Donald Trump

"Why Hillary Clinton Should Thank God for Donald Trump"

The billionaire is keeping us all from focusing on just how terrible the Democratic frontrunner really is on everything.


Having served as First Lady, U.S. senator, and Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton has a formidable resume to run for president. She's got a pretty invulnerable lead not just on her Democratic rival Bernie Sanders but on the GOP field as well, with betting markets giving her three-to-one odds or better to beat all rivals and win next November's election.

And yet, she is arguably not just the worst candidate in this current cycle but for many cycles. Whether you're right-wing or left-wing; care about the economy,  foreign policy, or free speech; or just want a forward-looking politician, Hillary is just god-awful.

Which is, I argue in a new Daily Beast column, one more reason to hate Donald Trump: He's distracting the country from really grappling with just how catastrophically terrible Clinton is.

Let's forget for the moment the bizarre but disturbing character flaws such as Clinton's unwillingness to acknowledge that she used a ghostwriter while writing best-sellers and weekly newspaper columns that were published everywhere for years but read by exactly nobody. Or her lying about being shot at in Bosnia. Or her WTF bringing up Bobby Kennedy's assasination while discussing scenarios where she could beat Barack Obama in the 2008 Democratic primary. We all have bad days, after all, and who hasn't embroidered a little bit about who we were named after, how broke we were after leaving the White House, and whether our daughter was jogging near the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001?

She is "reflexively opprossive" when it comes to the economy (she's a cronyist who bailed out Wall Street, banks, and auto companies and has proposed a new infrastructure bank that will function as yet one more taxpayer-funded slush fund), foreign policy (her record at State is one of unparalleled failures, yet she still argues that the "reset" with Russia "worked" and that Libya is a great example of "smart power"), and civil liberties (she still digs The Patriot Act, wants to neuter encryption, and is all in favor of limiting political speech in the name of "campaign-finance reform").

It's true that Donald Trump has been a uniquely stupid and reprehensible candidate. But a candidate despised by so much of the electorate can't possibly win. Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, can, and probably will, so for the love of god, can we not forget about her unique brand of awfulness as we all bash The Donald?

Yes, yes, politics is the art of the possible and the "Don't Blame Me, I Voted for Deez Nuts" t-shirts aren't going to get us very far. . But if South Park has taught usanything over the years, it's that the choice between a giant douche and a turd sandwich isn't the sort of choice for which we should settle. If we want to get serious about just how awful the 2016 election is going to be and start demanding better choices, we've got to start looking past the candidate who wants Bill Gates (of all people) to close up the internet and look at the candidate who wants actual internet companies to start doing the government's bidding.

Read the full article.

NEXT: Friday A/V Club: An Early George Lucas Film About a Man Escaping East Germany

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. The billionaire is keeping us all from focusing on just how terrible the Democratic frontrunner really is on everything.

    Bullshit. The only one keeping you from focusing on Hilary (or any other topic for that matter) is yourself.

    1. Sadly, I’ll speak up for Reason. They are being good libertarians and following the market, and the market (commenters) have decided that Trumpticles are 10-50 times more interesting than articles on any other contender. That means, Trumpticles bring in more money so it’s rational to have more of them.

      1. Here we are commenting, proving the point.

        1. And, just to prove me wrong, now this article shot to #1 on Most Visited sidebar, despite having only 60-ish comments. Odd, did it get linked elsewhere? Does Daily Beast auto-pingback and inflate the views?

          Speaking of matters Beastly, now that Derpetologist is off getting hazed or beaten with sacks of potatoes or whatever military does to people, does anyone dare go see the comments there?

        2. I clicked on this article because of Hillary. Anyways, it’s not her fault the GOP candidates suck ass so much Darth Trump is their only option.

      2. Hillary is terrible and stale. Trump is still novelly terrible.

        1. He’s so hot right now.


    1. Technically, Daily Beast published the article, Nick just put up an ad for it.


  3. If he’s ultimately the GOP nominee or just a third party candidate, he’s going to hand her the White House.

    1. That’s the truth but there are a whole lot of folks unwilling to see that

    2. What are you? A cuckservative?

        1. Whatever, Eugene.

          1. Now *that* was a good recall.

    3. If he’s ultimately the GOP nominee or just a third party candidate, he’s going to hand her the White House.

      Not so sure. One thing Hillary Clinton is quite accomplished at is losing when she should win. I’ve never seen Hillary Clinton appear coherent or competent for any stretch of time when people actually are paying attention to what she’s saying and doing.

      1. This has nothing to do with Hillary Clinton.

      2. “…when people actually are paying attention to what she’s saying and doing.”

        There’s the problem, right there.

      3. Last time, some guy with more victim cards than she’ll ever have showed up and put on the “hope -n- change” show. There’s nobody running against her this time who can trump her “vote for me, you sexist pigs” schtick.


        1. Not even Fiorina?

    4. Someone’s not feeling the Bern.


    1. You do it better than me.

      1. I grew up in the South!

        1. That’s very good.

    2. *chuckles*

  5. …the choice between a giant douche and a turd sandwich isn’t the sort of choice for which we should settle.

    If I may riff off of the excellent Kate McMillan at the Canadian website small dead animals, when faced with such a choice, one should pray for an asteroid strike rather than pick a side.

    1. Prayer does about as much good as voting, so it’s not bad advice.

      1. With the one, you’re hoping for a politician willing to curtail their own power and influence; with the other, you’re expecting an omnipotent being greater than all of space and time to take an interest in the desires of one human being. The second one strikes me as far more likely.

      2. My thoughts and prayers are with you, Hugh.


    2. I plan on partying like it’s 1999. And that’s saying something because New Year’s Eve 1999, I had an awesome party that lasted TWO WHOLE DAYS.

      Really, I plan on ignoring everything.

  6. The Dems have their balls tied to Clinton like a brick. There are no other options. It doesn’t matter.

    Honestly, the left is probably ready for some bloodletting (it seems that some on the left are waking up to/becoming aware of the insane shit on college campuses vis a vie sexual assault and free speech) and the only thing keeping the peace seemingly has been having Obama to rally around (Take the Syrian refugees- instead of being some soul searching, “ISIS is contained”-Obama fucked up convo, it turned into a “God, Republicans are so racist! TEAM BLUE” tribe building exercise). If they lose, I expect at first to see in places like CA and NY any moderate dem to be purged before an even worse electoral defeat in 2020 makes them wake up (or start to).

    Theory I just had: Maybe having Congress for all those years was good for the Dems. They are the party of more government, and they were in charge of the purse strings. Sure, Republican presidents could veto their stuff, but they could either wait or whine to the media if they needed to.

    Now, without control of the legislative branch and no path to get it, they seem lost. They still want the government power, but don’t have the power of the purse that they used to. It does kind of logically lead to a more imperial presidency.

    1. I am still looking at the white knight scenario. I have laid it out before on here. Clinton gets in big trouble of e-mail, tax thingy, any number of issues. The current admin hates her anyway. When she starts to sink Algore rides in on a green horse and rescues the Dems.

      just sayin.

      1. Gore/Biden 2016: Scared Ya, Didn’t We

      2. I’ve thought same thing about Al Gore, though I think that window is closing fast. There’s also issue that Gore has become one-trick pony being High Priest of Carbontology. That dog food is just not selling, even among Democrats it is niche issue.

        In so much Shrillary getting legally torpedoed, she is basically one Barry-phone call away from criminal charges for her email idiocy. I wonder what is in Lightworker’s dossier on Shrillary, and if he is using it to pull her chain going forward – Chicago Way and all that. I’m thinking Barry might be angling for Prez of World Bank or U.N. Chief Parasite or something.

        1. “The value of the Sword of Damocles is that it hangs, not that it falls.”

          1. Ooh. I like that.

  7. From a libertarian standpoint, Hillary is much better than Trump. Trump is very authoritarian. He holds many authoritarian positions from the left and right.

    Hillary isn’t a good candidate, and would arguably be a disaster, Trump would be far worse.

    1. So Hillary is more libertarian because rather than authoritarian she is…what? Merely evil?

      1. She might be less authoritarian than Trump but more libertarian when starting with zero libertarian is still zero.

      2. Run-of-the-mill center-left politician.

        1. Or corrupt war monger. Six of one, half a dozen of the other.

            1. That’s pretty insulting to liars, sacks, and shit.

              1. my thoughts too

        2. That’s pretty insulting to the center-left.

          1. My thoughts too

          2. They deserve it

        3. …incompetent, venal, corrupt…

    2. It’s comments like this that tempt me to throw my sarcasmometer into the trash and just sob in the corner.

      1. It’s called Poe’s LAW, not Poe’s Suggestion.

    3. From a libertarian standpoint, Hillary is much better than Trump.

      I have yet to see much evidence of that, whatsoever. As far as I’ve seen Clinton and Trump are just two different flavors or authoritarian asshole. Trump will screw over immigrants and proggies. Hillary will screw over anyone who doesn’t tow the social justice lion. Wow! Big difference.

      1. It’s simple to assess. Do either hesitate to suggest flagrantly unconstitutional policies or actions?

        1. I think I know the answer. Both.

          Do I win?

            1. Heads they win, tails we lose?

        2. This wouldn’t be a problem if the supreme court did their fucking job.

          1. They’ve been assisting the rest of the federal government in a slow coup d’?tat for over a century, so I’d say they are doing the job. . .on us and on the Constitution.

            Losing our fear, distrust, and contempt for government is the biggest single mistake in U.S. history.

    4. Someone mentioned the other day that even Trump probably doesn’t believe half the shit he’s saying, and is unlikely to carry through on most of it. Whereas Hillary means every word and will get it done. If that is accurate, we should be more afraid of her.

      1. “Trump probably doesn’t believe half the shit he’s saying, and is unlikely to carry through on most of it.”

        Not making me feel any better. What if he does mean what he says? What if he does set up a registry of religious people?

        You’re ok with authoritarian candidates because you “feel” like they might be lying? What the actual f*&%?

        1. You’re ok with authoritarian candidates because you “feel” like they might be lying?

          I’ve read his comment five times and haven’t found that part.

          1. Isn’s this one of the allegedly female libertarians that I’ve heard myths about? So isn’t it “her” comment? (I could be wrong. I honestly try to keep track but I’ve got no scorecard at home for everyone’s handles, especially after the “Great Woodchipper Name Switching Solidarity Movement of 2014.”) For those of us who troll and can’t drop by as often, it was a little disconcerting.

            What is nice, however, is Tony. Tony is always Tony. Thank you, Tony. Never change.

      2. “Hillary means every word ”

        [citation needed]

    5. According to the positions stated or inferred at Project Vote Smart, Trump is far from authoritarian. My positions line up w his 69%, with Rand Paul edging him out by just a hair at 70%. If Trump is authoritarian, that’s just because to a radical libertarian nearly everybody looks authoritarian. Compared to the avg. person, though, Trump is libertarian.

      Mostly, though, Trump looks more untoward because he’s uncouth. People are judging by his style rather than ideas.

      1. Yeah, like his “libertarian” idea that religious people should be added to a registry.

        Or his “libertarian” idea that we should close off our borders.

        Or his “libertarian” idea that we should have single payer healthcare.

        Or his “libertarian” idea that he judges all mexicans as a group instead of individually.

        Trump isn’t a libertarian, and if you agree with most of what he says, it sounds like you aren’t either.

      2. And the same thing says that I am 80% similar to Jeb Bush, because the choices are such that it’s pretty much impossible NOT to be similar to one of the candidates.

    6. Cthulu 2016: Why pick the *lesser* evil?

    7. From a libertarian standpoint, Hillary is much better than Trump.

      While I definitely do not like or trust Trump, I certainly wouldn’t go so far as to say that Hillary is better (let alone much better). Let’s not say things we’ll later regret.

  8. Trump is a Clinton shill to get Hillary elected. Far too many things point to it to be denied.

    Yeah, a lifelong Democrat and a lifelong Clinton BFF suddenly ‘evolves’ to run as a Republican…AGAINST Hillary Clinton.

    1. He ran as a R at least once before, maybe twice?

  9. “And yet, she is arguably not just the worst candidate in this current cycle but for many cycles.”

    What ridiculous nonsense considering who’s actually in this race, not to mention the last one. Worse than Michelle Bachmann? Than Carson or Trump himself? Far smarter men than Nick Gillespie have hauled out the “not a dime’s worth of difference” bullshit, and they were wrong too. The supplicating false equivalency leads us to Breitbart-level petulance with references to meaningless Hillary gaffes as if they were more relevant to the presidency than Trump’s overtly fascist policy proposals, or the only slightly tamer theocratic pandering horseshit coming from the other GOP candidates.

    1. You really tossed that salad.

    2. What difference, at this point, does it make?

      1. *slap*

        Don’t look in his eyes, man! Don’t do it!

        Everyone. Run.

        1. Tony doesn’t have eyes, just a sort of flat area where his face should be.

            1. No, Slender Man is real.

      2. Yea, Hillary is just Hillary, Trump is just Trump. It is our government that is F-ed up. You could put Jesus hisself in the race and half the people would hate him.

    3. meaningless Hillary gaffes

      Haaaaaaaaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

      Those aren’t gaffes, idiot. They’re calculated lies.

    4. Yes, Hillary is worse than Michelle Bachman, because Hillary is incompetent and corrupt.

      Yes, Hillary is worse than Carson, because Hillary is incompetent and corrupt.

      Hillary’s corruption is possibly less dangerous than the lawlessness of Trump, but certainly the two are in the same league.

      The fact that you even wrote that screed is yet more evidence of your utter lack of any moral compass to add to the mountain of other examples built up over the years.

      1. It’s. A. Fucking. Sockpuppet. It doesn’t “believe” anything. It says stuff to get you to react. And you do.

    5. Gaffe = getting caught telling lies.

      1. At least her lies were harmless puffery, unlike Carly Fiorina’s, which got human beings killed.

        1. *standing ovation*

          You blew the kayfabe but what a way to go! Bravo, maestro!

          1. You said it, man.

            Take a bow, whoever’s running Tony, you’ll never top that.

        2. Tony|12.11.15 @ 12:21PM|#
          “At least her lies were harmless puffery,”

          ‘There were no secret matters on my server’.
          Fuck off, scumbag.

          1. “It was riots in response to an Internet video.”

        3. unlike Carly Fiorina’s, which got human beings killed


          1. She continues to lie about the doctored Planned Parenthood video; these lies were uttered almost verbatim by the nutjob who recently shot up Planned Parenthood.

            1. Ah, so Carly Fiorina made him kill those people. I figured it was some BS like that.

            2. And Hillary blamed the Benghazi incident on freedom of speech…guess we can lay all terrorism on her now.

              Being a disingenouous douchebag is fun.

  10. Trump isn’t all good news for Clinton. He keeps moving the debate out of her court. Unless a Rino like Bush or Rubio somehow wins, the debates will be nothing like 2008 – where Obama and McCain weren’t arguing about whether to increase spending – just by how much.

    1. Since when has Trump proposed cutting spending?

      1. Greatness costs, hoss.

  11. Most who desire power can’t be trusted with it, and most who could be trusted with power have no desire for it. That’s why libertarians will always lose.

    1. That, and the Free Shit Brigade outnumbers us by a few orders of magnitude.

    2. “Evil will always triumph, because good is dumb.”

      1. Dark Helmet: Before you die there is something you should know about us, Lone Star.

        Lone Starr: What?

        Dark Helmet: I am your father’s brother’s nephew’s cousin’s former roommate.

        Lone Starr: What’s that make us?

        Dark Helmet: Absolutely nothing! Which is what you are about to become.

        1. I wonder what Dark Helmet’s degree was in?

          1. Why do you assume he went to college?

            1. Please, one doesn’t rise to an executive role with the Spaceballs without proper credentials.

              1. “Spaceballs!”

                “Oh, shit. There goes the planet.”

          2. The Schwartz?

                1. I thought that was part of the Philosophy program at Spaceballs Universal University.

          3. Shrinking children.

    3. Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement.

      (It’s completely unrelated to the content of what you said, but it came to my mind when I read your comment.)

      1. +1 Gandalf

  12. I really hope we don’t have a repeat of the Reason staff endorsing the Democrat because the Republican is icky. Endorsing neither and voting for neither is looking like the best option, but I’m fairly sure at least Chapman and Dalmia will tell us why Hilary is worth voting for.

  13. I would never vote for Trump but, sort of to his credit, I probably won’t move if he is elected. If Hillary is elected….well, New Zealand seems like a nice place.

    1. Should we live near the beach or in the mountains? I vote beach because I don’t ski.

      1. I have plans for a whole new continent that would have both. No need to choose, just learn how to raise land out of the depths of the oceans!

        Honestly, it would be pretty sweet. Most of you are invited.

      2. Yes, also running to the mountains would make it seem like I was trying to hide from her. I don’t want to give her that satisfaction. Going to the beach is more like an extended vacation.

      3. It is New Zealand. Why not have both?

        1. It’s a great place; I’m keeping it in mind. Profoundly civilized folks. Even their TSA is civilized. Seriously, those are some really, really nice people. It’s like midwesterner Kansas farmers with a nice soft British accent moved to a place that’s got the same weather as going from Santa Cruz to Portland, and throw in some sick mountains and resorts on the South Island. They’ve got some socialist tendencies, but fuck, it’s not omnipresent and in your face.

          Plus, they like Rugby. And the Maori are bad-ass. I think they finally got a peace treaty recently between the tribes and the central government. And they did it with comparatively less bloodshed and a lot less demonizing than, say, the Irish and English did.

    2. A libertarian Space Station! (yes little l, ‘cuz boarderz)

    1. It is a dirty job…

    2. Freddie has my vote!

  14. Although it’s not politically possible, I wonder if a Trump presidency + Democrat controlled House and Senate could actually be a positive learning experience. Trump wouldn’t get anything passed and the Democrats might actually roll back a bit of the imperial presidency in response, and maybe do some introspection.

    A man can dream…

    1. I actually think this would happen even with Trump and a Republican controlled House and Senate. Not enough that I would count on it and root for him, but I suspect that Schwarzeneggar’s reception in CA will look like homecoming in comparison.

    1. That was actually a pretty good article. Buchanan drives me nuts with his chicken little demographic armegedden prognostications and bunker mentality but he writes some interesting stuff from time to time. He is not a stupid man, just wrong a lot. I like his little history metaphors except for the nazi apologetics.

    2. That was actually a pretty good article. Buchanan drives me nuts with his chicken little demographic armegedden prognostications and bunker mentality but he writes some interesting stuff from time to time. He is not a stupid man, just wrong a lot. I like his little history metaphors except for the nazi apologetics.

      1. Damn Squirrels

    3. That was indeed pretty good, and about 85% spot on.

      He’d have made it the remaining 10%+ if he bothered to note that Trump, despite his self-aware goading of the press and rejection of their Narrative-control…. is often 100% wrong on policy….

      ….. but that *no longer matters* compared to the mere-opposition to the Media which is so unprecedented and distinctive as to provide him overwhelming support regardless of how dumb his actual proposed ideas are.

      Pat seems to think the opposition to the media is the only thing that matters; I agree with him that it is hugely significant, and explains 100% of Trump’s success

      ….but disagree entirely that Trump is actually even part of any ‘conservative’ historical trend, or that he deserves half the credit he receives merely by being a Media Gadfly.

  15. Who hacked Gillespie’s account?

    Yeah, yeah, “STOP PICKING ON REASON!!!!”

  16. Hillary will be a continuation of the last 26 years. A continued increasing of executive power, a disastrous foreign policy full of hubris and not much else, an expansion of the welfare state and the police state. She is the establishment candidate. The cross section of the most infuencial lobby groups and think tanks are an incestuous blend of the elite ranks of both parties and are supported by the propaganda machine.

  17. “Why Hillary should thank God for Donald Trump”

    Bill Clinton is not God.

    1. Tell that to Bill Clinton.

  18. Having served as First Lady, U.S. senator, and Secretary of State,…..

    That trite formulation grinds my gears….”served”, huh. More like “reigned”, or “ruled”, or perhaps “held the post of” if you want to be civil. But “served” implicitly accepts the premise that she has put something else ahead of herself, which of course it precisely opposite of reality.

  19. Nick,

    Saying that Hillary “served” as First Lady is about as notable and admirable as saying a police K9 “joined” the force.

    I understand that many voters might think that FLOTUS is a nice resume-padder, but you, too?

    1. I was thinking the same thing. First Bitch isn’t a job.

      1. But the president’s wife can make law. Didn’t Michelle sign some school lunch legislation ?

    2. Being married to Bill Clinton should count as “time served,” though.

    3. It’s not nothing.

      1. Pretty much is.

        1. Oh yeah? Let’s see you do it, then!

      2. If it’s not not nothing, it’s something. So, what is it?

      3. It’s roughly similar to being the mayor’s nephew. You didn’t do shit to get the position, the position comes with no authority or responsibility, and YOU DIDN’T DO SHIT TO GET THE POSITION.

  20. betting markets giving her three-to-one odds or better to beat all rivals and win next November’s election

    No way. People here have repeatedly told me there are plenty of reasons why Clinton simply cannot win. First it was “Rand Paul is the guy to beat her,” then when it became clear he wouldn’t get the nomination, it was “basically any Republican could beat Hillary because she’s a bad politician and her negatives are too high.”

    1. Honestly, I was in the “Rand Paul is the guy to beat her,” camp. I still am.

      If Rand were the GOP candidate, I believe he would beat Clinton. Decisively. But, I always said the caveat was “if he were the candidate”.

      1. same here.

        the problem beating hillary isn’t hillary. Its GOP primary voters.

        I remain convinced only a fraction of those polling for trump will be pulling a lever for him anywhere outside South Carolina. he (hopefully) should be history after the end of Feb. But the problem is that the remainder will have gone full-retard in the meantime trying to steal his supporters.

    2. I’ve always thought the latter, within reason.

      But then I thought the same thing in 2012 and 2004, so I might be naive…

  21. I’m not sure why hillary should be thanking god for something she probably arranged…

  22. We’ll look back wistfully on these gentle days.
    As we cower and hide as the nightly patrols and raids of the Imperial Blood Commandos sweep our neighborhoods for the young women and their “essence”. The Essence, so necessary to keep the Empress alive and ruling the Glorious American Empire.

    We whisper about the Hero who will save us from her cruel reign.
    The Donald!
    He’s coming.
    He’s coming!

  23. Does the Daily Beast not do comments anymore? That was the only bright side of going there… to see the laughably-horrible things people would say about Nick/Libertarians in general

  24. Don’t get me wrong; I think HRC will make a lousy president. But there isn’t a single other current candidate, Democratic or Republican, who I can conceive of doing a better job. Let’s run through them.

    Sanders — Sanders is awesome on individual rights, but so catastrophically bad on economics that it overwhelms anything else he says. Worse, Sanders is a true believer, so he will pursue his madness regardless of how much it damages the economy (and it will).
    Trump — if you need me to explain why he would be worse, you’re not paying attention.
    Carson — Carson is a Creationist. I think I can stop there.
    Paul — Let’s be clear on this: Rand Paul is not a Libertarian. His positions are straight-up Republican. He is no different than Rubio etc.
    Rubio etc. — the rest of the Republican pack might as well be clones. You could take all the statements from Rubio, Santorum, Bush, etc., put them in a hat, redistribute them at random, and you wouldn’t be able to tell the difference.
    All other Democratic candidates — I can’t even bring one of their names to mind. That should tell you something about their chances of winning.

    So, yes, Hillary Clinton will make a terrible president. But as a lifelong politician, the one thing she will NOT do is risk her legacy on principle. Like her husband, she will follow opinion polls, blowing one way or the other as needed. And really, that’s about the best we can hope for at this point.

    1. I guess that other than hearing name-calling and whining about the lack of a perfect Libertarian knight . . . I must not be listening. I’ll pay more attention to look out for genuine argument why Trump is unqualified to manage the government. What he says doesn’t count or Obama would be the “second coming”.

    2. Carson is a Creationist. I think I can stop there.

      Fascinating!!! Why should someone’s beliefs about how the universe began matter?!? After all, most politicians form their opinion on questions of cosmology and the origin of the human race based on…. /drumroll which authority they decide to accept as the gospel truth?

      There are plenty of things to criticize Carson about, but creationism is so far down the list that I scarcely credit you are engaing in anything but a kulturkampf exercise.

      Let’s be clear on this: Rand Paul is not a Libertarian. His positions are straight-up Republican. He is no different than Rubio etc.

      Except for the fact that Rubio is a big fan of the military industrial complex and wars of foreign adventure, and a career politician who has no significant private sector experience, he and Rand are indistinguishable.

      Santorum, Bush

      You mean that the guy who shafted the anti-abortion movement and refused to do much more than pay lip service to its policy goals and the guy who makes aboloshing abortion front and center the main plank of his policy goals are indistinguishable to you? Truly, sir, your analysis is dazzlingly insightful.

      But as a lifelong politician, the one thing she will NOT do is risk her legacy on principle.

      Given that she *has* risked her legacy on a reckless influence peddling scheme, I find your faith in her wisdom refreshing.

    3. So, tell me, which of these positions is even remotely libertarian:

      * Businesses must provide health plans that include features they consider morally abhorrent?
      * The government should intervene to push out “the shadow banking industry” (i.e. financial institutions that part of the regulated cartel)
      * Demands another massive “stimulus” program to buy extra infrastructure
      * Supports heavy gun control
      * Supports the Patriot Act and removal on wiretapping restrictions
      * Calls for the jailing of bank executives based on….
      * Calls for an exit tax on companies changing locations
      * Supports removal of due process rights for college students accused of rape
      * Supports the “socialization” of children through schools
      * Supports government funding of pre-K through college; opposes vouchers
      * Pushes CO2 emissions controls
      * Wants to reintroduce the windfall profits tax
      * Pushes for paid leave being required of companies
      * Insists on troops on the ground in Syria – targeting Putin
      * Led the U.S. support for Qadaffi’ ouster.
      * Only problem with Obamacare is that it isn’t single payer
      * Wants Edward Snowden prosecuted
      * Supports indexed $12 federal minimum wage

      Yeah, with libertarian credential like that…
      * Wants a Constitutional amendment repealing Citizen’s United

    4. Carson — Carson is a Creationist. I think I can stop there.

      A lot of people would likely describe me as an anti-theist, but I would have no qualms for voting for a creationist if I agreed 100% (or enough) with his/her policy proposals. If a person is a creationist but has all the right policy proposals and positions, then they get my vote no question about it. I would vote for a Scientologist, Jehovah’s Witness, Mormon, Christian Scientist, Catholic, Evangelical, Hindu, Muslim, Satanist, whatever if they have the right policy proposals and positions. Likewise, I would not vote for another person who is an atheist if that person espoused too many policy proposals or positions I disagreed with.

      Policy positions/proposals, governing style, and trustworthiness are the factors that count.

      1. yeah not voting for him because of his religion would be discrimination, I think. kind of like voting for obama because of his race

  25. Look on the bright side. If it’s Trump vs. Clinton in the general election, there are enough people who passionately hate both that Gary Johnson could be pushing 1.2, even 1.3 percent.

      1. YES, if we can find a candidate of our own. I am sick of looter-republicans temporarily cross-dressing as libertarians to make us look insincere every election.

  26. God, and the rest of the GOP who can’t come up with a candidate

  27. Trump quote circulating on the communist sites: “The group that is not criticizing me is the public. The public agrees with what I say.” Nick held the mic when Trump said he likes libertarians, and thought we had good ideas. Reason sure as hell avoids committing that to print. Trump is clearly better than the prohibitionist warmongers that have turned the GOP into a Taliban party and wrecked the national economy with asset forfeiture looting. Soooo… maybe Trump really IS out to elect Hillary, the way Ross Perot elected her hubby, as a public service. So what? Would you rather have another George Bush asset-forfeiture depression?

  28. She should also thank Ghawd for Jimmy Swaggart, Billy Graham, Bin Ladin, Pat Robertson, Fulton Sheen, Oral Roberts Don Stewart, James Jones, Leroy Jenkins, Jerry Fallwell, Jesse Duplantis, Jim Bakker, Tammy Faye Bakker, Percy Crawford, Charles Coughlin, William Jennings Bryan, Billy Sunday… In fact, the entire violent prohibitionist mystical bigot wing of God’s Own Party serve as native beaters to drive voters into the arms of the looter democrats and their communist infiltrators. At least they did until Dubya’s asset-forfeiture orgy completely destroyed the economy in 2007–as in 1929 and 1932.

  29. Hillary Clinton is the fucking worst fucking candidate, fucking gun grabber and supporter of the racist war on drugs, fucking war mongering bitch, and all around enemy of freedom.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.