Grand Old Populists
Plus: Classified documents case dismissed, 1968 all over again, venture capitalists finally get representation, and more...

Something for everyone: If you had told me back in 2016 that the GOP of the future would, just eight years from now, feature the president of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters and a celebrity-stripper with a face tattoo, in quick succession and to great fanfare, I would have thought you were yanking my chain.
But here we are. Sean O'Brien, the general president of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, got up on stage last night at the Republican National Convention and rebuked big business while calling for labor law reform. With a massive amount of speaking time and no endorsement for former President Donald Trump, O'Brien was an odd choice. (Though he at one point praised Trump, saying "no other [Republican] nominee in the race would have invited the teamsters into this arena," which is probably true.) But inviting O'Brien also supports the thesis that the populist realignment has already happened, that Trump has remade the party in his own image, and that the party of free markets is no longer.
Looked at more cynically, O'Brien's speech could simply be a ploy by Republicans to cater to labor and shore up support in the swing states they're worried about: Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin.
"Companies fire workers who try to join unions and hide behind toothless laws that are meant to protect working people but are manipulated to benefit corporations," said O'Brien at one point, in precisely the type of speech you'd expect at the Democratic National Convention. "This is economic terrorism at its best. An individual cannot withstand such an assault."
"An individual worker has zero power," he continued. "It's only when Americans band together in democratic unions that we win real improvements on wages, benefits and working conditions." Soon after, O'Brien started picking on Amazon, a company that was "abandoned any national allegiance," which has the "sole focus" of "lining its own pockets."
It's unclear what exactly O'Brien thinks these businesses ought to be caring about if not profit or how state power ought to rein them in. It's even less clear what the Republican overseers of the convention are suggesting by having the king of the Teamsters grace the stage.
"Remember: Elites have no party, elites have no nation. Their loyalty is to the balance sheet and the stock price at the expense of the American worker," added O'Brien.
It's Vance's party now: Pair the O'Brien speech with Trump's pick of Ohio Senator J.D. Vance as running mate, also announced yesterday, and you get a portrait of a Republican Party that simply doesn't care about free markets the way it used to.
"There is no meaningful distinction between the public and the private sector in the American regime," said Vance last year in a speech at Catholic University in Washington, D.C. Vance is, as regular readers of Reason may know, a proponent of tariffs and protectionism. He has plenty of kind things to say about the antitrust policies pursued by the Federal Trade Commission under Lina Khan. He appears to be in favor of raising the minimum wage, and in favor of the federal government stepping in to prevent American-born workers from being outcompeted by the foreign-born.
More broadly, "the New Right"—of which Vance is part, writes Reason's Stephanie Slade—"openly calls on conservatives to wield state power against their domestic political 'enemies,' among whom it counts lefty corporations, universities, and nonprofits." It's a sign of the times that one of the most prominent members of the New Right, who frequently signals his anti-elitist bona fides despite having worked in venture capital and gone to Yale, has been selected as Trump's backup.
"Eight years ago, Pence was considered a savvy choice because of his ability to soothe any misgivings his fellow evangelical Christians might have about casting a vote for a thrice-married philanderer," writes Reason's Stephanie Slade. Now, those considerations just aren't part of Trump's equation; he's already secured support from evangelicals, so Vance doesn't need to even gesture in the direction of religion (though he is Catholic, having converted several years ago).
Which brings me to the stripper.
Amber Rose—model, stripper, face-tattoo doyenne, mom, and (apparently) inflation critic—took the stage just before O'Brien to talk about coming out of the Make America Great Again (MAGA) closet and how hard inflation has made it for parents to make ends meet. She said the media had "lied to us" about Trump, and that "the best chance we have to give our babies a better life is to elect Donald Trump president of the United States." Though light on substance, the optics were fascinating: Rose, a former girlfriend of Kanye West (himself a wearer of many hats, including those of the MAGA variety) and mainstay in the hip-hop world, was an unconventional choice for the RNC, but was given a warm welcome by both audience and punditry afterward.
Last night felt very much like the type of programming you'd expect from a Republican Party that's confident it will win—a far cry from "the party of Ronald Reagan" but a whole new beast, one that appears to be gaining in traction what it lacks in cohesion.
Scenes from New York:
A group called the Transit Liberation Front smashed 10 OMNY machines in subway stations across NYC in response to a call from Black revolutionaries in Atlanta calling for a summer of resistance against the US & Israel's colonial/state violence & surveillance. pic.twitter.com/YzJ0IZtGO4
— Ash J (@AshAgony) July 14, 2024
QUICK HITS
- A fair take:
Is anyone tweeting stuff like this noticing that O'Brien didn't even endorse Trump nor tell people to vote Republican? The Teamsters got a shot to give their message to conservatives who rarely would pay attention otherwise, and they took it. https://t.co/UfxtY9xDef
— Zaid Jilani (@ZaidJilani) July 16, 2024
- What is this even supposed to mean? How offensive to the conservative justices that their integrity and independence are being questioned in such a manner.
The latest cover of the New Yorker: pic.twitter.com/rtigAn11sm
— philip lewis (@Phil_Lewis_) July 15, 2024
- "In 2023, Special Counsel Jack Smith brought a 42-count indictment over Trump's 'willful retention' of classified documents he was no longer allowed to possess after leaving office. Trump's attorneys have argued, among other things, that Smith was improperly appointed to his position," writes Reason's Joe Lancaster. "On Monday, Judge Aileen Cannon of the U.S. District Court for Southern Florida agreed and dismissed the case."
- "Elon Musk has said he plans to commit around $45 million a month to a new super political-action committee backing former President Donald Trump's presidential run," per The Wall Street Journal. Palantir co-founder Joe Lonsdale and the Winklevoss brothers, who are crypto investors, will also back the PAC.
- How exactly did the Secret Service fail to secure nearby rooftops at the Butler, Pennsylvania, campaign rally where Trump was shot?
- "It's 1968 all over again," writes Eli Lake over at The Free Press.
- America!
JD Vance realizing that telling the truth (people are responsible for improving/ruining their own lives) sells books to one audience while telling a lie (they are helpless pawns of the global elite) to another audience wins power is, in a way, the most American story of all.
— Sonny Bunch (@SonnyBunch) July 15, 2024
- lol:
the jd vance ascension is an overdue victory for venture capitalists, an underrepresented and historically downtrodden minority group
— nic carter (@nic__carter) July 15, 2024
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
Cops and SS knew there was a shooter on the roof for 26 minutes before shots rang out.
https://www.wpxi.com/news/local/alleged-trump-shooter-spotted-by-law-enforcement-nearly-30-minutes-before-shots-fired-sources-say/Q6GIK5RP6RBY5PHIMYBNXRTEBI/
SS apparently requires a green light to shoot, and the provided lead SS agent was young and inexperienced.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2024/07/15/secret_service_in_crisis_inflexible_protocols_security_lapses_in_spotlight_151265.html
It took less than 48 hours for leftists to again start chanting Trump as the KKK and fascist as liberals scramble to divert blame to Trump for shooting.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2024/07/march-on-the-rnc-protest-didnt-get-the-memo-to-tone-down-rhetoric/
The Atlantic follows suit. Continued to call Trump a dictator.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/07/donald-trump-democracy-dictator/679006/
But hey, the FBI and DOJ are on the case, JesseAZ. Why, they only took 6 hours to figure out it was an attempted assassination.
I don't trust them, because of their past actions.
It is amazing watching Mayorkas and the SS leader take zero blame for the fuckups.
Not really amazing. SOP.
In their minds, the only fuck-up was that redacted missed.
This.
The whole thing was their Hail Mary, and fucking OrangeHitler moved his head at the very last second.
The stakes are high; que the efforts.
If we did have a dictator, at least we'd know who's running the country, which is more than we know now. It's certainly not the president!
You can’t have chicks in charge.
She has also refused to resign.
I'm not sure I can blame her - if they put her in charge knowing she was inexperienced.
Recent DEI hires have shown those who refused to put women in positions of power were probably right.
This is why I dont drink Pepsi. Her former gig.
Jeff gets his talking points. Sarc follows along like a puppy.
George Takei
@GeorgeTakei
Sorry, Donald. “Unity” doesn’t mean uniting behind a two-bit, lying, stupid, bloviating, fascist, rapey, would-be dictator like you.
If you can't trust a has been TV star who can you trust?
“Rapey” is pretty ironic coming from the guy that used to go out on the town with 14-year-old unrelated white “nephews”.
"Oh my!" - in probably the singular most rapey George Takei voice meme the internet has ever known.
Yeah, for commies like Takei, "unity" means "marxism." It's typical leftist redefinition of words.
Most of here said they would kill him before the election. How is allowing 26 minutes not collusion to kill a former president?
It depends if they knew he had a gun or not. I imagine people climbing up stuff to get a better view is somewhat normal.
I'd be one of the first people complaining if law enforcement forced someone off of private property outside a venue. Hindsight is 20/20 though, he was trespassing and had a gun, so in this case I'd be wrong.
What a dumbass thing to say.
Thanks for the enlightening assessment.
Go climb on a roof on private property near the next Biden event and get back to us moron.
If it was my property and I cared to see him, I would.
Yeah, the guy crawling on his belly was looking for a better view. Don't look at me is 100% right - this IS a dumbass comment.
OK. I didn't see any part of the report that said they saw a gun or that he was lying prone when spotted. You people are so much smarter than me you see facts that aren't reported I guess.
And Trump trumps private property rights too, I see.
I didn’t see any part of the report that said they saw a gun.
Where do you hide a rifle on a angled roof? If it was a handgun I could see, but it was a long rifle. Even if he lay it down it would have still been in plain view.
And the crowd had spotted it as well twenty minutes before.
Not only that, but the snipers apparently saw him fiddling with his gun for about three minutes before he started shooting, and cops had actually confronted him, but backed away when he pointed the gun at them (apparently cop guns are only good for killing dogs).
The main person who needs to be criticized here is the on-scene commander for not giving the green light to pop the guy when he started aiming down the sight.
Look, I get the idea that they might have reasons not to shoot a potential threat. But they have no excuse not to act in non-lethal ways, like rushing Trump off the stage.
The irony of them not doing so is that we ended up with one of the most badass political photos in recent memory.
The primary mistake was not having someone posted on the roof. It was literally the best spot to take a shot from.
Where do you hide a rifle on a angled roof?
Lying on the roof on the opposite side of the peak from the snipers (which appears to be where he was).
And the crowd had spotted it as well twenty minutes before.
I haven't seen this. I'm seeing more like a 1.5 minutes. Can you share your source?
Here’s two, but there’s all sorts of videos and interviews from the time flying around now:
https://x.com/anupamyad/status/1812439212102242463/video/4
https://x.com/anupamyad/status/1812439212102242463/video/3
Thanks.
These align with my belief. The first guy says he saw him there with a rifle "2 or 3 minutes", then later says "3 or 4 minutes" before the shots. The second guy says he told the officer (who was actively looking for a something) he could see him on the roof (no mention of a gun) and when he turned his back shots rang out (so immediately).
Yes, blame us for your ignorance. It’s a good look.
You're being intentionally obtuse. You know I was challenging that claim.
Police already reported seeing him with a gun when they saw him earlier, but they backed off because he had a gun. Are these cops the same cops from Uvalde school district or does our government now just allow shooters to shoot for some other purpose.
some one has to say it if he had been black they would have shot him the first time they saw him.
Are these cops the same cops from Uvalde school district or does our government now just allow shooters to shoot for some other purpose.
These are the right questions
My understanding is that after the cop backed off, he started shooting at Trump immediately.
This was bumbled opportunity for sure, but who wouldn't duck away if a gun was pointed at them.
"who wouldn’t duck away if a gun was pointed at them."
A director of an Alec Baldwin film.
There wasn't much debris. Officers had pictures of the gun man. Counter sniper has a scope. Not sure what you're trying to say. People outside were telling cops he had a gun.
People outside were telling cops he had a gun.
30 minutes before the shooting?!!
Yes. In the article. Maybe not 26, that is when they knew someone was up there. But there are videos well before the shooting of people telling cops just that.
And again. Counter sniper has a damn scope.
""Counter sniper has a damn scope.""
And he can only report what he sees until he receives permission to shoot. I'm curious how many times he asked. Whoever he was asking is in big trouble.
Whoever he was asking is in big trouble.
They will probably be "fired" as a crowd of billionaire DNC donors fight to give them a
rewardnew job.I watched the Don Bongino show on Rumble yesterday (figure he’d have more knowledge than a random reporter, as Bongino is a 10 or 15 year veteran of the Secret Service). He said that the USSS agents or snipers (snipers are uniformed personnel, not technically agents) don’t have to wait for the subject to fire first, and that the USSS can engage as soon as a threat to bodily injury or death appears. If, somehow, orders were given before the rally that no USSS can engage a credible threat to Trump until a higher-up gives the green light, the person who gave the orders to wait until approval needs to be interrogated, fired, or even prosecuted.
The more I learn of this event, the more likely it seems to me that there was either a LIHOP (let it happen on purpose) motive, or the thing was planned/coordinated. I can understand incompetence, but this would have to set a new world record for incompetence, and at so many levels, that I highly suspect malice.
My comments are based on the assumption that no one knew he was armed when he was spotted 26 minutes before the shooting.
Allowing someone on a roof for 30 minutes with a rifle and a clear line of sight to the stage where Trump would be strains credulity that security could be that incompetent or transparently corrupt. Thus I assume that at that time (26 minutes before the shooting), the only thing suspicious about him was his position on a roof.
One would think normal procedure is to have the counter sniper take a look for an unattended person on a roof.
Yes, absolutely. This is what makes me skeptical that the gun was visible.
Have you seen the pictures? He didn't have a gilli suit on. You can see the rifle from pictures taken from the ground.
Yes, I know the gun was visible when he shot and the minutes leading up to that. I'm only questioning that any security people were aware of the gun for a full half hour.
No suit or coverings. Gun a full size rifle. People reporting man with a gun. And this was well before shots fired.
Not sure why you seem to be insisting on nobody could see honest mistake type questions. There are videos and picture floating around well before the shooting on X.
I'm not insisting on anything. I'm just very skeptical that anyone could have known he had a gun for a half hour and he still got shots off. It doesn't make sense to me.
If it was 15 minutes 10 minutes, 5 minutes does it make it better?
Yes. The longer security had to intervene and didn't, the worse it is.
“My comments are based on the assumption”
That’s the best way to get to the truth, especially when this regime is involved.
We have to wait for the truth, probably months or years. Right now it's just filling in the blanks with assumptions and unreliable reports.
All commenters above assumed the gun was visible a half hour when the report only says the shooter was spotted on the roof. I assume it wasn't because it fits better with my perception of reality. Time will tell.
All commenters above assumed the gun was visible a half hour when the report only says the shooter was spotted on the roof.
Which commenter?
First 26 minutes was when he was known to be on the roof. Visibility from the counter sniper had full view. Gunman not wearing heavy clothes, no bags to hide anything in. Contemporary video and pictures from before the shooting saying man with a gun. Officer going up saying a gun was pointed at him.
What argument are you actually attempting to make here?
What argument are you actually attempting to make here?
I don't believe this: Cops and SS knew there was a shooter on the roof for 26 minutes before shots rang out.
I can believe this: "Cops and SS knew there was [someone] on the roof for 26 minutes before shots rang out."
Seems like an awfully strange nitpick. The shooter was the shooter. Your quote doesn't say they knew he had a gun at the time. But he did have one. He was still the shooter.
It seems like a form of sea lioning.
That's fine. To me it's a very important nitpick. Only in hindsight do we know the shooter was the shooter. Security doesn't have the luxury to respond in hindsight.
The local cops initially just told the SS they were looking for a “suspicious person.” I think they only confirmed his location immediately before he started shooting. The SS snipers couldn’t have seen him until he popped up to shoot, since he was on the far slope of the roof. I’m not sure how much time they had to decide or why they waited until he started shooting.
It’s also not clear how many shots the assassin fired. Some stories are saying 8, some are saying 7, but the sound on the video seems more like 3 shots (which tracks with the number of injured spectators, who were packed around Trump on the stage), followed by 5 shots with a different sound (which I assumed were return fire from the SS).
It's also an open question why Trump wasn't taken off stage until the threat was cleared.
To me, this (or something close to it) seems more likely to be how it actually happened.
What I've gotten is that they aren't required to get a green light on protective detail but this time they were.
He also drew on a cop that came up the ladder. Hard to believe there wasn't a sniper covering the guy climbing up the ladder that would have greased the guy for aiming a rifle at a cop.
The shooter was on the far side of the roof. The snipers had no view of the downslope. They should have had a drone, or a guy on the water tower.
I'm not convinced this is correct. The USSS sniper was on a taller building than the one Crooks occupied, the topography shows the ground of the building upon which the USSS sniper was on is higher than the ground of the building Crooks was on, and the slope of the roof of that building is pretty mild. I don't think he would have been completely screened from view of the USSS sniper.
That's how it seems to me, but I haven't inspected the site or run tests myself, obviously.
I've read the rules are different between president and others under protection.
Like everything else, the levels of protection are now (D)ifferent.
ROE still doesn't explain why they didn't move Trump and end the event after seeing the threat for 26 mins. They had plenty of time to calmly move Trump off stage. But instead they left him in the line of fire while the kid scouted, ranged, and ultimately fired upon Trump. They allowed it to happen. I also would not be surprised to find out some glowie talked him into it on Reddit.
Fired three times, apparently.
^^
I wouldn't be surprised if a fed talked him into it.
I don't believe that the same people that will empty their clip into a half naked guy crawling and crying down the hallway, that they need permission or shots fired to put down a potential threat to a president or presidential candidate.
If this is true, you people really need to put on your big boy pants and hit the streets antifa style. There would be no excuse not to. They will definitely take another shot to take him out if you are correct that they are this brazen.
You guys are deluded lunatics and cowards to boot.
Fuck off, Jeff.
It is definitely sarc or jeff. He got mad upset at bears in trunks link.
One or the other. I've got it muted.
26 minutes is plenty of time to do things other than shoot the suspect.
Yeah, that's the thing. 26 minutes wold have been before Trump came out. Even with uncertainty, they could have delayed the speech to roust the local LE out of the donut shop to check things out.
And if the account of the shooter threatening the cop who did climb up to the roof is true, then some people in the security detail are criminally stupid for not immediately taking Trump off the stage.
How did they not watch the perimeter of the building after losing a suspicous man near it? He wasn't going to shoot his way onto the roof.
There should have been at least one LEO standing on that roof before the shooter climbed up.
This.
It's 130 yards away. That's a ridiculously close range for rifle work.
New video shows Trump shooter climbing onto the roof 2 minutes before opening fire.
https://youtu.be/6tReC8aNS0A?si=MabZqRblD7Z4RjNJ
If you had told me back in 2016 that the GOP of the future would, just eight years from now, feature the president of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters and a celebrity-stripper with a face tattoo...
Huge tent.
Are these bad things?
I'm anti-body-graffiti regardless of party. In fact, I say our skin should produce antibodies for ink.
Truly a case of skin color being the most important thing.
Fauci is working on it for you, happy now?
Mandatory tattoo vaccines.
Vax and Vax card all in one.
What about ID tattoos in federal camps? For democracy.
Populism is bad.
But not being the caricature of the corporate media is even worse.
Liz: The Republican tent is just too damn big.
With Trump at the helm, I'm not surprised. He's the most inviting leading figure we've had. Contrary to all the reporting, he doesn't ostracize and keep out the other side. Let's see how "inclusive" the DNC is. Their idea of inclusion is bearded ladies, lady dick, and a bunch of Hamas supporting commies. The people they pander to are awful, and most of their policies hurt the vast majority of the country.
Yeah, the DNC Big Tent has a VIP section for the elite plus a show coral for the latest freaks, and stalls for the traditional protected minority groups. And as always, the Marxists are off in the back corner scheming how to take over the whole thing.
If corporations are only beholden to their shareholders, then collective bargaining would seem a reasonable counterbalance.
"CHANGE JOBS" works for skilled labor, but not for unskilled labor.
I'm pretty sure a lot of the employers prefer it as long as it's under control. Who has time to negotiate with 500-1000 individuals per plant? Some workers get hurt, shitty workers benefit, and the average worker gets what they're worth. It doesn't always work that way, some unions are fuckers, some employers are, but there are logical reasons on both sides of the employment agreement for it.
Uhhhh ... if unskilled can get jobs, they can change jobs. Maybe you think unskilled means slave.
Class analysis actually helps here. The GOP was traditionally the party of the bourgeoisie. The Democrats essentially purged their working class base (I won't even say white working class, because I don't think it's that important) in favor of an alliance between the managerial technocracy and the underclasses. Trump, a guy who is structurally bourgeois, but marketed himself to the proletariat, was the one who saw that the GOP's future, if it was going to be at all relevant, had to entail a full partnership between the bourgeoisie and proletariat. Hence, the Teamsters and the celebrity stripper.
Frankly, if libertarians aren't idiots, they'll start to try to figure out genuinely libertarian answers to the issues and concerns of bourgeois and working class voters. The managerial technocracy pretty clearly views liberty with, at best, thinly veiled contempt. I don't expect much from Reason or the Chase Oliver camp.
Frankly, if libertarians aren’t idiots, they’ll start to try to figure out genuinely libertarian answers to the issues and concerns of bourgeois and working class voters.
Those answers already exist. They are called "get government out of the way, which enables individuals to craft their own solution that works best in their particular circumstances".
But what is the solution to bears in trunks?
I think the project to eliminate private cars will deal with the bears.
No cars, no trunks.
No trunks, no bears.
Simple, really.
Bears on trains is going to be a nightmare.
Maybe they can ride in trunks?
If apes can ride in cages on trains, then bears can ride in trunks. Or at least a guy in a bear suit.
Since only the wealthy and connected will be allowed to travel on airplanes, we'll sadly never get "Bear Air," starring Samuel L. Jackson.
Just like citizens, bears will get a single airline flight in their lifetime.
I have had it with these motherfuckin' trunk bears on this motherfuckin' plane!
Those answers already exist. They are called “get government out of the way
How does that square for you with Top Men, and your antipathy to the "Common Man".
Blah blah blah.
Vague generalities that could mean any of a million different things, and in practice more often mean getting screwed over aren't a particularly useful answer.
How about:
* End the Fed.
* Stop funding higher ed.
* End the FDA (or at least forbid effectiveness criteria).
* Allow pharmaceutical reimportation.
* Slash IP protection periods.
* Repeal green mandates.
All of those things are most certainly getting government out of the way. It's just the beneficiaries of those government interventions are the managerial technocracy, rather than Joe Sixpack. And, yet, for some reason, I never hear you take up the cause for these sorts of issues, rather than insisting blue collar workers should have to economically compete with impoverished peasants from the Third World.
Let me clear it up: Lying Jeffy is a leftist.
But what if they don't do it voluntarily? Then they must be forced to do the right thing, right?
Pendulums explain it even better. Each party gropes in the dark for some new way to get voters, and as soon as something sticks to the wall, the old fogies in charge push it beyond its use-by date, taking their old constituencies for granted, who resent being taken for granted and resent the new constituencies who are taking their gravy and switch parties.
The root problem is government itself, immortal coercive monopolistic government, like a gutter whore just begging everyone to come bribe it and use it in the vilest manner possible, because that is where the power lies.
Color me cynical.
You didn't let me finish.
...IN MY PANTS.
Those dirty populist that think the US gov should act for the benifit of the American people, and not the globalist ruling class.
How dare you?
Reason hates them because populist tend to want controlled borders.
Not slaving for a ruling totalitarian elite? Why, that's practically fascist talk.
...you get a portrait of a Republican Party that simply doesn't care about free markets the way it used to.
Give the people what they want, which is apparently creeping toward Marxism.
But do they care about free markets more than the Democrats?
I’d give that a strong probably.
Tariffs
Tariffs
Tariffs
COVID STIMULUS
The markets are so much freeer when we only enrich a few chronies and break the rest of the country to do it.
Who are these cronies of which you speak, and what did we do to enrich them and break the rest of the country?
Well, we can start with the Fed and the Cantillon effect. Or you can get into IP abuse. Or the prohibition on drug reimportation that seems to be the only protectionism many libertarians want to avoid mentioning. Or the FDA effectiveness requirements that allow for patented drugs to change insane prices. Or the MIC.
Explain to me how anything mandated green isn't? Zero interest while printing trillions so the banks get risk-free profit off the Fed? The piles of rules and regulations that can only be navigated by corporate lawyers definitely don't disadvantage the rest of us. It's more than a few getting rich, but the freedom of the free market is far from free. How about all the small businesses being shuttered during COVID? I don't recall a single big retailer having to shut stores down.
I'm going to be the last to ask for new rules and regulations to replace the old, but to pretend that the markets and economy haven't been skewed against the rest of us is not accurate. Maybe its more ignorance by the government, but it's hard to believe all the ignorance goes one way. Then they pay off the lowest rungs with more welfare pandering for votes.
I'm not sure if you meant to reply to me. I'm completely in agreement. It's honestly why I find myself increasingly rolling my eyes at a lot of libertarians. There's a long list of interventions our government already does to favor some over others. And plenty of libertarians are all too happy to free up the market in a way that costs some poor schmuck his livelihood while studiously evading the interventions that favor the managerial technocracy.
"Markets for you. Protection for me." isn't a terribly appealing tagline for libertarianism.
No, I was replying to Medulla asking which chronies have been enriched.
Where do you suppose the billions of dollars for ev charging stations and rural broadband, that last I saw had resulted in one charging station and zero broadband, went?
I just love how the term free market has become the US not responding at all to the actions other countries have on markets. Or the fact that regulatory frameworks don't have an effect on markets.
When the term free market is used like it here it actually refers to globally managed trade. It isnt a free market.
See how they spend more time on tariffs, 50B a year, than they do on regulatory policy, over 1.5T a year. How they ignore non free market actions from other countries. What they call free markets isn't actually a free market.
Of course not, it's nothing more than a rhetorical device to bash Republicans to them. They don't attack actual Democrat policy with nearly as much invective as they do possible Republican policy not yet written. Same with borders and every other topic.
Free markets in the US benefit the US.
Full stop.
I'm not opposed to a little gunboat diplomacy to lower tariffs ex-US, but most market manipulation is in the form of subsidies which just means foreign taxpayers are subsidizing US consumer purchases.
Which is not a bad thing.
The market has never been free. Full stop. Regulatory policy effects markets. Full stop. Allowing theft from other countries imposes costs on domestic markets. Full stop.
Blind adherence to bumper stickers is not a thoughtful ethos.
Right now the costs from IP theft and security costs to reduce it dwarf the full costs of tariffs. When Trump put tariffs on China to crack down on it, China did. The costs of tariffs were a small percent of just that crackdown. Tariffs removed after the anti market behaviors.
Your understanding of the issue seems to be very facial and not based in reality.
Do you know China spends billions here funding lobbying and activit groups pushing regulatory policy to maintain market advantages? Yet your focus is tariffs which are such a small percentage of market costs from manipulation.
What is so wrong for us, if the Chinese people tolerate a government which uses their taxes to subsidize products for us? How does it hurt our national security for the Chinese to go into debt to help us save money for other products which they can't provide? If the Chinese government is so short-sighted as to be the world's cheap factories instead of concentrating on the sophisticated products which they can't build cheaply, how does that hurt our national security?
US workers get paid more because they are more productive, and that's due to a freer market than in other countries. No dictatorship, communist or otherwise, can ever match that kind of innovation, because that requires free thinkers which are the last thing dictators want.
Unilateral free trade works because it reduces domestic regulation and forces domestic producers to concentrate on the sophisticated production which is impossible in dictatorships. The Soviet Union disintegrated in part because modern telecom systems, including faxes, are anathema to dictators. Block the tools of innovation and you block innovation itself.
If other governments want to ban imports from the US with high tariffs, they effectively ban their own exports, because dollars (or the fiat money of your choice) in have to equal dollars out, by definition. You don't need to band imports or slow them down with tariffs; foreigners will do it to themselves by banning or taxing our exports.
Economic illiteracy is nothing to brag about.
Look. Not going to keep making the same arguments for you time and time again.
They tolerate their government subsidizing the theft from foreign competitors to reduce their prices without investments in R&D. You know the business costs that increase costs of goods sold? They tolerate forcing a cost on foreign markets in response to this encouraged theft as it raises competitor market costs, making their goods cheaper.
Chinas actions directly effect your costs from non Chinese companies and you happily applaud those costs to save pennies from Chinese markets. Advantage their market by disadvantaging non Chinese markets with costs.
I get it. You'll never admit to reality.
We even have double the cost from shop lifting in the country than we do the cost of tariffs, 120B compared to 50B. But hey. You can now buy stolen goods more cheaply by pushing your costs onto those choosing not to buy stolen goods. Free market right?
Reality? You want reality?
Dollars go out and have to be matched by dollars coming in unless the recipients burn them. This is fiat money, not gold which is fungible around the world. Fiat dollars are only useful to buy things sold in dollars.
The annual trade deficits are an accounting fiction. If you believe trade deficits are bad, you better start clapping for Tinkerbell. They are a fiction, a lie. If Toyota gets $10,000 for selling a car, they can send it back to Japan to buy stuff from the US, which means ZERO for that transaction, or they can spend it in the US on property, in which case it is not accounted because government likes stupid metrics. That money HAS to come back to the US sooner or later. There is no trade deficit, plus or minus.
Even dumber is pretending the trade balance with a single country is even meaningful. My trade balances with my landlord and grocer and other suppliers are way in the negative, my trade balance with my employer is way in the positive, and guess what -- they match!
So let's just suppose we have no tariffs and no import bans, but other countries have 100% tariffs. Guess what -- they're not going to buy anything from us. And guess what else -- they can't sell us anything, because they'd get fiat dollars they can't use because they can't afford to buy anything from us.
It's fucking self-balancing. Our unilateral free trade hurts no one. Their unilateral trade bans hurt themselves.
You are a fucking economic moron if you think we should hurt ourselves because the Chinese are hurting themselves.
Thats a lot of non sequitur in a row to avoid reality.
We have done this argument so many times and you continue to refuse yo admit there is a cost to both R&D and security.
Last time this discussion happened you even inferred the only issue was design trademarks lol.
Your entire trade philosophy reduces incentive for R&D while initializing theft.
You refuse to acknowledge the theft you openly support, at much greater costs than the tariffs, is a thing.
I can honestly say you’ve never helped develop a competitive product from any aspect of responsibility.
You refuse to admit the negative market costs from the behaviors you ignore.
When you finally admit to these costs and the effects on markets maybe there can be an actual conversation to be had.
Until then, stick your head in the sand. Don’t really care.
What does it hurt from a national security standpoint? How about the gutting of our manufacturing and dependence on foreign powers for critical components needed for defense projects? What do you think won us WW2? Manufacturing capacity. Which is now gutted, we can't even replace something rather simple like 155mm artillery shells were giving away to Ukraine. What if we were in a real shooting war with China? Who could out manufacture who? Remember amateurs discuss tactics, professionals discuss logistics. Logistics win wars, doesn't matter how well trained your troops are if they don't have beans and bullets.
We have the biggest manufacturing economy in the world. We have he most productive manufacturing workers in the world. Want proof? They get paid the most. Businesses don't pay more than they can afford. Therefore our workers are the best in the world.
We have the best farmers in the world. We measure that by $$$$ output, not by jobs. If all you care about is job count, then let's ban ATMs, self-serve gas pumps, and hell, go back to general stores where the customer never touches a thing and the hired help get everything off the shelf.
Are you as economically ignorant as Jesse? Are you proud of that?
Learn some goddam economics before you spout more nonsense.
And if you want to argue national security, then get in line with that damned congress critter who wants to subsidize garlic. Go look up autarkey and read The Vampire Economy about how Hitler crippled the Nazi economy in the name of autarkey.
Then think about what it means to insist that we be self-sufficient in everything. If we make dishwashers more expensively than South Korea and ban theirs, then we have to pay more, and we will buy fewer of them, we will have less money left over for other purchases, and that means less production and less employment, and now where's your damned national security when people can only buy 10-20% fewer goods because (1) they have less money, and (2) there's less being made because there aren't enough workers to make everything they used to.
Workers who churn out $100,000 of value every year can make 200 $500 appliances, or they can make 100 $1000 fridges, or whatever you want, but they can't make anything else. If Americans could buy those same appliances cheaper, those workers could make something more valuable that they are better at making than anybody else.
If you force workers to work inefficiently, you force them to make less and use resources more inefficiently.
Learn some basic economics. Knee-jerk protectionism is an incredibly inefficient way to destroy an economy.
We have such great manufacturing we can't produce enough simple 155 mm artillery shells to maintain peacetime inventories.
Is the current plant working full time? Or is it just that the Government isn't buying enough to maintain the stocks?
I truly don't know the answer, so if you do, please let me know. But I'd be pretty shocked if it was an actual plant limitation. And if something like that actually was hitting a plant limitation, and the FedGov actually wanted to buy more, I'd be very surprised if there wasn't an expansion of capacity.
Unless nobody could get permitted to expand capacity, which is the depressing as shit thing I think about when I ponder the US airplane industry in WWII. We couldn't even get the permits pulled to build the factories in the five years they took to win the war, these days. :-/
It's a combination of multiple things.
Additionally, it's not knee jerk protectionism or economic illiteracy to point out what I pointed out. It is telling that you resorted to those attacks though, while dismissing the real world situation that our manufacturing is so debased we can't maintain, let alone expand, peacetime ordinance inventory.
I think that's a lot more the EPA's fault than much else.
It's like how freedom or liberty doesn't mean individual liberty, it means "freedom from being reminded of the consequences of your actions by Conservatives".
If the government colludes with corporations to censor individual people in a straight up fascist fashion or the IMF and EU unfairly tax and subsidize tea coming into Boston harbor, those aren't libertarian concerns. Just free markets at work.
Last night felt very much like the type of programming you’d expect from a Republican Party that’s confident it will win…
You know who else was sure they were going to win?
Killary, because it was "her turn?"
Speaking of dodging bullets...
USSR Olympic Hockey 1980?
Me last night at the blackjack table?
And? Don't leave us hanging in suspense!
Thomas Dewey?
the Houston Oilers?
Also the Oilers from Edmonton.
wonder which is worse?
All of Rocky's opponents?
Ohio town of 60k has had 20k Haitians relocated to the town causing massive disruptions to housing, markets, and city aid agencies.
https://nypost.com/2024/07/10/us-news/ohio-city-facing-significant-housing-crisis-due-to-migrant-influx/
Good thing sarc tells us there is no downside and all profit. This town about to become super rich.
Think of the food trucks!
What will they do with all the newfound prosperity? Jesse is just jealous that he didn't get an assload of Hatians in his town to make it UberRich.
Towns don't need 1000 food trucks of goat head stew.
Wow, fancy dining. A welcome change from Cane Rat fricassee.
Hey, just 20,000 free people exercising their freedom of movement, that all happened to travel from the poorest country in the world to a small city in Ohio. Why do you hate freedom?
And importing some 10M people in the last few years has had nothing to do with the spiking rent and housing costs...
I'm sure zoning laws and excessive red tape doesn't have anything to do with it. It's only because of the immigrants.
But are they all going to vote?
No. Our voting is secure. We put proper security measures in place like, checks notes, a box on a form that never gets investigated.
Sometimes, if you fuck up enough, the checked box is the best way to prosecute you. Isn't that how the Hunter Biden story will be written, or is he just a poor, innocent victim of a vile machine?
He is the best man Joe knows.
They already have.
This is an obvious error by the immigration authorities.
They meant to send the 20k Haitians to Martha's Vineyard, but the bus drivers got lost in New Jersey.
The drivers forgot the New Jersey state motto: "All Turns From Right Lane".
With just an investment of 15 billion dollars, your energy costs can raise 20% and become intermittent with load too!
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/business/3080817/new-jersey-offshore-wind-faces-fierce-criticism/
You know, for a guy shot in the face, Trump is having a good week
He made $763 million on Monday
First Jesus saves him from assassination at a rally on Saturday. Then Judge Cannon saved President Trump from the outrageous Mar-a-Lago raid and prosecution on Monday. His political fortune rose, as Democrats have given up on replacing the Guy Who Can’t Draw a Clock. On top of that, his financial fortunes rose too.
The Hartford Courant reported, “Trump Media shares surge on 1st day of trading after assassination attempt on the former president.”
The price rose 31% on Monday. He owns 78.8 million shares, which means he made $763 million as the stock closed above $40 a share.
That last bit is what's going to hit poor Buttplug hardest.
Tale as old as time. Democrats removed homeless for optics at DNC convention.
https://apnews.com/article/democratic-national-convention-homeless-chicago-fcd971c7c575cc7171ae6accf90c85a6?utm_campaign=TrueAnthem&utm_medium=AP&utm_source=Twitter
Unpossible! They're the People Who Care About Everyone!
According to Tony [been gone a while, but probably a sock somewhere] Democrats "at least act like they care." That apparently is enough, along with speciously good intentions.
They have good intentions but sometimes make honest mistakes. Ask sarcjeff.
They have good intentions but sometimes make honest mistakes. Ask Jesse/ML/90% of the people here about Team Red.
"I'm rubber, you're glue..."
Poor Lying Jeffy. He’s been completely exposed for the leftist he is, and he’s not smart enough to switch up his approach, so he just screeches like a retard.
Hilarious to watch. He is even still going with the Trump is Hitler like he has been for months while pretending to be neutral. Just like Sulu above.
But he claims he would never compare Trump or his followers to Nazis. He pinky promises he never did or will. And if you say otherwise, you're lying.
Genociding the homeless to make room for the Hamas protests.
Did the democrats move the homeless to the mayor's mansion or the governor's mansion?
...a call from Black revolutionaries in Atlanta calling for a summer of resistance against the US & Israel's colonial/state violence & surveillance.
WHY IS IT IMPORTANT TO TELL ME WHAT COLOR THEY ARE?
At least Liz is sticking with the ap racist guidlines
Faggot
Fuck off, Jeff.
Skin color is the most important thing.
He's not wrong; she's the racist one:
https://youtu.be/JQ0_ubBm2yQ?t=24
Probably the best headline ever written to destroy DEI written by WaPo.
He never saw himself as disadvantaged. Then the government had him write an essay.
https://archive.is/20240701213011/https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/06/29/sba-8a-curtis-joachim-racial-inequality/
"Joachim said the program changed the course of his life, allowing him to win more than $32 million in accounting and auditing contracts over the past decade from the departments of Housing and Urban Development, and Transportation, among others."
Man that's tough! And yet he is reborn a victim, because.
Givermint contracts, I notice. Glad my taxes could help him get ahead.
The republican party doesn't care about free markets?
Hi Liz,
Can you let me know which administration had the largest reduction in regulation?
Thanks
As mentioned above, only tariffs are related to free markets based on the usage of the word here.
It's almost like Reason is only interested in anything that might affect Koch Industries. Weird.
Can you let me know which administration had the largest reduction in regulation?
The Carter administration, by far. It is not even close.
The administration that created the DoE and DoEd lol. The one who basically took the conservative plans before the 1980 election to try to help his campaign? Lol.
Show your ignorance then.
Carter deregulated airlines/transportation, natural gas, banking/interest, and even beer making.
and those departments existed before - he just moved them.
Fucking retarded pedo isn’t even trying anymore.
Look shrike, I get your team loves rewriting history and all, but this is pretty well documented. Carters deregulation came in direct response to criticism of his first 3 years and he implemented plans his opponents were campaigning on.
This whole myth of Carter being a deregulation fighter is utterly hilarious when one actually investigates the claim from the left trying to reform Carter.
For example:
Take oil deregulation, for example. By 1980, the oil situation in this country was critical. On the left, Carter’s Democratic challenger Ted Kennedy was advocating outright nationalization of the oil industry. On the other side, Republican Ronald Reagan was calling for complete decontrol. Carter took the “middle road.”
.
First, he announced gradual decontrol of oil prices and the phasing out of the Keystone-Cops like government allocation system. However, Carter also pushed a “Windfall Profits Tax” on the belief that decontrol would bring higher prices and, thus, higher profits to oil companies that “really don’t deserve them.” The Wall Street Journal so opposed Carter’s oil tax that it published an editorial, “Death of Reason,” on the day Congress passed the tax, bordering the editorial in black.
https://mises.org/mises-daily/rethinking-carter
This was true of most of the activities you are trying to credit him with lol.
His acts were in response to conservative criticism and declining poll numbers.
But keep your liberal left leaning reformation project alive.
turd, the ass-wipe of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
Carter was awful, but his predecessors were bad at a level it’s hard to imagine now. Carter committed atrocities like forming the Department of Education, but by comparison with what came before it definitely felt like Carter was lightening up on regulations.
Ford had federal regulation of thermostat settings, minimum of 78F in summer for everyplace except private homes. He set a national speed limit of 55mph. He started the Federal Election Commission and comprehensive regulation of campaign finance.
Although Ford didn’t start the Department of Education, he passed federal laws creating national standards for local schools that were later assigned to the Dept of Ed for enforcement.
Nixon was much worse than Ford. He enacted comprehensive national wage and price controls. Companies needed permission to change prices or salaries. In particular there were restrictions on giving people raises.
Nixon created the Alternative Minimum Tax. He finished off the gold standard. He proposed, but did not get, a national guaranteed minimum income. He proposed a national mandate for employer-provided healthcare. Nixon’s heavy attacks on laissez-faire were the primary motivation for the formation of the LP.
And oh yeah, Title IX was passed under the Nixon administration.
Carter was awful, but his predecessors were bad at a level it’s hard to imagine now. Carter committed atrocities like forming the Department of Education, but by comparison with what came before it definitely felt like Carter was lightening up on regulations.
Carter was the wrong guy for the time. He was an okay administrator, but for someone who had served as an officer in the Navy, he should have understood how morale works, and that you not only have to know that low morale is an issue ("It is a crisis of confidence"), but you have to understand how to engage that problem and build it back up.
He wasn't helped by the absolutely atrocious economy of the time, but his biggest failing was not understanding that the nation needed a cheerleader at that moment, not a policy wonk. That's why Reagan's campaign resonated so much at the time.
Agreed. He also had a whiff of pious and righteous that got on people's nerves.
If you're going to attempt to give Carter all the credit, you should note that Ford started the path towards deregulation such as with airlines. But that doesn't fit well into the Jimmy Carter reformation project.
In addition, the Ford administration drafted a deregulation bill which was introduced "by request" in the Senate by Senators Magnuson (D-Wash.) and Pearson (R-Kan.) on October 22, 1975.
https://www.heritage.org/government-regulation/report/airline-deregulation
Well, it's Plug's reformation project, not mine. I said he was awful.
And let's not reform Ford either. I drove for 18 years and 250,000 miles under that 55mph speed limit. (Quick calculation...) That cost me about 900 hours of extra driving time, or roughly 100 full-time workdays out of my life. Not to mention some wallet-lightening encounters with various Justices of the Peace.
Fucking retarded pedo isn’t even trying anymore.
turd, the TDS-addled ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
> "How exactly did the Secret Service fail to secure nearby rooftops at the Butler, Pennsylvania, campaign rally where Trump was shot?"
Enh, no need to have the SS and CIA on the same roof.
OK, that is complete batshit insanity, but hilariously presented. Well done, sir!
The Immaculate Conception of Thomas Crooks
Had Saturday’s assassination attempt been carried out against President Joe Biden, we have no doubt we would have read about how the right’s dangerous rhetoric was behind it. We are old enough to remember more than a decade back when former Alaska governor Sarah Palin’s use of crosshairs imagery to identify congressional districts—or, as the Atlantic’s James Fallows put it, "extreme, implicitly violent political rhetoric and imagery"—was fingered as an incitement for former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords’s (D., Ariz.) shooter. (He was, in fact, a deranged individual with no discernible motivation, political or otherwise.)
We could go on: The media fatuously attributed a Georgia spa shooting in 2021 to right-wing, anti-Asian hatred while the motivations of the left-wing lunatic who almost took out Rep. Steve Scalise (R., La.) and other Republican lawmakers on a baseball field in 2017 went studiously unexamined.
The beautiful thing about being a liberal is you never have to blame yourself.
The entire purpose of the liberal agenda is a life free from responsibility.
"What is this [New Yorker cover] even supposed to mean?"
It means Kirkland's prediction of a 7 - 6 liberal majority Supreme Court before August 1, 2021 still hasn't been dethroned as the dumbest thing ever written on Reason.com.
Neck and neck with “bears in trunks”.
For new readers.
https://reason.com/podcast/2021/10/25/freedom-responsibility-and-coronavirus-policy/#comment-9176512
Uh duh, let me check my bookmarks. Yuck yuck. I'm on reason 14 hours a day and have files on my enemies. Totally not paid guys.
Hi sarc.
Jeff and sarc are far to principled to spoof someone else. They swore it.
Fuck off, Jeff.
"...and it's HO2 coming in third!"
That was truly classic, Sandra.
More broadly, “the New Right”—of which Vance is part, writes Reason’s Stephanie Slade—”openly calls on conservatives to wield state power against their domestic political ‘enemies,’ among whom it counts lefty corporations, universities, and nonprofits.” It’s a sign of the times that one of the most prominent members of the New Right, who frequently signals his anti-elitist bona fides despite having worked in venture capital and gone to Yale, has been selected as Trump’s backup.
This is such dishonest framing.
It is to use the same tools against people who are using the tools against regular Americans and conservatives. A form of mutually assured destruction.
Reason has gone out of its way to allow and defend one sided lawfare and abuses while spending more time and energy attacking the response.
You are allowed to respond to violations of the NAP. You dont have to get on your knees and submit.
And most of this talk is about using government to investigate the abuse of government. Unlike dems who use it to go after moms, bakers, and abortion protestors.
This is such dishonest framing.
Of course it is. She fails to mention that virtually everything the Republican's "domestic political ‘enemies,’" are doing is blatantly illegal and unconstitutional, and that the "state power" they will wield against those domestic political ‘enemies,’ are called laws.
This is pure political hackery.
They are famous for their calm demeanor and sober wit.
First Episode of 'The View' After Trump Assassination Attempt Was Something Else
Apparently Trump was actually shot because of lax gun control and... racism???
What...no climate change?
Climate change is definitely to blame. The local cops weren't already on the rooftop because it was too hot outside.
Don’t pay attention to those dizzy bitches.
Repeal the 19th.
Is there anything in Amendments 16+ that's actually worth keeping?
The Teamsters got a shot to give their message to conservatives who rarely would pay attention otherwise, and they took it.
What was the message? Buy American?
While there's still time
Pay us or accidents will happen!
"Nice little package you got there; it would be a shame if it got sold on ebay."
Everything should be made by union workers. And in addition to higher prices, you will pay a special federal union-support tax.
The first half of the speech was not totally bad, the second half was totally deranged. The cheers became much less enthusiastic as he continued to speak. Except when he mentioned American workers being the best in the world. I applaud Trump for inviting him, because it's nice to see someone who doesn't fit the mold speaking at a convention. I also applaud letting Amber Rose speak, and the Hispanic immigrant. Yesterday was about appealing to fence sitters. Amber Rose spoke about her conversion from a never-Trumper to full MAGA. The Hispanic woman spoke about how voting for Biden hurt her family and how it was a mistake and how illegal immigration hurts legal immigrants the most. Hell, even Vance fits that mold, from diehard Trump is literal Hitler, to full bore Trump supporter. It was beautiful marketing. It also was directed at people the left takes for granted, which O'Brien actually addressed, and how voting Democrat, just because you're supposed to, actually harms you. Trump is a salesman. His Daughter-in-law is a salesman. His sons are salesman. Yesterday wasn't aimed at rank and file, but at the marginals that Trump is increasingly attracting. The LP should take some pointers, but we see the won't, after nominating Oliver.
I think some people react knee jerk with apathy whenever something doesn't fit their preconceptions of the way things should be. Imagine the stories if all the speakers last night had been straight, white, Christian males, giving out the same decades old talking points.
It’s noteworthy that McArdle did similar by inviting Trump, RFK and Biden to LPNC.
Yeah, it's good for the LP to invite opponents but not for Trump to do so.
"from diehard Trump is literal Hitler, to full bore Trump supporter"
You could have just said "unprincipled opportunist".
Or, you could consider people change their minds. At least, most people learn to do that.
""This is not an election with a wrongheaded but well-meaning Republican. It’s an all-out war with an illiberal megalomaniac who will happily destroy American democracy if it buys him one more ounce of power and keeps him out of prison," said Times contributing opinion writer Elizabeth Spiers."
They are very much interested in keeping the rhetoric high.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/new-york-times-publishes-scathing-guest-essay-on-former-president-trump-two-days-after-assassination-attempt/ar-BB1q4Pea?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=e6c91b9a3ede4766885d56dbdb2eb211&ei=13
They will do this while continuing to attack the Republicans for blaming the shooting on their rhetoric, and not taking this chance to "tone it down".
Hypocrisy is the point.
Hypocrisy is the most worn-out tool in their toolbox.
At this point it is one of their favorite aphrodisiacs, second only to blatant lying in front of contradictory evidence.
But enoigh about FJB.
The unity and tolerance are just overflowing.... "all out war," "megalomaniac," "destroy American democracy..."
What is this even supposed to mean?
Whitewashing a strong independent black man who wasn't even nominated by Trump and owes him no allegiance?
How offensive to the conservative justices that their integrity and independence are being questioned in such a manner.
Outlaw spray tanning in DC!
Put spray tanning in the crosshairs!
All shades or just orange?
Is there another?
Look at me, commenting in the afternoon!
"On Monday, Judge Aileen Cannon of the U.S. District Court for Southern Florida agreed and dismissed the case."
The walls are moving outward.
The number of basic errors in the Lancaster article was pretty amazing. Citing MSNBC legal analysis was the chefs kiss.
"Citing MSNBC legal analysis"
Oh wow! Did he really?
I've got to go and read that.
Ever since, commentators have accused Cannon of being in the tank for Trump, or perhaps just in over her head. “It is wholly inappropriate to have somebody with that combination of bias and inexperience handling a case like this,” wrote MSNBC legal analyst Andrew Weissmann
Unbiased Weissmann for the win.
Biased and inexperienced? Doesn't that describe most of Biden's political appointees?
Wouldn't that make the ceiling cave in?
The federal government has no ceiling on malicious prosecutions.
They're an open air prison?
Christians might have about casting a vote for a thrice-married philanderer," writes Reason's Stephanie Slade.
Boy, this is some weapons-grade harumphing from Reason.
Again, I point to the Little Sisters of the Poor who the Obama Administration persecuted for failing to sufficiently bending the knee to Obama's moral stance on contraceptives. The Christian Right embraces Trump because at least he will leave them alone, which is something you cannot say about any Democrat, especially Biden.
Christians on Trump , in a nutshell:
“Donald Trump is going to embarrass me every day of the year, but unlike the other side, he doesn’t hate my faith, and seek to do me harm.”
Related: Christian Just Voting For Whichever Candidate Less Likely To Make His Faith Illegal One Day.
"Christian Just Voting For Whichever Candidate Less Likely To Make His Faith Illegal One Day."
We have had to explain this to the local lefties here over and over. When one side engages in things you really dont approve of but at worst leaves you alone, and the other side uses your religion as a scapegoat for the nation's problems, its a pretty clear choice who you are going to vote for.
Lefties constantly invoking "Christofascists!" somehow confused that Christians want nothing to do with their party. More news at 11.
Weapon's grade concern trolling.
I think “propaganda” is the word you’re looking for.
"the New Right" the use of a populist Big Government and cultural issue mix to appeal to blue-collar flyover hayseeds.
Take your culture issues down the road, cis-hetero white patriarchy!
Because the last thing those "Hayseeds" need, is appealing to.
Democrat's have adopted attitudes like Pluggo's, where every working class man is worthy of nothing but hatred, scorn and derision, and then they wonder why the working class are "Voting against their own interests".
Well why do you think Arty is always going on about our "betters?" The prols need to do as they're told, and stop trying to think for themselves [as cute as that may be].
“Musk plans to donate $45M a month to super PAC backing Trump — after fully endorsing candidate following shooting: report.”
There’s your reason why there were two assassination attempts on Musk recently. And there’s your reason why the FAA just grounded the Falcon 9 a few days ago despite it being the safest, most reliable, most flown rocket ever in human history by a factor of five.
Falcon 9 did have it's first mishap in 300+ flights, an oxygen leak meant that though its Starlink satellites are in orbit they aren't in the correct one. Meanwhile Boeing's is under investigation for a far greater mishap involving a crew.
But nobody better investigate the FAA. That would be wrong.
It's political warfare to investigate political warfare.
The faa investigated the faa and found no fault with the ffa
The FBI and the Secret Service are investigating the Secret Service.
You just want to POUNCE!, and nobody should POUNCE!
“Boeing’s Starliner ISN'T currently under investigation for a far greater mishap involving a crew.”
Boeing also got a sweetheart plea deal for their safety issue criminal case.
Elon Musk history of support for President:
2016 Bernie Sanders
2020 Andrew Yang
2024 Donnie Trump
What a fucking political moron. I can't think of three worse candidates and that includes old brain-dead Joe.
Could be worse. Could be a retarded Soros simp.
Buttplug loves fellow traveler and child molester Biden. Don't be fooled.
"I can’t think of three worse candidates"
Imagine voting for "Chase".
turd, the ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
Isn't Yang the guy who wanted to bankrupt America with his universal basic income idea?
I've got an idea.
UBI: Offered to everyone.
Comes with mandatory long-term pharmaceutical contraceptives for anyone who accepts it. Starts wearing off when the recipient stops receiving the UBI, totally clear a year later.
Stupid Republicans trying to broaden their appeal and get more votes…..so very very UnLibertarian of them
'But inviting O'Brien also supports the thesis that the populist realignment has already happened, that Trump has remade the party in his own image, and that the party of free markets is no longer.'
You mean the old GOP free market party? The one that promoted crony capitalism as the best capitalism?
You know the Romney party of huge social programs, unlimited immigration, and greasing polititions
JD Vance realizing that telling the truth (people are responsible for improving/ruining their own lives) sells books to one audience while telling a lie (they are helpless pawns of the global elite) to another audience wins power is, in a way, the most American story of all.
I don't see how these two things contradict. There are things you have control over in your life and things you don't. Why didn't blacks in the south make better decisions. They had agency, it is not like they were helpless pawns of the Jim Crow Democrats.
Blacks consistently improved their station in society, until lbj passed the great society bill that keeps blacks on the gov/dem plantation
All those people in the gulags were entirely responsible for their own predicament. After all, freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences.
There is a difference between government coercion oppressing a minority group, and a "feeling" of being oppressed by shadowy unnamed outside forces.
This can be seen on the left, when, after the overt government oppression was abolished - repeal of Jim Crow laws - nevertheless many tried to claim that blacks were still being oppressed by 'structural racism'.
It is the same thing on the right now, when the poor, downtrodden 'forgotten man' is claimed to be being oppressed by 'globalists' and 'the elite'.
These vague claims of 'oppression' really are just an exercise in excuse-making. One might think that 'structural racism' still exists, or one might think that 'the elites' rig the game in their favor to a certain degree, but the individuals being 'oppressed' do indeed retain their agency to change their circumstances in life.
shadowy unnamed outside forces.
The administrative state has a name, is part of the nation, and operates in broad daylight with impunity.
But that is part of the government. That is not what I'm referring to. I'm referring to when people like Jesse refer to 'globalists'.
Globalists like Biden, Macron and Trudeau aren't part of the government?
What power do Macron and Trudeau have over American workers, particularly when it comes to oppressing them?
That's what I'm talking about. The claims of oppression are vague and shadowy and not based on any concrete law or action. It's like "hurr durr Biden and Macron met at Davos and now I got laid off, it's all their fault"
Macron and Trudeau have power over French and Canadian workers and citizens when they import millions of unskilled workers with cultures antithetical to the native population with no intention of ever integrating. Homogenization is a goal of the one world globalist WEF types.
He knows, but he thinks if he says “globalists” with a sneer, it will somehow make everyone ignore the obvious. And if he moves the goalposts and conditions it to just the US (instead of globally) your statement will somehow no longer apply.
Thank you for not answering the question, but instead just ranting about 'globalists'.
That was literally you who started with the term several comments up:
"But that is part of the government. That is not what I’m referring to. I’m referring to when people like Jesse refer to ‘globalists’."
Cmon man. That was so many comments ago so it means the comment doesn't exist.
He can’t stop lying.
“What power do Macron and Trudeau have over American workers,”
Was Lying Jeffy really confused by what Moonrocks was saying, or is he just being dishonest here? I’ll let you decide.
Are you suggesting that business managers aren't a different breed from business owners, or even owner/managers? Because, in many ways, their interests more closely align to high-level bureaucrats than business owners. Their status, position, and economic prospects more closely tie to the degree that their specialized expertise (and connections) is needed than the underlying performance of the business. And, of course, the larger and more complex the enterprise or society, the more valuable their expertise and connections. And global scale is the largest and most complex.
The idea that globalists are some sort of fiction is risible.
Jeff has been saying government is separate from the people for a week now. So probably what he thinks.
Not only is it separate but that's a good thing per Jeff
Globalists are not a fiction. Just like racists are not a fiction.
But it is just as much of a fallacy to claim that "globalists are the source of our problems" as it is to claim "structural racism is the source of our problems". Both are an attempt to blame these shadowy vague forces, and because they are so vague, either hypothesis is essentially unfalsifiable - just adjust the vagueness to address any criticism!
The WEF and Davos have names.
"I don’t see how these two things contradict."
Ya this is one of those very obvious "two things can be true at the same time" scenarios, especially depending on the context
Then you're making the same mistake as those on the left who blame "structural racism" for all of their problems.
Tell us more about the structural homophobia that is unfair to the LGBT community for putting people in jail for soliciting sex from minors.
I'd like to hear more about the structural racism that is unfair to immigrants for putting them in jail for raping minors.
*drunk minors
Oh, not all of them have been drunk. And some of them have been only twelve years old.
Elon Musk has said he plans to commit around $45 million a month to a new super political-action committee backing former President Donald Trump's presidential run...
He's gone fully Bond supervillain as I've always maintained his name suggested he should be.
I'm just waiting to see Soros-fanboy Buttplug criticizing him for it.
With this and Lara Trump's emphasis on getting out early voting, and even Trump pushing people to vote early if they need to, it's going to take a shit ton of fortifying. This PAC is actually Musk's answer to Zuckerbucks. It was entirely formed to identify and turn out Republican voters in early voting and ballot harvesting where legal.
ballot harvesting where legal
And in the case of the Zuckerbucks, ballot harvesting especially where it's not legal.
How exactly did the Secret Service fail to secure nearby rooftops at the Butler, Pennsylvania, campaign rally where Trump was shot?
YOU BETTER NOT SUGGEST IT WAS DEI HIRES.
I'm no security expert but even i and most Americans would have put someone on a roof that close.
What about blind midget SS agents? (See the Bee today)
It's 1968 all over again...
Then I'm going to kill Hitler in Argentina.
I will neither be going to San Francisco nor putting flowers in my hair.
“that Trump has remade the party in his own image, and that the party of free markets is no longer.”
Keep pilling on the BS.
De-Regulation and Tax-Cuts now deemed Anti-free market by Reason (not sure I’d even call them Libertarians anymore) … because of ‘Trump’ of course… /s
Reason staff caught themselves a massive case of TDS.
They probably went to all those D.C. cocktail parties unmasked.
“There is no meaningful distinction between the public and the private sector in the American regime,”
Is he wrong? Didn't even Reason acknowledge that all those private companies that were doing whatever they wanted were directed to want things by the government?
We aren't allowed to note the actual fascist desires of the left, societal control through corporations. We can only misuse fascist as a rhetorical tool and say it has no effect on assassination attempts.
I have to admit, Trump deserves a little bit of credit here for "lowering the temperature".
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/trump-republican-convention-2024-day-1-analysis-1.7264049
I really hope Trump continues in this trend to knock off the awful rhetoric about 'vermin' and 'bloodbath' and 'poisoning the blood of the nation' and to act more like the statesman and leader that he now is.
Looking for someone to worship or RU looking for someone to ensure Liberty and Justice for all?
In this case, I'm looking for a leader who acts like a civilized adult.
No mean tweets!
Hitlers demeanor was quite professional.
Maybe there's more to government than who dresses nice and talks professional?
Jefferson was pretty famous for being a subpar orator, and also quite often a sloppy dresser.
Lincoln was a great orator, but never quite stopped dressing like someone from the backwoods dressing up to visit the city (students of history would understand this reference).
Before the advent of television put a premium on 'looking' presidential, we had quite a few Presidents who would fail to look or speak professionally by today's standards, and quite a few of them are considered among the better presidents.
Also noteworthy: the radical individualist just admitted he wants the president to be his “leader”.
Is anyone tweeting stuff like this noticing that O'Brien didn't even endorse Trump nor tell people to vote Republican? The Teamsters got a shot to give their message to conservatives who rarely would pay attention otherwise, and they took it.
It should be noted that Erik Baker is just another fat marxist academic who absolutely hates the very people he claims Vance doesn't give a shit about. These types of people absolutely LOVE to condescend and wave their socio-economic status around when they think they're talking with someone who's below them on the ladder, and Baker isn't any different in that regard.
Based on his Twitter posting career, he's stupid as all get out, too. Nothing more than a leftist assembly line product that academia's been producing for the last 50 years, and the quality is declining as the machining and tolerances wear out.
“Erik Baker is just another fat marxist … he’s stupid as all get out, too.”
Unnecessarily redundant.
You remind me of the atheists that hate their parents. I bet your mother was a real cow, huh?
Still pissed that you're forever alone, spoofer? Ask McGoo how that worked out.
Fuck off, Jeff.
It was probably the “fat” part that set him off. Landwhales gotta stick together like Snickers bars in the sun.
“you get a portrait of a Republican Party that simply doesn’t care about free markets the way it used to.”
Yes the Republican Party sure did have a commitment to Free Markets. Like when it joined the Democrats in endorsing anti-free market ideas like “Too Big to Fail”? Or when the they gave us Medicare Part D, a $400 billion dollar spending program that, until Obamacare, was the largest expansion of entitlements since the Great Society.
But those are small things right? All that matters is rhetoric, and hey the Bush family loved immigrants and “Free” trade agreements, that was definitely a sign of commitment to Free markets!!!
Sarcasm aside, the portrait of the Republican Party before Trump was one of Crony Capitalism, reckless interventions abroad, and government expansion at home. Libertarians should welcome the populist turn in the Republican Party rather than denounce and complain about it. But it seems this magazine appears committed to making the same mistakes it made during the rise of the Tea Party movement. I'll take Pat Buchanan style politics any day of the week over Bush era/fake Reagan style politics.
“before Trump was one of Crony Capitalism”
Well Said.. +10000000000000
What separates Trump from the old RINO is precisely why the lefty-media hates this Republican specifically more so than most.
He's not nearly as [Na]tional So[zi]alist as the rest were.
^^ this.
Funny you bring up Tea Party populism, when their crowning achievement is the sequester, the same sequester that Trump teamed up with the Dems to end. And it was Trump that negiotated (thru Mnuchin), championed, and signed the 2-6 trillion dollar Cares Act and 2 or 3 more Covid bills after that monstrosity.
He's just as much a Bush as W or HW.
Trump also went after Thomas Massie as a “third rate grandstander” for holding up one of the Covid bills. https://apnews.com/article/thomas-massie-kentucky-primary-2024-d95affd68baeb0d123550942b01b6aa4
In my criticism above I never stated that Trump was a great populist (or libertarian). What I’m suggesting is that libertarians, rather than lament the populist turn of the GOP, should take advantage of it. Instead of making easily refutable claims about the Pre-Trump GOP, help mold the current populist friendly GOP to something worthwhile rather than leave it to Bush 43 style Neocons to do the molding.
Luckily the Mises Caucus is doing just that, and Reason will never give them credit for it.
“This is the product of serious negotiations on my part, and the Trump campaign's serious interest in courting our votes. We are advancing liberty at the federal level.”
https://x.com/angela4LNCChair/status/1813234740926853299
In response to this post:
“Vivek confirms that Trump intends to put a libertarian in his cabinet and he does not mean a liberty Republican like Vivek. Huge news if Trump follows through.”
https://x.com/LibertyLockPod/status/1813077535313334291
I'll laugh my ass off if he makes Gary Johnson Secretary of State.
Lol
first stop ... Aleppo!
10-4, but missing the boat on Tea Party (mistake) shouldn't mean jumping on to this populist movement. Trumps first term was lush in big government spending in the same vein as GWs. I don't see this current wave of populism being anything more than bitching about elites. Tea Party had a stated grivience and worked to fix it; spending. Maybe I'm still salty about the inglorious end of Tea Party at the hands of Trump, but just don't see much to glom onto here from MAGA populism.
You think Trump ended the Tea Party?
"Sarcasm aside, the portrait of the Republican Party before Trump was one of Crony Capitalism, reckless interventions abroad, and government expansion at home."
This. The Bush Republican's were pretty much the antithesis of libertarian.
It’s a sign of the times that one of the most prominent members of the New Right, who frequently signals his anti-elitist bona fides despite having worked in venture capital and gone to Yale, has been selected as Trump’s backup.
So he's a traitor to his class? It's incredible watching his critics turn themselves into pretzels trying to figure out what stereotype they can use to denigrate him. I guess if he was a True and Honest Welfare Queen like Cori Bush who voted Democrat that would be different.
Vance is a politician and isn't any more or less sincere than his colleagues. But this pathetic attempt by the left and the centrist right to try and paint him as some sort of child of privilege is exactly why populism isn't abating. Anyone can see such efforts are insincere and shouldn't be taken at face value.
"So he’s a traitor to his class? ...Vance is a politician and isn’t any more or less sincere than his colleagues."
Notable silence from the legacy media on Kamala Harris' cringe commercial in which she is very painfully pretending to be a black woman with lines like "Im out here in these streets" and "they not like us" despite having a lifelong career involving locking up black men for marijuana possession and threatening single mom's with jail time if they couldn't get their kids to school on time.
But I guess that's (D)ifferent
I was pretty underwhelmed at the pic. The reaction from leftists is making me reconsider…
^^ exactly.
While my initial reaction is similar, I have to remind myself they thought Mitt Romney was going to be Hitler and put black people back in chains.
Hell, im sure they would be going with the standard "He will end democracy as we know it" if we weren't 5 seconds after an assassination attempt caused by the same rhetoric. But after 10 seconds though...
Same here.
Vance is not a real hillbilly?
Yeah, nothing says silver spoon at birth like a drug addict mother, a father who abandoned him, raised by his grandparents who had to beg at times for extra food from Meals on Wheels just to feed him, who nearly failed out of high school, who then joins the Marines as an enlisted man and turned his life around through hard work. Shit, used to be libertarians would applaud someone like this, for showing that you can overcome personal adversity to become a success.
And managed to navigate Yale without turning into a drooling marxist zombie at the end.
>>If you had told me back in 2016 that the GOP of the future would, just eight years from now, feature the president of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters and a celebrity-stripper with a face tattoo, in quick succession and to great fanfare, I would have thought you were yanking my chain.
lol fomo. also not "had told" just "told"
Yeah, because featuring nothing but straight white males, regurgitating Reagan but only paying lip service to it for the past four decades has worked out so well.
>>Trump has remade the party in his own image, and that the party of free markets is no longer.
lol between you & Welch we're gonna need a bucket for all the lament
>>How exactly did the Secret Service fail to secure nearby rooftops at the Butler, Pennsylvania, campaign rally where Trump was shot?
~~ inserts like eleventy-nine of those emoticons going hmmmmmm
Sure is a puzzler. The absolute bestest place at the site to shoot a rifle from, If it wasn't for the fact that you're in plain site of well, virtually everyone.
The people that conducted an attempted coup and are conducting lawfare against him are investigating the assassination attempt against him, so I’m confident we’ll get to the bottom of this.
whoever signs off gets to be president in 2032.
My nephew could have conducted pretty adequate surveillance of the best spots there with his drone.
He's 11. He would probably do it for 50 bucks or a Pokemon booster box.
Honestly the fact that they dont have a person there, of the dozens of agents standing there with their thumbs up their butts, that is just flying a drone around watching the likely spots is bizarre to me. It would be a pretty cheap and effective strat
"The drones took our jobs!"
Some labor union probably
From the perspective of a soldier the only thing wrong with that spot was it offered little to no chance for a safe egress but that only matters if you expect to live.
>>Eight years ago, Pence was considered a savvy choice
Slade is not a credible source.
Not true. Her dad thought that pinning Trump down with an establishment candidate was just fabulous.
I think the choice is awesome. Vance is far more likeable than Reason gives him credit for. Will help in the Rust Belt (he's one of them). Has a compelling life story. Is young, fairly handsome, appeals to veterans, looks masculine with his beard, is a dedicated family man with a photogenic young family. Oh, and offing Trump now doesn't accomplish much, because Vance is a much younger Trump (and a viable candidate to carry on Trump's legacy in 28).
upvote.
>>A group called the Transit Liberation Front smashed 10 OMNY machines in subway stations across NYC in response to a call from Black revolutionaries in Atlanta calling for a summer of resistance against the US & Israel’s colonial/state violence & surveillance.
Viva la Toll Resistance?
also, “responding to a call for” not “in response to a call … calling for”
Historically, they used to just dump pennies in those machines.
much cuter plan than utter destruction.
More broadly, "the New Right"—of which Vance is part, writes Reason's Stephanie Slade—"openly calls on conservatives to wield state power against their domestic political 'enemies,' among whom it counts lefty corporations, universities, and nonprofits."
the left has been doing this to their enemies for decades. At some point you gotta wonder, will it ever come back to bite them? hmmmmmmmm
>>How offensive to the conservative justices that their integrity and independence are being questioned in such a manner.
offense needs to be taken. I'll lay a fiver Thomas thinks the New Yorker cover is funny
>>JD Vance realizing that telling the truth (people are responsible for improving/ruining their own lives) sells books to one audience while telling a lie (they are helpless pawns of the global elite) to another audience wins power is, in a way, the most American story of all.
these two things are not mutually exclusive even though this sonnybunch guy thinks he's cute
So what's wrong with populism?
I'll take it over elitism any day.
Most, if not all, your elitists graduated from some prestigious university, think they so much better than all us peasants, never worked in a blue collar job, served in the US armed forces, believe all the bullshit some professor who has no clue what reality is, don't have to worry about making payments on a mortgage, live paycheck to paycheck because they're richer than a chocolate cream pie, etc.
The elites have utter contempt for us peasants and often demonstrate it in a vulgar manner, and if they're an elitist politician, the only time they come around to mingle with middle class inferiors is at election time so they can get re-elected and become even more wealthy and pay off all their cronies.
Populism vs. Elitism?
I'll take populism every time.
Populism is great - if you're in the in-group.
Once you're no longer in the in-group, populism starts to suck.
Who decides who's in the in-group? The emotional irrational whims of the mob.
everyone is the in-group.
Except the illegal Mexicans. And the "vermin".
the illegal Mexicans can cast their votes with the populists just the same
choose to be in or choose to be out. your choice. it's the whole point.
Leftists always project.
> and that the party of free markets is no longer
Am I taking crazy pills? The GOP has never been the 'party of free markets'. No, not even with Reagan.
They're *Republicans*, not libertarians, after all.
Humorously, from I’ve seen, most self-identifying Libertarian politicians are just as much hypocrites on the subject of free-markets as Republicans are.
Being free-trade on ONLY Foreign-widgets doesn’t instantly leap you into the free-trade status symbol.
As-if the USA was socializing foreign industry….
Oh yeah; they can’t but they sure do try.
Enter the very reason U.N. 'Green-Nazi Energy' politics exist.
Imagine how wonderful that cover would look with 6 mugshots of leakin' Joe on it.
>JD Vance realizing that telling the truth (people are responsible for improving/ruining their own lives) sells books to one audience while telling a lie (they are helpless pawns of the global elite) to another audience wins power is, in a way, the most American story of all.
No, the story he is telling is that we *aren't powerless* against global elites. Hence the whole hoopla of 'Trump is gonna push back'.
We are powerful as a group - so now you can go ahead and call us fascists.
">Eight years ago, Pence was considered a savvy choice because of his ability to soothe any misgivings his fellow evangelical Christians might have about casting a vote for a thrice-married philanderer," writes Reason's Stephanie Slade
None of these people know anything about Christians, Evangelical or otherwise. Slade, divorce is not a scarlet letter in Christian society, not even among evangelicals.
And it wasn't why Pence was chosen. It had nothing to do with placating evangelicals, and everything to do with placating the GOPe.
"Sonny Bunch @SonnyBunch
JD Vance realizing that telling the truth (people are responsible for improving/ruining their own lives) sells books to one audience while telling a lie (they are helpless pawns of the global elite) to another audience wins power is, in a way, the most American story of all."
Global Elite (near constantly on all their websites, and in magazine articles and journals) - "We need to seize power and rule the world"
Hoi Polloi - "Oh no, they want to seize power and rule the world"
JD Vance - "Don't worry, we promise we won't let them seize power and rule the world"
Sonny Bunch - "It's a c0nSpiRaCy tHeOrY".
How exactly did the Secret Service fail to secure nearby rooftops at the Butler, Pennsylvania, campaign rally where Trump was shot?
This is a very good question. Let's check in on what the MSM is doing to get to the bottom of this...
oh. wow. ok then. Never mind.
a far cry from "the party of Ronald Reagan" but a whole new beast, one that appears to be gaining in traction what it lacks in cohesion.
Imagine having diversity of The Correct Kind™ shoved into every orifice and mental nook and cranny so hard for two decades that when you see someone else voluntarily participating in diversity of a variety that you don't recognize, you shout "AH! The lack of cohesion makes my head hurt!"