I didn't read this entire paper, but I did skim enough of it to get a good chuckle: it's yet another one of those grasping at straws deals, trying to "figure out" libertarians.

Principle of Occam's Razer: maybe libertarianism accrues followers because it's correct?

The paper frequently asserts that there must be something different about libertarians, because libertarians "eschew other moral principles" in lieu of "individualism".

What other principles?

A principle is a rule you can follow in order to help with decision making. "It's wrong to club someone over the head with a baseball bat and steal food from their refrigerator, unless it's to feed a baby with really cute eye lashes" does not constitute a principle.

If there is a rational argument for when it's suddenly ok to morally rape, murder, and pillage, there isn't a libertarian on the planet who wouldn't be interested to hear it. Unfortunately, such a guiding moral principle has not been forthcoming even after hundreds of thousands of hours of cumulative debate.

Oh, and paper authors: enough with the Ayn Rand quotes-- she wasn't even a libertarian!