Do we have any Trump supporters here?

[Elixir]

Do you have any evidence Putin murdered any political opponents?
Unbacked allegation from Fox News don't count

As an aside, the Trump/Putin broromance is spooky. Some people say (to steal a Trumpism) that Trumps tax returns would show a relation to Putin (ownership in Russian companies). They certainly are alike in being strongmen, dictatorship like desires, and a dislike for Europe.

I'm pretty sure the tax returns would be damning, or he would have released them. (Same for his medical records.) Whether his returns would reveal his unsavory relationships, that he lies about his wealth, that he lies about his charitable donations or all of the above, we will never know because he will never release them.

 

[fast]

All we know is he has a fondness for a Russian strongman who's political enemies are assassinated on the street.

Of course he does. Putin's is the model he wants to emulate. Trumples would love to murder all his political opponents, make the media property of the State and run roughshod over the rest of the world.

I'm just looking for clarification on "Trumples." Do you mean Trump or Trump's followers?

 

[Elixir]

Of course he does. Putin's is the model he wants to emulate. Trumples would love to murder all his political opponents, make the media property of the State and run roughshod over the rest of the world.

I'm just looking for clarification on "Trumples." Do you mean Trump or Trump's followers?

Herr Kandidate of course. The s'porters would be Trumplers.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Of course he does. Putin's is the model he wants to emulate. Trumples would love to murder all his political opponents, make the media property of the State and run roughshod over the rest of the world.

While this is true, how long do you really think it would last? Putin has ... like ... goals/I]. He has an idea of what he wants and is willing to take the actions necessary to achieve them. I can't see Trump bothering to put in the effort to oppress people over the long term. That doesn't mean he won't find somebody who gives a shit and delegate it out, but I can't see him sticking with it himself.

 

[Elixir]

Of course he does. Putin's is the model he wants to emulate. Trumples would love to murder all his political opponents, make the media property of the State and run roughshod over the rest of the world.

While this is true, how long do you really think it would last? Putin has ... like ... goals/I]. He has an idea of what he wants and is willing to take the actions necessary to achieve them. I can't see Trump bothering to put in the effort to oppress people over the long term. That doesn't mean he won't find somebody who gives a shit and delegate it out, but I can't see him sticking with it himself.

Good point. Trump doesn't have the attention span to pursue any goals on a global level - he is too easily fixated on such things as someone tweeting something bad about him.

 

[braces_for_impact]

Have you ever read how Gary Kasparov describes Putin?

Trump admires a strongman.

He is dangerous.

Really? How many dead are at the feet of Hillary Clinton? Yet you think trump is the dangerous one??

View attachment 8076

Yes Trump is worse by far, and I am struggling to understand how someone who is intelligent fails to see it. It's like your yearning for peace has blinded you to Trump. (Which is at least slightly better than being a racist in support of Trump) Have you been listening to the inane ramblings of the one you wish to vote for? You sound like Robert Price. Love his scholarly work, hate his politics.

Does Hillary want to remove millions, ship them somewhere south and dump them off?
Does Hillary want Japan, South Korea and others to have NUCLEAR FUCKING WEAPONS?
Does Hillary want to carve out pieces of Iraq, stay there indefinitely while we drill for oil?
Does Hillary say that if Iranian sailors make "rude gestures" and such at American sailors that they will be able to open fire for such an act?

Trump hasn't been in politics long, and certainly hasn't done so in any official capacity, so we cannot judge him by that. We can only judge him by what he says he will do (FAIL), his knowledge of the state of the world (FAIL), his ability to negotiate (FAIL), his ability to understand economics (FAIL) his ability to understand the US constitution and the freedoms it brings (FAIL) and on and on we go.

We can also judge him by how he's fucked things up already when he's not even in office. Let's see. Our allies are already nervous with regards to his comments about pulling out of NATO, or requiring cash in exchange for protection. He's already made our allies and enemies nervous with his talk about purposely pushing nuclear proliferation. His visit to Mexico was interesting "The Great And Tough Negotiator" broached no subject of import, barely made it through a speech, and the end result was an argument with the Mexican Presidente. He is so reviled that our ally Mexico wouldn't have him travelling on the streets. Race relations are at quite a low, with little Trumpies everywhere crawling out of the woodwork asserting their white superiority, along with backlash from people of color, along with hiring and being advised by white supremacists. He has set the intelligence community at odds for saying that they "signalled" their distaste for the Obama administration to him during his security briefing. Half his own party hates him. Virtually everyone on the other side of the aisle hates him. He is surrounded by idiots in name and in practice. The man is pretty much reviled world wide by our allies, but not of course by Putin, who seeks to use his dumb ass as a rube.

A most impressive display for one who is only RUNNING so far wouldn't you say? Yet somehow you feel like he is the bringer of peace? WTF?!

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

This has been an interesting experiment. It is clear from the responses that people here desperately want libertarians to support Trump, but none have done anything towards explaining why they want libertarians to support him.

I have a few hypotheses, but none of them have enough support for them to rise to the level of theory. So I'll just have to ask.

Why is it so important to people here that libertarians support Trump?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

"I am speaking for myself, which is about as Libertarian as one can get." -- Penn Jillette

Dr. Donald Miller (donaldwmiller@gmail.com) and I (wblock@loyno.edu) are starting up a new group to be called Libertarians for Trump.

LFT has its work cut out for it in mobilizing massive support for Donald Trump within the libertarian community. For there are some libertarians who oppose supporting any politician for political office, even a 99% pure one such as Dr. Ron Paul. However, I dedicated this book to refuting arguments of that sort: Block, Walter E. 2012. Yes to Ron Paul and Liberty. New York: Ishi Press. (By the way, the foreward to that book – not written by me — contains, in my opinion, the single best short essay ever written about Dr. Paul).

Let me just say that there is nothing, nothing at all, incompatible between libertarianism and voting, or supporting political candidates. Both Lew Rockwell and Murray Rothbard can be considered political junkies, and you won’t find too many better libertarians than those two.

Suppose we were all slaves, and the master said we could have a democratic election; we could vote for overseer Baddie, who would whip us unmercifully once per day, or overseer Goodie, who would do exactly the same thing, but only once per month. We all voted for the latter. Is this incompatible with libertarianism? Would this make us worse libertarians? Anyone who thinks so does not really understand this philosophy. For a remedial course, read this book: Rothbard, Murray N. 1998 [1982]. The Ethics of Liberty, New York: New York University Press.

There are several issues upon which libertarians do not and cannot support Donald Trump. For example, protectionism. But, typically, regarding the issues where Mr. Trump deviates from libertarianism, so do the other candidates.

And, also, we readily admit that the presidential nominee of the Libertarian Party (unless they nominate someone like, ugh, Bob Barr) will very likely have views much closer to ours than those of Mr. Trump.

But, the perfect is the enemy of the good. It is our goal to throw our weight behind the candidate who has a reasonable chance of actually becoming President of the United States whose views are CLOSEST to libertarianism.

When put in this way, it is clear that The Donald is the most congruent with our perspective.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/03/walter-e-block/libertarians-trump/

 

[untermensche]

From the above link.

He has said, time and time again, things like “Look at what we did in Iraq. It’s a mess.

Trump supported the invasion when it mattered (before it happened). His only complaint is that it went badly. He has the same complaint about Syria. The same complaint German generals had about Stalingrad. Is this Libertarianism?

I don't really see any other arguments to support Trump in that article, maybe other people can.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Okay, Penn.

But why to forum posters in Talk Freethought want for libertarians to support Trump?

I need some answers so that I can eliminate some hypotheses and perhaps even elevate one hypothesis to theory.

 

[RavenSky]

Of course he does. Putin's is the model he wants to emulate. Trumples would love to murder all his political opponents, make the media property of the State and run roughshod over the rest of the world.

Do you have any evidence Putin murdered any political opponents?
Unbacked allegation from Fox News don't count

For a political shill for Putin, you are very very funny You, who claims in all seriousness that HRC is directly responsible for the deaths of people (backed up by a photoshopped meme ) but you object to those same standards applied to Putin.

 

[ZiprHead]

Do you have any evidence Putin murdered any political opponents?
Unbacked allegation from Fox News don't count

For a political shill for Putin, you are very very funny You, who claims in all seriousness that HRC is directly responsible for the deaths of people (backed up by a photoshopped meme ) but you object to those same standards applied to Putin.

Would anyone like a hot, steaming cup of polonium?

 

[maxparrish]

Do you have any evidence Putin murdered any political opponents?
Unbacked allegation from Fox News don't count

For a political shill for Putin, you are very very funny You, who claims in all seriousness that HRC is directly responsible for the deaths of people (backed up by a photoshopped meme ) but you object to those same standards applied to Putin.

Will Wiley,

It's rare that I agree with Ravensky, but she is 100 percent spot on. How the pathological haters of HRC can fantasize a Clinton version of murder inc immune to investigative discovery, while turning a blind eye to the authoritarian regime of Putin (and his cowed oligarchic crew) is breathtaking.

Thirty-four journalists, critics of Putin, have been murdered by unknown persons (in the US, only two journalists in the same time period have been murdered by anyone). In most cases investigations don't occur, and those fellow journalists that try to uncover the facts are often killed as well.

Here are links of a fierce Trump supporter, one of the few who don't buy into the Putin is our friend nonsense:

http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/183650/putin-and-shadow-kgb-glazov-gang-frontpagemagcom
http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/252330/putin-and-new-iron-curtain-francis-p-sempa
http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/252...d-political-murder-putins-vladimir-tismaneanu

And here are other stories, explaining Putin's murderous rule...

http://news.sky.com/story/the-putin-critics-who-have-been-assassinated-10369350
https://larussophobe.wordpress.com/putinmurders/
http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/03/europe/russia-putin-critics/

 

[ZiprHead]

Western propaganda!

 

[Will Wiley]

Do you have any evidence Putin murdered any political opponents?
Unbacked allegation from Fox News don't count

For a political shill for Putin, you are very very funny You, who claims in all seriousness that HRC is directly responsible for the deaths of people (backed up by a photoshopped meme ) but you object to those same standards applied to Putin.

No I object to a lack of evidence, as we are on a "rational forum". If I was on a religious forum I would not object.

 

[Will Wiley]

For a political shill for Putin, you are very very funny You, who claims in all seriousness that HRC is directly responsible for the deaths of people (backed up by a photoshopped meme ) but you object to those same standards applied to Putin.

Will Wiley,

It's rare that I agree with Ravensky, but she is 100 percent spot on.

She would be 100% spot on on a religious forum, where things are taken on "faith", but here we require evidence.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Do you have any evidence Putin murdered any political opponents?
Unbacked allegation from Fox News don't count

For a political shill for Putin, you are very very funny You, who claims in all seriousness that HRC is directly responsible for the deaths of people (backed up by a photoshopped meme ) but you object to those same standards applied to Putin.

I think the US and Russia have bigger issues they can work together on such as joining up against ISIS and others. Libya is an example of Hilary taking credit for Gadhaffi's death but then thousands more have died since. What once was a booming country is an impoverished region.

 

[RavenSky]

For a political shill for Putin, you are very very funny You, who claims in all seriousness that HRC is directly responsible for the deaths of people (backed up by a photoshopped meme ) but you object to those same standards applied to Putin.

No I object to a lack of evidence, as we are on a "rational forum". If I was on a religious forum I would not object.

You selectively *object to lack of evidence* when it suits you to do so. For instance, you need to provide factual evidence that Hillary Clinton killed anyone.

 

[Will Wiley]

No I object to a lack of evidence, as we are on a "rational forum". If I was on a religious forum I would not object.

You selectively *object to lack of evidence* when it suits you to do so. For instance, you need to provide factual evidence that Hillary Clinton killed anyone.

No I object because you seldom supply evidence and often makes silly claims, and I think a rational discussion forum deserves better.
I would appreciate it if you stopped doing that.

 

[Will Wiley]

Yes Trump is worse by far, and I am struggling to understand how someone who is intelligent fails to see it. !

I'm not an American, so I'm more concerned about the wars America starts than you probably are. Trump is an unknown but everything he has said indicates that he understands the simple fact that you guys have wasted something like $6 trillion dollars on two wars you couldn't win and have made enemies all over the globe and pissed of many of your allies.

You just don't seem to care because for the time being people are buying US T bonds for no return. Of course there is nothing in all of recorded history to give you any comfort about that. Though of course the FED has by far been the largest buyer, which is not a good sign by any means.
You don't seem to understand that it is going to be impossible for your nation to meet it's unfunded liabilities. The fiscal gap.

All because you continued to support wealthy people who were insane. People who kept trying the same failed policy, even though it did not work, with your money. None of them will be any worse off. But the American people will be.
But you continue to support them...why?...why? ...why?

Do you care about the fact that the money that should have been set aside for ordinary Americans has been wasted on wars?
If not...why not?

Can you explain why you keep supporting these people after they have all but destroyed America with their senseless wars on borrowed money?