Election 2016

Video: Nick Gillespie and Walter Block Debate Whether Libertarians Should Vote for Trump

Soho Forum debate


On Tuesday night in Greenwich Village, I debated Loyola University economist Walter Block over whether libertarians should vote for Donald Trump. As the founder of a group called Libertarians for Trump, Block argued the affirmative position while I took the negative. It was an Oxford-style debate, meaning the crowd is polled before and after arguments and the winner is the one who gains the most adherents to his point of view. In Tuesday's debate, the victor was Block, who capped a raucous and feisty debate by denouncing me as "vile" and a "thick libertarian."

The debate was hosted by The Soho Forum, which produces monthly events of great interest to libertarians (even or perhaps especially "thick" ones such as myself). In January, for instance, Reason's Matt Welch will be debating New York magazine's Jonathan Chait regarding Barack Obama's legacy as president.

Jim Epstein posted the audio to the debate yesterday. Check that out here, and subscribe to Reason's podcast at iTunes to automatically receive new audio content as it's posted online.

Here's the video of the debate:

Don't miss a single Reason podcast or video!

Subscribe, rate, and review us at all these platforms:

Subscribe to our audio podcast at iTunes.

Follow us at Soundcloud.

Subscribe to our video channel at iTunes.

Subscribe to our YouTube channel.

Like us on Facebook.

Follow us on Twitter.

NEXT: Weld's Bells and Other Late Campaign Hits: The New Fifth Column

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. Who broke Brock’s leg?

    1. Thick libertarians in true Clinton Crime Family mode.

      1. Thick libertarians

        Aye, I was told libertarians were like intelligent and stuff.

        1. Do you believe everything you are told?

          1. U wot M8?

  2. Supreme Court

    You want 6 of her justices to overturn the 1st and second amendments?

    1. Overturn? Regulate, esteve7, regulate. Unless you start using their words, they will find you, and they will Neeson kill you.

      1. “Every Right That We Have Is Open To And Subject To Reasonable Regulations”


        That’s like Obama bitching in the early 2000s that the constitution focuses on negative rights… you sknow shit the government can’t do….

        1. Look, you only want the right to say what you want so that you can commit a crime and get away with it!

    2. Wait. I thought Obama already banned all the guns?

      1. Josh Huff might think so.

  3. Vote Johnson…the thickest libertarian of all!

    1. I like how you refuse to be typecast.

    2. No butts about it,your the man HM.

      1. They are too thin for John.

        For sarcasmic, they are borderline obese.

        1. I, too, know what it’s like to live in such a liminal zone.

        2. And for Crusty?

        3. Sarasmic? Those are fully grown women, dude, he’ll be totally offended.

    3. God damn, my impression seeing that was “aww, so cute, little girls dressing up for their first dance”

      I’ve gotten old.

      1. I’ll wheel you into the Old Reason Canadians Home where Rufus and But Enough About Me live now. I will continue to be young and reckless.

        1. Do computers at the home have Steam?

            1. Then my body is ready! I’ll just dump my GOG collection on a memory stick.

          1. Yes, but it’s the 2005 version for ‘nostalgia’.

        2. Oi! I do not live there!

          I have, however, visited on a number of occasions to fluff Pan Zagloba’s pillows.


          1. By the way, John, you can just call me BEAM — that’s my keyboard macro for my full handle.

    4. I concur with HM. And I’m whiter than white.

  4. Thin libertarianism is libertarianism.

  5. At issue is not which one is worse but instead which one will have their Big Gov agenda pushed through by a GOP Congress?

    Trump and the GOP Congress will make the Bushpigs expansion of government look mild. Fatherland Security will police all the Hispanics and other Trump scapegoats into Glenn Beck style FEMA camps for processing.

    1. Given Beck’s view of Trump, won’t Glenn be one of the first in line for processing?

      1. Perhaps.

        Dissent won’t be tolerated by a Trump Reign.

        His empty threats of lawsuits will be replaced with visits from state officials.

        1. “His empty threats of lawsuits will be replaced with visits from state officials.”

          Turn it so the shinny side is out, turd.

          1. PB finally got a little bump of yay. Cash is tight these days. Let him have his 20 minutes of fun before he faces reality again.

    2. Isn’t it past you bed time?

    3. “Trump and the GOP Congress will make the Bushpigs expansion of government look mild. Fatherland Security will police all the Hispanics and other Trump scapegoats into Glenn Beck style FEMA camps for processing.”

      OK, how long do you think it takes a diseased mind like turd’s to compose this sort of crap?

      1. If he had any taste, I’d say “30 seconds to mangle the plot of original Deus Ex“.

        1. To be fair, Deus Ex is itself a mangled version of every 90s conspiracy theory.

          1. Mangled? Carefully curated to only top, what, eight? Then lovingly assembled into a Matrix-influenced package.

            1. JC Denton, savior of humanity.

              Subtle Ion Storm, subtle.

              (I actually really like the original Deus Ex but some of it has aged poorly)

              1. I wish they fully held to the symbolism and named the hero of DX:HR John instead of Adam.

                1. Just be glad that they didn’t actually reboot it with 2000s conspiracy theories. Otherwise Adam would have been fighting the Illuminati’s attempts to control Iraq’s oil after engineering 9/11…and then they’d turn out to be Space Lizards.

    4. Eh, but the media has already shown their willingness to go after Trump, and Republicans seem to be pushing back as well.

      President Hillary will be able to invade Syria and get into it with Russia, and the media will say “look: a girl can start a World War, too! Aren’t these progressive times we live in?”

    5. Fuck you, shreek. You know full well that Hillary and her neocon buds John McCain and Lindsey Graham, who I assume you also love since they are exactly the same, will make Bush blush with their blood lust. Hillary will drink the blood of innocent children in the middle east and you’ll cheer it on, you fucking war mongering shithead.

  6. Someone stop Nick before he debates again!

  7. It was an Oxford-style debate, meaning the crowd is polled before and after arguments and the winner is the one who gains the most adherents to his point of view.

    That’s bullshit. As you can see, before the debate 30% agreed with Block and 51 percent agreed with Gillespie (and about 19 were undecided). Yes, after the debate, Block picked up around 5 percent more than Gillespie, but that still just means that by the end of the debate 38% of the people left the room agreeing with Block and 55 percent agreed with Gillespie.

    You want to see winning? Scroll down on the link given above to see Heather Mac Donald (sadly) eviscerating Tim Lynch on the question of “There is a war on cops that makes everyone less safe.”

    1. When I was in law school, I tried to institute Oxford Style debate formats for our student organizations. I failed to persuade anyone.

      The rebuttal: “We don’t want our guests to be embarrassed if their talking points are rejected in a large way.”

    2. More people were persuaded by Block than Dr Nick. Unless there were a bunch of shy Trumpeters in there, that makes him a winner.

      No, it’s not a “Rax down at 20, Ancient down at 22 minutes” win, but it’s a win nonetheless.

      1. It’s a Midas game, is what I’m picking up here…

        1. Is any game not an Iron Talon into Midas game, regardless of hero?

            1. The trench never ends!

              Though I never actually had enough games to be allowed into ranked. I think I barely cracked 100. Then Overwatch came out and was like, 85% less shittiness, and games last 10-15 minutes. Also, does not erode your soul, and I was out.

      2. It makes him a winner only by the artificial rules of Oxford-style. My point was that if you merely look at it just as ‘an audience went to hear two people debate’, the majority of the audience still left holding Nick’s views. So, yes, Block won the debate as a game in that he changed the amount of people who agreed with him from before by 9 percent to Nick’s 4. But looking at the entire audience, Nick’s stance on the resolution won by 17 percent.

        1. Yes, but it’s not like “Audience went in who had no stake in the issue”. Oxford rules recognize the handicap because not every position is equally strong, nor audience equally receptive to the argument, and give credit to whoever pulls more. Though I’d prefer if ‘undecided’ option wasn’t allowed, so we could see the full swing.

          Like I said in the other thread, when you give a liberal Toronto audience a proposition (“Be it resolved, give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free”) that 77% accepts, and 90 minutes later 55% accept, you have lost decisively. Doesn’t matter that majority still cleaves to your position. You debating actually caused you to bleed support, which makes you a bad debater.

        2. I bet ol’ Doc Gillespie would’ve taken a real ass whoopin’ if they held the debate down in Opelika

        3. It makes him a winner only by the artificial rules of Oxford-style.

          *Unless you are Charlie Sheen, or This Guy, the concepts of ‘Winning’ or ‘Losing’ are always based on someone’s arbitrary set of rules.

    3. Sadly, my dad sad at the dinner table tonight that people should be in fear of the cops, and then nobody would get tased to death by them.

  8. Robby Soave awoke in a bar room lit by a naked light bulb. An old TV in the corner flicked on and displayed a ghastly puppet. It spoke to him.

    “Hello Robby. You don’t know me, but I know you. I want to play a game. Here’s what happens if you lose: the hatch above you will open and you will be crushed by an avalanche of fruit sushi. To live, you must throw the chains in front of you onto the platform. Yes, Robby, you have have always been late putting up the links. Now putting up the links in time is your only chance of survival. Look around Robby and know I’m not lying. You’d better hurry up. Live or Die. The choice is yours.”

    1. You an mount his hair on your standard as a warning to others.

    2. One plays a dangerous game infringing on Sugarfree’s territory.

        1. Still dangerous

      1. Would you say that the zone Derpy was entering would be one of danger?

        1. Do I have to take the highway to it? I’d prefer more scenic route with less traffic.

          1. The most effective pro-choice argument ever

    3. If Robby ever goes on a Reason cruise, he’s probably going to fear for his life.

      1. Norovirus is a killer.

        1. They only load so much fruit sushi on those boats.

    1. Was supposed to be response to Derpy above. Not the whatever the hell Nicholas was doing.

  9. On Turkey trying to ban the letters Q, W, and X: It’s not because Turkish doesn’t need them. It’s because Kurdish uses them and Turkey has long history of suppressing the Kurdish language.

    1. This is some evil reverse-Sesame-Street shit.

      1. Q is a dumb, clingy letter always needing U next to it. You were hot in Roman times, Q, just get over it.

        1. Q E D!

          1. What’s your point?

          1. Go wear a fur hat on triple letter score, you commie symp.

  10. I tried watching but I ended up hating both of their debating styles. Block basically hand waving away every serious flaw of Trump in favor of random scaremongering and Nick basically polling the audience about each of his points every few seconds “How many of you…?” Maybe it got meatier later on but the opening arguments were rough.

    1. Block raised the issue of the jacket having expressed the view that America is better off with less manufacturing activity and that he wants fewer, not more, factories operating. Block called that Nick’s “industrial policy.”

      Regarding the loss of manufacturing jobs in the rust belt areas and the reasons therefor, Block made the point that the three southern states of Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana have a number of factories humming, in part, because of a relatively more liberty friendly environment (less tolerance for unionism, lower taxes).

      The jacket responded that those three states are three of the poorest states in the country. Non-sequitur. Logical fallacy. The point was that the blue states in the northeast, by and through ever growing doses of progressivism, chased manufacturing out of those states by their own industrial policies whereas the three aforementioned southern states proved to be more attractive to manufacturing businesses.

      1. Poor is also relative. Living in those three states does not cost nearly as much as the Northeast or West Coast. Those states keep attracting plants and they won’t stay on the low end of the ranking, and you’re right that Nick totally misses the point of cause-and-effect where plant location is concerned.

        1. Good point on the cost of living.

    2. The debate got kind of nasty and petty at times. I like Nick but what he did to Walter (w/NYT)was pretty fucking shitty and should apologize. Walter should mellow out. I would side with neither in that none of them approached the possibility that voting is a colossal waste of time and gas and accomplishes nothing.

  11. To the question: no, Hillary should have defend her positions by herself. Then again, it wouldn’t be Weld participating.

  12. I don’t live in a swing-state. A vote for either of the two parties would not only greatly compromise my principles, but be even more of a wasted vote than a strategic vote for the party with no chance of winning. I have absolutely no incentive to vote for Trump.

    Thank you, no.

    1. Even in a swing state, one vote doesn’t matter. Trump and Clinton are unworthy of support. Some libertarians may say the same about Gary Johnson, but he is the best option on the ballot.

      1. And then Bill took her backstage and introduced her to the joys of pole-smoking.

    1. GOD DAMN IT!

      You are entering HM “links as a minefield” territory man. The Army has changed you. You lost something…your soul.

      1. You want to see something *really* scary? This one got an interesting reaction:

        Suthenboy|3.11.15 @ 5:44PM|#

        Why in the name of God would you show us that? What the hell did we do to you?

        Watch if you dare:

        [raucous, wheezing laughter, crescendos into Cryptkeeper cackle]

        1. Derpetologist is currently being investigated for violations of the 1972 Derp Disarmament Act (a result of the United States dropping Jane Fonda on the North Vietnamese).

        2. Even I retired that WMD (weapon of mass derpitude). Play nice Derpy.

        3. I remember that. Much to my chagrin.

    2. They really missed the mark with that song choice.

      So much more apropos.

    3. Dammit, I liked Liz Banks.

  13. You know, I freely admit I didn’t watch the video, but having recently read Walter Block’s position (and being already familiar with Nick Gillespie’s) I think I’m more persuaded by Block’s argument. There’s something to the argument that supporting “thick” libertarianism really doesn’t get us much in terms of real, principled liberty. There isn’t too much daylight between the Gary Johnson position on Nazi cakes, say, and the Progressive position, at least in terms of respecting freedom of association.

    1. Nick wasn’t agreeing with Johnson’s position on the Nazi cakes, but for Block to be opposed to Johnson b/c of wedding cakes and yet give Trump a free pass on practically everything else is absurd.

      1. I was actually referring to something else that Block wrote about the “thick” libertarianism of Johnson. Like I say, I didn’t watch the video. But Nick’s argument about laying a foundation for Libertarians at the national level by voting for Gary Johnson does ring a smidge hollow if the nominee is introducing America to a form of libertarianism that isn’t really that far from Progressivism.

        I agree about Block, though. I think he glosses over some of the truly glaring issues with Trump, but I think that’s coming from his #neverHillary perspective more than anything.

      2. Did you forget to listen where Block said he supported Johnson? Block wasn’t giving Trump a free pass, but was making the case that in swing states, Trump should be voted for, because if not Hillary would be more likely to become President.

        1. Yes, which I took to mean that he realizes how silly it sounds for a libertarian to vote Trump. He can have his Nazi cake and eat it too.

          The reason that the GOP keeps moving ever farther from a libertarian direction is that when it matters, the GOP gets the vote of those with libertarian sensibilities. They can take it for granted again and again just as the Democrats can count on the black vote.

          On the other hand, ever since 1980 the GOP has been chasing those blue collar “Reagan Democrats”. Well, now they have them — good and hard.

        2. Yes, which I took to mean that he realizes how silly it sounds for a libertarian to vote Trump. He can have his Nazi cake and eat it too.

          The reason that the GOP keeps moving ever farther from a libertarian direction is that when it matters, the GOP gets the vote of those with libertarian sensibilities. They can take it for granted again and again just as the Democrats can count on the black vote.

          On the other hand, ever since 1980 the GOP has been chasing those blue collar “Reagan Democrats”. Well, now they have them — good and hard.

  14. I find it kind of funny that Block considers Nick’s lack of nostalgia for factory jobs to be an industrial policy, but is happy to vote for anti-market anti-trade protectionist Trump because if you squint and pray real hard then Trump might be against war.

    1. Trump said his first act as president would be to ask the generals “who do we hit first?”

  15. “We should be valuing families.”

    Deep Thoughts, by Hillary Clinton


    1. She exudes ‘let go stop hugging me’.

      Anyone babbles about values should be immediately ignored.

      1. who

    2. If Hillary Clinton was the only source of love and kindness in the nation, the nation would have descended into flesh-eating anarchy ages ago.

  16. Weld looks like the guy who after promising to stick with says with a soft smug look, ‘you snooze you loose’ as he walks away after fucking you over going to the other side.

    1. It’s just like The President said!

    2. Where do these people think all the fucking books have gone?

      1. Trumpshirts Browntrumps Deplorables burnt them!

    3. Note to self: Society is a lousy contractor. Post zero stars on Yelp.

    4. Has access to the greatest information collection in human history. Can legally access an inconceivable amount of pre-copyright art and literature from the entirety of human history. Can learn entire new skill sets from random people providing the required information. Can get the answers to simple questions with ten seconds of typing. Can literally store the entirety of the library of Alexandria in their phone. Ten times over.

      …Uses it to watch cat videos and make dumb political memes. Dumb political memes than then complain about a lack of access to information.

      SMOD, take me now!

    5. That’s the America that rests in their minds.

      I mean, who fucking does that?

      1. I know, right? I hide the guns in the books.

    6. OD makes DU look intelligent.

      Seriously, they’re the retarded mongoloid step-brother in the Democratic family.

  17. First confirmed tire kill by Trump sign spike strip:

  18. Watching Gillespie’s remarks, it’s like a different world I used to know–the one before William Weld sabotaged the Libertarian Party in what I suspect was a quid pro quo for an ambassador’s job.

    I was more than halfway to voting for Trump before that, now that I think Hillary and Weld are joining forces to sabotage the LP for their own reasons (not that they care about our ideas), I’m more determined to vote for Johnson than ever.

    Didn’t this debate happen before Weld went Benedict Arnold? The arguments just aren’t the same anymore.

    I still want Hillary to lose and for all the same reasons. It’s just that now I want the Libertarian Party to win.

    My most compelling argument for voting for Johnson is this: How can you go around telling other people to vote for libertarian candidates if you don’t vote Libertarian yourself?

    1. The same way I tell people to vote for Trump.

    2. Try listening to Weld’s words. You presumably respected his judgment at one point. He says a very reasonable thing–he knows Hillary and thinks she is vastly preferable to Trump, understanding full well that those two are the only choices–and suddenly he’s been bought? What doesn’t make sense about what he’s saying? Do you know Hillary Clinton better than Bill Weld does, what with all your careful, objective research on rightwingfucktard.com?

      1. No one here respected Weld.

        1. Ah. Is it because he knows how to find places on maps and speaks like he has a post-high school education?

        2. Never respected him.

          He was a tool.

          We used him like a tool.

          He used us, too.

  19. Anyone who even entertains the idea of voting for Donald Trump to be the most powerful person in the world is a fucking moron who in a harsher, but perhaps more just, world would be castrated.

    Let’s just see how fucking stupid we’re going to make ourselves look to the rest of the planet.

    1. Stop making me like Trump.

      Seriously, if your goal is actually for Clinton to win, you should probably just shut up.

      1. People who base their vote on how a stranger on the internet makes them feel are too stupid to vote. So don’t vote. Spend the 35th of November doing something you’re good at.

        1. Actually, I’m basing it on how much you hate him. Since your ethical system is totally fucked up, I figure he might not be as bad as I previously thought.

          1. I had no opinion of him until I learned that he was a racist raping tax cheat. Which would be one thing if he weren’t running to be the most powerful person on earth.

            1. By tax cheat you mean someone who’s figured out a way to keep his money from getting stolen, war monger.

              1. Carry loss forwards are considered tax cheating or loopholes to these morons.

              2. Notice that’s what he lands on-“tax cheat”. Not, “tax-cheating racist rapist”, or even, “rapist tax-cheating racist”.

                Nope, it’s that DT somehow didn’t cough up enough money for shit-stain’s liking.

              3. Just be predictable as fuck why don’t you.

                1. Rapist, racist… hello

                2. You’re the one that chose the words and their order, ball-bag.

                  Can’t help that you’re so transparent.

        2. Shut the fuck up, war monger.

    2. 00000000
      There. I gave you the nuclear launch codes.

    3. Thank you for voicing your support for torturing and mutilating your political opponents, this is far more reflective of you than Trump supporters.

      1. Come on, John, he just recognizes that castration is more merciful alternative to death. They can’t inherit but you don’t take as high opinion penalty!

        1. The ‘Order Them To Take the Oath’ option exists for a reason. A monk’s life is not a bad one!

          1. Separation of church and state killed that one, sadly.

            I wish it was still an option – can you imagine Bassillisa Hilary I ordering Trump tonsured and frogmarched to a monastery?

            1. I believe Weiner is currently engaging in the secularized version.

      2. Would those be the people who genuinely, not jocularly, think Hillary Clinton should be electrocuted until she’s dead?

          1. David Duke, notable Trump supporter.

            1. Go tell the KKK, then.

        1. If only they did wonderful things like Clinton, like laugh at a man being sodomized by a bayonet and his female guard gang-raped and mutilated.

          1. Well I cheered when she killed bin Laden, so what’s the difference?

            1. Then that’s just another of your own moral failings, the braying of a man-ape indulging his inner savage.

              A captured man of such crimes is to be tried and, if found guilty, hanged. Not anally raped by a knife. Somehow we were able to do this with scumbag Nazis. A hanging is a respectable removal of a threat after judgement, a mob rape is an act of barbarism. Laughter as a result of a violent, sadistic rape is reflective of an unstable individual.

              1. Agreed but Hillary didn’t kill him. Libyans did.

    4. Agree on Trump. Anyone who even entertains the idea of voting for Hillary Clinton is saying that character and integrity and transparency and respecting the laws of the land aren’t really required for public office.

  20. Did Walter Block ever get to use his bionic-ass-kicking boot?

  21. Glenn Thrush is the gift that keeps on giving. Jesus how could anyone be such a pathetic toady?


    1. Meh, seems like the guy’s just living up to his surname.

  22. I will just leave this here I got nothing. Wow.


    1. It’s purposeful trolling.

    2. It’s Salon level trolling.

      1. No Salon was embarrassed by this

    3. Why do you hate women?

    4. I didn’t know professional Hillary apologist was an actual job.

    5. Oh. My. God.

  23. The verdict at LRC is “Block Demolishes Dishonest Gillespie.”

    1. There isn’t anything dishonest about Gillespie.

      You suck.

      1. Settle down Ken. It’s just a headline from the place Block happens to post blogs to.

        1. Well excuse me.

          My apologies.

    2. that makes me feel sad for them.

      1. I feel sad for us.

        This country is going to shit.

        Worst libertarian moment ever.

    3. LRC wouldn’t even back Rand Paul because they viewed him as too militaristic. Then they went en masse for Trump over Johnson, even though Trump is for far bigger government and far more military action than either Paul or Johnson.

    1. Those are some class-act people spouting that shit in the first poster. Apparently, without the government forcing them, they won’t do anything to help those in need.

      Such scumbags.

    2. Hey Derpy, any suggestions for foreign language self-study?

      1. Prioritize your vocab. I suggest translating this list into your target language and then practicing with flashcards. For a double whammy, you can do flashcards while listening to your target language. I strongly recommend speaking your TL as often as possible, even if it’s just to yourself. Keep a journal in your TL.

        At the very beginning, stick to memorizing simple, common phrases: meeting and greeting, times and dates, and simple questions and phrases like “what time is it?” or “I’m not sure”. Interestingly, it’s often easier to remember a whole phrase than a bunch of words. It also prevents you from having to figure out grammar as you speak.

        If you plan on using your language for a certain activity, make a separate list for words used for it. So if you’re trying to learn Korean for taekwondo, learn words like “punch” and “kick” and phrases like “show me how” or “do it again”.

        Think about what you say and try to learn the words for that. Remember, about 90% of what we say comes from a list of 1000 words.

        1. Thank you! That is most helpful!

  24. Apparently, Nick lost because he refused to answer Block’s question, “How long have you been diving for Roto-Rooter?”

    1. Re Huma’s alleged terrorist connections, when Snopes can’t clear you…


      1. Look, i despise the Hillary camp as much as anyone, but for the love of 9*!@*()#&* twinkies, trying to link Huma to Al Qaeda via some muslim version of 6-degrees-of-kevin-bacon only serves to make the charges of influence peddling, mishandling intelligence, corruption etc. LESS effective, because it taints every accusation with the impression that everyone’s a conspiracy-mongering moron.

        1. Yeh but what about Patrick Swayze?

          Here’s the thing that confuses me. Her husband is Jewish. I mean, no serious Muslim terrorist ready to destroy America would marry one, right?

          1. That’s exactly what they’d want you to think.

          2. what about Patrick Swayze?

            I can’t make up my mind if roadhouse, or point break is his best work.

  25. Attn Sevo :

    This story just keeps getting stupider and stupider.

    1. Caught that earlier. Herrera is as slimy as Harris, so this is a photo op for him.
      But the owners (and sellers of the residences) *are* required to ‘disclose’, and the question is somewhat technical since (according to a friend who is a geologist working for developers) there is a commonly accepted rate of sinking for buildings founded on friction piles and the tower was well within that (‘non-disclose’) rate until the digging (and de-watering) began for the moonbeam choo-choo terminal.
      The taxpayers will pay that asshole Herrera (& Co.) costs, while Millennium Partners will pay their legal staff; my guess is, as is common, they took all legally required steps to build the damn thing and sell the residences.
      And Herrera getting bitch-slapped by the judge will be buried under the fold on page 10 two years from now.
      I am looking forward to a lunch with another geologist in a week or so (depending on the weather; he golfs and we’re to meet at his club). The claim that the sinking was ‘well in excess’ of the predicted value is true as far as the one guy knows, but told me to ask guy #2 top confirm it was within the ‘non-disclose’ value.
      It’s an odds-on bet that Herrera hasn’t a clue as to the actual issues, and I don’t know enough about his staff to even guess whether anyone there does.

      1. And:
        “Millennium Tower resident posts video of rolling marble to demonstrate building’s tilt”

        A friend ran a hardwood floor company at one time. He used to take a golf ball with him for the initial meetings and when someone said ‘we want it as flat as it is now’, he’d turn the golf ball lose just to watch it find the low spot.
        Someone else can do the math tonight, but a 2″ tilt in a 600′ tower is not going to cause a marble to roll, and I’ll bet the Millennium Partners ends up using that vid to show the irrelevancy of the ’tilt’ as it’s a very good chance it rolled the wrong way.

        1. It said 2″ at the base, whatever that means.

          If I’m doing piles on the SF peninsula, they’re going to bedrock. But I wouldn’t develop there.

  26. I don’t get current music. Young MA is on bar jukebox playing ooouuu. Peeps at bar into it but I don’t understand. Guess I’m old.

    1. Honestly the rap music getting played tonight just seems like shitty pop. But what do I know. I like motown and blues.

      1. It all sounfs exactly alike at this point. Sad.

        1. Its very monotone and repetitive.

          1. Oh somethong I like Oh, it’s Rhianna, that explains ithat

    2. its not you, its complete shit.

      1. That’s what I was thinking.

      2. Thankfully the music has improved some. Sounds like a little older scool funk.

      1. Still at bar, might try and check out. So now “I got the Keys” is on. This sounds just like all the other sonfs I heard earlier which is what I was talking about. Borimg.

        1. Changed bar. Better music.

  27. I had am interesting conversation with a gentlemem at the bar this evening. Trump voter. Heath care, minimun wage, crony capitalism, many other issues he sounded like a libertararian. He got the actual principles and economics totally. I think we have an opeming with a lot of these people. We didn’t get into a lot of other issues but I will next time. It’s very difficult to counteract the media on so mamy issues but this guy sounds open, others must be too..

    1. What was his position on pussy grabbing?

      Asking for a friend.

    2. It’s pretty difficult to even know what a Trump voter is. My take is that it’s just a person who is extremely fed up with, as in had enough of, the GOP establishment. But of course if you listen to the media, they’re made up of a mix of neo-nazis, misogynists, racists, etc. Of course, I don’t buy into the latter at all, as the media have no integrity left at all, and I now just automatically assume that anything they say is a lie and so go do my own research. I actually know a lot of Trump voters, and I would describe them as anywhere between typical conservatives and people who lean libertarian on most issues. The NeverTrumpers are neocons from what I can see. Trump is too dovish for them, so they’d prefer Hillary since they can’t have another Bush.

      And like you noticed with the guy you talked to, every Trump voter I’ve talked to are completely open to conversation even if they don’t agree with you about everything, I don’t sense any hostility. So your typical GOP voter. Unlike Hillary voters who will either not talk to you or just be completely hostile from the onset. Most Democrats are becoming very nasty people. Since they’ve become leftists, it’s their only recourse, since they have no real argument for their failed ideology.

      Republicans are wrong on a lot of social issues, but at least they have some grounding in reality.

      1. The only die-hard Trump voter I know is my aunt, and that she is a Trumpet shocks the hell out of me. She’s a life long Democrat, pro-choice, anti-gun, professional woman (retired as a VP for a major oil & gas corporation here in Houston). But she fucking hates Hillary. Views her as everything wrong with politics and despises her treatment of Bill’s victims. She is someone who really should be in Hillary’s wheelhouse, but instead she’s making phone calls for Trump and will probably be doing whatever passes for a GOTV effort for Trump.

    3. We didn’t get into a lot of other issues but I will next time

      Next time start with Immigration and National Security.

      1. Right. I thonk he would be on board against the WOD knowing the bar:) i don’t consider immigration a hige issue. You can’t stop it.

        1. You misspelled “hyoooooge.”

  28. I agree with Walter Block’s strategy. He made a compelling case how in swing states, individuals should definetly vote for Trump to try to stop a Hillary presidency which is far worse than what a Trump presidency would be. If you are in a heavy blue state voting for Johnson would help get to 5% for the LP.

    What Nick did to Walter is beyond messed up, and he should definetely appologize to him.

    1. “stop a Hillary presidency which is far worse than what a Trump presidency would be”

      I’d say the opposite. Hillary, unlike Trump, seems to respect thought, arguments and evidence. She’s bought into some bad ones, but is pretty typical in this and many regards. She’s been pulled leftward economically by Sanders, but could rebound in office. Trump is a proud irrationalist. I’d expect, more or less, crappy status quo with Hillary. With Trump, I’d expect a supercharged series of destructive initiatives, surreal episodes, and shameful calamities. What IS the presidential-powered equivalent of denying the veracity of a standard birth certificate? Of his star-powered “way” with women? Of his respect for property rights and contracts? I hope to never find out.

      1. “Hillary, unlike Trump, seems to respect thought, arguments and evidence.”

        How can you say Hillary respects these things at all? I see no evidence to support such claims. Despite the “evidence” such as the Constitution clearly stating the right to keep and bear arms “shall not be infringed”, she wants to infringe on people’s rights.

        She believes others should be punished for violating policy or procedure, yet calls her actions mistakes that should be forgiven. All the while many folks in the military have had their careers destroyed for a mere pittance compared to her crimes.

        Didn’t her support for sending people to fight these war’s and conflicts violate those who served rights to life liberty and property that they can no longer enjoy because they are either wounded or dead all because of bullshit protracted conflict?

        As for eminent domain, she had no problem with the govt taking land from someone through the use of E.D for the Clinton Library in Ak. So either of the two are just as guilty in it’s use.

        Supreme court judges…what thoughts, arguments and evidence has she used to form such a bastardized view of individual rights, and the Constitution??? Her supreme court picks would be folks who use her same line of reasoning while using Toddlers as a front to further strip away an individuals right to bear arms. Trump has some good picks lined up for the SC that would definetely stop even Donald in his tracks in regards to violating the Constitution.

  29. 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://YoutubeJobs.Nypost55.com

  30. I would like to see a debate between Mike Rowe and NIck on the value of blue-collar work and “crap work”.

    1. I’d like to see a debate between those who romanticize blue-collar work and my great-grandfather’s black lung.

  31. Walter Block is why libertarians have trouble making friends.

  32. Proposition: “Should libertarians vote for Donald Trump for president?”

    This is a dishonestly framed proposition because it hides the different types of NO votes as one block:

    a) NO: they should vote for Johnson
    b) NO: they should vote for Clinton
    c) NO: they should vote for another candidate

    Vote tally before debate (actual):

    17.8% UNDECIDED
    31.1% YES = TRUMP

    Breakdown of NO (possible)-
    – CLINTON: 31.1% (say same as Trump)
    – JOHNSON/OTHER: 20%

    Vote tally after debate (actual):

    5.5% UNDECIDED
    38.8% YES = TRUMP

    Breakdown of NO (possible)-
    – CLINTON: 10%
    – JOHNSON/OTHER: 45.5%

    Results (possible):

    TRUMP increased by 7.7% (Walter Block)
    JOHNSON/OTHER increased by 25.5% (Nick Gillespie)
    CLINTON decreased by 21.1%

    In other words, by implicitly combining CLINTON, JOHNSON, and OTHER into one category, we only see that there wasn’t that much NET change in this group (only 4.4%), but in actuality, this change COULD have come from a massive reduction in CLINTON/UNDECIDED votes, and huge increase in JOHNSON/OTHER votes. This is hidden by the choice of proposition.


  33. (…continued)


    The proposition is false, and should be rejected since it biases results heavily in favour of Trump by concealing the breakdown of support in the NO categories. This debate was organized for one purpose only: to drum up support for Trump, using dishonest question rigging tactics. Gillespie was right to reject the proposition. Block and the organizers should be ashamed of themselves.

    A proper proposition would have been framed to cover all possible choices clearly and explicitly:

    “Should libertarians vote for: a) Trump, b) Clinton, c) Johnson, d) Other, or e) Undecided?”

    Then take a before and after snapshots. Increases in the Trump category would go to Walter Block, and increases in Johnson (and Other) categories would go to Nick Gillespie.

  34. Walter succinctly defeated Nick and he didn’t even need a black leather jacket to do it. Did that sting???

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.