Liz Cheney Loses to Trump-Endorsed Primary Challenger Harriet Hageman
While she was ultimately felled for criticizing Trump's lies, Cheney was also a poor candidate.

As expected, Rep. Liz Cheney was defeated tonight in the Republican primary for Wyoming's sole U.S. House seat, by a considerable margin. Despite solid conservative credentials and name recognition as the daughter of a former vice president, Cheney was opposed by a solid majority of her party due to her criticism of former President Donald Trump. Attorney Harriet Hageman will be the party's nominee in November—and given the state's partisan lean, she'll almost certainly win.
After Trump's quixotic attempts to retain power after losing in 2020, Cheney lambasted the former president for propagating lies about the election. For her efforts, she became a pariah in her party, stripped from her position as chair of the House Republican Conference. Trump endorsed her primary opponent nearly a year ago before Hageman had even announced her candidacy.
Much of the rest of the party fell in line: In March, more than 50 House Republicans attended a fundraiser for Hageman, and more than 100 endorsed Hageman over Cheney.
But while she was ultimately felled criticizing Trump's lies, Cheney was also a poor candidate: In line with her father's record, she defended waterboarding and the Iraq War long after each had been shown to be ineffective and counterproductive. Before she ran for Congress, she characterized attorneys who defended terror suspects as being in league with terrorists themselves. In 2009, she defended "birthers," conspiracy theorists (like Trump!) who believed then-President Barack Obama was not born in the U.S., by saying they were simply "uncomfortable with a president who is reluctant to defend the nation overseas."
Cheney lost her seat because she put country over party, but that doesn't mean she should be missed in the House.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Eat a dick, lying bitch.
(Oh, just to clarify: that statement is directed at Joe Lancaster, though I guess it does apply equally to Liz Cheney as well)
"Eat a dick, lying bitch"
For once I'm going to criticize you for being too emollient.
I worked part-time from my apartment and earned $30k. After losing my previous business, I quickly became exhausted. Fortunately, I discovered this jobs online, and as a result, I was able to start earning money from home right away. Anyone can accomplish this elite career and increase their internet income by….
After reading this article…>> http://oldprofits.blogspot.com
I just worked part-time from my apartment for 5 weeks, but I made $30,030. I lost my former business and was soon worn out. Thank goodness, I found this employment online and I was able to start working from home right away. (res-33) This top career is achievable by everyone, and it will improve their online revenue by:.
.
After reading this article:>>> https://workofferweb24.pages.dev/
https://twitter.com/Shem_Infinite/status/1559673654451081223?t=oSWrZYbY9XL6RePAFj6fHQ&s=19
I can translate: "I'm going to lose by 30 points today but the corrupt media and Never Trumpers will keep propping me up until 2024 when they spend over $50 million on my Presidential campaign only for me to drop out after the first primary when I get no votes"
[Video]
https://twitter.com/jeffzeleny/status/1559722075811524608?t=4LBCU9ii0CnoIPYFTW1fOw&s=19
The Cheney speech tonight will be delivered in a picturesque spot outside Jackson. Veteran TV producer James Goldston, an adviser to the Jan. 6 committee, and a film crew are on hand here in Wyoming--as "a friend" of Cheney. From our CNN blog:
[Link]
She had spent so much of her life in DC and expected her house seat as a legacy that she didn't even like most of her constituency. Her divorce from the majority in her state was exposed by her votes, and people started looking beyond her father's name. That is what put the end to her career. Now she can get a job at MSNBC or maybe even on The View.
She can get a job at Reason, as an intern to Joe Lancaster. He seems impressed by her credentials.
I am creating eighty North American nation greenbacks per-hr. to finish some web services from home. I actually have not ever thought adore it would even realisable but my friend mate got $27k solely in four weeks simply doing this best (lap-67) assignment and conjointly she convinced Maine to avail. Look further details going this web-page.
.
---------->>> https://smartpay21.pages.dev
https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1559728412863905794?t=V8AlCV8DCVtC0rwsVx7EJg&s=19
Liz Cheney: "Abraham Lincoln was defeated in elections for the Senate and House before he won the most important election of all."
[Video]
Kamala Harris withdrew so early from the presidential race she wasn't even around for the Iowa caucus, and yet she might be a favorite to be nominated as the Democrat's POTUS candidate in 2024.
Democracy!
She'll be the favorite all the way up until the campaign begins and she opens her mouth.
Oh, she opened her mouth years ago.
...said Willie Brown.
I can't tell which is more astounding. The gall of comparing herself to Lincoln or the stupidity of criticizing Trump and then comparing yourself to the one person who unequivocally split the Republic in two.
Unlike Liz Cheney, Abraham Lincoln wasn't a lying neo-con jerk trying to destroy the rule of law in this country.
Well... technically Lincoln suspended habeus corpus..
and the lowest estimate of citizens arrested by 'order' was 14,000 journalists.
I don't know if I see a problem with that anymore.
I guess we don't have 'journalists' anymore anyway.
He also criticized foreign military adventures by the US that were started under shady pretexts.
He also didn't increase his net worth by $9,000,000 in 5 years in office. Military-industrial complex is good for country club Republican neocons. (Just speculating.)
And Richard Nixon lost a gubernatorial election before he won the Presidency, though to be fair he was less corrupt.
Are we still kicking that one around?
Don't worry, she'll end up with a super sweet media gig as the 'respectable Republican' who will parrot the narrative without fail.
If Liz becomes the presidential candidate it will be the first time i won't vote
I don't think you're at much risk, DeSantis already owns the "I'm not Trump" angle for '24.
After Trump's quixotic attempts to retain power after losing in 2020, Cheney lambasted the former president for propagating lies about the election. For her efforts, she became a pariah in her party, stripped from her position as chair of the House Republican Conference.
If all she did was call out Trump, she might not be so unpopular. She instead not only voted to impeach, but was a willing participant in the show-trial Jan. 6 Committee, serving as the controlled opposition team. Ultimately the committee was engaged in narrative-building more than truth-seeking, and Liz Cheney didn't look very rational, but more spite-driven and bitter.
People who have had disagreements with Trump but have avoided joining in the persecution of him have done well enough. Brian Kemp easily survived his primary despite not seeing eye-to-eye with Trump on a plethora of issues (for one, lifting the bogus lockdowns in Georgia in 2020 earlier than Trump advised).
"a willing participant in the show-trial Jan. 6 Committee"
There's nothing more anti-libertarian than that farce. Joe Lancaster is a disgusting authoritarian shill.
Really? Trump got an unfair share, but it kinda seems like normal infighting of the 2 party establishment reminiscent of Clinton Lewinsky, Watergate and Iran-Contra.
The j6 committee is the breaking of every norm. The 7 years of investigations and juries is also the breaking of every norm.
Is it the breaking of every norm? It seems like the usual show-boating that congress has done before to me.
I'm not sure what you mean about the 7 years of investigations and juries. I'd appreciate if you could clarify for me.
Russia gate.
Impeachments.
Tax Returns.
J6 Show Trial.
Raiding his home.
I'm sure there are more going back to 2016.
It broke the 230 year unbroken precedent that the minority got to name their own committee members. That was a pretty big norm to break, and she gladly cooperated in it.
Looking at the polls, she might have been reelected before she did that. It really marked the moment at which she burned the last bridge back to her old party.
Got it. Good points.
Keno ended lockdowns while DeSantis was basically acting like Newsom
Fuck you Joe, Cheney was a warmongering neocon fighting an unethical vendetta against Trump for criticizing her warmongering neocon dad. And there's nothing ethical about operating a kangaroo court dedicated to misleading idiots about January 6.
I can't believe that a purported libertarian magazine would write a hagiography for the person who did this: House Democrats, Working With Liz Cheney, Restrict Trump’s Planned Withdrawal of Troops From Afghanistan and Germany
Absolutely fucking disgusting.
How is this article a hagiography? It also mentions nasty positions she's taken over the years. Do you have reading comprehension problems?
Apparently you do:
"After Trump's quixotic attempts to retain power after losing in 2020, Cheney lambasted the former president for propagating lies about the election. For her efforts, she became a pariah in her party, stripped from her position as chair of the House Republican Conference. Trump endorsed her primary opponent nearly a year ago before Hageman had even announced her candidacy."
Oh well, they’ll be a nice gig waiting for her at fucking Raytheon.
Or MSNBC
Can she write? She’d make a good Reason writer.
Writing skills aren't required at Reason.
Liz Cheney might have been a poor candidate from a Reason perspective, but did being pro waterboarding and anti-terrorist-defending attorneys, and to some extent going along with the birthers cost her votes amongst GOP supporters? Most assuredly not.
The irony is that when she finally stood up for principle and the truth, then she lost GOP support.
And why should it? Those are not issues that affect most Americans.
What Cheney stood up for was a massive abuse of government power, a witch hunt, and a suppression of any discussion of problems with US voting procedures. Cheney was part of an attack on the foundations of American liberties and the rule of law.
Ah, a true believer.
Yes, I'm a true believer in the rule of law, the Constitution, and small government.
You're obviously not.
Riiiiiight. So you would have opposed the 1/6 rioters once they trespassed on the Capitol and got violent, and supported prosecuting them where crimes were committed, and you would have wanted to investigate how it happened and whether the Federal government - in the person of the president and any other politicians - were involved. You know, rule of law.
The people involved in 1/6 have been thoroughly prosecuted. Except Ray Epps.
“and you would have wanted to investigate how it happened”
You can always tell a fifty center from a true believer, because a true believer is actually aware of the opposition’s position (except idiots like Dee). A fifty center like SRG doesn’t even realize that there has been requests for “how it happened” since day one.
Yes there were requests, initially. A bipartisan commission was going to be established. Then the GOP backed away from this probably because the leadership were afraid that enough of the Trump cult continued to support him that it would cost them their position to investigate honestly. And then when the Democrats set up the committee, McCarthy nominated members who would potentially be persons the committee wanted to investigate, hence showing bad faith.
But I guess it's just easier for you to pretend otherwise.
Investigating crimes is not a legitimate function of Congress, period.
It is when the investigation is for the purposes of establishing whether or what new legislation might be required, for example, There are other grounds.
And the GOP did not, IIRC, advance that particular argument.
BTW what do you think happens for an impeachment to occur? An investigation. I guess you didn't think this through.
That is clearly not the case for the 1/6 commission.
Impeachments are not criminal investigations.
SRG has no critical thinking skills otherwise he'd know not only what the Jan 6 committee stated but also the most compelling unanswered questions about the Jan 6 narrative the committee produced (i.e., what was Ray Epps doing there, why did the Capital police and Epps take barricades down and wave people into the capitol, non-answers as to whether federal agents were suited up and acting as protestors and/or capitol police and did these people, if they existed, have identifying wristbands, the timing of finding the pipe bombs at the RNC and DNC headquarters in Washington D.C., the way the video showing the planting of the DNC bomb was edited to NOT show the planting of the bomb when there was a second camera that would show it perfectly, the illogic of the whereabouts of Kamala Harris during this time [at the DNC headquarters or not], the claim that 5 people died because of the "insurrection" when there was only one that died as a direct result of it [Ashli Babbitt, a Trump supporter, shot for no apparent reason by a Capitol police officer] and the 4 others that died of natural causes that were Trump supporters, the fact that "we were 10 minutes from congress-people being killed" despite their being no weapons in the Capitol, the apparent lies of AOC about her being in the Capitol and many more questions that have been raised). I'm not saying there was a conspiracy committed by the DOJ and Democrats, but just answer those questions. Not ever addressing any of those questions makes thinking people question the honesty of the narrative.
Congressional committees have no legitimate function investigating crimes; their purpose is limited to impeachments and the passage of laws, neither of which the 1/6 commission is doing. That is what makes the 1/6 commission such a serious abuse of power.
Of course.
We know how it happened, and we know that the Federal government was involved, through numerous embedded FBI agents.
By the way, I despised that family of neocon, totalitarian war mongers long before Trump entered the picture.
So did I, and it is interesting that Cheney chose this hill to die on. I also think it was appalling that both Bush and Cheney pere were allowed to give unsworn testimony in secret about the Iraq campaign. But I also think that Trump is an authoritarian POS who is corrupt, incompetent (fortunately, in some respects). a mendacious grifter, and suspiciously deferential to Putin.
“So did I, and it is interesting that Cheney chose this hill to die on”
Only if you’re completely ignorant. Or are you denying the existence of the MIC?
But you voted for Biden anyway.
To be more accurate, I voted against Trump. I thought Biden was a poor choice but even then he was better than Trump.
There was a third choice and write in if your principles didn't align with Biden so I'm not sure the voting against is really accurate when you had other choices that could meet your needs.
There was no third choice who had a chance of defeating Trump, bucko.
Not a Trump fan. But as a libertarian, you can't really claim to hate the Bush-Cheney Administration and their ilk then vote for someone with Biden's record. An Establishment Democrat Party hack whose only redeeming quality is that he may have opposed Obama's surge in Afghanistan. There's not really anything there to hang your hat on unless you bought into his BS campaign rhetoric.
It sucked as a choice, I agree.
In what way was Trump, who FOUGHT the demands of the media to lock down the country, authoritarian?
Because authoritarianism requires fealty and deference to the leader. I agree it normally manifests with the imposition of greater control as well. But you have to consider the specific context. Trump evidently regarded Covid as a threat to his re-election from the beginning and hence continued to downplay it for a very long time.
You're free to think that. That does not legitimize the 1/6 commission. The first impeachment of Trump was a legitimate exercise of power by the House (even if it was legally ridiculous). The second impeachment and the 1/6 commission are unacceptable abuses of power.
As for your charges against Trump, I have seen no evidence for authoritarianism, corruption, or incompetence, at least not relative to other presidents. If you want to see a truly authoritarian POS who is corrupt, incompetent, a mendacious grifter, and suspiciously deferential to foreign dictators, look no further than Biden, Obama, and the Clintons. For starters, unlike Trump, these people increased their net worth a hundred fold while in office.
^THIS^
Its as if people think repeating the talking point that Trump is a fascist authoritarian [which he wasn't in practice] that will make everyone take that as a given.
Leftists project. It's all they understand.
"The irony is that when she finally stood up for principle and the truth"
Oppressing dissidents, lying about legitimate protests and kangaroo court show trials will never be principle and the truth, you fascist fuck.
Dissidents? This isn't the USSR. Rioting in the Capitol because your guy lost a fair election - as 60+ fucking lawsuits plus additional audits proved - doesn't make you a dissident. It makes you an anti-American POS.
Fuck off back to the Confederacy, you inbred loser.
It doesn't understand.
It does. It's pretending it doesn't. Shrike pulls that trick all the time.
Do you think the changes in election laws by people who didn’t have the authority to change election laws (all democrats) makes it more or less fair?
Ir depends on the consequences.
BTW how did all those lawsuits fare?
It depends on the consequences?
Either the process is fair, or it isn't. The ends don't justify the means.
The apparently unfair steps taken - though not found by any court, regardless of the politics of the judge, to be unfair (with a single exception IIRC) - led to more citizens being able to vote and, indeed, voting.
On what basis do you claim that the original process was fair given that there was clear bias against Democratic voters as a consequence? Oh wait, consequences don't matter.
If a process is unfair, on the other hand, and a solution to unfairness is also claimed to be unfair, one pretty much has to look at consequences. In the case of elections, the easiest way to judge fairness is citizens voting.
The Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin suits ruled against the changes dumbfuck.
"Dissidents? Squawk, bluster"
Well, I was thinking about the parents and the FBI, and the IRS harrassment and the political prosecutions, but I guess the Jan 6 guys work too, sort of.
You've been busy little rats.
"Fuck off back to the Confederacy
Oh Shrike. You're the Georgia peach, I'm just that asshole Canadian, remember?
This isn't the USSR.
Not yet, but the Democrats are doing all they can to turn the USA into a Soviet shithole.
Fuck off back to the Confederacy,
The Confederacy was defeated by Republicans, you pig-ignorant lefturd.
-jcr
You try to justify House committees abusing their power and persecuting political enemies without any legal basis. That makes YOU the "anti-American POS".
Claims unfounded in fact.
I saw on Tucker tonight that she increased her net worth by seven- fold from 6 million to 44 million in the six years she was in congress. How the fuck does that happen?
She was a top (Republican) politician for years before the 1/6 committee. That's what happens.
Pelosi and Schumer's wealth took the exact same trajectory but Rand Paul's didn't.
Even AOC and Talib are getting rich. Are you sure you want to go there Shrike?
There's a reason I put Republican in brackets. Getting wealthy in Congress is common across the political spectrum. I didn't know that Rand Paul isn't getting rich, but I doubt he'll be short of a few bucks once he steps down. Lots of well-funded think tanks for him to go to.
I wonder what your source is for Paul's lack of wealth. There seems to be a discrepancy.
2018: $770k https://www.opensecrets.org/personal-finances/rand-paul/net-worth?cid=N00030836
2022: $31mm, of which over $20mm is inherited, according to one source. https://caknowledge.com/rand-paul-net-worth
That's a nice jump in wealth, even if much is inherited.
I'm genuinely curious about why you think "shrike" is any kind of insult. Is there some meme or urban dictionary definition I'm unaware of? The shrike is an intelligent and sometimes co-operative hunter - unusual for predatory birds, so it seems odd to use it as an insult. Over to you for enlightenment.
"That's a nice jump in wealth, even if much is inherited."
Most of it was inherited. Now how much of Pelosi, Schumer, AOC and Talib's new wealth was inherited?
"why you think "shrike" is any kind of insult... The shrike is an intelligent and sometimes co-operative hunter"
"I'm not Shrike, but he's associated with a marvel of nature"
Oh yeah, you're totally not him, lol. Now tell us how wise, discerning and generous you are too.
Ah, so you think I'm a sock of a prior poster, because I know what shrikes are. What a maroon.
Yeah, you're really tricking everyone.
Ron and Rand Paul both had very successful medical practices, and Ron had been investing in gold mining stocks ever since Nixon reneged on the Bretton Woods treaty. Not at all surprising that their family wealth is quite significant.
-jcr
The two impeachments, the Jan 6 committee, and the FBI raids are horrific abuses of power by Democrats, the kinds of stuff that happens in totalitarian regimes and banana republics. The fact that you think that participation in such abuses of power amounts to "putting country over party" shows that you are as much of a fascist as Cheney is.
A latte republic.
(Soon we can just delete one of the "t"s.)
"kinds of stuff that happens in totalitarian regimes and banana republics"
You mean stuff like challenging the results of an election?
Disclaimer: I agree that Dems are power abusing would-be authoritarians, I just take issue that Trump and Republicans are any different.
You think both sides are equally bad? The dems begged trump to be more authoritarian under covid and he refused. Same with most GOP governors.
No I don't think both sides are equally bad in terms of acting like a banana republic. The republicans are way worse. On most other issues dems are worse though.
You're a fool.
That's the nicest insult I've received here yet.
It's not an insult, it's a statement of fact.
Getting meaner...
There hasn't been a single election of a Republican president since 1988 that hasn't seen the Democrats make claims of theft during the count of the electoral vote on the floor of Congress.
And yet you think that when the Republicans challenge a presidential election that had more procedural irregularities (justified by COVID) than the previous five combined, they're suddenly "way worse" about acting like residents of a banana republic.
You are being utterly ridiculous.
It's a difference of scale. Show me the loser trying to strong-arm state officials to change the outcome, the loser trying to stop congress from certifying the election or the loser's supporters storming the capital in those elections. That shit is bananas.
Gore saying he really won Florida or HRC excuse making about russian bots is just not the same order of magnitude as what Trump is doing.
Strong arm? Lol.
Bully?
That you found it necessary to swap from discussion of Republicans versus Democrats to the specifics of "the loser", is, of course, a complete concession of the point that the parties aren't all that different.I mean, what's your argument here?
"Oh, sure, twenty Democratic members of the House tried to block certification of the electoral vote count on January 6, 2001; one Senator and 31 Democratic members of the House did so on January 6, 2004; and seven Democratic members of House did so on January 6, 2016 . And of course Trump's inauguration was met by a mass protest that broke into rioting in DC, plus all sorts of declarations of forming a 'resistance' by Democratic elected officials. But the fact that Trump in his own person was less cautious and dignified about claiming the election was stolen than Gore, Kerry, or Clinton were means the Republican Party is an order of magnitude more election-rejecting than the Democrats!"
Like I said, utterly ridiculous.
"That you found it necessary to swap from discussion of Republicans versus Democrats to the specifics of "the loser", is, of course, a complete concession of the point that the parties aren't all that different." What?
"But the fact that Trump in his own person was less cautious and dignified about claiming the election was stolen"
Less cautious?! That's a HUGE understatement. He was actively trying to alter the outcome after the fact. And he has a large percentage of republicans on board with him.
Also remember they said it was racist. Pelosi marched in NY. Trump wanted to close the international travel in Jan. Dems cried and said no.
No, challenging the result of an election is not what happens in totalitarian regimes at all; to the contrary, persecuting people who challenge elections is what happens in totalitarian regimes.
Another thing the US has in common with totalitarian regimes is that it lacks any meaningful processes for auditing election results or for addressing problems that happened during elections. If you are too partisan to understand that during the 2020 election, just look at the 2000 election.
US elections are a joke. That didn't use to matter when government was small and powerless, but in the 21st century, the broken US election system is a red carpet for fascists and socialists.
"No, challenging the result of an election is not what happens in totalitarian regimes at all"
I should have been more clear that I meant like a banana republic, not a totalitarian regime.
But yeah, you make good points that there are major problems with US elections and I agree with your red carpet statement.
"challenging the results of an election?"
Hillary, Gore constantly.
Abrams says she is governor of GA .
If it's close, there will always be challenges.
To name a few. Yeap Trump challenged and is not in office. When in was in office he was a total authoritarian right? Banning books, language, telling companies I'm going to destroy you...wait that is Biden and the Dems.
I'm not a fan of Trump's character. Thin skinned, sleazeball. But the people giving advice or running him - his policies, in general were good.
Can you say that about Biden's handlers? Biden can't even remember where he is at
"Birtherism", "Russian Collusion" and "Florida Recount" are all things of a piece. They were desperate backdoor attempts to find a reason to overturn a presidential election, but only the first is truly held against anybody who advanced it.
Well the Birtherism is the only one that truly has issues of fact.
The others were at least at one time up for debate or concern, and if you feel you have been lied to, I can see at least partially believing some of it.
However, there has never been any reasonable doubt about Obama's place of birth, and he provided every piece of evidence that could reasonably be asked for. Then, every other serious candidate for president has been born in a way that the location of their birth does not matter. It only mattered for Obama because his mother was so young that she could not convey citizenship alone, and his father was a non-citizen.
That's a solid list of bad causes Cheney supported, but it's strange that your takeaway is that her support of the "get Trump" cause is an exception to the badness of the rest, rather than a sign that get-Trump is also a bad cause
I don’t understand why the trumpista commenters read Reason.
I get that Reason isn’t as libertarian as it used to be, but the comments. Holy shit.
Yeah, why don't we love the Cheneys as much as we did 20 years ago?
A Reason article celebrating the egregious Liz Cheney because she's hosting political show trials is about as bad as it can get, Bubba.
I started subscribing to Reason as a teen 20+ years ago, when everything Cheney stands for was anathema to this magazine. And now look.
I can't understand why you're not furious too.
Because there is a strand of authoritarian conservatism that is completely oblivious to its own political position and its followers think that they are libertarians, being utterly delusional, and come here so that they can excoriate Reason and pragmatic libertarians for lack of purity.
Meanwhile authoritarian Marxists like yourself are the real libertarians, huh.
Fuckwit, how can someone who favours lightly regulated free markets and private ownership of the means of production, and market economies over distributive economies, be a Marxist?
Sheesh you lot are ignorant of political terms.
Fuckwit, how can someone who favours lightly regulated free markets and private ownership of the means of production, and market economies over distributive economies, be a Marxist?
They can't.
But since you only ever take time out from defending Marxist, totalitarian authoritarianism to mention those things when someone point out that you're a leftist or a Marxist it's been understood that you're not one of the people who favors lightly regulated free markets and private ownership of the means of production, and market economies over distributive economies.
There are enough weasel words in there to make your ideology compatible with progressivism, neo-Marxist, and fascism.
What's funny is prof Haidt studied this and showed leftist losers like yourself were the least likely to understand their opponents arguments often attributing the least gracious interpretation of the arguments on surveys. And this was before the anti trump hysteria.
I am well aware of Haidt, who I have often cited. You're making the mistake off thinking "Anti-Trump" =- "leftist". You're also assuming that the average finding is universally applicable, which is a mistake.
And clearly you don't understand why people are anti-Trump.
You're free to entertain whatever beliefs you have about Trump.
What makes you a radical leftist is that you justify the abuse of power and destruction of the rule of law by the left in an attempt to persecute Trump.
Oh, please show us some evidence for this "authoritarian conservatism".
Reason's "pragmatic libertarianism" consists of free drugs, free sex, no zoning, open borders, and no-tariff trade. That's not "libertarianism" at all; that's somewhere between a communist utopia and a delusion.
Ah yes, things you don't like are communist. Does Reason advocate seizing the means of production? No. Does it advocate for fewer restrictions on citizens? Yes. Are you aware that opposition to tariffs is pretty much a hallmark of free-trade thinking? No.
Under neo-Marxism and fascism, the means of production are held privately.
So does utopian communism.
Opposition to tariffs is also pretty much a hallmark of trade between socialist nations.
"Bubba Jones
August.17.2022 at 12:07 am
Flag Comment Mute User
I don’t understand"
We know.
I don’t understand why life-long libertarians trash Reason for being Democrat shills.
Seriously Bubba, do you think multiple articles defending Liz Chaney is an appropriate position for a libertarian publication to take?
Either the rag is actually libertarian, or it's just another right-leaning place. If you can't figure out what they are, well there's no helping you.
Left leaning DNC propaganda machine is more appropriate, but then you may be one of antifa's foot soldiers looking for a marxist utopia to grind everyone else down to your level of useless
"I don’t understand why the trumpista commenters read Reason.
I get that Reason isn’t as libertarian as it used to be, but the comments. Holy shit. "
TDS goes both ways.
I used to read Reason. Even donated. For me, Reason is TDS. Everything is Trump trump trump. They can even see it.
I'm not a Trump fan. I voted for him twice because the other options would destroy the country (As you see fit).
This article is a total lie. Cheney was never a conservative. She was elected on name. Look at her votes. Republicans' hold people account (Take Trump out since that is what TDS says). Cheney was lying. Dems re-elect their liars - Nader, CA I slept with a Chinese spy, Hillary, Biden (40 years there), the list goes on.
I come to reason once and a while with hope. Nick's articles are still good.
After Trump's quixotic attempts to retain power after losing in 2020
If nothing comes of the search warrant and the 1/6 inquisition, she's helping to pave the way for his return in 2024.
Nothing will come out of the search warrant.
The Mar a Lago raid happened because the J6 show trial had failed and the left was not going to be able to hold congress because the methods they used to install Biden had been short-circuited since because they couldn't help bragging about how they'd cheated.
So the congress will flip. But worse, this means that they can't stop Trump from getting the second term he should be in now so he's going to be president in 2024 --and he's openly promising to hurt them, to rout them, and to end them.
So they have just two months to do what they thought they'd have two more years to do.
Oh the Huge Manatee!
https://twitter.com/AmbJohnBolton/status/1559729674087006209?t=SxX9MO7Sh7Xb8siQc0kR7g&s=19
.@Liz_Cheney’s loss diminishes our party. By putting her Constitutional responsibilities above partisanship and political future she deserves the highest possible praise. Attacks against Republicans based merely on disagreements about Trump must end.
Reason writers for John Bolton!
"The palindrome of Bolton would be Notlob! It don't work!"
Exactly whose talking points are you parroting?
Wyoming gets what it deserves. Unfortunately we get what Wyoming deserves as well. The place is a dump except for it's spectacularly beautiful but non-productive NW corner and inhabited by mostly idiots. It's Texas with less greenery.
Now if only leftards thought that more of the time...
They could stop pestering everyone with their 'federal' dictation...
Oh but that's right... Their tyrannical socialism tends to throw cities (who got what they deserve) like Detroit into the sh*tter while CA is well on it's way to the same utopian ?paradise?...
Leftard idiocy would be so much better if only leftard State's and Cities were involved.. Finally you pronounce a speckle of wisdom; Now if only that wisdom wasn't so loaded with hypocritical B.S. it was leaving poop stains all across the U.S.
The place is a dump except for it's spectacularly beautiful but non-productive NW corner
You know why it's "non-productive"? Because Teton County is the home of your champagne socialist/Hollywood allies who use the state as a haven from California's onerous income taxes. Talk about a self-own.
and inhabited by mostly idiots.
I'll agree that your fellow left-wingers moving to Jackson, Cody, and Casper are mostly idiots.
It's Texas with less greenery.
Shit, someone's never actually been to Wyoming, other than driving across I-80.
Most people hqve4 never actually been to Wyoming except driving - as fast as they can - across I-80. There's a reason why it's the least densely populated state in the US - 10th largest by area and half a million people. Regrettably I've driven across it in several directions on several occasions.
By the way, Biden counties account for 70% of US GDP while Trump counties account for 30% - true story, look it up.
Cope, seethe, and dilate, Joe Fuckface. Thanks for admitting your allies are "non-productive."
Biden counties account for 70% of US GDP while Trump counties account for 30%
Cope, seethe, and dilate, Joe Fuckface. Thanks for admitting your allies are "non-productive."
How's those Dem sanctuary cities doing? Easy to say we talk everyone till everyone calls your bluff.
Biden counties account for 90% of US crime while Trump counties account for 10%
BTW I would love to see your source because you really don't understand GDP.
What a perfectly concise expression of progressive elitism. And not to worry, Biden is doing what he can to shrink the difference in GDP by reducing the aggregate amount.
He’s doing great! That’s why he’s so popular!!!
Yeah, you follow a real man of the people who has a gold toilet, right? You should check actual GDP growth before saying stuid shit bevis.
I’m in trouble in another spot on this very thread for criticizing Trump, idiot. Way to think independently.
And are you serious about GDP growth? Really? GDP shrunk at 1.6% in Q1 and Is expected to shrink around 1% in Q2. Recognizing a brand new recession is stupid shit?
Biden was handed a smooth bounce back from an intentionally suppressed economy and he butchered it. He’s created a crisis in energy. That’s why he’s historically unpopular. But you think he’s doing swell. You have no grounds to call anybody stupid.
Idiot, can I call you idiot. If Biden counties are so great, why are the Democrats trying to increase the SALT write off again? Isn't it an honor to pay taxes? Why should NY get to write their federal income tax off that someone in WY.
Biden counties account for 70% of US poor and homeless Trump counties account for 30%
LMAO.... Your federal tyrants pretend they own 48% of WY (federal land) so you can take your UN-productive narrative and stick half of it right back up your own *ss...
You and I own federal lands you nincompoop.
California is 45.4% federal lands.
PS Wyoming is 46.7%
https://ballotpedia.org/Federal_land_ownership_by_state
No Joe!!! You treasonous communist retard... I don't own 1/2 of Wyoming and neither do you and neither does your federal commie-tyrants even if they think they do.
Only a treasonous communist would proclaim such an idea that the entire Western USA landmass was 50% --- 100% communist... Because that's what you treasonous leftards do to the USA..
"It's all mine!! It's all mine!! Because I'm in love with treasonous Gov-Guns that STEAL property for communism (i.e. STEALS/CONQUERS the USA for selfish greed)!!!", you summarized.
And you're just kidding yourself if you think that 45% commie-CA is any more productive than the 46% commie-WY is...
He's an idiot. Crap, if I don't pay property taxes I don't even own my house.
Let's see him try to sell some Federal land
Screw off, Joe. You gave us Biden and the progressives and a ruinous energy policy. You don’t get to complain.
Trump Republicans are terrible, anti-Trump Republicans are terrible, and Democrats are terrible. There you go.
Liz Cheney is a pro-war neo-con which makes her undesirable.
Nice job of shitting on the rest of the state JF. I'm sure where you live is a total garden spot, right? The NW corner is Inhabited by a lot of progressive idiots from the west coast who have voted to make the place's they come from total shit holes and like locust's they will destroy their host and move on to their next victim's
"they will destroy their host and move on to their next victim's"
One of the side-effects of STEALING instead of EARNING/CREATING.
Which is very old news; that STEALING what's already CREATED is leftards entire agenda. And they are literally on the very edge of running out of things to STEAL (complete victim destruction).
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2022/08/16/politics/liz-cheney-wyoming-alaska-primaries/index.html
"The last of the 10 House Republicans who voted for Trump's second impeachment to face voters, Cheney now becomes the eighth who will not be returning to Congress next year. Her loss, though widely anticipated, represents a significant marker in the wider fight over the direction of the Republican Party."
Love the completely unbiased framing here. They don't mention the one who was gerrymandered out by Democrats, the two whose primary opponents were funded by Democrats, or the ones who aren't running.
"Cheney lambasted the former president for propagating lies about the election". He propagated no lies. And everything coming out of her low-budget version of the Moscow Trials (Jan 6 committee) has been lies.
He propagated no lies.
You mean, he didn't say the election was stolen?
Fact: in multiple critical states, the executive and judicial branches of government violated state election laws.
Fact: Zuckerberg and others spent more than half a billion dollars to bolster turnout in blue areas.
Fact: US corporate media colluded to suppress negative information about Biden prior to the election.
You may say that these are not legally actionable, but they certainly add up to a "stolen" election.
(That is on top of any actual fraud, which is impossible to prove given current US voting procedures.)
Fact: over 60 lawsuits were rejected.
And it seems that according to you, only Republicans are allowed to boost turnout. When Democrats do it, it counts as theft.
So? How does that negate anything I said?
We're not talking about "boosting turnout", we are talking about selectively subsidizing public election infrastructure. That should be illegal no matter who does it. I'm not aware of any Republicans doing that, let alone to the tune of half a billion dollars.
I loved the counties that had dead on their voter rolls. I also love how some democrat counties voted at 107%. That's a neat trick.
Trump said it was stolen. I'm sure you have the same issue with Abrahams the non-governor of Georgia. What about Hillary? She felt it was stolen. What about Gore?
Humm, maybe the pattern is every politician thinks if they lost it was stolen. Maybe you just have TDS
Correct
The author did no research beyond 10 minutes on Google.
Hageman sounds better than many LP candidates, certainly 1000% better than Cheney.
From Harriet Hageman's website:
Our government must be transparent and accountable and so we must rein in the surveillance state in America. The FBI and NSA have been pursuing surveillance operations outside of the public eye and in violation of the Constitution.
Current FISA law inhibits Congress’ ability to exercise proper oversight of FISA activities and investigations. FISA laws must be reformed to restrict the government from circumventing the Fourth Amendment, from snooping through our private records and communications, from pursuing political witch hunts, and from abusing its power.
Every decision that Congress makes should be focused on what is best for American families and businesses, not on what helps the globalists or the military industrial complex.
The federal government has grown so massively in excess of anything our Founders could have ever envisioned that they would hardly recognize this country today. For years, Congress has been delegating its authority to ever-expanding agencies, thereby empowering unelected government bureaucrats to write and enforce regulations that affect the lives and livelihoods of every person in Wyoming.
It is vital that we rein in spending. High inflation is a hidden tax on Americans at the grocery store, at the gas pump, and in every aspect of our lives.
Their agenda is Critical Race Theory, imposing bone-crushing taxes on American families, taking our guns, silencing free speech, weaponizing government agencies against us, and destroying the American dream.
And quite a bit more. I don't agree with some of it, but it is far better than most major party candidates I have seen.
https://www.hagemanforwyoming.com/issues
Why let research and real reporting get in the way of an agenda? If Lancaster did that, he might not get invited to the same cocktail parties as ENB.
Until last year Hageman disliked trump. Hard to know what she believes in. Just because she says it doesn’t mean it’s what she really believes. Need to check in every morning to see what’s changed.
Until last year, Cheney hadn't yet alienated the party and the people who voted her in to office. Anyone with political ambitions in Wyoming would have been nuts not to take the opportunity to knock that nepot off her perch.
And inter-party squabbles amongst former allies over political power aren't exactly uncommon in those circumstances. Read up on the slapfights between New Mexico Governor Clyde Tingley and Senator Dennis Chavez sometime.
Until around 2018, the majority of Republicans disliked Trump. That was until they saw what he actually accomplished in office, saw past his ridiculous rhetoric and the smear campaigns, and saw how utterly evil Democrats have become.
People legitimately change their minds, in particular about Trump.
Tru - Dat
No one at Reason read Biden's website, why would they read Hageman's?
"After Trump's quixotic attempts to retain power after losing in 2020, Cheney lambasted the former president for propagating lies about the election. For her efforts, she became a pariah in her party, stripped from her position as chair of the House Republican Conference."
When you attack a large voting bloc in your party, your position in leadership is not beneficial to anybody.
Poor candidate? She was and had been the perfect candidate and would have run uncontested, that is, until she decided to channel fascism and act and talk stupid.
I don't know about the fascism part, but it's pretty clear she was toast when she decided to alienate the party and the people who actually voted for her. Contrast her approach to guys like Kemp or Youngkin, who were able to to deflect the Trump issue and thus deprive it of oxygen--which is, to be blunt, the way to make him a non-entity in the political realm again.
You'd think the smart set would know better than to provide a well-known attention whore with the thing he craves, but the fact they continue to do so shows that they needed him as their Emmanuel Goldstein once Bush left the stage.
Since February 27, 1933, that's been the usual word for liberty-hating right-wingers who spread the lie that some property damage to the seat of the legislature was an insurrection directed by a conspiracy of their political opponents.
Fascist economies were developed before that date, you know.
>>Cheney was opposed ... due to her criticism
it's been +100 degrees here in Dallas for three months ... due to a slight warming trend
Y’all are like the progressives and Biden’s energy disaster. You’re so fucked up by politics that you can’t see how ridiculous this is. Republicans are the only thing that can stop our glorious progressive future, but instead have lost themselves over a narcissistic megalomaniacal huckster.
The new rep from Wyoming looks like a flip flopping nothing, but she was willing to fellate Trump, which is the only criteria needed to represent the Republican Party these days.
You’re lucky that Manchin was willing to take shit to save us from the worst of it after Trump’s fit cost the senate, but that ain’t gonna last forever. Biden’s absolute incompetence will put it off for awhile, but it won’t last forever.
So, for what you’re letting the progressives do, fuck right off.
Unless you're actually from the South or Texas, you don't sound "homespun" when you use y'all, you sound like a hick.
Born in Tennessee, been in Texas since late high school.
Bless your heart.
Bless your own for thinking that anyone here is "letting" the progressives do anything.
When you try to insult a stranger publicly and turn out to be 180 degrees wrong and instead of being embarrassed enough to simply shut up, it proves you’re a jackass.
Maybe save the outrage for the copium in your OP.
All presidents are "narcissistic" and "megalomaniacal"; that goes with the job description.
But as for "huckster", if I look back at the actual policies over the past two decades (Bush, Obama, Trump, Biden), Trump is by far the most accomplished and successful president.
And people who abuse the power of Congress to impeach presidents after they have left office and to conduct criminal investigations using congressional committees are not going to save Republicans; in fact, such people are going to destroy this country and the rule of law. That's why Liz had to go. Whether you like or dislike Trump has nothing whatsoever to do with it.
All presidents are "narcissistic" and "megalomaniacal"; that goes with the job description.
Not HIllary.
Except in her deranged mind, Hillary never was president.
And Hillary's psychological and moral problems go much deeper than mere narcissism or megalomania.
Hillary didn't lose the election. It was stolen by Russian bots.
Which among the four stooges (counting Shemp here) was the smartest?
I couldn't care less which one is the smartest; what I care about is which one did the least damage, and we have a clear winner there.
"Cheney lost her seat because she put country over party"
Does anyone here know of any websites promoting libertarian views?
Dude, you’re not libertarian. Quit deluding yourself.
Dude, take your own advice.
"The real libertarians are we authoritarian lefties, because legal weed and buttsex and abortion."
Yes.
spiked-online.com
And.
I’ve been pointing out Germany’s experience with the Green New Deal and the progressives don’t give a shit. They have their axes to grind and don’t give a shit about who it hurts.
Hello.
Not just that. When the SC was threatened physically after Dobbs the pundits were just “it’s only words” and “protest at someone’s home is fine”. Now the FBI is threatened over this and now words are violence again and it’s the end of our republic.
The level of hypocrisy is off the charts.
Cheney wasn't defeated for criticizing Trump; she was defeated for going full Captain Ahab over Trump. Twenty months after Trump left office, Cheney was still screeching that her primary mission in life was to bring down Trump. Perhaps the author of this post finds it surprising that the voters of Wyoming do not share this priority and strangely expect their only representative to pursue their interests rather than devote all her energies to her personal vendetta against one man.
If she was such a conservative and traditionalist; why did she keep her Dads name and not her husbands? If my father was a warmonger I would ditch that name.
Calculated.
The best part about Cheney's loss is that the neocons have been consoling themselves with the time-honored lament, "at least she still has her principles, moral victories are just as good as actual victories."
Liz Cheney has become very focused on Trump, much to the disapproval of her constituency. Liz also voted for the gun control bill, much to the dismay of her constituents. Her vote wasn’t even need for its passage. Her attempts to manipulate the primary process was an unethical and blatant attempt to avoid the consequences of her choices. All she ended up doing, was ensuring the republicans voted in large numbers to keep the democrats from influencing the republican primary. She has the right to do as she feels best, but her constituency also has the right to voice their disapproval at the ballot box. Any politician who feels they are above having to answer to their constituency has forgotten why they were elected in the first place and has become caught up in the feeling of power at being seated in the halls of Washington. As a side note, just because we disapprove of Liz Cheney’s actions does not automatically make us Trump supporters.
There's no excuse for voting for a lunatic to have power over me.
It's hard to feel sorry for someone who made millions of dollars during her time in Congress.
Boy Reason, you have gone down hill
"Despite solid conservative credentials and name recognition as the daughter of a former vice president, Cheney was opposed by a solid majority of her party"
Please show what she has done to advance the conservative cause? Just because her last name is Cheney? She did nothing buy January 6th. Did she take Biden to task for any of the numerous issues? No, she is stuck 18 months ago (even if you believed it happened).
Bush/Cheny (all of them) are not conservatives..maybe neo but no. They aren't.
Face it - she was useless and it was all about her. You didn't talk about the lies, and nothing burger produces by the committee. Wait, I know the Russians did it.
Finally Democrats go on and on about Trump and Russians which was disproved and they don't get punished.