Election 2016

Why Trump and Bernie Are Bae, Not Rand

Disaffected millennials were supposed to stand with Rand. What happened?

|

eventphotosnyc/Flickr

In some ways, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul dropping out of the Republican presidential race Wednesday shows precisely what Reason staffers said back in summer 2014, when The New York Times Magazine annointed Paul the archangel of the Libertarian Moment: that the GOP will have to drift left on social issues if it's to capture millennial voters. Paul drifted rightward during his campaign since then, downplaying civil-libertarian policy goals and going hard on things like a federal abortion ban and banning refugees from "high risk" countries. Meanwhile, millennials (roughly defined as those between ages 18 and 34) have flocked to Bernie Sanders—the most socially and economically leftist of the bunch, sure, but also the candidate closest to holding libertarian positions in arenas from foreign policy to criminal justice to auditing the fed now that Paul is out of the race.

Yet among Republican-leaning millennials, the candidate who dominates is the one with the least libertarian ideals and the biggest intolerant streak: Donald Trump. Could it be that what millennial conservatives really wanted is a candidate that's drifted further right?

Alexandra Schwartz at The New Yorker offers another explanation, one that covers how a libertarian-leaning Kentucky senator like Paul, an authoritarian blowhard like Trump, and a curmudgeonly old socialist like Sanders could be competing for the same millennial cohort: capturing the youngest of the youth vote is predicated on projecting authenticity and political purity. This is where some people thought Rand Paul would shine in campaigning—after all, his dad Ron did it—but Rand failed to do so, for whatever reason. In their own weird ways, however, both Trump and Sanders do. 

"The belief in the possibility of true purity might be a delusion for most voters," writes Schwartz, "but it's a privilege of youth"—hence millennial love for Trump and Sanders.

In the Iowa caucuses Monday, 84 percent of Democratic voters under age 30 chose Sanders. In polls, his support tends to be highest among the youngest voters. For instance, a December poll from the Harvard Institute of Politics found 41 percent of 18- to 29-year-old Democrats support Sanders, compared to just 35 percent for Hillary Clinton. But in the 25- to 29-year-old age group alone, Clinton actually came out on top. Schwartz suggests that this older millennial group is "the portion of the age bracket that has voted before, and witnessed the election-to-elected transformation firsthand." 

In other words, older millennials learned to temper their political expectations with Obama, who also inspired young voters by convincingly promising to alter the status quo and bring change to Washington. Aesthetically, Sanders is the anti-Obama—elderly, unphotogenic, decidedly uncool, and an old white man to boot—but they both managed to effectively cast themselves as the comparatively radical candidates. 

Schwartz senses "a whiff of historical fetishism to the young love for Bernie, a yearning for an imaginary time of simpler, more straightforward politics that aligns with other millennial tendencies toward false nostalgia for past purity, in fashion or food, for instance. The obsession with the banks and the bailout is itself phrased in weirdly retro terms, the stuff of an invitation to a 2008-election theme party."

But such idiosyncrasies seem only to bolster Bernie's cred as an authentic outsider who won't be bought.

Trump, too, offers a fantasy of politics without compromise, and his numbers with millennials show it. In an early January survey of 18 to 34-year-olds, 26 percent said they would vote for Trump, making him the favored conservative candidate with this cohort (in second place was Ben Carson, with 11 percent). The Harvard poll also found Trump leading among 18- to 29-year-old Republicans, at 22 percent support; he was followed by Carson with 20 percent, Marco Rubio with 7 percent, and Paul with six percent. 

As Nick Gillespie wrote here in December, "it's a monumental—and intentional—mistake to conflate Paul's electoral fortunes with the persistence of…'the Libertarian Moment,'" which is less about electoral politics than American "comfort with and demand for increasingly individualized and personalized options and experiences in every aspect of our lives." And diagnosing "the failure of a broad-based cultural and commercial shift by tying it to one person is best understood as a defense mechanism by folks deeply invested in perpetuating the played-out politics of left versus right." 

But it would also be a monumental mistake for freedom-minded folks to conflate a generation hungry for hope, change, and a departure from party-politics-as-usual with a sure opening among millennials for libertarian-leaning candidates. That slot seems up for grabs each electoral cycle to whoever can leverage their countercultural cred the best. Whatever it means, Trump and Sanders, not Paul, are the candidates who have been best able to do that going into 2016. 

NEXT: Two Cheers (& More!) for Rand Paul!

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 Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Why do you call Trump “further right”?

    1. I’ll be charitable and say it fits her theme and is in accordance with the Reason website’s style manual.

      I will point out, once again, that Rand’s numbers went south BEFORE he emphasized his long-standing agreement with the popular Republican issues of the day. His popularity dropped when he moved to the center.

      Nobody stole his appeal, he fucking ceded it.

    2. Probably because she wants to attack the right.

      1. Latin Post reports millenials feel that Trump-support is the “counterculture”. Makes sense now that SJW PCism is the culture.

  2. “Why Trump and Bernie Are Bae, Not Rand”

    I see Nick has infected you with his affected Millennialese.

    For shame.

    1. What is Bae? Is that the sound a sheep makes?

      1. It is a retarded spelling of “babe.” Some try and argue it that it isn’t a retarded spelling of “babe” but making it a backronym for Before Anyone Else.

        1. And that sign still makes no sense to me.

          1. Think “Bernie is No. 1.” Sort of the Japanese idea of ichiban.

            1. Think “Bernie is No. 1.” Sort of the Japanese idea of ichiban.

              First!

          2. Bae is broad in scope. It is really, really stupid, and the fact that “Bernie is Bae” exists should be shameful.

              1. Shame is a micro aggression.

                1. the microaggressive part, ive been thinking, seems to be having any opinions or values whatsoever. preferring pizza to general tsos could be triggering to italians. obviously the law students not wanting to talk about rape law is news because it’s an extreme example, but, and I know this sucks, there is a real reality independent of what anyone thinks about it, I think.

            1. I don’t even know if I’m supposed to be Whipping or Nae Naeing while I say it

        2. Sweet, I assumed it was as simple and stupid as that. I was afraid it was another SMH situation, which took me way too long to figure out.

          1. SJW took me forever. I still lean towards me orginal guess: single jewish wombat.

            1. I always thought it sounded like an abbreviation from a personal ad. Single Jewish Woman or something.

              1. Single Jewish Woman is exactly what I thought for a long time too, for the same reason. I also guessed Hit The Highway for HTH.

        3. That is even more retarded than I could have imagined. These millenials don’t have no edumencation.

      2. From Urban Dictionary:

        B?/bae is a Danish word for poop. Also used by people on the internet who think it means baby, sweetie etc.

      3. That’s what I wanted to know.

      4. Bae is Danish for “no alt-text.”

    2. And I see she provides no definition of bae.

      This Millennial is confused and displeased.

      1. I’m gonna try winging it here.

        She was like I really like you. And I was like bae. And she was like, like I really meant it! And I was like bae, and then she was like bae!

        Is it like that?

        1. Dude. So bae.

          1. 9 of those letters were unnecessary

        2. No it is not, Grandpa. Go drink a Tab.

          1. Is it going to be on ‘your’ tab? Ok, don’t forget to pay it.

              1. I was thinking more about 20 micro brews, Crusty is paying, he mentioned something about a tab.

                1. More fool you. Crusty lives under a park bench and doesn’t have any money.

                  1. I knew that, but I don’t really care if he pays, as long as I get my twenty free beers.

                  2. Don’t let him fool you. Living under a park bench is really affordable, and pan-handling/butt-whoring pays a lot better than people realize.

                    1. I was thinking about that Sunday when the wife and I were walking and there was this guy standing around asking for $1.50 to get on a bus. If you successfully get 100 people a day to give you that, that’s $150 a day. That’s like 35k a year.

                    2. Having been homeless, I can attest that you will never get 100 people to give you anything a day (that’s like, 6 people per waking hour…that kind of closing efficiency would make you the Donald trump of panhandling negotiations). You can totally get 100 people to spit on you though. Pays surprisingly few bills though

          2. I saw Tab at the grocery store and was surprised to find out it still existed. Also, the label design hasn’t changed in 30 years, maybe longer.

            1. The whole retro soda thing has been a trend for quite a while now. Several old brands have been completely resurrected from seeming permadeath.

              1. I bought Faygo Orange at the grocery store yesterday. It might be cheap for Juggaloes in flyover country, but you can only find it in specialty stores her.

                1. Topo Sabores makes the best orange soda. Not like that nasty “natural flavorings” shit from Jarrito’s. Topo Sabores gets a superior scientific orange flavoring. It’s an improvement on nature founded on human achievement in chemical ingenuity.

                  Even Fanta beats the shit out of Faygo

                  1. where do you get that? i really like jarritos, but that’s compared to like 30 years of high fructose corn syrup or aspartame. if i can’t find anything with cane sugar i really dont have a preference between the two.

        3. It’s totally rad and gnarly, dude.

      1. These old boomers and Gen Xers sure do love to whine.

        1. Shutup, snapper!

      2. It’s retarded, like Bernie’s supporters. They should make one with little sheep following Bernie around saying ‘bbbaaaeeee’.

      3. ENB, I am a Millennial, yo. I just don’t like “bae” and “super-cereal” infecting Reason magazine like a plague of Millennialisms.

          1. I can’t even. Your Millennial speak is on fleek, tbh. On fleek af

            1. I was like meh, and she was like bae, and I was like OMG!

              1. [smacks you upside the manbun]

      4. Sorry ENB, that’s a SF on the link.

        1. That worked just a few minutes ago.

          1. Huh, I’m getting an error message on the tinyurl site.

      5. Well, you’re a meme, memehead!

    3. Shame! Ding-ding! Shame! Ding-ding! Shame!

  3. “Alexandra Schwartz at The New Yorker offers another explanation, one that covers how a libertarian-leaning Kentucky senator like Paul, an authoritarian blowhard like Trump, and a curmudgeonly old socialist like Sanders could be competing for the same millennial cohort: capturing the youngest of the youth vote is predicated on projecting authenticity and political purity. ”

    So basically Millennials are idiots who would prefer voting for the purity of Stalin over the impurity of Eisenhower.

    This explains quite a bit about my generation.

    1. This explains quite a bit about my generation.

      +1 P-p-p-people trying to put us down

    2. I am not surprised to find you disliking a person with a Jewish last name.

      1. Are you two in love or something? If so, can you keep your lover’s quarrels to yourself? (:

        1. JJ is too ethnic for my tastes

          1. You know who else had a list of people too ethnic for his taste?

            1. Donald Sterling?

            2. Hannibal Lecter?

              (I think eating Thais gave him awful reflux)

            3. The CEO of Abercrombie and Fitch?

        2. In case you missed some of the threads yesterday, let me recap:

          Turns out Irish is a hateful bigot and racist of the highest order.

          It is my sworn duty to follow him from thread to thread to make sure he is publicly outed and shamed for this unacceptable belief system.

          1. Couldn’t you just sic Nicole on him or something?

            1. I had a lot of help yesterday. The entire first part of the MLK thread was a bunch of jokes.

              Unfortunately, everyone else here is a lazy piece of shit and I’m the only one who (correctly) derives humor from beating something to absolute death over the course of many weeks.

              Citizen X was at least helpful below.

              1. “beating something to absolute death over the course of many weeks.”

                You said this and didn’t relate it to my opinion of minorities?

                1. You’ve found the cracks in his armor.

                  1. You’ve found the cracks in his armor.

                    The phrasing is important, because lord knows he’d never allow a CHINK in his armor.

                    1. “The Chink in the Armoire” is the almost finished sequel to “The Indian in the Cupboard”

                2. the bull connor jokes write themselves!

                3. Come on, Irish, we all know that you’d never punch a black person – because, secretly, you fear some of the color might come off on your hand.

              2. Unfortunately, everyone else here is a lazy piece of shit and I’m the only one who (correctly) derives humor from beating something to absolute death over the course of many weeks.

                Bae haz teh sadz (:

          2. Turns out Irish is a hateful bigot and racist of the highest order.

            Wow… That’s almost as bad as being a sanctimonious and preening goody-goody bully.

            1. We’re joking. It’s kind of hard to tell if you didn’t see yesterday’s communal jokes about my racism.

                1. It’s not a metaphor when it’s we’ve had that exact interaction, HM.

                  1. Actually, your attempts at interaction with me have been more like this.

                    1. I am very confused right now.

              1. My bad. My visits are increasingly rare since I changed jobs and now have restricted access to the series if tubes during the day.

                Still read a decent amount of articles while crapping. Less time for comments via mobile.

              2. We’re joking.

                Bigotry is just a big joke to you, isn’t it?

            2. This is why we need a HnR wiki page. I am too lazy to find the thread in question, thus can’t figure out whose being sarcastic and serious

              1. Various people have tried to create the H&R wiki, but I don’t think any have caught on.

                1. There is this one, created by our old friend Lonewacko. http://reason-magazine.wikia.c…..azine_Wiki

                  I’m rather proud of my contributions to the Reason contributor bios.

      2. It’s also the fact that “schwartz” means “black”.

    3. This explains quite a bit about my generation.

      That and the miscegenation, right?

    4. Millennials certainly poll strongly in favor of some of Rand’s big issues: 4th Amendment, criminal justice reform, a restrained foreign policy, and getting the financial house in order. The problem is that, millennials are millennials (read: they want everything), so they also poll strongly in favor of WANTING THE GOVERNMENT TO DO MORE. Basically, anybody hoping for our nation to be pushed towards liberty by the next generation is in for a series of unpleasant surprises, this being the first.

      So, if there’s one thing we can safely say we’ve learned from this election season so far it is this: millennials are fucking stupid.

      1. Everyone is fucking stupid. Millennials are just younger so their stupidity is inconsistent. Older people have stupidity that is coherent and makes internal sense, even as it is totally at odds with reality. Younger peoples’ stupidity is vast and contains multitudes.

        1. True. My old man is 67 years old, very successful and incredibly intelligent.

          Despite all these things, he is supporting the Donald.

          (punches self in balls)

          1. Same with my old man. Even sadder, he has a master’s in economics and still likes Trump’s take on trade tariffs and his position on China. I have to remind him about the benefits of free trade and letting people vote with their dollars. *palm to forehead*

            1. Trump insists with some supporting evidence that the US has within the last few decades agreed to unfavorable Trade treaties. So, it’s not clear that Trump is against trade, so much as pushing for a slightly better deal.

              And most trade treaties while tending to lower direct monetary barriers to trade, tend to be highly regulatory and really aren’t good examples of “free trade”. That being said, I think a lot of trade agreements are a step in the right direction.

        2. Millennials are just younger so their stupidity is inconsistent.

          Don’t forget superficial, trendy, and vapid. Even if they are consistent in their ideology, they’ve only held it for a couple of decades, at most.

          It usually takes a couple generations-worth of dead bodies before plain-old stupid ideas become truly horrific and are abandoned (temporarily).

      2. Millennial are also ignorant about what socialism is and how badly it breaks things.

      3. they want everything

        Except an honest job and their own place away from mom.

      4. Millennials are ignorant, not stupid. Even though ignorance is curable while stupidity is not, there is nothing in the culture that might induce a millennial to learn something. Colleges are bastions of militant ignorance, devoid of any spirit of discovery. If the tales of PC dominance are true then these schools make medieval scholastic monasteries look like the homes of free inquiry.

        Millennials growing up in major cities see corruption as a way of life with only the politically connected prospering.

        How many millennials could tell you who Thomas Edison was? Or Frederick Douglass? They know that Ariana Grande licked a donut but don’t know that Jonas Salk licked polio. They’ve never seen a crime show on TV where the killer wasn’t a rich white guy. (I once watched a “Law and Order” marathon where in seven consecutive shows the killer was a rich white guy with one exception. In that show the killer was a rich white woman, but the story made it clear that her rich white husband drove her to it.)

        With that kind of culture do you really expect millennials to become staunch defenders of human liberty?

  4. What exactly does ‘drift left’ on social issues mean? Are you claiming that the left are liberals? Hasn’t this silliness been thoroughly discredited enough already? Leftward like Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot? I don’t think that’s what we want.

    1. it’s a circle, with the traditional “right” and “left” converging somewhere about 180 degrees from “libertarianism”

  5. “Alexandra Schwartz at The New Yorker

    STOP

    RIGHT

    THERE.

    The New Yorker has been completely contaminated by some sort of liberal smarm virus. They’re about as bad as Salon.

    1. man you’re getting a red card for that one

    2. A screening that screens out nothing.

  6. Rand was always going to have a hard time with the youts because of his association with the Republican party. It’s a shitty brand to that demographic. No matter how he distinguished himself from them, he still defaulted to the most hideous of their members to the lightly engaged.

    The GOP is a garbage brand that offers garbage products for the most part. That one or two of their offerings are good or, at least, acceptable, those products still have to fight the brand perception.

    The Democrats have a slightly better brand but given that there are only two brands, and the other brand is so toxic, they shine by comparison.

    1. Yes, most of *us* millennials tune out as soon as a Republican says “traditional marriage,” and it usually goes downhill from there.

      1. But if you get called a moron and people whine enough, you’ll definitely change your mind about it, right?

        1. I do not like being called a moron, so of course.

      2. My thoughts and prayers are with you and your “non traditional” marriage

        1. Hey, what a sack of ripened bananas and I do with my life is none of your beeswax.

          1. Crusty Juggler is The Amazing Atheist?

          2. I bet you two like to get mushy on Valentine’s day

          3. One morning CJ woke up married to a pineapple

            An ugly pineapple

            But he loved her.

            1. Crusty is Ted Moseby?

    2. ^This.

    3. Well, it’s not like Rand could be a democrat. He’d either have to goose step it in line, or they’d throw him out. He doesn’t have much of a choice, as in no choice at all.

      1. Well, no. He really couldn’t be anything but a Republican in this duopoly. He should have been a Libertarian, but that brand is shot to shit as well, mostly because they have never understood the value of managing their brand.

        A lot of what Reason does is brand management of small l libertarianism, which causes so many of the people who refuse to believe in the value of a brand to howl and rend their garments.

        1. Not nearly enough people in this country are ready for a multi-party system. It’s all about the team for most still. Sure there are more independents than ever. But nearly all of them still vote for their favorite team.

          1. But branding is about attracting people; TEAM is about keeping them in line. Without an attractive brand, you are never going to change anyone’s mind.

            It’s like the idea of “the libertarian moment.” Everyone likes to make fun of it because it doesn’t describe the reality see experience, but maybe it was never supposed to be descriptive, but rather aspirational.

            1. I’d believe it was meant to be aspirational if Nick argued we should work towards the libertarian moment rather than declaring we’re secretly having a libertarian moment now, even as Sanders and Trump kick ass.

              1. Sometimes you have to fake it until you make it.

                1. Yes, but sometimes it just comes across as out of touch and maybe even a tad delusional.

        2. At least someone up there loves me:

          Elizabeth N. Brown on Twitter
          From the comments: “A lot of what Reason does is brand management of small l libertarianism” https://t.co/pzz5JWcgBd? Elizabeth N. Brown (@enbrown) February 3, 2016

          1. REASON IS A BUNCH OF COSMO-CHUGGING, BERNIE-LOVING CUCKMOTARIANS!!!11

            /RedTard

          2. At least someone up there loves me:

            She obviously did not follow your link to the Trump wound-fucking documentary.

            I felt like the hair after reading that.

          3. When she starts quoting the rest of your writing, that will be worth noting.

        3. You just described why back inthe 90s I had a subscription to Liberty and let my Reason one lapse.

        4. There’s a fine line between “brand management” and marketing BS.

          1. I’d call it more of a fuzzy gray area.

    4. The number one “negative” I have heard from college students regarding Rand is “he wants to dismantle Planned Parenthood.”

      1. The truly sad thing is that these college students equate “removing federal funding” with “dismantle.”

        1. To be fair, the GOP has made it no secret that they *want* to dismantle Planned Parenthood, and removing federal funding is just one step in that process.

          If Paul feels differently, as a Republican it is his responsibility to differentiate from Republicans, as he has done on other issues where he *does* feel different.

      2. But that’s all it takes. “Dismantling PP” is associated with a dozen other negative things they dislike about Republicans. It’s a reverse dog whistle that lets them think he is just like all other GOP garbage people without having to think about it.

        They aren’t going to care if it is a principled stance because it already smells like fifteen other types of bullshit they won’t put up with.

        1. It’s also barely a principled stance, because he’s going to let other providers continue to collect Medicaid payments. It screams “pro-life.”

          1. True, and that doesn’t play well.

          2. So being “pro-life” is not a principled stance.

            Got it.

            1. Yep, that’s what I said.

              1. But if you’re pro-choice you alienate half the millenials.

        2. Then they are, again, absolutely fucking stupid if Planned fucking Parenthood is a primary consideration in their political preferences.

    5. Well that and not going around yelling about how he would give millenials free shit.

    6. So why did the youth support Ron Paul and Trump? Ron Paul was also a “immigration restrictionist” by libertarian standards.

      There are enough social conservatives in the dem base that would deliver for the GOP every year if immigration and social issues alone were the defining issues. Millennials who support gay marriage isn’t likely to support freedom of religion and association.

      Millennials are uninformed and not a reliable voting bloc. Their “social justice” movement has cost someone’s freedom on college campuses and elsewhere. Any Republican or libertarian that supports marriage freedom but opposes free stuff will lose out with this group.

      1. Well, for one they don’t walk in lockstep. And Ron Paul and Trump both have a no-brand brand. Ron got the groovy kooky uncle vote that is mostly going to Bernie this time. And Trump has appeal to the rural youth base who are still running on the received politics of their parents.

        Millennials who support gay marriage isn’t likely to support freedom of religion and association.

        I doubt many Millenials connect the two. All they hear is anti-gay marriage sentiment, which has so many other associated negatives.

        And no, they are not a reliable voting bloc. Because they will stay home if no one inspires them.

      2. “Any Republican or libertarian that supports marriage freedom but opposes free stuff […]”
        Seeing as there aren’t any Republicans who *actually* oppose “free stuff”?, I don’t think that describes, well, any Republican or libertarian candidate for national office.
        ________
        ?Opposing “free stuff” for *those* people? Sure. But then they have “free stuff” for the *right* people. Face it, Republicans and Democrats are both for giving out “free stuff”, they just disagree on who should get it, and what to call it.

    7. Yeah. This always surprises me about libertarian-leaners who want to effect change within the existing party system cuz it’s ‘easier’.

      Not exactly sure how
      a)fighting to get basic ideas even accepted and
      b)fighting to correct the ideas once enemies within the party have distorted them and
      c)fighting to get accepted outside the party because the enemies within the party have created a brand that is at odds with what you believe/want and
      d)still having to create an independent organizational apparatus (ie a political party within the party)

      is ‘easy’. But then my guess is that most libertarian-leaners are simply trying to create wishful thinking scenarios for how voting and doing nothing else will create some miracle.

      1. Yeah. This always surprises me about Libertarian-purists who want to effect change outside the existing party system cuz it ‘better’.

        Not exactly sure how
        a) fighting just to get on the ballot in all 50 states
        b) fighting to correct ideas once those not quite ideologically pure distort them
        c) fighting to get accepted outside the party AT ALL
        d) have no idea how to creat an independent organizational apparatus

        is ‘better’. But then my guess is that most Libertarian-purists are simply trying to create wishful thinking scenarios for how voting Libertarian (or not voting at all) will create some miracle.

        Don’t talk to me about wishful thinking:
        In 1996, the Libertarian national convention (which I think was in half the ‘Diamond’ conference room at the
        Holiday Inn. I think the other half was being used by the Shriners):
        “And now, the next President of the United States: Harry Browne!!”.

        1. If most libertarians are anything like me, they hold very little hope of anything really changing in a particularly libertarian direction. It’s not wishful thinking but complete cynicism.

        2. I’m not a fan of ‘political party as church for zealots’ either. But that is only a reality for the LP because pragmatic libertarian-leaners are busy doing useless things within the two main parties. Those folks have a great skill – pragmatic political experience – but are choosing not to actually be pragmatic (ie take over a party that IS on the ballot in plenty (49?) of states).

          I’m not going to blast the few LP actives as too purist/impractical. After all, they are the ones who have nominated non-LP members as their Prez candidates – for a few elections now. So who is reaching outside their clique? All they need are people who actually have some experience in getting a political campaign organized at the grassroots. Something as simple as having one person who has precinct experience could completely transform an election in a city. You have no idea how easy your point C is – once you have one person who can leverage their experience and understands the value of little things like yard signs.

          1. And BTW – the point in working thru third-party is NOT to ‘win the election’. It is to grow that vote so that it is the margin of difference in an election.

            In 2012, with absolutely no serious/effective LP effort, the LP was just short of being the margin of difference in FL/NC/OH.

            With serious/effective effort (probably means a 3-5% nationwide result), the LP could quite easily be the margin of difference in VA/WI/AZ/CO/GA/MI/MN/MO/NV/NH/PA/SC.

            Do that – and you have a political earthquake in this country that completely realigns the R’s and D’s. THAT is why the R’s and D’s want libertarians to remain sheep in their ‘big-tent’. So that libertarian ideas can remain ignored.

      2. Well, it’s ‘easy’ compared to 1) having basic ideas that absolutely no one will hear.

      3. Gays and lesbians did it within the Democrat party.

        The Tea Party did it within the Republican party.

        So it’s not like it’s impossible to change a party from the inside and swing their viewpoint around on a topic.

        Is it easy? Nah. Not surprisingly, changing the way a few million people feel on an issue is hard work, taking many years to really see change. But it can be done.

        1. I question whether ‘gays/lesbians’ did anything uniquely in the Dem Party. Whatever achievements they made came thru the courts (following common law) – not politics (following ‘statutory’ or civil law). Pols changed their minds later – after the courts said that the statutes weren’t legal.

          Tea Party? I wish I knew what issue you think they’ve succeeded with. They elected a couple critters but so far they are very much like the socons (40 years ‘working within the GOP tent’ and have achieved remarkably little of their agenda even though they comprise probably 60% of the GOP precinct people).

  7. Based upon the events taking place on college campuses across the country, I just think young voters are not libertarians.

    1. Unpossible! We’re having a libertarian moment! And only the millenials and Reason writers know about it. Why do you hate the libertarian moment?

    2. There was an interesting article, I’m wanting to say on National Review, a few weeks back (I tried searching for it just now but couldn’t find it), that posited that no, it isn’t branding, or having a bad messenger, or anything like that.

      People have heard, and understand, the appeals for limited government. They just don’t agree. The vast majority of people are in favor of large, expansive government, and really only fight about exactly which parts get to be the biggest.

      1. this is definitely it. there is only so much and so often and so many times you can try to sell a product and realize it’s just not selling. i’ve gotten on the political nihilists before but i am starting to think lulztopia is all we can hope for.

        trumpenfurher 2016!

      2. Like Obamacare. I want to work on my acting career, or work in media, or become a writer, and those jobs typically do not provide their employees with healthcare, so the government should provide healthcare.

      3. Interesting article on National Review? It’s about time you outed yourself you piece of shit!

        /winkyface

      4. People have heard, and understand, the appeals for limited government. They just don’t agree.

        I don’t know if I totally agree that they’ve heard and understand it, but I do think way too many people use this excuse. A lot of libertarians do need to accept that most people don’t care about liberty, or despise it, or have other values. or perceive benefits that come at its expense. This is especially important to remember when there is all this infighting about improper rhetoric or the need to promote or reject some other group. E.g. libertarianism was not doomed because of Ron Paul’s newsletters or whatever Rothbard did in the 90s, or because of the “liberaltarian” strategy in the 00s.

        1. A lot of fellow millenials just don’t have a reality-based grasp of economics. In public school it was drilled into our heads that WW2 ended the great depression because STIMYULUS MULTIPLEIRS. Keynsian voodoo is treated as gospel and not even debated. Most millenials don’t even know that an opposing viewpoint exists, because they’ve never been exposed to it.

          Speaking from personal experience, I grew up a Daily Show-watching nodder and genuinely believed that the only people who oppose minimum wage hikes are people who want more inequality. It wasn’t until I discovered this neat little youtube channel called LearnLiberty that I was even exposed to these ideas, and when I was, it just clicked.

          Most kids will never get that far.

          1. There is a general lack of intellectual curiosity, but I think that goes for most people in general.

          2. It’s like we’re the same person.

          3. Hah, cool to know that the LearnLiberty won someone over. Score one for GMU!

          4. Gee, it’s almost like it’s not just “millennials” that aren’t, broadly speaking, persuaded by libertarian ideas, it’s everyone else too.

            Face it, if “Keynsian voodoo” is taught even in Texas, it’s not a liberal conspiracy.

          5. What’s funny if WW2 ended the great depression that makes the New Deal failure look even worse

      5. No this isn’t it. People do want to know what the candidate will DO in office. Which is entirely rational.

        It is libertarians who have failed to clearly state what they will actually DO – ie get govt off your back in area A B C. Going anarchophilosophical is a FAIL because it doesn’t address what you will DO. And picking irrelevant/secondary issues means you become irrelevant.

        It’s about the economy stupid. It’s always about the freaking economy. And libertarians don’t get that.

        1. Even Sanders economic message can be understood in libertarian terms. He is deploring the reality that government is favoring Wall St and financial elites – and the result is that the burdens of govt end up on everyone else. He is saying that he will DO something about that. What he will DO may be crap – but libertarians can’t seem to even admit the problem so can’t say what they will DO. And no – ‘Audit the Fed’ is not doing anything.

    3. Well, they probably are at about the same rate as any other age group. No cohort of voters, generally speaking, are libertarians.

      1. young people have especially shitty politics, primarily because they do not pay taxes and have little to no responsibilities. they’re not particularly resentful of people who get unearned benefits from government because they live in a context-free world, particularly at college.

        1. Yeah, I suppose that’s true. But it’s always true of young people. I’m sure the millennial cohort is more libertarian than they were 10 years ago.

          I just get sick of all the generalizations about “generations”. Just like every other generation they will grow up to be more or less evenly divided politically and mostly pretty un-libertarian.

          1. I’ve met far far more Libertarian Gen-Xers than I’ve met libertarian Millennials.

            1. I’ve met plenty of libertarian Millenials, they just don’t know what they are.

              1. “Dude, pot should be legal and free.”

              2. This ^ Too many times when I criticize a politician or position, people revert back to protect their party, as if I directly insulted them, even if we agree on the issue. Complete shut down in conversation. They’re stuck in party mode with the f*ing talking points bouncing around in their head.

            2. This. Though I’d say the Oregon trail segment of the millennial generation might tilt even more libertarian than Gen X.

            3. We Xers were plenty stupid in our youth, we just weren’t automatically lockstep leftists.

  8. capturing the youngest of the youth vote is predicated on projecting authenticity and political purity free shit.

    I’ve seen nothing from the Berniaballers to suggest otherwise.

    “Crush your enemies. See them driven before you. Hear the lamentations of their wallets.”

  9. “Disaffected millennials were supposed to stand with Rand. What happened?”

    The people who did the supposing expected to lead a Children’s Crusade to Libertopia.

  10. who cares about millennials? they have ridiculous politics and they don’t vote. they can take their “come on it’s 20XX” Jon Oliver crap and shut up.

    1. “They”? Come on, dude.

      1. generalizations are valid. i don’t have any respect for the politics of younger people.

        1. Including yourself, apparently.

          1. I don’t care for the politics of older people, either.

  11. Schwartz suggests that this older millennial group is “the portion of the age bracket that has voted before, and witnessed the election-to-elected transformation firsthand.”

    This is what passes for cynicism at The New Yorker.

  12. Rand was always going to have a hard time with the youts because of his association with the Republican party. It’s a shitty brand to that demographic

    Republicans? They’re the ones who wanted to dump that crazy bastard Romney on us. That guy wanted to completely dismantle the government and leave us at the mercy of roving bands of cannibals and investment bankers.

    1. Don’t forget the death camps for gays and incubation chambers where mothers will be strapped to tables to force them to carry children to term.

      1. Stop being so culturally insensitive towards Muslims.

  13. Apropos of nothing…

    I saw a Tesla charging station in Bozeman the other day. I wonder how many Teslae there are in Gallatin County, Montana (I have seen one).

    1. I’m happy to see someone who knows the correct plural for Tesla. You know, not many people even know that the plural for Lexus is Lexi.

      1. I’m one of many who drive Toyotae. There are millions of us.

      2. Is Taxus the singular for Taxi?

        1. It’s Bernie’s campaign slogan.

          1. +1 internet for you Sir!

    2. That is all purely to provide a path such that a Tesla can make a claim that their cars can travel across the country. That path uses I-90, so that’s why you have a station in Bozeman. There are two more chargers on I-90 in South Dakota. Come to think of it two is also the number of Teslas I’ve seen in South Dakota.

    3. Tesla once famously said “you will live to see man made horrors beyond your comprehension”. Little did he know that those man made horrors would be the cars bearing his name, driven by motorists combining all the worst traits of BMW and Prius drivers.

  14. “…but also the candidate closest to holding libertarian positions in arenas from foreign policy to criminal justice to auditing the fed now that Paul is out of the race.”

    Auditing the Fed is EXACTLY what Millenials care about. After all, monetary policy is what drives the youth vote to the polls in record numbers election after election.

    And, Bernie is all for auditing the Fed. And then forcing it to be controlled by the proletariat.

  15. What happened?

    He tried appealing to reason.

  16. I saw a Tesla charging station in Bozeman the other day. I wonder how many Teslae there are in Gallatin County, Montana (I have seen one).

    Doesn’t yours make 2? [ducks]

    1. So you’re right there with P. Brooks on the issue of threaded comments?

      1. I respect the man’s primitive customs.

    2. Tesla charging station

      Fancy words for an electric receptacle

  17. capturing the youngest of the youth vote is predicated on projecting authenticity and political purity being completely fucking off your nut and promising lots of free shit you can never deliver.”

    There’s also this =

    [Sanders] = the candidate closest to holding libertarian positions in arenas from 1) foreign policy to 2) criminal justice to 3) auditing the fed”

    “arenas”? really?

    this suggests that the things listed represent mere book-ends on the wide range of Sanders ‘libertarian’ views….

    ….rather than cherry-picked examples being spun as the product of libertarian motives, when in fact they have almost zero actual conceptual overlap.

    Are we to believe that Bernie’s so-called Fed-Audit is conceived as a means to *limiting* the power of federal economic intervention? Or that his interest in criminal justice reform is driven by any belief that the state must be restrained from over-zealous application of authority?

    Who the fuck are you kidding?

    1. Bernie’s “libertarian” ideas:
      Foreign policy: “Not only will I not get involved in foreign adventures, I won’t let us get involved in foreign trade or allow companies to outsource to foreign workers. No wars! Higher Tariffs! No Outsourcing American Jobs!”

      Criminal Justice: “Police should be nicer to those brown and black people. And maybe legalize pot (so those brown and black people can be more mellow). But anybody with an ‘assault weapon’ should be shot on sight.”

      Auditing Fed: “We should arrest all the bankers. And then make the Fed hire ‘regular’ people like farmers and housewives to control monetary policy”

    2. Or that his interest in criminal justice reform is driven by any belief that the state must be restrained from over-zealous application of authority?

      Yeah, I see Bernie’s claims of criminal justice reform as a movement away from policemen with guns *back* to the days of men in white coats with syringes full of sedatives with convenient initiatives to reinforced socialized medicine.

      1. The argument seems to be,

        Vote For Bernie! = THE GUY WHO GETS SOME THINGS RIGHT FOR THE WORST-POSSIBLE REASONS

        1. This is the magazine that had a not insignificant portion of its staff endorse Obama in 2008. Don’t be surprised when we get the “libertarian” case for Bernie should he capture the nomination.

          Sometime above mentioned reason as doing small l libertarian brand management. If that’s what it’s doing, it is almost driving the core libertarian constituency away from libertarianism.

          1. “Sudden|2.3.16 @ 4:24PM|#

            This is the magazine that had a not insignificant portion of its staff endorse Obama in 2008.”

            I’m not sure that says much at all, since people were presented with a choice between “change of party”, or John “Bomb Iran” McCain

            I think the ‘change of party’ after 8 years of bush was not an unreasonable vote at the time. Voting for Obama in 2012 would be far more criminal IMO

        2. “Vote For Bernie! = THE GUY WHO GETS SOME THINGS RIGHT FOR THE WORST-POSSIBLE REASONS”

          Even that is generous.

          “Vote For Bernie! At least he’s not a LINO!”

    3. Capturing the youngest of the youth vote is predicated on being completely fucking off your nut and promising lots of free shit you can never deliver.”

      IOW, promising them that they never have to grow up.

  18. Fine you want to hate ted Cruz that is your business but according to my research he was cum laude from Princeton University and magna cum laude Harvard Law School and unlike the Democrats he might run against he has a pretty good professional resume which includes.

    Solicitor General of Texas from 2003 to 2008, 5 years) an adjunct professor of law from 2004 to 2009 at the University of Texas School of Law in Austin, where he taught U.S. Supreme Court litigation.

    But just a basic review of his Wikipedia page would have pointed that out…

    I mean I could care less one way or the other but this sounds like a Democrat Hit Piece more than a REASON article.

    Hate the guy for his positions if you want to but to write him off as some dumbass is poor reporting…

    So maybe, we really don’t know, he is not a nice guy…. or maybe he is hatred because his skills are far greater then those he is forced to work with in Wash-DC…

    You know a little research will really help when writing an article….

    1. So you think Tuna Can Ted is bae?

      1. So bae.

      2. “So you think Tuna Can Ted is bae?”

        Sorry, but Canucks are too bland to be bae.

    2. “Hate the guy for his positions if you want to but to write him off as some dumbass is poor reporting…”

      I searched this article for Ted Cruz and found nothing. What article are you reading?

      1. I think it’s copy pasta. The coming of the TedBot.

        1. I miss the Paultards.

    3. maybe he is hatred because his skills are far greater

      ted pays the bills and crushes foes like darth vader

  19. Bernie Sanders will dismantle the banks; by executive order decree, presumably.

    But Rand Paul is divorced from reality and cannot be trusted with the tiller.

    1. Same-sex marriage offends Rand Paul, that’s all that millennials hear.

      1. He never offered to pay off their student loans.

  20. All I got out of this is that young people are stupid. Well, not stupid, but ignorant. No that’s not right either. Basically young people are not yet fully developed souls. Sure there’s that cliche about liberal/youth/heart, conservative/old/brain, but it’s more than that. Maybe I’m projecting, but I didn’t really start to figure out how the world works until I was pushing 50. You have to see several cohorts grow up behind you to realize that you too were young and, let’s be charitable, idealistic. Or naive. Or stupid. I don’t think I’m any smarter, just more clear-eyed about the nature of other people, particularly those that would purport to fix the world so I can end-run reality.

  21. Too bad Rand blew off his natural constituency of really pissed off government-haters. That’s like 2/3 of the GOP electorate this go-round.

    1. They don’t hate government, just the influence that business has in it. Hence, why establishment and donor class are such closely related concepts.

  22. I’m a 24 year old minarchist. Most of my friends are apathetic libertarians. Outside that small circle, my Vermont friends are pretty much terrible on politics. This weird inconsistent socialism and anarchy. It’s just feelings. No thought to force or economics. Above, someone noted that young people were all instructed that there is one economic thought. This is true. It wasn’t even mentioned that there were opposing views. Or that some of these people predicted and explained various recessions. Hell, economics wasn’t really even explained.
    It wasn’t until I started looking at that subject that I was turned to libertarianism.

    1. Nice. Yea my thought with younger folks these days is they dont really bother to think critically of what they want. I am a millenial older though.

      My one buddy was ranting about lack of jobs and profits one time. I asked my friend why he wanted to open his restaurant as he has said before….first thing out of his mouth…to make money. He got it thereafter

  23. That’s the lamest NG quote I’ve read yet.

  24. Trump and Sanders are British Aerospace?

  25. Reason sure writes a lot of millennial bashing pieces…then they sprinkle in ones that say we are the future of our culture and politics. Furthermore, it seems as though Reason doesn’t back a single candidate for President, even Gary Johnson. They write articles saying each candidate COULD be a smart choice for Libertarians and write still more articles bashing the same candidates into the dirt. They wrote an article essentially calling out Rand Paul for “not being Libertarian enough” and today, they wrote one saying he deserves praise. They suggested Bernie is the best choice for Libertarians while skewering him in a separate article. They did the same for Hillary. I’m not sure where Reason actually stands on much and I don’t think they are either. One would think that, as a Libertarian publication, they would automatically have all of their staff throwing support behind the Libertarian Party, but they don’t. I’ve had a subscription to their magazine for two years, but I may soon let it lapse.

    1. Fuck those statist nutjobs in the LP. They’re why even some cosmotarians have to call themselves an-caps now

    2. Reason isn’t an entity with one single viewpoint but a collection of a lot of different people with varying shades of libertarian beliefs and varying opinions on public policy & current events. We try to showcase a broad spectrum of libertarian belief

      1. Yet you all seem to agree that Nick is the boss.

        1. The Jacket is the boss, the occupant is somewhat incidental.

      2. We try to showcase a broad spectrum of libertarian belief

        For example, I’ve always appreciated Reason’s willingness to give voice to the vastly underrepresented “pay for my birth control” school of libertarian thinking…

    3. Furthermore, it seems as though Reason doesn’t back a single candidate for President, even Gary Johnson.

      They don’t officially make political endorsements on account of the Reason Foundation being a 501(c)(3), but you can get a pretty good feel for the broad inclinations of the editorial staff when they publish their “Who’s Getting Our Votes piece in presidential election years.

  26. Bae

    And we wonder why white Americans are killing themselves in droves these days.

  27. “it’s a monumental?and intentional?mistake to conflate Paul’s electoral fortunes with the persistence of…’the Libertarian Moment,'” which is less about electoral politics than American “comfort with and demand for increasingly individualized and personalized options and experiences in every aspect of our lives.”

    Nothing says “increasingly individualized and personalized options and experiences” like universal Medicare and “You don’t necessarily need a choice of 23 underarm spray deodorants or of 18 different pairs of sneakers when children are hungry in this country”. Yessiree, individual liberty is positively catching on fucking fire with the yung’uns.

  28. just before I saw the receipt that said $7527 , I accept that my mom in-law woz like actualey making money in there spare time from there pretty old laptop. . there aunt had bean doing this for less than twentey months and at present cleared the depts on there appartment and bourt a great new Citro?n 2CV . look here…….
    Clik This Link inYour Browser.
    ???????? http://www.Wage90.com

  29. My last pay check was $9500 working 12 hours a week online. My sisters friend has been averaging 15k for months now and she works about 20 hours a week. I can’t believe how easy it was once I tried it out. This is what I do..

    Clik This Link inYour Browser….

    ? ? ? ? http://www.Workpost30.Com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.