“He’s playing two games,” said John Walsh, a former professor of physiology at the University of Massachusetts Medical School. “He’s trying to position himself so he doesn’t get tripped up and ruled out [of 2016], and at the same time, maintain his anti-interventionism.”
Paul already faces deep skepticism from many establishment Republicans. They are quick to note that he once espoused isolationist-leaning views, including arguing for ending all foreign aid, including to Israel; reining in defense spending and expressing deep reluctance to intervene in the Middle East. He has since distanced himself from some of those positions — saying, for instance, that he would not support ending aid to Israel anytime soon — but hawkish members of the GOP donor class remain unconvinced.
“When people meet Sen. Paul in person, they’re impressed by him, and he exceeds the expectations they have based upon the rantings of his father,” said one Republican who works closely with hawkish GOP donors. “He can change his positions now and come across as friendly in one-on-one meetings, but he still, at some point, is going to have to explain for his previous positions. And by the way, if he actually flips to a pro-Israel or more interventionist foreign policy, he’s going to lose a lot of his base libertarian isolationist supporters.”
Join the conversation as a VIP Member