It may be that you've bought this up with them on previous shows but when "chopping liberty into economic & social issues between the two parties" was mentioned, may be it would've been worth a shot letting them that Paul is the only one who can bring people together that way since he's for free markets, less regulation, less taxes & at the same times, he's not a moral policeman telling people how to live which is what liberals want so he's the ONLY Republican that can actually bring the both parties closer
Not to mention, Paul is the only Republican that can throw poignant darts at Obama about continued wars (since he was the "peace-candidate"), he's the only one who can question Obama on economics (since Paul had predicted the bubble & opposed bailouts & vehemently supports spending-cuts & balanced budgets), he's the only one who can question Obama on civil liberties - about unPatriat Act, NDAA, SOPA, etc he's the only candidate that can question Obamacare very well because being a doctor himself, he knows first-hand the plight of patients under a socialised-healthcare system - the rising costs & plummeting quality & so on for many issues
Further, Ron is leading the pack amongst Republicans when it comes to Independents, Democrats, non-whites, all of which are very important voting-blocks in the General-Election & Paul is the only one who can attract enough of them to beat Obama
When they brought up "racists newsletters" - Paul is the only one who's offered to pardon all non-violent drug-offenders, majority of whom are colored-people & the fact that he doesn't want to go around killing non-whites in Middle-East & Africa in itself shows that he's NOT racist but (& turn the tables on them instead
), it's the war-mongers who want wars & want to kill brown & black people are racist & that they should stop being racist (this should shut'em up nicely
)
The ending was EPIC -
"where are you going to get the money from?"
These are idiots so one could've followed up & told them that 60-70% of the budget goes to SS, Medicare & other welfare & in these times of economic distress, the older people & others can't be thrown out on the street (& only Paul has a transition-plan to tide them over) while the rest of the budget is mostly defense/military expenditure so welfare + military together cost WAY MORE than what the govt takes in as revenues so military is the only area where significant cuts can be made to balance the budget WITHOUT raising taxes (which would kill the economy) or raising the debt (which could also kill the economy)
And why do we still have so many bases around, we don't need bases in Japan & Germany & many other countries, they have been able to run their welfare-states because we've been paying for their defense (some neo-con rank-&-file tend to agree when Rand Paul brings this up
) And he'd install more bases IN AMERICA & they would then spend their money in America rather than in other counties & he'd use them to strenghen the borders to make sure terrorists aren't just able to walk across the border & such
Anyways, despite my suggestions (it's easy for me or others to say "you should've said this or that" in hindsight so the suggestions here are NOT criticism in any way 
), I think you did a fantastic job & represented Paul very well (in fact, you should consider running for some public office, be it state-legislature or Congress/Senate ) What was fantastic to see is that you did NOT lose your cool when they were flogging Paul (which can be VERY hard for Paul-supporters) but that's good, we can't convert them by getting angry at them, we must keep our cool & explain our positions, which you did VERY WELL, you didn't come of as some "kooky" Paul-supporter, you were unbiased & professional in your approach so job well done
Note : We also need to point out to others that he's the only who's going to ACTUALLY cut spending (rather than "cutting" proposed-future-increases like Obama & others, which is simply ADDING more to debt) & has already posted his budget -
http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/ron-paul-plan-to-restore-america/
And then there's the "waging war against a billion muslims." If we go to war with Iran, it will absolutely be viewed as an attack against Islam. The neocon says Paul believes that the US is out to destroy muslims. Not intentionally no, but that is the result when the US invades muslim countries by creating threats that don't exist. That is the key point to make. If Iran poses no threat, and we invade them, then wouldn't it be correct to call it an attack on Islam? That's all Paul is saying. Perhaps using "a billion" was a poor word choice on Paul's part, but the point is still valid.
Know your information front and back and be forceful. Good job overall, just mostly giving my constructive criticism.
^^^
