The Overrating of Rand Paul 2016

[DonViejo]

By David Weigel

The punditocracy is in the grip of Rand Paul Fever. "Dismiss the Kentucky Senator as a fringe candidate at your peril," writes Chris Cillizza, who pronounces that "Rand Paul is winning" the GOP's 2016 invisible primary. "Rand Paul is the 2016 Republican frontrunner," writes Peter Beinart, arguing that "on issues from NSA surveillance to drug legalization to gay marriage, the GOP is moving in his direction."

Both Beinart and Cillizza warn "the media" not to under-rate Paul. Well, I'm never going to make that mistake -- back in August 2009, before any polls showed Paul within striking distance of winning his Senate primary, I was talking to the candidate and profiling his race. (Okay, at the time I was asking whether Paul would merely make life difficult for the GOP establishment's choice. Obviously he did.)

But I vividly remember a moment from that interview, and how it revealed something about Paul that pundits don't cover unless they're forced to. At the end of a short and friendly interview, I asked Paul whether the darker associations of Ron Paul, his father, could be used against him. If Republicans were looking to tar him, couldn't they bring up the racist newsletters published under Ron's name, or the donations from white supremacists that Paul never solicited but declined to give back.

It was like an Arctic blast came through my receiver. I don't see how anyone could think that, Rand Paul said. That has nothing to do with this campaign.

In the short term, absolutely, Paul was right. He ran a brilliant primary campaign and a steady general election campaign, in exactly the right year. He only stumbled in a post-victory appearance on Rachel Maddow's show, in which the host socratically wore Paul down on whether he'd have backed the Civil Rights Act. Paul never forgave Maddow for that interview, and for years since then he's attacked the "mischaracterizations" inspired by it.

more
http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2014/03/03/the_over_rating_of_rand_paul_2016.html?wpisrc=newsletter_jcr:content&mc_cid=b832839b6f&mc_eid=7a8b58c8c3

[Gothmog]

1. Rand Paul has no chance of being elected

Rand Paul is a lightweight and can not win a general election. Rand Paul may well be the GOP 2016 nominee but that is a function of the weakness of the GOP field and not due to his strength as a candidate

[stevenleser]

2. Oh he is a total loser of a candidate. But the schadenfreude will be awesome. nt