It's also encouraging that the best these opponents can come up with are debunked claims of bigotry and attacks on Paul's foreign policy, which I won't talk about beyond saying it's clearly a stance which has been attracting, rather than repelling voters.
Regarding the other assertion, that newsletters which went out under Paul's name were bigoted, it's an issue barely worth addressing. Partly because Paul has, for years, stated that he denounces the language used in several of those letters. But mostly because the idea of racism and anti-semitism is in such conflict with Paul's political philosophy and personal record. This week for example several media outlets played up an attack piece on Paul by former staffer and later congressional opponent Eric Dondero. The thing read more like a recommendation than an attack. Dondero outlined Paul's distaste for bigotry, writing Paul had no problem with hiring minorities and was not an anti-semite. He did note that Paul was uncomfortable around gay people, attributing this to a generational difference. Dondero's point then is that Paul adheres to precisely the philosophy he espouses: you can do whatever you want in your own time, but don't ask others to subsidize it.
Does the fact that Paul, a devout Christian, does not celebrate the gay lifestyle shock anyone? Am I the only Republican (except for maybe Bob Barr) who watched "Bruno?"
The notion that Paul would judge someone based on their race or religion is preposterous. To do so would be in conflict with the central tenet of libertarianism, that people are individuals and should be judged on their own merits, not by collective labels. It's an approach, incidentally, which was developed in detail by a host of great Jewish thinkers. Much of Paul's intellectual development was under the guidance of the von Mises Institute, an organization named after the esteemed Jewish economist. On the subject of naming, Paul named his son after Ayn Rand, who was Jewish. In a recent debate he promised to bring Austrian Economics, the school formalized by Nobel Prize winning (and Jewish) economist Friedrich von Hayek to the White House.
I think much of the concern comes from the fact that there are a number of lunatics out there who have proclaimed support for Paul, claiming he supports their idiotic viewpoints. Tactically, Paul has a very good approach in that he is willing to take votes or money from anyone, but will never do what they want. in other words, if some KKK chapter wants to send Paul $1,000, he'll use the money. There is no way he would ever advocate what they are seeking, in fact their contribution would be counterproductive because ultimately Paul seeks a fully equitable society under the Constitution. But he'll take the money if they are stupid enough to send it.
Strategically though this creates problems, because attackers can point out- and they very much are recently- that he is receiving money from truthers, birthers, birth-truthers, and whatever other fringe groups are out there.
Fortunately, I think many people have realized that if this is the best his opponents can come up with, this guy is pretty much the cleanest politician on the planet. This guy literally declined to participate in the Congressional healthcare program, because he thinks it is unfair that Congressmen get better care than citizens. He's a father who refused to take out student loans for his kids, instead footing the bill himself, because he thought such an act would be against the Constitution. Additionally, voters seem to understand that even where they disagree with Paul on the issues, at least he's frank and consistent.
That makes for not just a decent level of support, but almost an unassailable level. Paul's poll numbers over the last year are the only in the field which have consistently risen. When voters decide to support Paul, they stay with him.
This can only be a good sign headed into Iowa next week. Paul's strong base of support in a fractious race promises him a strong showing in the nation's first contest. His slow but steady rise in the polls speaks well for his campaign's future, which as I have written before, wins every time he gains a delegate, something he is set to do in good form next week.