Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
    • Reason TV
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • Free Media
    • The Reason Interview
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • Freed Up
    • The Soho Forum Debates
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Log In

Create new account

Politics

Will Rep. Justin Amash Oppose Donald Trump? Looks Likely.

"Nothing better illustrates the phoniness of politicians," he writes, "than the ease w/ which they shift from blasting one another to praising one another."

Jesse Walker | 5.5.2016 10:35 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
Large image on homepages | Gage Skidmore
(Gage Skidmore)

A series of Republicans who once were harshly anti-Trump are now lining up to kiss the Donald's ring. But it doesn't look like that line will include Michigan Rep. Justin Amash, the libertarian-leaning congressman who once suggested that Trump "presents a kind of threat to our system that is maybe in some ways bigger than what the Democrats present." If you head over to Amash's Twitter page right now, you'll see that this is his most recent Tweet:

Twitter

Hmm: What do you think he's referring to? The item right below that—retweeted from Reason—certainly suggests that he isn't about to jump on the Trump train:

Twitter

And below that, a retweet from Sen. Ben Sasse, the anti-Trump Nebraska Republican who's been calling for an independent or third-party candidate to emerge:

Twitter

I have reached out to Rep. Amash's office to ask who, if anyone, he plans to support for the presidency this November, and I'll update this post if/when I get a response.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: A Tale of Two Recoveries: Reagan vs. Obama

Jesse Walker is books editor at Reason and the author of Rebels on the Air and The United States of Paranoia.

PoliticsJustin AmashDonald TrumpElection 2016
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (82)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Spencer   10 years ago

    So, was THAT the libertarian moment?

    1. sarcasmic   10 years ago

      No. It was just gas.

  2. colorblindkid   10 years ago

    Favorite sitting politician.

    1. Mongo   10 years ago

      I don't understand why he is a Republican, the party of true pant-shitting dumbasses.

      1. Microaggressor   10 years ago

        Because running as an (L) will get you nowhere?

      2. Azathoth!!   10 years ago

        Because 'libertarian' is what 'repuiblican' should be.

  3. Mustang   10 years ago

    Twitter fights are so lame. Politics would be so much more interesting if they beat the daylights out of each other a bit instead of having pissing contests over the internet.

    1. Free Society   10 years ago

      In the old days, assholes like Alexander Hamilton were taken out back and shot. T'was a simpler time.

    2. Free Market Socialist $park?   10 years ago

      The man who can wear the crown is the man who can take the crown. And that man can wear the crown for as long as he can hold it.

    3. invisible finger   10 years ago

      Real leaders duel with pistols at 20 paces.

      1. Swiss Servator   10 years ago

        Wellington : Come sir. Choose your stoker.
        Blackadder : What's this? Are we going to tickle each other to death?
        Wellington : No sir. We fight with cannon.
        Blackadder : But I thought we were fighting with swords.
        Wellington : Swords! What do you think this is, the middle ages? Only girls fight with swords these days. Stand by your gun sir. Hup two three. Hup two three.
        Blackadder : Wait a minute.
        Wellington : Stand by cannon for loading procedure. Stoke. Muzzle. Wrench. Crank the storm barrel. Pull tee bar.
        Blackadder : "Congratulations on choosing the Armstrong Whitworth four pounder cannonnette. Please read the instructions carefully and it should give years of trouble free maiming."
        Wellington : Check elevation. Chart trajectory. Prime fuse. Aim...
        Blackadder : Look, wait a minute.
        Wellington : FIRE!

  4. Ken Shultz   10 years ago

    I've been consoling myself with the realization that having a wildly unpopular emperor is better than having a popular one.

    If Hillary and Trump were both wildly popular, they would have a mandate and the legitimacy to push Congress around and get what they want. Because they're both wildly unpopular, they won't be able to get as much done.

    I'd rank my preferences in this order:

    1) Popular libertarian President
    2) Unpopular libertarian President
    3) Unpopular authoritarian President
    4) Popular authoritarian President

    When we see stories about Trump's unpopularity, we should keep this in mind: Unpopularity isn't a negative attribute in an authoritarian President--certainly not from a libertarian perspective. Wouldn't America be better off if Barack Obama had been massively unpopular?

    1. Hugh Akston   10 years ago

      0) Why does there need to be a president?

      1. Citizen X   10 years ago

        Y U DUNT LIEK GOVMINT HUG AKTONS U GO TOO SOMALKEIA

        1. Chipper Morning Wood   10 years ago

          SOMALKEA = worst furniture store ever

          1. Swiss Servator   10 years ago

            Dammit, you beat me to it.

            *applauds dourly*

      2. kbolino   10 years ago

        The same reason there needs to be a janitor. The real question is why should a glorified janitor be given so much power?

        1. Free Society   10 years ago

          To scrub toilets and put saw dust on puddles of vomit? Sorry but I think civilization would be better off without a majoritarian crime racket spanning 300ish million people.

          1. kbolino   10 years ago

            Outside of war, the government--especially the national government--doesn't have much to do except keep the lights running. The idea that it exists to provide something other than the organization of martial resources in response to large-scale threats to the peace and liberty of its citizens is more dangerous than the idea that it such a body needs to exist in the first place.

        2. Rhywun   10 years ago

          why should a glorified janitor be given so much power?

          Right?!

          /Richard "Dick" Vernon

      3. Ken Shultz   10 years ago

        You can't always get what you want, but if you have to choose?

        And if you want to go that route, "Popular libertarian President" is probably the one where there's no emperor at all. That's like the one where there's no authoritarian President, and hardly anybody wants one either.

      4. Night Elf Mohawk   10 years ago

        Because the country is a constitutional republic and the Constitution calls for one.

        1. Ken Shultz   10 years ago

          I'm not sure the reality of the office of President today looks much like the one in the Constitution, but I get what you're saying.

        2. Free Society   10 years ago

          Because the country is a constitutional republic and the Constitution calls for one.

          Why does North Korea need Kin Jong-Un? Because the country is a Communist hereditary dictatorship and the men with guns demand his position be filled.

          1. Night Elf Mohawk   10 years ago

            That would make a lot more sense if it weren't "arguing" in favor of a man rather than a position. It's the whole "government of laws, not of men" thing.

            Now, a strong case can be made that it's no longer a government of laws, or whatever, but that's a separate issue from the design. And, of course, you're free not to like the design, either, but that's also a separate issue, since the question wasn't "why does there need to be a President?"

            1. Night Elf Mohawk   10 years ago

              Ummm... "why does there need to be a Constitution," this is.

    2. WTF   10 years ago

      Of course, President Hillary will be able to shape the SCOTUS to her ideology for decades.

      1. Another David   10 years ago

        So will President Trump. You think he'll put in people who might strike down literally one single executive action? He'd sooner nominate his own back hair.

        1. mad.casual   10 years ago

          Right but I wouldn't expect Trump to give two shits about what SCOTUS does one day after the Trump presidency. Especially since the GOP is effectively killed/dismantled/dismembered or w/e. Moreover, all this time as a real estate developer and Kelo v. New London was decided entirely without him.

        2. WTF   10 years ago

          I don't believe we will be seeing a President Trump. Not with the Republicans preparing to go to war with themselves rather than elect Trump. He might be slightly better on SCOTUS nominations than Hillary, at least not as bad on the 2nd amendment, and likely not quite as bad on the 1st amendment.

          1. lulztopian   10 years ago

            this is what kills me: someone like Trump is practically begging to be shaped by an inner circle of informed conservatives, but instead of trying to influence someone who is clearly better than Shrillary, they've decided to act like petulant little children.

            1. UCrawford   10 years ago

              That's because they're not conservatives and have no interest in molding a President into a conservative...they want someone who will play ball with them and keep the pork flowing exactly as Bush/Clinton/Bush/Obama did. We've had one party since Reagan left office...with only a short respite in the 1990s.

      2. Ken Shultz   10 years ago

        In which case, her being massively unpopular is still better than her being wildly popular.

        It's the authoritarianism that's the problem for libertarians--not her unpopularity. Her unpopularity is an undisguised blessing. Thank Jesus she's so unpopular. Pray she becomes even more unpopular still.

        1. mad.casual   10 years ago

          Pray she becomes even more unpopular still.

          Which is why I think Trump is the best candidate for that particular job. She probably *could* sit back until Nov. and drink Mimosas. I fully expect Trump to successfully goad her into a dick measuring contest.

          1. Night Elf Mohawk   10 years ago

            He wouldn't have a chance in such a thing.

  5. Fist of Etiquette   10 years ago

    Justin Amash isn't very classy, to be honest. Everyone says so. He's a loser who is going to be on the outside looking in.

    1. Ken Shultz   10 years ago

      Classy probably won't help us in the fight against President Trump or President Hillary. They're just not likely to be classy Presidents.

      The leaders of the opposition to either one of them may need to be completely bereft of class in order to be effective.

      Vulgarity, silliness, brazen, someone who can tell fart jokes at a funeral without batting an eye. If we're going to be effective against the Crook in Chief or Trump, we may have to get Palin's Buttplug level stupid before this is over.

      1. Nihil   10 years ago

        Vulgarity, silliness, brazen, someone who can tell fart jokes at a funeral without batting an eye.

        Could someone direct me to the sign-up form, please?

    2. You Sound Like a Prog (MJG)   10 years ago

      Why is he denigrating the Will of the People?

      1. Ken Shultz   10 years ago

        The will of the people is porn.

        The will of the people pizza.

        The will of the people is at Amazon.com

        The will of the people isn't politicians. Politicians make hot chicks barf.

      2. WTF   10 years ago

        The people have spoken - the bastards!
        - Dick Tuck

  6. Crusty Juggler   10 years ago

    I'll update this post if/when I get a response.

    I assume that will be...soon.

    1. Ken Shultz   10 years ago

      Soon?

      Like when Jesus comes back?

  7. american socialist   10 years ago

    I'm going with Trump. My goal would be chaos, an emerging class consciousness, and a socialist revolution. You're telling me Clinton is going to help with this? She's a dangerous capitalist lackey. Trump, 2016-- highlighting the contradictions in the 21st century.

    1. You Sound Like a Prog (MJG)   10 years ago

      Good luck with that.

    2. Ken Shultz   10 years ago

      See, this is what I was talking about above.

      That's certainly Palin's Buttplug level stupid--it's just pushing in the wrong direction.

      But good effort!

      1. american socialist   10 years ago

        I'm just saying, Ken, that when Clinton/Trump come around and launch some asinine war in which the rubes' kids keep dying and then they go to the park where some asshole, paid off politician is arguing strenuously that it's important to vote-- maybe some of those people will start looking around. You know?

        1. Ken Shultz   10 years ago

          I have no idea what this is supposed to mean, but this really is the level of stupidity I was talking about. Your initial post was even better/dumber than this one, but you're on the right track with the Palin's Buttplug level stupid. And you should be congratulated for that.

          I'm just saying maybe it should be to more of a pro-libertarian stance, but I guess the anti-libertarian stupid shit you say is objectively pro-libertarian in a way--if reading the stupid shit you write makes people want to be even more libertarian. So keep up the good work!

          You're doing what you can in your own special way.

        2. Citizen X   10 years ago

          maybe some of those people will start looking around.

          Oh, you're 'just' saying that. For a second there i thought you were 'just' saying that you'd like to see "an emerging class consciousness and a socialist revolution."

    3. Citizen X   10 years ago

      Because envy-based collectivist ideology has accomplished such great things in places like Venezuela, right?

      1. This Machine   10 years ago

        IT WAS THE CAPITALIST PIG-DOG WRECKERS AND KULAKS THAT DESTROYED VENEZUELA, TOVARISH!

    4. Chipwooder   10 years ago

      You could just go back to Cuba and lecture them again on how good they have it again.

  8. lulztopian   10 years ago

    Republicans need to learn some party discipline. They love to talk about Reagan but forget about the 11th Commandment. I think a lot of Trump fans are 'in the closet' and if the Republicans took some pride in their candidate, no matter how they feel internally, it at least makes you look like you know what you're doing. nobody wants to vote for a party that looks entirely chaotic.

    1. paranoid android   10 years ago

      I think a lot of Trump fans are 'in the closet' and if the Republicans took some pride in their candidate, no matter how they feel internally, it at least makes you look like you know what you're doing. nobody wants to vote for a party that looks entirely chaotic.

      They should throw a Trump Pride parade.

      "WE'RE HERE! WE'RE RETARDS! WE VOTE! GET USED TO IT!"

  9. american socialist   10 years ago

    OT: More guns Equal Less Crime:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05.....eaths.html

    1. kbolino   10 years ago

      I thought you were apathetic on the matter?

      1. american socialist   10 years ago

        More or less. I'm just arguing for apathy on your part.

        1. kbolino   10 years ago

          So you have no idea what apathetic means or this is just another instance of you being a bald-faced liar.

          Got it.

          1. WTF   10 years ago

            There's no 'either/or', he is both stupid and dishonest. That's why he's a socialist.

          2. american socialist   10 years ago

            I went to a party recently and some hothead Clinton supporter and I got into it about The election. I told him I didn't really care one way or the other whether Clinton won and, for that matter, I didn't really care about the fate of the Democratic Party. I feel the same way about laws designed the restrict access to firearms. I don't jump around and wave the 2nd amendment in people's faces when local communities act to protect their citizens nor do I cheerlead efforts to restrict access to firearms. I don't care, really, because I-- like so many others-- aren't going to buy a firearm any time soon. The particular argument about how it's fascist totalitarianism when the government says you should show your drivers license and prove you aren't a.) going to go home and shoot your wife and b.) are not a nut don't interest me beyond marveling at how absolutely fucking wrapped up in hysterics other people can get about the issue.

            That's apathy, right?

            1. The Last American Hero   10 years ago

              Socialists don't understand inherent rights to self defense and believe freedom means asking permission.

              And how does one prove item a, above? Pinky swear? Or do the right people from the right families get to have access to firearms?

    2. WTF   10 years ago

      278 unintentional shootings at the hands of young children and teenagers
      I love how they jump from photos of toddlers to then include teenagers in the stats, which also includes 18 and 19 year old adults, just to goose the stats. There are also, according to the CDC, between 300,000 to 500,000 defensive gun uses every year, and as gun ownership has risen astronomically since the 90s, and gun laws have been loosened, violent crime has fallen substantially. They really are dishonest shits. In any case, my fundamental rights do not get cancelled bcause some idiots are careless with their children's safety.

      1. IndyEleven   10 years ago

        Don't forget the hunting accident lumped in with cute dead kids. That article is everything that's wrong with our political culture and exactly why we deserve shits like Trump and Hillary. Feels, feels, feels, more laws, more laws, more laws. Fuck off slavers.

      2. Rich   10 years ago

        includes 18 and 19 year old adults

        Shouldn't they now be including people under 26yo in the children stats?

      3. lap83   10 years ago

        "Young children and other people-shaped soap boxes"

    3. paranoid android   10 years ago

      LIsten, we've all been through this before, so let's save ourselves some time:

      We'll say naked appeals to emotion are not mature policy arguments, you'll respond with a non-sequitur, we'll point out that by this same logic swimming pools and drain cleaner should also be forcibly banned, you'll say that's different for some reason you won't articulate, we'll call you a retard, and you'll go back to huffing your own farts and masturbating to video footage of Bernie Sanders speeches.

      Can we move on?

      1. dantheserene   10 years ago

        This comment is definitely worth a clip and save, to be brought out on future occasions.

        1. Swiss Servator   10 years ago

          Seconded. p a really summed it up nicely.

    4. You Sound Like a Prog (MJG)   10 years ago

      One Week in April, Four Toddlers Shot and Killed Themselves

      OH MY GODDDDDDDD

    5. Ken Shultz   10 years ago

      So what?

      My rights don't exist for your benefit.

  10. Joec578   10 years ago

    Sasse/Amash 2016

    1. The Last American Hero   10 years ago

      Strike that, reverse it.

  11. Nativist, Racist & Xenophobe   10 years ago

    So now all of the Republicans who told us we needed to suck it up and vote for stiffs like McCain and Romney are having tantrums and threatening to go third party when one of their guys doesn't get the nod.

    Guess how much credibility they have left?

    1. lulztopian   10 years ago

      bingo.

    2. Jesse Walker   10 years ago

      So now all of the Republicans who told us we needed to suck it up and vote for stiffs like McCain and Romney are having tantrums and threatening to go third party when one of their guys doesn't get the nod.

      Amash refused to endorse Romney, though he did "support" him, which I guess means he was willing to vote for Romney himself but wouldn't urge anyone else to.

    3. JeremyR   10 years ago

      Because conservatives with principles were so happy to support people like McCain and Romney...

  12. LynchPin1477   10 years ago

    Does Amash read the comments?

    Justin, get in on this. Together we can get a libertarianish candidate into double digit percentages. BELIEVE!

    1. mad.casual   10 years ago

      I think just reading the HnR comments is pretty dicey as a political move.

  13. invisible finger   10 years ago

    Decision 2016: Third Party or Turd Party

  14. Mongo   10 years ago

    All - yes, all - of the media roundtables and columnists are begging for third-party alternatives yet never mention libertarians.

    The right-wing and lefty commentators on a game site I frequent long ago brushed off libertarianism and bemoan the lack of third-parties.

  15. Robert   10 years ago

    "Nothing better illustrates the phoniness of politicians," he writes, "than the ease w/ which they shift from blasting one another to praising one another."

    Or of spouses, other family members, or people who have just about any relationship at all. Nothing better illustrates how real & human they are, either.

  16. TKList   10 years ago

    Celebrity trumps logic.
    Celebrity trumps policy.
    Celebrity trumps intelligence.
    Celebrity trumps substance.
    Celebrity trumps money.
    Celebrity trumps campaign ads.
    Celebrity trumps facts.
    Celebrity trumps reporting.
    Celebrity trumps reality.
    Brought to you by the public school education system.

    40% of Republicans will either stay home, vote for the Libertarian Party or some other party.

    There is no point in voting between two Democrats.

    The likely nomination of Trump is a reflection of the poor education our children are receiving in our failing public schools and the lower standard of education our college graduates are receiving.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Trump's Responses to Kimmel and Comey Highlight His Contempt for Freedom of Speech

Jacob Sullum | 5.6.2026 12:01 AM

Elizabeth Warren Wrongly Implies Jeff Bezos Isn't Paying Enough Taxes

Robby Soave | 5.5.2026 5:40 PM

The People vs. CEQA

Christian Britschgi | 5.5.2026 3:25 PM

How the Slaveholding Founders Really Felt About Slavery

Timothy Sandefur | 5.5.2026 1:20 PM

Can We Ever Trust the Government To Be Honest About War?

Alexander Langlois | 5.5.2026 12:27 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS Add Reason to Google

© 2026 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

I WANT FREE MINDS AND FREE MARKETS!

Help Reason push back with more of the fact-based reporting we do best. Your support means more reporters, more investigations, and more coverage.

Make a donation today! No thanks
r

I WANT TO FUND FREE MINDS AND FREE MARKETS

Every dollar I give helps to fund more journalists, more videos, and more amazing stories that celebrate liberty.

Yes! I want to put my money where your mouth is! Not interested
r

SUPPORT HONEST JOURNALISM

So much of the media tries telling you what to think. Support journalism that helps you to think for yourself.

I’ll donate to Reason right now! No thanks
r

PUSH BACK

Push back against misleading media lies and bad ideas. Support Reason’s journalism today.

My donation today will help Reason push back! Not today
r

HELP KEEP MEDIA FREE & FEARLESS

Back journalism committed to transparency, independence, and intellectual honesty.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

STAND FOR FREE MINDS

Support journalism that challenges central planning, big government overreach, and creeping socialism.

Yes, I’ll support Reason today! No thanks
r

PUSH BACK AGAINST SOCIALIST IDEAS

Support journalism that exposes bad economics, failed policies, and threats to open markets.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

FIGHT BAD IDEAS WITH FACTS

Back independent media that examines the real-world consequences of socialist policies.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

BAD ECONOMIC IDEAS ARE EVERYWHERE. LET’S FIGHT BACK.

Support journalism that challenges government overreach with rational analysis and clear reasoning.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

JOIN THE FIGHT FOR FREEDOM

Support journalism that challenges centralized power and defends individual liberty.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

BACK JOURNALISM THAT PUSHES BACK AGAINST SOCIALISM

Your support helps expose the real-world costs of socialist policy proposals—and highlight better alternatives.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

FIGHT BACK AGAINST BAD ECONOMICS.

Donate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks