MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

The Idiocracy Candidate

Donald Trump’s awful speech at Freedom Fest

She was outnumbered. ||| Matt WelchMatt WelchDonald Trump saved the "libertarian" portion of his Saturday speech at the annual Freedom Fest in Las Vegas for the opening paragraph. "I happen to like Rand Paul, I really do," the billionaire television character generously revealed. Why, the two GOP presidential competitors have even played golf together!

Thus the defining characteristics of Trump's disconnected series of campaign mouth-blurts were established early: casually narcissistic, content-free, non-humble-braggadocio. But at least unlike other portions of the speech, Trump's golf anecdote didn't involve just making shit up.

Example: For entire minutes, in an address that rarely stayed on a single topic for longer than 30 seconds, the purported GOP front-runner went on about how "If you're a Christian" from Syria, "you cannot get into this country," because the U.S. only allows in Syrian Muslims. Trump has been repeating this claim for months. And it's not true, as you might predict from thinking about the issue for longer than the duration of a belch.

In fact, something closer to the opposite is at play. The United States has only accepted a tick more than 1,000 refugees from Syria (whose brutal civil war has displaced 4 million people), largely due to fears that Islamic extremists may be among their midst. The more scrutiny that national-security screeners apply to Syrian refugees, the more likely that members of the Christian minority will also be kept out. It's almost as if there's a lesson there. "Oh, I could talk about Syria all day," Trump chortled. Don't say he didn't warn us.

What other paranoid fantasies came darting out of the Donald's rictus-like mouth? That the Mexican government is conducting the same prisoner-exporting exercise that Fidel Castro did during the Mariel boatlift, only "more sophisticated." PolitiFact, not even assessing the Mariel claim beyond paraphrasing University of Chicago demographer Tom Smith as saying "there is no such evidence that the same thing has happened in Mexico," addressed Trump's ongoing contention that "the Mexican government forces many bad people into our country" thusly:

Setting aside the question of whether Mexicans who have come to the United States are "bad" or not, there is no evidence of any Mexican policy that pushes people out of Mexico and into the United States. As has been the case for decades, a combination of economic and family factors accounts for most of the migration from Mexico to the United States. We rate the claim Pants on Fire.

Trump and his fanbase portray his campaign against Mexican "rapists" as a brave truth-telling exercise in the face of pro-immigrant collusion between vote-buying Democrats, greedy Republican businessmen, anti-American media and the venal Mexican government. The ensuing conspiracy theories almost write themselves.

"I guarantee that the country of Mexico" is behind the recent wave of anti-Trump protests, the candidate said Saturday. When a questioner during audience Q&A identified himself as a Mexican-American libertarian dismayed at Trump's immigration rhetoric, the candidate shot back "Did the government of Mexico put you up to this?"

For all the attention Trump has stirred up over illegal immigration, including a sudden, hyperbolic national debate over "sanctuary cities" (about which please read Shikha Dalmia and Steve Chapman), his concrete policy recommendations about the issue could fit inside a fortune cookie: Build a wall along the southern border. (This last line was the only one of Trump's to generate significant boos at Freedom Fest; the speech drew much applause and many hoots of pleasure.)

Like all the other issues Trump referenced Saturday (trade agreements, ISIS, the economy, Russia being driven into the arms of China) immigration was best addressed using a combination of cherry-picked anecdote and blustery application of Great Man Theory. For instance, this was one complete sentence: "If I win the nomination, I will win the Hispanic vote, because I'll take our jobs back from China!"

You see, America's problem is that we don't have competent enough negotiatiors. And you've seen the Donald negotiate on TV! Besides, when he can't step in himself to do things like fix our relationship with Russia because he's "nice," well, let's just say he knows some guys who can really negotiate. And if the Trump administration's negotiating charm fails to, say, dislodge American hostages from a given regime, then we'll just "double or triple the sanctions." That the audience of a libertarianish conference lapped these bits up would be disheartening if it wasn't so comical.

This is the single dumbest speech I have witnessed in 17 years of covering American politics. Not just the lies, the policy positions (such that they existed), or even the dizzying heights self-regard, but the level of basic human intelligence and decency. For a guy who complains that the media only quotes "half-sentences," Trump's real adversary is the full-length transcript. These aren't speeches, they're seizures.

Trump is genuinely puzzled how call centers in India can be cheaper for American companies than ones in Arizona, since they're so far away. He says things like, "Not that it matters, but I'm much richer" than you think. He can't even deliver the hoariest of campaign cliches without making it sound additionally narcissistic, such as "My whole thing is make America great again."

The only thing Donald Trump will make greater in 2015-16 is the exit velocity with which whole swaths of Americans will leave even the theoretical orbit of the Republican Party. There's a reason why the Robert Kuttners of the world are actively cheering him on, while National Review writers compete against one another to write the most bilious takedown.

Republicans could be the party of South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, whose respectful-to-all-sides speech last month about lowering the Confederate battle flag over her state's capitol was one of the genuinely great pieces of recent American oratory. Or it can be the party of bestselling conservative entertainer Ann Coulter, who snorted ignorantly on Kennedy that Haley "is an immigrant and does not understand America's history," and then when called out on the collectivist error (Haley was born in South Carolina) tweeted out: "2d gen immigrant, as she constantly brags. Maj. Nidal Hasan, Anwar al-Awlaki, Octomom -we R getting the best ppl!"

Donald Trump is, as National Review's Kevin D. Williamson has pointed out, "a tax-happy crony capitalist who is hostile to free trade but very enthusiastic about using state violence to homejack private citizens," and also "a lifelong supporter of Democratic politicians." That such a record can be forgiven by conservatives and Republicans—Ann Coulter, for one, has gone from calling Trump a "clown" four years ago to gushing this week that he's "magnificent"—is like a flashing neon sign to the growing ranks of never-gonna-be-Republicans that all else can be forgiven if only you ratchet up the rhetorical ante against violent Mexicans, actual crime evidence be damned. Will even Cuban- and Vietnamese-Americans vote GOP in 2016 at this rate?

As a politically independent journalist and small-l libertarian, all of my incentives point toward propping up, not tearing down, Donald Trump. I am certainly not invested in the GOP, and it's materially helpful when ideological adversaries have such a clumsy, off-putting grasp on basic facts and argumentation. That some Republicans look at those same incentives and choose Trumpmentum is this week's most amazing, and damning, political development.

Related: Does Donald Trump Belong at FreedomFest?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Lee G||

    "I happen to like Rand Paul, I really do," the billionaire television character generously revealed. Why, the two GOP presidential competitors have even played golf together!

    Validating my theory that Trump is in the race to help bury Rand Paul and make Jeb more palatable by comparison.

  • John||

    I don't think so. I don't see how that would work. Trump stands in absolute opposition to Jeb and makes Jeb look even more appalling. In contrast, Trump makes Paul and Cruz seem reasonable by comparison and much less radical alternatives to Jeb.

  • Trshmnstr doesn't recycle||

    It's a psychological trick. If you have two competing options (Rand and Jeb), and you want to improve the chances of one (Jeb, for instance), you find a shittier version of that one (Trump) and include them as a third option. That can influence support by up to 20 percentage points.

    It's called the Decoy Effect

  • John||

    That is absurd.

  • JohnGaltstone||

    That's a wonderful bit of deflection. Pretend he's not yours, and that somehow, to someone, your candidate looks better. Except, the only person Trump looks good to is himself and a few dumb rubes that believe the same things as most of he people on this forum, but are not scared to admit it.

  • ||

    Trump is just playing the same part as gingrich. Some people love that over the top rhetoric. he's just an archetype of the gop candidate.

    1. the inevitable fake a-hole Romney, bushes
    2. The bible thumper Santorum, Huckabee
    3. the centrist Carson, Huntsman
    4. the looney libertarian Paul's, Johnson
    5. The pompous narcissist Gingrich, Trump
    6. The Texan Perry, Cruz
    7. The trainwreck women Palin, Bachmann

  • JohnGaltstone||

    You forgot "The Crazy Uncle:" Paul, Trump, Buchanan.

  • Lee G||

    I suppose that's possible. I'm incredibly pessimistic about the lengths the GOP will go to trying to stymie Rand Paul.

  • Charles Easterly||

    Beat me to it.

  • JWW||

    Yep. The backlash on the confederate flag is starting to ramp up. Just saw people driving around with it in South Dakota!!

    I have cared less about that flag my whole life, but this speech backlash has my first amendment hackles up and I find myself grinning at these acts of civil disobedience.

  • Napoleon Bonoparte||

    If it wasn't a rebel flag before - it sure is now!

  • JohnGaltstone||

    They don't have to resort to any lengths to stymie him. He'll do that to himself, by stating his ridiculous views to the American public.

  • JohnGaltstone||

    Both. They're birds of a feather, appealing to populist fears.

  • Lord at War||

    Who's your favorite populist fearmonger- Hillary or Bernie?

  • ||

    "I didn't want a crazy-ass conspiracy theorist in charge."

    Lyndon LaRouche?

  • Michael Hihn||

    Validating my theory that Trump is in the race to help bury Rand Paul

    Rand Paul buried himself long ago. And since you probably read only tribal media, you don't how his crazy-bullshit tax "plan" has been totally demolished.

  • Lord at War||

    If anyone knows "crazy-bullshit"- it's the Hihn-sanity.

  • Michael Hihn||

    Precisely as I predicted about those locked into a tribal cage.

  • EndTheGOP||

    NONE of the GOP candidates will have any affect whatsoever on the 2016 election. Hillary is going to win it in an Obama-like landslide bringing the the senate with her. It doesn't matter if there are 15 GOP nominees or 150. The republicans are just a sideshow.

    Enjoy the show.

  • Tundra, well-chilled.||

    I'm getting the feeling that Matt won't be penning The Case for Trump in October, 2016.

  • John||

    Trump has at various times supported single payer healthcare and donated to Hillary Clinton's campaigns. Yet, somehow these people think he is some kind of a conservative.

    The GOP has only themselves to blame for the rise of this idiot. If they hadn't been so two faced and dishonest about immigration, Trump wouldn't have such an opening by talking about it. That is really all that is going on here.

    John Fund last week raised the possibility that Trump is nothing but a mole for Hillary who will after losing the nomination run as a third party for stupid people and split the vote and ensure Hillary wins even though she has no hope of ever commanding a majority or winning a fair two way race. There is some logic to that. A third party candidate for stupid people is how Bill one. It is certainly a Clinton move.

    The only problem is Perot had United for America and a way to get on all the ballots. Trump doesn't and likely wouldn't by the time he would bail and run as a third party. I am not sure he could actually get on the ballot even with his money.

  • ||

    John Fund last week raised the possibility that Trump is nothing but a mole for Hillary who will after losing the nomination run as a third party for stupid people and split the vote and ensure Hillary wins

    It's far more likely that he's in this for a publicity/cash grab, like many other candidates have done (and are doing), like Huckabee. It seemed to grab Huckabee a pundit slot.

    Palin did this the best though, all she had to do was tag along as VP for a presidential campaign that was destined for failure (and surely she knew that). Didn't have to do any of the work and still cashed in.

  • John||

    Pailin never intended to do that. I think she was happy to go back to being a governor and her old life. The left went insane and made it impossible for her to do that without being bankrupt. So she took the only option available and made millions trolling their dumb asses.

    And Trump is a con artist. He is not stupid and doesn't do anything that isn't good for Trump. And the Clinton machine can absolutely make it worth his wife if Hillary were to win. Remember, they would want him to run again in 2016.

    The more I think about it, the more I think the ballot issue keeps him from running as a third party. Instead, it seems more likely he is running for attention and to help Hillary by baiting the GOP base and alienating Hispanics from the party.

  • Pan Zagloba||

    And the Clinton machine can absolutely make it worth his wife

    *standing ovation*

  • Tundra, well-chilled.||

    It's really quite amazing, isn't it?

  • Charles Easterly||

    Poetry in motion....

  • ||

    The great ones make it look so easy.

  • ||

    The only thing that could have made it better:

    help Hillary by bating the GOP base

  • Tony||

    Sarah Palin's vast stupidity is not the fault of "the left."

    Do you think someday you guys might ever demonstrate that you are indeed the party of personal responsibility, or is it gonna be whining and blaming from here to forever?

  • John||

    Tony you really do have animal level intelligence. Trained seals have more complex behaviors than you do. Just write the word "Palin" and you will bark.

    It must really be hard going through life as stupid and hate filled as you are. That maybe it is easy because if anyone is too dumb to know any better it is most certainly you.

  • Tony||

    Someone defending Sarah Palin's intellect doesn't get to call others stupid.

  • John||

    Yes Tony. She is not the smartest person but much smarter than you. But most house plants are smarter than you.

  • C. S. P. Schofield||

    A lefty nitwit attacking Palin at this late date does't get to decide who gets to call others stupid. Every anecdote about Palin that was supposed to underline her stupidity that I have ever tried to run down has turned out to be either blatant distortion of the facts or simple lies. Doesn't mean she would have made a good VP (although that bar is pretty goddamned low).

    It's kind of like the Left's attacks on Limbaugh; If he's so dumb, how come he's so successful?

    Mencken at least was prepared to credit the objects of his scorn with their virtues, and felt no need to make up additional faults. His eulogy of Bryan was genuinely admiring of the man's abilities as a speaker. His account of Aimee Semple McPherson was genuinely impressed by her talents as a rabble-rouser and snake-oil saleswoman.

  • Chipper Chipping Rodrigue||

    Tiny insists on the utmost intellectual standards for the office of Vice President. That's why he voted for the ticket with Biden on it twice.

  • ||

    That's why he voted for the ticket with Biden on it twice

    Both times.

  • Bob Meyer||

    Mencken was capable of recognizing the best in people even if he once said "Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public".

    He said nasty things about Jews but insisted that German Jewish refugees be given sanctuary in the US, not just the 900 on the ocean liner MS St. Louis, but hundreds of thousands if necessary to save them from Hitler.

    Justice mattered to Mencken.

  • Woodchippin' 4 Jesus||

    Why are you dogging on Sarah Palin? She didn't seek the VP nomination. John McCain was desperate and begged her.

    John McCain is the real retard here.

    We've already discussed this. You asshole.

  • Animal||

    Tony you really do have animal level intelligence."

    Hey. Don't you compare me to Tony.

  • ||

    Maybe Hawk level intelligence then?

  • Tundra, well-chilled.||

    RIP, Hawk. A great man.

  • OldMexican||

    Re: Tony,

    Sarah Palin's vast stupidity is not the fault of "the left."


    It is possible I am not familiar with every nuanced aspect of American politics but what exactly is that Palin did to deserve being called "stupid"? Not that it matters since, well, it's you, but still... inquiring minds want to know.

    Oh, and the claim that she said she could see Russia from her home doesn't count, because she didn't say that ─ that was actually Tina Fey.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    It is possible I am not familiar with every nuanced aspect of American politics but what exactly is that Palin did to deserve being called "stupid"?

    She talked with a hokey accent. At the end of the day, really, that more than anything drove the entire argument.

  • Tony||

    Why do all of you feel it necessary to always defend Republicans, even the dumbest ones? You can hate Obama and Republicans at the same time. I kind of thought that was what this place was about.

    I think you rightwing idiots have driven away all the thoughtful libertarians. What's the point of this place if it's just a clone of the FOX News comments sections?

  • BigT||

    It is OK to hate people for their policies and statements. With Palin most people hate her for things that she never said or did. She has to be the poster child for the victim of the politics of personal destruction.

  • Tony||

    And Sarah Palin was always so calm and measured in her criticisms of her opponents.

    I'll agree that it's piling-on since she's never going to set foot near another political office. But her defenders should realize that she did absolutely no good for the Republican party and possibly a lot of harm. I blame John McCain for not vetting her.

  • Igor||

    Concern troll is concerned.

    And wrong. Palin created a lot of energy for that old man's campaign, whether you, I or we like it or not. That was precisely why she was targetted the way she was.

  • Contrarian P||

    Always? Really?

    Perhaps your perception is because all you ever do is attack Republicans, then get upset when commenters here (rightly) point out that the members of the party you love are just as odious or that your attacks are baseless? Or perhaps it's that you read the comments section with blinders on, oblivious to the mocking of Republicans (like Trump in this article)?

    The Republican party is one big steaming pile, but the fact of the matter is that the Democrats have been in charge of the country for almost seven years with almost nothing good to show for it. You're the party in power, Tony, so you'll get the lion's share of the criticism. It's the same reason we don't spend a lot of time heckling the American Communist Party. They haven't been screwing things up for more than half a decade.

  • Tony||

    My party has the presidency, and as far as that power goes I'm pretty happy with how things have gone. We'd be even further along if Republicans hadn't outright controlled Congress or done so via filibuster. Congress, you know the branch of government that makes laws?

  • Igor||

    Bookmarked.

    It's rare you're so forthright with your biases.

  • Lord at War||

    Congress, you know the branch of government that makes laws?

    So, since the Dems ran both houses of Congress starting in 2006, they were obviously responsible for the "Great Recession"?

    And of course, because the Repubs took over Congress in 1994, they were totally resposible for the Clinton "surplus"...

  • Cyto||

    Actually.....

    Having been alive at the time I fully recall Clinton's team being dispatched to the Sunday morning shows to inform the public as to just how stupid an idea balancing the budget was. They fought the idea of balancing the budget tooth and nail.

  • ||

    Tony: If Palin is stupid, what is Obama?

  • John Titor||

    I've been saying for years that Obama's best trait is that he's utterly incompetent. If someone with actual skill ended up with the cult of personality he did in 2008 he could have pulled a Caesar.

  • cavalier973||

    I don't know; what if Caesar was just dumb and lucky? Maybe he really intended to order his men to stand down instead of cross the Rubicon?

  • tardisisbiggerontheinside||

    In the Oval Office?

    BAZINGA!

  • Chipper Chipping Rodrigue||

    Trump lost his tv shows as a result of his comments. That wasn't really good for Trump.

  • ||

    I think she did intend to do that, and I think that is to her credit and not a slam against her.

  • X[redacted]s||

    I love John's typos so much.

  • Woodchippin' 4 Jesus||

    To error is human, to forgive John, divine.

  • Woodchippin' 4 Jesus||

    It's not that Trump is running. It's that there's a sizeable portion of the GOP who actually like him. Love him. Want him.

    So much for the GOP becoming more libertarian. The social conservatives were SUPPOSED to be in retreat, the neocons were SUPPOSED to be humbled and muzzled and the libertarian wing of the GOP stool was SUPPOSED to be in ascendancy. Libertarian moment is NOW, remember?

    I blinked, it passed and the crazy moron wing took over.

  • R C Dean||

    Palin did this the best though, all she had to do was tag along as VP for a presidential campaign that was destined for failure (and surely she knew that).

    I thought McCain was leading until he ran back to DC to stab his base in the back by dragging one of the bailouts (TARP?) over the finish line.

  • John||

    He was.

  • ||

    If you paid attention to mcCain's campaign against Bush in 2000, then destined for failure would be a grand description of any time he's ran for office outside of AZ.

  • Derpetologist||

    "Trump is nothing but a mole for Hillary"

    Funny- This is also Thom Hartmann's theory.

  • Chipper Chipping Rodrigue||

    Wow, you are really committed to studying the depths of the derp.

  • Robert||

    Yet, somehow these people think he is some kind of a conservative.


    "Somehow"? He's [perceived as] a rich entrepreneur, which automatically gives anyone a conservative cachet that takes a lot of effort to shake off. His association with big bldgs. heightens that popular impression, because something about a big bldg. (its apparent permanency, I guess) suggests "conservative". Plus, he's bellicose, which has been associated in the USA w conservatism since ~1960.

  • Robert||

    A third party candidate for stupid people is how Bill [won].


    The exit polls said otherwise.

    However, it is also said that Perot's entries & exit from the campaign were timed to hurt Bush.

  • BigT||

    "The exit polls said otherwise."

    citation required

  • JohnGaltstone||

    A mole for Hillary? More like exactly the type of person the Republitarian system is meant to create. He's yours, so take responsibility.

  • Wizard with a Woodchipper||

    "The Idiocracy Candidate"

    It's funny how you only picked the one.

  • Lee G||

    Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho feels slighted, but in a totally non-faggy way.

  • Wizard with a Woodchipper||

    I didn't catch this at first, but nice!

  • Judge Chipper||

    I'm not sure...

  • Drake||

    Really. Hillary, Santorum, Bernie, are all fighting for the idiot vote? Is Huck in yet?

  • Charles Easterly||

    Huckabee is all in.

  • Drake||

    So the idiots have a lot of choices. You could probably do worse than the one who legally made a lot of money.

  • X[redacted]s||

    It's Idiocracy candidates all the way down.

  • B26354||

    My vote is for Beef Supreme and the Dildozer!

  • Mrs. Lemuel Struthers||

    I agree with almost everything you've written about Trump, Matt. But, now where's your article lambasting Bernie as the idiocracy candidate? Yeah, I know he wasn't at Freedom Fest, but why waste ink on Trump? He's no real front-runner and everyone knows it. He'll implode soon.

    Ah, I know why - cocktail parties?

  • GILMORE, LVL20 Blowhard||

    oh, thanks. Old Fashioned with Bulleit Rye.

    Wait, were you not taking orders?

  • John||

    I always drink Old Fashioned and will continue to until they start serving a Reactionary.

  • Plàya Manhattan.||

    Guys, come on.
    Only beer before lunchtime.

  • Mr. Paulbotto||

    What about bloody Mary's and mimosas?

  • Woodchippin' 4 Jesus||

    It's 5 o'clock somewhere

  • ||

    I'll just take Makers Mark, straight.

  • John||

    Jack Daniels. If it is good enough to be Frank Sinatra and Keith Richards' drink of choice, it is good enough for me.

  • Plàya Manhattan.||

    John Daniels. His close friends call him John.

  • ||

    Most weeks I would agree, but I like a little change up every now and then. Plus Makers Mark just goes down like water some days.

  • Mrs. Lemuel Struthers||

    Wait, were you not taking orders?

    *glares angrily, voice rising, face turning red*

    This is because I'm a woman, right? And, you believe we were born to fetch you drinks and pleasure you? You sexist cis-shit lord!

    Next you'll be requesting I whip out my boobs.

    /Jezebel commenter

  • Chipper Chipping Rodrigue||

    Next you'll be requesting I whip out my boobs.

    Biologically, I can't not respond to this.

  • GILMORE, LVL20 Blowhard||

    (yawns, tips $5, nods condescendingly)

  • Mrs. Lemuel Struthers||

    RAPE CULTURE!

  • Mrs. Lemuel Struthers||

    Now fetch me a mimosa.

  • Agammamon||

    Next you'll be requesting I whip out my boobs.

    Of course not!

    but, you know . . . we were thinking it.

  • Charles Easterly||

    Well, Ag, if you've seen one....

  • ||

    ... You wanna see the rest of em?

  • Mrs. Lemuel Struthers||

  • gaoxiaen||

    What's not to like? Side-boob and side-nipple at the same time.

  • MJGreen - Docile Citizen||

    It's not a Jezebel comment until you say you're literally crying or hyperventilating because you're so triggered.

  • Trshmnstr doesn't recycle||

    Next you'll be requesting I whip out my boobs.

    something something Free the Nipple Movement something something

  • Bill Dalasio||

    Tullie with seltzer and ice.

  • JohnGaltstone||

    Because Reason is embarrassed to finally have a candidate who lives up to the principles contained in its pages. It takes a look in the mirror, and doesn't like what it sees -- much like the American voter has felt about the libertariot party for 40 years.

    But keep trying to explain why you're clearing about 1%.

  • GILMORE, LVL20 Blowhard||

    Yawn. Who cares about the Donald. He'll be gone before there's even a debate.

  • X[redacted]s||

    As with the rest of his endeavors, Trump will end up flying away in a helicopter while his campaign goes bankrupt.

  • ||

    +1USFL

  • Tony||

    I think Trump's campaign is brilliant. His cards are already on the table. Reporters, if they bother at all, call out his lies and ridiculous bluster only in a "of course he's gonna act that way" manner. A gigantic falsehood or racist statement will not get the criticism or scrutiny of a misplaced comma in a speech by Hillary or Jeb. And watching his insane spectacle, I can almost inhabit the mind of a conservative couch warrior and find something appealing. He's many things, but desperate isn't one, and that's what he has over all the other GOP guys. The fact that they're all spending time and money campaigning to almost no national media attention (because Trump dominates every political conversation) is only making them more so, and probably more than a little pissed off. This is way more entertaining than I thought it would be.

  • Plàya Manhattan.||

    You heard it here first!!!!!!
    The press is way too hard on Hillary!!!!

  • Sevo||

    Sorry, stopped reading after the first sentence.

  • ||

    I stopped after "Tony"

    What do I win, besides peace of mind?

  • Tony||

    I may analyze comparative treatment by the press but I will never say they're being too easy or hard on anyone. For example, relative to any basic standard of decent, sober journalism, the press is paying way too much attention to Donald Trump. But it's a free country so who am I to say it's wrong?

  • Chipper Chipping Rodrigue||

    Yeah, I wonder why they're paying more attention to Trump than, say, Hillary's illegal acts.

  • Plàya Manhattan.||

    The multiple felonies that she committed in office, and the violation of public trust? Those things?

  • Chipper Chipping Rodrigue||

    According to Tiny, not mentioning that stuff is unfair because she deserves more press than Trump. Yet she's also being "scrutinized". Impressive spin-trolling.

  • Charles Easterly||

    "According to Tiny...."

    Vying for John-level posting, I see.

  • X[redacted]s||

    What difference, at this point, does it make?

  • Sevo||

    Tony|7.13.15 @ 12:50PM|#
    "I think Trump's campaign is brilliant."

    Not surprised.

  • Mrs. Lemuel Struthers||

    tl;dr

  • SoCal Deathmarch||

    "And watching his insane spectacle, I can almost inhabit the mind of a conservative couch warrior and find something appealing."

    Of course you can, you're the opposite side of the same coin. Do you really believe you aren't anything more than a progressive couch warrior? Oh wait, you do? You really do! Oh, that's soooo sad!

  • Tony||

    No, I don't. I will at most donate to a campaign.

  • brokencycle||

    At least he's honest about being our better. Most politicians try to portray themselves as just an average American. Trump is blatant about being better and richer than everyone.

    That being said, the above conversation about him making Jeb or whichever candidate more palatable, you're wrong. He's a Hills supporter. He's doing this to torpedo team red.

  • Francisco d'Anconia||

    HAHAHA!

    Trump = Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho

  • bluecanarybythelightswitch||

    I'd actually vote for him then. Him telling Putin his head looks like a peanut would be priceless.

  • gaoxiaen||

    Then he could alter its shape with a classic pile-driver.

  • cavalier973||

    Walker announces.

    "To win the nomination, Walker is banking on defeating a crowded GOP field as the only candidate who can appeal to the party’s business establishment, its religious conservative faction and its tea party voters. The son of a minister who took on labor unions, he has had a lock on all three of those groups in Wisconsin.

  • Wizard with a Woodchipper||

    I posted this last night: http://dailycaller.com/2015/07.....ty-tenure/

    Walker has seriously undermined professor tenureship in Wisconsin (or will whenever he signs that bill today). Whatever you think of the man, this is pretty fucking awesome.

  • Je suis Woodchipper||

    He took $250M that was slotted for U of Wisc and put it toward charter expansion.

    He seems to be able to get it done.

  • Wizard with a Woodchipper||

    A few weeks ago he signed two bills into law that expand gun rights and ownership. This during the heat of the South Carolina murders by that Roof asshole.

    http://www.jsonline.com/news/s.....37451.html

  • Agammamon||

    I am in a *unique* position of liking TWO candidates this time around and am having a hard time choosing.

    Paul - *talks* a much better (l)ibertarian line but, as a senator - what *concrete* change has he effected.

    Walker - is too Republican but, he's actually gotten shit done that I approve of. Its not all talk.

    As it stands, I'm leaning Walker this time around.

    I suppose I may have to register as an R to have a say in who gets the nomination then.

  • Illocust||

    I'm leaning towards Walker. The unions are going to come out in full force against him, which will not only rally people to his side but also set the tone for his first four years. We might get a lot of repeals on some really stupid federal labor laws if Walker is president.

  • Pan Zagloba||

    Have a dose of optimism: even if both candidates fail to win the nomination, they can keep doing good stuff in their current positions, if they are serious about it.

  • Woodchippin' 4 Jesus||

    There's part of me who wants Bernie Sanders. A socialist president? Oh, my!

    Yes, I want to punish my fellow Americans. I want them to suffer through socialism on steroids. I want another Great Depression. I want high inflation and mass starvation.

    This steady drip-drip-drip on our way to commie hell is bullshit. The sooner we all get to hell, the sooner we can start over. Keep your powder dry and your escape plans ready.

    Vote for Bernie and then, get out of the way. Give the American people the government they deserve, the fucking retards.

  • bluecanarybythelightswitch||

    I agree. We may end up in some sort of Mad Max post-apocalyptic wasteland, but I have my sawed off 12 gauge and an electric guitar at the ready.

  • ant1sthenes||

    He's also personally been a target for the really nasty totalitarian left (the Lerner types), so I have to hope he has good reason to thoroughly purge them from the Leviathan and secure some indictments against the worst of them.

    He's not perfect by any stretch, but if it came down to him in the primary versus Hillary or Bernie, I think I could forgo a protest vote. Him or Rand. Any other R, and it's LP.

  • brokencycle||

    So, I'm in the minority here: while I oppose public unions, I think professor tenureship is generally a good thing for two reasons.

    1. Having professors able to research and lecture without the fear of reprisal from a politically elected legislature helps advance ideas. I thought that dude from Colorado blaming 9/11 on the US and calling it a conspiracy was crazy, I didn't support him getting canned for it because it was politcally motivated.

    2. While a catch-22, most universities do have tenure. By doing this, it puts UW at a disadvantage for attracting top talent from around the world, which has historically done. Now, all other things being equal, do you think a professor will go to Wisconsin or Berkley or Northwestern or a handful of others?

  • Illocust||

    The academic field is so overpopulated you don't need top talent. There are plenty of adjuncts who would jump at the chance to be a real professor even if it didn't come with tenure.

  • Trshmnstr doesn't recycle||

    I think that the relative quality of tenured profs to adjuncts puts your argument to rest. Tenure does more to keep shitty profs in teaching positions than it ever hoped to insulate good profs from a vindictive board. My experience (UG: Engineering at a top 15 public school, Law School at a top 30 private school) has been that the good adjuncts are worth 10x a good tenured prof.

  • brokencycle||

    I have a BS and MBA from top 15 universities (both public), and I have had great professors and adjuncts. I've also had shitty versions of both. The downside for adjuncts is they typically don't do any research, and tenure professors tend not to be as good at teaching because teaching awards actually generally hurt their chances at tenure because research is what gets them tenure.

  • Harold Falcon||

    That's fine at top tier schools. But I went to a shitty state school. There was absolutely no reason to have tenure at that place. It wasn't attracting top talent no matter how hard they tried.

  • bluecanarybythelightswitch||

    Here's the thing, though: when tenure was first implemented it was to protect unpopular, largely liberal, views, and now the people in power adhere to the same faith as an overwhelming majority of faculty. The classically liberal or conservative faculty actually NEED tenure for ideological protection, but are less likely to enter academia or receive tenure because of the biases against them at every level. In essence tenure now just protects shitty professors - since they all live in an echo chamber no one would get rid of them for holding controversial or contrary opinions with or without tenure, while classically liberal or conservative scholars are blackballed, with a few exceptions of course.

  • Hugh Akston||

    Classic Matt Welch rant. Hopefully the Mexican Government replaces the Kochtopus as the next astroturfing boogeyman.

  • Pan Zagloba||

    Narco cartels could improve their image by simple expedient of growing mustaches and wearing bandoliers. Now that's a proper boogeyman!

  • John||

    If people really want an outsider candidate, Carly Fiorina is the choice. Yeah, I know she offended a bunch of engineers at HP and that means she must be the worst according the people here. First, the people here are not going to be happy no matter what. Second, even if it is true, that doesn't mean she couldn't be a good President. Being President takes a different set of skills than being a CEO.

    Every time I see Fiorina talk, she is saying something that makes perfect sense. Our entire political class is rotten to the core. I honestly can't see how she could be any worse than what we have and she might be a lot better. Besides, I seem to have heard from a lot of people how 2016 is finally a woman's turn. Nominating Fiorina would be fun as a way of trolling those people if nothing else.

  • cavalier973||

    I'm sorry, but women will have to wait their turn; it's the trans-species' folks turn in 2016.

  • Knarf Yenrab!||

    So it's Hillary's year after all.

  • Charles Easterly||

    Ouch.

    Even so... In fairness I guess I can award you a +1 Lizard CFR-Bilderberg Overlord point

  • X[redacted]s||

    Wouldn't that imply that she'd changed species at some point? As far as i can tell, she's ALWAYS been a bitch.

  • Trshmnstr doesn't recycle||

    It's time for our first gorilla-American president!

  • Knarf Yenrab!||

    On the downside, she has a history of being a shitty executive with no history in government. On the upside, she has a history of being an executive in any capacity at all, and she has no history in government.

    I know we're supposed to be at least lukewarm for Rand, but after this debacle, the idea of electing another feckless, empty-suit senator president fills me with dread. I'd elect Service Merchandise's last CEO if it meant avoiding another senator-cum-president.

  • John||

    I like Rand Paul a lot. But I think the country is going to be loath to elect another fast talking Senator after this debacle. People of every stripe loath Washington with the heat of a thousand suns. And Hillary is totally a creature of Washington and everyone knows it. I think running anyone from Washington is for that reason a bad idea.

    They need to run a governor or someone from outside of politics. That leaves Walker, Perry and Fiorina as the only choices interested in the job. And she seems as good of a choice as either of those two.

  • tarran||

    You know, of all the potential match-ups, it's the Walker/Webb one that leaves me least shaking in fear.

  • cavalier973||

    ...and hope.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    I like Rand too, but think that he's much too weak for the most important task at hand, which is reigning in the out of control bureaucracy and picking up the pieces of Obama's foreign policy fecklessness.

    A heartless CEO type that fired workers is exactly what we need. Which leaves Walker or Fiorina.

    Romney could have taken on that mantle in 2012, and it would have fit his record or reorganizing business, but was too big a pussy to do so.

  • Heedless||

    Maybe I'm misremembering this, but my impression was that she was a highly competent manager. She got fired for that terrible merger, but that was an instance of horrifically destructive bad judgment, not part of a pattern of overall incompetence.

  • R C Dean||

    Carly has two things going for her, electability-wise:

    (1) She's a chick.
    (2) She is not afraid to go straight after the other candidates, by name.

  • Agammamon||

    Except she has absolutely no track record of walking the walk.

    She can talk a good game, but she's never put anything on the line in even a semi-meaningful stance like Paul has, let alone *accomplished* things like breaking a state's public sector union - which Walker has.

    Personally, I think if she were to get the office, she'd be another 4-8 years of Obama/Bush. Both talked big, both pushed for huge increases in government power.

  • Agammamon||

    Ultimately, I don't think she offers *anything* the other, lesser, R candidates do outside of being a woman - a foil to counter Hillary.

  • Mrs. Lemuel Struthers||

    I think she'd make a great VP. The traditional role of the VP is to attack the other party and play bad cop to the president's good cop. She'd be terrific in that slot. She's aggressive and has proven she can dish it. I wouldn't trust her on policy - no way.

  • Agammamon||

    That's a possibility.

    Though nowadays it seems the VP's role is more Barney Fife to the President's Andy - someone who's willing to be seen as a complete moron to make the president look better.

  • Robert||

    Cheney? Doesn't seem to fit that description. Maybe you could say it of Gore, very uncharitably. Otherwise "nowadays" seems to extend only to Biden.

  • Animal||

    You're just too used to daffy old Uncle Joe Biden.

  • Robert||

    Or she might be 4 yrs. of Jesse Ventura.

  • Mr. Paulbotto||

    In this climate, that wouldn't be a bad thing. Ventura was known for doing nothing while in office, but the thing is that is what he was elected to do. He was a protest vote against Norm Coleman, a Socon's Socon, and HHH's grandson, who had proposed a radical state takeover of education.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    Yeah, I know she offended a bunch of engineers at HP and that means she must be the worst according the people here.

    Well, not only engineers. Also stockholders. She did a really, really, poor job of running the company.

    If her name were Carl Fiorina, no one would be talking about him as a serious candidate. And yes, the same goes for Hillary Clinton.

  • Robert||

    Of course if Hillary Clinton were named Carl Fiorina, that'd be true, but that's owing much more to the last name than the 1st. Her supporters are really expecting another term or 2 of prez Bill de facto.

  • Knarf Yenrab!||

    "bestselling conservative entertainer Ann Coulter"

    Can we please just begin calling her the Bill Maher of the right? Every decent polemicist blushes with shame to hear her humorless intonations, and always--ALWAYS--in that affected, awful valley-girl lilt.

    Seriously, that crone's voice is worse than Gilbert Gottfried's. She must've devised it as a preteen for the sole purpose of annoying everyone who found themselves in a position where they could not escape her company or easily defenestrate her. Or themselves, in the case of heightened security and prolonged exposure.

  • John||

    Her voice sucks but her writing is funny as hell. People around here just hate it because she makes a habit of shooting your ponies in the head just as much as she does the Progs'.

  • Knarf Yenrab!||

    She's only funny to the witless, thus the Mahr comparison. And if you find her funny rather than purposefully obnoxious, God help you.

    Not even Gavin McInnes could make her funny, and he actually managed to make Welch funny once or twice.

  • John||

    She's only funny to the witless, thus the Mahr comparison. And if you find her funny rather than purposefully obnoxious, God help you.

    Maybe. Or maybe you are utterly witless and thus find her unfunny but have no idea the real reason why? Part of being humorless and not knowing it.

    There are multiple funny quotes on this page

    http://www.brainyquote.com/quo.....ulter.html

    You just hate because you think that is the thing to do. I in contrast really don't give a shit what the thing to do is and judge her writing on its merits. And some of it is without question funny. If your delicate sensibilities can't take that, well it sucks to be you.

  • Knarf Yenrab!||

    Nah.

    The appeal to you is that you're half-crazy in that wild-eyed uncle sort of way, and when you find a fellow spirit you buy all of her books and begin firing randomly at anyone who points out her banality and obnoxiousness.

  • X[redacted]s||

    Banality and obnoxiousness! Those are the words i was looking for after clicking John's link.

  • Knarf Yenrab!||

    Be warned: unless your boss is cool with naked fat chicks, you will occasionally get in trouble clicking on John's links.

  • Knarf Yenrab!||

    (and I mean that, as always, in the nicest way possible)

  • John||

    This from the person who no doubt thinks Menkin is the greatest thing since Shakespeare. And yes she is funny. Sorry that makes your butt hurt.

  • Citizen X||

    Some people feel the same way about Rob Schneider movies.

  • Cyto||

    from the brainyquote site:

    I think there should be a literacy test and a poll tax for people to vote.
    Ann Coulter

    Funny as hell, that one...

  • John Titor||

  • Plàya Manhattan.||

    "non-humble-braggadocio"

    A non-humblebrag?

  • ||

    We used to just call that " bragging ".

  • Plàya Manhattan.||

    That's brilliant!

  • LynchPin1477||

    Trump vs Hillary: Everybody loses.

  • Sevo||

    Not if neither come out of the cage.

  • OldMexican||

    Setting aside the question of whether Mexicans who have come to the United States are "bad" or not, there is no evidence of any Mexican policy that pushes people out of Mexico and into the United States.


    There is no evidence because it doesn't happen at all. The idea that "Mexico" (rather, its government) is deliberately pushing undesirables toward the border by a process of extrusion is preposterous.

    The problem is that there are enough Americans who believe such claptrap, or believe that all their economic problems can be resolved by shoving millions of undocumented workers out into the Sonora desert. I am not making shit up: I read the Facebook comments at Breitbart, whose writers seem enamored of Trump.

    "I guarantee that the country of Mexico" is behind the recent wave of anti-Trump protests, the candidate said Saturday.


    Not that anybody has a TV in Mexico, mind you. Or that there are no competent translators who can tell the average Mexican exactly what Trump said about them, word for word.

  • X[redacted]s||

    There is that one guy who could translate, but he's out back having a siesta under a cactus with his sombrero over his face. I think his name is Lopez.

  • gaoxiaen||

    That's not a siesta. You didn't notice the empty Gusano Rojo bottles scattered around him.

  • Tony||

    Trump is playing to perhaps the biggest anxiety of Republican base voters while ensuring that Republicans don't win a national election for 50 years. It's a tricky spot for everyone. It's possible you can't win the GOP primary today without promising to deport all the Mexicans.

  • OldMexican||

    Re: Tony,

    Trump is playing to perhaps the biggest anxiety of Republican base voters while ensuring that Republicans don't win a national election for 50 years.


    That is entirely possible, but the Demo-rats should not rest on their laurels considering ever more Hispanics and their immigrant siblings and family members are realizing that the Demo-rats have been playing them for fools for years. The Demo-rats had NO intention of fixing the immigration system; in fact, it became far worse under el queridísimo, amo y señor de todo, presidente Obama. We know perfectly well that Obama and his minions had control of the Senate and the Congress and did absolutely nothing to fix immigration, rather using their time to get Obamacare and Dodd-Frank passed before anybody realized what happened.

  • Tony||

    Democrats don't have to appease a voting base of white supremacists. But keep telling yourself that. Except would you mind not doing it like goddamn Drudge scum?

  • Agammamon||

    Not that anybody has a TV in Mexico, mind you. Or that there are no competent translators who can tell the average Mexican exactly what Trump said about them, word for word.

    *This* is the shite they're watching on tv in Mexico.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch? feature=player_embedded&v=ePG6zUYvUZg

    I can guarantee that not a single Mexican knows or cares what Trump is saying.

  • ||

    Trump is doing what many of the fringe-ish candidates do now that we are firmly in the grip of full-blown KULTUR WAR: he stakes out one area of the KULTUR WAR to own. Trump has decided to go for the "the foreigners are gonna kill us all!" angle. And since this is KULTUR WAR posturing, he has to own that shit. He has to go full bore.

    This works initially because by being the loudest voice about a KULTUR WAR battle, he gets the interest of people who are most concerned with that particular battle. But over time it becomes one-note and they fade away, but not before they've had a chance to raise some funding and stroke their egos a bit. Which is par for the course for Trump.

  • ||

    "the foreigners are gonna kill us all!"

    Kill and rape.

  • X[redacted]s||

    Some of them are okay.

  • ||

    In that order?

  • Chipper Chipping Rodrigue||

    If you're lucky.

  • Pan Zagloba||

    Lindsfarne 793, Never Forget!

  • Citizen X||

    I still haven't forgiven the Sea Peoples!

  • ||

    I honestly don't know what everybody's problem with him is.

    I mean, I plan on voting for the guy.

  • Plàya Manhattan.||

    If it'll make everyone angry, I'll even volunteer for his campaign.

  • ||

    Ha ha, JJ thinks his vote means someth...WAIT A SECOND.

  • ||

    Joke's on you, shithead. My vote is the ONLY one that means something.

    And I'm voting for Trump.

    Also, fried chicken.

  • X[redacted]s||

    Damn, now i want some fried chicken.

  • Tundra, well-chilled.||

    Fried in duck fat!

  • Plàya Manhattan.||

    Do you think duck fat grows on trees?

  • Tundra, well-chilled.||

    I know, but I came across this over the weekend. Now I must try it.

  • Mr. Paulbotto||

    Damn. I'm a southern-fried chicken traditionalist, but that looks amazing.

  • ||

    JJ checks off any ballot entry that has the words "extra crispy" next to it. Which perfectly explains your vote for Trump.

  • X[redacted]s||

    That also explains how Boehner got into Congress!

  • ||

    (cymbal crash)

  • ||

    You just have to be different, eh?

  • John||

    This is an example of how the left makes everything into a culture war to distract people from their incompetence. The fact is San Fransisco refused as a matter of policy to turn an obviously dangerous guy that everyone agrees should have been deported over to the Feds and the guy ended up murdering a woman. That is a massive fuck up and shows the downside to the prog policy of sanctuary cities. So the left makes the issue about the culture war and whether Trump hates Mexicans to avoid having to answer for it. Trump of course helped them to do that in being so blunt in his terms. Whether that was by design or because Trump is a moron or both is anyone's guess.

  • ||

    It's funny that you think this is just the left waging culture war, when that is exactly what Trump's idiotic racist idiocy was.

  • ||

    Sorry John, but it takes two to tango. You can't play KULTUR WAR without eager participants on both sides. That's the only way it works. That's why it works.

  • ||

    What if they threw a KULTUR WAR and nobody HURRRRRGHHHH DERP DERP?

  • ||

    One brave man, alone in a world overrun by illegal immigrants and rife with faggots getting married. One man stands against the inexorable tide of history.

  • Plàya Manhattan.||

    I just pitched that show to CBS. They're getting back to me.

  • Mrs. Lemuel Struthers||

    Was it called Fear the Walking Mexican Faggots?

  • Charles Easterly||

    Can you somehow include pot-smoking in the working title?

  • Trshmnstr doesn't recycle||

    To call Warty a man is ... uh ... an interesting choice.

  • ||

    You just want to let the Plutonians in without checking them for weird alien diseases and criminal records!

  • X[redacted]s||

    Hey, my cousin married a Plutonian, and i'll have you know that xhit's a really nice fourthgender who barely eats people at all!

  • ||

    THEY TOOK UR FLESH!!!

  • gaoxiaen||

    He owns a whole one-mile-high ice mountain.

  • John||

    You can't play KULTUR WAR without eager participants on both sides.

    Really? I am pretty sure when they come to fine your ass for saying not to a gay wedding or when the Left calls you a racist for stating the obvious, the kulture war has found you.

    The culture war is how the left wins. They use it to make any position they don't like considered racist and hateful. It is how they shut down the debate. Saying "I won't fight it" is just saying "I am down with the left determining what can and cannot be said".

  • cavalier973||

    "Sure I'll bake your gay wedding cake...NOT!"

  • Tony||

    So that's a no to the party of personal responsibility thing?

    Maybe you don't recognize the right-wing side of the culture war because you want Jesus shoved down everyone's throat, don't believe in science, and think gays are icky.

  • Lord at War||

    What if I don't believe in Jesus, know more science than you, and think gays are fabulous-- and still think leftist justice warriors are fascist brownshirts...

  • ||

    If Trump is an idiot, what is Obama?

    I used to be a libertarian until the movement became consumed with pot, homosexuality, and illegal immigration.

    Can anyone tell me why Trump would be any worse than Obama, who was supported by many writers on this site? Because I can tell you why he would be much better.

  • SugarFree||

    Is it the hair?

  • William Pilgrim||

    The sages ask this same vital question of Senator Paul, and will no doubt pursue with vengeance against Hillary if she ever gives an interview.

  • Tundra, well-chilled.||

    Nice handle. For the record, though, Secord sucks!

  • ||

    I was just gonna comment on his handle.

    /shrugs shoulders.

  • ||

    I used to be a libertarian

    No, you didn't.

  • GILMORE, LVL20 Blowhard||

    "I can tell you why he would be much better."

    This should be fun. Ok, go.

  • ||

    who was supported by many writers on this site

    [citation needed]

    I mean really guys, it was almost entirely contributors not actual Reason writers and of those were they almost all not employed here any more.

  • OldMexican||

    Re: Al_Secord,

    I used to be a libertarian until the movement became consumed with pot, homosexuality, and illegal immigration.


    We do have the coolest mascot. Are you really going to forgo that only because we support liberty?

    C'mon.

  • Tundra, well-chilled.||

    We do have the coolest mascot.

    "We"?

    My mascot is a polar bear with a rifle.

  • Knarf Yenrab!||

    Look, if there's a market for rifle-toting-polar-bear mascots among JV libertarians, so be it.

  • Knarf Yenrab!||

    We have BOTH of the coolest mascots.

  • Knarf Yenrab!||

    To be fair to the cosmo-naut Reasonoids, Obama the Candidate said many non-crazy things, and his opponent was McCain. I can almost forgive their optimism. And it's entirely possible that McCain would've been even worse in the same sense that lung cancer is worse than bowel cancer.

  • John Titor||

    That and there seemed to be a collective weird cultural flipout about Obama almost worldwide in 2008. Obama really was elevated to a creepy cult of personality for awhile there, and you were stepping on egg shells when you criticized him. I remember Canadians who didn't watch their own elections months before watch the American one.

    But after Bush's campaign run you'd think Reason might take Presidential candidates' speeches less seriously.

  • ||

    I used to be a libertarian, until I took an arrow in the knee.

    Now I support Medicare.

  • Jordan||

    If Trump is an idiot, what is Obama?

    Also an idiot?

  • Pro Libertate||

    There is an abundance of idiocy in politics. Not a new phenomenon, but we're perfecting idiocy with modern technology.

  • Theoretical Bi Irish||

    "I used to be a libertarian until the movement became consumed with pot, homosexuality, and illegal immigration."

    Sorry - that's weed, Mexicans, and ass sex. We have very specific terminology for these things.

    "Can anyone tell me why Trump would be any worse than Obama, who was supported by many writers on this site?"

    Writers for Reason being Obama supporting useful idiots in 2008 does not have anything to do with whether Trump would be a disaster. They're completely unrelated and 'better than Obama' is a might low bar.

  • ||

    It IS very disconcerting that Reason writers who are supposed to read right though a statist's evil brain, supported Obama. How could that have gone full blown useful idiots?

  • Christophe||

    They assumed his positions about civil liberties, the drug war, and not getting involved in as many wars abroad reflected what he'd do in office.

  • Brandybuck||

    Among regular contributors, only Weigel was an Obamanoid. And he left as soon libertarianism became consumed with pot, homosexuality, and illegal immigration. So he doesn't count. The only other person who picked Obama ahead of None of the Above apologized for it in advance.

  • Overt||

    The biggest problem I would have with President Trump is that he is likely to advance a bunch of Proggy causes and get a pass by Republicans because of his GOP affiliation.

    If you look at No Child Left Behind and the Medicare Drug Benefits, you find huge progressive programs that, if the GOP is being honest, would have been resisted by every Republican if offered by a Democrat president.

    All it takes is a simple review of Trump's past positions on healthcare, immigration and other causes to see that has shared common causes with a lot of Democrat issues. Only Nixon could go to China. Only Bush could blow up the education budget to massive proportions, and only Trump can give the left everything it wants on Central Planning

    Further, I see Trump the same as Bloomberg. Like any strong entrepreneur he thinks his success proves that his way is the best way. In his companies, his methods have earned him success. That doesn't mean it is the only way to success, and many business leaders fall into the trap of thinking that everyone would be successful if they just followed the same recipes he did. With Bloomberg this has led to the fat police and all sorts of other meddlesome laws. With Trump it will be more of the same- nation wide.

  • JPyrate||

    My thoughts exactly Overt. It's like voting for your Boss in a business you cannot voluntarily quit to get a better paying job.

  • Brandybuck||

    I used to be a libertarian until the movement became consumed with libertarian issues.


    FIFY

  • Cytotoxic||

    This.

  • Gilbert Martin||

    THE idiocy candidate?

    Trump may be A idiocy candidate but he's not THE idiocy candidate.

    He's certainly no more idiotic that Bernie Sanders.

  • OldMexican||

    At least Bernie has some cool human sexuality theories under his belt. No one candidate can beat that.

  • X[redacted]s||

    It was the '70s, man. Things were different.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Or hillary, or ricky, or Jeb, or ...

  • Bob Meyer||

    Give Trump some time, he's not nearly as experienced in idiocy as Sanders. I'm confident that if he works hard and keeps his nose to the grindstone, he can surpass Sanders. I think that Trump has what it takes to make it all the way to the Idiot Hall of Fame.

  • ATXChappy||

    "a tax-happy crony capitalist who is hostile to free trade but very enthusiastic about using state violence to homejack private citizens," and also "a lifelong supporter of Democratic politicians."

    I may be a bit of a conspiracy theorist on this one. But, knowing his history of support for the Democratic party, and his crony capitalist way of doing business, it wouldn't surprise me if he wasn't purposely trying to sabotage a meaningful GOP primary. His shanangins have taken over pretty much all election news coverage providing outstanding cover for Hillary and her baggage (as well as playing the perfect immigrant hating GOP caricature the left likes to play up). I would keep an eye out for a check or two between the Clinton Foundation and some Trump entity.

  • brokencycle||

    I posted the same theory earlier in this thread.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    This is the single dumbest speech I have witnessed in 17 years of covering American politics.

    Really?

    Or is it the single most unabashedly dumb speech?

    My impression is that the overwhelming bulk of the political class from both parties rely on abject idiocy no less than Trump, the difference being he identifies his moronic premises.

  • Knarf Yenrab!||

    That's his sin. Successful politicians always stand for some banal list of values that would take paragraphs to debunk, but what separates the men from the boys is how effectively they select their scapegoats.

    Trump is really bad in the scapegoat selection department. Give me a GOPer who has a team of underlings attacking the rent-seeker billionaire class of Elon Musks and Algores, and I'll give you a president.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    This is the single dumbest speech I have witnessed in 17 years of covering American politics.

    Really?

    Or is it the single most unabashedly dumb speech?

    My impression is that the overwhelming bulk of the political class from both parties rely on abject idiocy no less than Trump, the difference being he identifies his moronic premises.

  • Stormy Dragon||

    How dare you impugn the name of a great man like Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho by comparing him to someone like Donald Trump?

  • GILMORE, LVL20 Blowhard||

    Matt Welch is asking politicians tough questions and uploading video of their response to Youtube.

  • X[redacted]s||

    WEEEELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLCH

  • X[redacted]s||

    Also, i believe you mean ToughQuestions.

  • Not a Libertarian||

    Nikki Haley, whose respectful-to-all-sides speech last month about lowering the Confederate battle flag over her state's capitol was one of the genuinely great pieces of recent American oratory.

    Virtually no one outside of South Carolina would have heard her speech so it is not that it would ever have any impact on history.

  • William Pilgrim||

    Give it time. She is VP material.

  • Loki||

    Trump vs. Sanders, 2016! Because why the fuck not turn the 2016 election into the biggest shit show possible. The lulz would be epic.

  • X[redacted]s||

    According to what my proggier friends have been posting on Facebook all day, that's already the lineup.

  • Animal||

    Meanwhile, on Channel 9, a rerun of the South Park episode "Poop Sandwich v. Giant Douche."

  • Almanian - Wood Chipper-ish||

    Well, at least The Donald's presence made the event "more classy". Like he always does.

    Right?

  • ericbl||

    A lot of people in this country are angry.

    The right claims to be angry about immigration and the left claims to be angry about "white privilege", whatever in the hell that means.

    But what they are both actually angry about is that under the last two Presidents, the American Dream has seemed to finally die -- with incomes stagnant and both black youth and white middle aged men unemployed and out of the labor force in record numbers.

    Sure, Trump is riling people up with his comments on immigration. But underlying his support is the belief that this guy is a successful business man who knows how to create jobs.

    The rotten Bush / Obama economy is why people are angry. All of this other stuff the news media talks about every day would mean almost nothing if we had the kind of economy we had in the 1980's and 1990's.

  • Sidd Finch v2.01||

    Welch calling a bunch of people idiots in a piece that includes "please read Shikha Dalmia and Steve Chapman" is rich.

  • Not a Libertarian||

    No one is currently taking Trump at all seriously (and I would include most of his "supporters" in the polls.) and are concluding that he will fade back to an irrelevance by the time of the intra-party debates.

    Where does this assuredness come from? The debates are coming up very soon. The Iowa caucus is in six months. He would only need to retain a third of his present support and he would be setting agendas in the debates.

  • Robert||

    Suppose Trump succeeds in knocking out all other contenders for the nomination except Bush. Who would you then prefer for the nomination?

  • Harold Falcon||

    Who gives a shit? In that case I'm voting Libertarian. As you should, too.

  • Bob Meyer||

    "This is the single dumbest speech I have witnessed in 17 years of covering American politics. Not just the lies, the policy positions (such that they existed), or even the dizzying heights self-regard, but the level of basic human intelligence and decency. "

    Stop beating around the bush Matt, tell us what you really think.

    Trump seems to be working on the theory that to get elected all you need is the dumbest, most ignorant 50% of the country plus your own vote. The only other possibility is that the man really is that stupid. Considering his recent statements I'm going with "he really is that stupid".

  • John||

    Funny how Matt calls it the dumbest speech ever. Ever? dumber than the economic idiocy coming out of Sanders and various others? Saying mean things about the sacred Mexicans is now dumber than advocating for socialism? Really?

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Or how about Obama's bullshit in Denver in 08.

    ....this was the moment (his inauguration) when we began to heal the sick and the seas to recede....

    Totally not dumb compared to suggesting that unrestricted immigration has some downsides.

  • Bob Meyer||

    That was megalomania on display. Why is it that the smaller someone's actual accomplishments, the bigger his ego?

  • Bob Meyer||

    There is a difference between "stupid" and "delusional". Anyone advocating socialism in the 21st century is in a class with people who believe that space aliens live under the polar ice cap and control the planet by replacing world leaders with androids. Sanders lives in a make believe world where "real" socialism has never been tried.

    Trump's statements aren't delusional, they're just stupid. From Obama's birth certificate to "there are some good Mexicans" Trump consistently spouts clumsy nonsense.

    Anti-psychotic drugs might help Sanders. Nothing can help Trump.

  • ||

    "...his concrete policy recommendations about the issue could fit inside a fortune cookie."

    Don't you be bringing fortune cookies into this, Matt. Some of the best advice I ever got in my life came from fortune cookies.

  • John Titor||

    "My whole thing is make America great again."

    Holy shit, Trump is a shittier Senator Armstrong.

  • cliftonm||

    I make up to $90 an hour working from my home. My story is that I quit working at Walmart to work online and with a little effort I easily bring in around $40h to $86h… Someone was good to me by sharing this link with me, so now i am hoping i could help someone else out there by sharing this link... Try it, you won't regret it!......
    www.jobnet10.com

  • Not a Libertarian||

    But sadly is there really any way to counter "Trumpmentum" once it has been unleashed?

    It wouldn't seem as there is any logic that can stand up to his populist appeal to certain voters.

    Trump's massive ego, money and ability to command free media will ensure that he will go on to fight his own insurgent third party challenge once he has been eliminated from the GOP running.

    Even with the most optimistic option of Senator Rand as nominee, Trump will split the anti-Clinton vote and ensure her a massive Electoral College win.

    The Democrats will retake the Senate and at the very least severely whittle down the GOP majority in the House.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Huh?

  • Not a Libertarian||

    Well I am not a very optimistic person.

    Whatever might be the (for the moment) the most unfortunate outcome, I'll work my way back in order to make it seem inevitable.

  • Igor||

    Confident prediction - Trump will fold and endorse one of the front runners in a very flamboyant manner.

    His objective - ultimately - is as an influencer and he just wants to be a celebrity. Depending on circumstances and his popularity, he *might* want to buy himself into VP position. His first, last, and primary objective is to maintain his image.

  • cliftonm||

    I make up to $90 an hour working from my home. My story is that I quit working at Walmart to work online and with a little effort I easily bring in around $40h to $86h… Someone was good to me by sharing this link with me, so now i am hoping i could help someone else out there by sharing this link... Try it, you won't regret it!......
    www.jobnet10.com

  • Arthur45||

    Matt Welch seems to be clueless as to why Trump has ignited the GOP rank and file.
    How can he not understand the appeal? Trump is nonsensical in charging Mexican officials as pushing their undesirables our way,but it's hardly likely that they are not pleased about it.
    Trump needs to get specific about just how undesirable so many of these people are and why even not undesirables are throwing our unemployed Black population under the bus. Libertarians are incredibly stupid about all this. Even the Hungarians are building a border fense, something this country should have done ages ago. This article has mostly pointed out that Trummp may not be the best guy to carry his main argument. Big deal.

  • Sevo||

    "...Even the Hungarians are building a border fense, something this country should have done ages ago...."

    There ya go!
    Nothing further need be said; Arthur retires the idiocy chair for the day.

  • JohnGaltstone||

    Your festival, your speaker, your candidate, Libertrumpians. A more fitting speaker your movement has never had. Glad he is getting lots of publicity and making the charade you call a movement well known. Bravo, Trump! For doing what Ron Paul never could accomplish.

  • Michael Hihn||

    That the audience of a libertarianish conference lapped these bits up would be disheartening if it wasn't so comical

    It's not comical. Those are precisely the libertarianish goobers you and Nick have been pandering to.

    Trump appeals to the same folks as Ron Paul. Ron plays to the same wackos by saying illegals get free medical care and free education, plus the crazies like Alex Jones and infowars.com

  • Cytotoxic||

    Lies and more lies.

  • Michael Hihn||

    (yawn)

  • cavalier973||

    Trump appeals to the same folks as Ron Paul.

    Ron Paul is for Free Trade, Trump is a neo-mercantilist.

    so...in your face.

  • Michael Hihn||

    Ron Paul is for Free Trade, Trump is a neo-mercantilist.

    They both appeal to wackos -- like you -- with bellicose rhetoric and dumbfuck proposals that only their cults believe.

    so...in your face.

    On top of his dumb-fuck tax proposal, Ron tried to deny homosexuals any right to defend their constitutional rights -- the worst abuse since FDR's concentration camps.

    Ron also supported DOMA giving the federal government a veto power over states defining marriage ... while telling his goobers that states should define marriage (if government is to be involved. Were you suckered on that one too?

    He says the constitution never mentions marriage which means ... duh ... the government NEVER had the power he claims. And as long as government IS involved, he's allowed to abuse individual rights. And the goobers swallow that also!

    Back to the comparison, they both shit all over the Constitution and individual liberty,

    so...in your face

    Wipe the drool from your own face, puppet.

  • JohnGaltstone||

    This man is correct. Trump is a cartoonish, larger than life capitalist who appeals to the same 'Murka First crowd that eats whatever scraps Paul throws them. Fed bad = fur'ners bad. Same mentality, same futile tilting at windmills, for the same losing result.

  • Michael Hihn||

    Ron is also a massive, raging bullshitter about the constitution.
    Libertarians don't see it because it's in places we don't look, but Ron gives plausible sounding arguments for the very worst bigots in America. His perverted version of States Rights (NOT federalism) places him right next to Orval Faubus, George Wallace, David Duke and the KKK.

  • patskelley||

    Yes! That's the word I was looking for "Idiocracy"

  • James Anderson Merritt||

    Will Trump also court the LP nomination at the convention next year?

    Seriously, it so damages whatever good reputation FreedomFest has to provide even a few minutes on stage to this "candidate," not to mention that he can afford to pack the room with paid extras who will cheer for him and make it appear (for CSPAN and other TV news cameras, at least) as if libertarians support his candidacy.

    I have been paying attention to libertarian politics since 1980, and this is perhaps the most disgusting thing I have seen yet. Or at least, it seems to Trump everything that came before...

  • plaasjaapie||

    Looks like the Trump candidacy has elicited a hysterical response from Reason. Oh my... guess who else is in bed with the GOP leadership RINO herd? Who'd have thought it? :-p

  • Longtail||

    I'm not sure the fact that a lot of what Trump says is incorrect is really going to affect his relationship with the Republican base.

  • plaasjaapie||

    I'm not sure that a lot of what Trump says is incorrect. For sure, otoh, it is unpopular with our political elite.

  • dbobway||

    This is the single dumbest speech I have witnessed in 17 years of covering American politics. Not just the lies, the policy positions (such that they existed), or even the dizzying heights self-regard, but the level of basic human intelligence and decency. For a guy who complains that the media only quotes "half-sentences," Trump's real adversary is the full-length transcript. These aren't speeches, they're seizures.

    Gee Matt that exactly how fell every time I here Obama speak.

    Outside side of the boring I don't give a shit delivery.

    Except when he is speaking on race with African Americans!

  • Jennifer O||

    I knew Trump passingly well back in the 80's. I sincerely doubt he's changed much.

    And my opinion back then is that he is a modern day PT Barnum who plays to a crowd's baser instincts in order to make money. And fame for himself. His actual positions over time are all over the place depending on who he is looking to fleece.

    Right now he sees the right wing as an easy mark. And they are, because they cannot see he is playing a Republican character as it would be played on South Park.

  • Grant||

    Trump may not be an intellectual giant - but don’t be too fast to call him an “idiot.” Compared to Congress, he may be in the top of his class.

  • Napoleon Bonoparte||

    So when are you officially changing the name of the magazine to "Tantrum"?

  • carolcardona||

    my buddy's step-aunt makes $68 /hour on the laptop . She has been without a job for nine months but last month her check was $99350 just working on the laptop for a few hours. check my source
    www.jobnet10.com

  • ||

    Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do...... ✹✹✹✹✹✹ www.online-jobs9.com

  • chmercier||

    Optimist route: Trump is tooly and doesn't really understand the whole immigration thing (conflating certain communities of illegal aliens with all immigrants).

    But! I think the positive response to Trump is similar to the sudden popularity of Robert E. Lee's battle flag - he calls out the Obama administration in coarse language.

    In an oddly symbolic way, and with the wrong issue, Trump is saying something that a lot of Americans know: Obama is no friend to the US, if not the majority of people's ideological/philosophical enemy. That resonates - for a political person to come right out and say "Obama's an idiot" is what a lot of people want to hear. Not some vacillating buffoon.

    That being said, when the rigs get counted and we have single party rule starting post-haste in 2016, this will all be a moot conversation.

  • Michael Hihn||

    But! I think the positive response to Trump is similar to the sudden popularity of Robert E. Lee's

    More like Michelle Bachmann's massive collapse. Her "plain talk" put her near the top in the polls almost immediately .. until she collapsed to only the hardcore goobers, as she kept making an ass of herself.

    Plus, too many folks are stupid on how polls work. When you have total outliers like Trump, Bachmann, Cruz and Paul, their initial poll numbers are as high as they'll ever get. As other primary candidates drop out, VERY few of their supporters will switch to Trump or Cruz or Paul ... or they'd already be there.

    Polarization is ... polarizing.

    Trump's collapse may be even faster than Bachmann's, now that even Rupert Murdoch is calling Trump out as a liar ... and I assume pulling out the chair from the wackier commentators at his Fox News. And Rand Paul's wacky tax plan -- free tax cuts for everyone -- is already hurting him outside of the goober segment. The math is a crazy as his father's.

  • livelikearefugee||

    On the other hand, if Trump were elected we'd have the best looking first daughter ever. Ivanka Trump is even better looking than Amy Carter.

  • Michael Hihn||

    She did get my attention, announcing her Dad. She also speaks well. Better than dad. :-)

  • livelikearefugee||

    On the other hand, if Trump were elected we'd have the best looking first daughter ever. Ivanka Trump is even better looking than Amy Carter.

  • crow||

    cruel

  • crow||

    Make fun. But this dipshit is hitting a nerve with not just "Coulter" Republicans. Protectionism, in a different form, is the backbone of American labor unions. We may end up with a really weird POTUS in '16.

  • Michael Hihn||

    fun. But this dipshit is hitting a nerve with not just "Coulter" Republicans

    Which means you like him. :-)
    The polls say the opposite. One new one, 75% of voters think he's not even a serious candidate. That's UP from 73% right after he announced. The decline (in credibility) is within the margin of error, but obviously all his bloviating, and the most highly publicized campaign in America has achieved precisely ... nothing

    He'll crash and burn for the same reason as that wacky Bachmann.

  • Mark P||

    Wake up, we have been living in an idiocracy for the past few years: the Bush bailouts, Obamacare,
    the White House coverups, Justice Department prosecutions of innocent people merely protecting themselves from criminals, the IRS scandal, the Supreme Court abandoning the Constitution, the corruption of the Clinton foundation, Hillary's private emails as secretary of state, and today a new treaty with Iran that will lift their sanctions and finance their building of weapons, still leaving American citizens locked in Iranian prisons. Trump may be a little crazy, but he is not going to do anything crazier than that.

  • Michael Hihn||

    the Supreme Court abandoning the Constitution

    Aww geeez, the Paulista Cult.

    Trump may be a little crazy, but he is not going to do anything crazier than that.

    He'll never get even close to having a chance.

  • John B.||

    I believe that all the libertarians should answer us the principal question, about what is going to happen when we destroy our habitat? Will they sell us clean air and water (well, they do this already). What is this all about? I see this presidential candidate as full of lies about his fortune, plans, about his strategies. Why is his richness so important to us? We need guidance about our environment and conditions we create, not more dirty money.

  • ||

    Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do...... ✹✹✹✹✹✹ www.online-jobs9.com

  • Page Turner||

    We have been dragged so far to the left as a country the only way to regain any rights or sanity is to have multiple loud, brash candidates to the right of Trump reminding us of what every generation before us treasured.

    The idiot candidates are those who support Obama, Clinton, Boehner, McConnell, the Chamber of Commerce and every group that wants to put its hands deeper into the citizens pocket while usurping every Constitutional guarantee.

    Reason should be praising Trump's honesty and common sense while pointing out how those who live under rocks are using their tried and true method of "Isolate, Ridicule and Marginalize" with the low info Gruber voters.

  • Garagefather||

    All these media halfwits haven't figured out that Trump is trolling them. We can smell the stench of rotting brains from all the heads exploding in the media.

    Ever heard the saying, " me thinks thou doth protest too much"?

    The longer this tantrum at Reason and the rest of the media goes on, the more it looks like Trump may have a point. If a more likeable and viable candidate starts to look at the research being produced by those opposed to open borders, and uses it wisely in his campaign, they will probably win the next election in a land slide. That is what Reason and the rest fear and that is why they are going ballistic on Trump. The truth cannot be known or the charade falls apart.

  • plusafdotcom||

    "Trump is genuinely puzzled how call centers in India can be cheaper for American companies than ones in Arizona, since they're so far away."

    Well, that tells me that The Donald is about as ignorant of free market competition as Obama, Krugman, Hillary and a few other economic illiterates.

    'nuff said.

  • KnaveDave||

    I would have a hard time voting for Donald Trump. I would have a hard time not voting for Donald Trump. Trump serves himself first. He’s a cartoon of bombast and ego. He has used political campaigns frivolously just to generate media attention and then backed out of the race when it got real.

    Yet, Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders — who stand on opposite ends of the political spectrum — are also the political candidates who are speaking most directly to a seething undercurrent of the American populace — a growing sea of people who have had no champion for decades.

    Knave Dave
    http://thegreatrecession.info/blog/trump-politics/

  • Cloudbuster||

    there is no evidence of any Mexican policy that pushes people out of Mexico and into the United States. As has been the case for decades, a combination of economic and family factors accounts for most of the migration from Mexico to the United States. We rate the claim Pants on Fire.

    It's almost as if Mexican government policy has absolutely nothing to do with the economic state of Mexico. Imagine!

  • algeria||

    I don't think so. I don't see how that would work. Trump stands in absolute opposition to Jeb and makes Jeb look even more appalling
    algeria 2016

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online