What's wrong with the Rand Paul campaign?

[dudeabides]

When this campaign began, I saw Rand Paul as the worst possible candidate to challenge Hillary Clinton because he is to the left of her on foreign policy (if that's even possible) and because he flip-flops. But with Donald Trump in the race, I have come to the conclusion that Paul would actually have a chance. He has some appeal to centrist voters on criminal justice reform, and he's not a hard liner on immigration completely like Cruz.

[dudeabides]

Rand Paul has made some strategic missteps. His strategy seems to have been to try and unite libertarians and conservatives. On several issues, conservatives and libertarians have some common views. This is especially true on economic issues, both conservatives and libertarians are proponents of free markets, though libertarians are more likely to oppose safety net programs than conservatives. The problem is, conservatives and libertarians are very different when it comes to foreign policy. Conservatives have believed in investing in the military and maintaining an international presence for national security purposes. Libertarians are more isolationist and are less likely to support foreign interventions, just like the left. Paul has tried to play both sides. He would have been better off sticking to his libertarian convictions and trying to convince independent voters that he's right and the "neo-cons" are wrong. His pandering to both sides is the reason some of his father's pure libertarian supporters are against him, and his foreign policy is the reason many conservatives stop short of supporting him for President.

That being said, Ron Paul did better in 2012 in places like New Hampshire and Nevada than anyone expected, so maybe I'm wrong but right now, Paul has no momentum.