Confronted with new polling showing that Republicans — especially Tea Partiers — are moving back toward supporting a larger role for the United States abroad, assumed 2016 presidential candidate Sen. Rand Paul has performed a startling reversal when it comes to responding to the threat posed by ISIS.
Speaking on Fox News on Friday, the Kentucky Republican said he would vote to authorize airstrikes against ISIS “in a heartbeat.” The clip was flagged by the Washington Free Beacon.
This was quite a turnaround from his June 19 op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, in which Paul wrote:
If it were anybody else, perhaps it would be easier to argue that he changed his mind as the threat of ISIS grew. But Paul’s past opposition to airstrikes was rooted in a broader philosophical critique of interventionism. Had his language not been so stark a few months ago, he could have argued that ISIS was one of those limited examples of when he believes U.S. national security is being threatened and thus the use of force is justified.
Politically, the risk to Paul of making this shift is that a lot of his passionate supporters have backed him for his willingness to stake out non-interventionist stands on foreign policy issues, filling a niche among elected Republicans. At the same time, hawkish Republicans are likely to treat with skepticism Paul’s new openness to exerting military force. So ultimately, he could be eroding support among his core followers without winning over any converts.
