Paul May Lag Behind Now, But Better Numbers Could Be Ahead

by Josh Guckert

As the country moves to within 200 days of the Iowa Caucuses, political spectators are becoming more eager to anoint a front-runner on the Republican side. Many libertarians have been anxious to see Rand Paul make a move in the polls to position himself as such, but his numbers thus far have been fairly stagnant. There are a number of reasons as to why this has occurred.

First of all, as other candidates have launched their bids or simply become better known, it has resulted in endless news coverage and natural intrigue from the public. For instance, Ben Carson has swung from a RealClearPolitics average of 12.3% on March 4th, to 4.8% on May 3rd and then back up to 9.4% presently.

To further prove the point, following his official announcement, Donald Trump went from coming in near-last place in most polls to finishing in second with 11% in the most recent FOX News poll (this in spite of the fact that the same poll showed that 64% of Republicans view Trump as more of a “side-show” than a serious presidential candidate).

One need only look at the 2012 race to see the significance of stability as opposed to rapid surges and falls. No less than four different candidates led Romney throughout the cycle, as his numbers stayed mostly flat from February 2011 to February 2012. However, the bursts shown by the others were ultimately unsustainable, as these candidates’ novelty quickly wore off once they were subjected to heightened scrutiny. More importantly, Romney remained near the top in Iowa and New Hampshire, allowing him maximum exposure for the early contests.

Only two candidates reflect this desired arc: Rand Paul and Jeb Bush. While Paul has yet to command leads in national polls, his apparent basement of 8% is one which lends itself to the gaining of ground significant enough to make a mark, particularly as many polls show Paul to be one of the top “second choices” for many Republicans.

Furthermore, as Romney demonstrated, Iowa and New Hampshire can be essential building blocks in cementing status as a front-runner. Wins in both are not essential, but all serious candidates are expected to finish in the top 4 in each state. Additionally, any ground lost in one of the elections must be seemingly made up with a better result in the other (for instance, John McCain was only able to survive in 2008 following his 4th place finish in Iowa when he won New Hampshire).

As it stands today, Rand Paul finds himself within striking distance of where he needs to be: he is in 4th place in Iowa and 4th place in New Hampshire. This is, of course, before any debates or advertisements have taken place and candidates are still getting into the race. Much like Romney, Paul has shown himself to be a major player in these two critical races, with others overtaking him and just as quickly disappearing.

In front of Paul in Iowa are: now-apparent front-runner Scott Walker, who polled at under 5% in the state as recently as January; Marco Rubio, who was also polling at just 5% in February; and 2008 winner Mike Huckabee, who has seen his numbers steadily decline since joining the race.

Likewise, in New Hampshire, in front of Paul are: Bush, who will be a force to be reckoned with, as his name ID has allowed him to steadily gain since entering the contest; Walker, who has seen his numbers in the state get cut in half over the course of the last month; and Trump, who, as previously mentioned, has received a sudden (but likely brief) surge due to his unexpected entrance into the primary.

As these other candidates rely on the mere novelty of their candidacies, Rand Paul will quickly take control as he builds upon his already solid numbers and shows himself to be different from the rest. By emerging from this large field with new ideas like those outlined in his “Fair and Flat” Tax Plan and his plans to privatize marriage, Paul will soon enough position himself to become the standard-bearer of the Republican Party as its presidential nominee.