Rand Paul: The 'X Factor' in 2016

   On Tuesday, the second domino fell in the race for the Republican presidential nomination when Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky announced his candidacy for president. This should come as a surprise to no one who has been paying attention, as Paul has been talking about running for at least a year. And while he stands little chance of winning the White House, or even surviving his own party's primaries, don't underestimate him. Win or lose, Paul could exercise a significant influence on who wins the GOP nomination, maybe even the White House.
   Rand Paul is the son of longtime Texas Congressman and perennial presidential candidate Ron Paul. Before being elected to the Senate, he was an opthamalogist. And while he is a libertarian like his father and shares many of the same views, he also has several important differences with the elder Paul. While Ron Paul drew fire four years ago when some seemingly racist writings surfaced, the younger Paul has gone out of his way to speak at historically black colleges and universities and has made an effort to reach out to minority voters. While the elder Paul was a strict isolationist when it came to foreign policy, Rand Paul understands that this is not a position we an afford to take.
   Perhaps Paul's biggest advantage as he joins the race is a high level of name recognition. His father, Ron, enjoyed a great deal of grass-roots support, especially among younger voters hungry for a change from the status-quo. Rand is likely to inherit that support, along with whatever fund-raising network his father had established.
   Rand's biggest disadvantage is the same as his father's: His libertarian views are largely outside the mainstream of his party, and his willingness to speak out, even against his own party line, is likely to alienate his party's leaders. Like his father, Rand is an ideologue who stands on principle. But having the right idea can only take you so far. Unless you have the ability to sell that idea to others, you remain just an ideologue with the right idea and no chance at seeing that idea become a reality. That makes for a largely  ineffective leader, which I fear would be Rand's fate in the unlikely event that he became president.
   That doesn't mean, however, that Paul couldn't have an impact on this election. In fact, I view him as the "X factor" in this election, the same way Ralph Nader was ultimately the deciding factor in the election of 2000. Paul has almost no shot of winning his party's nomination. He knows that, even if he won't admit it publicly. But he does have a loyal, grassroots following, just like his father. Combine that with voters who are fed up with the status-quo, who view the two parties as largely identical, and it's possible that he could draw enough votes off of one candidate to throw the election to the other.
   I have said for years that what this country needs is a viable third party to offer voters a real alternative to the two entrenched parties. But Rand Paul is not that alternative. Hopefully, he will realize that and withdraw quietly before any real, lasting damage is done.