PAGE 2: SOMEWHAT NEUTRAL POLITICAL COVERAGE
I’ll let the Washington Post have a few words on the matter as far as analysis:
In making clear that he is publicly behind Romney, Rand Paul is sending a very clear signal: I’m a good soldier for the GOP.
Make no mistake: The Republican party establishment will never embrace Rand Paul as one of their own — nor would he want them to. But, it is possible that Paul playing the role of loyal Republican in the 2012 election could well neutralize some of the fears the party regulars have about the prospects of him carrying their standard at some point down the line.
The lesson? Sometimes — actually almost always — in politics there’s more than meets the eye.
“I’m a good soldier for the GOP.” We’ll see.
Not surprisingly, Willard might not get a woody at the prospect of Rand doubling down on dumb and offering his services as Vice President. It might be a conflict of interest to allow such a young sith into the dark inner circle, but he’s still throwing it out there, you know.
Reason’s Hit & Run Blog first tipped everyone off on this was uniquely father-not-like-son by pointing out the elder Paul hasn’t endorse any Republican presidential candidate since Reagan’s failed bid in 1976:
Ron Paul’s campaign has all but acknowledged Ron Paul’s not winning the nomination, but the elder Paul has never endorsed the Republican nominee. Though he said he stood with Reagan, that was in 1976 when the California governor challenged sitting President Gerald Ford for the nomination. Paul spokesman Gary Howard said he didn’t think Paul endorsed anyone in 1980, and by 1988 Ron Paul was so disappointed with Ronald Reagan he wanted to “totally disassociate” himself from the president. Paul didn’t endorse George H.W. Bush, Bob Dole, George Bush or John McCain either.
And obviously Rand Paul could have learned something from his old man by remaining neutral.