Paul is Paul. His debate performance is exactly how you would expect it go. Same points, same temperament. He has to be the most remarkably consistent debater I've ever seen. You've seen him once you've seen them all.
That's why I see no way Paul ever gets above 15% in the Republican primary. He has his loyal set of fans but will fail at attracting a much wider audience. If you are at all familiar with him you can practically predict his answer to ever question.
It also screams hackishness when people actually vote for Paul for the "who benefited from this debate" or say their opinion of Paul improved after a debate because if you've haven't figured his views out by now, you're not paying attention. Anyone who votes that way is likely just doing so because they are a Paul supporter and not because watching a debate changed their mind.
