Think of a torus like a circled cylinder, then rotate the cylinder along its natural rotation axis. It rotates up in the middle and down around the outside. Vortex ring rotation, like a smoke ring. The torus-type rotation converts the asymmetric chiral rotation of a ball (or cylinder) into a symmetric rotation with a very up (or down) vector.
The torus is then symmetric with the generated magnetic field. Indeed in my preferred model, the particle is the field.* Though, probably, just like electrons are positively (-) charged and protons are negatively (+) charged, it is likely that notational magnetic fields are all pointing the wrong way, rotating outward at the south pole and inward at the north pole.
Did...did I just defeat a whole field of science? (Again?) Did nobody else think of this? Certainly I've never heard the idea floated before, and Google-sensei hasn't any inkling of it. I don't even know what I'm supposed to call this torus-core rotation axis.**
So...how do particles (=fields) have spin? Like that. Probably.
Torus-type rotation is in fact a superposition of many rotating spheres. Imagine a sphere that's trying to rotate both ways across every axis parallel to some plane. If the plane is flat like the ground, then it's trying to rotate up on every side and also down on every side. It can resolve this superposition by wobbling a bit across the plane, so it's in fact a series of spheres in a circle, all rotating up in the middle and down on the outside, or vice-versa. As soon as any asymmetry appears in the rotating sphere superposition, it will resolve into a torus as it interacts with its own mirror images.
Though more realistically particles (=fields) are merely spherically symmetric when undisturbed, they're actually the 3D version of the Gaussian. You can graph the density as a normal bell curve with radius.
The way fermions like to pair seems extremely natural with this model. If you have the torii at any angle but parallel or anti-parallel, the superpositions will cross-interfere and make them unstable and asymmetric. Making them parallel would double the strength of the field, meaning it has to cram more energy into a smaller space. Making them antiparallel means the rotation is countered by anti-rotation, meaning space gets to relax, as is its wont.
*Point particles don't make any real sense, and existence is defined by interaction. That is, Popper was right, which is why everyone shits on him.
I do find it amusing that everyone else sees quantum mechanics as counter-intuitive. Sorry, you're just stupid. Which means when you propose something that really is counter-intuitive, such as a point particle having angular momentum, you don't notice anything is out of place.
**Revealing once again that nobody knows what words mean: I can describe it in numerous ways with individual words as particles, but unless it's a set phrase, probably defined by a picture, nobody will know what I'm talking about.