Reason: Bernie Sanders, First Libertarian Socialist?

Well, the article makes a good point.
It goes on to pose this question:

So, when it comes down to what increasingly seems to be the only three realistic possibilities for Leader of the Free World in 2016—Hillary, Jeb, or Bernie—who would libertarians feel most comfortable with, for four more years?

Sanders is running on abject authenticity. I gotta say, I miss having someone so authentic in the race - someone who is going to say what he thinks needs to be said regardless of how it affects his poll numbers.

If the choice is between those three, well, I'm gonna refer to Hayek's definition of the Rule of Law - that the governing body absolutely has to be predictable. You need to be able to anticipate the actions of the state. And Sanders is certainly predictable.

I've stated before that I'm pretty sure not even the Gestapo nor the KGB would walk up to people randomly and gun them down in the street in a hail of 200+ bullets if they didn't think their conversation partner was showing the proper deference to their authority. In that sense, I believe that our state is less predictable than theirs were.

So I'm not really all that fearful of a man who openly wants to bring hard core communism to the US. If he says he's going to do it, he believes it, and we know what to expect and can plan for it.

I'm way, way more scared of a lot of the running Republicans than I am of Sanders.
 
Yep, something to be said about that.

One of the very worst aspects of the tyranny we find ourselves under now is its utter randomness and, on the surface at least, insanity.

Sanders would be predictable.

Sanders is running on abject authenticity. I gotta say, I miss having someone so authentic in the race - someone who is going to say what he thinks needs to be said regardless of how it affects his poll numbers.

If the choice is between those three, well, I'm gonna refer to Hayek's definition of the Rule of Law - that the governing body absolutely has to be predictable. You need to be able to anticipate the actions of the state. And Sanders is certainly predictable.

I've stated before that I'm pretty sure not even the Gestapo nor the KGB would walk up to people randomly and gun them down in the street in a hail of 200+ bullets if they didn't think their conversation partner was showing the proper deference to their authority. In that sense, I believe that our state is less predictable than theirs were.

So I'm not really all that fearful of a man who openly wants to bring hard core communism to the US. If he says he's going to do it, he believes it, and we know what to expect and can plan for it.

I'm way, way more scared of a lot of the running Republicans than I am of Sanders.
 
They do have a point. If it comes down to a choice between a socialist and neocon warmonger, I would give serious consideration to going for Sanders. My reasoning is I'd rather Sanders give away free crap than some idiot like Trump start WW3.
 
They do have a point. If it comes down to a choice between a socialist and neocon warmonger, I would give serious consideration to going for Sanders. My reasoning is I'd rather Sanders give away free crap than some idiot like Trump start WW3.

I'd never vote for him, and give my tacit approval to that, however.

Because, as we both know, none of it is "free"...it's stolen merchandise.

Based on where things stand right now, I'll be writing in Ron Paul, again.
 
Reason said:
So, when it comes down to what increasingly seems to be the only three realistic possibilities for Leader of the Free World in 2016—Hillary, Jeb, or Bernie—who would libertarians feel most comfortable with, for four more years?

In what world does Jeb Bush look like the GOP presidential nominee, as of now, September 2015?

Since when did Reason push the 'lesser evil' line? Not that a nutjob socialist is even a 'lesser' evil.
 
If my choice is between Sanders and Bush, I'm just going to stay home. Screw this country if that's the choice its going to give me.

Anybody who is thinking of voting for Sanders JUST BECAUSE HE'S AUTHENTIC is woefully misguided. Who here wants to vote for Charles Manson? I hear he was pretty genuine.
 
They do have a point. If it comes down to a choice between a socialist and neocon warmonger, I would give serious consideration to going for Sanders. My reasoning is I'd rather Sanders give away free crap than some idiot like Trump start WW3.

Is there some kind of law that says that you have to vote for either the (R) or the (D) candidate?
 
Randal must have done better in that last debate than I thought; what with the recent horseshit coming out since then.

I'm guessing that Rand's internal polling got a noticeable boost after that last debate, particularly in Iowa and New Hampshire, that is specifically being suppressed by the official media polls by targeting demographics hostile to Rand. I don't think Rand is quite in the lead, but I wouldn't be surprised if his internal polling is showing him in 3rd or 4th place right now.
 
Back
Top