Trump for president?

I will vote for Gary Johnson knowing full well my vote doesn’t matter, since Hillary has a lock on California. But between Trump and Clinton, whom to root for? Trump is an empty suit with a filthy mouth. Clinton is pure evil, hell-bent on extinguishing what remains of our freedom and prosperity. Fascist dictatorship is her goal, draped in red-white-and-blue bunting. Will someone please write an update of the Sinclair Lewis novel, “It Can’t Happen Here”?

Forced to choose, I’d have to go with Trump. His election would be a much needed kick in the teeth to the Eastern establishment. We would have to hope he would listen to cool-headed advisors once in office. Or maybe get bored and resign.

But as I write, I remind myself that there is precious little any president can do, even Gary Johnson, to alter major trends that have so much momentum. You can recite the list as well as I can: government debt and unfunded liabilities, nuclear proliferation, race and class divisions, climate change hysteria to name a few.

To hell with them all. I’m going outside to enjoy the sunshine while I can.

14 thoughts on “Trump for president?

  1. “Clinton is pure evil, hell-bent on extinguishing what remains of our freedom and prosperity. Fascist dictatorship is her goal, draped in red-white-and-blue bunting.”

    Everyone is entitled to their opinion. My opinion is that your opinion is bullshit. Fascist dictatorship indeed,

  2. “Clinton is pure evil, hell-bent on extinguishing what remains of our freedom and prosperity. Fascist dictatorship is her goal, draped in red-white-and-blue bunting.”

    Everyone is entitled to their opinion. My opinion is that your opinion is abcrock. Fascist dictatorship indeed,

  3. @Brandon
    I kept it a civil as I could. Misogynistic vitriol brings out the worst in me although one would think that my mother’s travails with senile dementia would inure me to these sorts of outbursts. I’ll move to Facebook, I’m going to link to this post to show the ugly face of libertarianism to the younger ones attracted to Johnson and Weld. I’m tempted to do the same with Mr. Gibson’s paean to segregationist Lester Maddox here at NOL. They’re too young to know who he was but maybe they can learn some history along with a good look at libertarian values. You and Barry are facebook friends, feel free to stop by and try to defend this POS.

    • Seems to me that you’ve joined the crowd and dramatically lowered the bar for what counts as misogyny.

    • Exactly!

      Terry’s charge of misogyny is not based in reality.

      Think of what would happen if Leftists had their way and were put in charge of what is right and what is wrong. Yikes.

  4. The only problem with your forced choice of Trump is that it rests on your assumptions of what he’s all about. Trump is like Obamacare in that we’ll have to elect him to find out what he stands for.

    The advantage of Hillary, if you can call it that, is that she’ll be a terribly unpopular president and will be opposed by the Republicans in congress every step of the way.

    The danger of Trump is that we know that the Republicans will fall in line and go along with whatever he wants.

    My hunch is that Hillary is more likely to get us in to a terribly serious war. However, can we say with any confidence that Trump won’t?

    • Even if Clinton is a better choice than Trump, and even if she’s not hell-bent on fascism, your accusation of misogyny was totally unwarranted, dude.

      It’s a great example, actually, of why property rights are so important…

    • His comments are so over the top that misogyny is the least negative of the two possible causes. If, in fact, senile dementia is responsible I will apologize misogyny.

    • I agree that they’re a bit over the top. In fact, I started an essay about two months ago making a “libertarian case for Hillary Clinton” over Donald Trump. The basic premise of my argument is that lawyers make better politicians than businessmen. I never got around to finishing it, but with a little encouragement I might do so.

      I want to make a deeper point here, though. Warren didn’t make any misogynistic remarks whatsoever, but because you got caught up in the heat of the moment you labelled his argument as such. There’s a meme on the internet that goes something like this:

      Can’t come up with any evidence to support your position?

      Just yell “racist!”

      Can’t defend your position using logic?

      Just yell “racist!”

      It’s a snarky meme, to be sure, but I doubt it would be a meme if it didn’t have a kernel of truth to it. If we don’t have robust property rights in place, including the right to run your business as you please (so long as you don’t pollute), then the risks associated with speaking your mind and doing as you please (so long as fraud or force are not involved) become supremely heightened because factions that are currently en vogue can then start accusing other factions of bad things, and this of course leads to cultural stagnation.

      Like your accusation of misogyny, your attempt to paint defenders of property rights as closet racists or outright racists is dishonest and chips away at the foundations of individual freedom. Re-read Warren’s piece on Lester Maddox and tell me where you find him rooting for racism. Again, you’ve lost a lot of credibility by calling Warren a misogynist without backing it up with any evidence, so my advice is to tread carefully when you come back to criticize liberal/libertarian arguments in favor of property rights. (And bring some beer with you.)

    • Misogyny – Dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against women.
      I believe that Mr. Gibson’s despicable statements about Mr. Trump and Secretary Clinton demonstrate dislike of, contempt for, and ingrained prejudice against a specific woman: Secretary Clinton.

      This sort of thing is consistent with vascular dementia, I see it frequently in my mother. So generalized misogyny may not be the cause. If there are any other writings that can shed light on his vitriol towards Secretary Clinton point me towards them.

      I would prefer to separate discussion of property rights and civil rights from Mr. Gibson’s absurd comments. Another thread perhaps?

Please keep it civil

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s