Nobody pulls in swing states or a "specific group". That nonsense has been thoroughly discredited in recent years, which is why the past two Vice President's have been white guys from Wyoming and Delaware, respectively. The most important qualification for a VP candidate is that he doesn't embarrass or hurt the ticket. If the press stops talking about the VP forever the week after he's named, you have made a good choice. The most important thing for Rand is to find not only a good candidate from a political standpoint, but also one that is at least somewhat similar from an ideological standpoint. Otherwise he'll never get out of his first term alive.
DeMint is a poor choice because he would be a lightening rod of criticism. The left may not hate him as much as Cruz, but DeMint was their Cruz before Cruz came on the scene.
Mike Lee is a good choice but for the fact he's a sitting Senator. We don't have that many pro-liberty folks in the Senate and since we are already losing Paul in this scenario, how does it make any sense to give up Lee too?
Amash is a little young and might be too risky. He's far more libertarian than Paul and that will attract high levels of constant media attention. The media will portray him as a spoiled trust fund Ayn Rand freak. Amash needs to continue to build his reputation and body of work in the House. He has a bright future but VP in 2016 is not the right path for either him or Rand.
Labrador is the best choice. He's careful and well polished. He's well liked in the House. His media story (Puerto Rican son of a single mother becomes lawyer) doesn't give the Left any room to attack. And he's ideologically similar enough to Paul that there is no advantage for anybody in ordering Paul killed. Bonus in that Mormons have deep pockets and support their own.
