How do people come up with these arguments? It's like The Granger trying to make the case that the reason we, as Paul supporters, have a bad impression of the GOP is because of the MSM. As if the MSM doesn't support the GOP as much as the Dems or as if Paulers even watch MSM.
Point is, we aren't against Rand because we think he's a threat to the system - that's a copout you're using because you can't rationalize why people can't support him. We're against him because we have the feeling that he ISN'T a threat to the system.
We're scared that in trying to work with the system instead of around it (like his father) he will end up a pawn in the establishments schemes.
You frame people the way you like to see them because you don't want to hear their real reasons for the way they feel.