Sometimes There Is No Lesser of Two Evils

The Republic will survive an election cycle but the Republican party may not

|

When your choice is two reprehensible, corrupt and immoral demagogues, you can always pick the ethical way out and choose none of the above. The Republic will survive an election cycle.

The Republican party is a different story, however. For those who are idealists about the Constitution—and there are probably far fewer than some of us like to imagine—there are a number of reasons to sabotage The Trump Party, even if it ends with a Clinton presidency. The first is to salvage some of your own dignity and principles. But there are other long-term political advantages to beating back an authoritarian populist who peddles conspiracy theories and big-government schemes and doesn't have a freshman-level comprehension about the basic workings of American governance.

The first political advantage is to save our divided government. On the same day Trump wins the GOP Indiana primary and secures the party's nomination, he decides to use a National Enquirer story—the future in-flight publication of Air Force One—to accuse opponent Sen. Ted Cruz's father of helping Lee Harvey Oswald assassinate President John F. Kennedy. This was just an amuse-bouche of the utter stupidity that down-ballot GOP candidates will have to deal with, justify, rationalize, ignore, excuse or support every day for the next six months or so. One hopes the stench of this kind of endorsement clings to them for the rest of their unprincipled and, hopefully, short political careers.

If you're worried about alienating people, you already have. The people who ensured that the most flawed GOP candidate running—who's also the most unpopular in every demographic category—the least conservative and the most vulgar will blame movement conservatives and their imaginary puppet masters for bringing down a hero. Trying to placate them is a waste of time.

You might ask yourself: What sort of thing will alienate the average voter more?

Imagine how tough it will be for any decent candidate in a competitive district, running in places like Colorado or Utah or Wisconsin, where Trump is unpopular and conservatives will be in no mood to vote in the presidential election, to deal with the ugly vagaries of Trumpism day after day and win an election.

To see what the future looks for the average Republican, think about how Trump talks about women. Recent polls show that approximately 70 percent of women voters have an unfavorable view of the presumptive GOP nominee. And this is a party that already struggles to attract them. Simply by using direct quotes, Republicans will be forced to spend an inordinate amount of time explaining why their candidate believes mocking the menstrual cycles of journalists who ask him difficult questions is acceptable behavior.

Now that Trump has secured the nomination, the press will finally become hyperfocused on the massive backlog of Trump's business dealings and various other points of his unpleasant history. Does anyone think it's going to be easier to share a ticket?

The only way to avoid this is a concerted write-in campaign or third-party candidate—with all the caveats about getting on state ballots and having absolutely no chance of winning in the general election. A person who candidates can support to diffuse the Trump attacks. Find a person that a movement can coalesce around, or it's just a matter of time before Hillary-hatred gets the best of people who consider themselves #NeverTrumpers.

Trump has already exposed various pretend anti-establishmentarians, hucksters and statists masquerading as conservatives. Former governor Mike Huckabee, Gov. Chris Christie, Gov. Rick Scott and former governor Jon Huntsman immediately come to mind. A party without any guiding ideology or principles is a party of nothing but opportunists. This goes for party "establishment"—and that includes big donors and the Republican National Convention—that has never moved to stop Trump, although his agenda and tone stands in contrast to everything they preached in their "autopsy."

More dangerously, it's clear that when led by the conservative entertainment complex, many voters are willing bend their own views to match the ever-changing positions of Trump.

It's quite possible that Reaganism is no longer relevant or popular among a majority of voters on the right. Do people believe in conservatism (widely understood) because it's popular, or because they find some truth in it? If it's the latter, conservatives can either chase Trump fans by attempting to make a compelling case or offer some new ideas or better arguments. Or they can surrender and adopt Trumpism and reward the least classically liberal candidate in Republican party history. A Clinton presidency, even with a Republican Congress, will be a disaster for conservatives, but lesser so.

It was the constitutional idealism of the Tea Party that held back Democrats and establishment Republicans from working together to expand the reach of government. A turn to white identity politics and anger is a turn away from that idealism.

COPYRIGHT 2016 CREATORS.COM

Advertisement

NEXT: Movie Review: Captain America: Civil War

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. Yeah yeah, we could make that old joke about Cthulhu 2016, why settle for a lesser evil….but what if Trump is Nyarlathotep?

    1. Just confirms that everyone is fucked no matter the outcome.

    2. Just confirms that everyone is fucked no matter the outcome.

    3. Appears we are being set up for that Trump-equal-to-or-worse-than-Hillary article we’ve all been anticipating. Enough already. It’s not too early to set the record straight: Hillary is worse than Trump by at least an order of magnitude. She has amply demonstrated her pure intention to kill the First Amendment, the Second Amendment, and obviously has no respect for the Bil of Rights as a whole. She lies every time she opens her mouth. She has made a career out of being unaccountable for anything whatsoever (and will laugh at you for even imagining she should be held to a standard befitting a public servant). And her vibe is pure contempt for the very concept of individual freedoms. Her “reign” would be a disaster. Hillary Clinton seeks to be the consummate control freak, and we’d be stuck with her because of who-would-dare-impeach-blah-blah-blah.

      Trump might at best be a work-in-progress. That could be scary. But at least he’s taking the position of being reluctant to engaging in foreign wars. And to even suggest that those who wish for us to go to war on their behalf should foot the bill – what’s not to like about that? Seems the best assurance to keep us out of trouble anybody has come up with yet. Yeah, I can sort of see why Rand Paul has endorsed him.

      1. …Oh… ahem … word limit… Anyway… …Does Trump mean what he says? Well, who knows – but he’s taken on the PC crowd head-on, and that’s every bit as earth-shattering important as anything – period. I don’t see him backing off that – he’s only saying in public what the commenters HERE say every day! And finally, if he does nothing else at all, for an “outsider” to set the event that caused the Clinton Cabal FINALLY to crash and burn would be well worth whatever uncertainties he would bring. Holy shit! We should be clamoring for a front row seat.

        1. Could not have said it better.

      2. “Hillary is worse than Trump by at least an order of magnitude.”

        No she isn’t that’s bullshit. She’s a criminal he’s a fascist.

        “But at least he’s taking the position of being reluctant to engaging in foreign wars. ”

        More fantasy. He’s the one who mused about taking troops into Syria to seize oil.

        1. Um… Hillary is worse than Trump by an order of magnitude precisely because she is a criminal AND a fascist.

          I certainly don’t care much for Trump, but while he “mused,” Hillary was bragging she came, she saw and someone died. Yeah… and we still can only wonder how many times. Thanks to the most secretive democrat party ever. Somehow I can’t quite envision anyone giving Trump a pass on that level of control or secrecy – at least he’d have to start from scratch.

          *pats the little toxic thing on the head and says, “nice try.” *

  2. I find these opinions laughable when basically ~90% of Trump’s professed policy views are commensurate with the existing GOP platform.

    1. Part of that is because he has no problem reversing himself within 24 hours. So he is only in agreement with the standard Republican platform half the time.

      But even if you trust he’s being honest those times he is saying something in agreement with Republicans and pandering to independents/Democrats when he says the reverse, that remaining 10% where he disagrees can be critical.

      1) Oppose abortion
      2) Oppose Obamacare
      3) Support free trade
      4) Lower taxes
      5) Secure the border
      6) Increase military spending
      7) Turn the presidency into a literal fascist dictatorship
      8) Push educational decisions back to state and local governments
      9) Increase skilled immigration
      10) Say “Merry Christmas” in December

      Even if you support 9 of 10 of the above, you still may have concerns about supporting Trump due to the severity of the 10th.

    2. Which policy views are those? They change so frequently.

      1. Trump’s had a bunch of policy positions on his website for many months now.

        I dare anyone to explain how these are somehow a 180? departure from standard GOP views.

        1. Tariffs are such a core tenet. Nice to find another morning urine drinker. Tell me, did nick have asparagus ladt night?

          Trump’s in favor of open bathrooms and noninterventionalism. Seems like there isn’t a whole lot of daylight between him and libertarians.

          1. Eminent domain. Excuse me while I find my sunglasses.

          2. Eminent Domain, Surveillance, Criminal Justice Reform, and Free Trade. Too name a few issues where there is “daylight.” Of course he could be lying about his stances on all of these issues. That’s thing about Trump, we have no idea what he would do as President. A true wildcard, which may not be so bad compared to Clinton.

            1. Don’t forget about free press, immigration, entitlement reform, campaign finance, cutting military spending…
              But yeah, he doesn’t care where you pee and sometimes he doesn’t want to have US forces abroad.

        2. Well, Trump praised Obama’s stimulus. He also praised the ideas behind Obamacare but was concerned about the cost.

          http://www.redstate.com/diary/…..cy-agenda/

        3. Are those really his policy positions? He was asked about a direct website from his website at one of the debates and he accused the moderator of making up that he had that position.

    3. True. I’ve read the 2012 version of the Republican Party’s Mein Kampf, and Trump hews to it on everything except abortion, which he waters down to sending men with guns after doctors, instead of women already bleeding from coathanger abortions. Real Republicans would nominate Robert Lewis Dear, “Warrior For the Babies” and increase asset forfeiture to include confiscating Trump Towers and casinos.

  3. I am still undecided. Which show should I binge watch on election day? I need something to distract me from the depressing reality of Clinton v Trump.

    1. I’m planning on a beer binge .

    2. Are you kidding? I will be feasting on tears.

      Either

      Tears of the Twitter-brained low-info shmucks roaring in anger that Trump lost to a vile hag who should be in Leavenworth for the rest of her miserable life, combined wit the tears of the GOP elite ripping the last few wisps of their hair out that we didn’t pick Jeb! like they wanted.

      Or

      Wails of despair at the death of democracy from the safe spaces of the world should Hillary lose to a demented jabbering blowhard with no consistent position except that he and everyone who matters loves him, combined with the gnashing of teeth from the socialists of the country that we didn’t feel the Bern hard enough.

      It will be GLORIOUS.

      1. This is what our politics has become. Half the country is miserable at any given time and they think they only solution is to get back into power so they can make the other half miserable for a while. Meanwhile no one realizes just how much prosperity we’re all forgoing so we can engage in this never-ending power struggle. Both sides could have 90% of what they wanted if they just left each other alone. But unfortunately that last 10% is a desire to watch the other tribe suffer, so they’re always going to be trying for it even if it hurts everyone in the long run.

        1. Well said.

        2. ^This. I hate the game.

          1. And I hate the players.

        3. Well, giving each side 90% of what they want is EXACTLY what has caused the expansion of our government to oppressive proportions.

        4. Yes half the country is not satisfied at any given time but one side wants to shred the Constitution and that must be stopped and this article just wants to hand the election to the very person we know will do just that. I am a moderate myself but I do not see much choice here guy.

      2. If Trump loses we’ll also get the usual wailing from Team Red that it’s because those darn libertarians didn’t vote for him. You wasted your vote! The Libertarian Party candidate stole it!

        1. No, it’ll be focused on the nevertrumpers who just couldn’t see the danger of a female trump.

          1. Would that make her a Frump?

      3. This is a very good point.

        No matter who wins, someone I hate will lose.

    3. Vote for the Libertarian Party candidate and you will have a great day!

      1. And also will mean you want the Constitution to die.

  4. That which is falling, deserves to be pushed. Kicked. Beaten. And forgotten.

    1. Nothing says “abolish the caste system” like rigorously adhering to its definitions and violently enforcing them.

  5. Harsanyi sucks but I’m really looking forward to the rest of the dozen or so Trump articles today. They absolutely in no way ever get old.

  6. Their both snakes in the grass.Hillary’s sort of viper,possibly a rattle snake. Trump is a puff adder .

  7. If nothing else Trump has outed the “constitutional conservatives” and “libertarian-leaners” who were nothing but TEAM RED, GOP-establishment hacks all along.

    1. Do tell.

    2. it’s galling that the base had to choke on McCain and Romney, but when they get their turn, the establishment turns into a bunch of petulant brats.

      1. Which base, exactly, is Trump representing?

        I’m having a hard time understanding how a lifelong Democrat represents the base of the Republican Party.

        1. The point is that the GOP base voted for this guy, in rather significant numbers. He’s already netted more primary votes than any GOP candidate ever.

          Argue that he’s a lifelong democrat if you wish (I’m skeptical of that claim), but this is clearly who they wanted regardless.

          1. He’s already netted more primary votes than any GOP candidate ever.

            George W. Bush had more in 2000 by the end. And despite all those votes, he only just broke 40% of the total. It is probable that by the end of this election, he will have more votes than GWB did in 2000 (although the country’s population has increased by 14% during that time) but less of a share of the total than establishment candidate Romney did in 2012, or establishment candidates McCain and Romney netted together in 2008.

            I’m skeptical of that claim

            What is there to be skeptical of? He’s boosted Democrats and claimed closer affinity to the Democratic Party than the GOP in the past.

            this is clearly who they wanted regardless

            I’m not contesting his election as the GOP’s candidate, I’m contesting his representation of the party’s base. You could just as well say that Romney, McCain, or GWB were the base’s choice, if you’re going by votes.

            1. They did have a stronger (and much bigger) field this time than in 2008 or 2012, so it’s natural there’d be more spread in the vote totals. Either way it was obvious that Trump was increasingly ahead with commanding majorities in states he was winning. I doubt this’d be happening if he wasn’t somehow appealing to a rather sizable portion of the base.

              I think GWB was certainly representative of the base circa 2000. McCain and Romney less so, but then their respective competition was also weaker. Had stronger candidates emerged, they probably wouldn’t have been nominated.

              What is there to be skeptical of? He’s boosted Democrats and claimed closer affinity to the Democratic Party than the GOP in the past.

              Boasting that claim doesn’t make one a ‘lifelong Democrat’. There’s writers on this site who boast of being in agreement with certain Democrats on certain issues, but that hardly makes them ‘lifelong Democrats’ either.

              1. that hardly makes them ‘lifelong Democrats’ either

                If it quacks like a duck…

                Had stronger candidates emerged, they probably wouldn’t have been nominated.

                Based upon the predictive power of counterfactuals?

                1. Nice try, shitbag.

                  1. Mmmm urine. Is the sky always orange in your world?

                  2. What?

                    “Nice try” at what, exactly? Implying the writers who vote for Democrats are Democrats makes me a shitbag? Or are you saying that I’ve been inconsistent on that point?

                    1. Although I remain unsure as to whether he was just trolling us, Nick Gillespie said a “prog Democrat” naturally has a lot of things in common with libertarians. Taken at face value, either he has a very skewed definition of libertarian, or else he’s a Democrat who wants to pull in libertarian votes. Whether it’s the tail wagging the dog, or the other way around, it’s still fair to call him a Democrat, or at the very least to say that his sympathies lie with Democrats.

                    2. As much as I don’t think Libertarians should be extolling Progressives under any circumstances, doing so does not make one a Democrat. And I doubt Gillepsie votes as one.

                    3. this exchange is interesting to find on an article with “there is no lesser of two evils” in the title. nothing misses the point of libertarians more than the continued fallacy that everyone must fall into one of the two major parties.

                    4. Let me give you a short primer on what is and is not libertarian.

                      Being against free trade is NOT libertarian.
                      Being against police brutality IS.
                      Being against immigration is NOT libertarian.
                      Being in favor of protecting the rights of black people IS.
                      Being against gay marriage is NOT libertarian.
                      Being in favor of bombing random brown people is NOT libertarian.
                      Being in favor of eminent domain is NOT libertarian

                      Libertarian is not a term that means “loves guns and hate immigrants”.

                    5. I’m against same-sex “marriage”, and although I oppose eminent domain abuse, I’m not against its proper use. And I’m as libertarian as they come.

                    6. Newsflash, Robert: You’re not libertarian.

                    7. ^Not libertarian^

        2. Exactly what I’d expect a lifelong Republican to say.

          1. Yes, I don’t usually vote for Democrats. Apparently that’s a bad thing now.

          2. In fact, I don’t think I’ve ever cast a vote for a Democrat in any election. Blame it on being a resident of Maryland, if you wish, where our Democrats range from “take your guns and raise your taxes” to “take your guns, raise your taxes, and implement the rest of the progressive social agenda”.

        3. because you assume that the base is ideologically pure neo-liberals, when the base is an admixture of various forms of conservatism.

          1. I make no such assumption. First of all, neoliberalism is a term defined by opposition to Marxism. It has no coherent ideology, so how can it have a measure of purity?

            Of course the membership of the party is an admixture. The real question, then, is what is “the base”? The definition seems to get fuzzier the more it’s examined.

            1. It seems like “the base” is a phrase like “the people”. It’s an irrelevant phrase intended to invent some kind of non-existent authority for what you say.

              1. By the base, God’s Own Prohibitionists mean God’s Own teen and naygur shooting, baby saving, girl bullying Prohibitionists. It’s the Senior Antisex League, 68 years after George Orwell’s Nineteen eighty-four. They’ll be licking the blacking off Trump’s loafers, squirming and pissing themselves for government jobs in January. Bet on it.

            2. Neoliberalism is what commies everywhere else in the world call libertarianism. Only U.S. Republicans (after 1932) and German National Socialists use “liberal” and “jew” as interchangeable n-words.

      2. Well, what else were they going to do? Sanction that the actual GOP base should be able to choose its own candidates (as it did this time)?

        1. Given the number of open contests is it really fair to say the majority of Republicans voted for Trump?

      3. Don’t get me wrong; McCain is an execrable freedom-hater and Romney would be a Democrat anywhere south of the Mason-Dixon line. But while Trump is, this election cycle, inarguably not “the establishment” (yet), he’s also not “the base” of the GOP.

        1. Trump is the choice of the base of the GOP.

          1. Pretty much. Trump has 10.7 million votes thus far, more than any other GOP primary contender ever.

            Anyone arguing that he somehow isn’t representative of the GOP base is deluding themselves.

            1. You misspelled denuding. The Emperor is dressed. It’s the Robert Lewis Dear “Warrior For the Babies” faction that is sobbing naked and abandoned into its snotrag.

          2. By what measure? I want to see some concrete elucidation of the reasons that doesn’t fall apart under examination like mfckr’s has.

            1. Because Republicans are voting for him in huge numbers while the GOP leadership is shrieking that they shouldn’t.

              The base wants 2 things from president Trump.

              Don’t pick any Constitution-gutting SCJs, and kill PC culture.

              1. As far as I can tell, the definition of “the base” is circular and transient. We know he represents “the base” because votes were cast for him; so that means “the base” is whoever shows up for primary elections.

                Which is a fine definition, but then Mitt Romney and John McCain were representing “the base”, too. Romney moreso than McCain.

                Really, it seems that “the base” is an empty vessel onto which the speaker can project his own feelings as representative of the “true” party membership. It doesn’t much matter that the term has no explanatory power whatsoever.

                1. It’s transient to an extent, given that voter priorities/preferences will change over time. Nobody’s arguing that Romney and McCain were absolutely non-representative of viewpoints that likely GOP voters tend to be aligned with.

                  1. Nobody’s arguing that Romney and McCain were absolutely non-representative of viewpoints that likely GOP voters tend to be aligned with.

                    But that’s the thing, isn’t it? Romney speaks for some factions of the party, while Trump speaks for some other factions of the party. Why does one get to be called “the base” and not the other?

                2. This.

              2. “Don’t pick any Constitution-gutting SCJs, and kill PC culture.”

                Neither of those things is going to happen even if Trump is president.

          3. By ‘the base’ you mean ‘40% of an admix of GOp base and a bunch of people who usually never vote’.

        2. McCain wants to change the Fourteenth Amendment to read: All ova fertilized… The Tear Party mohammedans and the Constitution party Nationalsocialists are right there with him. Anyone who wants women AND doctors shot or jailed to eliminate reproductive choice need only vote for those worthies.

  8. For those who are idealists about the Constitution?and there are probably far fewer than some of us like to imagine?there are a number of reasons to sabotage The Trump Party, even if it ends with a Clinton presidency.

    Cuckservatives and Cucktarians Unite!
    You have nothing to lose but any credibility that you oppose the Progressive Theocracy!

    Willful sabotage to derail Trump and put Hillary in power. And you wonder why people call you cucks.

    1. No one here wonders that, actually.

    2. That sounds a lot to me like he does think there is a lesser of the two evils

      1. David Harsanyi prefers Hillary, I prefer Trump.

    3. Obama-hater : racist :: Trump-hater : cuckold

      1. It’s almost as if he doesn’t know what that word means. Or he thinks he’s still in the eighth grade…

        1. I wish these assholes would retire “cuck.” It’s really boring.

          1. Not for me.

    4. Oh, and we are totally going to show we oppose the “Progressive Theocracy” by voting for a guy whose economic policies are right out of the progressive playbook. Economic populism for the win? If I’m going to call anyone a ‘cuck’ it’s supporters of the man who want big daddy government to tuck them in at night and make them feel safe.

      1. Because supporting Hillary is really sticking it to the Progressive Theocracy, right?

        1. So, not supporting Trump is the same as supporting Hillary? That’s some truly Progressive logic you’re using. Keep shoveling. Eventually you’ll dig your way out of that hole.

          1. Orange logic.

          2. So, not supporting Trump is the same as supporting Hillary?

            See the article, and my original quote:

            there are a number of reasons to sabotage The Trump Party, even if it ends with a Clinton presidency.

            Don’t claim to be against Hillary and the Progressive Theocracy when you don’t attack them, but advocate attacking their opponents *knowing* it will keep the Progressive Theocracy in power.

            1. See? Another GOP infiltrator pissed that the Robert Lewis Dear “Warrior For the Babies” slate got the snot beat out of it. The Soviet Socialism or National Socialism–take your pick gambit fails. Spoiler votes defeat large party policies, change platforms and amend the constitution. It’s “the case for voting libertarian.” Google it.
              Looters vote for looters and get what they deserve.

          3. Voting for looter prohibitionists increases prohibitionist looting. Voting libertarian decreases it. It’s the opposite of how communists and birth-control-prohibiting bigots gave us two constitutional amendments to destroy freedom and the economy.

    5. Does anyone seriously think that Hillary’s SCOTUS appointments will be constitutionally better than Trump’s SCOTUS appointments? And if so based on what?

      1. I could flip “Trump’s” and “Hillary’s” in that sentence and the answer would be the same: “No”

        1. Really? Has Trump shown overt hostility to the 2nd amendment like Hillary? Has Trump advocated overturning the 1st amendment to be able to allow the government to censor movies and political speech like Hillary has? I guess maybe I missed all that.

          1. Yes. Next question.

          2. yes, he has.

          3. Really?

          4. Trump has endorsed men with guns to force doctors to let back-alley abortion girls die of sepsis. The coercive practice of religious superstition is forbidden by the First Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment. Far better to let the Dems beat their heads against the Second Amendment–that withstood the entire Soviet Empire–than to let Christian National Socialists turn this into another Kristallnacht Germany.
            Besides, Both George Bush Administrations pushed asset forfeiture until it completely wrecked the economy in 2007. Naziism is not ze answer. This ain’t Vichy France.

        2. No. You couldn’t.

          Trump has no record of political action to indicate which side he’d fall down on–and some records of business transactions that indicate his positions might be better than hers.

          1. Trump has no record of political action. Full Stop.

        3. When has Trump ever shown any interest in who is appointed to SCOTUS? I think he’ll just run with some recommendations. We know Hillary’s nominees will be left of center. We know those nominees will be amenable to increased power for the Federal government. We don’t know that about Trump. He would probably end up nominating someone in the center or right of center.

          1. In an interview with FOX News, Trump said would consider “wonderful, conservative, good, solid, brilliant judges in the form of” the late Justice Antonin Scalia. “I’m going to actually lay them out. I’m going to discuss people … I think before the convention. I want to put 10, 12, 15 names of the type of people that we’d like,” he said.

            “From that list, I would choose.”

            So he has said the kind of SC Justice he wants, and he’s going to name names from which he will select. How many nominees have ever been that specific?

            I’d prefer a bunch of Clarence Thomases, but I’ll take a bunch of Scalias over what Hillary would appoint.

  9. I’m a little skeptical that letting HRC win and pick one to three justices is a win for the constitution. More likely, it will be a dead letter for the rest of our lifetimes. Not that Trump is guaranteed to be an improvement.

    1. Tmp would likely be not as bad on the 1st amendment and way better on the 2nd amendment at least.

      1. But at that point you’re just choosing the speed at which we lose our freedoms. I’d rather vote for a legit liberty-loving candidate even if I know he’s going to lose.

        1. Your single vote is statistically irrelevant anyway.

          1. Yes, but then at least I feel a little better about the whole thing. And I usually have a few good stories about stupid things I heard people say in the voting line. (2008 was, by far, the best for this.)

            1. (2008 was, by far, the best for this.)

              I suspect 2016 will easily top that.

          2. Your single vote is worth ten and can change the Constitution–unless you waste it on a looter party.
            The communists and mystical fascist prohibitionists LOST with less than 1% of the vote, yet made beer a felony and force you to spend weeks at involuntary servitude every year lest IRS looters confiscate your car.
            I vote libertarian and repeal shitty laws.

        2. It’s always been a race against the clock to delay inevitable of loss of liberty and the emergence of omnipotent government. Why is this election cycle any different?

          1. It seems the race to fly over the cliff is speeding up.

            1. It is indeed accelerating.

            2. We’re already over the cliff. That speeding up is the acceleration of gravity.

              Yeh!

    2. Not that Trump is guaranteed to be an improvement.

      I agree with that. There are no guarantees with Trump.

      But there are with Hillary.

  10. Trump supporting tow truck driver refuses to tow car of Bernie supporting millennial:
    http://www.foxcarolina.com/sto…..ie-sanders

    1. I saw that yesterday, he had some good lines “my truck says Shupee, not freebie”

    2. Trump, wants us to fight back in kind against the Progressive Theocracy.

      No guarantee that he wins. No guarantee that we win. But the will to fight back instead of cuck is the first step.

      1. By raisong the minimum wage?

      2. Nothing says cuckold like taking money in exchange for providing a service.

  11. I can see what your saying… Carrie `s st0rry is great, on monday I bought themselves a BMW 5-series from bringing in $7500 this – four weeks past and-a little over, ten k lass month . with-out a doubt this is the easiest work Ive ever done . I actually started six months/ago and pretty much immediately began to bring home at least $72, p/h . browse this site…

    ——- http://www.Report20.com

  12. Ha. David Harsanyi is the ultimate Republican tool, quick to deny every government and country ill on Democrats and progressives. The irony of this article is almost infinite.

  13. hillary is a fruit loop but donald doesn’t drink or smoke…that’s basically what the choice is…

    1. and as for ted, did you see him in his lee jeans cowboy outfit from k-mart…..the guy looks about as athletic as a boxing ring girl at a voo doo doughnuts eating match….

  14. there are other long-term political advantages to beating back an authoritarian populist who peddles conspiracy theories and big-government schemes and doesn’t have a freshman-level comprehension about the basic workings of American governance.

    Wait. Which candidate are we talking about?

    1. We’re talking about candidates in general.

  15. “Between two evils, I pick the one I’ve never tried before.” –Mae West.

    1. “Then, since I’m only willing to acknowledge two evils, I go back to the first.” –American voter

    2. Another vote for Trump! Fine gal.

  16. Or they can surrender and adopt Trumpism and reward the least classically liberal candidate in Republican party history.

    Conservatives hate classical liberals, so this would hardly be a surrender.

    1. the least? Hardly – the Republicans ran Nixon, did they not?

      1. Nixon was their boy though?so it was different. Somehow.

        *shrugs*

      2. They also ran Lincoln, and he was practically a wartime dictator.

    2. This is one problem with the label “conservatives”. This label includes both reactionaries and classical liberals, at least last I checked. It would be nice if someone could come up with an authoritative definition of all these ideologies.

  17. This seems more like an article for The Blaze crowd than for libertarians.

  18. Is it just me, or does it seem like Republicans are actually afraid to influence policy and win the Presidency? I get the sense that they enjoy being out of power and unpopular at this point.

    1. I don’t think they’re necessarily afraid to influence policy so much as desperate to maintain their sinecures. They’ve lost badly on culture war issues like abortion and gay marriage (and are getting hammered on transgender bathrooms now) because they haven’t had any control of the cultural zeitgeist since as far back as the early 90s, if not before then. Their other policies of open trade and overseas interventionism are years past their sell date for the only demographic that supports them in large numbers, which is blue collar and middle class whites–and no amount of neocon boasting about how these people can buy cheap shit at Walmart is going to soothe their anxieties when the cost of basic necessities like housing, food, and transportation keeps climbing while the labor force participation rate keeps falling. Finally, their instinctive response to the left’s PC perjoratives is to curl up in a ball rather than tell the SJW morality police to go kill themselves.

      So they have nothing more to really offer their most loyal constituents from either a social or economic perspective, and they lack the courage to stand up to Jacobin PC brigades, so they’ve settled on simply maintaining their cushy political chairs while blowing rhetorical smoke about “MUH CONSTITUTION”. And then they wonder why Trump’s economic populism and throwback appeals to pre-1960s cultural attitudes gained so much traction amongst such a large section of their base.

      1. Because it’s really easy to scapegoat foreigners. It’s been done before.

        1. Yeah, and it’s not really a coincidence that socialism became increasingly desired during the late 19th century and early 20th century as immigrant radicals got kicked out of Europe and began settling here during our own industrial revolution. Now we have a technology revolution and a whole new cycle of mass immigration, and it’s not libertarianism or free market capitalism that’s being pushed by our elites or the majority of the newcomers.

          1. Open borders imports voters for the Progressive Theocracy. Those are just the facts.

            1. That’s a lie.

              1. Well reasoned and evidenced retort!

      2. I don’t think they’re necessarily afraid to influence policy so much as desperate to maintain their sinecures.

        That’s largely what’s going on with National Review.

        It’s less about who rules the country with them, and more about them maintaining their personal status and power. Trump wins, and NR is relegated to pundits without influence. They’re rather be the talking heads of the opposition party, which makes for a fine and dandy career, than, gads, in the same place as libertarians, able to argue but having few listeners.

  19. So, the takeaway I get is this: it’s better for the future of TEAM RED to help elect the candidate that has shown evidence to be corrupt to the point of selling influence, and incompetent in her mishandling of sensitive information-despite widely promulgated laws and procedures that someone with a security clearance is all but physically forced to be made aware of…because the other guy says mean things and probably doesn’t hold a principled opinion on public policy?

    A known corrupt politician and liar. Known not by her words, but by her actual votes and decisions in multiple government positions. This candidate is somehow less dangerous to democracy than the blow-hard who we really can’t know what he’ll do because his stated positions seem fluid and he’s never held public office?

    Am I missing something?

    1. Of course you’re missing something:

      TRUMP derp de derp. Derp de derpity derpy derp. Until one day, the derpa derpa derpaderp. Derp de derp da teedily dumb. From the creators of Der, and Tum Ta Tittaly Tum Ta Too, TRUMP is Da Derp Dee Derp Da Teetley Derpee Derpee Dumb. Rated PG-13.

      1. Well, count me convinced.

    2. no, you’re not missing anything, and this is why DCers make me want to vomit.

  20. The Republic will survive an election

    Probably; but will it survive what comes after the election?

    1. I like the assumption that the Republic isn’t already gone.

  21. Double-dip much, Harsanyi?
    If I wanted to read a National Review article, I’d have clicked here, dammit!

    1. National Review! So that’s why this article was so cuckilicious! It just screams “better to rule in Hell”.

      As a reminder, the National Review attitude towards “downscale” white communities:

      The truth about these dysfunctional, downscale communities is that they deserve to die.

    2. AH, that makes more sense. I was wondering why in the world he was talking to us like we’re all on board with saving the republican party. I mean, if the party is in danger of collapse, as he claims, then why is that not a silver lining in an otherwise cloud of vaporous shit?

  22. I’ve made $64,000 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student. Im using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money. It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it. Heres what I do,

    ——————- http://www.worknow88.com

  23. This is ridiculous. I can understand disliking Trump for his style, but at what point did he become “corrupt and immoral”

    We have seen clear evidence of such in Hillary. But where is it for Trump? Why hasn’t evidence of it been all over the media? The complete inability of Cruz and the gop establishment to dig up dirt beyond some racy pictures of Melania would seem to indicate there isn’t much there.
    Argue against Trump’s policies or lack there of, but the insulting personal attacks are ridiculous and tiresome.

    1. but at what point did he become “corrupt and immoral”

      When he became Hitler. Haven’t you seen all the articles proving that he is Hitler?

    2. Trump has told the American people repeatedly that he “GIVES” to politicians so when he needs a favors they will be there to pay him back. He gives to Republicans, Democrats, Progressives and Conservatives not for idealogy but to make his business and personal wealth grow. That my friend is Corruption and if you can’t see that then please do America a favor and stop voting.
      ,

      1. “Trump has told the American people repeatedly that he “GIVES” to politicians so when he needs a favors they will be there to pay him back.”

        And this is unusual? You do realize that every corporation solely gives money to politicians for have their ear, and ideally leverage, to get favorable legislation. that isn’t corruption….that is crony capitalism and has the basis of our governmental system for at least a century. Everyone from Google to Exxon plays that game and holding Trump to a standard above everyone else is childishness in the extreme. Grow up.

        1. This is the exact same argument for Hillary that Steve is complaining about above.

    3. Look, just because the guy thinks it’s perfectly ok to grease palms and take people’s property using Eminent Domain for his own personal use doesn’t mean he’s corrupt. It means he’s uhh…a good businessman? I don’t know, stop asking questions and get in line god damn it!

      1. again….holding someone to a standard that no one else meets is a symptom of historic illiteracy and teenager-level idealism.

        Yeh, I would love to have perfect people in elected office, but that has never happened in the history of this country. not once.

        Slinging labels of “corrupt” and “immoral” is childish. Grow up and argue against his policies or lack there of.

        1. “Slinging labels of “corrupt” and “immoral” is childish.”

          It’s not a label it’s a fact.

  24. It is time the people of this country woke up. Birds of a feather flock together and the Clinton’s and Trump have been flocking together the American public long enough. 60 percent of Americans hate Trump and Hillary yet one of the 2 is most likely going to be President. Is this the best this country can do for a leader. No wonder people around the world hate and laugh at our nation. Do you want to straighten this country out. Then pass one simple law. Anyone that has been to law school or sat for the bar can not run for any public office. Lawyers are probably the most despised white collar profession and 90% of all politicians are lawyers. If you can’t see the correlation your to stupid to be voting in the first place.

  25. No wonder people around the world hate and laugh at our nation.

    Have you seen their leaders?

    No, I think these “people around the world” are just smug, self-unaware assholes.

    1. In re: simplybe

    2. Just because the world has assholes for leaders doesn’t mean we the people should settle for assholes for our leaders

      1. That is not the point to which I was responding. “No wonder…” implies there is merit to the opinions of others; I was attacking that premise.

      2. The whole point of separation of powers is that we will have assholes in government, so let’s just accept it and try for damage control.

    3. No wonder people around the world hate and laugh at our nation.

      Progressives are herd animals with no moral center. The feelz of others determines their feelz.

      1. Holy Christ the irony.

  26. There’s so much here to agree with, but a point I’d take issue with.

    “It was the constitutional idealism of the Tea Party that held back Democrats and establishment Republicans from working together to expand the reach of government.”

    I can only speak for the Tea Party gatherings in my state, but the attendees (other than those the Kochs paid to be there), couldn’t spell Constitution (or many other words of two or more syllables.). They were predominately just furious that there was a black man in the White House who wasn’t there to shine shoes. (You could swing a very long rope before you’d hit a North Carolinian that’s ever opened The Constitution let alone read it).

    Here it’s still about race, authoritarianism, populism, homophobia, xenophobia, generational bitterness over the war of Northern aggression. The Donald has said all the right things to communicate that he’s a billionaire George Wallace, and since we can’t raise Edmund Ruffin from the dead, Donald Drumpf will have to do.

    This is a year to get behind the Libertarian candidate. In all our history we’ve never been more ripe to throw two major parties in dumpster and this cycle is lost whatever conservatives do.

    1. If you’re opposed to the Progressive Theocracy, you’re a racist.

      Heard it before.

  27. til I saw the draft which was of $6881 , I didnt believe that my mother in law had been realy taking home money part-time on their laptop. . there best friend has done this 4 only twelve months and at present took care of the mortgage on there condo and got a top of the range Subaru Impreza . Learn More ….

    Click This Link inYour Browser….

    ?????? http://www.Reportmax20.com

  28. til I saw the draft which was of $6881 , I didnt believe that my mother in law had been realy taking home money part-time on their laptop. . there best friend has done this 4 only twelve months and at present took care of the mortgage on there condo and got a top of the range Subaru Impreza . Learn More ….

    Click This Link inYour Browser….

    ?????? http://www.Reportmax20.com

  29. Here is the path forward. Rand Paul resigns from GOP, and becomes Libertarian. He wins the Libertarian nod. Works hard to get the electoral college to be contested, and then the election thrown to House. And the GOP members elect him.

    Free of charge advice.

    1. And the GOP members elect him.

      Because they have so much love for Rand Paul? In a choice between two people they dislike, they’d be damn fools not to choose the one their party actually nominated.

      1. Among GOP Congressmen/women, if the choice is between Rand and Trump, I believe many would pick Rand over Trump. It’s a chance.

        1. highly doubtful. Rand says some interesting things, but he is a nobody politically.

          1. But think of all the Republicans who have said they can’t support Trump or only do so reluctantly. Plenty. At historic numbers for the party nominee.

            Work to be done? Sure. No one will hand it to the Libertarian Party. So what. Dream big.

            1. “But think of all the Republicans who have said they can’t support Trump or only do so reluctantly.”

              to date they have been handily outnumbered to the point of irrelevance.

              1. With my scenario, you are attempting to circumvent the large numbers of GOP electorate who vote for Trump, and instead depend on GOP House members. You lost with GOP electorate. You would have a chance in House.

                1. With my scenario, you are attempting to circumvent the large numbers of GOP electorate who vote for Trump, and instead depend on GOP House membersplaying the political equivalent of Dungeons and Dragons

            2. But think of all the Republicans who have said they can’t support Trump or only do so reluctantly. Plenty. At historic numbers for the party nominee.

              I dunno about ‘historic’. There’s usually lots of crying and gnashing of the teeth among those who didn’t get their way after a nominee emerges. But it typically abates over time, and I fully expect that will be the case this time around as well.

              1. I have never seen a Speaker of House say about his party’s nominee for Peesident “I’m not sure I can support him. He’s gonna have to work for that.”

                In essence he is saying he may be willing to watch the other side win.

                In my eyes, that’s historic.

                1. A Speaker not immediately endorsing the nominee is unprecedented AFAIK. So sure, in that vein it might be ‘historic’.

                  But I’m not sure it’ll be historically impactful. I doubt Ryan has a strong command over his party as a whole to follow his lead, and voters certainly don’t seem terribly fond of him?I checked his approval ratings out of curiosity: http://elections.huffingtonpos…..ble-rating

                  If anything it might be a net positive to Trump, vindicating him as the ‘outsider’ or whatever.

                  Either way, I’m pretty sure Ryan will come around. They’ll have some meeting or two, then Ryan will tell everyone how he’s seen the light and changed his mind on Trump, and that other dissenters ought to consider the same.

                  1. You’re right. He will come around. Unless someone or something changes that narrative. Dare to be great.

          2. By the way, both Paul’s have enjoyed GOP support in the past.

            1. Not in any substantive manner, and more established conservatives in the party/punditry consider them cranks because they didn’t want to bomb foreign countries indiscriminately.

              1. In any other election, what you say is true, in regard to Paul vs GOP nominee. This one is different. It’s the despised Trump. There are so many openings to drive a wedge. It’ll take courage. But this election has already proved different.

      2. Other than that, start working for Johnson to achieve same. But in House, I think Rand does better than Johnson.

    2. Rand Paul resigns from GOP, and becomes Libertarian. He wins the Libertarian nod. Works hard to get the electoral college to be contested, and then the election thrown to House. And the GOP members elect him.

      If Rand was that cunning and ruthless of a politician, he wouldn’t have even needed to consider this path–he would already have the GOP nomination sewn up and Libertarians would be voting for him anyway.

      What you’re proposing is nothing but a fantasy for spergs to fap over.

    3. Free of charge advice.

      And worth every penny.

  30. there is more evidence that the Republic will not survive Hillary and there are only biased assumptions that Trump will be bad for the country. For those who think both are bad you could vote for Gary Johnson. With all the Top Republican saying they will vote for Hillary only proves people view that they are RINO’s and every thing they do is just showmanship to get votes.

  31. When you write an article about “no lesser of two evils” that consists of rehearsing the evil of one of the candidates, I kinda think you really believe the other one really is the the lesser of two evils.

    1. Trump is the lesser of two evils. If the Republicans want to impeach him, the Democrats will go along.

  32. Super and Easiest 0nl!nee Home opportunity for all. make 85 Dollars per hour and Make 6500 Dollars per month.All you just Need an Internet Connection and a Computer To Make Some Extra cash.

    ———- http://www.E-cash10.COM

  33. Of course, if you want to profit from alienation, write a story that presents adjectives instead of facts and arguments and hope the ad revenue goes up.

  34. I don’t have anything in common, politically, with either Trump or Clinton.

    I could support Sanders, maybe, if he is on the ballot.

    BUT THERE IS ANOTHER CHOICE!!

    I agree with Libertarian Party candidate Gary Johnson on almost every issue. The LP candidate, no matter who it is, will be getting my vote.

  35. What’s all this about demagogy?

    As universal suffrage means enfranchising everyone, rilliant careers await politicians and professional wrestlers able to operate in the comfort zone of citizens with two digit IQ’s and/or cursive writing issues.

  36. I would never vote for either Trump or Hillary. They would both be terrible presidents.

    However, if Trump loses, people will recognize that Trumpism does not win, and the GOP may regroup and rebuild along conservative lines in 2018 and 2020.

    If Trump wins, this will prove that Trumpism wins, and the GOP will be transformed into a populist authoritarian party for the foreseeable future.

    It’s because there is virtually no chance that the Democrats will support libertarian ideas that Trump must lose. If he wins, then the only options will be an extreme progressive-left party or an extreme authoritarian-right party.

    1. If Trump wins, this will prove that Trumpism wins, and the GOP will be transformed into a populist authoritarian party for the foreseeable future.

      Not quite as populist and not quite as authoritarian as the Democrats, though.

      It’s because there is virtually no chance that the Democrats will support libertarian ideas that Trump must lose. If he wins, then the only options will be an extreme progressive-left party or an extreme authoritarian-right party.

      If Trump wins, the Democrats will have to change massively as well, because they’ll realize that their extreme progressivism is going to continue to get them to lose.

  37. The Republic will survive an election cycle but the Republican party may not

    That’s nearly perfect. If Hillary could please kill the Democratic party too, then maybe we can finally move forward on “hope and change”.

  38. Not voting for either of these clowns but Hilary is a proven evildoer, Trump remains unknown policywise. A backhanded endorsement of Clinton on Reason.com just confirms my good judgement in not renewing my subscription 10 years ago. Third party, anybody but Trump, blah blah blah, doesn’t change the fact that your girl Hilary is drenched in the blood of innocent people. Trump may be if he assumes office, but Hilary been there and done that. Trump says mean things about people. Hilary engineers the death of people and then brags about it. Which one will be the next Hitler,Stalin,FDR,Polpot,LBJ,GW,Abe,Truman or pick your favorite war criminal. I don’t know but HRC is already a competitor.
    Non aggression is the 1st principal. Candidate A is verbally aggressive. Candidate B kills people. The author hysterically endorses Candidate B to save a political party. Fuck you David.

  39. I’ve made $76,000 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student.I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money.It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it.

    Open This LinkFor More InFormation..

    ??????? http://www.selfcash10.com

  40. Start making cash right now… Get more time with your family by doing jobs that only require for you to have a computer and an internet access and you can have that at your home. Start bringing up to $12000 a month. I’ve started this job and I’ve never been happier and now I am sharing it with you, so you can try it too. You can check it out here…

    Go to tech tab for more detail… http://www.earnmore9.com

  41. I’ve made $64,000 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student. Im using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money. It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it. Heres what I do,

    ============ http://www.richi8.com

  42. Ah! Another hack from the looter press all disappointed that The Don defeated the entire Robert Lewis Dear “Warrior For the Babies” slate of mystical bigots. Supposing that everything the Dems, commies and prohis say about The Don is true, that STILL makes him the least disgusting and objectionable candidate–and most competent–struggling to take the GOP away from the looter theocracy.
    If my libertarian vote weren’t certain to repeal ten times the number of bad laws, I’d be tempted to waste it on the billionaire.

  43. Oh cool a Reason piece about Trump that’s serious, rooted in reality, and not taken as an excuse to flaunt hipstery nihilism. I’m sure the area mongoloids and know-nothings are butthurt over it.

  44. Start working from home! Great job for students, stay-at-home moms or anyone needing an extra income… You only need a computer and a reliable internet connection… Make $90 hourly and up to $12000 a month by following link at the bottom and signing up… You can have your first check by the end of this week….

    Read more on this web site============ http://www.earnmore9.com

  45. I’m making $86 an hour working from home. I was shocked when my neighbour told me she was averaging $95 but I see how it works now.
    I feel so much freedom now that I’m my own boss. This is what I do,
    http://www.social36.com

  46. I’m making over $9k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life. This is what I do…. Go to tech tab for work detail..

    CLICK THIS LINK===== http://www.cashapp24.com/

  47. I’ve made $64,000 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student. Im using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money. It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it. Heres what I do,

    ============ http://www.richi8.comhttp://www.social36.com

  48. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last friday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 6-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $97 per hour. I work through this link,
    Go to tech tab for work detail.========== http://www.earnmore9.com

  49. Start making more money weekly. This is a valuable part time work for everyone. The best part work from comfort of your house and get paid from $100-$2k each week.Start today and have your first cash at the end of this week. For more details Check this link??

    Clik This Link inYour Browser
    ? ? ? ? http://www.MaxPost30.com

  50. I’m making over $9k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life. This is what I do…. Go to tech tab for work detail..

    CLICK THIS LINK===== http://www.cashapp24.com/

  51. RE: Sometimes There Is No Lesser of Two Evils
    The Republic will survive an election cycle but the Republican party may not

    The republican party is nothing more than socialist party light and has been for decades.
    I wonder how many libertarians (such as myself) left the republican party for its latent socialist ideals.

  52. I’ve made $76,000 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student.I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money.It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it.

    Open This LinkFor More InFormation..

    ??????? http://www.Centernet40.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.