Justin Amash

Justin Amash's Biggest Fiscally Conservative National Donors Are Abandoning His Re-election Bid

Club for Growth and FreedomWorks cease supporting the congressman they've showered with awards

|

FreedomWorks, the influential libertarian/conservative advocacy group that gave Rep. Justin Amash (I–Mich.) FreedomFighter Awards each of his first eight years in Congress, is reportedly not intending to help the incumbent hold onto his seat as an independent.

"We don't have any plans to get involved in MI-03 at this time, seeing as we're focused on some other key races to help regain the GOP's House majority," FreedomWorks spokesman Peter Vicenzi told Declan Garvey of The Dispatch, which published a long profile of Amash today. "We're going to support some incumbents as well, mainly [House Freedom Caucus] members."

Amash, who co-founded the Freedom Caucus and was widely considered to be the brains of the group from 2015 to 2018, left the 30-member bloc last June, then three weeks later bolted from the Republican Party as a whole. It's that last apostasy, coupled with his outspoken support for impeaching President Donald Trump, that has coincided with an epidemic of cold shoulders from the very organizations that before last summer routinely celebrated Amash's intellectual independence and fiscal/constitutional conservatism.

Amash's single biggest campaign contributor throughout his career, The Club for Growth, with whom he has a lifetime rating of 99 percent and from whom he received Defender of Economic Freedom Awards for each of his first eight years in the House of Representatives, gave what Garvey described as "an indignant 'no'" when asked if the fiscally conservative group would again back the most fiscally conservative member of Congress.

Americans for Prosperity, which joined the Club in helping Amash beat back an establishment-GOP primary challenge in 2014, told The Dispatch that they "have nothing to announce at this time."

The influential DeVos family from Amash's own district, which has been his second-biggest donor over the years and with whom his family has various longstanding relationships, announced last year that its days of officially supporting the hometown libertarian were over, too.

Amash's three-way race in the swingish district of greater Grand Rapids is expected to be among the most competitive in the country. The Cook Political Report last month moved its projection for the November 2020 election from "toss-up" to "lean Republican," citing the loneliness of the pro-impeachment right. Democrats and Republicans are holding contested primaries for the nomination on August 4. Increasing the incumbent's degree of difficulty is the fact that Michigan is one of a handful of states to allow for straight-ticket voting, meaning an entire party's slate can be supported by checking just one box.

Amash likes to counter that he routinely exceeds expectations of pollsters and forecasters, that his district has some truly only-in-MI-3 characteristics (therefore rendering comparative models ineffective), and that, well, he has a pretty good track record of winning elections. His race hasn't really been polled, and we're still waiting to hear on fourth quarter fundraising numbers.

But the abandonment of Amash by limited government advocacy groups illustrates how party-dependent their commitment to principle is. As long as you fly the GOP flag, you'll be eligible to receive a "Top Ten Reasons to Support Justin Amash for U.S. Congress in MI-3." Support the impeachment of a Republican president, or leave your party and caucus behind, well, won't you please sign our thank-you card to Rep. Jim Jordan for fighting "shifty Adam Schiff"?

It's hard out there for an independent in this highly polarized political environment. Almost all of the incentives—for politicians, advocacy groups, even journalists—encourage actors to pick one team and work within it, regardless of what bizarre ideological and comportmental turns the institution takes.

After the government-growing, economy-tanking, Middle East-wrecking, disaster-mismanaging record of the George W. Bush administration, many conservative individuals and organizations took stock, expressed regret at having looked the other way, and then helped build a new movement rededicated to hardcore fiscal conservatism, foreign policy skepticism, personal freedom over the surveillance state, and constitutionalist trimming of executive power. It's hard to imagine—and certainly difficult to find a better conservative-group score for—a member of Congress who typifies those values more than Justin Amash.

By making the understandable, pragmatic choice to turn their backs on Amash in a time of need, the very organizations that helped to nurture a new generation of genuinely interesting politicians now threatens to sow the seeds of their own future regret. As ever when it comes to politics, ye shall know them by their fruits.

NEXT: The Democratic Debates Are Downers. That's a Big Problem for All of Us.

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. Don’t worry FreedomWorks. I’m sure you’ll get a bigger friend of liberty in Amash’s Republican challenger.

    1. FreedomWorks and Club For Growth are blindly partisan GOP outfits. No surprises here. Tribalism and group-think at its finest.

      1. He took money from them before.

        Suck on that.

        1. He would take money from them today if they were offering it. Are you trying to argue Amash is somehow bad for taking money from a GOP partisan organization when he was in the GOP?

          This looks really bad for both Club for Growth and FreedomWorks. They look like they will toe the party line before they will support politicians who defend their supposed “principles” – politicians they themselves rate with highest performance marks. What legitimacy do they have as think tanks if they are not willing to support candidates who support what they do because Not Republican?

          1. It would look worse if they blindly supported a Deep State Supremacist like Amash, who’s accomplished nothing in his 10 years of taxpayer check-cashing other than being the lone non-Democrat vote for a coup against the president most of his constituents voted for

            1. Lol, “Deep State Supremacist”? Is that the new name for anyone who thinks Trump is an authoritarian fuckhead who constantly violates the Constitution, pines for dictatorial powers free from interference and thus should be removed from office asap?

              1. What else would you call putting the CIA and FBI in charge of picking presidents?

              2. I knew this new sock would jump back into old habits and forget citations to its claims.

                1. “Nobody ever mentions Article II. It gives me all of these rights at a level that nobody has ever seen before.”

                  “Article II allows me to do whatever I want.”

                  Trump’s view of constitutional limits to executive power, from his own mouth.

                  1. Except that discussion was very explicit in his article 2 powers for appointments Jeff.

                  2. Is this Chemjeff’s new sock?

                    1. Most likely. If you look at the naming, it appears to follow a pattern.

                    2. I have no idea who Chemjeff is. I used to be a regular here 8-12 years ago and then became mostly apolitical/disenfranchised/realized pointless internet bickering was a waste of time.

                      It makes me sad that authoritarian-defending bootlickers have taken over the Reason comments section, and that libertarians who call an authoritarian fuckwad an authoritarian are accused of being Rachel Maddow/sock puppets/”deep state supremacist” (lol).

                    3. Well proprietist, if the shoe fits….

                  3. “Article II allows me to do whatever I want.”

                    TDS causes lying.

              3. an authoritarian fuckhead who constantly violates the Constitution, pines for dictatorial powers free from interference
                By that standard, every president in my lifetime should be impeached.

                1. I’ve said that myself: You CAN make a case for impeaching Trump, but it requires setting the bar for impeachment low enough that every President in living memory should have been impeached.

                  Trump has actually, so far as we can tell, been MORE law abiding than most of them!

                  1. Pretty much every president in living memory should have been impeached. They all violated the Constitution and the laws. I don’t think it’s a low bar to impeach a President for breaking the law and abusing power.

                    The difference is Trump has a frighteningly infinite view of executive power and fetishizes the unchecked power of third world dictators like no US President we’ve ever seen in US history. He’s the antithesis of libertarianism. In that sense I don’t give a fuck if the Ukraine shit is a stretch criminally speaking. He needs to be removed from power asap.

                    1. Unlike Obama, who gave the freedom loving Iranians $150 billion, promised a Russian-reset (once he had more wiggle room after the 2012 election), waged a genocidal war in Yemen at the behest of Freedom-loving Saudi Arabia. On the home front, Mr. “Pen and Phone” threatened to do through executive order what congress refused to do through legislation and turned the NSA security apparatus inward on all US citizens. Sure, Mr. Peace Prize talked a good game, but his actions were just shy of dictatorship.

                    2. And replaced by whom, proprietist?

                    3. So, now that you’ve put that marker out there, let me call it in.

                      You want to impeach Trump. OK. WHERE are all your calls to impeach Mr. “Pen and phone”?????

                      GFY.

              4. It’s merely a politically correct term for communist.

          2. This looks really bad for both Club for Growth and FreedomWorks.

            Not really. They look like they’re not hitching their tugboats to the Titanic. If a politician isn’t advancing your cause, even if he supports it, why should you write him checks? Incompetence doesn’t get better results than ill will.

        2. So what?

          1. I guess you sucked on it.

      2. FreedomWorks and Club For Growth are blindly partisan GOP outfits. No surprises here. Tribalism and group-think at its finest.

        And they supported Amash in the past–while getting showered for being “influential libertarian/conservative advocacy group(s)”

        But now, they’re EVIL for not supporting someone who rejected them in favor of….wait for it….Adam Schiff.

        And you think THEY’RE the ones being tribalist?

        1. I am not sure who you are criticizing here. I never praised those groups. As for Amash, why should he turn down money from someone just because he doesn’t agree with them? Ron Paul had the best reply to this, when he was criticized for receiving donations from a racist. He said “don’t you think that money will be used for better things in my hands, then if I were to return it?”

          1. “I am not sure who you are criticizing here.”

            LOL.

            1. He was confused because he sucked on it.

    2. Why waste money on someone who proved in ten years they cant compromise? Sometimes a small step is more productive than no steps at all.

      1. Absolutely shocking that a political funding organization would decline to throw funds at a loser.

        This is less about their politics, or even his politics, as much as it is about people not wanting to support losers.

    3. So Freedomworks should support someone enthusiastically in favor of process crimes generated from abuses of state power?

  2. Maybe there is more to growth than raising taxes and cutting spending? Maybe deregulation and tax policy matter too?

    Amash has made a fetish out of pissing all over a President who is doing more to create a free business environment than any President since Reagan. The people who support those causes have decided to stop funding. Let me get my shocked face.

    Maybe Amash can make up for it with Soros donations.

    1. Maybe deregulation and tax policy matter too?

      I must have missed where Amash didn’t support Trump’s deregulation and tax cuts. By the way, he voted for Trump’s tax cuts.

      1. By wanting to get rid of the President doing them, that’s how.

      2. I figured it out. Amash mixed up the voting buttons all these years. He didnt figure it out until he left the GOP and became a Democrat.

    2. This is all about party loyalty. Amash is been right on target for tax cuts, spending cuts, deregulation, and tax policy. Better than anyone else in Congress. But none of that matters, it’s only about loyalty to Big Man.

      1. ^ Yep

      2. This is all about party loyalty. Amash is been right on target for tax cuts, spending cuts, deregulation, and tax policy.

        Weird then how he’s taken up with the people who are against tax cuts, spending cuts, deregulation, and for a more openly redistributionist tax policy.

        And ‘loyalty to the ‘big man’? Which ‘big man’? The one who is for tax cuts, spending cuts, deregulation, and sane tax policy? Is there something wrong with supporting someone who’s for those things? Isn’t that how this all works? You support each other to get the policies you want enacted.

        But Justin decided to support Pelosi, and Schiff, and Schumer. people who are working actively against everything he claimed to believe.

        Why should Justin still merit support from people who are for tax cuts, spending cuts, deregulation, and sane tax policy?

        1. What the fuck are you talking about. Name even one single instance where Amash stood with Pelosi or other Democrats against the GOP to increase spending. You are just a blind partisan whose political views can be reduced to one bit of information.

        2. > Amash is an independent. He DID NOT take up with the Democrats. If you got your head out of your ass you could see that.

        3. I’m sorry did all of you miss Amash traipsing along with the Democrats ridiculous impeachment?

          Or do you not know what ‘taken up with’ or ‘supporting’ means?

          He’s abandoned the Liberty and Freedom caucuses. And now, he nods in time with Schiff.

          And Pelosi and Schumer.

          Who are trying to get rid of the guy actively working for for tax cuts, spending cuts, deregulation, and sane tax policy.

          He’s trying to stop that.

          Or do you think removing the president means something else?

          1. He’s Sinestro, and the GOP are the Green Lantern Corps.

      3. Better than anyone else? He has done nothing but disparage trump who has gotten those things at least moving in the right way (outside of spending) which is more than Amash did in his 10 years prior.

      4. “Amash is been right on target for tax cuts, spending cuts, deregulation, and tax policy. Better than anyone else in Congress.”

        And he passed bills doing those things?
        No?
        So just empty virtue signaling for jackasses like you, leo, and eunuch to blindly guzzle

        1. A congressman cannot pass bills by himself, moron.

          1. Really, dumbass? I had no idea.
            A politician’s job is to implement the policies he and his constituents favor.
            Amash has been an utter, unmitigated failure.
            If he wasn’t just an impotent little bitch, maybe he could’ve accomplished something more than getting the blind loyalty of other impotent little bitches like blardo.

            1. LOL that “impotent little bitch” accomplished more than you can ever hope to achieve! You’re not convincing anyone when you pretend to hate Amash for being an ineffective politician. You hate Amash because you’ve got your head up Trump’s ass, and you will always take Trump’s side over any libertarian that opposes him.

              1. I dislike Amash for being a fraud, you unaccomplished fraud

          2. You’re right. He can’t. That’s why you’d think a Congressman who was really interested in changing policy would be building bridges to bring potential allies closer and working to see where he could find common ground with potential allies to move the needle. But, the truth is that Amash is really, really bad at doing that. He’s willing to accept the plaudits of people who’ll actively work against his proposed policies to denounce imperfect allies for their imperfections.

      5. No, it isn’t. It doesn’t matter if Justin Amash is 100% right on the issues if he’s a goofball screaming at the clouds about them. What matters is whether he can move the dial closer to 100% right on the issues. If he can’t do that, he doesn’t serve a useful political purpose. And if he is actively combating someone who is successfully moving the dial closer to 100%, even if that guy is only 80% right on the issues, he’s an active liability.

    3. Trump has made a fetish out of pining for the limitless political power of third world dictators. He claimed China and the Philippines were doing a great job on the War on Drugs by mass executions of drug users. He has found more common cause with Kim Jong Un and Putin than Angela Merkel or Justin Trudeau. He bullies political opponents and 16-year old girls on Twitter, essentially siccing his angry mob on them, while retweeting convicted white supremacist criminals.

      You need to look in the fucking mirror dude. I never thought you were libertarian, but it’s pretty ironic that you claim “pissing all over” a guy who is anathema to almost everything libertarianism stands for is a “fetish.”

      1. When did maddow start posting here?

        1. LOL, yes, I am Rachel Maddow because I think Trump is possibly the least libertarian President in American history. I don’t like misusing/overusing the term “fascist” but Trumps love of autocracy, belief in infinite power and utter disdain of checks and balances is un-American, fascist and utterly unlibertarian.

          “I have an Article 2, where I have the right to do whatever I want as president.”

          “They’re going to charge (drug traffickers) with the highest level of crime. And in China, unlike in our country, the highest level of crime is very, very high. It’s the ultimate. You pay the ultimate price. So I appreciate that very much.”

          Duterte did “an unbelievable job on the drug problem” (referring to the bloody drug war that has killed over 20,000 people in the Philippines)

          “I want to know who’s the person who gave the whistleblower the information, because that’s close to a spy. You know what we used to do in the old days, when we were smart, with spies and treason, right? We used to handle it a little differently than we do now.”

          Those came from Trump’s own fucking mouth. So either you’re a sycophant to a guy who openly supports the right of the government to kill whistleblowers and drug dealers and believes he has no limits on his power, or maybe you just were ignorant and didn’t know the guy you’re defending supports those things.

          1. Things don’t go well when you and reality have a conversation, do they

            1. Why don’t you go back to Breitbart where you belong so you can post your substance-free comments to the unthinking choir of your choice?

              1. Ah “why don’t you go to Breitbart” – the last bastion of the npc

              2. Why don’t you go back to Salon where you belong so you can post your substance-free comments to the unthinking choir of your choice?

          2. I don’t like misusing/overusing the term “fascist” but Trumps love of autocracy, belief in infinite power and utter disdain of checks and balances is un-American, fascist and utterly unlibertarian.

            For the left, it’s forever 1935 and everyone to the right of them are varying degrees of Hitler.

          3. Trump is not the most anti-libertarian president in history, but he may be the most open about his authoritarianism. Obama, Nixon and LBJ were all at least as bad as Trump but lacked the “authenticity” to openly acknowledge their tyrannical inclinations.

      2. You make all these accusations as if Jesse would be shamed by mass executions of drug dealers, bullying of teenage girls, or supporting racists. No, those are things Jesse likes.

        1. Citation needed, eunuch

          Your strawmen are more virile than you, which is just hilarious

        2. That’s a dumb comment even for you you.

        3. To be honest, I personally would not have problems with mass executions of drug dealers if they dealt drugs to children. I’m good with doing them right on the courthouse lawn and letting them swing for a few hours (until sunset) and finally toss them into a lime pit.

  3. Why would anyone give that goober money?

    He has a long Congressional voting record of “No” but him supporting a frivolous impeachment of Trump just shows that voting “No” was because he mixed up the button to vote.

    1. Tired Trump troll is tired.

      1. Kill yourself.

    2. Lets all guess which troll this new sock propriestist is.

      1. I’m myself only and haven’t been on Reason in almost eight years. People from way back might remember me.

        Don’t worry, I won’t be here for long. Pro-Trump trolls like you have hijacked Reason and started claiming wannabe autocrats are libertarian, and life’s wayyy to short to waste my time trying to talk you out of that sort of backwards ass stupidity. And no, I’m not voting for or supporting Democrats either.

        It’s just sad most of the reasoned voices seem to be gone now, but can’t blame them for not sticking around if this is the b.s. they have to put up with.

        1. Pro-Trump trolls like you have hijacked Reason

          Nah, you just got older and dumber in your time away and now you’re getting crushed because you make terrible arguments.

        2. Ole green eyes gonna miss ya!

        3. Ok….buh bye.

  4. “We don’t have any plans to get involved in MI-03 at this time, seeing as we’re focused on some other key races to help regain the GOP’s House majority,”

    Of course. Because FreedomWorks is not about Freedom, but adherence to the party line.

    I mean it’s one thing if a group with “Republican” in their name chose to only support Republicans (ei. Republican Liberty Caucus). But FreedomWorks was never partisan until the Freedom Caucus went full statist and Amash left them.

    1. Many of these Lobby organizations are partisan. So what?

      Bloomberg is living proof that money does not guarantee anything and certainly wont buy him the White House.

    2. Both groups have voted against McConnell and the establishment. They simply arent buying the impeachment which Amash ran fervently to the front of the line for. Odd you think not supporting an IC impeachment is anti freedom.

  5. “It’s hard out there for an independent in this highly polarized political environment.”

    “Mob rule” has its downside.

  6. i’d be more impressed if he won as (I). turncoat has not fit him well so far.

  7. As our president sat across from Volodymyr Zelensky in New York last autumn, he explained to the newly elected leader that he knew all about his country because, after all, he used to own the Miss Universe pageant, and one year the winner was from Ukraine.

    “We got to know the country very well in a lot of different ways,” Donald Trump said.

    It was, unsurprisingly, completely false. A Miss Ukraine had never won the Miss Universe title in the pageant’s 66-year history, including the 20 that Trump had owned it.

    Equally unsurprisingly, the lie went largely unnoticed and uncared about. In the flood of falsehoods that gush from Trump’s mouth and Twitter feed most every day, something like this lacked anywhere near the heft to make a splash.

    Indeed, on that day during his United Nations General Assembly visit, Trump also claimed:  “We have created the greatest economy in the history of our country.” Of the USMCA trade agreement: “It’s a great trade deal — the greatest we’ve ever had. NAFTA was a horrible trade deal. It replaces NAFTA.” Of Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi: “A lot of her members now are having second thoughts. They’re saying they’re in a very bad position.” Of his long-promised wall along the Mexican border: “And the wall is going up, many miles a week.” Of the WTO: “World Trade Organization was not one of the greats. Not one of the greats. That was the creation of China, which went like a rocket ship from the day they signed.” And of new automotive plants: “Many of the great Japanese companies, at my request, are now building their plants in the United States. … Big ones going up in South Carolina, Florida.”

    Not a single one of Trump’s assertions was true.

    1. I’m sorry, we should care about this why?

      And frankly, you wouldn’t know a fascist if you were being loaded on a cattle car, so stop acting as if you know something.

      1. Today’s economy is not the greatest economy in the country’s history, and has, in fact, over the past year been slowing down. Trump’s United States Mexico Canada Agreement is essentially the North American Free Trade Agreement with some minor tweaks. Pelosi was not losing support among her Democratic members. Not a single mile of new fence had been built someplace where there hadn’t already been a barrier. China did not create the WTO, and Toyota and Nissan are not suddenly building new plants here. Not in Florida. Not anywhere.

        1. New pedo sock. Great.

          1. Pedo Jeffy, Pedo Shreek, or did they merge into some kind of horrid amalgamated pedophillic blob when they were fucking?

        2. This must be OBL’s new parody account.

          1. In this case, a Parody of a Parody is NOT my friend.

  8. But FreedomWorks was never partisan until the Freedom Caucus went full statist and Amash left them.

    If FreedomWorks backed only Republicans prior to Amash leaving, that’s the very definition of partisan.

    1. Good. Fuck that guy.

  9. Amash tried to pull a Lieberman by sneaking around as an “Independent” in order to extract concessions from both parties for what he imagined would develop into his weighty, “tie-break” vote. Except, it never worked because, in reality, he stands for nothing and has alienated both sides of the political divide.

    Suffice it to say, his gambit backfired and he found himself auditioning, instead, for a talking head gig with CNN or MSNBC, hence the TDS.

    If you’re going to be a gadfly, you really need to have something to give back in exchange for annoying the shit out of people. Amash had nothing to give, but demanded everything. Hopefully, he’s on his way out.

    1. well said. +10000

    2. It also didn’t help his case that the only thing he’s accomplished in a decade in office is renaming a post office.

      Amash is a lightweight who couldn’t work with others and liked to give speeches while producing nothing of value for his constituents. I suspect that’s why he’s more comfortable with the progs than conservatives…they’re worthless and ineffective too.

      1. UCrawfor….this is the part that resonates with me: …who couldn’t work with others…. And that is the crux of the matter. Yeah, I like the libertarian orientation of this guy. And yeah, in a 100% principled outlook that takes no account of reality, I could see supporting impeachment. I get all that.

        But he can’t work with others. And politics is the art of the possible.

  10. You can take the boy out of the stupid party but you cant take the stupid out of the boy. I don’t doubt there are many if not most GOPe types in office that would love to dump Trump but are canny enough not to cross their voters. This guy went full Maverick and instead of getting full MSM love he gets kissee kissees from Reason.

  11. Lays it out plain as day that all those people use their stupid soundbites not because they believe in those principles but it gets them what they want. They have no actual interest in reforming government- they just get the rubes to think they do.

    Heaven forbid anyone in the Republican party think for themselves and represent their constituents dutifully.

    1. Why do you think spitting in the faces of the people who supported you, voted for you, vested their power in you is ‘representing their constituents dutifully’?

      Amash pissed off the people who elected him. THAT’S what matters.

    2. The epitome of stupid is thinking you can change a 400+ person entity with one vote.

    3. “represent their constituents dutifully”

      Those people are usually shoe in for re-election, usually don’t quit the party that got them there, and usually get financial support if only for being the incumbent

      Amash fucked that all up.

  12. The Prohibition Party is chock full of mystical fanatics eager to swim to the Grand Old Poltroons and cast a vote against birth control. It’s like with AOC. The Dems expect her to divvy out a couple hundred grand in pelf and boodle to the DEM party war chest. The difference is SHE is pro-choice, hence raises millions for other Dem infiltrators, and has a chance of getting seated instead of just bleeding off spoiler votes. Spoiler votes are great for changing bad laws, but they don’t pay for Cadillacs and private jets. To political soft machines, that is the key thing.

  13. Look at all these Trump/Republican sycophants shitting on the most libertarian representative because he left their “tribe.” How tiresome.

    Hold on, tell me more about how a President who openly pines for dictatorial powers, claims the Constitution says there are no limits to his power as President and openly violates the Emoluments clause so he can profit off of his Presidency while in office is more libertarian than Justin Amash.

    1. That’s a lot of ignorant liberal msm talking points for one paragraph.

      1. That’s a lot of convincing ad hominem for one ten word sentence.

        If you think being libertarian = “liberal msm talking points” I guess I’m a liberal.

        1. Progressive

        2. You’re more of a leftist than a liberal.

        3. You’re not a libertarian. You’ve literally regurgitated maddow based talking points and conspiracy theory the entire day.

        4. “If you think being libertarian = “liberal msm talking points” I guess I’m a liberal”

          Since when was a little jackbooted authoritarian like you a libertarian… or remotely liberal for that matter?

        5. Fuck why are you still here?

    2. #turnOffCNN

      1. I don’t think I’ve watched CNN in years. I don’t even live in the US.

        1. Just tune into whatever Socialist National news you have and its pretty much the same Propaganda.

      2. Does anyone really turn it on in the first place?

        #CNN’sJourneyToZeroRatings

  14. “Fiscally conservative” means you want to spend lots of taxpayer dollars to achieve conservative goals.

    1. Pretty much.

      And pretty much to the exact same extent ‘Reason libertarian’ means you want to spend lots of taxpayer dollars to impose ‘libertarian’ goals.

      Or have you never read Peter Suderman, Matt Welch, et. al.?

      1. I feel so sorry for Matt Welch here, he’s obviously crushed. Now how will Amash be able to afford to pay him to write hagiographies and puff pieces?

        1. Matt will endeavor to persevere through grit, determination, and a bucket load of Koch money.

    2. You fail to distinguish between fiscal conservatives and social conservatives.
      Social conservatives want to use taxpayer money to enforce their ideas of morality such as some locales that outlawed drinking, prostitution, gambling, smoking pot, or dancing.
      Fiscal conservatives want government limited to protecting people from others who’d harm them like robbers, thieves, murderers, and foreign invaders. I’m for being fiscally conservative so we minimize the evil that comes with government, but we have enough of it to deal with criminals and enemies.

      1. In 1985.

        In 2020 Social conservatives want to stop pedophilia and people raping animals.
        Fiscal conservatives want government limited to subsidizing their companies.

  15. Gee, Mr. Welch, ever consider the possibility that it’s Amash who’s run away from libertarian interests?

  16. I never assumed Welch was hopelessly naive. It may well be admirable for a particular politician to stand principled in his beliefs. But, an advocacy group isn’t and shouldn’t be a fan group for an individual politician. Their responsibility is to fight for the issue they’re advocating for. And at some point a politician, even a politician who is good on your issue, can prove so disagreeable that he becomes a net negative for your issue. Does anyone think that Mr. Amash’s crusade against Trump has advanced the cause of fiscal restraint? Or has it only served to alienate potential allies to the cause and win plaudits only from those who would hold the cause in contempt? Because, if it’s the latter, financing it is a sucker’s bet for an issues advocacy group. And it’s not like this is exactly a one-off for Amash. As Welsh notes himself, Amash had an ongoing feud with the previous House leadership, a feud they backed him on. At some point, its only logical for them to decide he’s not exactly good at winning friends and allies.

    1. Excellent point Bill. Personally I see Amash as fed up working as a Congressman and not able to do much with the RINOs in charge of the GOP in Congress. I believe he misread the political pulse and felt he had a good chance at a presidential bid in 2024 or later. Supporting impeachment and leaving the GOP gets him a lot of attention or so he thought. IMHO, supporting impeachment was a mistake based on the facts, but maybe Amash is watching MSNBC and CNN.

      FreedomWorks apparently believes getting the policies they want implemented, must be done though our representatives in the GOP by getting more fiscal conservatives in the GOP instead of the big government RINOs. The way I see it, Trump isn’t even fighting on the budget and spending, because it’s a battle he know he can’t win against the Democrats and RINOs. I hope Amish wins.

  17. Because Amash is a disingenuous shill and a petulant child who deserves to be bounced from office in a landslide and all of the adults in the room realize it.

  18. Amash, who co-founded the Freedom Caucus and was widely considered to be the brains of the group from 2015 to 2018

    Well that was a horrific lapse in judgment by a lot of people who perceive themselves as very intelligent.

    Hopefully they’ll take a look inside and learn from their mistake. Or maybe they’ll continue to learn nothing while cranking out dreck for Reason.

  19. What shocking news!
    Groups that support Republicans don’t contribute to non-Republicans!
    whodathunkit?

  20. “Amash’s single biggest campaign contributor throughout his career, The Club for Growth, with whom he has a lifetime rating of 99 percent and from whom he received Defender of Economic Freedom Awards for each of his first eight years in the House of Representatives, gave what Garvey described as “an indignant ‘no'” when asked if the fiscally conservative group would again back the most fiscally conservative member of Congress.

    Americans for Prosperity, which joined the Club in helping Amash beat back an establishment-GOP primary challenge in 2014, told The Dispatch that they “have nothing to announce at this time.”

    Even non-profits have a fiduciary duty not to squander their foundation’s money.

    There’s this thing called Duverger’s Law. If Amash doesn’t fade into insignificance after the upcoming election, he will eventually.

    1. Maybe the #NeoClowns will throw Amash a bone or two. Or Koch.

      Maybe they can all share office space with Reason.

      Globalists gonna globalist.

  21. He’s owned just like Matt Welch and Reason are.

  22. Amash threw away his career and his influence buying into the democrats impeachment boondoggle. He felt it was a battle he needed to fight but he lost the battle and the war and is now the lamest of lame ducks.

  23. Truly a mind boggling career decision by Amash to side with the Democrats with their banana republic theatrics of impeachment.

    How did he calculate ‘yup. I’ve got a good feeling about this one’?

    Why not just be a critic of Trump? Why go that extra step and vote with weasels like Schiff? Every step of the way the tactics used by the Dems was incredibly cynical. And he supported that.

    And the key here, by all accounts, the economy is at its healthiest point in the last 20 years. Amash, by voting to impeach, indirectly voted against the American economy.

    Weird.

    Incredible.

    1. Most curiously, you have not even considered the possibility that Cong. Amash is not calculating his advantage but doing what he considers to be right, because he considers it to be right. Frankly, I think that the simplest and most likely explanation.

      Don’t get me wrong. I don’t think he is right. I think he’s deeply mistaken. But mistake is far more common than corruption. Error as deep as his is ample reason not to return him to the Congress.

  24. Amash has obviously been mostly awesome with his votes… But his problem is he caught a wicked case of TDS when Trump came along.

    An intelligent person would realize that Trump is more positives than negatives for liberty vs the Hag or anybody coming in 2020, and just deal with it. Going all in on baseless impeachment crap, endless trying to virtue signal to people that hate everything you believe in, and then leaving the GOP were all stupid decisions.

    If he really wanted to be super principles man he could have just remained in the GOP and kept bitching. Which I think is dumb too, but far less dumb than getting yourself thrown out of congress come election time.

    He’s proven himself to be an irrational virtue signalling retard. As much as I prefer Ron Paul (for a lot of reasons), IMO Rand has been a far smarter politician, and because of it I think he will ultimately do more for the cause of liberty than his dad. Amash went the Ron Paul direction, but in a very stupid way in the particulars.

  25. What I haven’t seen here is that Justin Amash’s family has extensive financial ties with China… Might that have something to do with his anti-Trumpism?

  26. The political reality is that real power and influence in the House is in the committees, and is therefore tied to the parties which control committee assignments, which leaves Amash in an awkward position. Can he mend fences with the Republicans? If not, could he really accomplish much within the Democrat party apparatus? The fact is, if Trump is President, then Amash is a non-entity in the House, so it is prudent for his former backers to focus elsewhere.

  27. “By making the understandable, pragmatic choice to turn their backs on Amash in a time of need, the very organizations that helped to nurture a new generation of genuinely interesting politicians now threatens to sow the seeds of their own future regret.”

    These seeds they might or might not regret. I guess not.

    Political philosophy isn’t and even political journalism often isn’t, but politics is a team game. Does Mr. Welch seriously suggest that special-interest groups should nurture “interesting” politicians at the expense of their congenial policy team? Why should they?

  28. I am making 7 to 6 dollar par hour at home on laptop ,, This is make happy But now i am Working 4 hour Dailly and make 40 dollar Easily .. This is enough for me to happy my family..how ?? i am making this so u can do it Easily > Click it here  

  29. I am making 80$ an hour… After been without work for 8 months, I started freelancing over this website and now I couldn’t be happier. After 3 months on my new job my monthly income is around 15k a month… Cause someone helped me telling me about this job now I am going to help somebody else…….. Read more

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.