I’m pretty sure the majority of Paul’s funding comes from perturbed libertarians.
And even if leftists do contribute to his campaign, it seems like they would be working against their interests, since Paul’s view of government is completely antithetical to liberal leftist ideology.
Not since their main goal is to lose the war on terror and Paul is more likely to do that than Hillary...
They don't have a single candidate running who could win in a national election...including Billary.
Unless, of course, they see to it that a very weak Republican is our nominee.
The better Paul finishes in the primaries, the more Repubs start dropping out due to lack of support and funding, etc.
>>And even if leftists do contribute to his campaign, it seems like they would be working against their interests, since Paul’s view of government is completely antithetical to liberal leftist ideology.
<<
Liberal dollars to Paul translates to fewer dollars to the dems. It isn’t all bad.
Since Paul has no chance whatsoever, it's a risk-free investment. They're not trying to get the guy elected. They're trying to finance a sustained third-party effort that will siphon 2-5% of the vote away from the GOP candidate.
“And even if leftists do contribute to his campaign, it seems like they would be working against their interests, since Paul’s view of government is completely antithetical to liberal leftist ideology.”
They see it as a means to an end.
The leftist’s goal is to install hillary.
And as long as they can skew the Republican primary to put in a weak candidate who polls in the single digits then so be it.