Donald Trump

If Gary Johnson Voters Can Tolerate Clinton and Trump Supporters, The Two Groups Can Live With Each Other

Supporters of good candidates accept election outcomes, so backers of evil candidates should do the same.

|

A visiting member of my extended family had to brace himself for the next stop on his trip: Calling on his adult children. He intended to try to rebuild his relationships with them after they'd cut ties over his unpardonable sin: He voted for Trump.

That's right. Supporters of one major political party's losing presidential candidate cut off their father because he cast his vote for the other major political party's winning presidential candidate in last year's election. This familial cold war is bizarre for at least two reasons:

One, that's just unbelievably stupid in a democratic political system which necessarily features opposing candidates competing for office all the frigging time. Disagreement is the basis for the system. There's no way to live a normal life if you cut off contact with even close family members who hold opposing political views.

And two, if a Gary Johnson voter such as myself can overcome the vast divide between my preferred non-evil candidate and the stock villains put forward by the Republicans and Democrats, surely Clinton and Trump supporters can find a way to bridge the moral sidewalk crack that separates them.

I wish I could say that my family was an outlier on matters of political division, but our internal split unfortunately reflects national divisions. Stories on families torn by politics have become a feature of news reports in our strange age. Reuters/Ipsos polling finds that 16 percent of respondents "said they have stopped talking to a family member or friend because of the election." The poll went on to report that "13 percent of respondents said they had ended a relationship with a family member or close friend over the election."

So my family drama is apparently being replayed in living rooms across the country as husbands, wives, parents, and children battle over their contrasting preferences between the intolerant blowhard and the authoritarian robot. Is populist nationalism better or worse than elitist corporatism? Cage match!

Actually, "cage match" isn't too far from the truth. On March 4, anti-Trump protesters demonstrated their dedication to democracy by violently attacking supporters of the bloviator-in-chief at a rally at the Minnesota State Capitol. Way to emphasize your message, folks. Trump fans and opponents likewise clashed in Berkeley, California where police confiscated metal pipes, baseball bats, two-by-fours and bricks from the participants in vigorous political discourse.

You folks do know that there are lots of elections to come, right? And they just might feature differing ideas that will compete for public support?

This simmering tension is remarkable considering how little passionate support either of the two major party candidates stirred among Americans before the election. Last May, FiveThirtyEight noted that "Clinton and Trump are both more strongly disliked than any nominee at this point in the past 10 presidential cycles." Months later, the Republican and Democratic parties locked in the effort in collective fail at their nominating conventions, leading to headlines like USA Today's "Poll: Clinton, Trump most unfavorable candidates ever." Voters were truly torn over whether they were more disturbed by Trump's overweening self-regard, matched only by his dislike of everybody else, or Clinton's deep-seated belief that she should get to make lots and lots of rules that should only apply to little people. Which one was more thoroughly marinated in corruption also was up in the air.

Some of us, to dredge up old arguments, thought that Americans should consider voting for a candidate from outside the major parties who was less overtly repulsive than the donkey and elephant offerings, less ethically crippled, and quite clearly not bone-deep evil. And for a while it looked like Americans were considering the possibility of supporting an awkward but competent former two-term governor. You remember him, right? He was the lousy public speaker who supported civil liberties and economic freedom, and didn't leave a whiff of brimstone in his wake.

But in the end, most of our compatriots remembered their Social Studies lesson that real democracies feature predetermined political choices that never die, but exist in an undead state forever, feeding on their hosts and recoiling from sun—Well, I'm probably confusing my old textbook with Dracula, but the end result was the same.

Sure, some voters opted for Gary Johnson, or the Green Party's Jill Stein, or Evan McMullin. But most voters dutifully trooped to the polls, swallowed hard, and made a choice between two candidates almost the entire country loudly proclaimed unpalatable. And Donald Trump won in a squeaker over Hillary Clinton.

And now Americans are battling each other over which crappy, distasteful candidate should have won.

But remember, just months ago, Americans agreed that they were both crappy and distasteful. That really doesn't give the people who chose either major party candidate the moral authority to bash backers of the other. Meanwhile, those of us who voted for other candidates who we actually found to be decent human beings have made our peace with the election outcome. We may not be happy with the results of the final tally, but we're not going to shun those who were so foolish as to vote for Trump or Clinton—even though our political choices were vastly better than the ones they made.

Because life goes on. And we long ago learned that we have to live alongside people with whom we disagree, to do business with them, eat meals with them, and even sleep next to them.

So if Gary Johnson voters can find a way to cross the huge moral gap separating us from the likes of Trump and Clinton supporters, surely they can bridge the relatively small divide between their tribes. And maybe they can even keep their families intact despite disagreements.

NEXT: CBO's Report on the GOP Obamacare Repeal Bill Offers More Proof That Neither Party Offers Health Care Choices People Want

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. I’m thinking that maybe I should quit tolerating anyone who votes for a Ruling Party Narcissist. They’re such fucking infants when they lose.

    -jcr

  2. I can’t believe you picked Giant Douche over Turd Sandwich. I’m never speaking to you again!

  3. This simmering tension is remarkable considering how little passionate support either of the two major party candidates stirred among Americans before the election. Last May, FiveThirtyEight noted that “Clinton and Trump are both more strongly disliked than any nominee at this point in the past 10 presidential cycles.”

    Well that was retarded. The fact that the guys who support the other guy hate your guy means you can’t passionately support your guy?

    Complete cognitive dissonance.

    Anyone who can’t see that Trump has a mass of passionate supporters is in the grips of serious delusion.

    I don’t think even Reagan had such passionate support. He had broader support, but not as passionate. And certainly no Republican since compares at all to either for passionate support.

    1. I don’t think it was so much “I support X, and hate Y, so I’m voting for X” as “I really hate X and Y, but since Y is (slightly/significantly/infinitely) worse than X, I’m holding my nose and voting for X.” Yes, the most enthusiastic Trump supporters were almost certainly both more enthusiastic and more numerous than the most enthusiastic Clinton supporters–even just going by lawn sign counts in my area–but I doubt that those people made up more than a few percent of the voting population. And even at the rallies where the most passionate of the passionate showed up, what was the Trump voter’s rallying cry? “Lock HER up!”

      In America, at least, passion doesn’t win support. Voters begrudgingly pulling the lever out of party loyalty or the fear of the greater of two evils does.

      1. That should read “passion doesn’t win elections.” I vote for an edit button.

        1. Yes!

      2. You hit on something important when you note the “Lock Her Up” chant. Trump’s most passionate supporters aren’t in politics to advocate for certain policies to be adopted; they want every event since 1945 repealed. They hate women like me — educated professional who lives in a city — for simply existing. The insults they hurled at Clinton weren’t about statist policies or reforming the government. They called her ugly and used the grossest sexual slurs I’ve heard since high school. One of my “friends” on Facebook made his profile picture that meme about “Monica Sucks But Not LIke Hillary.” I take that shit personally because it bloody well IS personal. I can discuss policy and disagree on the amount of regulation that’s appropriate or the size of the federal budget. I’m not going to accept the assertion that I’m disgusting because I’m female and all women are gross.

        1. I take that shit personally because it bloody well IS personal

          Wait, so are you Monica or Hillary?

        2. There’s nothing sadder than a grown woman who uses Hillary as a proxy for her own insecurities.

          1. I think Karen is onto something. This 2016 election wasn’t mainly about policies, it was about culture. Trump may not “want every event since 1945 repealed”, but Steve Bannon does, or at least those since 1965. That people are using openly misogynistic “memes” to identify themselves IS disturbing. Being anti-woman isn’t the core of it, but it is certainly a part. The core may be closer to something Matt Welch mentioned today, and Robby Soave yesterday, in articles about Congressman Steve King.

            “You can go to live in France, but you can’t become a Frenchman,” the Gipper said in a 1990 speech, paraphrasing a correspondent. “But ? anyone, from any corner of the world, can come to live in the United States and become an American.”

            King’s not having any of that.

            Neither is Bannon, or Trump. And that goes to fundamental questions of what this nation is all about. So yeah, it is not surprising that stronger emotions were elicited by the recent election than by most. As for breaking up communication within families, if you learn that other people in your family hold values that are totally incompatible with yours, I think that could cause some problems, yeah.

            1. I’ll give you that Bannon’s not having any of that, but I don’t think the facts on the ground support your case that Trump agrees.

              His two immigrant wives and the fact that he appointed Taiwan-born naturalized US citizen Elaine Chao as Secretary of Transportation are strong arguments that he doesn’t think you can’t come to live in the US and become an American.

              1. Maybe, maybe not, it’s difficult to say what someone actually thinks. Especially someone like Trump. But whether he actually believes the alt-right crap he rode to the nomination or just exploited it, at some point it doesn’t matter: the clear message from the WH, in tone and action, is of isolationism, distrust of foreigners, and (at best) indifference to minority populations. Low and behold, the people who this general animus is directed at are picking up on it and are rationally concerned.

                1. ^
                  Hag losers are simply irrational; good example here.

                  1. Thank you Sevo, I look forward to all of your insights.

                    1. You’re welcome, and you could use any you can find anywhere.
                      BTW, you lost. Get over it.

        3. Get some sleep Karen.

          1. You only suggest that because she’s a woman.

        4. I’m not going to accept the assertion that I’m disgusting because I’m female and all women are gross.

          I know some Republican women who felt that way when Dems asserted the same via Palin. And the gross sexual slurs were even better.

        5. They hate women like me — educated professional who lives in a city — for simply existing.

          Is Karen24 a parody account?

          1. Gotta be a staffer…

        6. I take that shit personally because it bloody well IS personal.

          What’s a collectivist like you doing on a libertarian site then?

          They hate women like me — educated professional who lives in a city — for simply existing.

          I really, really doubt they hate women for existing. If you mean for being an educated urbanite, it could have more to do with the elite class’s former death grip over the federal government which has resulted in an unprecedented creepy and insulting level of micromanagement over every citizen’s life, bathed in smug condescension that educated urbanites know what’s best for you because they’ve got the facts and sciencey-sounding studies on their side.

          I’m not going to accept the assertion that I’m disgusting because I’m female and all women are gross.

          Pretty much nobody thinks this way. You must have picked it up from one of your dishonest progressive media outlets.

          1. You guys think you know what’s best for everyone because you have a couple bullshit pamphlets and a lame sci-fi novel.

            Conservatives think they know what’s best for everyone because they hear voices in their head.

            Everyone is a collectivist.

            1. You know who else had a couple bullshit pamphlets and a lame sci-fi novel?

            2. The whole point of libertarianism is that nobody knows what’s best for everyone, Tony, you uneducable fuck.

              1. Nobody knows best, except libertarians of course, who want to tell everyone they can’t have most of modern civilization and that it will be good for them and they’re evil for even asking for it.

                1. Oh hey, i can make up blatantly wrong shit, too: Tony is a good person and a credit to the human race, which he loves.

                  1. So not only do you deny what you obviously do on a daily basis, which is tell everyone what they’re supposed to believe and what they’re legitimately allowed to do via government (a pretty draconian list), you want to affix a halo to your head as well and ask that I kindly acknowledge your saintly lack of meddling in other’s lives.

                    1. Keep making shit up, Tony. It’s almost entertaining. I don’t give a fuck if you acknowledge me, though.

                    2. You people always start babbling defensively when I make a good point.

                    3. When was that?

                    4. Tony, you are wrong. Libertarians don’t believe we can force our ideology on others… that’s kind of the point of our ideology. What we do say is that just because you have a majority or plurality of support for your whizbang govt contraption, doesn’t mean you can oppress or trample on the rights of the rest of us. IE we tell you what you’re NOT allowed to do via government.

                    5. I’m not sure why I should be okay with you supporting the state putting a gun to my head to support your policy choices. Nor why me being opposed to you doing so, is somehow “forcing my ideology on you” or “telling you how to live”, you’re the one telling me how to live and how to spend my money!

                      You want to be a Progressive, That’s fine, I don’t give a shit. But at least be honest about it! Not this bullshit about libertarians telling you what to do. Libertarians demanding that government get out of their wallets is telling you how to live your life. Give me a break!

            3. Liberals think they know what’s best for everyone because their feelz are really strong.

            4. “You guys think you know what’s best for everyone because you have a couple bullshit pamphlets and a lame sci-fi novel.”

              I believe you got mixed up. You’re thinking Scientologists. If you’re arguing with Scientologists’ beliefs, your comments might make more sense.

        7. they want every event since 1945 repealed. They hate women like me — educated professional who lives in a city — for simply existing.

          that’s just bullshit. This is mostly you projecting. When every other Trump supporter, or non-Hillary supporter for that matter, is called a misogynist or racist or supremacist or what-not, is your outrage meter pinging then, too, or does your head bob in agreement?

        8. they want every event since 1945 repealed.

          More like 1933…

          No 1913

          No make that 1860…No

          I got it, Roll back everything to before 1789.

        9. They hate women like me — educated professional who lives in a city — for simply existing.

          And they showed this hate by voting for a man who hired an educated, professional woman to run his campaign? The first woman to run a successful presidential campaign? I don’t think so.

          I take that shit personally because it bloody well IS personal.

          It is personal, but not against you. All politicians get personally insulted, and taking a personal insult against Clinton as a personal insult against yourself, simply because you are both women, is as stupid as a man being personally offended by an insult against Trump, a rich person being personally offended by an insult against Romney, an old person being personally offended by an insult against McCain, or a woman being personally offended by an insult against Palin.

        10. They hate women like me — educated professional who lives in a city — for simply existing. … I’m not going to accept the assertion that I’m disgusting because I’m female and all women are gross.

          Seriously? You needn’t go through life with the unhappiness that such delusions cause. Please get help. Your ObamaCare policy covers the psychiatric services that you require.

        11. They hate women like me — educated professional who lives in a city — for simply existing… The insults they hurled at Clinton weren’t about statist policies or reforming the government… I take that shit personally because it bloody well IS personal… I’m not going to accept the assertion that I’m disgusting because I’m female and all women are gross.

          The fact that you actually believe this is be true says way more about your own mental health than the nature of your opponents. It’s rather obvious that you’re taking your own bias and projecting it as a product of paranoia. I recommend therapy.

          1. Maybe you’re not disgusting and gross. Pics or GTFO.

    2. I didn’t vote for Trump. But HELL NO I didn’t vote for Hitlery either!

      As someone who wasn’t interested in either candidate, but definitely did NOT want to see Hitlery elected, that anyone was stupid enough to vote for Hitlery would still surprise me had I not long ago concluded that the depths of stupidity for the average American voter have yet to be plumbed. I don’t know how many people voted for Trump. I tend to think most were voting against Hitlery.

      So yes, I can tolerate Trump supporters – whether they actually support Trump – or merely hate Hitlery. And to be fair, Trump has already been a far better president than Obozo… and with a little guidance, might not be a bad president after all.

      I just have a hard time picturing any sane person who didn’t have a directed vested self-interest (like someone trying to buy political influence, or a capo in the Clinton Foundation, or a Demoncrap political operative) voting for Hitlery.

      So you had two major categories of voters: Those who couldn’t wait for Hitlery to win so there would be more socialist handouts and those who were so disgusted with the current state of the system after 16 years of Bush-Obozo that rather than tolerate 4 more years of insanity they would prefer to burn the whole thing down.

      Yeah. That’s kind of where I was coming from.

  4. I do hope for more tolerance but when i read this…[Trump fans and opponents likewise clashed in Berkeley, California where police confiscated metal pipes, baseball bats, two-by-fours and bricks from the participants] All thats missing was some fold up chairs and somebody yelling ARE YOU READY TO RUMBLE

  5. Visit http://overnightessay.co.uk where collected top writing tips and the most helpful writing tricks.

  6. Jill stein and evan mcmullin were pretty awful as well.

    1. Jill was like a rabid attack dog toward Hillary.
      Which makes sense, because she’s not going to siphon votes from disaffected conservatives.
      No, actually, it must be internalized misogyny.

    2. And Gary Johnson was awful too! I think any dispassionate assessment of the previous election can reasonably conclude that everyone on offer was terrible, just some less so depending on your point of view or biases. I can’t imagine anyone being proud of voting for any of the rascals that were on ballot (and I did vote for one of the rascals, I’m not advocating non-voting, just clear-eyed voting).

      1. Gary Johnson was an awful candidate. Unlike Trump and Clinton, Johnson is not an awful human being. He’s also a bit more libertarian than his authoritarian opponents.

    3. Evan is a cuckolded useless statist shit. The only benefit he can serve the planet is as fertilizer.

  7. I partly agree with your sentiments J.D. about elections happen all the time, so why get upset when one does not go your way.

    On the other hand, it is not about a simple choice of Team A or Team B. On most occasions, Team A and Team B are actually working together to openly violate the constitution and they should know better because politicians tend to be lawyers. Where do you draw the line between brushing off a political loss and throwing down the gauntlet? The Founding Fathers openly rebelled at taxes they felt were excessive and out of control, warrants and seizures for trumped (no pun intended) up reasons and natural rights being violated by government (in that case, the King).

    Trump has not been bad and far better than Clinton would be. I think military actions in the ME is a huge mistake but I think Trump’s plan is to do what he can and then pull troops out of most foreign locales. I think he is fine with being a 1 term president and does not want American troops perpetually in Iraq, Afghanistan or other shitholes.

    1. “I think Trump’s plan is to do what he can and then pull troops out of most foreign locales.”

      Been watching a lot of Netflix lately? Me too. But I’ve been trying to catch up on some of the news. Trump is jumping in. Bigly.

      1. I know and I cringed when he sent in Marines to Syria.

        I think Trump thinks he can beat an ideological religious militant group with conventional ground forces and “win”. The generals are almost certainly pushing that position too. Big mistake.

        I think Trump’s plan is to get a quick military victory that can work to claim “missions accomplished” and then get the troops out before he loses the “win”. Its a bad strategy and won’t work. You cannot “win” against these nuts unless you have the moral high ground and have a continuous war for 16 years is not having the moral high ground. Plus, I don’t think Trump wants to be a war president like Obama was.

    2. Politicians knowing better because they are lawyers is exactly right. They know know better than anyone else just how to go about coming up with vaguely plausible sounding reasons that it doesn’t really mean what the words say or that a later event turns words into their opposites or …

  8. Considering before the primaries even got started Democrats where talking about how poorly Republicans were doing, and that it did not matter who Republicans nominated they were going to loose, I think the Election was a giant slap in the face wake up call to many Democrats that they where in pretty bad shape. And then to loose to possibly the worst possible candidate the Republicans could have put forth was salt in the wounds.

    Combine that with many Trump supporters feeling that they had been silenced by Democrats, and now suddenly they feel like they can say and do anything. you have a toxic mix of emotions, and suddenly a lot of peoples world views have been flipped upside down.

    1. “Combine that with many Trump supporters feeling that they had been silenced by Democrats […]”
      I’ve never understood that sentiment. Even if you restrict yourself to mainstream news (and these days, why would you?), Fox News has been there trumpeting Conservative/Republican issues and casues for something like two decades now. For someone to be “silenced”, it would have to be way more then Democrats responsible.

      1. You’re basically making those people’s point. There is Fox, some of Fox. And talk radio. And some blogs. Otherwise, there is a lot of silence. Just look at this whole US Attorney business – every administration does it but with Trump, the incumbents are fired while with Obama or Clinton, or either Bush and Reagan for that matter, they were replaced. Pissed off lefties riot and it goes ignored. A Trump golf course vandalized and it, too, is ignored. Imagine an Obama property similarly affected.

        1. And you don’t hear conservatives being lauded as “brave” for being a total dick to Progressive as basically every Leftist who is a shit to a conservative is.

    2. It was pretty obvious going in that the Democrats were going to lose. It’s what this country does, flip between Democrat and Republican every eight years. Four years if the president does something stupid like raising taxes after pledging not to. It’s like clockwork. Despite the media fawning over the president like he was their personal chocolate messiah, people didn’t like him and didn’t like his party.

      A Republican win was inevitable. Then the Republicans picked Trump! OMG! Trump couldn’t win a race for dog catcher in a town full of orange cats! The only hope Trump had was if the Democrats ran… Clinton. And they did. The only Republican Hillary could possibly beat was Trump, and the only Democrat Donald could possibly beat was Clinton.

      So with two equally pathetic candidates, and a Federal Statue prohibiting anyone from voting third party upon pain of Facebook ridicule, the election went by default to the Republicans. Because it was their turn. End of story.

      1. The country always flips, but the duration of the interval is always up in the air. Lately the interval has been 8 years (Clinton, Bush 2, Obama), but it can be as short as 4 (Carter) or as long as 12 (Reagan-Bush 1). Pre WW-2 the duration could be even longer, such as the 16 year reigns of the Democrats (FDR-Truman) and the Republicans (Grant-Hayes-Arthur-Garfield and then again with McKinley-Roosevelt-Taft).

        1. Yes. Many things continue until thy end.

  9. Progs, like many of their hard line Conservative opponents, cannot possibly entertain the idea that they’re incorrect. As a result, they inevitably enforce their dogma with a fervor on par with the inquisition.

    1. It actually reinforces their worldview when they read the rationalizations for why they lost being blamed on things like America is really a lot more racist than you thought, arch-conservative Putin pulling the strings, etc. That’s why they’ve been doubling down. They refuse to acknowledge their opponents’ grievances, and continue to make shit up that’s comfortable to them.

      I don’t think it’s a winning strategy in the long run. We have the Internet, and the truth is pretty easy to find if you care to look for it.

      1. They refuse to acknowledge their opponents’ grievances

        the more I see, the more it’s obvious they refuse to acknowledge the legitimacy of their opponents’ viewpoint. On anything. These people are in a cloistered bubble so that any differing idea sounds like heresy. And yes, I get that many on the right take a dim view of leftist ideas, but there is a gap between believing your opposite is wrong and in believing the argument itself has no grounds.

        1. Pretty much. Trump is busy promoting a health plan that is essentially identical to ObamaCare, you would think they would be crowing over their victory in cementing Corporatist Healthcare permanently, but no, they’re whinging because the Republicans are filing the name “Obama” off the act.

        2. there is a gap between believing your opposite is wrong and in believing the argument itself has no grounds.

          Or in believing that the people on the opposite side aren’t simply wrong, misguided, misinformed, etc. but believing that they’re literally (and not in the idiotic millennial overuse of the word) evil fascist Nazi scum that all deserve to be punched in the face.

    2. Yeah, I don’t care who voted for who. But I sure got berated by both flavors of partisan for my LP vote. Don’t even live in a swing state.

  10. I don’t remember who it was I was reading who brought this up, but these kinds of vehement arguments will become more and more par for the course as government increases its power.

    Now, instead of determining a few small things, now someone’s entire career and store of wealth can be completely stolen by the government on a whim. Your livelihood may very well depend on who wins the national popularity contest. As government grows, that will apply to more and more people. As more and more of everything is dependent upon governmental blessing, people will squabble more and more about who gets to control it.

    It’s almost like governmental control is the opposite of liberty. It’s almost like we’ve all forgotten the lesson learned during the Enlightenment, of how great liberty is…

    1. Most people don’t care because they aren’t aware of the tangible value liberty brings. Progressive-captured public schools and mass media seem to be major contributors hard at work instilling alternative facts about things like economics.

      1. Most people don’t care because they aren’t aware of the tangible value liberty brings.

        Not in the abstract, no, but suggesting that you take their stuff away, and anyone will get mad. Hence the bigger the government, the bigger the deal it is when “your side” loses.

  11. That’s retarded. Imagine being so fricken politicized to the point of cutting off a family member. I know in my family that would not be tolerated. FAMILY FIRST you fucken idiots. It makes no sense to divide a family over politics and politicians who don’t really care about you.

    And it damn well says a helluva lot more about those kids – driven by faux righteous bull shit – than it does the father. What a shame.

    I experienced sort of this lunacy gripping America when a friend – from New England – went complete unhinged over Trump’s election. I mean really stupid ‘what am I gonna tell my girls’ and ‘you tolerate rapists’ and all that other sophomoric blathering the left have been displaying. They lost and are acting like a bunch of complete morons about it. I told him to basically ‘man up and stop being a fucken pussy’. I haven’t heard from him since. He’s always getting into arguments with his family over this crap. I don’t know what it is about informed, smart, decent people like him losing their shit so easily.

    Honestly, if that’s how they want to be, let them.

    1. What’s worse is they’re alienating their father over a crooked cunt. Who in their right mind would pick Hilary Clinton to hang your principles on? Think how unbelievably stupid you have to be. I wouldn’t let Hillary serve my kid ice-cream let alone lose a family member over.

      Che cazzo?

      1. And one last thing. This is pretty much the standard, in general as far as I can tell, libertarian stance. That is, they’ve taken it with a far more mature and rational (outside a couple of Reason articles we like to mock) posture. Of course, progressives take this for meaning libertarians *support*Trump but it’s not that. He can be opposed or supported without being unbelievably unhinged about it. Libertarians recognize this.

        1. Unhinged you mean like you guys for the last 8 years? Over a calm, Harvard-educated former senator?

          Sorry if some of us aren’t taking the fat, incompetent hand-raping treasoner in stride like you guys did Obama.

          1. tell me about those righties holding cry-ins, vandalizing property, taking non-political events hostage to broadcast their hostility, etc etc.

            False equivalence is false. But it’s you, so no shock there. “Treasoner.” I guess the previous talking stupid points didn’t work, so you’re going to stupid harder.

            1. K, after you tell me about all the Jewish cemeteries that Obama supporters vandalized.

              1. and how do you know it was Trump supporters? Oh, that’s right; you don’t. You just want to believe that the same people you lectured about not harassing Muslims – people who almost exclusively did not harass Muslims – suddenly decided to attack Jews. This election has managed to make you even more full of shit.

                1. As long as Steve Bannon is a top adviser to the president you don’t have a leg to stand on. Trump literally said he wanted to ban all Muslims from entering the US. He thinks immigration is best handled by a “great wall” on the southern (but not northern) border. Racist assaults and neo-nazi activity has spiked. If this isn’t a nativist racist administration to you then you’re lacking a couple basic senses.

                  1. No, Trump didn’t say that but you being dishonest is nothing new. We heard all about the great racist pogrom months ago, too, and 98% of the stories were hoaxes. The only violence is coming from the left. Isn’t it time for you to go break a few windows or trash someone’s property?

                    1. “Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on.”

                      It’s still on his fucking website. Try making excuses for stuff that I can’t google immediately.

              2. That was the ERF.

                1. Don’t bother Tony with facts. He’s only interested in fake news.

              3. About as many were vandalized by Trump supporters.

                Namely, none.

          2. Right Tony. The people here were ‘unhinged’ about Obama.

            You’re a disingenuous tool as usual.

            1. Unhinged is absolutely correct. How many bricks of .22lr do you have sitting in your basement next to your bugout bag and canned/dry goods?

              I made the mistake of buying a 22 Marlin for my son a couple of months prior to SandyHook. Didn’t realize that it shot the new default currency of the hysterical right.

      2. What’s worse is they’re alienating their father over a crooked cunt.

        it actually goes deeper than that, to a more personal level. Like yours, my evidence is anecdotal. It’s not that Hillary lost, per se, it’s how her acolytes paint anyone who did not vote for her as morally reprehensible. It’s not just this man’s vote that is under attack, it is his entire character. Imagine your children, in essence, saying you are the usual litany of horribles that Camp Hillary believes about anyone not in league with her.

        Frankly, my approach would be different; if my kids want to be such giant douches, I’m not going hat in hand anywhere and, moreover, I would be wholly embarrassed at having reared such retards.

        1. Pretty much.

          The person I mentioned? He attacks me personally.

          All the currency gone into building a relationship (I thought) that was out of mutual respect was ripped to shreds because of….Trump.

          Irrational to the point I can’t comprehend.

        2. And you, or the rest of the Republicans who flocked here post ’08, didn’t constantly refer to those who voted for Obama as duped sheep. Didn’t constantly refer to him as Hussein, or question his legitimacy, or refer to him as a Manchurian candidate for Islam?

          Many on the left are acting like hysterical idiots right now. Just like those on the right did when Obama was elected. You’re just a team loving Republican and the bleating by the other team bothers you more than the bleating by your own team.

    2. They watch the Daily Show/Colber/John Oliver and end up with a partisan distorted worldview, but with the strong illusion that they’re highly informed. I should know, I was the same in college. It wasn’t until after college that I took an interest in economics, and by the time I had a basic understanding, the Daily Show was too painfully insulting to my intelligence to watch anymore.

      It’s an alternative fact-based worldview. But people buy it because it’s so frequently reinforced by the media and public schools and universities that they aren’t really exposed to good arguments against it. And going against the grain tends to be social suicide in these environments.

      1. How any literate individual with life experience would consider those shows to be ‘smart’ is perplexing.

        I can’t watch a second of it without feeling dumber for having done so.

        It’s smug progressivism celebrating ignorance is all it is.

    3. Evidently, young progressives value their enlightened vision of the state more highly than their own family.

      More significantly, they actually believe in their heart of hearts that Drumph=Hitler. They believe it even more than they believe their own life experiences with their parents.

  12. And two, if a Gary Johnson voter such as myself can overcome the vast divide between my preferred non-evil candidate and the stock villains put forward by the Republicans and Democrats, surely Clinton and Trump supporters can find a way to bridge the moral sidewalk crack that separates them.

    But if you’re a libertarian, you understand that government is at best a necessary evil and a healthy distrust of government power and those who seek it is a good thing. Those Clinton and Trump supporters don’t have that same distrust, they think of government as a benevolent unicorn soaring high overhead and crapping magical golden nickels over the populace. When Johnson lost, we shrugged it off as “oh, well, that had little enough to do with me and my life any way” whereas Hillary’s loss – as Trump’s would have been to his supporters – was like a dagger in the heart of everything they are and stand for and believe in.

    Like a child finding out Santa Claus doesn’t exist, the foundation has been cracked and it’s going to take some time to rethink the construction and rebuild an edifice of belief. Now might be a good time to tell them the truth about the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy and where babies come from. Maybe they’ll come to the light and understand everything they’ve been taught about government has been a pack of lies but self-reliance, voluntary cooperation and living with the truth is far more fulfilling.

  13. Pretty self-congratulatory for a supporter of the guy whose big election moments came when he couldn’t handle basic facts about geography and world leaders.

    1. 57 states, speaks Austrian and corps-men, right Tony?

      1. So you’re saying his blunders are indicative of his overall intelligence? Or does that only count for Obama?

        1. Only Obama. Duh.

        2. no, we’re saying you’re a bit selective about which blunders you choose to notice. Shouldn’t an alleged Harvard guy know that corpsman is not pronounced corpse-man?

          1. Look, if it weren’t for intellectual dishonesty, there’d be nothing intellectual about Tony at all.

        3. no, we’re saying you’re a bit selective about which blunders you choose to notice. Shouldn’t an alleged Harvard guy know that corpsman is not pronounced corpse-man?

          1. W. was a Yale guy and couldn’t get his tenses right by accident.

            Perhaps these things are what Obama is best known for in the cousin-fucking alt-moron corners of the Internet, but the point is that not being able to name a single foreign leader or what the city of Aleppo is was GJ’s biggest claim to fame during the election. So I’m surprised anyone’s not embarrassed to claim support for him let alone be smug about it.

            1. Smugness should obviously be reserved for the guy who’s support of the Arab Spring has created the mess that is much of the Middle East. But that’s okay; keep reminding everyone why the Dems spent the Obama years losing hundreds of elections nationwide, and why that’s not likely to change no matter how stupid Pubs gets.

              1. So you completely changed the subject in order to signal some chest-pounding support for the stupid party (now with extra stupid on top)?

            2. not being able to name a single foreign leader that he respects

              Lying through omission doesn’t help your case, Tony.

              1. “I guess I’m having an Aleppo moment.” I wonder what that was supposed to refer to.

            3. And yet he apparently had higher grades.

              And yes, I don’t consider Obama the genius you progressives think he is.

              And I’m pointing out your double standard.

            4. Johnson was a bad candidate but a decent human being.

              Clinton was a horrible candidate; so bad that she lost to Trump. She is also a reprehensible human being.

        4. You just did about Trump. If you’re predisposed to believe Obama is *smarter* than Trump or Bush then yeah, you’re gonna pull what you just did.

          But here’s the thing. He’s no genius; at least not to the extent your progressives believe.

          He’s rather mediocre, shallow and really…unimaginative. Just your run of the mill stagnant progressive sprouting vapid prog terms and dated concepts.

          He’s…meh.

          1. And as a fellow president of the Harvard Law Review you are of course in a position to make that judgment.

            1. One doesn’t need to be an emperor to recognize that the emperor has no clothes.

            2. Winning an election isn’t synonymous with being a genius, in case you were wondering.

          2. Obama was an extraordinarily gifted community organizer and cult leader. These talents served him well during his presidency. They didn’t do much for the election results of his fellow Democrats, however.

            Trump is extraordinarily gifted as a self-promoter. Unfortunately, self-promotion only goes so far in setting up a presidential administration.

  14. “And two, if a Gary Johnson voter such as myself can overcome the vast divide between my preferred non-evil candidate and the stock villains put forward by the Republicans and Democrats, surely Clinton and Trump supporters can find a way to bridge the moral sidewalk crack that separates them.”
    Didn’t even finish the article. Got to this point and had to laugh.

    I mean seriously, there’s a lot of folks round here who can’t tolerate other Gary Johnson voters. So yeah, unless the article took a sharp turn after that line? Yeah, the premise is funny.

    1. GARY JOHNSON NOT TRUE LIBERTARIAN! WE COULDA WON IF WE RAN MACAFEE!!! AAARGH!!!! N.A.P.!!!! N.A.P.!!! NO WEDDING CAKES!!! WE COULDA HAD PETERSON!!!!!11!!

      1. Actually, I’d have voted for McAfee. Who doesn’t love that kind of crazy?

  15. This is how Glibertarians was spawned.

  16. This reminds me of my sister in law who suffers from TDS and screams at the TV whenever Trump is on it, calling him stupid and a liar. I don’t say anything to her, I just think to myself: “Now you know how I’ve felt EVERY FUCKING ELECTION FOR THE LAST 40 YEARS.”

    1. I don’t say anything to her, I just think to myself: “Now you know how I’ve felt EVERY FUCKING ELECTION FOR THE LAST 40 YEARS.”

      That’s probably the biggest reason why libertarians, in general, have an easier time getting over election losses and moving on with our lives. We’re so used to losing, we probably wouldn’t know what to do with our selves if a Libertarian ever actually won anything.

  17. Nah, I can only tolerate some Clinton supporters, and three Drumpf supporters

  18. This is not new. I remember my first encounter with BDS back in the day. The old BDS. Back when it meant “Bush Derangement Syndrome”.

    I was at a party and there was a television set in the corner of the room. With the sound off. Bush came on the television and one of the attendees freaks. Went apeshit. Because Bush was wearing… a cowboy hat. “DOES HE THINK HE’S A FUCKING COWBOY?!?!?! OMG! KILL HIM! KILL HIM! FUCK HIM AND HIS MOMMA! KILL EVERYONE WHO VOTED FOR HIM! KILL THEM ALL!”

    Seriously, the guy was quivering in rage. Out. Of. Control. Frankly I was shocked. I have never seen an adult behave in such a fashion before. Toddlers yes. But an adult? I was afraid he would shit his pants on the spot. Or die from exploding blood vessels.

    So again, this is not new. Disgusting. But not new.

  19. Nice article. 2-Chili knocks another one out of the park.

  20. Those “Crappy, distasteful candidates” are figureheads to iconic macrocosms barren of conceptual skills and logic. Led about through the machinations of media personalities, corporate scribes, and tribe dynamics the Trump/Clinton collectives could not exist without each other.

    Clinton increased in sereneness and bumbling ineptitude under the Trump flambeau of simplistic innuendo and caustic realism. This same puddling creation has overflowed onto the committed rabble and disciples sparring viciously yet today.

    The mighty crowds of left and right now grip cold calculating fingers around infinitely-powerful levers due to the shameless expansion of all levels of federal authority over the lives of individuals.

    What the fuck makes anyone think the seething battlers are ready to relinquish ground of any kind under the burgeoning state of governing empire that exists in modern America?

  21. The entire premise of this article is complete bullshit. As a fellow third-party candidate voter, I must inform you what you already know: we are on the margins. We do not count. We cannot be used as a bar for anything, let alone what is the acceptable behavior for those in the two subgroups of real voters.

    Our fantasy time is over. We’re not the children we were five months ago. It’s time to cast off childish allegiances and pick a side. Personally, I am tossing my wholehearted support behind – um, oh, I don’t know… fuck it – Trump. I suggest you do similar. Trump or Hillary, it doesn’t matter just pick one. (Although at this point choosing Hillary is kind of silly.)

  22. Republicans managed to avoid riots, INCESSANTLY, when Obama won the WH. Nobody called Joe the Plumber “Brave” when the state of OH decided to fuck him over when Obama made an idiotic comment to him. Nobody was trying to find more and more ludicrous ways to justify impeaching Obama in his FIRST MONTH IN OFFICE.

    Given their behavior, would you trust these clowns to have power?

  23. Love the point made here. Made it myself in my forecast piece early last month. Who died recently and was extolled in reason blog pieces?

  24. The Republican Party did not pick Trump, they tried to get rid of him but
    the primary voters picked him. The Democrats actually picked Clinton, can you believe it ?
    Clintonistas had to lie and cheat ( surprise) to shrug off Bernie.What a pathetic party.

  25. To respect democracy entails accepting a real defeat, but not a stolen election. Greg Palast has reported on how Republicans in certain states systematically arranged to take over a million Americans off the voter lists, mostly members of minorities that usual vote Democrat. Without this enormous act of disenfranchisement, Trump would not have carried the electoral college.

    For the details, see
    http://us4.campaign-archive1.c…..283eff9b8.

    By the way, I’m not a supporter of Clinton and did not vote for her.

    1. “By the way, I’m not a supporter of Clinton and did not vote for her.”

      Fine, but the tin-foil hat act is tiresome.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.