Marco Rubio's Libertarian Challenger Blasts the Senator as a 'Socialist'
Dennis Misigoy is unsparing in his criticism of both Rubio and likely Democratic nominee Val Demings.

When Florida holds its primary elections on Tuesday, the Senate races are likely to be the least dramatic: The incumbent, Sen. Marco Rubio, is running unopposed in the Republican primary, and Rep. Val Demings, who currently represents the state's 10th Congressional District, is polling at 80 percent in the Democratic primary.
Despite the relatively low stakes, the race is still likely to garner attention: Rubio, who ran for president in 2016, faces a tough potential opponent in Demings, who was famously on the shortlist for President Joe Biden's potential 2020 running mates. A University of North Florida poll this month showed Demings with a four-point lead over Rubio, 48–44. And in an election year when Democrats could defy historical trends and keep control of the Senate, every close race will be under intense scrutiny.
One person who is counting on that extra attention is Dennis Misigoy, the only Senate candidate from the Libertarian Party of Florida.* Speaking with Reason earlier this month, he made the case for a third-party candidacy. He also criticized both of his likely future opponents but reserved particularly strong words for the incumbent.
"Rubio is pretty uniquely bad," says Misigoy. "Not just in the sense of being unpopular and easy to dislike, but policy-wise: This is a guy who got elected as part of that Tea Party wave back in 2010, and…when you listen to him talk about dealing with issues of economic policy, it's all central economic planning, it's not free markets."
In an age when socialism seems ascendant among younger Democrats, and Republicans position themselves in full-throated opposition, Misigoy sees little difference between Rubio and progressive icons like Sen. Bernie Sanders (I–Vt.) or Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D–N.Y.).
"I would characterize him, by the Republican standards, as a socialist. Is he a socialist by the means of, 'seize the means of production and nationalize everything,' socialist? No. But is he socialist by the 'Obamacare is socialist' standard? I'd say, yeah."
Not that Rubio is necessarily an outlier in the GOP, in Misigoy's view. "Republicans have long presented themselves as the champions of fiscal responsibility, smaller government, and whatnot," he says. "I really got turned off to them in the first part of the 2000s…George W. Bush was president for eight years. For six of those eight years, you had Republican majorities in Congress, and what'd they do with the spending, and the growth of government?"
Misigoy is the son of immigrants, including a mother whose family fled Cuba immediately after the 1959 revolution in which Fidel Castro overthrew military dictator Fulgencio Batista and installed a Communist regime. Notably, Rubio initially claimed the same about his own parents and has used his family's experience as fuel for his own anti-Communism. But in 2011, The Washington Post reported that Rubio's family had actually left in 1956, not as political refugees but as economic immigrants.* (Misigoy clarifies, "I don't begrudge anyone for being an economic refugee, but obviously when you then take [such] different positions on immigration policy, then there's a different wrinkle to that.")
In contrast to both Republicans and Democrats, Misigoy hopes to bring an actual sense of fiscal restraint to the Senate. In 2016, he ran successfully for a spot on the board of supervisors for a Miami-Dade County Community Development District (CDD). A CDD, as defined under Florida law, is a "local unit of special-purpose government" formed for "specialized functions." Misigoy says the experience gave him a sense of what a term in office would really be like as a third-party candidate: "I spent two years where any motion I made died for lack of a second, unless it was to adjourn a meeting or to approve minutes."
But in leading by example, he says he was able to convince other like-minded citizens to run for office as well. "We had a new majority after the 2018 midterms, and we were able to do a lot of things differently: We had a slate of wasteful projects, [and] we were able to save the district 78 percent of what had been allocated for those projects."
Misigoy has a lengthy list of policy proposals, from a more restrained foreign policy to repealing the Davis-Bacon and Jones Acts. But speaking to Reason, he focused largely on inflation and government spending.
"The most widespread negative impact [of government policy] is inflation. Inflation is affecting everybody in this country" in the form of higher prices, he explains, "and all of that is the consequence of the monetary policy and the fact, in particular in the COVID era, that we've been printing trillions" of dollars.
Misigoy accuses both parties of going along with it, either with the "tacit approval" of preserving the status quo, or more overtly, as when Demings tweeted in February that "the Federal Reserve is the most important institution in America in the fight against inflation."
"I got a laugh out of [that]," says Misigoy. "Obviously, we have a little bit of a different perspective: The monetary policy we have is causing all these problems…Creating money doesn't mean that you're actually creating something new, it's stealing the wealth from the money people already have in circulation…Their bank account looks the same, but the value is not the same."
"We want the market to be as efficient as it can be, because an efficient market delivers goods and services to people at the lowest cost possible, lowers the cost of living, overall that makes it easier for people to live, and it leaves more capital left over for people to create new things that improve people's lives further."
This article includes reporting from Alyssa Varas.
*CORRECTION: The Washington Post reported that Rubio's parents had left Cuba as economic immigrants, not as political exiles fleeing communism as Rubio had claimed. Misigoy's party's full name is the Libertarian Party of Florida.
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
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-07) This top career is achievable by everyone, and it will improve their online revenue by:.
.
After reading this article:>> https://incomebuzz7.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. (dnt-01) This top career is achievable by everyone, and it will improve their online revenue by:.
.
After reading this article:>>>>> https://extradollars3.blogspot.com/
Given Rubio's background and his parents escape from Cuba, his chances of being a Socialist is less likely than Val's Communist leanings.
I can't believe anyone can be so partisan to call Rubio a Socialist.
Maybe Val can run for mayor of Orlando next.
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 (anj--11) assignment and conjointly she convinced Maine to avail. Look further details going this web-page.
.
---------->>> https://googlechoice.netlify.app
A University of North Florida poll this month showed Demings with a four-point lead over Rubio, 48–44.
“The UNF PORL Florida Statewide Poll consists of a random sample of 1,624 registered Florida voters and was conducted August 8 through August 12, 2022, by the Public Opinion Research Lab (PORL) at the University of North Florida… This study had a 4.2% response rate.”
So polling data from 68 people?
Jeez. Sure sounds that way. One would hope that 4.2% resulted in 1624 samples, but that's not what it says.
Has to be. A quick check shows it's impossible to get 48% out of 68. 32 is 47%, 33 is 48.53% or 49%.
Young Americans are drawn to alternative economics because they see that the current system of capitalism has MORPHED into modern version of FEUDALISM which increasingly fails to reward HARD WORK similar to extreme socialist systems.
As far as our current economic structure, Younger folks have awakened - one of several reasons for current worker shortages - to the bleak reality of more concentrated corporate oligopolies with engrained corporate wage suppression (offshoring, foreign worker visas, union destruction) that is mostly enriching the taker investor class. The unfortunate reality is that for a growing populace, only working for yourself will you have chance of any kind of prosperity.
Fuck off slaver.
“ The unfortunate reality is that for a growing populace, only working for yourself will you have chance of any kind of prosperity.”
only working for yourself will you have chance of any kind of prosperity.
Only then will you understand what long hours and real work is.
I would actually be quite pleased if people pushed for a growth of small-businesses and start-ups. That would involve a lot more petty bourgeoisie though, which I believe at least Marxists take issue with.
One argument for better public education and a public health system is that it increases the number of people who are both capable of setting up and running small businesses and who can also afford to take the risk of going it alone because they don't have to attach themselves to EvilCorp for medical coverage.
Feudalism is the exact outcome you get when central government dictates so much of the economy. Asking for more government control, regulations, subsidies, etc is how you get MORE feudalism
Feudalism implies a powerful manorial aristocracy, where peasants and serfs essentially exist at the mercy of the landowning classes, not a strong central government. Each estate was its own government, and feudal peasants often turned to the monarch to protect them from the nobles.
That being said, given how real estate speculation enriches a parasitic upper class and how much the lower classes are drowning in private debt, I'll go along with America being quasi- or semi-feudalistic. At least the old school peasants had the commons and feudal lords had a sense of noblesse oblige, which didn't persist into industrial capitalism.
He used "feudalism" in an analogy, not it a literal sense. In case you hadn't noticed there are no manorial lords or serfs anymore. Or maybe you're one of those uppity Libertarians that just wants to show of some recent "book learnin" from the Wikipedia page on feudalism.
It's a leftist bot.
Literally cancer.
Nardz, you contribute no more to these discussions than the spambots do.
It's a poor analogy. Not uppity, and no Wikipedia articles necessary. Just autistic AF.
Or they've been ingrained with marxist orthodoxy and are incentivised to do nothing by the government largesse.
"Translators" generally believe the world owes them a living, and gather into associations run by "unpaid" corporate drones. These worthies put up "association" websites on which customers only see Corporations. Yet the "legal expert" proletariat refuse to learn how to write bids, NDAs and start small business accounts. The "tech" proles cannot find a square root or assemble the most basic HTML. Both therefore end up financing the corporations with interest-free loans on unsigned work assignments while muttering "we wuz robbed."
Our current system of capitalism is NOT free market capitalism. Capitalism is a given in a modern industrial economy. The real choice is between free markets or central planning.
Your solution of replacing crony capitalism with crony mixed socialism isn't fixing anything.
This will require a complete revamping of our society. First up, Universal Healthcare. Probably the greatest impediment to self Employment is Healthcare Costs. Resolve that and the playing field is FINALLY level. Other policies are needed but this is the first and MOST IMPORTANT.
This statement has no connection to reality.
A lot fewer people are chronically ill invalids terrified of getting a bruise when one looks outside the totalitarian leftist bubble.
Make healthcare spending pre-tax, or 100% fully tax deductable. Then it's no longer tied to your employer. Makes it affordable to the self-employed and the retired. Allow group plans for groups other than your workplace. Join a plan with your church or your chess club or even your neighborhood. Finally, legalize over the counter, "concierge", and pay-for-service medicine.
So… basically because of democrats. Plus kids are really fucking lazy and entitled these days.
Marco Rubio's Libertarian Challenger or others, what we will get nothing, so instead wasting time you can check the http://www.hackerspaces.io #1 job search site for hand-screened flexible and remote jobs (work from home jobs). Plus get resume, coaching and career help.
Why use word "socialism" when what AOC and Bernie and others advocate more closely resembles Mussolini-era fascism? Even "Worker Shrugged" above possibly approves of fascism though also possibly uses that label to smear fascism-lite Republicans.
Dem and Grabbers-Of-Pussy looters use socialist differently. Dems focus on Christian National socialism = Spanish and Italian caudillo fascism. True to form, God's Own Pussy-grabbers depict all opposition as unreconstructed red-hat Jacobin commie atheists. Both factions worship altruism, so all they can do is name-call and cheer racial collectivism. We USED to have a Libertarian Party gaining vote share at 12% a year before the 1980s infiltrations.
No, it’s because weirdos like you amd kook candidates like MacAfee scare the average voter away. If you could just go ahead die it would be a big help.
So, could you just be a lamb amd do that? Thanks a bunch!
The original LP platform is structured to minimize initiation of force. Nowhere in all of the myriad pages of Atlas Shrugged are communism or fascism even identified by monicker. The whole point of the Nolan Chart is to familiarize people with the difference between coercion by knout and service pistol and uncoerced choosing by voluntary exchange AND unrigged elections. Instead, both terrified looter factions sent in narcs, infiltrators, Trojan gangs and agents-provocateurs to add moronic planks and anarchist screeching.
You can tell he wasn't one of the candidates recruited by the Mises Caucus crowd because he is referring to a Republican as a socialist. Only Democrats or anyone to the left of Ted Cruz should be referred to as a socialist. Republicans who advocate collectivism are merely misguided and well-intentioned capitalists who advocate for collectivism because the
Democratssocialists made them do it.Did I do that right?
Indeed you did, jeff. Excellent work.
Now make sure to drop by the education thread and explain how the real problem is racist white parents who don't want their kids to be forced to recite 1619 Project history.
#LibertariansForCRTInPublicSchools
No no, libertarians are more modern than that!
#LibertariansForFlatScreensInPublicSchools
I keep seeing references to this Mises Caucus from leftists like you, now. Is this the new boogeyman you all have decided to create?
Well, the Mises Caucus now controls the LP and is decidedly partial to "right-wing libertarianism," especially Neo-Austrian, paleolibertarian anarcho-capitalism a la 90s Rothbard and Rockwell, and they have a shockingly high tolerance for and desire to target Groypers and other national populists for conversion. Some are more far-right decentralists in the vein of Hoppe, advocating a thousand, tiny, illiberal governments enforcing right-wing ideology and forcibly expelling those with opposing values or dissenting opinions. Then there are some MiCaucs, likely the majority, who are basically just nostalgic for the good old days of the '08 and '12 Ron Paul GOP campaigns.
Main takeaway is, they aren't going to spend resources on reaching independent centrists, left-leaning libertarians outside the party, or disillusioned moderate Democrats because they believe (a) it's probably hopeless anyway, and (b) that real libertarianism is right-libertarianism. The LPMC speaks the language of conservatism because that's where they come from, and the energetic MAGA movement is the keg they want to tap. I think they underestimate the extent to which Trumpism is a Republican cult of personality rather than a blue-collar list of grievances or a spinoff ideological framework. Unconditional support for Donald Trump is now the main factor in determining who is and isn't a "true conservative" in the post-neocon GOP.
Here we go again. Did your mother tell you every day you were "gifted" or is the current version of "you" the result of that EST seminar you took in the 70's?
I wasn't alive in the 70s, Bobo. And I thought my description was fairly unbiased until I gave my opinion at the end. Was it not flattering enough toward the LPMC?
Rubio is a lousy Senator, but he is not a socialist. To call him a socialist is to rob the term of all of its meaning. Once again, the LP achieves the level of discourse found in a low end Reddit troll.
Yeah.. He is.. He's pitched/supported far too many 'socialist' bills to pretend not to be with a straight face.
So no different from any Democrat by that metric, and you think you haven't robbed the word of distinction or meaning.
How about.. He's a little less socialist than most pure-socialist Democrats?
Just because he claims to be a Republican doesn't auto-exempt his support and crafting of many socialist bills. Granite; Less socialist is better than more socialist but if the USA is ever going to escape it's modern socialist-regime is going to take more than a less of a socialist to get there.
He's socialist in the same way Barack Obama was socialist, in the same way Obamacare was socialist. And I distinctly recall Republicans calling him and his program "socialist". You can go around tossing out pejoratives only to complain when one lobs the same one back.
Yet one side actually embraces socialists and their platforms as a part of their party and the other doesn't. Again, extreme bothsidesism is just as bad as extreme party loyalty.
One side is a turd. No argument there. But the other side is a douche campaigning on the platform of "Hey, at least I ain't a turd sammich!" Congrats on making it over that very low bar.
You're literally cancer though
It is sad how Southpark remains the depth of some of the commentary here. They seem to be all leftists as well. Those who really hate the mises caucus and run cover for dems.
If you think South Park "runs cover for Dems," then you have your partisan blinders on. They're equal opportunity satirists.
I think he means the commenters referenced are the ones giving cover for democrats.
Progressive collectivism is all the same, the academics tried to distinguish socialism and fascism, and if you care about nuance you can discuss the detailed variations between them endlessly. Doesn't change the fact that the two party system is fundamentally progressive collectivist in it's practice, if not in all the rhetoric that comes out of it, which is what sucks in so many liberty minded individuals.
Socialist has long been dragged around to the point of being confusing in use. Which is too bad, because the original meaning is something worth discussing and rebutting. Now people use it for, like, increased transfer payments.
...or "anything I don't like originating from someone politically to the left of me regardless of how far right I am".
Or maybe people have just gotten comfortable with re-defining socialism as being "just democracy", "save our democracy", etc, etc, etc.
When all along what they are really saying by definition is "just socialism", "save our socialist empire", etc, etc...
When have you ever heard anyone say "save our democracy" when it didn't involve MORE Gov-Gun dictation??
def communism; a totalitarian system of government that controls means of production .... a 'final' stage of society in Marxist theory in which the state has withered away and economic goods are distributed equitably ... communist systems collectively ... a theory advocating elimination of private property ... a system in which goods are owned in common and available as needed.
Fiat money. Un-Earned ?stimulus?. Free-Rent. Market dictating bureaucracy. etc, etc, etc... For some reason the term socialist seems to be getting "dragged" around for good reason. Just never-mind many Democrats ARE members of a socialist party and many OPENLY admit to their socialist agenda.
And never-mind the calmly acceptance that 30% of the entire USA landmass is 100% communist (federal land) -- An *ILLEGAL* 'taking' by the U.S. Constitution generally accepted "assumption".
What's the TRUE cost of taxation on goods. I remember a study in the 80's showing a loaf of bread got the mass-content actual producer (farmer) $0.01/loaf in private wheat profit and a good 80% of the price went to taxation throughout the chain of production.
Ignorance isn't going to save the USA.
Accepting that a "monopoly of GUN-Force" (i.e. Gov-Guns) has a self-explanatory purpose in civilized societies to ensuring Individual Liberty and Justice ONLY instead of carelessly using that "monopoly of GUN-Force" to fulfill criminal wishes ( STEALING and DICTATING ) others for one's own selfish ends. Accepting that GUNS in general don't education or make human resources (short of Liberty & Justice) and pretending they make anything else is dis-associating the tool with the effect.
Austro-conservatarians seem to have redefined "socialism" in such a way that it no longer bears any relation to ownership of the means of production. For them, socialism is just when the government does anything, or it refers to virtually any policy they consider less than ideal from a right-Rothbardian perspective.
Still, I agree that Rubio is a worthless turd sandwich.
If 'ownership' but not bureaucracy was the subject the word would be "communism" not "socialism".
https://www.dictionary.com/e/socialism-vs-communism/
3. (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.
Rubio supports ethanol, which is the Swedish phrase for giving billion$ in tax money to lutheran farmers to turn their corn into gasoline that fucks up your engine. Go back to Malmö Rubio, you socialist asshole!
Demmings has a lot of money behind her and a lot of commercials are being run to introduce her to the state. She has a good cocktail napkin story... lower class parents to police chief. Attack ads against Rubio stress that she showed up as chief and reduced crime and he misses committee meetings.
So her polling well at the moment is not surprising ... Rubio is not running ads.
If the money raised is similar, I would expect an easy win for Rubio once he actually joins the fight.
Nobody down here is looking at that race right now, and none of the issues have been discussed in even a superficial way.
I just can't see high inflation working in her favor.
I can't see Rubio losing in what is shaping up to be a very good year for Republicans.
Well, it appears Mitch McConnell has given up so it might not be a good Senate year for Republicans. Marco's seat would however be a big blow for Republicans if Demmings won.
He’ll defend that one. Rubio plays ball. What he doesn’t like are real conservatives that aren’t going to support him.
Bitch McConnell is an enemy of the republic.
"Demmings has a lot of money behind her and a lot of commercials are being run to introduce her to the state."
So, so, soooo many ads
Hopefully it goes like it did for Bloomberg.
Any Republican who cannot fully honor the U.S. Constitution (as they swore an oath to do) and principles of Individual Liberty and Justice for all is a deceitful RINO and is no better than the leftard members who openly do the exact same thing.
In many ways RINO'S are more dangerous than Democrats. At least people who support Nazism(National Socialism) know they are Nazi's.. RINO'S pretend not to be Nazi's (deceiving the public) while writing and supporting Nazi(National Socialist)-Policy. They're liars, deceivers and manipulators that grow the Nazi-Regime.
Okay, Director Hayden
Misigoy sees little difference between Rubio and progressive icons like Sen. Bernie Sanders (I–Vt.) or Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D–N.Y.).
I'm sorry, but this is just idiotic. Does Rubio suck? Sure. Is he wildly uninspiring as a candidate? Absolutely. Is he incredibly weak sauce for any principle a libertarian might support? No argument from me. But, going from that to "not different from Bernie Sanders or AOC" means you're either an idiot or you're replacing substantive political criticism with hyperbole. You might argue that hyperbole has a legitimate place in politics. Now do the Mises Caucus.
you're replacing substantive political criticism with hyperbole
Welcome to the Libertarian Moment 2022, when everyone who is not a Rothbardian Anarcho-Capitalist is a Marxist Socialist Communist*.
* except if the person is a Republican, then the person is merely a misguided wanna-be libertarian
Screw off, you dishonest hack. The entire point I raised at the end of my comment is that hacks like you and the writers here have been all too happy to decry hyperbole from the Rothbardian Anarcho-Capitalists. Now hyperbole is just honkey-dorey as long as its leveled at Republicans (and cosmotarians have been playing precisely this game for years)?
How DARE you accurately summarize the Republican Anschluss takeover?!
In the what passes for a brain in far-Right Conservatives, unless it's trickle-down/supply-side Satanomics, aka Conmanitalism, it's the USSR.
Meanwhile, back in Reality:
• Study of 50 years of tax cuts for rich confirms 'trickle down' theory is an absolute sham
". . . the vast majority of the populations in those countries have little to show for it, as the benefits of slashing taxes on the wealthy are concentrated among a handful of super-rich individuals—not widely shared across society in the form of improved job creation or prosperity, as "trickle down" theorists alleged would happen. . . .
. . . "Major tax cuts for the rich since the 1980s have increased income inequality, with all the problems that brings, without any offsetting gains in economic performance." . . ."
MORE armed robbery always makes a BETTER SOCIETY.....
Every d*psh*t leftard...
Why don't you go be productive and start EARNING a wealthy living you retarded F! Instead of constantly trying to STEAL it from someone else?
This guy praised Stalin over the weekend (see the Bulgakov thread). Nuff said.
Wait'll you see the Libertarian Moment of 2014-2021
Do we have any specific ways in which Rubio sucks? I'm open to hearing them. The closest we get in this piece is a questionable claim that his parents might not have been economic refugees.
I'm not dialed in on Rubio because I'm not from Florida.
He's a drug warrior, a war hawk and a big spender.
^
Pretty bog standard establishmentarian, but at least he's not a leftist
And given a choice between freedom and traditionalist ("pro-family") dirigisme, he's pulled pretty far from a libertarian line. But he's nowhere near as big a spender as the Democrats of similar stature.
He's pretty much a "conservative" as American "conservatives" were 45+ years ago.
https://reason.com/2022/08/11/the-disappearing-differences-between-republicans-and-democrats-on-federal-family-spending/
Just a recent example in the last Month...
Oh yeah, thanks, I remember reading that one.
Yeah, that struck me as well. He could compare Rubio to generic-democrat maybe, but I haven't seen much from him to indicate he's akin to Sanders or AOC. I think this is an example of a fellow stretching the comparison too far. Something pretty common in 3rd party politics since it tends to have inexperienced or bad candidates running.
Bill: He's just making sure that he gets less than 1% of the vote. It's a Libertarian tradition.
> "Rubio is pretty uniquely bad," says Misigoy. "Not just in the sense of being unpopular and easy to dislike, but policy-wise: This is a guy who got elected as part of that Tea Party wave back in 2010, and…when you listen to him talk about dealing with issues of economic policy, it's all central economic planning, it's not free markets."
The GOP is no longer about the ideas of conservatism or fiscal restraint. It's a tribal party that only cares about team colors. So another Republican challenger could say that in the primary, but a third party candidate won't get heard because no Republican cares. Whatever the team does is moral and righteous, even if it happens to be Obama-style central economic planning.
Besides, this country is in the middle of a Kulturwar! There's no time for free markets! After we win the war against godless progressives, then we can talk about restraining government. Until then there's not time to be quibbling over free markets! Gaargh, sounds too close to free trade. Are you sure you're an American?
Calling a spade a spade. If this is indicative of the new Mises Caucus LP, I might be interested.
Von Maeces anarcho-fascism is about bullying girls and minimizing candidates and votes by copying the failures of the econazi Greens. LP "leaders" in Texas just got ALL non-Kleptocracy candidates tossed off the ballot. Smooth mooove...
Watching you people on the left trying to create a boogeyman out of the Mises Caucus is very entertaining. It seems like every couple of weeks the left gets together to create another evil group out of their fellow countrymen.
I swear, if the left put in as much energy to enacting quality policy that they put into demonizing Americans, they would be steam rolling Republicans.
The Mises Caucus got lots of pub here at Reason when it was founded back in 2017, as it was the most interesting thing that happened to the Libertarian Party in years. Later, when the New Hampshire version made waves, it was also reported here.
Plus, the Mises/Cato division in libertarianism has been around for decades. Above, Bill Dalasio references this with his comment about "cosmotarians". Back in the day on this site, cosmos were the Cato sympathizers, and "yokletarians" were the Mises types.
Watching you trying to insist the Mises Caucus is a leftist boogeyman is very entertaining.
Yup. I was here when the "cosmotarian" and "paleotarian" labels were coined. Hell, I helped coin one of them. But the paleotarians are way too close to paleocons, getting impossible to distinguish between them at times.
The libertarian movement does need a small and vocal minority to keep quoting Mises and Rothbard, lest we forget. We need the raving ideologues and the sensible pragmatics. But the ideologues need to be reminded that we're trying to win elections, not to drive away potential voters.
But the ideologues need to be reminded that we're trying to win elections, not to drive away potential voters.
To paraphrase Dr. Phil, how's that been working out for you? Selling out libertarian principle to be popular with progressives doesn't exactly seem like it's been catapulting the LP to electoral victory after electoral victory. Just ask "President Johnson" or "President Jorgensen".
"It profiteth not a man to gain the whole world but lose his soul." But for 3% of the vote?
You should have been interested the whole time, but left leaning libertarians are inherently distrustful of right leaning libertarians, and vice versa. If we just all remembered that if you're a libertarian that pushes against collectivism you're a good guy, the liberty movement could get a lot farther.
If you think brandybuck pushes against collectivism and/or is an ally, your ideology is dogshit
I don't want to get mixed into your guys feud, thanks. My statement was generic, you are blinded because of who made the original post. I am trying to convince him to be more open minded about liberty, not just the left leaning narratives surrounding it, by being attentive to movements like the MC. You can tell me I'm wasting my time, but it's mine to waste. Also, you probably just dislike the "middle ground" rhetoric I used when talking to him, but I try to address every individual effectively, and that seems to be what he is responsive to. Don't know if that is what set you off, but it's my guess, feel free to tell me to go away as rudely as you like if I'm wrong.
It's not a feud, and if you're trying to appeal for totalitarian leftists you're an enemy of liberty.
Grow a fucking spine and face reality.
An intelligent LP candidate would talk about women having individual rights as in 1973--that and bad laws needing repeal. A mudfight with a Christian National Socialist inspires brainwashees to react by branding Libertarians anarcho-communists. Stalin and Hitler were both socialist. "Left" is socialists who don't worship Jesus or Mohammed and "right" is socialists who don't worship looter populist heroes. Both hordes infiltrate the now-compromised LP to eliminate the law-repealing spoiler votes we had in 2016.
But the struggle for women's rights in the USA's already been won.
He wants women to murder as many babies in the womb as possible. Hank is a real ducking sicko.
A smarter strategy would've been to run someone against him in the primary. Rubio has irritated enough conservatives over the years that he's probably vulnerable to a credible primary challenge. Other than that, a third-party challenge in Florida, if it's not an eccentric millionaire/celebrity on the ticket, is pointless.
Adhering to principle is never pointless. Don't know anything about the lp candidate here, but running third party candidates is the way to go unless you've enjoyed the slowly progressive expansion of the state under the two party system.
"running third party candidates is the way to go unless you've enjoyed the slowly progressive expansion of the state under the two party system."
This argument only works for me if the LP has actually built up a bench of local candidates who have shown they know how to govern at the local level. Candidates who have successfully provided voluntarist/non-government solutions to their community's problems.
I'm not against third-party candidates existing. But I believe it's a pointless endeavor, especially to continue to run candidates in these large expensive federal state-wide races when it gets us nowhere.
Fair enough, it's hard to get people interested in being lp candidates unless we start somewhere though. I don't disagree that the starting point of local government might be better. I'd be interested in seeing that as well, hopefully the MC makes something happen there, but I'm afraid the focus will always be on national, as the federal threat to individual autonomy is greater simply because of the nature of the leviathan. National/federal collectivism is always more threatening than a city somewhere going full collectivist, is the best I can describe it.
"smarter strategy would've been to run someone against him in the primary. Rubio has irritated enough conservatives over the years that he's probably vulnerable to a credible primary challenge"
100%
I don't want to vote for Rubio.
I want even less for a Democrat to win a senate seat from Florida.
So fuck off, LP, you've done nothing but help the left for 50 years
So fuck off, LP, you've done nothing but help the left for 50 years
The Green Party has done the same for the Republicans. In hindsight it is hard to see how Al Gore could have been worse than George W. Bush but it is also hard to underestimate how bad a divinity school dropout would have been.
“Divinity school dropout.” —What’s Stalin got to do with Florida? He was Georgian!
So members of the Libertarian Party are on your kill list too? Glad I'm not a registered voter.
I don't live in Florida so I don't really follow Rubio. I could believe he's a socialist, but this article would be greatly helped by specific instances of Rubio pushing socialist positions. It just says he does in broad terms, however, without really getting into it.
Accusations in broad, nonspecific ways are not persuasive.
"Accusations in broad, nonspecific ways are not persuasive."
Don't you know how American politics works?
"Inflation is affecting everybody in this country"
People pretend to forget that it would be worse under a far-Right Conservative regime, given the current nature of the lack of Supply:
The far-Right Conservative run Brazil's inflation rate: 11.89%
The far-Right Conservative run, while still clinging to some straws of "European Style Socialism", UK's inflation rate: 9.4%
The radical extremist Centrist/Moderate run U.S. inflation rate: 9.1%
One side is restricting the supply of energy, which restricts the supply of everything else. They want to next restrict the supply of Nitrogen fertilizer.
It isnt the Right, you disingenuous cherry-picking imbecile
Hey lookie... Another leftard spouting the, "If the USA isn't as sh*tty as the rest of the communist world it isn't sh*tty enough!" clause... lol... This is how we know you leftards are enemies of the USA.
And the inflation rate in Venezuala? Nazi(National Socialist) Germany? Cuba (Oh lookie 26.16% in May)...
Yeah; I can legitimately say it wouldn't be as bad under a far-Right Conservative **Constitutional** USA.
Again, this is the one who praised Stalin over the weekend in the Bulgakov article thread. Nuff said.
You say a lot of stupid things. This isn’t a departure from that habit.
Senate races are now big money events. I think it unlikely that a less well funded libertarian candidate would have a chance.
As LIz Cheney discovered, money isn't everything.
What a bunch of shit. True libertarians vote for Republicans and anyone who disagrees with Republicans is a leftist.
Therefor this guy is a leftist trying to steal votes from the true libertarian.
Many Republicans disagree with RINO'S...
Why it's almost like you're purposely trying to make stuff up for some reason just to make Republicans sound like [WE] gangsters the left most definitely **is**. (PROJECTING???)
You need clarity.. Perhaps a visit to the party platforms would be helpful (published on the internet). It might surprise you that a good 90% of the Republican platform is directly inline with Libertarians; sadly the party politicians in D.C. 90% of the time act just like RINO'S.
RINO simply means someone who listens to their constituents instead of party leadership.
Remind me of why that is bad.
Because they ignore their sworn oath of office.... duh...
The USA isn't based on democratic Nazism and constituents have to go through the right channels (Constitutional Amendment) if that's how they want to *LEGALLY* topple the USA. NOT a banana republic route.
Then what's the point of electing individual people? Just have robots that do the Party's bidding.
Why don't you go read the Constitution for once and find out.
But I'll give you a hint; "enumerated powers".
“All of us should be on guard against beliefs that flatter ourselves. At the very least, we should check such beliefs against facts.” – Thomas Sowell
Misigoy has a lengthy list of policy proposals, from a more restrained foreign policy
I knew at some point he'd get Trumpy.
as when Demings tweeted in February that "the Federal Reserve is the most important institution in America in the fight against inflation."
Wait'll Demings finds out what the Federal Reserve thinks is the most important issue in America.
There it is. Proof that the guy is really a Democrat. Because only Democrats insult Republicans.
lol... Well you've certainly demonstrated you're a Democrat who worships [WE] gang-color RULES theology... One character trait the Republicans have always demonstrated far better than the 'gang' team was self-evaluation. Course that's a give-away since Democrats are all about [WE] gang building by their very platform of [WE] gang RULES! (i.e. Democratic Nazism)
Entirely self-evident in the political world to the point of the right actually being envious of lefts ability to have so many sheeple minds who follow the pack without any speckle of skepticism.
Entirely self-evident in the political world to the point of the right actually being envious of lefts ability to have so many sheeple minds who follow the pack without any speckle of skepticism.
You're kidding, right? Because "sheeple minds who follow the pack without any speckle of skepticism" is how most people outside the Republican tribe would describe you and the rest who wallow in the former president's cult of personality. You're no different than the people who worshiped the guy before him.
Yep... UR PROJECTING... Why don't you go back to Reason articles when the CARES Act was passed or when the Bump Stock ban was initiated. UR completely lying if you won't admit that many were against those actions by Trump.
Of-course PROJECTING is one leftards strongest character traits.
The only 'cult of personality' Republicans have is that of a Constitutional USA... And the Trump Administration adhered to what the USA is better than any in the last 100-years.
But leftards [WE] gangs find that push for Individual Liberty and Justice for all threatening to their democratic Nazi-Regime empire that is taking over the USA so they have to make personal attacks and try to de-stain him anyway they possibly can.
Screaming "PROJECTING" at someone who isn't projecting is, well, embarrassing. Well it would be if you were capable of shame.
The cult of personality around Trump was just as strong as the one around Obama. The only major difference was political party.
And that cult of personality is still alive and well. People outside the tribe see it every day in the constant sniveling and whining about the election, search warrant, media bias, and whatever else it is that makes you cry at night.
It was especially evident when Reason and other libertarians criticized Dear Leader. Whether we're talking about Obama or Trump, the response was the same. Obama cultists called libertarians "racist, fascist, fundamentalist conservatives" for being critical of his policies. Yet when the new cult of personality enters office libertarians suddenly become "Marxist, leftist progressives" for being the same thing.
What you fail to see is the consistent support for liberty by libertarians, regardless of the cult in power.
What you fail to see is ..... reality...
Isn't it great how you don't even have to go back to those articles and check your biased observations?? You want to pretend that everyone is about 'party' and not policy but fail (play ignorant) to recognize R-Induced commie policy is shunned by Republicans (RINO move)... Now; show me places where Democrats have openly shunned their dear leader?? You want to play a boaf sidez game but fail to collect the necessary evidence.
Isn't it great how you don't even have to go back to those articles and check your biased observations??
That's the problem. You see negative observations or your team to mean some something something in favor of the other team.
It's all in your head. I'm not on a team.
*of* not or
Pure Denial-ism... RU seriously going to pretend that both teams are after Commie-Healthcare, Commie-Energy, Commie-Education, Commie-Housing, Commie-Wealth-Distribution to the same extent?
You want to pretend that everyone is about 'party' and not policy but fail (play ignorant) to recognize R-Induced commie policy is shunned by Republicans (RINO move)...
I don't know what that means.
Now; show me places where Democrats have openly shunned their dear leader??
No. That has nothing to do with anything.
You want to play a boaf sidez game but fail to collect the necessary evidence.
As I've said. It's obvious to people on the sidelines. You're on the field. Any attempt to convince you is a waste.
If you think I'm a Democrat then you are retarded. There is no other explanation.
No sarc. I'm dead serious.
Is someone having a hard time coming out of the closet?? 🙂
Project much?
"Socialist" means different, but overlapping things, to self-avowed socialists and to communists. To communists, socialism is a set of programs, or policies regarding programs, to get people used to not owning stuff. The hope and expectation was that once people saw they could live well without owning things, they'd adopt communism.
To socialists, socialism is a set of programs to improve people's lives directly, and may be similar in practice to the kinds of socialist programs adopted or espoused by communists. To communists, socialist programs needn't benefit people directly to be worthwhile, but it they do that's a bonus.
To non-socialists, the two types of socialism are similar enough that distinguishing between them is often not worthwhile.
Well that didn't take long.
How’s Greta coping so far?
Rubio's an evil neocon, an exemplar among Republican leadership of the bad side of today's GOP, so we're used to shitting on him — in relationship to the rest of the GOP. However, compared to the corresponding Democrats, Rubio could be George Washington. Not a difficult choice.
This is a major strategic blunder on the part of this candidate. Rubio's base is the Cuban population in FL. They take that charge seriously. When the rhetoric and actions don't line up, this will only harden support for him.
First rule of politics: it's always local.
"Dennis Misigoy is unsparing in his criticism of both Rubio and likely Democratic nominee Val Demings."
And yet he will get fewer votes than either one.
The only question is will he pull down the democrat vote, or the republican vote?
I like this guy. He's an actual libertarian.
he has no chance.
If the LP had a chance the LP would be outlawed.
>>Rubio ... faces a tough potential opponent in Demings
Crab Juice, or Mountain Dew.
Maybe I skimmed the post too fast, but I still don't know how Marco Rubio is a socialist (other than "All Republicans are socialists!").
Marco Rubio has an unflagging support of all big government endeavors, programs, and spending initiatives.
Another politically utterly incompetent Libertarian candidate.
The Fed should be abolished; it is an evil, corrupt, and harmful institution. But just because politicians tolerate the Fed (or big spending) doesn't make them socialists.
And let's be clear here: we have massive amounts of borrowing, spending, and printing because Americans want it. If you run on abolishing the Fed and balancing the budget, you'd lose in a landslide. The difference between Republicans and Democrats is that Democrats are accelerating the problem, while Republicans are slowing it down. (In the long term, slowing spending down enough may even be enough to grow out of it.)
Payer les frais de scolarité est une charge énorme pour les familles pauvres et misérables mais aussi pour les riches et surtout pour les étudiants étrangers qui sont devant un choix suivre le cours ou réfléchir dans quel supermarché à voler pour survivre...donc il faut une réforme profonde du monde de l'éducation à l'instar de ce que propose Xi en Chine d'avoir une autre orientation que celle des occidentaux y compris dans l'enseignement à savoir comment faire apprendre le savoir d"une autre manière que l'excellence ...le savoir
The idea that the West should listen to China and Xi about how to educate people is ridiculous. Any Chinese who can comes to the West for their education and moves their money to the West. And China today itself is an intellectual and economic basket case, run based on the ideas of a failed German academic.
History will not be kind to 20th/21st century China or its leaders.
If the GOP is socialist, what does that make the radical left-wingers President and his party in power right now?
Bad look for Libertarians. Rubio for whatever Rubio is, he is not a Socialist. It’s as bad as calling Reblicans Nazis.
Republicans
"But Mom, vegetables are communism!"
-All you fuckers
People who vote Libertarian aren’t responsible for your party’s bad choices.
A libertarian publication giving exposure to Libertarian Party candidates.
The horror.
Geiger Goldstaedt yet again trying to pump up the Republican party as some paragon of individualism.
If you actually wanted to appeal to individualists to choose the lesser of two evils, you might have a case; is a GOP Senate better with Biden? Probably is. But pretending Rubio is better than Deming is irrelevant to that equation, and insulting everybody who recognizes how scummy all politicans are is not the way to win friends and influence elections.
Fuck off, slaver.
BOTH SIDES!!!
Any Democrat is a thousand times better than any subhuman Republican/Libertarian trash.
Lol, if Little Marco loses, that's on Little Marco - no one else.
What the ever loving fuck is wrong with you?
This claims to be a libertarian magazine. Supporting the libertarian candidate is not a betrayal of your partisan vote counting.
Two sides of the same coin, hon. The Demopublicans are the same as the Republicrats. One may talk a better game but both use the iron fist of the state for their own whims.
No, the failure of Republicans to stop their wacko idol worship of an orange dimwit and his merry band of crooked miscreants instead of voting for competent, small government conservatives without all of the crazy is what causes Democrats to win.
"People who vote Libertarian end up being ruled by Democrats."
Maybe... and just maybe, republicans should notice those lost votes and actually do something in order to gain them.
But pretending Rubio is better than Deming is irrelevant to that equation
The problem there is that you don't have to pretend. You don't have to pretend that Rubio is any better than lousy to get to Val Demings is utterly awful.
Ah, the masturbatory narcissism of the True Libertarian, so willing to see this country fall to totalitarianism for the warm fuzzy feelz of muh pRiNcIpLeS!
We don’t have to pretend Rubio is infinitely better than Demings
Great comment. This is why I don't have you on mute.
Weird how no "libertarians" ever run against democrats...
Funny how there is never the Libertarian alternate to a Democrat, but you stay in that fantasy world where Reason represents libertarianism and not progressive policy.
Then how has the state expanded so far if Republicans are effective at limiting it? No one here (except people no one respects because TDS smoothed their brains) has a problem acknowledging that democrats are currently worse than Republicans on most policy, but that's analogous to admitting Stalin is worse than Hitler, it doesn't really give you a great direction to go. Vote libertarian if you actually believe in a government constituted among men to provide individual autonomy, don't if you don't.
American politics are as real as American professional wrestling...orchestrated, choreographed theatrics for the gullible masses like you. When it comes to expanding the powers of the NSA, the Soviets style KGB that spies on all Americans, when it comes to extending the repeal of Habeas Corpus, taking away citizens freedoms, when it comes to bombing and invading much weaker little countries that did absolutely nothing to the US so as to steal their oil, democrats and republicans vote in unison with no as much as one minute of debate. They are one and the same and in the end, it is all about more money for the 1%
No you disagree with the analogy, or you think that Stalin wasn't worse than Hitler?
It has real consequences, like the “Inflation Reduction Act”. And more Kagans and fewer Gorsuches on the bench
Don't you have Democrats to murder?
Meanwhile, every libertarian that throws a "lesser of 2 evils" vote to republicans allows them to drift ever more evil.
Patriot act, domestic spying, NSA, FDA, CDC, CIA, FBI, the Fed...all cool with republicans.
“English writers who consider Communism and Fascism to be THE SAME THING invariably hold that both are monstrous evils which must be fought to the death: on the other hand, any Englishman who believes Communism and Fascism to be opposites will feel that he ought to side with one or the other.” --George Orwell
The Libertarian Palimpsest could learn from this...
You are exactly right.
You must vote for Hitler otherwise Stalin will win! Don't throw away your vote on Churchill or Roosevelt!
Ummm, the Libertarian and other third party candidates run against BOTH Republicans AND Democrats in general elections. It’s your failed two-party duopoly that bars Libertarians running in primaries in most states. And last time I checked, strong support for 2A is hardly on the progressive platform.
Sometimes the Libertarian's the only alternative to the Democrat, but that's because it's such a lost cause in the polity that the Republicans don't have a candidate.
So if you despise Libertarians so much, why are you here?
I hardly think a dyed-in-the-wool Trumper is in a position to say who or what is truly libertarian.
There will be an a huge turnover this midterm, because Democrats are resting on their laurels, laurels they won only be not being Trump. This is a sad state of affairs, but it's been going on since the late 90s. Everyone voting for whoever ain't in power at the moment. And so the the Team Red Crazies are going to replace the Team Blue crazies come next January.
I can dream of Reagan style small government Republicans in the same way I can dream of Kennedy style small government Democrats. Ain't neither gonna happen.
Do you get paid by the lie?
Do the Greens, Socialists, and Communists ever run agains democrats?
Regardless of which was worse, it made sense to side with Stalin. Don't think about ideals, those are easy, practically trivial; think strategy.
What constructive elucidation, clearly you are arguing in good faith, like all "small government" Republicans who never seem to roll the administrative state back at all. Is it like how the inflation reduction act reduces things by not spending as much? Like, you have less government because you don't lose as many rights as you could have? We didn't spend money because we could have spent more! We preserved your rights because we could have taken more!
Fun comment section.
if you despise Libertarians so much, why are you here?
I don't despise libertarians. I am libertarian. But I most certainly do despise Libertarians. Whenever they get any traction, all they accomplish is that Democrats -- the party of Big Government -- win. Fucking morons...
As for why I'm here if I hate Libertarians: I didn't realize Reason was a party publication. I thought it was supposed to be a small-L libertarian publication. (Of course, if it were, they wouldn't spend most of their time attacking Republicans.)
In s sense, I agree. I do think the result of a relatively successful libertarian challenger is that enough votes are pulled from the Republican to give the win to an even worse Democrat. I agree with the criticisms if Rubio and would like to see him primaried out, not split the more libertarian voting base
Is that why the dominant faction of the LP right now is a bunch of Austrian school anarchist paleoconservatives who instinctively oppose everything that might appeal to people left of center? Because they really want to be ruled by progressive Democrats?
You’re not a libertarian. So just stop Hank.
Kill yourself
Hey look, garden variety leftists projecting their low IQ talking points. How... typical.
Are you aware that Reagan expanded the Federal government and blew up the deficit?
Yet yall (I assume this new faggot leftist is a Reason "editor") only prop up the ones running against Republicans
You know who else killed himself?
signed, Epstein's mother.
Not the CDC after COVID, and not the FBI, at least not at the moment, but that's only because of their undying fealty to Trump.
Your life is absolutely worthless.
You could have stopped at the word "responsible". If you wanted to take some responsibility instead of evading it, you’d need to get off the sidelines and help one of the teams that govern.
Yeah, that checks out.
Just like Democrats, the Republicans no longer believe in election results when they lose.
Yet you're still ruled by totalitarian leftists.
Valid point.
For some people, self-describing as "libertarian" makes them feel good about themselves, "I'm a libertarian so I'm an intelligent individualist who's in favour of liberty unlike y'all", etc. etc. And they then tie themselves in knots to explain why they are also rabid Trump supporters.
Between Trump and his two opponents -- Hillary Clinton (2016) and Joe Biden (2020) -- can you seriously dispute that the former is, by far, more libertarian?
LOL - that’s some Rick James speak right there:
See, I never just did things just to do them. Come on, what am I gonna do? Just all of a sudden jump up and grind my feet on somebody's couch like it's something to do? Come on. I got a little more sense then that.
...Yeah, I remember grinding my feet on Eddie's couch.
And George W. Bush was "more libertarian" than Al Gore, judging by their '00 presidential platforms. What's the point of drawing such comparisons?
(d) none of the above.
Trump is no libertarian. He's a lazy authoritarian. As far as comparisons of who is the most libertarian amongst three non-libertarians go, there's no objective way to answer. But even if one thinks as a matter of opinion that Trump is somehow more libertarian than Hillary or Biden, that is very different from being a rabid Trump supporter. And if you're a rabid Trump supporter, you're not a libertarian. I can certainly conceive that a right-leaning libertarian might vote for Trump against both Hillary and Biden, while putting two clothes pegs on his nose, lest one fall off, but he would not be enthusiastic about it, just as I was utterly unenthusiastic about voting the latter two.
Fuck off slaver
I am going to go with no. HE TRIPLED the debt and made vogue the idea that spending doesn't matter.
LOL
The point is that with Gore, we still would have had the 2 wars, and the Education bill, and the Financial Crisis (sooner and worse) and TARP. But we would have worse judges, no tax cut, and the Entire Green New deal 20 years ago
Would we have had 9/11? And the resultant Iraq debacle and the longest war in US history?
Gore would never have needed to show he could compete with his daddy.
I'm not saying that people don't make choices and trade offs. So, I agree, people will give in on principles to achieve trade offs they desire. I'm also just not blind about what the oligarchs running this country have gotten away with by people not adhering to their political principles, and I genuinely believe a libertarian government wouldn't do these things. I may be wrong, but that's why it's a belief, since the counterfactual can't exist to prove it right or wrong. Feel free to disagree, the majority of Americans have for a long, long time. The march of the collectivists through every aspect of American life will continue, until Americans show that individualism as a set of governing principles is not up for trade.
And is that better or worse for you and your values?
Yeah, so are you.
I know. It's so bad I have nothing better to do than reading/posting here some days.