Credible Poll: Ron Paul tied for US Senate in Texas GOP Primary!

[Libertea Party]

PPP was one of the most accurate pollsters in the 2010 election cycle. Wow!

Tough Choice for Ron and his supporters. Does he continue his accountability for the Fed in the house as chair of a subcommittee or does he start out as a freshman Senator with a Paul-Paul tag team in the Senate?

If he doesn't run he should blackmail the GOP establishment into clearing the field for Gary Johnson for US Senate in New Mexico! i.e. "I won't run in Texas if you clear the way for Gary."

What a great position to be in for us all!


Ron Paul for Senate? (http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2011/01/ron-paul-for-senate.html)

The top two choices of Texas Republicans to be their Senate nominee next year are David Dewhurst...and Ron Paul. The duo is basically tied with 23% saying Dewhurst would be their top pick as the GOP candidate and 21% picking Paul.

Maybe a couple years ago the thought of Senator Paul would have seemed ridiculous but after his son breezed through both the Republican primary and the general election in Kentucky last year it seems a lot less far fetched that his dad might join him in the Senate as well. He has a highly committed base of supporters that at the least might help ensure him a runoff spot in what's likely to be an extremely crowded GOP primary field and you have to think he would be the most well funded candidate in the race if he decided to run, given his already existent national donor base.

A much more obscure Tea Party candidate, Debra Medina, got 19% of the vote in the primary for Governor last year even though she was running against two heavyweights in Rick Perry and Kay Bailey Hutchison. If she could get almost 20% against that pair, why couldn't Paul get 30-40% against what's likely to be a much weaker field of candidates? A potential Paul bid is well worth keeping an eye on.

The only other potential contender getting double digits on the Republican wish list right now is Attorney General Greg Abbott at 14%. Joe Barton at 7%, Elizabeth Ames Jones at 6%, Ted Cruz, Tom Leppert, and Michael Williams at 3%, and Roger Williams at 1% round out the folks we tested.

Jones, Cruz, Leppert, and the two Williams' could all eventually become viable candidates in this race but for now their low poll standing is a reflection of the fact that they just aren't very well known. 73% of GOP primary voters don't know enough about Leppert to have an opinion about him and the same is true for 75% when it comes to Michael Williams and 79% for Jones. We didn't test favorability numbers on Cruz and Roger Williams but it's a safe bet that they're similarly anonymous at this point in time and certainly have nowhere to go but up.

Our general election numbers yesterday suggested this might not be all that interesting a race in the fall- but it certainly will be in the late winter and early spring and doubly so if Ron Paul ends up making a go of it.

Full results here (http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_TX_01191210.pdf)

[awsharp]

WOW. Yes, PPP is a very reliable polling firm. Great find, thanks for posting.

[Epic]

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_TX_01191210.pdf

Hiding in the data:

2012 President Texas GOP Primary

Huckabee 24
Gingrich 17
Palin 17
Paul 10 (TAKE THAT, SECOND TIER!)
Romney 10
Perry 9
Pawlenty 4
Daniels 3

(the same primary, without Perry, yields Paul just 9% somehow, proving that once again, the entrance of more neocons only dilutes the neocon vote, helping Paul)

Other interesting notes

- RP does better among women than men in the prez primary
- RP wins hispanics in the senate primary
- RP wins 18-29 in prez primary (w/perry)
- RP wins 18-29 and 30-45 in senate primary
- Lots of work to do with the 65+ crowd, as usual. RP wins just 4% of them in the prez primary.

[sailingaway]

I think the GOP would be thrilled to have him lose his House seat and chairmanship for the HOPE of becoming a junior Senator with no seniority. Particularly if it means he dropped a Presidential run.

Right now Gary's pac is running articles in Huff Po saying Gary is "A Whole Lot MOre" than Ron Paul. Ron is a bigger man than I, I fully realize, but I see no reason he should expend any more political capital on Gary's behalf.

[sailingaway]

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_TX_01191210.pdf

Hiding in the data:

2012 President Texas GOP Primary

Huckabee 24
Gingrich 17
Palin 17
Paul 10 (TAKE THAT, SECOND TIER!)
Romney 10
Perry 9
Pawlenty 4
Daniels 3

(the same primary, without Perry, yields Paul just 9% somehow, proving that once again, the entrance of more neocons only dilutes the neocon vote, helping Paul)

Other interesting notes

- RP does better among women than men in the prez primary
- RP wins hispanics in the senate primary
- RP wins 18-29 in prez primary (w/perry)
- RP wins 18-29 and 30-45 in senate primary
- Lots of work to do with the 65+ crowd, as usual. RP wins just 4% of them in the prez primary.

I think the mere idea of Perry fires up OUR folks...

[Libertea Party]

I think the GOP would be thrilled to have him lose his House seat and chairmanship for the HOPE of becoming a junior Senator with no seniority. Particularly if it means he dropped a Presidential run.

Right now Gary's pac is running articles in Huff Po saying Gary is "A Whole Lot MOre" than Ron Paul. Ron is a bigger man than I, I fully realize, but I see no reason he should expend any more political capital on Gary's behalf.

Yeah Gary's been a bit erratic. But I think the GOP establishment would HATE the possibility of another Paul in the Senate. Especially this one.

As for Ron winning. Think about it. Ron starts out tied nearly a 10 months ahead of where Rand was in 2009. And where does it say he loses any position if he runs?

Here would be my price for Ron not running off the top of my head:

1) Rand gets all his committee assignments he wants in the Senate
2) Movement on Audit the Fed in the Senate
3) Johnson for Senate
4) Speaking slot at 2012 RNC Convention

If they say no, well there's a way for a pro-liberty voice to push for Auditing the Fed, having another vote/voice in the Senate and prominence in public (The media will eat up the Father/Son in the Senate story. The Ron and Rand show!) and that's by having Ron Paul as the US Senator from Texas!

[specsaregood]

I think the GOP would be thrilled to have him lose his House seat and chairmanship for the HOPE of becoming a junior Senator with no seniority. Particularly if it means he dropped a Presidential run.

Correction: both the GOP and DNC ie: the establishment would be thrilled.
PPP was only "accurate" in the last month when there polls are counted as far as accuracy. Prior to that they were not "accurate" and it doesn't take much imagination that they use such polls to try to manipulate public opinion. They would love to fool us and RP into going for a senate seat.

[Libertea Party]

Oh I'd add that they get out of Michael Williams way too in Texas too. That's a nice way of helping out the DeMint/RedState crowd that helped Rand out.

[Sola_Fide]

I think the GOP would be thrilled to have him lose his House seat and chairmanship for the HOPE of becoming a junior Senator with no seniority. Particularly if it means he dropped a Presidential run.

Right now Gary's pac is running articles in Huff Po saying Gary is "A Whole Lot MOre" than Ron Paul. Ron is a bigger man than I, I fully realize, but I see no reason he should expend any more political capital on Gary's behalf.

^^^this.

It seems like both Gary's people and the GOP would like to see Ron run for the Senate. It is a bad idea. Furthermore, what is wrong with Gary Johnson's people???? They are going to dare denigrate the lion of the people, Ron Paul? The person Gary gets his ideas from and his supporters from?

Bad move on Gary's part. Gary and his people better start kissing Ron Paul's backside or there may be a lot of us around here that will really start to sour on Gary.

[sailingaway]

Yeah Gary's been a bit erratic. But I think the GOP establishment would HATE the possibility of another Paul in the Senate. Especially this one.

As for Ron winning. Think about it. Ron starts out tied nearly a 10 months ahead of where Rand was in 2009. And where does it say he loses any position if he runs?

Here would be my price for Ron not running off the top of my head:

1) Rand gets all his committee assignments he wants in the Senate
2) Movement on Audit the Fed in the Senate
3) Johnson for Senate
4) Speaking slot at 2012 RNC Convention

If they say no, well there's a way for a pro-liberty voice to push for Auditing the Fed, having another vote/voice in the Senate and prominence in public (The media will eat up the Father/Son in the Senate story. The Ron and Rand show!) and that's by having Ron Paul as the US Senator from Texas!

In Texas you can only run for two offices at the same time if one is the Presidency. It is the old LBJ law. Otherwise, you have to choose. Ron would have to choose between his House seat and his subcommittee chairmanship, or the Senate. I think he has a better than even chance of winning the Senate seat, but if there is even a 20 % chance he could lose it, he'd be giving up something better for nothing. And I really think he has more power with his subcommittee, but I could be wrong. If he wants a senate seat, obviously I'd support him.

[sailingaway]

Oh I'd add that they get out of Michael Williams way too in Texas too. That's a nice way of helping out the DeMint/RedState crowd that helped Rand out.

DeMint and we have both lost where we don't back the same candidate, have you noticed?

However, you keep thinking they would want Ron to NOT run, and I think the GOP would love him to run for Senate and give up what he otherwise has.

[Libertea Party]

Just read the "whole lot more" (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/matt-simon/gary-johnson-the-next-ron_b_808570.html) piece and frankly didn't find it offensive. He's said some other things that give me pause but in other places. But honestly I think it's a Rand Paul situation where he's just trying to "distance" himself from Ron without really distancing himself.

[Inkblots]

Here would be my price for Ron not running off the top of my head:

1) Rand gets all his committee assignments he wants in the Senate
2) Movement on Audit the Fed in the Senate
3) Johnson for Senate
4) Speaking slot at 2012 RNC Convention

If they say no, well there's a way for a pro-liberty voice to push for Auditing the Fed, having another vote/voice in the Senate and prominence in public (The media will eat up the Father/Son in the Senate story. The Ron and Rand show!) and that's by having Ron Paul as the US Senator from Texas!

While I would much prefer to have Ron remain as Chairman of his subcommittee than enter the Senate, I really like your idea of using the threat of a Senate run to extract concessions. And this list you've put together is a good one, too. It's be great if this happened!

[Libertea Party]

DeMint and we have both lost where we don't back the same candidate, have you noticed?

However, you keep thinking they would want Ron to NOT run, and I think the GOP would love him to run for Senate and give up what he otherwise has.

Again I'm a novice about protocol but where does it say he has to give up anything?

[sailingaway]

Again I'm a novice about protocol but where does it say he has to give up anything?

Read my post before that one.


In Texas you can only run for two offices at the same time if one is the Presidency. It is the old LBJ law. Otherwise, you have to choose. Ron would have to choose between his House seat and his subcommittee chairmanship, or the Senate. I think he has a better than even chance of winning the Senate seat, but if there is even a 20 % chance he could lose it, he'd be giving up something better for nothing. And I really think he has more power with his subcommittee, but I could be wrong. If he wants a senate seat, obviously I'd support him.

[Inkblots]

Just read the "whole lot more" (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/matt-simon/gary-johnson-the-next-ron_b_808570.html) piece and frankly didn't find it offensive. He's said some other things that give me pause but in other places. But honestly I think it's a Rand Paul situation where he's just trying to "distance" himself from Ron without really distancing himself.

I think that's called a distinction without a difference. And I hope that's true - although his stated willingness to support humanitarian interventionism under some circumstances is a bit worrisome.

[Epic]

Considering that Ron Paul is 75%+ to run for president, and the fact that he would have to give up his house seat in order to run for senate, I think Ron Paul will not be running for Senate. Doing so would be foolish.

[pcosmar]

F U Frank
Polls are deceptive. Are worded to get a particular desired reaction. And confuse the issues.

And what is all this speculation of Ron doing something he has expressed no intention of , and would be totally illogical for him to do??.

More attempted manipulation I suspect.

[sailingaway]

I think that's called a distinction without a difference. And I hope that's true - although his stated willingness to support humanitarian interventionism under some circumstances is a bit worrisome.

"A Whole Lot More" isn't subtle, it is saying Ron isn't much, really, but that Gary could be so people should stop looking to Ron and jump onto the Gary Johnson bandwagon. And to AquaBuddha, I don't think Ron nor we want Gary to kiss his ass, but there is a difference between kissing ass and subtly but chronically denigrating someone who has given you only kind words and good opportunities. Gary in his invitation to CPAC also cited that last year Gary was there with Tom Woods and Judge Napalitano, without mentioning Ron (OR that all three were appearing, not at CPAC proper, but at a subforum run by C4L at CPAC.) I have written Gary off except as a possible 'better than' vote for lower office somewhere. I surely wouldn't work for nor donate to him, unless something drastic were to happen to change my opinion of him.

I tried hard to like him for some time but never really could and I see no reason to keep trying.

[Brett85]

If Ron's son doesn't want to run for this Senate seat, then I think that Ron should. Ron has a much better chance of winning this Senate seat then becoming President. Assuming that the filibuster rules stay the same, Ron could really slow things down in the Senate if he were to join.

[specsaregood]

F U Frank
Polls are deceptive. Are worded to get a particular desired reaction. And confuse the issues.
And what is all this speculation of Ron doing something he has expressed no intention of , and would be totally illogical for him to do??.
More attempted manipulation I suspect.

I'll just say it again. Our enemies would love for Ron to be a junior senator with no seniority to speak of, where they can hide him away in some uninteresting committee with no power. And eliminate the role he has wanted for years with the power to question and subpoena the federal reserve officials at will.

I mean come on, could it be any more obvious?

[Libertea Party]

Read my post before that one.

Okay you're right I missed that post. I wonder when that law is actually triggered though. I mean he has some time and wiggle room to make a Senate threat credible and extract concessions at least.

[erowe1]

If he did win the senate seat, I'd rate that higher than chairing that subcommittee in the House. To me, the tougher question is whether or not it would be better than a presidential run.

[Libertea Party]

Just saw this:


Ted Cruz, the former solicitor general of Texas who's become a sought-after conservative speaker, is in the race to replace Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison. Michael Williams is already in, and he's quitting his post at the Railroad Commission to run.

Does this make it more likely that neither of them will win the race? They have different constituencies -- Williams has won statewide, Cruz hasn't -- but they both appeal to national conservatives. And theoretically that gives Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, a 65-year-old veteran politician who can count on more establishment support, a chance to box them out. The advantage either dark horse has is that if no candidate gets 50 percent of the vote on primary day, the election goes to a runoff, and that could help Williams or Cruz if one of them gets to a showdown with Dewhurst.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/weigel/archive/2011/01/19/tea-vs-tea-in-texas.aspx

Maybe he can work out a something with conservative activists too. Johnson in New Mexico for sure but I just remembered that Indiana has a Senate seat that might open up too. Dick Lugar is hated by everyone and is in danger of losing the GOP primary to a conservative challenger. Hostettler and possibly Johnson (NM leans blue slightly) in exchange for Williams or Cruz in Texas.

[Agorism]

Please run for PRESIDENT instead.

[Libertea Party]

Here's a recent story (http://dallasmorningviewsblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2011/01/does-ron-paul-w.html)talking about the possibility before this poll came out:


Does Ron Paul want to join Rand in the Senate?
Colleen McCain Nelson/Editorial Writer

The line of wannabe U.S. senators is already stretching around the building. But we might need to add another name to the list of possible candidates for Kay Bailey Hutchison's seat: Ron Paul. While the congressman hasn't been top-of-mind of most people's lists today, it certainly appears that the idea of running for the Senate has at least piqued Paul's interest.

On ronpaul.com , visitors will find the headline 'Ron Paul for U.S. Senate ?' with a poll asking, "What should Ron Paul do in 2012?" The early leader in the results is: Ron Paul should run for president, but a bid for the Senate is the second-most popular option. Paul, who's been called "the Tea Party's brain," could add another interesting element to the GOP Senate primary.

Conservative leaders in and out of Texas are already assessing would-be candidates' tea party credentials. Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina has made clear his lack of enthusiasm for Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst. He's intrigued by Raliroad Commissioner Michael Williams and former Solicitor General Ted Cruz.

But Paul, who attracts rather ardent supporters, would bring a different dynamic to a race that could become a hard-fought battle for the heart and soul of the Texas GOP. Do tea partiers wield the power -- or more traditional Republicans? And any hint of a Paul candidacy would launch the storyline mulling over the possibility of a father-son duo in the U.S. Senate. Paul's son, Rand , of course is the headline-generating senator from Kentucky. And as luck would have it, Rand Paul just announced the formation of a tea party caucus in the Senate.

2012 is already shaping up to be a fascinating year.

[Matt Collins]

OP is right - this does give Ron a huge bargaining chip because he now has leverage that he can choose to use.

However I still maintain that Ron should stay in the house and run for President. I think that will be the best possible outcome.

[Agorism]

Texas has the runoff system as well. We could surely get to the 1v1 runoff. Then it would be if we had enough statewide appeal so it could be a tight race in that case.

[jtstellar]

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_TX_01191210.pdf

Hiding in the data:

2012 President Texas GOP Primary

Huckabee 24
Gingrich 17
Palin 17
Paul 10 (TAKE THAT, SECOND TIER!)
Romney 10
Perry 9
Pawlenty 4
Daniels 3

(the same primary, without Perry, yields Paul just 9% somehow, proving that once again, the entrance of more neocons only dilutes the neocon vote, helping Paul)

Other interesting notes

- RP does better among women than men in the prez primary
- RP wins hispanics in the senate primary
- RP wins 18-29 in prez primary (w/perry)
- RP wins 18-29 and 30-45 in senate primary
- Lots of work to do with the 65+ crowd, as usual. RP wins just 4% of them in the prez primary.

fukin hating old ppl more and more.. anything for their cash even if they don't get any because of inflation and worthless checks, they want everybody to die wit them. if there ever was an urge to approve of population cleansing

[Sola_Fide]

fukin hating old ppl more and more.. anything for their cash even if they don't get any because of inflation and worthless checks, they want everybody to die wit them. if there ever was an urge to approve of population cleansing

^^^lolololol

[RonPaulFanInGA]

Ron Paul will be 77 by the time he's sworn in to the Senate if he ran and won. This is completely stupid, he's too old to be making that leap. This seat would've been nice when Paul first ran for it in 1984; now he'd have no chance to gain any seniority. Paul would be a lowly junior Senator from Texas for likely only one term. Paul should run for President where he would have real political power if he won.

Has Ron Paul even mentioned any interest in this Senate seat or is this the media trying to trick him out of a presidential run and his U.S. House seat?

[Maximus]

Any buzz is good buzz, seeing Ron Paul on top of a real poll helps to make him a serious candidate.

Like the others said, he should use this as a bargaining chip.

[Zap!]

Well, just in case he does...

Ron Paul For Senate Facebook Page (http://www.facebook.com/pages/Ron-Paul-for-Senate-2012/185656571458868)

:)

[jmdrake]

OP is right - this does give Ron a huge bargaining chip because he now has leverage that he can choose to use.

However I still maintain that Ron should stay in the house and run for President. I think that will be the best possible outcome.

I agree. But here's something I think people are overlooking. This is the highest I've ever seen Ron Paul in a legitimate statewide poll PERIOD! I would assume that most of the people polled who would vote for him for senate would at least consider voting for him for president.

[sailingaway]

I agree. But here's something I think people are overlooking. This is the highest I've ever seen Ron Paul in a legitimate statewide poll PERIOD! I would assume that most of the people polled who would vote for him for senate would at least consider voting for him for president.

You don't count his presidential primary votes? Because he hit 21% and 25 %, numbers like that, a few places. It wasn't statistically a tie for first, though, more's the pity....

[garyallen59]

fukin hating old ppl more and more.. anything for their cash even if they don't get any because of inflation and worthless checks, they want everybody to die wit them. if there ever was an urge to approve of population cleansing

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARXfQzfl9EQ

[jmdrake]

You don't count his presidential primary votes? Because he hit 21% and 25 %, numbers like that, a few places. It wasn't statistically a tie for first, though, more's the pity....

Were any of those before McCain had the only other alternative candidate left? Anyway I should have worded what I said more carefully. This is the first time I saw Ron this early with a decent chance to win statewide. (And yeah I know we got ripped of in Nevada and possibly Louisiana). Hey, I'm trying to be positive here. :D

[jmdrake]

fukin hating old ppl more and more.. anything for their cash even if they don't get any because of inflation and worthless checks, they want everybody to die wit them. if there ever was an urge to approve of population cleansing

Ummmm....you realize Ron is old too right? :o

Here's the deal. Most old people aren't on the Internet. That's where Ron Paul's strength is. To win old people we have to go to them with the message and not count on them "Googling" Ron Paul or the media giving Dr. Paul a fair shake. That means visiting retirement homes and knocking on doors in retirement communities. Most old folks are happy enough for the company to at least listen to you. You may even win some votes that way. Many of the young crowd who loved Ron Paul abandoned him in 2008 for the "more trendy" Barack Obama. And some just plain didn't show up to vote.

[specsaregood]

That means visiting retirement homes and knocking on doors in retirement communities. Most old folks are happy enough for the company to at least listen to you. You may even win some votes that way.
True enough. I quickly gathered 100 signatures to get him on the ballot in my state with one visit to a retirement comunity.

[erowe1]

Ron Paul will be 77 by the time he's sworn in to the Senate if he ran and won. This is completely stupid, he's too old to be making that leap.

Why do you think that?

Spending the next 6 years in the Senate would be better than spending them in the House, regardless of his age.

[RonPaulFanInGA]

Why do you think that?

Spending the next 6 years in the Senate would be better than spending them in the House, regardless of his age.

Ron Paul is the Chairman of the House Domestic Monetary Policy Subcommittee, overseeing the Federal Reserve.

Ron Paul in the Senate has zero seniority and he's too old to build any up. The whole Senate thing is a ruse. "Hey Ron, don't run for the White House and ditch your House seat...."

[jmdrake]

True enough. I quickly gathered 100 signatures to get him on the ballot in my state with one visit to a retirement comunity.

Cool beans! We really need to start brainstorming ideas like this. Dedicated thread? Subforum? We're going to have to do more then pwn the net this time.

[SilentBull]

I really do not see the point of Ron becoming senator at his age. He needs to either become president, or stay chairman of the subcommittee and do what he can from there.

[SilentBull]

What exactly is it that people think he'll be able to accomplish as a junior senator? Right now he is CHAIRMAN of the subcommittee on monetary policy. Use common sense here! Just because a senator is more important than a rep, does not mean he would be able to accomplish more. This makes no sense whatsoever!

[speciallyblend]

Ron Paul 2012 or what the /gop establishment neo-cons would like? senate. I am not buying this BS!!! I call BS!!

[SilentBull]

fukin hating old ppl more and more.. anything for their cash even if they don't get any because of inflation and worthless checks, they want everybody to die wit them. if there ever was an urge to approve of population cleansing

The first thing his 2012 campaign needs to do is work on ads targeted for seniors.

[trey4sports]

The first thing his 2012 campaign needs to do is work on ads targeted for seniors.

AGREED! If his campaign team is competent then the vast majority of money spent should be towards bringing old folks to the R3VOLUTION

[nobody's_hero]

I wish Huckabee would stay put. I think they ship him around just to piss people off.

[RonPaulFanInGA]

The first thing his 2012 campaign needs to do is work on ads targeted for seniors.

No rest until these two are singing a Ron Paul "battle hymn":


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhMepzqJvIw

[itshappening]

MEDINA for US Senate with Ron Paul and our full backing, if she wins that primary which she can do then another liberty voice is in the Senate for 20 years

[Agorism]

What work did Medina do prior to becoming a politician?

[sailingaway]

MEDINA for US Senate with Ron Paul and our full backing, if she wins that primary which she can do then another liberty voice is in the Senate for 20 years

Is she interested in federal issues? She seemed state oriented. I did like her, if everyone wants to get behind her. But I'd back Ron first, of course, assuming he wanted to run, which i doubt and don't recommend.

It is also something to consider that so far we and De Mint's group win when we are on the same side or at least the other doesn't have a different candidate. From the PPP poll De Mint seems to be backing a loser (Williams) though.

[erowe1]

Ron Paul is the Chairman of the House Domestic Monetary Policy Subcommittee, overseeing the Federal Reserve.

Ron Paul in the Senate has zero seniority and he's too old to build any up. The whole Senate thing is a ruse. "Hey Ron, don't run for the White House and ditch your House seat...."

I wouldn't overstate the power he has chairing that subcommittee. When it comes to the effect he could have on what bills actually do or don't become laws, he could have more effect as a senator than a congressman, regardless of his position in the chamber.

[MRK]

I would like to mention another possibility solely for the sake of consideration. If Ron Paul ran for the Senate seat, while Rand ran for the Presidency, there would still be a Paul running for the White House and at the end of the day it would also be likely to have at least two Pauls in the Senate, adding two sane votes to the significantly smaller chamber.