With the R's Hindenburg-like collapse during the 2012 Presidential election, it's left a power vacuum in the order.
And politics, like nature, abhors a vacuum.
Some people are saying that the R's aren't going to change. Wrong. They are. The primary proof is in the current people running for the R's nomination in 2016, Mark Rubio and Bobby Jindal. Rubio is Hispanic, and Jindal is Indian. Any other time, they would be marginalized out of existence (no one knew who Rubio was until he was rumored to be Mittens' veep pick). Instead, a party that prides itself on being stuck in the 1950's as far as race relations goes has them gathering press. Newt Gingrich himself is trying to feel things out instead of acting as the guardian of the party's conservative philosophy. The old guard is finished.
However, this also means that just about anybody has a shot at being the focal point of the party.
Including an assclown by the name of Rand Paul.
Rand is the son of Ron Paul, the "libertarian" Republican who sold out his principles in hopes of speaking at the RNC instead of stumping for the actual Libertarians, guaranteeing they wouldn't get more than 1% of the vote. Rand paints himself as a libertarian himself, however there's a difference -- Ron Paul is aware of the limitations of his philosophy. Rand Paul is just an asshole, stumping for free market economics (I love people who say Jesus is a myth but the Free Market is real) and hands-off objectivism that borders on Randianism. Ron's ideas can be summed up by saying that anything that compels someone to do something is an infringement of rights, since the person is ultimately not doing something by their choice. TL;DR -- compassion and understanding is for suckers.
Rand has been trying to sponge off his daddy's cache in the R party. Now, he's trying to build his profile. Why not? Anyone who followed the R platform for 2012 is done. They'll be wiped out in 2016. The field is wide open for someone to challenge the party's fundamentals, much like Bill Clinton successfully did in 1992. Voices that would normally be sent off with a "go away, kid, you bother me" are getting the mic. Some get it because they are seen as, "He could have changed things" (Rubio). Some get it because they are seen as talking straight about economic realities, what was behind Romney's initial climb before he fucked himself with the party stances on gay and women's rights (Jindal). And some get it because they have a cult following and are hoping they are better organized than the competition and they'll withstand everything (Rand Paul). Remember, 2016 is a long time away. Everyone thought Sarah Palin would be the nominee for the R's in 2008, and by 2011, she was a joke. Again.
Rand recently did a filibuster to protest President Obama's response to the question of using drones to kill Americans. 12 hours, 52 minutes.
Completely wasted time.
All he did was put on a show that got the spotlight on him if for no other reason than how long he talked. Instead of a deeper examination of Obama's position (it's actually more nuanced than the press is reporting), and trying to do something...you know...CONSTRUCTIVE, Rand just presented himself as a challenger speaking truth to power.
Rand, for some reason, is trying to inherit his dad's support of the tea partiers, the weekend warrior activists who, on an organizational level, are just as hardcore objectivist as Rand Paul is. The tea partiers continue to believe they are a political power because politicians court them. News flash -- politicians support them because the tea partiers give them money. If it weren't for that, they'd be rightly branded as a bunch of kooks and ignored.
"Randian" is supposed to mean "Ayn Rand." Rand Paul is putting his own spin on it. Hopefully, it'll be done in four years.