Branded

This is how I see Ron Paul. Like all candidates with an “R” at the end of his name, he uses the label to acquire electoral office. He accrues the benefits that the party label provides. However, because he takes so many divergent issue positions both in the campaign and in Congress – he does not contribute to the maintenance of the brand. To put it intuitively, he’s a libertarian who dresses up as a Republican. This is why I chuckle whenever he argues – which he often does in the debates – that he is the only true Republican in the field. If you define a Republican as a libertarian – then that would be the case! ~Jay Cost

In this post Cost seems to be lamenting the lack of ability on the part of political parties to bar candidates from debates.  It’s interesting that Cost would make a point of insisting that what Paul believes really has nothing to do with the GOP.  I have known that for some time, but it’s remarkable for someone arguing on behalf of the “GOP brand” to announce that the GOP brand really has no connection to advocacy for U.S. sovereignty, limited government, and constitutionalism, defense of civil liberties, protection of life, opposition to illegal immigration and a non-interventionist foreign policy.  The GOP must be fundamentally against all these things, since the candidate who espouses them is not helping “maintain” the GOP brand. 

If you define a Republican as a pro-choice, pro-amnesty authoritarian jingo, Giuliani would then be the ideal candidate.  For some reason, the party would rather be identified with that than with someone like Paul.  Perhaps Paul doesn’t represent the “brand” well, but that has a great deal to do with the content of the “brand” being absolutely awful. 

P.S.  There is also actually an advantage in having candidates who match their districts to provide greater flexibility and adaptability for a national party “brand.”  If everyone tried to maintain the exact same “brand” in every district, the losses would add up quickly.  The Democrats finally figured this out last year when they started running candidates that were actually suited to local views on social or cultural issues.  Complaining about candidates who are “undermining” the brand is a luxury the GOP can’t really afford when the national party’s brand is widely reviled.

about the author

Daniel Larison is a senior editor at TAC, where he also keeps a solo blog. He has been published in the New York Times Book Review, Dallas Morning News, World Politics Review, Politico Magazine, Orthodox Life, Front Porch Republic, The American Scene, and Culture11, and was a columnist for The Week. He holds a PhD in history from the University of Chicago, and resides in Lancaster, PA. Follow him on Twitter.

leave a comment

Latest Articles