Naturally presuming that the person against tarriffs sees his income from the importing of goods from abroad and Paul is a working stiff who sees that the destruction of manufacturing and just about every other reasonable job that an American can perform is at stake or is in a job that depends on a large size middle class for his income. Anyone at that level would be someone who benefits from a protective tarriff. The only people who do not benefit are those with a vested interest in imports and those who are of the leisure class as the plantation owners of the Confederacy were.
If your intent is to set the tarriffs at a rate that would protect jobs, then it is implicit in that rate that there would be no imports. Since no imports mean no tarriffs, why would you think there would be no income tax to fund the federal government? Don't you think that's rather wishful thinking on your part?
A protective tarriff provides an incentive for capital investment in the USA to have full access to our markets . that is what protects job not a prohibitive tarriff that shuts out all imports.