Election 2020

Larry Hogan Out, John Kasich Half-Out, Bill Weld Talking Abortion with Bill Maher

The #NeverTrump primary challenge to the president is nearly DOA.

|

"I'm not going to be a candidate for president in 2020," Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan tells The Washington Post in an interview published Saturday afternoon.

Thus ends what was for months the Great #NeverTrump Primary Hope, in the form of a medium-sized blue state's locally popular, nationally unknown purple governor. Jeb Bush had vouched for him; Jerry Taylor, president of the ex-libertarian Niskanen Center, had dedicated "every fiber" of his "being" toward convincing Hogan to run. But in the end the math was just too cruel: The incumbent president has a 90 percent job-approval rating among Republicans, and even in Maryland polling showed Hogan trailing in a head-to-head matchup, 68 percent to 24 percent.

"There was less of a demand out there in a Republican primary for the kind of thing we're talking about right now," Hogan says to the Post. "The president has a pretty solid lock on Republican primary voters."

The news came one day after the anti-Trump Republicans' other non–Bill Weld presidential wannabe, Ohio governor turned CNN commentator John Kasich, told his employer that there's "no path right now for me. I don't see a way to get there. Ninety percent of the Republican Party supports him….There is not a path. There's not the support for that. So maybe somebody wants to run and make a statement, and that's fine. But I've never gotten involved in a political race where I didn't think I could win. And right now, there's no path." (True to form, Kasich later tweet-clarified "all of my options are on the table," thus maintaining at least some thin reed for John Weaver to fundraise from.)

As ever, but even more so, that leaves Bill Weld all alone in the bug-on-Trump's-windshield field. Would-be #NeverTrump backers like Bill Kristol are running out of warm bodies.

So what's Weld been doing to woo Republicans? Writing a USA Today column in favor of abortion rights and going on HBO's Real Time with Bill Maher to talk up "gender equality" and assert that if Trump loses he probably would not leave office "voluntarily." You can watch the latter performance, from Friday night—which includes Weld's comments on why he isn't running for the Libertarian nomination—below:

In nine national head-to-head polls since mid-February, Weld is trailing Trump (and consistently so) by an average of  70 percentage points. In three polls of New Hampshire, where Weld is pinning his hopes, he trails by an average of 64.

When I asked the former Massachusetts governor five weeks ago whether he's running as "kind of an insurance policy" in case something goes wrong with the president, here is how he answered:

No. Not really. I mean, as you know, I'm spending a lot of time in New Hampshire, that's my kind of territory. You've got to win the voters over in New Hampshire one at a time. They don't really think they've met you, until they've shaken your hand three times. I don't think that the president parachuting in that the eleventh hour to do two rallies, never meet people in their houses or on the street is going to work in that particular state. That's an influential state….

Ten months is a long time in national politics. I've seen what can happen in the New Hampshire primary. Things can change very quickly at the end. I think the president ignores that, at his peril, frankly.

All has been predicted by Reason TV's 2020 Presidential Campaign Blowout:

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.

77 responses to “Larry Hogan Out, John Kasich Half-Out, Bill Weld Talking Abortion with Bill Maher

  1. …assert that if Trump loses he probably would not leave office “voluntarily.”

    If you’re in a race solely to make a statement, a wild conspiracy is probably not the statement you want to make.

    1. I have no doubt that Trump will assert massive voter fraud if he loses the election. He did it in 2016 when he won, so why would he hesitate to do that now. That would be his go to excuse to try to invalidate the election or to simply declare that he won.

      1. Maybe he’ll declare himself the “real” winner despite the constitution. Or beg the electoral college to see things his way and vote for him. Something vastly, like that.

      2. I think you’re confused – Trump is the orange one.

      3. Oh bullshit, so tired of these unsupported nonsensical claims. According to people like you back in 2016, Trump was going to declare himself dictator or some such crap.

      4. To be fair you Yanks have had massive voter fraud in every election. From Tammany Hall, to the Solid South to the Chicago Machine and the Cook County Democratic Party, to the recent convictions in East Saint Louis for vote buying with cigarettes and beer, the Democrats are a force.

        The Republicans would also probably be just as bad if they weren’t so inept and if they knew the media would be complicit like they are with the Dems.

      5. Gee, we’ve heard stuff like this before: “Trump Won’t Obey a Court Order”…”Trump is going to declare Martial Law and suspend the 2018 Midterms”
        I don’t care for the man, but spout crazy theories doesn’t help the situation.

      6. Except Trump was right. Democrats always engage in rampant voter fraud. Including voting in multiple states, illegal alien voters, the GY vote, registering cartoon characters to vote (see ACORN), etc..

        Why would 2016 have been any different?

    2. Weld is desperate to win over the crew over at The Bulwark, not to mention folks like Molly Jong-Fast, Marcy Wheeler, and other Resistance twits.

      1. *win over the crew at The Bulwark

    3. Sounds like he wants to set up a Hilary type excuse when he loses. Seems more like Weld desperate to be relevant tried to be a liberatarian, now a republican. He is just politics as usual, the establishment status quo.

  2. Insurance policy? Pence may not be as popular as Trump be he is far more well known than Weld.

  3. A sitting president with majority approval within his party is largely uncontested? Shocker!

    Who cares? Weld still isn’t libertarian leaning. Reason is getting really pathetic trying to peddle GOP Lite.

    1. Reason is much like #NeverTrump, cast adrift on the sea of irrelevance by the political realignment of Globalists on the Left, Nationalists on the Right.

      Nick made Open Borders Uber Alles Reason’s official “core value”:
      “In the 21st century, libertarians are going to have make common cause with the globalists of all parties, with the people whose core value is the right of individuals to move freely around the planet. ”

      Nick’s core value is Invasion USA. That’s why he’s been busy fellating postmodernism and Marxism lately.

      That’s the trade off he’s willing to make. That’s the tradeoff globalists *have* to make if they want to remain politically relevant.

      The Right is nationalist. The Left is all the evil of the Left rolled up into one package, every kind of identitarian hatred coupled with starvation economics. But they’re globalists, and if that’s your “core value”, then they’re the horse for you.

      1. +1000

      2. Fortunately, there are more than just two tribes in the world.

        There is no inherent reason why anyone who supports individual liberty, including the liberty to move freely, has to get in bed with either the nationalist collectivists of the right, or the socialist collectivists of the left.

        1. “There’s no reason not to be electorally irrelevant! Politics is about moral preening, not electoral coalitions!”

          1. You should be happy that libertarians aren’t endorsing either of the two major tribes. Because, according to you, if libertarians were forced to choose between Team Red and Team Blue, they’d choose the globalist Team Blue and work against your interests on Team Red. Why you would want to force this false dichotomy on libertarians is puzzling.

        2. There are those who support the rights of the individual, and those who would take away those rights

          That’s 2

          Everything else is window dressing.

      3. Poor Chemjeff and his inability to understand that some who want voluntary association under the Constitutional Democratic Republic want, choose this form of government and give up some rights voluntarily for the Common Defense or nation and those individual rights we choose to keep our own.

  4. William Weld is related to Theodore Dwight Weld, the Massachusetts abolitionist. (See Wikipedia, “Weld family”).

    Thedore Dwight Weld was a seminary student where he defied the school administration for the sake of being able to promote abolitionism. In addition to his most famous work, *American Slavery As It Is* (providing much of the documentation which Stowe used in Uncle Tom’s Cabin), Theodore wrote a book saying the Bible was against slavery:

    https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Bible_Against_Slavery

    Or as his degenerate descendant William might put it, Theodore tried to impose his divisive religious views by force.

    From Theodore to William – “Look here, upon this picture, and on this!”

    1. Or as his degenerate descendant William might put it, Theodore tried to impose his divisive religious views by force.

      Stupid abolitionists and their sky fairy!

    2. Thedore Dwight Weld was a seminary student where he defied the school administration for the sake of being able to promote abolitionism.

      As it’s early and I’m not wearing my glasses, at first glance I read that as “promote alcoholism”. Which, given one look at his descendant, would have been an entirely believable statement.

      1. I don’t know if William is directly descended from Theodore, but they have common Weld ancestors. Probably the Mayflower or something.

  5. Wait…

    the list of guests on the “bipartisan invitation” to meet Bill Weld includes Diana Prince?

    Either someone is trolling Gov. Weld, or Wonder Woman herself is taking a respite from the pages of DC Comics to muster support for the primary challenge against President Donald “Lex Luthor But Dumber” Trump

    1. To be fair, how many other billionaires can manipulate kryptonite and build a battle suit capable of facing up to Superman?

  6. Narcissism hardest hit.

  7. Kasich later tweet-clarified “all of my options are on the table,”

    and subsequently further clarified “and none of my non-options is off the table.”

    1. #Biden-Kasich 2020

      1. AKA Grumpy Old Men.

        1. #Bernie-Hillary 2020

          AKA Grumpier Old Men.

          1. Touché.

  8. Let’s see Trump’s approval rating when his ill advised trade war with everybody tanks the economy he always brags about. I’d vote for Weld in the primary.

    1. The #HateAmericaFirst crowd prays for a Depression in hopes of the Left ascending back to power in the ruins of America.

      1. +1000

        A normal market correction will of course be blamed on Trump, while the media is loathe to acknowledge that the market is doing better in no small part because Trump Era tax breaks and lowering of regulations.

      2. The #HateAmericaFirst crowd prays for a Depression

        Why are you praying for a Depression, buybuy?

    2. POO’s* overall “approval” rating limps along at a historically low 40% over the duration of his regime, buoyed only by a surging economy he inherited from his predecessor. When the POO really hits the fan, that bloated orange blob will crash and burn like the Hindenburg.
      https://youtu.be/CgWHbpMVQ1U

      *President Orange Obstruction

      1. As a hint, if you have to explain your childish nickname every time you write it, it’s not a very good one.

    3. #MAGA!

      1. Is Blowhard the kiddie raper’s new sock?

  9. Isn’t talking with Maher on abortion like chatting with Lord Haw-haw on the Final Solution?

    1. Maher pretty much despises marriage, families, and children in particular. His whole universe is an upscale cocktail party failed with snarky self styled elitist progressives.

  10. I’m just glad to see Weld gone away from the Libertarian party. We are supposed to have Libertarians running after all. Not just any person with whatever political beliefs, who can not get nominated in their party coming to the LP, Otherwise what is the point of having the Libertarian party.

    1. “I’m just glad to see Weld gone away from the Libertarian party. ”

      Why would anyone in the Republican Party be happy to support the carpet bagger returned from abject failure?

      Just another Egg McMuffin candidate for the last dozen #NeverTrumpers who miss The Weekly Standard but can’t give up their moral preening as “Republicans”.

      1. +100

  11. The incumbent president has a 90 percent job-approval rating among Republicans…

    …and a 101% approval rating from far-right Republican xenophobes pretending to be libertarians. Meanwhile:

    Pentagon Bitch-Slaps POO
    SEOUL, South Korea — The Pentagon has told the White House to stop politicizing the military, amid a furor over a Trump administration order to have the Navy ship named for the late Sen. John McCain hidden from view during a presidential visit.

    A defense official said Acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan is also considering sending out formal guidance to military units in order to avoid similar problems in the future.

    Shanahan, who was traveling to South Korea on Sunday, confirmed details about a Navy email that said the White House military office wanted the USS John McCain kept “out of sight” when President Donald Trump visited Japan about a week ago. The internal Navy email came to light last week, triggering a storm of outrage.

    Fake news. Total exoneration. Witch hunt. MAGA
    https://nypost.com/2019/06/02/pentagon-tells-white-house-to-stop-politicizing-military/

  12. Far-Right Propaganda Troll Behind “Drunk Pelosi” Video Outed

    OK, fess up — which of you fellas is Shawn Brooks?
    https://www.thedailybeast.com/we-found-shawn-brooks-the-guy-behind-the-viral-drunk-pelosi-video

    1. Great video–hopefully more to come in the future.

      1. Rocks, since this guy is almost certainly Buttplug, I would not click on his links. They are as likely to be child porn as they are what he claims.

        1. Yup, The Daily Beast is a porn site. Ya’ got me there, shit-for-brains.

          1. Given what a sick pedophile you are, one can never tell what you will post. Which is why Reason banned you and scrubbed your posts.

    2. I am Shawn Brooks!

  13. The #NeverTrump primary challenge to the president is nearly DOA.

    Surprising absolutely no one.

    1. “The emperor has no clothes, but damned if I’ll mention it!”

      –CYA Republicans

    2. Exactly Ray McKigney

    3. Oh, I’m not so sure, Ray.
      Bubble boys and broads, like Welch and his progressive y*uppie ilk, really think they know the “common” man’s perspective. I think some are genuinely surprised that more than 10% of Americans can accept a boorish outsider leading the country.
      Welch, bill Kristol, Matt Yglesias – serious “thinkers”

      1. Trump is blunt. Which is refreshing co pared to most elected officials that give a five minute response to ‘you want fires with that?’. He’s also a doer. People like that too. If most politicians weren’t such awful weasels, Trump would not be necessary.

  14. A Weigal-tweet?

    Matt, your depravity knows no bounds.

  15. I don’t think it’s a mistake to suspect that the major forces that stop other people from a supporting a Republican alternative to Trump are the same forces that make me reluctant to support a challenger. In this case, the question isn’t even just whether the Republican candidate in question represents my thinking so much as how badly the Democrat alternative violates everything I care about.

    Duverger’s law is a guide to how voters think when confronted with choices like this in single member districts. My primary concern as a libertarian capitalist within single member districts is preventing someone who supports the Green New Deal and Medicare for All from taking the White House.

    If vocally criticizing Trump on immigration and trade while voting to support him in the election will let me leverage the support of people who like Trump’s policies on immigration and trade to defeat the Green New Deal and Medicare for All, then that’s what I’ll do.

    If the threat of the Green New Deal and Medicare for All weren’t so serious, I’d be more willing to support Republican alternatives to Trump, but supporting a Republican challenger to go after Trump–because he’ll alienate anti-immigration and anti-free trade supporters in the Republican party–will only succeed in fracturing support for the opponent of the Green New Deal and Medicare for All.

    So, yeah, people are making a strategic decision within the context of single member districts, and that’s what single member districts are supposed to make people do.

    Give the Democrats a trouncing because of the Green New Deal and Medicare for All, this time, and maybe next time they’ll abandon that losing strategy and go pro-free trade like Bill Clinton. Then I can go back to doing my patriotic duty by refusing to participate in the election, which usually only helps legitimize the awful shit the next president of either party will wants to do.

    I once voted for George W. Bush because he promised to privatize socials security and replace welfare with private charity. Wow, what a libertarian president he’ll turn out to be!

    How embarrassing.

  16. I wouldn’t vote for Trump or Weld, so it makes little difference to me anyway.

    1. Yeah, we already knew you were a progressive.

      1. Ken, nails it…again!

      2. Even if I was a progressive. So what?
        Does progressive mean “evil” now?

        1. Progressives willfully ignore the important differences between the private sphere and the public sphere, individual rights and group membership, legal rights and the real thing, etc. These differences are crucial to the functioning of an ethical and free society, and willfully ignoring those differences and infecting the general population with that specific form of stupidity is among the bigger reasons why progressives are America’s most horrible people.

          But that wan’t why I brought it up. I just wanted to mention that by telling us that you were a progressive, you weren’t telling us anything we didn’t already know.

          1. “Progressives willfully ignore the important differences between the private sphere and the public sphere, individual rights and group membership, legal rights and the real thing,”

            So progressives are ~99% of the population?

            1. Actually, respecting other people’s agency is something most people do. It’s not only difference between right and wrong, it’s also the definition of crime. Rape, theft, etc. are both crimes and unethical because the victim’s consent was never obtained and the duty to respect it was completely ignored.

              No, being a progressive is all about using the coercive power of the state to force people to do things against their will for the greater good. The reason they feel the need to struggle so hard is because it that’s what’s necessary to get people past their natural aversion to ignoring other people’s agency. That’s one of the reasons progressives try to dehumanize their opponents so.

              People wouldn’t normally accept using the coercive power of government to, say, force nuns to underwrite the costs of their employees’ fornication. You have to dehumanize nuns as some faceless force against abortion, gay rights, and Barack Obama to get people to accept that.

              Like I said, progressives are America’s most horrible people.

              1. Sure, most people will respect people’s agency on a one-to-one basis. But give them the power of the vote and quite a few of them are perfectly willing to let government take away agency from their neighbors. And that’s not just progressives doing that.

                But this whole thing about “respecting people’s agency” wasn’t on your original ‘definition’ of progressive anyway.

                “being a progressive is all about using the coercive power of the state to force people to do things against their will for the greater good.”

                Are you sure you don’t want to revise this position? Otherwise, again, you’ve basically defined most everyone to be a progressive, most libertarians included. Even minarchist libertarians would still maintain some minimal level of taxation for things like courts. Are they “progressives” too because they would force people to pay (minimal) taxes to pay for the “greater good” of publicly run courts instead of vigilante-style ‘justice’?

                1. Yep, full progressive.

                2. Pedo Jeffy, you’re a stupid kid who argues ridiculous semantics with no sense of proportion or reality. It’s incredibly tedious, not intelligent.

        2. commiejeff, President of Libertarians for the Progressive Deep State

          1. “deep state” lol

          2. AKA Pedo Jeffy, Kiddie Raper Enthusiast.

        3. You’re the one who said it led to death camps, you tell us.

        4. “Does progressive mean “evil” now?”

          Yes. When hasn’t it?

Please to post comments