After the vote, Paul noted he gained more votes than in previous efforts and said that he hoped the vote would serve as a litmus test to conservative voters: "Our hope is that people will see it at home and it may influence who they send back up here." He also lashed his party for hypocrisy on the debt and deficit.
Sadly come election time most voters will just vote based on name recognition and party affiliations.
Both monopolist parties are uniformly bad on this, so the only option is to not vote or vote for a party that actually cares. I don't play "lesser or two evils" or buy into the nonsense that "a vote for the X party is a vote for Democrats/Republicans". I simply refuse to reward bad behavior.
That's what I did in the last election. I voted third party where there was the option and left all others blank except for our State Agriculture Commissioner race (I felt the incumbent has been doing his job well). Unfortunately too many voters fall for the false arguments that a third party vote is a wasted vote or will give the worst choice the win. The duopoly has done a great job of convincing people of this and they tend to ramp up that rhetoric when there is a third party candidate who could potentially be a threat to their system. They'll do anything to stay in power.
And people still think Republican leadership is serious about reducing government spending? There are only a handful of Republican Congressmen who actually vote that way. I can think of Amash, Mike Lee, Massie, and Paul off the top of my head and there might be a handful of others but that's it. The majority of Congress is more concerned with keeping themselves in power and don't actually care about fixing the problems they have created.