So as I tried to post before:
There had been - at the least - unspoken assumptions that Rand Paul's campaign did not dispel before, and in practice - cultivated actively, that Rand Paul was a slightly more moderate Ron Paul.
This is clearly untrue.
There's a vast gap not merely of degree, but of principle and substance, between Rand Paul and libertarianism - clearly Rand Paul is not a libertarian, not even a libertarian-conservative like his father.
He is, at best, a conservative with some libertarian leanings.
Certainly I would - were I an American of the appropriate age - vote for him in a primary race (unless someone better turns up).
But his candidacy now represents, at best, a gradual improvement over the status quo, not - as Ron Paul's would - a severe wound to it.
Whether this will lose him more votes than it gains is an open question. Perhaps not.
But elections are not merely won by a sheer quantity of voters. Voter enthusiasm translates into donations and volunteering hours.
It is not clear that this move made him any more 'electable' than he was a week ago. I suspect not.
