Rand Paul, not Ron, runs in 2012

"One day early in 2011, Ron met with Jesse Benton — the young political strategist he shared with his son — to break the news that he wasn’t going to run for president again. …

Benton was disappointed, but with Ron out of the picture, he decided it was time to start grooming Rand for a presidential run. He approached the younger Paul and pitched him on mounting an insurgent bid for the Republican nomination in 2012. He was adamant that Rand’s... polish and pragmatism would make him a far more serious candidate than his dad ever was. Benton argued that, between the fiery base of supporters Ron had built up and the new voters Rand could attract, he would be a real threat to win the White House.

Rand ate it up. He told Benton to start putting out feelers for a 2012 bid, and the strategist moved quickly to schedule a trip to the early primary state of South Carolina. On March 23, 2011, Rand made a surprise appearance at the Charleston Meeting, a gathering of Palmetto State Republican elites, and news of the visit set off sirens in the political punditocracy. Rand fanned the speculation by announcing future trips to Iowa and New Hampshire as well. The buzz was building, the strategy was working, the wheels were in motion — and then, suddenly, it all came to a screeching halt.

A couple of days after Rand’s headline-grabbing South Carolina trip, Ron called up Benton. He had been giving some more thought to the idea of a 2012 presidential bid, and he’d changed his mind.

I’ve decided I’m going to run, Ron said. And I want you to manage my campaign.

Rand, it went without saying, would have to take a seat...." http://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppin...ily-feud-that-helped-sink-rand-pau#.gcPlVA0g1

Suppose Ron Paul had decided not to run in 2012, clearing the way for Rand? It is easy to conclude from Rand's poor performance thus far in 2015 that he would do poorly, but this could be a mistake. In 2015, the rise of ISIS suddenly reignited Republican foreign policy interventionism and support of domestic surveillance, making Rand Paul's views much less saleable within the party than they would have been a couple of years earlier. And for those Republicans who *do* believe that the US intervention in Iraq was a disaster, there came along Donald Trump, who combined this point of view with an anti-immigrant rhetoric that Rand Paul could never match, no matter how hard he tried (and tries). Likewise, Cruz has helped destroy any hope by Rand Paul of getting the Tea Party and evangelical vote.

In 2012, by contrast, Rand Paul would probably get the support of the people who voted for his father in OTL plus a certain number of other Republicans who thought Ron Paul was too extreme. And remember that in 2012 Ron Paul finished a close third in the Iowa caucuses, only three points behind Santorum and Romney. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Results_of_the_Republican_Party_presidential_primaries,_2012#Iowa It is conceivable that Rand Paul could have won the Iowa caucuses, which would put him in a reasonably strong position for New Hampshire, where in OTL Ron Paul finished in second place, with 22.89% compared to Mitt Romney's 39.28%. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unite...ion_in_New_Hampshire,_2012#Republican_primary
 
I personally think 2012 was too soon for Rand, as he had just been elected to the Senate in 2010 and held no elected office prior to that.

However, if he were to run, I don't think he'd win Iowa, social conservatives have a lot of pull there (as Huckabee winning Iowa in 2008 and Santorum doing as well as he did there in 2012 prove) and with Rand being Libertarian or not hard right socially, he'd lose.

New Hampshire is the only one I can see him winning and it would be close, and I don't see him posing a serious threat to Romney. Yea, he'll have Ron's supporters of OTL and a few other, but that still won't be enough.
 
I personally think 2012 was too soon for Rand, as he had just been elected to the Senate in 2010 and held no elected office prior to that.

However, if he were to run, I don't think he'd win Iowa, social conservatives have a lot of pull there (as Huckabee winning Iowa in 2008 and Santorum doing as well as he did there in 2012 prove) and with Rand being Libertarian or not hard right socially, he'd lose.

New Hampshire is the only one I can see him winning and it would be close, and I don't see him posing a serious threat to Romney. Yea, he'll have Ron's supporters of OTL and a few other, but that still won't be enough.
Rand is pretty socially conservative, and if the Social Conservative faction was divided enough, he could squeak through on a narrow plurality.
 
Rand is pretty socially conservative, and if the Social Conservative faction was divided enough, he could squeak through on a narrow plurality.

I still don't see it. Rand may be conservative socially (as was Ron), but he still takes more of a libertarian stance on social issues when it comes to politics. Plus, the neo cons still had/have a lot a pull in the party as well, so there's another group that's going to do everything in its' power to keep him away from the nomination.
 
Yeah, too soon for Paul Junior, but father or son, I really doubt either one can win the nomination, much less the election.

Perhaps more realistic for Rand as VP...?
 
Rand is pretty socially conservative, and if the Social Conservative faction was divided enough, he could squeak through on a narrow plurality.
As a newly minted senator most known for being the son of Ron, Rand doesn't have time to really build an identity separate from his father. Even if he, personally, is more socially conservative, he will still be thought of as his father's son, with all the pluses and minuses that that entails.

Today, he's had most of a Senate term to establish his own brand (and fall flat in the process, but that's neither here nor there).

And Ron Paul didn't have the ability to win the nomination in 2012; I doubt Rand will do significantly better. He'll be seen by everyone as Ron 2.0, by both supporters and opponents, and Ron Paul had a definite cap on his support.
 

TinyTartar

Banned
There is a lot I'd personally tolerate as a Republican. Someone with Rand's foreign policy views is not one of them; I'd vote for Obama out of spite. Obama is corporatist and militarist enough that I can tolerate him if the other guy is Rand Paul.

Now, me aside, I think Rand would have a chance if he was able to take social conservatives, and Santorum tanking early might do this. If Rand combines the social conservatives and the libertarians, he has a chance. He'd have to make some stands on culture war issues but at the same time, push for a simplified tax code and deregulation. For him to actually win on foreign policy, he could come from a quasi racist view of letting the savages fight it out, or something like that. He could with this view possibly win the nomination.
 
Top