The New American Politics thread

[Buster]

Originally Posted by 2Stonedbirds

Plus they are gentlemen. Put them on the stage and they won't embarrass the party. Articulate, intelligent and better than either of the two turds left for office by a long shot.

Ron and Rand might not be the best interpretation of modern libertarians.

They are Ayn Rand devotees (obviously), which carries much baggage.

They are also crazy christian evangelical types. Which is not in keeping with most new-style libertarians.

[ResAlien]

Originally Posted by 2Stonedbirds

Plus they are gentlemen. Put them on the stage and they won't embarrass the party. Articulate, intelligent and better than either of the two turds left for office by a long shot.

But one was put on stage very recently and got boat raced by everyone right out of the election.

Libertarians are the right's answer to communists. Nice sounding ideas in theory that shred apart like wet papier mache when put to any real test. I wouldn't call either of them stupid per se, just naïve.

[2Stonedbirds]

Originally Posted by ResAlien

But one was put on stage very recently and got boat raced by everyone off the stage.

Libertarians are the right's answer to communists. Nice sounding ideas in theory that shred apart like wet papier mache when put to any real test. I wouldn't call either of them stupid per se, just naïve.

When Ron Paul was on the stage during the last election, he wasn't even given the time of day. Either for debates or to present his platform.

Didn't Rand run out of money, or at least the oligarchs put all their sheckles into Jeb! and Rubios pocket? His grass roots support is large, corporate ehhhh not so much.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Doesn't Ron Paul also have some crazy, KKK level racist baggage from a few decades back?

Rand's problem was that he actually needs more than 8 minutes in a debate to explain his views and set himself apart, which you can't get when there are fifteen other guys on the stage. That nominating process was basically tailored for sound bites, as the political process is generally. Nuance won't get you noticed.

[2Stonedbirds]

Originally Posted by Buster

Ron and Rand might not be the best interpretation of modern libertarians.

They are Ayn Rand devotees (obviously), which carries much baggage.

They are also crazy christian evangelical types. Which is not in keeping with most new-style libertarians.

Perhaps not but they were willing to work within the current framework.

Not scorched earth libertarianism. They may be Christians but I never heard pulpit pounding from either one? They both hold religious freedom in high regard, but not once did I hear either get preachy.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Eh, that's a less than charitable interpretation of the text I'd bet.

Yeah, not really. I'm not saying all libertarians are like that but there are plenty of the "well if poor people would just pull-up their bootstraps and get to work..." variety. I know this because I was one such person many many moons ago.

[Looch City]

To avoid hacking, Trump wants to go back to the good ol' days of Morse code and horse drawn couriers.

Seems like a good plan.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Iggy City

To avoid hacking, Trump wants to go back to the good ol' days of Morse code and horse drawn couriers.

Seems like a good plan.

Wait, seriously?

[Buster]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Yeah, not really. I'm not saying all libertarians are like that but there are plenty of the "well if poor people would just pull-up their bootstraps and get to work..." variety. I know this because I was one such person many many moons ago.

That's a poor understanding of how a smaller government bureaucracy would help poor people.

A libertarian would argue that a large, and interventionist government is so inefficient and poor at making decisions, that the un-intended consequences are to reduce the ability of poor people to create more wealth for themselves.

It's not blaming poverty on the poor people, as so many claim, but blaming poverty on government policy.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Buster

That's a poor understanding of how a smaller government bureaucracy would help poor people.

A libertarian would argue that a large, and interventionist government is so inefficient and poor at making decisions, that the un-intended consequences are to reduce the ability of poor people to create more wealth for themselves.

It's not blaming poverty on the poor people, as so many claim, but blaming poverty on government policy.

That's a lot rhetoric that doesn't actually propose any kind of solution.

[Buster]

Originally Posted by rubecube

That's a lot rhetoric that doesn't actually propose any kind of solution.

Not at all. There are about eleventy billion policy changes that would speak directly to my point.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Buster

Not at all. There are about eleventy billion policy changes that would speak directly to my point.

Such as?

[PsYcNeT]

Well you see, if you eliminate welfare, everyone on it will suddenly be clamoring for $9 an hour frycook jobs and janitorial positions, thus pushing out illegally employed Mexicans, who will in turn return to Mexico and kill all of the drug cartels to reclaim their home county.

Win-win.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

Well you see, if you eliminate welfare, everyone on it will suddenly be clamoring for $9 an hour frycook jobs and janitorial positions, thus pushing out illegally employed Mexicans, who will in turn return to Mexico and kill all of the drug cartels to reclaim their home county.

Win-win.

or they'll just riot.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

Well you see, if you eliminate welfare, everyone on it will suddenly be clamoring for $9 an hour frycook jobs and janitorial positions, thus pushing out illegally employed Mexicans, who will in turn return to Mexico and kill all of the drug cartels to reclaim their home county.

Win-win.

You forgot eliminate the minimum wage so that workers will have more of an incentive to climb the ranks.

[ResAlien]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

or they'll just riot.

No problem, then we just call in the national guard and...wait crap. Guess then we'd be hosed. Is there a libertarian paradise in the world we can use as an example?

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Wait, seriously?

I seriously doubt it. He did however just say that if he loses it's not his fault, it's because voters got lazy and didn't vote. Credit I guess for getting waaay out in front with his excuse.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by ResAlien

No problem, then we just call in the national guard and...wait crap. Guess then we'd be hosed. Is there a libertarian paradise in the world we can use as an example?

Somalia?

[Senator Clay Davis]

Goddamn it rube I was 1 second away from getting Somalia in.

[ResAlien]

Ah, I thought they were only a utopia of capitalism. Libertarian as well eh? Perfect. I'll visit posthaste.