At This Point, Who Do We Want to Be the Next POTUS?

[r3volution 3.0]

With Rand out of the race, it's pretty obvious that whoever wins, from whichever party, is going to be horrible.

With respect to policy, I don't think it much matters who wins: they're all about the same on the important issues.

However, it could matter a great deal with respect to how the liberty movement is positioned going forward.

For instance, if a GOPer wins we may have to wait 8 years for another attempt at the Presidency (primarying a sitting President is rarely attempted, for good reason). On the other hand, a GOPer win carves out a bigger space for a conservative/libertarian opposition movement within the GOP, as developed in the latter years of the Bush administration (whereas, with a Democrat in office, the party tends to rally together, united by a common enemy). Another angle: if it's a GOPer, do we want somebody who pays lip service to libertarian positions (to give the ideas wider currency), or an overt establishment type (because a fake libertarian would just give libertarian ideas a bad name)? Lots of considerations...

...I don't yet have a definite opinion, myself.

Your thoughts?

 

[KEEF]

I don't care who the next POS is. Irony is that whoever the next POS is, he/she will be a P.O.S.

 

[69360]

I suppose it would be better if a Republican wins it because of scotus appointments.

But if Trump is the nominee, I won't vote for him.

 

[willwash]

Is the question who do we WANT to be POTUS or who among the "viable" candidates are we backing?

 

[CaptUSA]

Whatever happens, it won't be good.

I was thinking Sanders might be ok, because after 4 years of that BS, the populace would be screaming for the free market.
But then, do we really want this guy picking SC justices?!

I just hope that whoever wins, that the opposite party controls Congress and very very very very little gets done. (I should probably add a few more "very's")

 

[willwash]

Whatever happens, it won't be good.

I was thinking Sanders might be ok, because after 4 years of that BS, the populace would be screaming for the free market.
But then, do we really want this guy picking SC justices?!

I just hope that whoever wins, that the opposite party controls Congress and very very very very little gets done. (I should probably add a few more "very's")

I definitely agree that if you want to go with the "frog in the pot" argument, Bernie is by far the best candidate. Also gives Rand a change in 2020 if he wants to pursue it when he's not also up for Senate reelection.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

Is the question who do we WANT to be POTUS or who among the "viable" candidates are we backing?

The latter.

...though you don't have to plan on actually backing any of them.

I couldn't bring myself to actively support any of these jackasses, even if there'd be a marginal strategic advantage for the liberty movement in doing so.

It's more a question of who you'll root for as a largely disinterested spectator.

Last time, for instance, I was rooting for Obama, because I didn't want to have to wait 8 years to run Rand, but I did absolutely nothing to assist Obama.

 

[ProBlue33]

I really want a Sanders Verses Trump, I think it will force people on RPF to pick a side.
Because the ideology is so far apart. People say they feel like sitting this one out right now, but come Nov I see them saying &*(! it and picking a side, especially in swing states.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

NOBVS. (No one But Vermin Supreme)

 

[r3volution 3.0]

I really want a Sanders Verses Trump, I think it will force people on RPF to pick a side.
Because the ideology is so far apart. People say they feel like sitting this one out right now, but come Nov I see them saying &*(! it and picking a side, especially in swing states.

A Trump Presidency (pause to shudder in horror) would provide a great opportunity to reinvigorate the conservative-libertarian opposition w/in the GOP. And the obvious downside, of having to wait 8 years instead of 4 for another POTUS run of our own, may not apply in this case, as Trump's Presidency would be such a massive clusterfuck that it might be fairly easy to primary him in 2020.

On the other hand, of all the candidates, Trump is the one who most worries me on foreign policy: an impulsive egomaniac w/ his finger on the button?

....tough call

 

[Mad Raven]

Beyond a third party candidate, Sanders is probably the best bet to tide us over.

For one, the country is already marching towards socialism, and how much quicker could Bernie really take it without congressional support? He isn't gonna have much support from either party. Even party line Democrats believe in something of a market economy. He might even acknowledge Congress as a branch of government and not crown himself czar.

For another, even though his solutions suck, he does start the conversation about corporations owning politicians, and that's a good topic to be keep talking about.

 

[rg17]

We need to have a powerful revolution and start over and become like 1776 again!

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Nobody. Abolish the position.State secession is the best solution.

 

[Sentinelrv]

I've heard some Sanders supporters argue that he would push for campaign finance reform, which could potentially make it easier for Rand to compete if he decided to run again in 2020. Is there any truth to this?

 

[dude58677]

I say we take Stewart Rhodes approach which is call the Oathkeepers when your rights are being violated. Electoral politics is a massive failure as it is unbelievably corrupt.

 

[squirl22]

I would like to be potus and I am the only one, other than Rand, that I will vote for.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

We need to have a powerful revolution and start over and become like 1776 again!

Thoughtcrime reported.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Nobody. Abolish the position.State secession is the best solution.

Ur Thoughtcrime also reported to Big Sister.

 

[Dianne]

None of the above. I am so excited to get rid of that Muslim, ****** in the White House; equally as much as when I was excited to get rid of Bush, the Christian ****** in the White House. Let's start by destroying Mitch Mcconnell and Paul Ryan. Once we dump those two bastards, it might not matter who is in the White House. Once an honest Congress, the President won't be able to further the destruction of this once great country.

 

[Unknownuser]

With Rand out of the race, it's pretty obvious that whoever wins, from whichever party, is going to be horrible.

With respect to policy, I don't think it much matters who wins: they're all about the same on the important issues.

However, it could matter a great deal with respect to how the liberty movement is positioned going forward.

For instance, if a GOPer wins we may have to wait 8 years for another attempt at the Presidency (primarying a sitting President is rarely attempted, for good reason). On the other hand, a GOPer win carves out a bigger space for a conservative/libertarian opposition movement within the GOP, as developed in the latter years of the Bush administration (whereas, with a Democrat in office, the party tends to rally together, united by a common enemy). Another angle: if it's a GOPer, do we want somebody who pays lip service to libertarian positions (to give the ideas wider currency), or an overt establishment type (because a fake libertarian would just give libertarian ideas a bad name)? Lots of considerations...

...I don't yet have a definite opinion, myself.

Your thoughts?

We need a horrible democrat to win so we can have another shot with a conservative in 4 years. Let's all vote for Hillary. The Dems don't even want her!