his children are classically educated, that We may yet get our (Braveheart version) of Robert the Bruce, portrayed as first a betrayer, and then a hero with “you bled with Wallace, now bleed with me.”

    The beauty of our thing is that it wants more then ever has been asked in American politics–many don’t realize this yet, and still reach back to a mythical past. Ronald Reagan, after winning the New Hampshire primary, actually fired his campaign manager and hired this guy, William Casey, who happened to be CFR establishment. Then he took on a former Trilat, George Bush, as VP–conservatives were routed and confused. But by what? Reagan’s record as Governor of California was horrific by any standard.

    And the forefathers who overthrew the Articles of Confederation and forced a DC-centralized government and the assumption of state paper money debts–wow, some aspiration, yeah, bring back the Constitution. (I trust Lincoln has already been routed so I don’t need to include him in the timeline.)

    I don’t know about you, Mr. Hales, but at one time or another, I have had to mouth the PC platitudes, play 3rd class citizen to a fellow protected co-worker–and humiliation after humiliation. Let the Pauls suffer in peace, and if you take to the act, pray for their eternal souls for ever bothering to get mixed up in this awful business.

    Satan was the first democrat, as a friend likes to say.

  9. Timothy Yung

    Why do you think Ron Paul approved this? Rand Paul is an adult and Ron Paul is a pro-liberty guy which means he is not going to dictate the actions of his son.

  10. Dylan Hales

    What possible “good deal” did Rand get? I suppose if he is a pro politician – and he clearly is – he may have gotten a great deal to forward his goals to achieve more power. But that does not mean that he isn’t a liar, when he obviously is one.

  11. Ryan S

    I no longer lend any support or credence to a Rand Paul presidency in 2016. I wouldn’t support it.

    I wish Ron would just run as an independent, split the vote, and continue process of disrupting the RNC convention in interim. Yes, it’s a fool’s errand to anticipate victory. But it sends a message to GOP on 2016 election that they cannot continue running moderate-liberals and courting the vote of principled Tea Party crowd.

    I do NOT anticipate Romney winning the election even with Paul out. Broad-based polls can be misleading that favor Romney, as the broad-based geographic distribution of individual votes in the U.S. has long favored Republicans for decades, but the big cities bring home the elections, especially in the Northeast, upper Midwest, and Left Coast. Obama has the electoral college (http://www.270towin.com/), markets and gambling bookies predicted the 2008 election, and it doesn’t favor Romney. Sure people are disaffected with Obama, but they’re disaffected by the GOP too; voter turnout won’t be high in 2012. People have less faith in political processes.

  12. Sean Scallon

    Right now the election map favors Obama for the same reason it favored Bush II at this time eight years ago. Incumbent presidents have a natural advantage in the polls which may pull Obama through if nothing severely bad happens to him. Now this is not to say Romney can’t win, he certainly can if an event or series of events undermines public confidence in Obama and the goodwill incumbent President have with the public. Nobody wants to see them fail unless it is clear they are not up to the job and then it’s up to the opposition candidate to close the deal.

  13. Jack Hunter

    I don’t want to get into every argument here, but know this: Anyone who thinks Sen. Paul doesn’t care about holding on to his father’s supporters is dead wrong. It is a major concern.

  14. Pingback: Reaction to the Rand Paul Endorsement of Romney | Independent Political Report

  15. Pingback: | Conservative Heritage Times

  16. Sean Scallon

    “Anyone who thinks Sen. Paul doesn’t care about holding on to his father’s supporters is dead wrong. It is a major concern.”

    Maybe it is Jack, you certainly know the internal campaign situation better than I do. But he’s going about in an awfully strange way that’s alienating many of them like it or not. And, in my opinion, I do think it plausible that some within the campaign would rather the Alex Jones/Adam Kokesh crowd and other, more libertarian types would go away, lest it continually affect Rand’s outreach to more conservative Republicans. I’m sure Jesse Benton would rather not have to put up with their abuse for much longer. That’s why I wrote the piece I did.

  17. Pingback: Reaction to the Rand Paul Endorsement of Romney | ThirdPartyPolitics.us

  18. Pingback: Revolution within the Revolution | Conservative Heritage Times

Leave a Reply

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

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>