Scorecard for undecided liberty voters -- Johnson vs Trump

euphemia said:
And for the record, this is Donald Trump's first move into politics.
Click to expand...

That's simply not true, Euphemia. Donald Trump ran for president on the Reform Party Platform in 2000. In that campaign, he made campaign appearances in California, Florida, and Minnesota. Memories these days are short, but not short enough that I could forget the four months that Trump was a presidential candidate in 1999-2000.

Having an opinion is not the same as actually being a legislator and voting to do something or being an elected official and not doing something that you say you are in favor of doing. It's not good to be a kid in New Mexico these days.
Click to expand...

"These days"? What does a kid in New Mexico now have to do with Gary's governorship a generation ago? Gary spent much of his time in office vetoing bills the NM legislature foisted on the people of New Mexico, and also spent a great deal of time campaigning against the country's failed drug wars.
 
RJ Liberty said:
That's simply not true, Euphemia. Donald Trump ran for president on the Reform Party Platform in 2000. In that campaign, he made campaign appearances in California, Florida, and Minnesota. Memories these days are short, but not short enough that I could forget the four months that Trump was a presidential candidate in 1999-2000.



"These days"? What does a kid in New Mexico now have to do with Gary's governorship a generation ago? Gary spent much of his time in office vetoing bills the NM legislature foisted on the people of New Mexico, and also spent a great deal of time campaigning against the country's failed drug wars.
Click to expand...


I think what he was trying to say is Donald Trump will say anything so how can you form an opinion on him based on what he says. I think that's a really important point, if he will say anything then obviously having an opinion of him based on what he has said means that you have lost the game.
 
nikcers said:
I think what he was trying to say is Donald Trump will say anything so how can you form an opinion on him based on what he says. I think that's a really important point, if he will say anything then obviously having an opinion of him based on what he has said means that you have lost the game.
Click to expand...

Right. If you can't form an opinion of Trump because he will say anything, then you can't trust him. If it's impossible to believe him based on what he says, does, or writes, then he can in no way be trusted. Trump repeatedly advocated for the Iraq War, in both interviews and in the books he wrote. Trump has repeatedly said during this election that he "wasn't a politician" at the time, despite the fact that he had recently run for POTUS, and we have people here parroting that lie, too.
 
This is just ridiculously biased. Johnson has actually opposed all gun laws, unlike Trump, is better on foreign intervention(see their ISIS responses), better on welfare/entitlements, better on drugs, much better on civil liberties (i.e., Johnson would seriously consider pardoning Snowden, Trump wants to execute him) Johnson has serious flaws. His stance on discrimination shows that he really doesn't understand liberty, but it shouldn't be difficult to be honest and objective about their positions. Trump is far more questionable on Iraq. When asked if he supported it in 2002, he said; "I guess so." But more telling is in his 2000 campaign book The America We Deserve, Trump praises George H.W. Bush for the Gulf War, but with a caveat. Trump wished he stayed 3 more days and "finished the job." A stance he reiterated 2 years later in that Howard Stern interview. Also, he called for a preemptive strike on North Korea in the book. Not too different from Trump calling for action against Gaddafi on video in 2011. Now, if Trump has learned from those interventions, and I believe he has to some extent, then great, but if this had been Johnson, you'd crucify them. Both candidates have flaws. Johnson happens to be more liberty-oriented in general, but neither of them are going to be confused for Murray Rothbard.

By the way, we can't penalize Johnson for Weld's egregious Liberal Rockefeller Republican views any more than we can Trump for Pence's atrocious Bush neocon views. Both men are light years better than their VP's, despite their glaring flaws.
 
Last edited:
If anybody thinks Trump actually cares about libertarian principles...man I feel bad for you.
 
LibertyEagle said:
If anybody thinks JOHNSON actually cares about libertarian principles...man I feel bad for you.
Click to expand...

It's more accurate to say that Johnson doesn't understand libertarian principles. If one is interested in the more libertarian candidate of the two, then Johnson is a better choice than Trump. However, if one is concerned about Johnson misrepresenting libertarians, then Trump may be a better choice because he doesn't claim to be a libertarian, but may tilt things slightly more in our direction on foreign policy and open the door more for alternative candidates. That's basically the reasoning that led to Murray Rothbard supporting Ross Perot after Buchanan lost the Republican Primary in 1992.

There is a case to be made for both of them. It really depends on what's important to you. Of course, if you want to vote on principle, then I think Darrell Castle seems like the best choice from what I know about him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Occam's Banana
  • Featured
Scott Horton @ Lex Fridman: The Case Against War and the Military Industrial Complex
Replies
3
Views
1K
Occam's Banana
Occam's Banana
Swordsmyth
Why the Congressional Budget Office almost always gets it wrong
Replies
12
Views
78
acptulsa
acptulsa
jmdrake
Barack Obama now more libertarian than Donald Trump
Replies
16
Views
214
familydog
F
Swordsmyth
Johnson Fires Pro-Ukraine Intel Committee Chairman
Replies
0
Views
191
Swordsmyth
Swordsmyth
PAF
Last Rights: The Death of American Liberty
Replies
0
Views
735
PAF
PAF
Back
Top