Rand Paul bets the campaign on ‘filibuster’

[Formerly Once-Ler]

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/rand-paul-bets-the-campaign-on-filibuster-118166.html

Rand Paul seized the national stage on Wednesday with his second Mr. Smith-style speech on the Senate floor, linking his presidential hopes to an effort to halt the National Security Agency’s data collection program.

The 10 1/2-hour speech was the big, attention-grabbing moment that presidential campaigns crave, and Paul’s advisers saw it as a huge opportunity, even as rivals insisted the move was out of step with the Republican Party’s hawkish mood.

“It re-establishes him as the candidate that is willing to buck the Washington establishment for something he thinks is important: to protect individual rights,” said Steve Munisteri, a senior adviser to Paul’s campaign and the former chairman of the Texas Republican Party. He added, “Sen. Paul is the only Republican candidate on the forefront of protecting individual privacy.”

A Republican strategist close to the Paul camp put it more bluntly: “In a multicandidate field like this, how do you distinguish yourself? How do you break out of the pack? This is one way of doing it: Every other candidate disagrees with [you].”

People in Paul’s orbit believe that the decision to take to the floor to fight the NSA — via a long, filibuster-like speech — will galvanize the libertarian base that supported his father, Ron Paul, without turning off more mainstream Republicans. The Paul forces wasted no time fundraising off the event, something sources say will continue, and the campaign revived the #StandwithRand hashtag that Paul made popular with his 2013 filibuster of John Brennan’s nomination to lead the CIA in order to dramatize his skepticism about the administration’s use of drones. At 6 p.m. Wednesday, Paul supporters attempted to stage a small, impromptu rally at the Capitol.

But big moves carry big risks, as supporters of Paul’s GOP competitors pointed out. Rival campaigns and other Republicans note that times have changed since Paul burst onto the national scene with his filibuster. Now, they say, with the Islamic State on the march, Paul’s efforts to restrict the NSA could jeopardize national security. Some predicted the filibuster would backfire, serving mainly to show early-state voters just how out of step Paul can be with the Republican mainstream.

“I just don’t know if it’ll generate the same level of energy or enthusiasm,” said Robert C. O’Brien, a foreign policy adviser to Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker. “We’re in a different security situation with the fall of Ramadi. … While there are people rightly concerned about the NSA following the law and appropriate rules and regulations, I think people realize we face a very, very serious security threat.”

Indeed, the move comes as Paul attempts to moderate his image on defense and foreign policy. For years, Republicans have sought to paint him as an isolationist who excessively prioritizes privacy over security. And on many issues, Paul has backed off or de-emphasized some of the harder-line libertarian views he espoused when he entered the Senate as a tea party insurgent.

But on this one, people in Paul’s orbit believe that the public is with him. They note polls that suggest voters prefer a balance between civil liberties and national security and believe that the issue will resonate with young people and voters from the technology sector — two groups Paul has been courting. That was reflected on his Twitter feed and Instagram accounts, both of which offered up steady streams of content tied to the senator’s speech, in keeping with the campaign’s digital-first mentality. Paul and his allies also had no problem taking swipes at other candidates — Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), for example — who don’t go as far as he does in taking on the PATRIOT Act.

“This is an easy way to communicate a message that a wide swath of voters agree with, or are at least willing to listen to, while at the same time, you’re exciting the base,” said the GOP strategist close to Paul’s team.

And with his libertarian base, where there has been some disappointment in Paul’s relative moderation, it appears to be working.

“I think his campaign has been pretty lackluster. … But this filibuster issue is the first time I’ve seen some enthusiasm,” said Aaron Day, chairman of the New Hampshire Liberty Caucus. “It is the ‘Live Free or Die’ state, and I think people in New Hampshire in general are not impressed with government overreach. … I think it’s a winning issue for him here.”

Andrew Hemingway, a New Hampshire tea party activist who ran for the GOP gubernatorial nomination last year, also nodded to the GOP primary implications of Paul’s move.

“I love the filibuster. I hate the PATRIOT Act, and any effort to stand up and to take that risk I appreciate,” he said. “I would hope that Cruz would lend support … even if it means that Rand Paul would get a little bit more of a bump than he does.”

Nonetheless, polls indicate that attitudes among Republican primary voters about national security and foreign policy have swung in a significantly more hawkish direction over the past year. During that time, the rise of the Islamic State and the beheadings and other murders of Americans in the Middle East have renewed concerns about terrorism, which was a dominant issue in the midterm campaigns.

Now, some Republican insiders think Paul’s civil libertarian message is off-key. He is directly at odds with most of the rest of the field, including Rubio and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, on the PATRIOT Act. And representatives of Republican campaigns expressed skepticism that Paul’s filibuster would generate as much momentum. “I don’t think it moves the needle for anyone in any way,” said one adviser to a potential Republican presidential candidate. “I don’t think anyone learns anything about Rand Paul from it.”

South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham summed up the current feeling of the most hawkish corner of the GOP when he said earlier this week in Iowa, “If I’m president of the United States and you’re thinking about joining Al Qaeda or [the Islamic State] — anybody thinking about that? — I’m not going to call a judge, I’m going to call a drone, and we will kill you.”