The Great Bernie Freakout

As Sanders steamrolls toward the Democratic nomination, the Reason Roundtable podcast dissects the panic attacks among MSNBC anchors, conservative commie-haters, and the bipartisan establishment elite.

1x 1.1x 1.25x 1.5x 2x 3x

:15 :15

Download

The Great Bernie Freakout

Could we really be just eight days away from an eight-month dirge of Bernie vs. Trump? Probably not, but that's no reason for political/media professionals not to panic over the Democratic frontrunner's purported Castro apologetics, coercive economics, Trump similarities, popularity ceilings, down-ballot jeopardizing, and even Russian stoogery.

All of which and more are analyzed and occasionally mocked on today's Reason Roundtable podcast, featuring Peter Suderman, Katherine Mangu-Ward, Matt Welch, and a pinch-hitting Elizabeth Nolan Brown. Also discussed: California's idiotic public policies, President Donald Trump's loyalty purges, the difference between Russian "interference" and "influence," and Midwestern canned clam dip. You can take the gal out of Ohio (or Minnesota), but…

Audio production by Ian Keyser and Regan Taylor.

Music credit: 'Sneaky Bass Latina' by Jimmy Fontanez/Doug Maxwell/Media Right Productions

Relevant links from the show:

"Bernie Sanders Defends Pro-Castro Comments," by Elizabeth Nolan Brown

"Bernie Sanders Wins the Nevada Caucus. He's on Track To Win the Democratic Presidential Nomination," by Peter Suderman

"Bloomberg Goes for Brokered Convention," by Eric Boehm

"Bernie Sanders' Troubling Agenda," by Veronique de Rugy

"Bloomberg Disses Sanders' Socialism: 'Other Countries Tried That. It Was Called Communism and It Just Didn't Work,'" by Christian Britschgi

"America's Two Major Political Parties Are Melting Down. But the Two-Party System Remains Strong," by Eric Boehm

"The Socialist Delusions of Bernie Sanders," by John Stossel

"California Bill Would Require Occupational Licenses for Porn Actors, Strippers, Cam Girls," by Christian Britschgi

"L.A.'s Plan To Solve Its Homeless Problem Is a Mess," by Zach Weissmueller

"Review: The Current War: Director's Cut," by Kurt Loder

Comments

[Ra's al Gore]

"Loyalty purge" - AKA Trump being the only President in history to be required to appoint disloyal political enemies to important posts.

[John]

No kidding.

[JesseAz]

Especially true if he urges Obama appointees he kept in office.

[De Oppresso Liber]

"Disloyal" aka people who tell inconvenient truths.

[Chipper Morning Wood]

Loyalty is the highest virtue for these cultists. One must not question Orange Daddy, no matter what their lying eyes tell them.

[Nardz]

Eunuch discounts the concept of loyalty and interjects impotent strawman?
How... unsurprising

[Mother's lament]

Well, retaining idiots who are deliberately abusing justice just to score political points for the Democrats, isn't really a viable option either, Chipper.

[soldiermedic76]

If you ever recognized truth it would be the first time and I don't doubt you would find it inconvenient to your view of the world.

[TrickyVic (old school)]

""“Disloyal” aka people who tell inconvenient truths.""

Why do you suppose Hillary Clinton fired the Whitehouse travel staff when Bill took office?

[Chip Chipperson]

LOL Obama fired every single ambassador on his first day in office. Nobody in the MSM batted an eye when Holder called himself Obama's 'wingman'. Obama sent leakers to PRISON.

What the fuck are you even saying right now? That a president doesn't have the right to pick his own staff and choose people who aren't constantly undermining him?

I mean, jesus fucking christ, if anything Trump has shown WAY more faith and deference towards these underlings than they would have gotten from nearly any other administration, in that he kept so many of them on -- believing they'd conduct themselves professionally regardless of who was in office.

And now that they've exposed themselves as backbiting partisans, leakers, and 'resistance' fighters, he's replacing them. THE REPUBLIC IS DOOMED!!!!!

[tlapp]

Exactly, same happens in private business. New person at the top cleans house and brings in their own people.

[Rich]

It'll be funny as hell if Bernie tanks on Super Tuesday.

[BigT]

Yes, I expect there will be a variety of 'winners' on ST. All will claim victory, but the real winner is POTUS as the Donkeys kick each others' asses.

[Gray_Jay]

It will be. However, and with the caveat that there's damned lies, and then there's political polling, for the two big prizes on Super Tuesday, Bernie is projected to win handily in CA and pretty much tie in TX. Slightly smaller states, like MN (75), MA (91), NC (110), and VA (99), he's projected to nearly tie his competition.

Bloomberg is projected to make a big run on delegates in some of those states, though none of the polling has him winning a state outright besides FL. He'll come close to beating Bernie in VA. Biden will likely have enough life that he might consider limping along.

It's going to be tough in the system the Democrats set up, to have any candidate beat the base group of voters Bernie has. Even if Bernie's base is by itself nowhere near a majority of Dem voters.

[NoVaNick]

The dems deserve Bernie as their standard bearer every bit as much as the GOP establishment deserve Trump. It is rich to see all these beltway progtards who claimed to care so much about things like inequality and climate change and how the government needs to do more finally have to choose between the real deal (Bernie) and a shameless elitist hypocrite like themselves (Bloomberg).

[Victor Whisky]

American politics are like American Professional World Wide Wrestling. Orchestrated, choreographed theatrics for the gullible masses. Makes no difference who is president. Trump is no different than all those who preceded him. He is just a court jester, a buffoon in the palace of the global oligarchs. The only reason why Dems and Republicans, who are one and the same, want to sink Bernie, is that he might actually change course and eliminate the massive government thievery, like the Pentagon being unable to account for more than 9 billion dollars that has vanished in thin air and he might ask for an audit of the Federal Reserve, which is actually a cabal of private banksters, who turn sheets of paper into what they call currency, loan it to us taxpayers and expect all of it back with interest. You could not come up with a better racket.

[Chipper Morning Wood]

Let's hope so. Right now, it's the Nationalists versus the Socialists. God help us all.

[ByteRot]

You say that as if Bernie isn't a nationalist, as well. He just wants to be a nationalist for a very different flavor of nation. But the rest of the world still isn't invited.

[loveconstitution1789]

As Sanders steamrolls toward the Democratic nomination...

Bernie Sanders has 45 of 1991 delegates.

In 2016, Bernie got 1865 delegates and won 23 contests.

[Kevin Smith]

Also worth noting at this stage in 2016 Bernie had 51 delegates. He is doing similarly this year as then: A strong second place in Iowa, win in New Hampshire. The Nevada win is a first, but due to the thinner in 2016 he still had more delegates

The difference this year is there is no clear challenger, however if all the non-Bernie candidates coalesce behind a single person, they'll win. At this stage I think they want to prevent Bernie from winning on the first ballot, so they can force a brokered convention and bring in the super delegates. I could see a repeat of the 1952 convention going down

[Real Books]

I want a repeat of 1924 - 103 ballots.

[loveconstitution1789]

I think you are probably on to something.

I personally want Bernie to win the Democrat Party nomination, so Socialism will get its ass kicked election 2020. The only way to shut Hillary up was for Trump to kick her ass Election 2016.

[Juice]

Sanders pushes child-care-for-all.

My 2024 presidential campaign slogan will be "All for all." Everyone gets everything. You want it? You got it. It's all yours. Weeeeeee...

[creech]

Dems using a Fabian socialist strategy to slice off our liberty one thin piece at a time. Next, food will be a right, then housing, then transportation. "End food insecurity - free foodstamps for all."
"One might lose one's house or apartment - rent stamps for all and cancel all mortgage debt." "Can't get to work? Free basic Chevy for all and forgive all car loans."
On the other hand, there is no Fabian libertarian strategy as the LP won't countenance pragmatism.

[Kevin Smith]

I'm just waiting for someone to apply that definition of a "right" to the right to keep and bear arms.

I can't afford a machine gun. The government needs to give me one for free

[Fat Mike's Drug Habit]

"I can’t afford a machine gun. The government needs to give me one for free."

Your ideas are intriguing to me and I'd like to subscribe to your newsletter.

[Inigo Montoya]

“Your ideas are intriguing to me.”

Agreed, but it’s more than I can say for his movies. I think Dogma was the last decent one he made.

And don’t get me started on his praise of Disney Star Wars. I hope the Mouse paid him well to say nice things about their schlock.

[Chipper Morning Wood]

What, you didn't like Tusk?

[EISTAU Gree-Vance]

Well, you’re in luck! Clerks 3 is on the way!

Haha

[defenestrate]

Vulgar was the feel-good movie of the decade, easily. Entertainment for the whole family.

[DesigNate]

People are already saying that housing is a right.

[Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf]

Nobody for President, cuz nobody's better than MY candidate.

[Jerryskids]

If you're willing to admit that Nobody is better than your candidate, I'm willing to meet you halfway and admit that Nobody is better than my candidate as well. We can agree that Nobody is the best candidate of all.

[Chipper Morning Wood]

Yes, but look at the other side of the coin. Nobody is also dumber than Jesse, crazier than Tulpa, more devoted to Trump than LoveCon89, and has fucked more chickens than SIV.

[Robert]

NOT RAPE MORE TOURISTS THAN STEVE SMITH!

[EISTAU Gree-Vance]

Meanwhile, as a bridge to “all for all”, the 2020 slogan is “everything is so terrible and unfair!” (tm)

You’re a victim, even if you don’t know it.

Haha

[lizhatraugottz]

I just love spending quality time with burgenland huren girls

[Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf]

I'd like to see all the Israel haters acknowledge that all Arab countries hate Israel far more than the Israel government hates Palestine.

[Mother's lament]

True, but lately there's been this weird Saudi and Egypt flirting thing going on with the "Zionist Entity". And Israel's old Islamic squeeze, Turkey, is acting like a vengeful ex.

[John]

http://www.huffpost.com/entry/the-young-turks-progressive-founder-urged-his-staff-not-to-unionize_n_5e540686c5b6ad3de3823a32

This is the most progressive story of the week. Young Turks founder urged his staff not to unionize. God what an asshole. I hope they unionize and leave him bankrupt.

[Gray_Jay]

Watching his blustering rage and frustration as results came in during Election 2016 was one of the best times I've had following an election.

I'm surprised he didn't ask them to work free, for the exposure.

[JesseAz]

I use the crying Maddow gif all the time on texts.

[JesseAz]

Didnt the Young Turks just get a million dollar grant from Google to be one of their flagship news entities?

[Chip Chipperson]

Five million I think. But yeah, TYT now officially has Google backing them as a flagship news outlet for YouTube, which is bizarre for a 'nonpartisan' tech company that actually testified to it's total nonpartisanship before Congress not too long ago.

But sure we can trust them with monopoly control over the internet.

[loveconstitution1789]

Uygur, once a Republican, slowly transitioned away from the Republican Party and conservative politics, citing the decision to invade Iraq as a "seminal moment" in that transition. He is now a progressive. Uygur is a supporter of Bernie Sanders
-Wikipedia

HAHA. This guy became a Democrat because the RINOs and Democrats okayed the invasion of Iraq?

Uygur was born in Istanbul, Turkey, and emigrated with his family to the United States when he was eight years old....Uygur was raised in a secular Muslim household, but became more religious during college before becoming agnostic

It does not even say if this guy is a US citizen now. Guy is all over the place with who he is and he wants to convince Americans that being Socialist is best. Fuck this guy.

[Jerryskids]

Make sure you mention Bernie's idea that Castro's literacy program was a good thing. Like Bernie's free healthcare for all program, what the thing cost is of no relevance to judging whether something is good or bad in the mind of an economic illiterate, it's only a matter of good intentions. Castro meant well so the literacy program was a good thing regardless of how many generations of Cubans suffered and starved and died for it. It's always affordable when you're spending someone else's money, isn't it Bernie?

[John]

Trump not wanting to go to war with Russia is the worst thing ever because it shows how fond he is of evil totalitarian regimes. Bernie loving Castro is just him appreciating enlightened leadership and social welfare.

Don't you see how this works Jerry?

[De Oppresso Liber]

"Trump not wanting to go to war with Russia"

Holy fuck can you be more dishonest? Who suggested going to war with Russia? That's right, fucking no one. But you have to be this disingenuous because the truth doesn't look good for your cult, even when you try to dress it up.

How about, "Trump still won't acknowledge that Russia attacked our democratic elections in 2016 through monetary donations to GOP campaigns through the NRA and hacking of Trump's opponents. Trump and the GOP have done nothing to prevent Russia from attacking our elections again, and have in fact, blocked several election security bills, almost as if they welcome help from foreign adversaries."

[Ryan (formally HTT)]

The democrats, especially Hillary, in 2016. Try to keep up.

[DesigNate]

I’m sorry, what would the implementation of a no fly zone over Syria have done?

What have pieces of shit like you practically been foaming at the mouth for since 2016?

Yeah, that’s what I thought.

[I, Woodchipper]

Trump still won’t acknowledge that Russia attacked our democratic elections in 2016

The deranged fever dreams about Russians controlling american voters' minds through some laughable facebook ads just won't go away eh?

[loveconstitution1789]

+10000 John

[A leftist]

"Like Bernie’s free healthcare for all

Actually, the rich would be paying more.

[soldiermedic76]

Bullshit, we all will be paying more. And getting less care. You do know England rations it's care in able to try and keep it somewhat affordable, don't you? Oh and the pay much higher taxes too, for a much smaller country.

[De Oppresso Liber]

While I want to believe you, there are 22 studies that show that medicare for all would save everyone money. A lot of money.

https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/healthcare/484301-22-studies-agree-medicare-for-all-saves-money

[Squirrelloid]

That's an opinion piece that's selectively choosing rosy studies.

1. They're lying through their teeth. For example, they haven't factored in how no copays or other costs directly to the consumer will increase demand (because it will *appear* cheaper at point-of-sale). Not to mention they're not factoring in government incompetence and inefficiency. I mean, we've seen how the VA is run. So yeah, if you assume away all the inefficiencies and unintended consequences, it saves money...

2. They're also ignoring the likely knock-on effects of increased centralization. Obamacare caused a tidal wave of mergers in providers, including a massive reduction in the number of private practices. Medicare for All would likely have a similar or even more drastic effect.

3. They're comparing to the wrong baseline. Our current system is awful, no one disputes that. And not just Obamacare either - our health care system has been slowly rotting ever since they capped wages during WW2 (and therefore health care coverage became a typical job perk). The primary flaw (due to the unintended consequences of the ww2 policy) is that insurance companies work out private prices with providers, which makes pricing opaque to consumers, and destroys any real market for healthcare. Thus the market can't reduce prices, because there are no real prices. The whole system has to be dismantled and liberalized - health care providers should be barred from communicating directly with insurance (the consumer should be the nexus of health care billing and insurance claims) and required to publicly post the price for all care (and banned from having multiple separate prices). The only real way to decrease health care costs is a free and fair market where consumers can make informed and transparent decisions. (And while we're at it, insurance should only cover non-routine health care costs. Insuring against routine care is nonsense).

4. They ignore the costs of locking into a particular healthcare model, because once healthcare is controlled by the government, innovation in how care is delivered becomes impossible. (ie, see Bastiat's parable on the seen and the unseen).

5. They ignore how government is especially susceptible to lobbying by special interests. This is a prime example of focused benefits and dispersed costs (something which already afflicts health care laws today).

6. They ignore how local and state regulations encourage monopolies which drive up prices. Certificate of Need laws, for example.

7. Finally, they ignore that health outcomes from programs like medicaid aren't any better than not having health care at all.

8. And let's not forget that medicare for all means all of everyone's health care is processed by the government. If you imagine for a second that the national security apparatus won't have access to everyone's detailed medical billing (and thus medical history by proxy), i've got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

[Gray_Jay]

Thank you for the excellent writeup, Squirrelloid. I'm going to use a few of these on some lefties who might listen. They at least claim to be science-directed anyway...

Posts like yours make visiting the comments worthwhile.

[soldiermedic76]

Since it doesn't work in any other country (e.g. they end up paying more and get less when you factor in all the taxes they pay) I will instead take a hypothetical study based upon faulty assumptions so I can continue my view of the world through Rose colored lenses... There I fixed your post for you.

[soldiermedic76]

Also for someone who supposedly is against tyranny, can you think of a faster route to tyranny then giving the government power over your health?

[TrickyVic (old school)]

Room 101 doesn't work the same without access to your mental health records.

[TrickyVic (old school)]

""While I want to believe you, there are 22 studies that show that medicare for all would save everyone money. A lot of money. ""

Are you going to fall for that line again after the Affordable Care Act failed to save costs as advertised?

Government can't even build a single rail line on budget.

[ElvisIsReal]

Or a couple of bike racks :/

[I, Woodchipper]

If you believe that, I have some Venezualan beach property to sell you.

[Sevo]

Just for you, leftist fucking ignoramus:
That wonderful UK system (which anyone who can afford it dodges; it’s Non Healthcare System for those who would rather be cheap than healthy):
“NHS brings in three month minimum waiting times despite warnings patients will suffer ”
[…]
“NHS officials have introduced new limits which mean patients in some parts of the country will be made to wait at least three months for routine surgery, such as hip operations and cardiac procedures.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/02/18/nhs-brings-three-month-minimum-waiting-times-despite-warnings/
Note that the wait time is the government-claimed chance for your mom (who should have aborted you) to die, thereby reducing their case-load:
“…will be made to wait *AT LEAST* three months…”

[Longtobefree]

Has anyone calculated the unemployment rate on day three of Bernie's reign?
You know, after he eliminates private health insurance companies and fracking companies and the coal industry?
I would say the unemployment payments would bankrupt the country, but all the free stuff will have done that on day one.

[Colossal Douchebag]

It's gonna be an entertaining year. I've always loved gawking at roadside carnage.

[Brandybuck]

He won fucking Nevada. A state known for blackjack and hookers. No need to be freaking out over Bernie winning a primary in the 32nd smallest state. Sheesh.

[lap83]

the Reason Roundtable podcast dissects the panic attacks among MSNBC anchors, conservative commie-haters, and the bipartisan establishment elite.

People need to stop panicking about the prospect of the first unapologetically communist president. I mean, at least he's not Trump.

[John]

I am puzzled by the term "conservative commie haters". Does reason think only conservatives hate commies? Aren't Libertarians supposed to hate communists too?

If the new Socialist paradise comes with open borders, pot and lots of state sanctioned sodomy, I get the feeling the reason staff is going to be just great with it.

[lap83]

Maybe they subscribe to some bizarre libertarian-ish reverse-marxist view that society needs to go full-socialist before we transition to libertopia.

[John]

Going full socialist and then transitioning to libertopia is Marxism. A government free anarchy is the end stage of Marxism.

yeah, that is probably what at least some of them think and I bet they also think they are not Marxists.

[DH]

I'll be interested to see if the mask finally slips here at reason or they just rip it damn well off . Fairly certain most reason writers will support Comrade Sanders if he makes it to the white house.

[Mother's lament]

Yeah. They'll line up behind whoever gets the Democrat nomination like the good little troopers they are.
Of, course a few of them will pretend to support whomever ends up as the LP candidate, but their mentions of them will be sparse while their praises of the Dem candidate will be effusive. Meanwhile, in the privacy of the voting booth they'll pull the right lever like little bien pensants.

[Fat Mike's Drug Habit]

I'm not sure why it has the "conservative" qualifier on it either, anyone with two brain cells to rub together and even a simple understanding of history hates communists.

[JFree]

Everyone also hates orcs. And zombies. And especially commie zombie orcs.

[Chipper Morning Wood]

I don't hate orcs.

[loveconstitution1789]

^^^Orc lover

[Nardz]

Of course
Everything real despises him

[EISTAU Gree-Vance]

Yup, commies are every bit as fictional as zombies, eh J? Nothing to see here.

Haha

[Brett Bellmore]

Yeah, what's the deal here? They write that as though hating commies wasn't a natural thing for anybody who values liberty AT ALL, let alone libertarians.

Hating commies is like hating mass murderers. But I repeat myself.

[loveconstitution1789]

unreason got their asses handed to them when the went all TDS after Trump kicked Hillary's ass.

They are not going to make the same mistake and finally admit that they are Marxists hiding as LINOs and Anarchists.

[UCrawford]

One of these idiots is going to publish an article with a "libertarian case for Bernie Sanders" theme. Just wait...it's going to happen.

They're so far around the bend with TDS that they're actually going to embrace socialism. Someone linked earlier to Gillespie actually pushing socialism.

[A leftist]

Sanders would be a great president from a libertarian perspective on civil liberties, foreign policy, the bloated military budget, arguably the environment, free speech, reproductive rights and probably more ways. He's a honest, smart and decent person. Trump is none of those things. You wouldn't buy a used car from a person like Trump and you know it. Just give it some thought.

[John]

Nothing says liberty like organized national looting of private wealth and federal government control over every aspect of economic activity. And everyone knows socialist nations never go to war.

You called it dumb ass.

[A leftist]

Duu

[A leftist]

That's just not true John. Sanders is more like FDR on economic matters and completely unquestionably badass on civil liberties, foreign policy, the bloated military budget, arguably the environment, free speech and reproductive rights.

[DH]

Thats right. We forgot that this time they'll get it right. Communism is just so hard to get perfect.

[Colossal Douchebag]

Funniest post of the day-- you used "Sanders" and "badass" in the same sentence.

Apart from that, you are boring, and an asshole.

[Chipper Morning Wood]

The only time that should be used in a sentence is:
"Sanders tries 22 different kinds of hemorrhoid creams for his bad asshole, and now he is sweating."

[Fat Mike's Drug Habit]

No one needs 22 different kinds of hemorrhoid cream.

[NoVaNick]

Leftist sounds a lot like Rev Kirkland or OBL. I smell a sock puppet

[Fats of Fury]

I suspect it's the Oklahomo kid.

[soldiermedic76]

How is the green new deal even close to being a libertarian principle? And you do know which country FDR copied most of his economic policies from, don't you?
What is his stance on free speech? Doesn't he support things like punishing social media, ending citizens united etc?
No, he is a typical leftist on the military budget, cut to just cut but not end the actual wasteful spending. Instead he will hurt troop training and preparedness. Just like everyone of his predecessors. He won't eliminate the wasteful spending or wasted time with mandatory touchy feely training, because he fully supports that. It will be training, equipment and troop numbers that suffer. Typical leftist, refusing to actually address the issue but offering empty talking points.
You list freedom of speech separate from civil liberties, but that is one of the most important civil liberties. Also, how do you square his stance on gun control with respect of civil liberties? Or his wanting to control people's property with civil liberties? Taxing people to keep them from getting to wealthy seems hardly congruent with civil liberties either. Taxing inheritance, nope. In fact, I doubt you included personal property or any of the rights in the Bill of Rights in your assessment of his "badass" reputation on civil liberties. No, to you civil liberties is a narrow, politically correct set of standards, and to fuck with personal property and basic rights such as the right to defend yourself.

[Chipper Morning Wood]

Bullshit. Sanders is enamored with dictators that trampled free speech and civil liberties. But hey, Castro had a literacy program.

[loveconstitution1789]

Sanders is going to put Japanese-Americans in internment camps?

That is pretty FDR of Sanders.

[DesigNate]

No no, this time the internment camps will be for EVERYBODY.

[DH]

It's like you guys dont even try anymore.

[A leftist]

It's like you're brainwashed.

[soldiermedic76]

Really? This from the person who only ever parrots talking points and proudly calls himself a leftist. Self reflection is not one of your strong suits I see.

[TrickyVic (old school)]

And will post an out right lie, like inserting Trump's name when the articles clearly say Obama.

[DH]

Brainwashed to believe what, that promising magical free shit is a sure path to a stable economy and growth generation. And what, puppies and kitties no way.

[damikesc]

"Sanders would be a great president from a libertarian perspective on civil liberties"

Hmm, Socialists are long known as being rock solid on civil liberties. No limitations on speech at all. Gun ownership. Free association.

"arguably the environment"

Ever SEEN a Socialist country?

Look at pictures of East and West Germany right after the wall dropped to see the difference.

"free speech"

Sure. Once we stop that horrible "hate speech", it will all be golden.

"He’s a honest, smart and decent person."

Honest? Didn't he oppose open borders just four years ago?
Smart? He still thinks Marxism WORKS. Nothing worse than a 78 yr old moron.
Decent? Based on what?

[The Knuckle]

I am sympathetic to this view. I didn’t vote for Trump (or Hillary). The example of Trump I use is this, I would trust Obama with my teenage daughter if I had one, Trump; no Effin’ way. The best thing about a Bernie or Tulsi presidency would probably be the foreign policy and inability to get anything done domestically.

[UCrawford]

The best thing about a Bernie or Tulsi presidency would probably be the foreign policy and inability to get anything done domestically.

That's an incredible foolish bet to make when you're talking about someone who gives zero shits about the law or the Constitution and would happily ignore both just to push socialism.

Socialists wield power enthusiastically when they get it and usually refuse to give it up peacefully. And trusting Congress to keep him in check? That's like expecting your toddler to protect your home from burglars...they'll roll over for President Sanders just like they did for Obama. Especially the Republicans who hated Trump and only went along with him because they didn't want to lose their jobs.

[bsmith]

Suderman has full on Sanders Derangement Syndrome in this one

[Diane Reynolds (Paul.)]

conservative commie-haters,

Like Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.

[John]

Yes. He would be one of them. And I doubt the reason staff has much use for or respect for the late writer.

[Colossal Douchebag]

WALLS CLOSING IN!1!1!!1!1!!!

Sorry, wrong freakout.

[damikesc]

"conservative commie-haters"

Libertarians are OK with Commies?

Why?

[NashTiger]

There is nothing libertarian about Reason anymore. Just Orange Man Bad

[De Oppresso Liber]

"I haven't changed; everyone else has!"

Trump isn't a libertarian, he's not even a conservative. Don't be shocked when people recognize those facts, even when you don't.

[soldiermedic76]

And Sanders path is the path to serfdom and tyranny. Don't be surprised when everyone else realizes these things but you.

[Nardz]

Says the "non" partisan pimping for nationalized healthcare

[Weigel's Cock Ring]

“The Libertarian Case for Bernie Sanders”, coming soon to a formerly libertarian publication near you.

[Chipper Morning Wood]

The fuck would you know about libertarianism. You are a conservative.

[Nardz]

"Wash, my shallow reflexively-progressive impotent idea of libertarianism isn't shared by all!"
-eunuch

[Azathoth!!]

Listen, you pathetic leftist wannabe--

LIBERTarian. That part in caps refers to LIBERTY.

Individual liberty. Personal liberty.

And communism and all it's deformed offspring are diametrically opposed to it. At the most fundamental level.

Infants in the cradle understand that libertarianism is incompatible with the statism that is all things left wing.

The only people that deny it are the leftists who have infected Reason and the modern Libertarian Party in the Gramscian hope of destroying it--and they only do this because not doing so exposes their charade.

[Butler T. Reynolds]

But, the funny thing is, Orange Man actually IS bad -- as in incompetent blowhard bad, not Michael Jackson bad or Bond villain bad.

[Chipper Morning Wood]

Facts are for cucks.

[Nardz]

1. That's clearly not a fact, but an opinion
2. Eunuch aspires to being a cuck, but its hopeless

[Nonstopdrivel]

Sanders, like Ron Paul before him, is precisely the kind of candidate that runs away with caucuses. He dominated the Minnesota caucus in March 2016. Because the kind of people who show up to caucuses are fanatics with a lot of free time, and Sanders' supporters are mostly, well, fanatics with a lot of free time. Primaries, on the other hand, tend to favor the more conventional candidates, so I think the Sanderistas are in for a rude awakening on Super Tuesday.

[JFree]

Primaries, on the other hand, tend to favor the more conventional candidates

That's only partially true. Yes, primaries are overwhelmed by voters who simply don't think much about their vote. Their decision is guided by habit, media, and neighbors/acquaintances they trust. In most years that tends to favor the 'conventional' candidate because the media always favors the conventional and the neighbors/acquaintances cancel each other out. But this year - the media certainly is still favoring conventional - but the 'conventional' candidates have very little grassroots support. No one cares enough about any of them to talk with their neighbors about that. It is very probable that Sanders fans will totally dominate the latter group this year. Which greatly increases the odds of a Sanders surprise in the primaries.

The difference with the Ron Paul fans was that the RP fans were stunningly anti-social. They waved signs and did online nonsense but did not actually talk to real people and within the R's they preferred offending people than persuading them. That's why nothing was built on the initial online surge.

[Nonstopdrivel]

The difference with the Ron Paul fans was that the RP fans were stunningly anti-social.

I considered addressing this issue in my original post but decided against it. You're undeniably correct, however. Anyone who hung out in the Ron Paul circle between 2008 and 2012 well remembers how overrun were the ranks of his supporters with the uncouth, the dorks, the socially awkward and inept, and people on the autism spectrum. Even when I agreed with most of what they were peddling, it was incredibly uncomfortable just being around them. They were so utterly incapable of interacting and communicating with normal people that they became the movement's worst enemies, and worse, in driving potential allies away, they became the worst enemies of liberty.

[Chipper Morning Wood]

Most of those people are now Trump supporters.

[soldiermedic76]

Or Sanders. As surprising as it seems, a number of Sanders supporters once supported Paul.

[DRM]

Which is why Bernie lost in the NH primary, right?

[Nonstopdrivel]

As I mentioned in one of my comments prior to the New Hampshire primary, he had the home-court advantage there. His victory was a surprise to no one.

[DRM]

Home-court advantage is why Warren came in the top two in the NH primary, right?

Second, the NV "caucus" was mostly determined by advance votes, where people filled out a preferential ballot and handed it in rather than attend the caucuses. So neither of youur explanations actually explain NV, because it didn't require fanatics with free time to win, and he certainly wasn't benefiting from any home-court advantage.

Third, Sanders is currently leading the polls pretty much everywhere, and polls don't select for fanatics with free time. He's first in national polls and in the state polls in Super Tuesday states California, Massachusetts, Maine, North Carolina, Texas, Utah, Vermont, and Virginia. He's second in Minnesota, where he's only two percentage points behind favorite daughter Klobuchar, and also second in pre-Super Tuesday South Carolina. In the singleton Arkansas and Oklahoma polls, he's third, and nowhere else has any polling from even this year.

Sanders is not a caucus-only splash; he's the legitimate Democratic front-runner.

[loveconstitution1789]

I for one can't wait for Bernie to win the Democrat nomination and lose his ass off to Trump election 2020.

[soldiermedic76]

When you have 6 or more competitors it just takes a dedicated group of fanatics to put you in the lead. Votes are a finite resource. And Sanders leads but his lead is usually around about a third of potential voters in most states. That means his lead, even in polling, is from a dedicated group of fanatics. Nothing you stated disputes this analysis. Put it another way, 70% give or take in most states want someone other than Sanders. As he piles up wins, yes this will change, but that will be more bandwagon effect then popularity.

[The Knuckle]

Hey, I don’t have free time and caucused for RP in MN.

[Butler T. Reynolds]

"Open borders? That's a Koch brothers proposal." --Bernie Sanders
https://youtu.be/vf-k6qOfXz0?t=24

Is OpenBordersLiberal-tarian actually Bernie's troll account?

[Squirrelloid]

All good people are commie haters.

I find it hard to blame the MSM for freaking out over a Sanders candidacy. It's the moral equivalent of Emperor Palpatine being up for supreme chancellor. Arguably, the MSM isn't worried enough.

Also, post transcripts! No one's got time to listen to people talk online for an hour, especially when it would probably be a 15-minute read, tops.

[Antsinmyeyeswilson]

You are all just as ignorant as all of the other people you're talking shit about. That, and you seem to think that people can understand anything that is being said - when everyone is talking at the same time. I subscribed to this podcast to see if it was any good. I'm just as quickly unsubscribing, because it is fear-mongering propaganda bullshit.

[JeremyR]

I think everyone should be freaking out that a communist might be elected president.

What's even scarier is that there seems to be a push back against those freaking out about potentially electing a communist.

[MasterThief]

What's sad is that we have "libertarians" here making that case. They really need to do some soul searching to justify why they think Trump is an authoritarian and further why they consider him as bad or worse than an avowed socialist.
Bernie being in position to win the Democrat primary doesn't remotely surprise me. He should have been their nominee in 2016. The party has temperamentally been there for over a decade and I've been alarmed about it for years. For some reason, Reason is more afraid of a Republican party that keeps shifting left than an extreme left party that is surging left.

[Brett Bellmore]

I don't think it's hard, coming from a genuinely libertarian perspective, to see Trump as an authoritarian. He IS one, on any libertarian scale.

The problem here is a lack of proportionality: Trump, while an authoritarian, is about the least authoritarian guy who could plausibly be elected in America at the moment. I mean, look at how Rand Paul did in the 2016 primaries; He didn't even last long enough to give me a chance to vote for him here in SC! And Paul is about as libertarian as is marginally viable in American politics above a very local level.

Trump comes off as practically an anarchist compared to anybody competitive in the Democratic primaries. The race is shaping up to be between Trump and either an outright Communist, or a billionaire control freak who never met a civil liberty he didn't want to violate.

We're going to elect an authoritarian President this year. The only real question is, authoritarian, or AUTHORITARIAN!!!!.

Trump's the lower case one, no question.

[soldiermedic76]

But Trump has raised tariffs on countries that already had high tariffs and trade barriers on the US, actually enforces border and immigration laws and said mean things about Mueller and other members of the perpetual swamp, don't you get it? And we can take some out of context selective quotes to make it seem like he is a meanie who craves violence. Oh and he hasn't gotten out of Afghanistan as quickly as we would like.

[soldiermedic76]

Because just pull out without any planning is a perfectly legitimate strategy, even if it results in greater casualties.

[NoVaNick]

Agree about Trump-his “authoritarianism” is mostly bluster. While Bernie might embrace authoritarian socialist regimes, he would not have been consistently re-elected by the people of Vermont, perhaps one of the more libertarian-leaning US states, were he a true authoritarian. The real danger for us is Bloomberg, who not only delights in authoritarianism, but has a proven record of extending his power and using the police to rough up those he disapproves of.

[John]

While Bernie might embrace authoritarian socialist regimes, he would not have been consistently re-elected by the people of Vermont, perhaps one of the more libertarian-leaning US states, were he a true authoritarian.

Have you ever been to Vermont? Are you kidding me. It was totally taken over by the worst leftist garbage back in the 70s. It is an incredibly authoritarian and leftist state. It is not New Hampshire.

[NoVaNick]

I am originally from Mass., so am very familiar with Vermont and NH. Vermonters do tend to skew left but are fond of weed and guns, hence why Bernie voted against the assault weapons ban 25 years ago and has favored pot legalization from before it was cool. Not saying he is a libertarian by any means, but you can’t really call him authoritarian.

[Gray_Jay]

"but you can’t really call him authoritarian."

Really. Is he going to pay for his gargantuan government proposals with freely given donations then? Or is he going to have the IRS stick a gun in your ear and take most of your stuff to pay for all of his shit?

Goddamnit. Just because a candidate likes weed, and didn't care much about gun control (because he couldn't do anything about it if he did) does not mean he's not an authoritarian.

Everything that man wants to do here will require government forcing people to buy this, forcing people not to do that, and forcing people to think a certain way. Or else.

Communes can get away with hippie thinking like, "Hey man, that's cool if you don't want to do the dishes." Scale it up to countries, and you don't get a choice about not doing the dishes, if not doing the dishes means The Plan fails.

Marxists like Bernie Sanders are Utopians. And Utopians, without fail, end up paving the road to their heaven with the bones of their people.

[TrickyVic (old school)]

What's the odds Bernie would vote for an assault weapons ban now?

[NoVaNick]

I think most of Bernie’s ideas are batshit crazy and would never make it through Congress, or pass a constitutional test- a lot like Trump’s border wall.

[Brett Bellmore]

You don't ask for the odds of something that's already happened: From Bernie's own website:

"Take on the NRA and its corrupting effect on Washington.
Expand background checks.
End the gun show loophole. All gun purchases should be subject to the same background check standards.
Ban the sale and distribution of assault weapons. Assault weapons are designed and sold as tools of war. There is absolutely no reason why these firearms should be sold to civilians.
Prohibit high-capacity ammunition magazines.
Implement a buyback program to get assault weapons off the streets.
Regulate assault weapons in the same way that we currently regulate fully automatic weapons — a system that essentially makes them unlawful to own.
Crack down on “straw purchases” where people buy guns for criminals.
Support “red flag” laws and legislation to ensure we keep guns out of the hands of domestic abusers and stalkers
Ban the 3-D printing of firearms and bump stocks"

[Dude24]

"... Vermont, perhaps one of the more libertarian-leaning US states..."

Couldn't be further from the truth. Vermont is ranked 45th freest state in the US by Cato, i.e. NOT FREE.

While the state has its strengths on freedom, they are overshadowed by hard-to-overlook weaknesses:

"Vermont is one of the highest-tax states in the country. It also looks extremely fiscally centralized, with state government taking 9.7 percent of adjusted personal income and local government taking just 2 percent. (...)

Vermont has fallen all the way to 48th on land-use and energy freedom, and one measure of local building restrictions based on “land use” prevalence in appellate court decisions shows a dramatic escalation in restrictiveness since 2000. (...)

The state has not done much to restrain eminent domain for private gain.

One of the toughest renewable portfolio standards in the country was enacted in 2016.

On labor policy, the state has a very high minimum wage compared with local market wages, and it has been rising since 2010.

(...)

Vermont is one of the lowest states for alcohol freedom, with a state monopoly over wine and spirits retail and beer wholesaling.

Vermont took travel freedom with one hand and gave back more with the other in 2013–14, enacting a primary handheld cell phone ban, which research has shown to be useless. (...)

Vermont has almost no legal gambling.

(...)

Homeschool regulations are fairly tough.

Tobacco freedom is extremely low, with airtight smoking bans, vending machine and internet purchase restrictions, and high cigarette taxes."

https://www.freedominthe50states.org/

[YolandaJRobinson]

Google pay 120$ consistently my last pay check was $9200 working 10 hours out of every week on the web. My more young kin buddy has been averaging 15k all through ongoing months and he works around 23 hours consistently. I can’t confide in how straightforward it was once I endeavored it out.This is my primary concern.....Read MoRe

[Dude24]

Libertarians keep throwing away their right to vote, and then complain that the candidates on the menu are never to their liking. Well, yeah, because you DON'T voice your preferences of the menu. So naturally, it won't be to your liking, but to that of the partisan voters.

They think that, by not voting, they're helping strip the parties or politicos of their legitimacy. Newsflash: Life and politics will go on with or without you. Only difference is, with your votes, they will go on in a direction that's a little more liberty-oriented and a little more to your liking.

[Dude24]

I'll add this. It'd be one thing to vote on the primaries (of any level of government), and then abstain in the general because neither of the nominees satisfied your threshold for an acceptable candidate. That's fair enough.

At least, then, you could say, "Listen, I gave my vote to the liberty guy, but I got outvoted by the statists so the statist guy won. Therefore, I'm no longer participating in this charade between two statists." I can respect that.

But for God's sake, stop trying to dissuade people from voting in at least the primaries, because that's where the ideological future of the party is really shaped, and that's where the libertarian's vote is most needed. And we need one of the two parties to go solidly in that direction.

And very often, the Liberty Guy does win the nomination, and goes on to win the election, because the liberty people bothered to pick him in the primaries. Matt Gaetz is a prime example of that. Stop trying to dissuade these people from voting.

[Cy]

Given the rapid spreading of the Coronavirus and it's high mortality rate for the elderly, I think this conversation may be moot.

If Corona gets loose in the US, we're looking at a heavy mortality rate for our Federal Representatives and candidates in every branch, simply because of their age. By no means am I advocating for his demise, I'm just pointing out the likelihood of someone constantly attending rallies with thousands of people, in his condition, does not bode well for him.

[Gordon Hilgers]

With the libertarian freak-out about "socialism", something I've found they continually and incorrectly define, I've got a question for all the libertarian geniuses in the room:

If the final goal for communism is for the state to wither away, isn't libertarianism the best way to get there?

Another question:

Who'd have thought that your neighborhood vegetable cooperative is a sign of "wildly oversized government"?

Sorry, folks. If you can't correctly define socialism, you really should stay out of the game. Educate yourselves first, and then whine.

[Brett Bellmore]

"If the final goal for communism is for the state to wither away, isn’t libertarianism the best way to get there?"

Start with a false premise, end with a false conclusion. If the final goal of communism really was for the state to wither away, you'd see less dictatorship and more withering. Communism is a con run by the people at the top, with the goal being their getting absolute power over their fellow men. If you think the goal is anything else, you're self-identifying as one of the marks.

[tlapp]

Bernie is the only honest democrat. The rest support most of what he is peddling. Bloomberg was the only one to defend capitalism and was loudly booed at the prior debate. But he does want to tell you what kind of soda to buy and to throw you up against a wall to be searched if you don't look right.