The 2016 Presidential Election Trainwreck

[Jeff Lebowski]

This line describes my main frustration with their ideology:


"the tenet that government can do no right and private industry can do no wrong and uses this faith in place of more careful analysis."

Let's give the full quote:

To many people, libertarianism is a reaction against an over-regulated society, and an attempt to spread the word that some seemingly intractable problems can be solved by a hands-off approach. Many libertarians have made excellent arguments for why certain libertarian policies are the best options, and I agree with many of them. I think this kind of libertarianism is a valuable strain of political thought that deserves more attention, and I have no quarrel whatsoever with it and find myself leaning more and more in that direction myself.

However, there's a certain more aggressive, very American strain of libertarianism with which I do have a quarrel. This is the strain which, rather than analyzing specific policies and often deciding a more laissez-faire approach is best, starts with the tenet that government can do no right and private industry can do no wrong and uses this faith in place of more careful analysis.

SU, take note.

[BlueK]

Add me to your group that is depressed. I have been adding up all the minuses they both bring to the table and sadly in the end I will probably vote for the one who has a negative 87% rating with me over the one with a 94% negative rating with me.

come on. give me a valid reason you need to vote for either. In the end, it doesn't matter how reluctantly someone votes for crap. The system doesn't care about that. Your vote still ends up supporting crap. Don't vote for crap. Either find a third party candidate to support (I promise, you will feel peace inside. I know from experience). Or just decline to vote for that office. You're actually supporting the very problem you are complaining about by voting for the lesser of evils. The crappy candidates don't give a flying pig that you had to hold your nose while casting your vote. They will gladly take it and run with it believing they have a clear mandate.

[BlueK]

Trump the closest to libertarians with foreign policy? A classical liberal foreign policy is focused on building positive relationships, with an emphasis on free trade, and avoiding negative relationships, with an emphasis on military non-intervention. Trump is building positive relationships through free trade? Nope. He is giving the international market a gigantic middle finger. Trump avoiding negative relationships through non military intervention? Nope, he wants to nuke the hell out of those damn Muslims.

Exactly. Most criticisms of libertarian thought come from a complete misunderstanding of the philosophy.

[BlueK]

Let's give the full quote:



SU, take note.

Nice essay about something that is a complete non-issue outside of a think tank or university. More aggressive strain of libertarianism? Come on. Those folks hardly exist in reality. Most libertarians are more practical than that and are just trying to do whatever they can to push an increasingly intrusive powerful state back to one that has more respect for individual freedom before it gets even worse.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Nice essay about something that is a complete non-issue outside of a think tank or university. More aggressive strain of libertarianism? Come on. Those folks hardly exist in reality. Most libertarians are more practical than that and are just trying to do whatever they can to push an increasingly intrusive powerful state back to one that has more respect for individual freedom before it gets even worse.

Hardly exist in reality? Come on. He nailed it.

[imanihonjin]

Let's give the full quote:



SU, take note.

Straw men are great.

[Uncle Ted]

Hardly exist in reality? Come on. He nailed it.

Congress has a whopping 11% approval rating. Both Trump and Hillary are the most unfavorable candidates in history. Clearly what both the dems and pubs parties have to offer people don't want. It is time for a third party. Maybe Bernie with run as a Green Party candidate.

[BlueK]

Hardly exist in reality? Come on. He nailed it.

extreme unbending theoretically pure libertarianism isn't very realistic. Got it. But the argument is only relevant to having a fun debate inside a university. It is not a good enough reason to vote for Hillary or Trump. It has very little application to dealing with the current political situation. I will vote Libertarian this time because it's going to be the only option that can keep me from wanting to violently vomit. But in my small attempt to try to defeat the madness I have actually donated money to both Cruz and Kasich and voted for Kasich when I had my chance. That's the best I can do right now. In November I may as well do what I can to increase the vote count for the Libertarians because they can use as many as they can get to increase their influence on the country over time.

[byu71]

come on. give me a valid reason you need to vote for either. In the end, it doesn't matter how reluctantly someone votes for crap. The system doesn't care about that. Your vote still ends up supporting crap. Don't vote for crap. Either find a third party candidate to support (I promise, you will feel peace inside. I know from experience). Or just decline to vote for that office. You're actually supporting the very problem you are complaining about by voting for the lesser of evils. The crappy candidates don't give a flying pig that you had to hold your nose while casting your vote. They will gladly take it and run with it believing they have a clear mandate.

The valid reason for me, I think Hillary and a democrat Congress would be horrible for my children and grandchildren. Believe me if I thought I could vote for someone and that result would end up with both Hillary and Donald losing, I would do so. However, the voting public so far doesn't seem to be giving me any option but those two. Although very, very sad, for me I will vote for one of them if I feel only one of them can win. I am not about protest for protest sake. As far as I am concerned those who think that way gave us Obama instead of Romney. How is that working out for those people?

So unless something changes and how I wish it would, I will be voting for one of those two. YUK

[Jeff Lebowski]

extreme unbending theoretical perfect, libertarianism isn't very realistic. Got it. But the argument is only relevant to having a fun debate inside a university. It is not a good enough reason to vote for Hillary or Trump. It has very little application to dealing with the current political situation.

And what does this have to do with Hillary or Trump? That isn't the point of the essay at all.

Viewing political issues through the lens of a simple ideological framework is both the best and the worst thing about libertarianism. The best because measuring issues based on principles vs. platform/party loyalty is laudable and there is much about about libertarianism that makes great sense. The worst because you begin to believe that the "one guiding principle" is always correct/applicable. I.e., you have a big hammer and everything in the world looks like a nail.

Well, that and Ayn Rand is a nut.

[Uncle Ted]

extreme unbending theoretically pure libertarianism isn't very realistic. Got it. But the argument is only relevant to having a fun debate inside a university. It is not a good enough reason to vote for Hillary or Trump. It has very little application to dealing with the current political situation. I will vote Libertarian this time because it's going to be the only option that can keep me from wanting to violently vomit. But in my small attempt to try to defeat the madness I have actually donated money to both Cruz and Kasich and voted for Kasich when I had my chance. That's the best I can do right now. In November I may as well do what I can to increase the vote count for the Libertarians because they can use as many as they can get to increase their influence on the country over time.

According to pew more than 1 in 10 of the people out there are Libertarians...



http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank...-libertarians/


If they would all vote then we can break the stoopid two party system.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Libertarians pandering for federal funding.

[BlueK]

Libertarians pandering for federal funding.

So they can later take it away from the demopublicans and republicrats. Sounds like a good thing to me.

[BlueK]

The valid reason for me, I think Hillary and a democrat Congress would be horrible for my children and grandchildren. Believe me if I thought I could vote for someone and that result would end up with both Hillary and Donald losing, I would do so. However, the voting public so far doesn't seem to be giving me any option but those two. Although very, very sad, for me I will vote for one of them if I feel only one of them can win. I am not about protest for protest sake. As far as I am concerned those who think that way gave us Obama instead of Romney. How is that working out for those people?

So unless something changes and how I wish it would, I will be voting for one of those two. YUK

why is it important to vote for one that has a chance to win? Please explain that logically. Given that no one ever wins a national election by just one vote, I don't think it can be done. But I'm interested in your explanation. I'm having a hard time understanding why voting for a terrible candidate who has a chance to win is better than not voting or voting for someone more in line with you who probably won't win. It's like you're saying that what you value most politically is to uphold the two-party system even if they're both giving you a bad deal at the same time. Why?

[byu71]

why is it important to vote for one that has a chance to win? Please explain that logically. Given that no one ever wins a national election by just one vote, I don't think it can be done. But I'm interested in your explanation. I'm having a hard time understanding why voting for a terrible candidate who has a chance to win is better than not voting or voting for someone more in line with you who probably won't win. It's like you're saying that what you value most politically is to uphold the two-party system even if they're both giving you a bad deal at the same time. Why?

I would ask, isn't by your thinking my one vote for someone other than the two isn't going to change the two party system.

So like you asked, why will I vote for one. I have perhaps the illogical thought that possibly between the two, it might be close in Utah. My one vote could be the difference.

Another reason may just be that I am still so ticked at Hannity suggested the protest vote and some evangelical types wouldn't vote for Romney to prove a center right can't win and the republicans need to run a far rightie. Because of this I have a very unhealthy attitude about protest voting.