The Rand Paul Effect – Media Love-Hate fest Begins on the National Election front.

Lately, the Love him or hate him effect from old and new media for Rand Paul, the Senator from Kentucky who is the current GOP 2016 frontrunner (though hardly announced) has been ramped up a bit. The reasoning is pretty clear to those who are of a political mindset – the Establishment GOP sees Senator Paul as a threat to their preconceived notions of a candidate, and the Democrats see him as a threat for the same reason. Oddly enough, Libertarian ideals appeal to voters on the left and right of the political spectrum, so therefore, Paul is a threat to the status quo.

In addition, with each major political party, there are those who are to the right of the right and the left of the left, absolutists that would never, for example, vote for a Mormon as they might see that religion as a “cult”, and there are those on the left that would never vote for a Democrat if that individual did not have a perfect NARAL (abortion lobby) score. It is the extreme’s that drive both parties, as they are “the base”. The base often lives in print and broadcast, so loyal to party affiliation they fail to see the forest through the trees – believing that a Hillary Clinton – Jeb Bush match-up is, somehow, perfect, (the political dynasty equaling name recognition), or some such nonsense.

Therefore, reading articles on the Senator is conflicting – as it is a love, hate relationship taking form – there are two from Politico one exemplifies the hate and one sits squarely on the fence of neither. This following a week of pluses for the Senator, especially the warm reception received in Berkley, by the millennial – those 18-22 year olds who are itching to vote for someone fresh.

The first is titled “Big in the Bluegrass, In Kentucky It’s already about President Paul”, written by Sam Youngman, who writes for the Lexington Herald Leader. He lays out the Paul phenomenon with clarity – what his challenges are on the right and the left, with personal inflections being confined to reminiscing about past campaigns and the reality of the right and the left. It is worth the read. It may well be state pride, or it may also be a career motivated article, considering there is always a special place for reporters that can become attached to a national presidential campaign.

The second is entitled “Ready for Rand? – by Kevin D. Williamson, a “roving” contributor to the National Review who suggests that American’s will learn to hate Paul, they just don’t know it yet – blaming his Libertarianism. Of course, he also suggests that most American’s would prefer to be government dependent on various programs, which in the end, will prevent them from pulling a lever for a man who may take away social security, or and suggests that Libertarians and Liberals are one in the same – as the labels are from the same root word. From the establishment comes a salvo aimed at suggesting Paul is a non-starter.

One might suggest the most egregious examples will come from the National GOP who undoubtedly has a candidate in mind who will carry the banner right up until the concession speech.

Frankly, at this early point in the game it is impossible to tell where the cards will end up falling, and who will be in the deck – for either political party. Therefore, early stone-throwing accomplishes the ground work for later – just in case. It is the way of it with the D.C. bunch, and as it has happened in the past, and will happen in the near future; those who would decide the issue of who will be the standard bearer may be surprised to find themselves overruled – by the simple act of a vote.