How Trump and Harris Meaningfully Differ

Plus: A listener asks the editors if there are closet Trump voters within the halls of Reason.

Audio Player

00:00

00:00

00:00

Use Up/Down Arrow keys to increase or decrease volume.

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

:15 :15

Download

How Trump and Harris Meaningfully Differ

HD Video Download

In this week's The Reason Roundtable, editors Matt Welch, Katherine Mangu-Ward, Nick Gillespie, and Peter Suderman convene one week ahead of the election to highlight a few issues where the major-party presidential candidates have significant differences.

01:53—The presidential candidates on tariffs, debt, foreign policy, and education

35:01—Weekly listener question

43:38—Election integrity ahead of next week's election

52:43—This week's cultural recommendations

Mentioned in this podcast:

"How To Avoid Paying Tariffs? Have a Friend in Washington," by Eric Boehm

"Perils of Broad Presidential Power Over Tariffs," by Ilya Somin

"Trump's Destructive Tariff Proposals Will Make Us All Poorer," by J.D. Tuccille

"Where Is Trump's Plan To Cut Spending?" by Eric Boehm

"Trump, Harris Ads Make Clear They Won't Be Cutting Government," by Christian Britschgi

"Democratic Platform Attacks Trump for Not Going to War," by Matthew Petti

"Party of COVID-19 Authoritarianism Improbably Rebrands as 'Party of Freedom'," by Matt Welch

"Show Us Your Votes, Cowards!" by Matt Welch

"How Are Reason Staffers Voting in 2024?"

"American Elections Are a Mess, and They Always Have Been," by Eric Boehm

"Placing Harris and Trump Tax Plans in Historical Context," by Erica York and Nicolo Pastrone

"Why Americans are worried about voter fraud but have faith in their own elections," by Matt Loffman

"Spending is the best measure of the size and scope of government," by Nick Gillespie

"How the World Works Podcast with Nick Gillespie," by Kevin Williamson

"New York abstains, courteously," 1776

1776: Original trailer

Ben Schiller, Coindesk archive

Upcoming Events:
Reason Speakeasy: Martin Gurri, November 18, 2024

Send your questions to [e-mail]. Be sure to include your social media handle and the correct pronunciation of your name.

Today's sponsors:

• From Greek philosophers, who are the wellspring of democratic ideals, to America's founding fathers to contemporary critics who question everything: each is welcome at St. John's College—where students encounter Adam Smith and Karl Marx; St. Augustine and Friedrich Nietzsche; James Baldwin and Virginia Woolf. Here, there are no secondary sources, no experts, and no one telling you what to believe. Rather, there are original sources and a community devoted to collaborative inquiry, intellectual humility, and the discomfort that comes from diverse opinions. Explore 3,000 years of human thought on campuses in Santa Fe, New Mexico, and Annapolis, Maryland. For Master's degree candidates, we also offer studies in the great texts of the East, in-person or online. Learn more at SJC.edu/reason.
• In an election year, getting overwhelmed by the constant buzz of news and opinions is easy. Understanding the true impact of political events can be a challenge. Not Another Politics Podcast, from the University of Chicago Harris School of Public Policy, provides clear, research-driven perspectives on the biggest issues. Get the insights you need to truly understand the political landscape—no spin, just facts. Subscribe today at harris.uchicago.edu/napp or look for Not Another Politics Podcast wherever you get your podcasts.

Audio production by Ian Keyser
Assistant production by Hunt Beaty
Music: "Angeline," by The Brothers Steve

• Video Editor: Ian Keyser
• Producer: Hunt Beaty

What are we consuming this week?

Nick Gillespie

• Happenstance: A Play About Bitcoin, Love, and Freedom, by Ben Schiller

Katherine Mangu-Ward

• The Radium Girls: The Dark Story of America's Shining Women (Harrowing Historical Nonfiction Bestseller About a Courageous Fight for Justice) by Kate Moore

Peter Suderman

• Strange Darling

Matt Welch

• Thomas Jefferson

---

Comments

[Rick James]

Plus: A listener asks the editors if there are closet Trump voters within the halls of Reason.

I suspect closet Oliver voters, 100%. Because Harris? Really? After 4 years of Harris, still Harris? I refuse to accept it.

[BigT]

Maybe one or two. But most are just cowards - they know Trump is the better option, but must virtue signal.

As long as they are in DC they will be absorbing fecal matter floating in The Swamp.

[Dillinger]

>>Because Harris? Really?

some people lead with Full Retard, I know I know ... America

[mad.casual]

closet Oliver

Are we talking about the same Oliver?

Oh, you mean the people supporting him are in the closet about their support for him...

Are we talking about the same Oliver?

[Mother's Lament]

Jeff and Sarc said were not allowed to say gay or something.

[Fire up the Woodchippers! (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

I thought all the Oliver voters were out of the closet?

[Gaear Grimsrud]

I heard that Oliver is out of the closet.

[Don't look at me!]

JD Vance was wrong about closets.

[AT]

I don’t.

You’re forgetting the fact that most people - left AND right - don’t vote for representative government anymore. They vote their cowardice. It doesn’t matter who the candidates are to most people. It matters who they’re not. It doesn’t matter who they are, it doesn’t matter what they stand for, it doesn’t matter what they’re promising, it doesn’t even matter their established track record – they don’t care. They vote against a perceived enemy. Their own candidates are all just empty suits at this point – and the farther downballot it goes, the truer it gets. It’s blind partisanship.

And this is especially true for anyone that’s bought into the Marxist critical theory nonsense. Remember – these are people who will side with literal terrorists because they perceive decapitated Israeli babies as “the oppressors” in their simplistic view of it all. If they perceive Republicans the same way, then they’ll vote for whomever their empty suit is. They don’t care.

Remember – the most important consideration for them is that it’s not Trump. Now, they may pretend to take an oh-so-righteous stand and vote for Oliver for President, but I’ll bet every dollar I have that most of them will blindly check “D” on every other candidate on their ballot – as well as side with the left-wing side of any ballot question – especially because most of them won’t HAVE a libertarian option. And you know why it’s easy to suspect that? What are the Chase Oliver campaign’s two biggest selling points: LGBTPedo and abortion.

Meaning, effectively, still Harris. Because it’s all the same ideology, policy, and plans. Harris-supporting Congressmen, Harris-supporting governors, Harris-supporting assemblies and school boards and mayors and sheriffs. Harris is the face of Democrat Party. And regardless of how much they may dislike that face, they still support everything it stands for.

So, yea, after four years of Harris – while they may not be supporting Harris in name, not a single one of their articles even remotely suggests they’re deviating from “still Harris.”

[Mother's Lament]

"but I’ll bet every dollar I have that most of them will blindly check “D” on every other candidate on their ballot – as well as side with the left-wing side of any ballot question – especially because most of them won’t HAVE a libertarian option.""

100%

[Commenter_XY]

Yes.

[LIBtranslator]

Lizard Wolfe, the sTrumpette infiltraitor brags about supporting the girl-bullier. Ironically, the effect is much like the Beavis and Boothead clown duo trying to suck up to libertarians--and turning up as poster kids on looter agitprop.

[Night Watchman]

Respectfully, is there any issue that is important to you from a libertarian perspective besides abortion? And do you truly believe that no one could be anti-abortion because they believe it is the killing of an innocent (albeit unborn) human?

I don't understand why there is this urge to label people who disagree about abortion with these insulting labels. I truly believe that abortion involves the killing of an innocent child, and that as a result, it violates the NAP and virtually every other possible code of ethics people should adopt. You, I assume, don't believe it is a person that is being killed. We can make social, ethical, or scientific arguments, but in the end, I think that represents the crux of our disagreement.

If you agreed with me that it was a child, I assume you would agree that it should be illegal to do so. If I agreed with you that it wasn't a child, it would be completely inappropriate for the government to be involved. Isn't that the issue? Can't we disagree on that without impugning each other's motives?

And, going back to my first question- is there any way besides her views of abortion that you can say Harris is remotely more libertarian than Trump?

[Chumby]

Hank posting here is his revenge on the world for him not being aborted.

[Rick James]

Nothing creepier than a dude whose single issue is clumps-of-cells killing.

[Ersatz]

agreed

plus – NWatchman, your question is exactly mine when hank and all the other aborto-fetishists post here.

I say 'aborto-fetishist' only because of the way they attack those whose opinions differ (as you noted, with name calling and poorly disguised hatred).

[BigT]

Gwyneth Paltrow (vomit) in Thomas Jefferson. Reason enough not to watch.

[Dillinger]

>>The presidential candidates on tariffs

jeebus you guys all play the one-note flugelhorn?

[Chumby]

They may have a two-seven off suit, but they are told to play the hand.

[JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

Pay attention to 50B in government costs. Ignore trillions in government regulatory costs. The new Reason mag.

[shadydave]

Of course. The single issue Harris might be marginally better than Trump (and as things play out might not be) on from a libertarian perspective and it's the leadoff hitter. Such a shock.

[Sandra (formerly OBL)]

"A listener asks the editors if there are closet Trump voters within the halls of Reason."

Really? I suspect Reason is full of people who are desperate to see Harris win, but didn't want to admit voting for her in "How will Reason staffers vote in 2024?" Because you just didn't want to deal with the inevitable "strategically and reluctantly" quips for the next 4 years.

Honestly if I were a Koch-funded libertarian I'd vote Harris. A Trump victory would represent a middle finger aimed at your signature issue (open borders), whereas a Harris win would merely disappoint you in mild ways like "Aw shucks, the government still spends too much."

[Chumby]

Sandy reading the code in the matrix again.

[Gaear Grimsrud]

whereas a Harris win would merely disappoint you in mild ways like “Aw shucks, the government still spends too much.”
Well that and WW3.

[Overt]

For all the negative publicity that Tucker's "Bad girl" speech has garnered, I think he touched on a key mechanism earlier in that rant. He basically said that the Media and left have fought tooth and nail to declare Trump off-limits. Their strategy has been to convince people that if they like Trump- or any of his positions- they must be a racist and a weirdo.

I think we are seeing in the polls that this is changing very quickly. People are realizing that it is okay to have right of center politics, and they shouldn't feel shamed about it. It is reminiscent of the preference cascade that followed the gay marriage decision.

I think Wolfe was an interesting first step, and I wouldn't be surprised to find that a couple of the "I'll vote Oliver" people wouldn't be terribly disappointed by a Trump victory.

Certainly KMW will be happy as it allows her to run her endless click bait headlines.

[Commenter_XY]

Sandra....what happened to #CheaplaboroverallforKoch ? 🙂

I miss the side-splitting, hilarious parody

[LIBtranslator]

The Libertarian Platform of 1972 called for NOT coercing doctors and forcing women to labor at unwanted reproduction. As soon as that electoral vote was counted, the Nixon Court realized that enslaving women was a suicide plank. Job seeking republicans are understandably eager to shift attention elsewhere in fear of a splintered Tea Party draining spoiler votes. Like George Wallace girl-bulliers in 1972 and the Klan in 1928, Teatalitarians were welcomed as assets by God's Own Prohibitionists.

[Mr. JD]

It is not possible to have a libertarian bone in your body and vote Democrat.

[LIBtranslator]

Quoth the masked sheet-wearer...

[Stuck in California]

Just straight to the ad hominem?

You're getting lazy, Hank.

[DesigNate]

He’s always been lazy.

[Rick James]

Hey, on the...crap what was it... oh yeah, isidewith quizticle, I chose nearly 100% shrink government, let the private sector handle it, eliminate the department of x, on every question and I did the whole thing, and I got 88% Oliver, and 80% Trump. Hell, Chemjeff, who's a Democrat who cosplays as a Democrat and uses Libertarian pronouns got 57% Trump over 45% Harris.

[Chumby]

USA Today says it won't endorse a presidential candidate, becoming the 3rd major newspaper to do so.

Bellum Acta

Per another source, USA Today typically does not endorse a candidate though in 2016 their position was “Not Trump” and in 2020 it was for Biden.

[Gaear Grimsrud]

2016 and 2020 were atypical.

[Roberta]

I'm convinced they're for Trump but have been lying for years to please the money man.

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

One is accused of threatening a totalitarian state that imitates Hitler's Nazis. The other represents a totalitarian state that hates Jews.

Next question.

[chemjeff radical individualist]

The other represents a totalitarian state that hates Jews.

Would this be the same "totalitarian state that hates Jews" that continues to turn on the money printer for Israel in their war?

[Mother's Lament]

Earth-based screwed up. It should be totalitarian "administration", not state.

[chemjeff radical individualist]

Please tell us how the Biden admin "hates Jews" when they continue to fund Israel's war.

[damikesc]

Started to deny them weapons. Are openly taking Hamas side in the "we need peace" bullshit. Not cracking down on the college protests.

In what way do they ever support Jews?

[Overt]

Personally I can understand how a person would strategically vote for Trump, and 70% of the people in this country will probably have a better life when he is elected. (I can't understand the libertarian case for Harris, since her administration has demonstrated its willingness to be every bit as authoritarian as what people accuse Trump of being.)

That said, if you are going to put yourself up as a thought leader for the libertarian party, its kinda your job to support the libertarians. I think anyone claiming to speak for libertarian politics has taken on a duty beyond their own personal beliefs and they ought to be supporting the libertarian.

As a result, these Harris and Trump voters in the Reason staff perplex me.

Imagine taking a job in the advertising wing of a company and then going out there and talking about how you actually use the competitor. I am doubly annoyed by the Mises Caucus members who have declared open support for Trump. Again, if that is your personal belief, fine. But when you have campaigned for support in an institution and gathered support, you have signed yourself up as an officer of that movement, and you owe it to all the people you convinced to sign up to see it through.

If - as one of these officers in the libertarian movement- you believe in your heart that Trump or Harris is the better option, then you by definition believe that your movement is a failure and not living up to your ideals.

You should resign.

[Overt]

That said, I can understand to an extent, the columnists on Reason, since the editors themselves don't necessarily purport to be leaders in the movement (though folk like ENB and Brian Doherty sure seem to feel qualified to opine on what is best for the movement). On a case by case basis, I guess I can contemplate how an independent editor might be able to reconcile their support of the non libertarian with their employment at Reason. It is an iffy thing, though.

[Gaear Grimsrud]

Think you're confusing libertarian with Libertarian.

[Overt]

Well, I was speaking specifically of libertarian movements, of which there are several- Libertarian Party, Mises Caucus, etc. People identifying as leaders of those movements are the ones I feel should be held to a different standard, as they are given special standing as leaders. As I followed up, I am on the fence about whether we should consider Reason one of those movements.

[sarcasmic]

You're angry at Reason because they can't herd cats?

[JFree]

Libertarians like to consider themselves 'cats'. But there are differences between anti-social creatures like cats v anti-social creatures like a hermit Unabomber.

[Mother's Lament]

"Are there any conspiracists in the theater tonight?
Get them up against the wall!
There's one in the spotlight, he don't look right to me,
Get him up against the wall!
That one's Jewish Israeli!
And that one's a coon!
Who let all of this riff-raff into the room?"

[sarcasmic]

You'll be cheering when it's illegals and Democrats.

[Commenter_XY]

Shades of Roger Waters...

[LIBtranslator]

The Unabomber (a sock name) was a force-initiating collectivist like sockpuppet Jfree and most of the Orangopox carriers who crowd here to fling ordure. Read his manifesto. He'd fit right in at a mystical rally.

[JFree]

I don't know what you mean by a 'collectivist' - but the Unabomber would fit in well with the alt-right commenters here.

If our society had no social problems at all, the leftists would have to INVENT problems in order to provide themselves with an excuse for making a fuss. - Ted Kaczinski

[Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)]

Check your fallacies, dipshit. Kaczinski being paranoid and violent doesn't make him wrong about leftists.

[JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)]

Regime Libertarians as lou rockwell says.

[Marshal]

(I can’t understand the libertarian case for Harris, since her administration has demonstrated its willingness to be every bit as authoritarian as what people accuse Trump of being.)

Personally I'm enjoying the Harris supporters who characterize Trump's threats to charge his opponents with crimes as fascist not realizing their heroes have already done exactly that to Trump with their full support.

[Roberta]

Just because they call themselves the Libertarian Party doesn't mean they represent libertarians, any more than the Democrats represent people who believe in democracy, that Republicans represent those who believe in republicanism, or that the Green Party represents money, agriculture, or Jewish interests.

[Gaear Grimsrud]

Well without bothering to listen to this I can see from the links that tariffs are, as usual, the number one source of libertarian angst. A real economist and Trump skeptic, David Stockman did a deep dive into Trump's proposals which he correctly identifies as a radical proposal to completely alter the US tax code. Lots of numbers and statistics and graphs and shit. Conclusion? Better than the alternatives.
https://brownstone.org/articles/trumps-19th-century-solution-to-fiscal-disaster/

[LIBtranslator]

Katherine Mangu is the only one who consistently, year after year, reads the same kind of books I like to read.

[Chumby]

Hopefully she leaves some of them for you to color in.

[Rick James]

Lyndon LaRouche pamphlets?

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

The Children's Book of Mao.

[LIBtranslator]

As an activist for legalizing nuclear electricity I did analyze Fusion Magazine lectures claiming that no true nuclear energy advocate could possibly oppose shooting people in efforts to ban hemp leaves. I showed this to Petr Beckmann, who was totally unimpressed by Lyndon and likewise smelt a rat. I was in youth paid by governments to translate propaganda. The incentive sharpens one's sense of smell. Recently I found "incoherent" used in one of the Federalist debates, and wonder if the Larouchies copied it from there.

[LIBtranslator]

Suderman is deadweight.

[Rick James]

But no one would ever mistake him for a Republican!

[LIBtranslator]

The Unabomber didn't present as a republican either, but he did zigzag back and forth amid both looter party talking points like a pinball. Today Youtube offers a video titled "Why do Libertarians Love The Unabomber", and online babblings talk of how Elon Musk and Tucker Carlson fawn like jilted catamites over Unabomber screed. The day Suderman successfully apes Milei, both klepto-factions will, you can bet, hail him as a libertarian.

[Rick James]

About that cratering crime rate...

Washington sees 65% increase in car thefts, among highest in nation

The number of cars stolen each year in the United States is getting close to the 1 million mark.

According to a new report by LendingTree, vehicle thefts jumped nearly 14% nationwide from 2020 to 2022.

In Washington, thefts were up more than 65% in that time period. Oregon was also within the "Top 5" on the list, jumping more than 40%.

Three of the top 10 cities seeing the largest spike in the country are in Washington: Kennewick, Bremerton, and Wenatchee.

"We're talking about smaller places that we don't necessarily associate with big city problems like car thefts," said Rob Bhatt, LendingTree auto expert and insurance agent.

34 states saw theft rates increase with Vermont at the top of the list.

Not sure if these stats made it into Sullum's Access database, or might be on a page typed by an IBM Selectric III with a dodgy ribbon that he overlooked. Not sure.

[Rick James]

*adjusts glasses*

*lol snort* "Define, 'cratering', Mr. Sullum!"

[LIBtranslator]

Pick up on the Jesus Caucus sockpuppet presenting as a lexicographer!

[Rick James]

Ron Bailey hasn't reported this:

Scientists Announce Megyn Kelly Now Officially Aging In Reverse

U.S. — Scientists announced today that after extensive study, they can now confirm that famed media personality Megyn Kelly has begun aging in reverse.

"She's going full Benjamin Button," said researcher Dr. Mark Stanton. "Somewhere in her forties, Ms. Kelly's aging process completely stopped and has now begun reversing. It's a medical miracle."

Though certain of Kelly becoming younger, scientists remain baffled as to how to explain the mysterious reversal. "There is simply no precedent for this," said Dr. Stanton. "Megyn has clearly descended back into her thirties, will she go into her twenties? Has she literally discovered the fountain of youth? We just don't know what to make of it."

[Chipper Chunked Chile Con Congress (ex NCW)]

"Trump hasn't ever kept slaves."

[DesigNate]

I wonder if any of the many, many editors here have taken the isdiewith quiz. The results for most libertarians makes it quite clear how the candidates meaningfully differ.

[MasterThief]

I need to do that again this cycle. It doesn't change my vote, but it's interesting to see the percentages. In 2016 I got something like 92% Johnson, 86% Trump, and 4% Clinton.
It's necessary to choose the detailed responses, because they provide toi many leading questions. When I did the same quiz only doing minimal questions with basic answers it put me close to 50% Clinton.
I also want to see the results from Reason staff rather than their official endorsements. Willing to bet they'd have a high degree of agreement with Stein.

[Ersatz]

I always max out the questions - basically for that reason.

[LIBtranslator]

So another fake name now obfuscates the memory-holed Nolan Quiz?

[n00bdragon]

How Trump and Harris differ:

Both are big government liberals from big coastal cities, hated in their home towns, who have have never held a real job or amounted to anything important in their entire lives. Despite numerous scandals that hover around them, politically they keep inexplicably floating to the top not through any action of their own but simply because of the unforced errors that their opponents keep making and the inexplicable indifference of the masses to their myriad shortcomings, any single one of which would ordinarily be fatal to any other politician.

Oh, this was supposed to be about how they differ. Uh, one comes from California and one comes from New York.

[AT]

But which one is Hitler?

[LIBtranslator]

The Fuhrer is the one that quotes Wholly Bauble homilies exactly like Hitler did in the NSDAP program, Mein Kampf and in 9 out of ten speeches. Hitler sounded like Billy Sunday, Oral Roberts, Billy Graham, Jerry Falwell and Father Coughlin, not to mention James Larratt Battersby and infiltrating Jesus Caucus Trumpanzistas here in the commentariat. https://libertariantranslator.wordpress.com/2022/12/03/hitlers-christianity-from-nobeliefs-com/

[Commenter_XY]

@Reason....could you please, please, please start posting transcripts to these podcasts?!?!!

[jimntempe]

When Trump said he would put tarrifs on when he was president, and he did put them on, the "experts" just like in this podcast, said they would be ruinous. They worked so well Biden kept them. But here we go again, the guy who got it right before, Trump, will, according to today's experts, "ruin" things. Such blather.

Trump is so clearly the better candidate why do you people even do podcasts like this. The only thing any of you should be doing/saying is to scream from the top of your lungs that unless those within earshot are blathering morons the only rational choice in this election is Donald Trump. You can LOOK at his record, and you can LOOK at Harris's record. Trump's record is largely success at things that mattered while Harris/Biden record is largely one of failure... unless you love inflation and crippling debt and ever growing gvt and ever increasing taxes... all things that have NEVER worked as a strategy for success.

[LIBtranslator]

You'd think Ellie Muskovite could afford sockpuppets that can actually spell tariff... but no...

[LIBtranslator]

Does Suderman even know the LP has a competent, rational, rights-respecting candidate running? Has he any clue as to how spoiler vote clout made the 16th and 18th Amendments out of 2% spoiler vote party platforms?

[LIBtranslator]

“We will be able to immediately repeal and replace Obamacare. (Meaning pregnant women also having access to subsidized medical care from government licensed cartels). Have to do it. Because Obamacare has to be replaced and we will do it and we will do it very, very quickly.” — Trump, November 2016
Subsidized medical treatment for MEN does not trouble GOP politicians. And doctors, terrified of losing their licenses, reversed their testimony on entrance v. exit wounds when JFK was gunned down.

[LIBtranslator]

So the wind-up yapper who can't even make up his mind to vote is gonna 'splain how the looter kleptocracy works to libertarians able to support our own candidate and platform. Riiiight.

[It's only a paper moon, Nominalists]

"The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) recently announced that the 2024 fiscal-year federal budget deficit — the amount the government spent over and above what it received in total revenue — was $1.8 trillion. That makes the Biden-Harris administration by far the biggest deficit spenders in modern history."

[It's only a paper moon, Nominalists]

She is stupid, spineless,and can't talk...he is the opposite.