As Ed Krayewski
blogged here Friday, Sen. Rand Paul shook up the Ron Paul fan
world by his (fully expected, by all those who followed Rand’s
career and spoke to him much) endorsement of Mitt Romney for
president. (I was slightly surprised only by the timing–I thought
he would likely wait until the Tampa convention. But his father had
just admitted the day before that he
wasn’t going to win.) 

My first, scrambled thoughts on the topic are
quoted in this article from Business Insider by Grace
Wyler, who follows the Paul movement intelligently, via a phone
interview she did with me on Friday while I was on the road in
Portland promoting
Ron
Paul’s Revolution: The Man and the Movement He
Inspired.

To sum them up again myself: Rand Paul is of course playing a
delicate game of trying to build on his father’s libertarian base
out to the more standard red-state right-wing-talk-radio mainstream
edge of the Republican Party.

In doing so he may (and may rightly) think he needs the most
hardcore no-compromise edge of the Paul movement less than they
think he does; but if he blithely assumes he will have the giving,
activist energy of that movement on his side moving forward, he’s
wrong. The very fact that most Ron Paul fans always thought of
their guy as the type who would never just go along to get along on
any level is key to why they support him so fervently. Again,
though, it remains to be seen how large a percentage of the over 2
million people who voted for Paul this primary season are the kind
of hardcore who will be alienated permanently from Rand by this
endorsement. 

But the political importance of the Paul movement will be
reflected in the next 4-8 years in ways other than votes for
president, especially if no presidential candidate fully embodies
Paulian principles.

*Good Daily Paul
post and comment thread summing up the hardcore Paul fan
reaction to the Rand endorsement, both those disgusted and those
who see it as a sensible strategic normalizing of Paulite ideas
within the GOP moving forward.

*Jeffrey Phelps at Examiner.com sees the endorsement as
the
ultimate betrayal; Barry Lyndon at Policymic as a
strategically brilliant move that will further the Paul
cause.

*Former Rand Paul campaign manager in his Senate primary in
Kentucky in 2010, David Adams, feels
“shock and dismay” and points out Rand can’t necessarily
deliver voters to Romney with this endorsement.

*In happier Rand Paul news, he signs on to a proposed amendment
to an omnibus farm bill that would
legalize industrial hemp.

*Rick Santorum
fears Paulite platform influence in Tampa, as the fight to
change the GOP marches on, endorsement or no.

*Jack Hunter, co-author of Rand Paul’s book
The Tea Party Goes to Washington, also points out that
Rand endorsing the eventual nominee was already in the cards, and
that the announcement came after Ron Paul himself issued a
statement admitting he would not be able to win.

Hunter argues that Rand’s authority with the typical Republican
voter who he will have to win over in the future would be ruined if
he had not agreed to endore the party’s candidate, whoever it is.
Hunter sums up it as a move that is “a political compromise with
the ultimate goal of advancing our principles. This is always Sen.
Paul’s guiding principle.” For those reading the “what does Ron
think?” tea leaves, it is worth noting this video appeared at the
official
Ron Paul 2012 web site.:

Tom Woods, author of the Ron Paulite bestseller

Meltdown, makes an open call to Ron Paul: don’t endorse
Mitt Romney. Woods rightly notes it is Paul’s so-far successful
career as a man who does not knuckle under to the establishment
would have its legacy ruined if he does such a thing: