is no stranger to the twisted rules of the American presidential
horse race. He ran for the highest office as a Libertarian in 1988,
and in 2008 and 2012 as a Republican.
arguably came closest to the nomination in 2012, when the GOP amended
its party regulations to prevent the former Texas representative from
stealing Mitt Romney’s thunder.
40(b) of “The
Rules of the Republican Party”
was changed so the Republican National Committee could “limit the
visibility and power of libertarian-minded Texas Rep.
Paul at the convention and thus present a unified front behind Mitt
Romney, the presumptive nominee,” according to David
an elections analyst at RealClearPolitics.
rule requires that, in order to win the nomination, a candidate must
have the support of a majority of delegates from eight states.
recent wins have tipped Sen. Ted Cruz past the cut off, the rule as
written came close to helping Trump take the nomination. Paul warned
that the GOP’s machinations to block Donald Trump are a sign of a
corrupt, undemocratic system.
worked on the assumption … for many, many decades, that whether
there’s a Republican or a Democrat president, the people who want
to keep the status quo seems to have their finger in the pot and can
control things,” he said in the interview.
just get so nervous, though, if they have an independent thinker out
there — whether it’s Sanders, or Trump or Ron Paul, they’re
going to be very desperate to try to change things.”
had nothing but scorn for Trump’s policies:
offering us nothing new, and he’s going backward in many way.”
suggested that the 2016 election is “a lot more entertainment than
anything else” because none of the candidates “have answers” to
modern political problems.
so, Paul interprets the success of these outsider candidates as a
sign that “more people are discovering that the system is all
rigged and voting is just pacification for the voters and it really
don’t think there’s an easy way out for the establishment or the
parties,” he noted, explaining that Democrats and Republicans would
both rather risk “further alienation of the people” than allow a
candidate to succeed who could shake up the system.
recalled his own 2012 encounter with Rule 40(b) as an important
political lesson for both himself and the American people.
was upset about it but didn’t want to waste too much energy being
angry because this is the way the system works,” he said. “It’s
a rotten system.”