Robert, even if Rand had kept the libertarian principles of his father, the fact that so many people flocked to the siren call of meaningless slogans ("Let's make 'Murica great again!") economic illiteracy and xenophobic finger-pointing ("... and some, I guess, are good people" when they're not rapists or drug dealers) tells us that voters are mostly unlibertarian, either leaning socialist or fascist.
Most voters are not sophisticated. They do not think deeply about politics, economics, and logic like we do. Just because Ron earned 26,036 votes from Iowa doesn't mean they are libertarians at all. A majority of them clearly prioritize other issues above soundness on economics and liberty. At least Ron shows libertarians can market to a wider audience; as they say, only a small committed minority is needed to bring political change - and Ron got closer to that than anyone else so far.I regret the fact that Judge Napolitano did not run this year. He was the overall best alternative messenger to Ron Paul.
Well, reducing the third world invasion of the current welfare state is not a meaningless slogan. Anyone who works the PD, Fire departments and hospitals can attest to the pernicious effect of migrant invasion. Yes, we get that the welfare state is to blame, but trying to stop someone who is adding fuel to the fire that is burning your house down is not a meaningless act.
Very Brutal.Ron Paul won last night. The radical idealism strategy (http://libertypolicyjournal.blogspot.com/2013/04/strategy-three-essential-guidelines-for.html) he used and Murray Rothbard wrote about was put to the test and turned in much more impressive results than the moderation, hesitation, and compromise of Rand.Rand has squandered much.
Rand misread the mood of the public. His pandering to Black Lives Matter thugs while they were burning down entire cities was the last straw.