He’s trying to bridge the (perhaps) unbridgeable gap between libertarians and traditional-values conservatives. Each one, if taken to its extreme, eliminates the other. Possibly each side must give way for a candidate to harness both sides. But then you could have the result we used to call “falling between two stools”—nobody wins.
“He’s trying to bridge the (perhaps) unbridgeable gap between libertarians and traditional-values conservatives.”
Reagan did it.
Bush destroyed that coalition with his spending spree and now Rand Paul is trying to piece it back together.
That would mean Libertarians = anarchy and traditional-values conservatives = fascist theocracy. I don't hold that position.
The beliefs can be identical (there are at least 2 types of Libertarians), but the path to implement is different. One believes government can compensate for moral deficiencies and the other believes government will reflect deficiencies and inhibit their correction.
- My opponents call me libertarian but I'm pro-life. (Feb 2011)
- Life begins at conception. (Jul 2010)
- Opposes federal abortion funding. (Aug 2010)
- Prohibit federal funding for abortion. (May 2011)
- Opposes same-sex marriage. (Nov 2009)
- Opposes affirmative action. (Aug 2010)
- Supports Amendment to prevent same sex marriage. (Aug 2010)