Reason Podcast

Who Do You Want to Lose the Midterms Most?: Podcast

If hatred is the country's main political motivator these days, you might as well lean into it.


America will lose, again. ||| Sergio Flores/REUTERS/Newscom
Sergio Flores/REUTERS/Newscom

From phony Beto-mania to predictable Cruz-baggery, from Medicare-for-all to protecting Medicare, the midterm elections coming two weeks from now are enough to drive a sober man into A.M. tequila shots. So in this era of negative polarization and left/right mob mentalities, perhaps the most fitting question to ask yourself is: Who do you want most to lose?

That's what kicks off this week's editor-roundtable version of the Reason Podcast, featuring Katherine Mangu-Ward, Peter Suderman, Nick Gillespie, and myself. We name names (including those few candidates we'd like to see win), talk issues (and lack thereof), and laugh mordantly, since that's preferable to the alternative.

Subscribe, rate, and review our podcast at iTunes. Listen at SoundCloud below:

Audio production by Ian Keyser.

'realest year 9' by Black Ant is licensed under BY NC SA 3.0

Relevant links from the show:

"The Only Remarkable Thing About Beto O'Rourke Is How Much the Media Love Him," David Harsanyi

"Desperate to Keep His Seat, Ted Cruz Gets Dumber and Dumber on Criminal Justice," by Jacob Sullum

"Steve King's Fear of Immigrants Is Ignorant of History," by Steve Chapman

"Rep. Duncan Hunter Uses Campaign Funds for Steam Games and Hawaiian Shorts," by Zuri Davis

"Ron Paul–Backed Libertarian Senate Candidate Murray Sabrin Not Getting Polled Despite Running Against Robert Menendez," by Matt Welch

"Libertarian State Senator Wants to Make it Easier for People With Criminal Records (And Everyone Else) to Work," by Brian Doherty

"Libertarians Cover the Polling Spread in 4 Senate Races," by Matt Welch

"Gary Johnson Out-Fundraising Republican Opponent Mick Rich," by Matt Welch

"Rep. Justin Amash Slams 'Pathetic' Spending Bill, Reminds Trump of His Pledge," by Joe Setyon

"Eric Brakey, Republican Senate Candidate in Maine, Endorses Gary Johnson," by Matt Welch

"Despite—or Maybe Because of—Trump's Immigration Crackdown, Record Number of Families Crossing Southern Border," by Nick Gillespie

"Donald Trump Defends Medicare, a Socialist Program, from the Threat of Socialism," by Peter Suderman

"Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump, and Why Civility Can't Return To Politics," by Nick Gillespie and Todd Krainin

"Proud Boys, Antifa Clash Again on Portland Streets," by Christian Britschgi

"Attack Ads, Circa 1800," by Meredith Bragg

"The Collectivist Election," by Matt Welch

"To Curb Political Violence, Make Government Less Important," by J.D. Tuccille

Don't miss a single Reason Podcast! (Archive here.)

Subscribe at iTunes.

Follow us at SoundCloud.

Subscribe at YouTube.

Like us on Facebook.

Follow us on Twitter.

What are we consuming this week?

Matt Welch

  • Birthday Party of Kat Timpf

Katherine Mangu-Ward

Peter Suderman

NEXT: Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump, and Why Civility Can't Return To Politics

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 or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.


    More and more people regretting sex change surguries. Gee, maybe this fact should be considered before allowing parents to pump hormones into their children and minors to mutilate themselves? Perhaps the failure of this surgury to make people happy in so many cases is something we should be talking about? But that would interfere with the narrative and we can’t have that.

    1. Can’t admit that. People might ask the same question about abortions.

      1. The fact that people are regretting this decision in such significant numbers, shows what a complete load of bullshit transgenderism is. If it were the case that they were “born that way” as transgenderism claims, they would never regret the surgery. The fact that a significant number of people do is very strong evidence of it being a mental disorder. It is not conclusive evidence that there is no such thing as “transgender”, since maybe the ones who don’t regret it are transgender as the theory claims. But, absent some kind of evidence beyond their word that they are, and there never has been any such evidence, there is no reason to conclude that they are.

        1. Anyone that would do this to small children is no better than the militant vegans who end up starving their babies to death.

          Just more proof we need a constitutional amendment against all forms of Marxism, including progressivism.

          1. Um, there are quite a few vegans alive today and I doubt they are “starving”

        2. Interesting. I just read a statistic that only 1.6% transgenders de-transition.

    2. Didn’t read the article, but the parents who do this are more into the virtue signaling of accepting a trans child, than the actual welfare of said child.

      1. Yes they are and it is sick.

        1. Its funny (or sad) how the left wants to protect “children” against guns, smoking, etc. But somehow they trust children with what will literally be a life-changing decision. Oh, and I really pissed off a prog friend this weekend when I told her that Kavanaugh was a child when he committed the alleged assault, so he shouldn’t really be held accountable.

          1. They don’t give a damn about children. From using them as human shields (Occupy Wall Street), to surgical mutilation, they’re fodder for achieving their goals.

      2. Thass OK, Bubber, Jawn and Jesusfaeces didn’t either, but all agree the problem is librulz “allowing” folks to run their own lives. I’m guessing, from the shrill desperation, God’s Own Prohibitionists are set to lose a lot of congressional leather upholstery to sit on. LP voters will be grinning soon. Brazilian elections are in a few days, Fascisti v. Comunistas with no LP allowed. It’s a screeching match–looter satrapies permit no LP votes.

    3. I have also heard that men who have surgery to change their sex organs to a larger size are disappointed with the results

      1. Since many women who get breast implants find the same and sometimes end up going back for even larger ones, that doesn’t surprise me.

        1. Is that even a thing anymore? I haven’t seen or heard much about fake boobs since the 1990s. Then again, I haven’t been to a strip club since then either.

          1. It’s seems pervasive in fitness circles. Slender, toned women with overly large boobs that don’t even look natural. To each her own, of course, (but they do nothing for me).

            1. overly large boobs
              No such thing.

    4. One guy interviewed with anecdotes. Checks out.

      1. yes Tony, anecdotes do not always represent the overall truth but they don’t preclude it either. More importantly, the existence of these people at all puts lie to the idea this is some inborn trait and not a mental disorder.

        But, since you are a complete hateful moron who is incapable of thinking rationally and will literally beleive anything that your political side tells you to believe, you don’t understand that.

        1. But let’s be honest, you’d never link to an article that argued what you don’t already believe.

          1. Yes he would, if it was actually supportable. Once again you’re thinking of you Tony. More projection.

            Just admit what an evil piece of shit you are.

    5. One problem with that article is that it doesn’t get into age at original transition or delve into the source of regret.

      One possibility is that the regret was more due to an unappealing result due to the fact that they attempted to transition post puberty. Puberty brings large scale changes in gross anatomy, bone structure for example, that can not be reversed or modified by the sex change surgery. So a male to female, still looks like a man with boobs from a distance and a female to male still looks largely like a flat chested woman.

      The point of the hormone treatments for kids is to delay puberty until the person is old enough and mature enough to make a rational decision for themselves and still allow for a more appealing outcome to the surgery. Is this strategy viable? I have no idea, and we’re unlikely to find out unless it’s allowed to proceed on an experimental basis.

      1. sure just put off puberty and pump kids full of hormones so they can make a rational decsion later. Yea that sounds like a great idea.

        1. It probably isn’t, but we will never know for sure unless it’s allowed to proceed on an experimental basis. It’s not like there is any other way to test it.

          1. So we just us kids as human guinne pigs. IS that your final answer?

            1. But no GMOs!

            2. Human experimentation happens all the time, particularly in the medical field. As long as it’s voluntary it isn’t seen as a problem. Why should this be treated any differently than human trials for new drugs or medical devices.

  2. Who do you want most to lose?

    I would really love to see the American voter lose. Unfortunately not sure how that happens.

    1. Rest assured, no matter who wins, the Snerican voter will lose.

      1. I’m pretty sure we have the elected officials we want (and deserve). And whoever wins will be the new group we want (and deserve).

        Which is always the problem. They suck either because we are stupid or we want suck.

        Either way I can’t figure out how the election can actually deliver a better outcome – which would probably be a voting booth kicking voters in the teeth and then saying how can you be such a stupid asshole

        1. and there are those advocating the everyone should be required to vote a la Australia. Yes, let’s force the uninformed / disinterested into tipping the scales. Wisdom of the crowds, right?

    2. Libertarians, since whoever’s in office gets blamed for the mess that the people before them created.

    3. Who do you want most to lose?
      Whoever is currently in office. No matter who it is, get them out.

    4. Libertarian voters have been winning since 1972. Every LP vote is worth anywhere from 6 to about 21 looter votes nowadays–in terms of law-changing clout. In countries with no LP, like Venezuela, Cuba, Peru… everybody loses except a few looter politicians.

  3. And BTW – where are the Reason articles on this caravan/army? I think we need an absolutely brainless open borders article followed by a bunch of equally braindead authoritarian comments.

    1. Sorry, that’s not going to be covered till they’ve made it to the northern border of Mexico. Just in time for the midterms.

    2. Impressive prophetic bitching!


      What if we just bus them to Canada? Or Sweden?

  4. Like always I want gridlock.

    The Big Gov Trump-tard GOP needs a check or a balance.

    Unfortunately Democrats are a sorry-ass ineffective opposition party.

    1. Yeah you were all about Gridlock in 2008 and again in 2010. Shut up shreek. At some point laughing at you gets boring.

      1. Fuck off you TEAM RED! hack.

        I have openly supported gridlock here since 2006.

        You’re the fucking party whore.

        1. Ah Shreek, it never gets old watching you lie about being a Democrat.

        2. oB, you have openly lied through your teeth your whole life. Your word means nothing. For example, you don’t lay your bets.

        3. Look how desperate and mad Lefties like buttplugger are getting.

    2. The Dems are throwing Warmunist Econazis, including Exxon, back to the CPUSA swamp. Without a carbon tax that exempts only Red China they will look less idiotic to people who know what kind of units a terawatt-hour measures. That was the only real platform difference in 2016. The LP platform has been worsened, especially by the infiltrators on the platform committee who changed the plank to welcome 52 million illiterati marching across the Rio Grande thirty abreast. So we might not get the 328% increase again. Too bad, because that would give us something like 13 million votes.

  5. The Democrats and the Republicans.

  6. everyone loses when we vote for (E). i especially want Beto to lose; i hope the poseur breaks an ankle on his board

  7. Whomever Arthur Kirkland wan’t to see win.

  8. Progressives, because they are actively working to turn the USA into Venezuela.

  9. at this point? The Democrats. If they can’t even manage to take control of the house, I don’t see them continuing to be a major party, especially if they continue to incite violence. Which would open up space for a new party… kinda like how the Republicans filled the vacuum left by the Whigs. I’d say the Libertarians are the best positioned of the smaller parties to take advantage of that.

    1. especially if they continue to incite violence

      Are you completely senile?

      About 90% of the political violence in the US comes from the right.

      1. facts, schmacts.

        1. Put your Tiki Torch down and read this:

          The politically conservative Daily Caller News Foundation using data from the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START), found 92% of all “ideologically motivated homicide incidents” committed in the United States from 2007 to 2016 were motivated by right-wing extremism or white supremacism.[39] According to the Government Accountability Office of the United States, 73% of violent extremist incidents that resulted in deaths since September 12, 2001 were caused by right-wing extremist groups

          1. cool. turns Right Wing Extremist Group Radar to 11.

          2. I don’t trust anything you post shitbird. You’re a frequent liar.

          3. I’m not surprised by this at all, considering that Fundamentalist Islam is arguably right-wing and has almost certainly been put into the “right-wing” box by the GAO statisticians.

      2. Ah Shreek, it never gets old watching you lie about your political enemies because you’re a Democrat.

      3. I highly question your statistics… a Mark Twain quote comes to mind. Of course, that might be partly because the MSM doesn’t consider what Antifa and similar folks to do to be violence and rarely report, or at best they say both sides are responsible. I used to work with a lady who moved to SC from Portland… She and her husband moved because they were scared and tired of being harassed for their libertarian beliefs. That was over 2 years ago. I’ve lived in quite a few places, including the south, and I’ve never heard anyone say they were moving because Republicans harassed anyone who wasn’t republican.

        I believe what my eyes tell me, not what some propaganda rags from the right or the left say. And what I see is there are a lot of violent incidents from the democrats, but there’s only outrage when someone fights back. The next time a Republican shoots up a bunch of congressmen let me know.

        1. Yeah, you’re a typical fact avoiding conservative.

          You cite the Congressional shooting (where no one died) but don’t remember any of these (list of 73 murders by right wingers):

          1. “2004 Bank robbery Tulsa, Oklahoma 0 1”


            “2001 Post-September 11 shootings Multiple 1 6”



            1. 2014 Penn State Police Barracks Attack… perpetrator only had a grudge against law enforcement… how does that make him right wing? Fairly certain the average libertarian doesn’t like the cops, or at least how the cops currently are, and I think plenty of them wouldn’t generalize themselves as right wing extremists.

              1. It’s on posting this shit. So of course his source is pure bullshit, just like him.

                1. ‘It’s PB posting this shit’

          2. I don’t understand why they’re allowed to edit out 9/11. Particularly when they leave in Oklahoma City.

            Doesn’t that kinda overpower anything around.

            Jihadis, allies of the left, killed almost 3000 people.

            We’re done.

  10. Tax cuts a bust for Republicans in midterms
    By BRIAN FALER 10/22/2018 09:43 AM EDT Updated 10/22/2018 10:07 AM EDT

    Republicans thought their massive tax overhaul would be the centerpiece of their midterm strategy. But it turns out they were so wrong they’ve been barely mentioning the $1.5 trillion tax cut on the campaign trail.

    With polls showing Americans are more likely to disapprove of the tax law than to approve of it, GOP candidates have been changing the subject to other issues like immigration and health care. Some of the lawmakers who wrote the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act are even struggling to hang onto their seats.

    Sham tax cut not so popular? NO WAY!


    2. Ah Shreek, it never gets old watching you propagandize for the Democrats.

  11. The best case scenario of Democrats winning the house and even the senate will be that no laws will be passed because they will be too busy trying to impeach/investigate Trump. The worst case will be that Trump will kiss up to them to save his butt and because that’s who he really is (and he has never been a small government guy), so will give them whatever they want. Not that it matters for me in my solidly blue district and state where the Dem senate candidate has the race in the bag.

    1. The best case scenario of Democrats winning the house and even the senate will be that no laws will be passed

      No more stupid laws?

      Why yes. Put me down for that.

      I can’t think of any law that an uncontested party (GOP 2003-2007, Dems 2009-2010, GOP Jan 2017 to now) has done worth supporting.

      1. Maga!

  12. Who Do You Want to Lose the Midterms Most?: Podcast



    What does he stand for?

    I dunno, BETO! BETO! BETO! BETO!

  14. Journalists

      1. I miss Tay.

  15. Yo Matt, this Clash fan appreciates your excellent use of “Phony Beto-Mania”! This beats his “Working for the clampdown” jibe hands down!

  16. I kind of want Barbara Comstock to lose so I can say “You got Wexton’d” but Wexton’s ads are equally obnoxious, so I’m torn.

  17. Lana, do you want Cruz for senator? Because Beto is how you get Cruz.

  18. I want both parties to lose…badly.

  19. Lefties deep down know what coming and its a bloodbath for Democrats.

    I would want to tune out reality too if I were them.

  20. Who do you want to lose most?

    The left, no matter what label they’ve glued to themselves.

  21. Every. Single. Democrat.

    If Trump holds the house, and gets 60 votes in the senate… I think he would actually do amazing things. Things that would trigger commies SO HARD it might make ME HARD… If you know what I mean.

    If you don’t know what I mean, I mean I might get an erection. In my penis. Yeah. It’d be hilarious. If Donald Trump has been good for nothing else, it is generating liberal tears, and that’s somethin’!

    I’m gonna be sending in my ballot probably tomorrow. No hope anybody decent will win where I live, but hopefully some of the horrible initiatives are shot down.

    That said, I’d also be fine if every Republican ALSO lost and 100% of people elected were Libertarians. They’d probably be retarded cucks about many issues I break with libertarian orthodoxy on, but they’d be awesome AF on other stuff. But that won’t happen, so Red Wave is the best chance.

  22. Anyone who calls himself libertarian and prefers Democrats to Republicans is a liar.

  23. Anyone who calls himself libertarian and prefers Democrats to Republicans is a liar.

  24. Anyone who calls himself libertarian and prefers Democrats to Republicans is a liar.

  25. I don’t want anyone to win, since either way, we all lose.

    So I guess it would be fun if Team Red wins. If they win, we get to watch the Prog Hive-Mind explode and provide us with salty ham tears for 2 more years.

    If Team Blue wins, we get a worthless impeachment proceeding that goes nowhere and sucks all the air out of the room for 18 months while guaranteeing a Trump re-election in 2020.

    Maybe a sliver of a Team Blue victory in the House with them losing a seat or 2 in the Senate. Gridlock, plus it’s hard to impeach when one defector can gum up the works. Also, no perception of a “mandate”.

  26. I have used to work with a lady who moved to SC from Portland. She and her husband moved because they were scared and tired of being harassed for their libertarian beliefs.

Please to post comments