Rand Paul Emerges
One of the most fascinating – and telling – political story lines appears to be unfolding underneath the radar of most beltway pundits. Just across the river from me in Kentucky Rand Paul is facing off against Secretary of State Trey Grayson for the Republican nomination for Senate in a classic battle of grassroots activism versus party establishment.
Virtually all of Kentucky’s GOP leadership has endorsed Grayson, and even prominent GOP leaders in the Senate have arranged high-profile fundraisers for him in D.C. So you can imagine that Rand Paul turned quite a number of heads when he outraised Grayson in the last reporting period by roughly $370,000. More recently, and perhaps more importantly, Paul has pulled ahead in opinion polls and now leads Grayson 35 percent to 32 percent. Paul is up 9 percentage points from the last poll, and all indications are that his ascent is nowhere near over. Paul’s fundraising prowess and growing popularity make it clear that he is a viable candidate and is now arguably the frontrunner.
Paul’s insurgence is interesting not only because it demonstrates distrust of current GOP leadership, but also because Paul doesn’t fit nicely into one of the GOP’s three traditional bases: social conservatives, business interests, and small-government types. He is solidly libertarian, and while libertarianism is not necessarily hostile to the goals of traditional conservatism, there are certainly important distinctions.
Rand Paul is a strong states’ rights advocate who wants the federal government out of people’s lives. He opposes federal drug laws and says the U.S. government should not outlaw gay marriage because only churches should be in the marriage business. He is skeptical of foreign interventionism and doggedly Constitutional about any engagement. But more than anything he likes talking about fiscal issues and the need to scale back government intrusion in economics and reform the nation’s fiscal policies. For better or worse, GOP leadership during the last ten years has often been on the other side of the coin.
Libertarian intrusions into Republican primaries are nothing new. But what separates Rand Paul from most other libertarian candidates (including his father) is that Rand is not a novelty act. He is a known commodity as a long-time practicing ophthalmologist in western Kentucky. Along with tremendous intellectual heft, Rand is a polished public speaker with a professional presence. In short, he is an ideal candidate for the libertarian cause. Rand Paul can sell the libertarian platform in a way that doesn’t sound crazy to the traditional Kentucky voter. His early success should give us hope that the future of the GOP is not yet lost.
12 Responses to “Rand Paul Emerges”
[...] Over at the blog In the Agora, Joshua Claybourn notes that libertarian (and Ron Paul offspring) Rand Paul has taken an early polling lead for the Republican nomination to replace retiring U.S. Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.). Paul has already raised far more money than his opponent, Kentucky's GOP establishment-backed Secretary of State Trey Grayson. But Paul has also been able to convert dollars into poll points. He has jumped 14 points in the last three months. [...]
I remain skeptical of his chances. It’s unfortunate that Rand Paul had to run in KY since the state might not be best suited to his message. KY is very very socially conservative and hearing Paul’s views on same sex marriage and fed drug laws will turn a lot of people away. I wish he was running in NH or Maine…
Josh, interesting post. However, I am confused by your differentiating Paul, as a libertarian, from a “small-government” type. I don’t mean to be snarky here, but aren’t libertarian’s exactly that?
Rand Paul is what Kentucky and this country need. But SK, tell me, what states are suited to his message? NH and Maine I get. Any other places in the south? Like Louisiana? Or just out west, in states like Nevada, New Mexico and Colorado? Just curious.
[...] Over at the blog In the Agora, Joshua Claybourn notes that libertarian (and Ron Paul offspring) Rand Paul has taken an early polling lead for the Republican nomination to replace retiring U.S. Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.). Paul has already raised far more money than his opponent, Kentucky’s GOP establishment-backed Secretary of State Trey Grayson. But Paul has also been able to convert dollars into poll points. He has jumped 14 points in the last three months. [...]
Really? Maine? I must not be familiar enough with it. Does Maine welcome economic freedom more than I think it does?
Also, I had the same question as Paul C. concerning the difference between “small-government types” and libertarians. Are you thinking of the “small government” category as being more defined by a low-tax, low-regulation focus?
I’m not sure yet whether the comment procedure has changed, so I apologize if I have another comment that says roughly the same thing — I just don’t see it here, yet.
Josh, I wondering about the same question as Paul C. Were you using “small government” to refer more to people with a focus on low taxes and low regulation instead of the broader “small-government” concerns of the libertarians?
Josh, interesting post. However, I am confused by your differentiating Paul, as a libertarian, from a “small-government” type. I don’t mean to be snarky here, but aren’t libertarian’s exactly that?
You’re right, but I think it’s more of an issue of degree.
“He … says the U.S. government should not outlaw gay marriage because only churches should be in the marriage business.”
I’m not sure what specific policy position this is endorsing. I couldn’t find any info online about Rand Paul’s position on gay marriage, though I did find the opinion of “only churches should be in the marriage business” attributed to Rand’s father, Ron Paul.
There are two federal issues related to gay marriage: the Defense of Marriage Act, which prevents gay marriage as enacted in one state from being exported to all other states, and the Federal Marriage Amendment, some versions of which would prohibit any state from recognizing gay marriages.
The latter could be construed as “outlawing gay marriage,” although technically it would not prevent churches from recognizing gay marriages–it would only prevent government recognition of gay marriages.
Ultimately, the federal government cannot remain “neutral” on gay marriage. It must decide whether to maintain the status quo (only straight marriages are recognized), recognize gay marriages or civil unions, or stop recognizing any marriages.
Anyhow, I disagree with a lot of both Rand and Ron Paul’s positions, but I welcome them into the Republican Party.
Eric:
In my humble opinion, the most significant part of “DOMA” is not that the federal govt. is preventing one state’s gay marriage to be exported from state to state, but the prevention of the IRS from recognizing gay marriage in their regulations. The disallowance of gay marriage (and the differentiation in taxation provided by marriage) by the federal govt. has much more signifcant financial consequences to a gay couple than a state’s recognition of gay marriage.
KY is particularly ill suited to the liberterian message since not only is it culturally conservative but it is also economically populist(coal mining and manufacturing roots). So Paul has to deal with the double whammy of people who don’t mind govt handouts and hate gays and pot. Beside NH and Maine, he would run pretty well in the Mountain West where people would be more receptive to his message.
Rand Pall just got endorsed by the Republican Liberty Caucus too.
http://randforsenate.blogspot.com/2009/11/rand-paul-endorsed-by-republican.html
Tracy