Will Rand Paul's movement build the broad movement for liberty?

[NACBA]

Three Questions About Rand Paul
How his presidential campaign can help or hurt the cause of liberty

Jesse Walker|Apr. 21, 2015 1:37 pm


It doesn't lead through Iowa and New Hampshire.Paramount PicturesI do not expect Rand Paul to win his party's presidential nomination this time around. I also live in a state where you have to be a registered Republican to vote in the GOP primary, so I'm not going to be in a position to cast a ballot for or against him next year anyway—not unless he defies my expectations and becomes the nominee. And I don't have tremendous faith that even a well-meaning president, should such a beast exist, can tame a vast and entrenched system of power.

So the question Would we be better off with Rand Paul as president? isn't particularly important to me right now. I'm more interested in three other issues:

1. What will Rand Paul the presidential candidate do to Rand Paul the senator? It'll be a few more months before we know this for sure, but it looks like Paul won't have to give up his Senate seat to run for president. That's good: Despite Paul's steps closer to the conventional right, he's still miles preferable to pretty much anyone likely to replace him. But in the meantime, Paul's drift toward Hannityville is bound to be reflected in how he votes, what bills he introduces, and, in general, where he chooses to take a stand.

Valuable though it may be to imagine what Paul could do if he's elected president, I spend more time thinking about what he can do with the office he has now. The Senate is a place where just one or two people can put the brakes on a terrible idea—as Paul reportedly did in 2011 by blocking a move toward bringing Georgia into NATO. It will be a shame if Paul's presidential ambitions make him less willing to exercise his power in such ways.

The flipside is that those ambitions may have made him more likely to make big pushes on the issues where he isn't folding. Right now it looks like he's standing by his deviations from GOP orthodoxy on criminal justice. Can that make up for his meeker positions on foreign policy?

http://reason.com/blog/2015/04/21/three-questions-about-rand-paul#.fbhsto:qTRr

 

[RonPaulGeorge&Ringo]

That's kind of a copout. There's still time to register Republican to support Rand Paul if you wanted to. What difference does it make?

 

[anaconda]

Pretty fair and thoughtful piece, IMHO.

To add to one of the author's observations, I hate to even imagine what potential coercion could be handed down by the powerful special interests to threaten a sitting president. I get the feeling that many here think that a great deal will change if Rand becomes President. Yet, I can imagine less than nothing getting accomplished and possibly even serious blows to the liberty movement orchestrated by the establishment. I am afraid that Mr. Paul would have to inspire a widespread state of class warfare for anything to change much. And I don't see this happening amidst the highly polarized electorate, whose left will cheer on any criticisms of a President Paul and eagerly embrace any negative propaganda narrative from the establishment media. Even Judge Napolitano said recently that a President Paul can't make much difference without a supportive congress.

 

[hells_unicorn]

I have a more interesting question than whether or not Rand Paul will do anything to expand the Liberty movement, namely, what the heck has Reason Magazine been doing for the movement lately other than writing interesting theoretical pieces that nobody apart from the converted care about and being a downer every time a Paul tries to run for office?

I used to follow Reason pretty heavily back in the mid 2000s, then I started to grow up and realize that there are 2 kinds of people in the Liberty movement: those who talk about it, and those who make things happen. Last time I checked, Reason's staff wasn't doing much on the latter front apart from making occasional television appearances to float their own egos, and that is getting incredibly boring.

 

[francisco]

I have a more interesting question than whether or not Rand Paul will do anything to expand the Liberty movement, namely, what the heck has Reason Magazine been doing for the movement lately other than writing interesting theoretical pieces that nobody apart from the converted care about and being a downer every time a Paul tries to run for office?

I used to follow Reason pretty heavily back in the mid 2000s, then I started to grow up and realize that there are 2 kinds of people in the Liberty movement: those who talk about it, and those who make things happen. Last time I checked, Reason's staff wasn't doing much on the latter front apart from making occasional television appearances to float their own egos, and that is getting incredibly boring.

QFT, and out of rep yet again

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

In my opinion, Rand Paul is going to have a monster of a time getting anything actually accomplished as president. The true value of the office won't be the bills he passes or the policies he pursues, but rather the spotlight it shines on libertarian ideas. If elected, his name and his policies will be discussed in every living room in the country, and throughout many foreign countries, and in history classrooms for hundreds of years in the future. This is a chance to permanently solidify libertarianism as the Republican brand, and start a groundswell movement towards freedom. Like Ron Paul's 2008 campaign times 1000.

He needs to set a good example for how a president is SUPPOSED to behave. Not flying around on multimillion dollar vacations on the taxpayer dime. Not engaging in petty flame wars with Fox News. And not abusing and expanding federal powers.

Because the truth is, we cannot win with just a president. The true battle is for the hearts and minds and character of the millions of people that live in this country. That's how we get freedom lovers in every state office, in every local office, and in every congressional seat all across the country. This is the true value of a Rand Paul presidency, and it can only happen if he doesn't moderate himself for political convenience. He already has to a certain extent, I hope he doesn't any more.

 

[Ronin Truth]

My SWAG bottom up is required NOT top down.

 

[NewRightLibertarian]

I have a more interesting question than whether or not Rand Paul will do anything to expand the Liberty movement, namely, what the heck has Reason Magazine been doing for the movement lately other than writing interesting theoretical pieces that nobody apart from the converted care about and being a downer every time a Paul tries to run for office?

I used to follow Reason pretty heavily back in the mid 2000s, then I started to grow up and realize that there are 2 kinds of people in the Liberty movement: those who talk about it, and those who make things happen. Last time I checked, Reason's staff wasn't doing much on the latter front apart from making occasional television appearances to float their own egos, and that is getting incredibly boring.

Remember that it was Treason Magazine that did everything they could to marginalize and undercut Ron Paul's 2008 presidential campaign. They are snakes. Same goes for the State-O Institute.

 

[jbauer]

Wait what? Since when does RAND Paul have a movement?

 

[Sola_Fide]

Reason magazine doesn't help the cause for liberty, in my opinion.

 

[JohnnyBizzoy]

A Rand Paul Presidency all by itself will not accomplish the policy changes and reduction of size and scope of government that we would all like to see begin to happen. What Rand Paul's campaign has to do is run a full insurgency inside the GOP, inspiring like-minded Libertarian and Constitutionalist candidates for all open positions in 2016. If Rand Paul is going to come into the GOP with a solid 15% to 25% of the primary vote, based on the Libertarian wing, plus millions of new GOP primary voters who are essentially independents, and civil libertarians - and then make such a splash that he inspires or peels off another 15% of the usual GOP primary voters (adding up to enough to win a plurality of votes in a crowded field) then that will constitute a large enough insurgency movement to ALSO elect new Libertarian-minded congressmen, mayors, sheriffs, and other locally elected positions. It probably won't be a landslide by any stretch of the imagination, but if just one or two Libertarian-minded republicans in the mold of Ron and Rand Paul are able to ride his coat-tails into the US Congress in 2016 - even if Rand himself does not win the nomination or the general election - then his attempt to pull the GOP back towards the Constitution will be a huge success with lasting results. So - while Rand Paul is at the top of our ticket and we should be supporting him, we should also be looking for candidates for lower offices who are in the mold of Ron and Rand Paul, who we can organize around at the local level. Essentially, focusing on Rand Paul - while it works for a nation-wide movement - is nonetheless doing it backwards. It would be more effective if we could all get as fired up over local candidates for Mayor, City Council, District Attorney and so forth. That way, precinct by precinct, there would be a Libertarian movement inside the GOP that would form a solid foundation for a Rand Paul Presidency as well. And I know for a fact there are many counties in the US that are more heavily Libertarian and Constitutionalist than the nation is as a whole - at least for the moment.

 

[hells_unicorn]

For everybody who is constantly going on about everything that Rand is not going to be able to accomplish if he does become president, I have a rather radical suggestion. How about we actually cross that bridge when we come to it? If you think we need to win more seats in congress, then get busy supporting whoever you need to support and talk to whoever you think can be convinced. Need more governors and senators perhaps? Apply the same logic. And if you need to cut your losses anywhere, nobody needs to hear about it ad nauseam.

People who were too busy worrying about the horrible time Ron Paul would have trying to do anything if he'd been elected President probably had little to say about Amash and Massie getting elected. As I stated before, if you've got time to be negative, you've got time to be constructive.

 

[Inkblots]

Reason magazine doesn't help the cause for liberty, in my opinion.

They're hipstertarians, they have no interest whatsoever in helping the cause of liberty. Being libertarian is a cultural signifier for them -- if it ever actually became a popular position, many of them would drop the philosophy in a heartbeat. A pair of commenters on the Reason blog said it best, I think:

LynchPin1477|4.21.15 @ 2:56PM

Reason is giving Paul the same treatment I usually expect from the fans of some indy band once they get on mainstream radio.

Dark Lord of the Cis|4.21.15 @ 3:03PM|#

Yes, they are. And possibly for the same reason.

 

[wizardwatson]

My SWAG bottom up is required NOT top down.

Yeah, and that died out in early stages of RP 2008.

So we've adopted that top down strategy and on top of that a "let's play politics" strategy.

How can we lose!

 

[anaconda]

A Rand Paul Presidency all by itself will not accomplish the policy changes and reduction of size and scope of government that we would all like to see begin to happen. What Rand Paul's campaign has to do is run a full insurgency inside the GOP, inspiring like-minded Libertarian and Constitutionalist candidates for all open positions in 2016. If Rand Paul is going to come into the GOP with a solid 15% to 25% of the primary vote, based on the Libertarian wing, plus millions of new GOP primary voters who are essentially independents, and civil libertarians - and then make such a splash that he inspires or peels off another 15% of the usual GOP primary voters (adding up to enough to win a plurality of votes in a crowded field) then that will constitute a large enough insurgency movement to ALSO elect new Libertarian-minded congressmen, mayors, sheriffs, and other locally elected positions. It probably won't be a landslide by any stretch of the imagination, but if just one or two Libertarian-minded republicans in the mold of Ron and Rand Paul are able to ride his coat-tails into the US Congress in 2016 - even if Rand himself does not win the nomination or the general election - then his attempt to pull the GOP back towards the Constitution will be a huge success with lasting results. So - while Rand Paul is at the top of our ticket and we should be supporting him, we should also be looking for candidates for lower offices who are in the mold of Ron and Rand Paul, who we can organize around at the local level. Essentially, focusing on Rand Paul - while it works for a nation-wide movement - is nonetheless doing it backwards. It would be more effective if we could all get as fired up over local candidates for Mayor, City Council, District Attorney and so forth. That way, precinct by precinct, there would be a Libertarian movement inside the GOP that would form a solid foundation for a Rand Paul Presidency as well. And I know for a fact there are many counties in the US that are more heavily Libertarian and Constitutionalist than the nation is as a whole - at least for the moment.

I agree with every word of this^.

 

[philipped]

A Rand Paul Presidency all by itself will not accomplish the policy changes and reduction of size and scope of government that we would all like to see begin to happen. What Rand Paul's campaign has to do is run a full insurgency inside the GOP, inspiring like-minded Libertarian and Constitutionalist candidates for all open positions in 2016. If Rand Paul is going to come into the GOP with a solid 15% to 25% of the primary vote, based on the Libertarian wing, plus millions of new GOP primary voters who are essentially independents, and civil libertarians - and then make such a splash that he inspires or peels off another 15% of the usual GOP primary voters (adding up to enough to win a plurality of votes in a crowded field) then that will constitute a large enough insurgency movement to ALSO elect new Libertarian-minded congressmen, mayors, sheriffs, and other locally elected positions. It probably won't be a landslide by any stretch of the imagination, but if just one or two Libertarian-minded republicans in the mold of Ron and Rand Paul are able to ride his coat-tails into the US Congress in 2016 - even if Rand himself does not win the nomination or the general election - then his attempt to pull the GOP back towards the Constitution will be a huge success with lasting results. So - while Rand Paul is at the top of our ticket and we should be supporting him, we should also be looking for candidates for lower offices who are in the mold of Ron and Rand Paul, who we can organize around at the local level. Essentially, focusing on Rand Paul - while it works for a nation-wide movement - is nonetheless doing it backwards. It would be more effective if we could all get as fired up over local candidates for Mayor, City Council, District Attorney and so forth. That way, precinct by precinct, there would be a Libertarian movement inside the GOP that would form a solid foundation for a Rand Paul Presidency as well. And I know for a fact there are many counties in the US that are more heavily Libertarian and Constitutionalist than the nation is as a whole - at least for the moment.

100%