Now that Thomas Massie has been dislodged from Congress, an emerging question is whether the Establishment will turn its crosshairs on Rand Paul, his U.S. Senate counterpart, next.
Neoconservative influencer Laura Loomer has already begun planting the seeds for a campaign against Senator Paul, another Kentucky Republican with a solid constitutional voting record. “Rand Paul, You’re next,” Loomer wrote on her X account just minutes after Massie’s race was called.
Loomer has bragged about having influence over President Trump. She took credit for his firing six National Security Council officials a year ago and admits to sending Trump’s team video clips of people on the Right whom she feels are betraying him, with the intent to goad him into attacking these individuals.
Common characteristics among those who incur Loomer’s ire include opposition to foreign aid—specifically to Israel—and opposition to unconstitutional wars, especially those involving Israel. Paul, like Massie, fits both categories.
According to Newsweek, “Paul stands out as one of the most likely next targets.” The report lists violations that would trigger a campaign against him: A libertarian-leaning Republican, Paul has repeatedly opposed Trump-backed foreign policy and spending policies, including voting with Democrats to restrict U.S. military action in Iran and criticizing presidential war powers. He has also pushed back on Trump’s use of executive authority over tariffs and emergency declarations, arguing they exceed constitutional limits.
Louisville Courier Journal columnist Joseph Gerth recently posed the question: “He knocked off Massie, could Trump target Paul next?” Gerth noted that Paul “has not always been all that well liked by establishment Republicans in Kentucky.” Paul’s close policy alignment with Massie makes him vulnerable to such pressure, Gerth and Newsweek argue. With Trump’s momentum strong after Massie’s defeat, Paul could face similar scrutiny in the next election cycle—though he isn’t up for reelection until 2028.
Paul stumped for Massie, held multiple events with him before the election, endorsed Massie on social media, and spoke at the rally Massie held three days prior to Tuesday’s race. The event emcee labeled Paul the “conscience of the Senate” and Massie “the conscience of the House.”
Yet given Trump’s pattern of endorsing Republican neocons with low regard for constitutional principles—while targeting principled constitutionalists like Andy Barr and Lindsey Graham—it would align with his behavior to go after Paul next. The president has already equated Paul with Massie, calling him “the worst person” during a rally where he declared Massie “Rand Paul, Jr.” because “he votes against everything.” Trump also recently urged Representative Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) to be primaried for supporting Massie; targeting Paul would follow the same logic.
Both Paul and Massie rank high in constitutional voting records exceeding 90 percent in The New American’s Freedom Index, alongside other conservative metrics. They represent lawmakers who prioritize constitutional fidelity over partisan loyalty—a trend Trump has repeatedly undermined through campaigns against principled Republicans.
The Massie victory was partly driven by tens of millions of dollars from out-of-state neocons, persuading voters to prioritize presidential loyalty over constitutional principles. This shift has left the nation’s political landscape increasingly susceptible to executive overreach and unconstitutional policies, including the war in Iran—a conflict launched without congressional approval that has strained national resources and endangered American lives.