After Trump Defeat, LP VP Nominee Weld To: “Rebuild the GOP”

william_weld_2016_cropped3x4
In an article by  published earlier today and headlined “Libertarian VP Candidate Bill Weld Gives Up, Will Focus on Preventing Trump Presidency,” current Libertarian Vice Presidential nominee Bill Weld is described by the reporter as saying that:

After blocking a Trump presidency, he’d like to work with Republicans like Mitt Romney and Haley Barbour to rebuild the GOP. Governor Weld is directly quoted in the article as saying regarding the Republican Party:

“Maybe somebody is going to come up with a new playbook, and I don’t know who it’s going to be, but it would be fun to participate.”

The full article is available HERE.

70 thoughts on “After Trump Defeat, LP VP Nominee Weld To: “Rebuild the GOP”

  1. Thomas Knapp

    No reason to complain. We knew he was a snake when we picked him up. We screwed ourselves, and the LNC clearly isn’t interested in doing its job vis a vis unscrewing us.

    Maybe the party will survive the destructive force of Johnson/Weld 2016, maybe it won’t.

  2. Gene Berkman

    Saying that he would concentrate on attacking Trump is not the same as giving up. Clearly the reporter put their own interpretation on this.

    Since he accepted the nomination for Vice-President. Gov. Weld has indicated he sees Donald Trump as the main opponent. Since it looks like Trump has no chance to be elected. it is a reasonable strategy for Libertarians is to try to destroy Trump and go for a seond place LP finish. Not likely to succeed, but one must have goals.

    Perhaps Weld will quit the LP to return to the Republican Party, but his remarks don’t guarantee that. It is certainly possible, with his many contacts and much experience, to think he could influence The Republican Party from the outside. I have certainly over the years tried to do so, though I have not reaffiliated with the Republican Party since dropping out in 1969. (at age 18)

  3. Anthony Dlugos

    Oh, dear. It appears qualified candidates typically have options.

    And here I was thinking the LP could be the first political party to never have to deal with defectors. (Although Ron Paul already did).

    In the future, maybe we could nominate only serial killers and child molesters who yapped incessantly about principle. No worries about defections there!!

  4. dL

    “In the future, maybe we could nominate only serial killers and child molesters who yapped incessantly about principle. No worries about defections there!!”

    Bottom-shelf whiskey + special ed class==bad combination

  5. Andy

    What happened to Bill Weld being a “Libertarian for Life”?

    Also, notice that he said that he wants to work with Mitt Romney, a mainstream big government neo-con Republican, to re-build the Republican Party, and not with any Republicans who at least lean in a pro-liberty direction like Rand Paul, Justin Amash, or Tom Massie.

    If, or perhaps more appropriately, when, Bill Weld does leave the Libertarian Party I will view it as good riddance to bad rubbish.

  6. William Saturn

    ” It appears qualified candidates typically have options”

    The only qualifications for the presidency are to be over 35, a natural born citizen, and residing in the nation for at least the last 14 years.

  7. Rebel Alliance

    Wow. Why is the LNC screwing around with Perry’s invisible meaningless write-in campaign, when this is much more serious. Weld really needs to be removed from the ticket right now. His comments about “dropping” the LP are yet another flip-flop from what he told delegates when he promised he’d be a “Libertarian for life”. As the LP’s VP nominee, his donations to a NH Republican candidate who’s running against a Libertarian is unacceptable.

    This man is a disgrace. At least Bob Barr and Wayne Root waited till the campaign was over before throwing the LP under the bus and running back to the GOP.

    Dump Weld Now.

  8. JamesT

    Man the ‘I told you so’ is gonna get old. Dump him now. Amazing how exactly what we said would happen happened.

  9. Anthony Dlugos

    “The only qualifications for the presidency are to be over 35, a natural born citizen, and residing in the nation for at least the last 14 years.”

    I have a 240 year history of Presidents, 2nd and 3rd place finishers, and primary stage losers that says otherwise.

  10. Thomas Knapp

    “The only qualifications for the presidency are to be over 35, a natural born citizen, and residing in the nation for at least the last 14 years.”

    You appear to have added a qualification.

    The Constitution says nothing about the 14 years having to have been the last 14 years. If that were the case, Eisenhower would have been disqualified from running in 1952 — he lived in Europe from 1942-45, then returned there to live for two more years as Supreme NATO Commander, living in Belgium in 1951-52 before running for president.

  11. William Saturn

    “I have a 240 year history of Presidents, 2nd and 3rd place finishers, and primary stage losers that says otherwise.”

    So is being a male a qualification also?

  12. Sean Scallon

    After these comments and after the comments Johnson recently made, Thomas and Andy were right in the end.

    Not right in the sense what the LP needs is another candidate who doesn’t pay his taxes (the Republicans have that market cornered), but what it needs is someone of credibility willing to run a vigorous campaign, full out until the very end, for basic principals a major of the party can stand behind. I’m not talking about dogma. For example, foreign policy should have been Johnson’s top policy differential in contrast between the two major parties. Instead he treats like an annoyance. That’s really what boils down too. It’s not about knowing where Aleppo is, is about caring what it means for the U.S. He doesn’t understand this the way Ron Paul would.

    One of these days, a Libertarian will come along who actually wants the job to be President, not just run to spread a message or fill a ticket or out of some sense of obligation. Unfortunately the opportunity the party had this year to gain a foothold is coming and going. I understand Johnson’s disappointment in not making the debates, but instead of protesting loudly with the added attention he has to make his argument, he’s basically given up. And Weld just another Wayne Allyn Root, only from the Left. And the danger to the LP is that with both of them basically tanking the campaign is the thousands of millenials actually interested in wanting a new party to vote for will either not vote this year or shrug their shoulders and vote for Hilary and the LP can’t get the breakthrough they were looking for unless a significant chunk of GOP voters ditch Trump if he appears he’s going down in a landslide (and the way the country is so polarized today a trained seal could be the GOP nominee and still get over 200 electoral votes). And it’s not because the chance wasn’t there, believe me it was. It’s because the two men who LP delegates and party activists trusted with all sincerity to lead the charge towards a mainstream foothold in U.S. politics, let them down.

  13. Andy

    “Anthony Dlugos
    October 5, 2016 at 13:48
    ‘The only qualifications for the presidency are to be over 35, a natural born citizen, and residing in the nation for at least the last 14 years.’

    I have a 240 year history of Presidents, 2nd and 3rd place finishers, and primary stage losers that says otherwise.”

    Real Libertarians don’t give a rat’s ass about any of this. You can take your bullshit “qualifications” and shove them straight up your ass.

    A note should be made that nobody in the Libertarian Party should follow any political or philosophical advice that comes from Anthony Dlugos.

  14. Thomas Knapp

    “My mistake Tom. You’re right.”

    That happens once in a blue moon 😀

    Good question on candidate sex, by the way.

    Anthony operates on the starry-eyed utopian supposition that we can fool Americans into voting Libertarian — that is, doing something different — by pretending to offer the same old crap. He’d rather click his ruby slippers together and say “there’s no place like 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue” over and over than do the work of convincing Americans to vote Libertarian by convincing them that we’re offering them something better.

  15. Anthony Dlugos

    Although I know everyone around here is smart enough to see the culture changing around us such that electing a female president with the necessary ADDITIONAL qualifications I am referring to is possible while electing merely the constitutionally qualified is not.

  16. ATBAFT

    Here’s a piece of David Nolan’s original “case for a Libertarian Party” in 1971:
    “A sixth point is favor of establishing a libertarian party is that by its mere existence, it would put some pressure on the other parties to take a more libertarian stand.”
    In personal conversations with Nolan, I know he always assumed this would include people transitioning back and forth between the parties and that said people would, in the case of the GOP, end upf helping with the necessary education that would drag the GOP closer to taking libertarian stands.

  17. Andy

    “Gene Berkman
    October 5, 2016 at 13:14
    Saying that he would concentrate on attacking Trump is not the same as giving up.”

    Heck, giving up campaigning would e preferable to focusing the rest of the campaign on attacking Donald Trump.

    Why? Because the Libertarian Party presidential ticket SHOULD BE FOCUSED ON SPREADING THE MESSAGE OF LIBERTY, AND BUILDING THE PARTY AND MOVEMENT. If the ticket is going to engage in attacks, IT SHOULD BE ATTACKING BOTH THE REPUBLICAN PARTY CANDIDATE AND THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY CANDIDATE EQUALLY.

    Another reason is because if Donald Trump loses, this will just give ammunition to the people who supported Donald Trump to say that the Libertarian Party cost Donald Trump the election, and they will blame us for Hillary Clinton becoming President.

    If our ticket ran a principled campaign, that focuses on spreading the message and building the party and movement, and that attacked both the R’s and D’s equally, we would at least have some ground to stand on to defray the attack of us, “costing Donald Trump the election” and, “allowing Hillary Clinton to get elected,” and William Weld’s game plan plays straight into this.

    It should be blatantly obvious to all that Weld does not give a rat’s behind about the Libertarian Party or movement, and that he is intentionally screwing us over.

  18. Gene Berkman

    Bill Weld posted this on facebook, in regard to the Boston Globe story:

    “In a story published in the Boston Globe, much attention was given to my grave concerns about the prospect of Donald Trump inhabiting the White House, and my determination to keep that from happening. The story did not, unfortunately, focus on my assurance that I believe Gary Johnson to be the best candidate for President, and that I would not be on the ticket with him if that were not the case. My Libertarian hat is firmly planted on my head, and will remain there.”

    “Gary Johnson and I are committed to offering voters a way to break up the two-party duopoly that has given us policy paralysis and divisiveness with which most Americans cannot identify. If one of the results of what we are doing is that the two so-called major parties temper their hyper-partisanship, then so be it. That would be a good thing for the country.
    Let there be no doubt. I am the Libertarian nominee for Vice-President, proudly running with Gov. Gary Johnson, and both Gary and I will be running hard and making our case right up until the polls close on November 8. Our ambition is to serve our country.”

    https://www.facebook.com/GovBillWeld/posts/1804212126489832

  19. Anthony Dlugos

    “Real Libertarians don’t give a rat’s ass about any of this.”

    What the f*ck do I care about what ‘Real
    Libertarians’ think? There aren’t enough of us.

    “A note should be made that nobody in the Libertarian Party should follow any political or philosophical advice that comes from Anthony Dlugos.”

    It’s not about taking or not taking my advice, Andy. It’s about your idea that the party should appeal to a silver of “pure” libertarians, and my idea that it should be a big tent party that welcomes all libertarian leaning citizens. This is why you are constantly on witch hunts trying to root out non-libertarians and ranting and raving about booting people out of the party, and I am welcoming of anyone willing to join the fight.

    You can’t win this one. No one wants to be part of a constant witch hunt for nonbelievers. Thats not a happy organization. You can change your attitude or run yourself out of the party, babbling incoherently about how no one meets up to your “standards.”

  20. Andy

    ATBAFT said< "In personal conversations with Nolan, I know he always assumed this would include people transitioning back and forth between the parties and that said people would, in the case of the GOP, end upf helping with the necessary education that would drag the GOP closer to taking libertarian stands."

    It is one thing for people with actual libertarian principles to go back and forth between parties, but when it comes to Bill Weld, he DOES NOT HAVE ANY LIBERTARIAN PRINCIPLES.

  21. Gene Berkman

    A historical note: In 1987 I attended a candidate forum sponsored by the California Libertarian Party featuring Ron Paul and Russel Means, candidates for the LP nomination for President in 1988. At this forum Ron Paul indicated he was committed to The Libertarian Party and not going back to the Republicans. He also promised to raise ten million dollars and get ten million votes, to put The Libertarian Party on the map.

    Ron Paul has done much to promote libertarianism and opposition to the warfare-welfare state. But he did return to the Republican Party in order to be elected to Congress, at least partly because his campaign did not result in a Libertarian Party as strong as he was hoping for.

    Despite the many missteps In this year’s campaign, The Libertarian Party will come out of it much stronger than it did after Ron Paul’s campaign. And certainly The Libertarian Party will be stronger than it would be if it had nominated one of the other candidates at the convention – with less credentials and less possibility of getting media coverage.

  22. Tony From Long Island

    ” . . . . . Eisenhower would have been disqualified from running in 1952 — he lived in Europe from 1942-45, then returned there to live for two more years as Supreme NATO Commander, living in Belgium in 1951-52 before running for president. . . . . ”

    Wow that’s a stretch . . . are you gonna say McCain is disqualified for being born in the canal zone and Cruz for being born in Canada?

  23. Tony From Long Island

    Gene, I couldn’t agree with you more.

    It is humorous, however, to watch people get bent out of shape over some words that could be interpreted several ways. Bottom line is – the party will grow much much more with Johnson / Weld than with any of the other’s on stage in Orlando – Especially the very strange Daryl Perry

  24. Andy

    “Gene Berkman
    October 5, 2016 at 14:46
    A historical note: In 1987 I attended a candidate forum sponsored by the California Libertarian Party featuring Ron Paul and Russel Means, candidates for the LP nomination for President in 1988. At this forum Ron Paul indicated he was committed to The Libertarian Party and not going back to the Republicans. He also promised to raise ten million dollars and get ten million votes, to put The Libertarian Party on the map.

    Ron Paul has done much to promote libertarianism and opposition to the warfare-welfare state. But he did return to the Republican Party in order to be elected to Congress, at least partly because his campaign did not result in a Libertarian Party as strong as he was hoping for.”

    Ron Paul did go back to the Republican Party, several years later, but even so, he NEVER actually quit the Libertarian Party, as he has maintained his Life Membership in the party to this day, and this was publicly acknowledged on multiple occasions.

    Also, I am pretty sure that Ron Paul did quit the Republican Party after the way he and his delegates got treated at the 2012 Republican National Convention.

  25. Tony From Long Island

    Anthony, be careful, or Andy will call you a troll too! Does he realize the NSA has a dossier on him and that they have assigned me as his personal troll?

  26. Gene Trosper

    Looks like IPR got trolled. Bill Weld issued a statement essentially calling this report BS and reiterated his support for the LP.

    Those of you with a propensity for dancing on the graves of those you deem to be “less libertarian,” simmer down and put away your party hats.

  27. Thomas Knapp

    “Wow that’s a stretch . . . are you gonna say McCain is disqualified for being born in the canal zone and Cruz for being born in Canada?”

    No. All the Constitution says is that you have to be a natural born citizen. There are lots of arguments about what that means, and not a whole lot of evidence about what the framers meant by it when they wrote it. I kind of assume that they went, as with most things, with British definitions — which at the time came down to “if at least one of your parents is a British subject, you are a British subject.”

    Furthermore, if you read what I WROTE, I was militating in exactly the opposite direction:

    William asserted (erroneously, as he admirably admitted) that the Constitution required one to be resident in the US for the last 14 years to be elected president.

    I pointed out that the Constitution does not specify “the last” 14 years, and that that would be a perverse reading precisely because it would have prevented Eisenhower (or MacArthur, whose hat was also kinda sort in the ring) from running.

    To be constitutionally qualified for the presidency, you have to be a “natural born citizen” (whatever that means — and I’ve held that Cruz, McCain and Obama all are, as I understand the term), to be at least 35 years of age, and to have lived in the US for 14 of those years. The Constitution doesn’t say it has to have been the last 14 years, or that it had to be 14 years in a row. Any 14 years will do.

  28. Sean Scallon

    “In personal conversations with Nolan, I know he always assumed this would include people transitioning back and forth between the parties and that said people would, in the case of the GOP, end upf helping with the necessary education that would drag the GOP closer to taking libertarian stands.”

    Unfortunately that’s not the way it works. When you leave a party, it changes without you. It’s hard to drag the GOP to libertarian stands when the libertarians are jumping to another party. Then you come back and expect that same party, which goes further from your positions without you and your followers, to somehow realize that you were right all along?

    No, people like Ron Paul and others who support Johnson are leaving the GOP because they are either getting out of politics or realize they have no future in the GOP. They don’t hurt politically themselves by supporting Johnson or bolting from the party. When someone with something at stake is willing to join the LP, then will know things have changed. Until then…..

  29. Tony From Long Island

    Thomas, I did sorta realize that after posting, but I don’t consider Eisenhower to have “lived” in Europe no matter where he slept. (remember, I post only at work, so I read the board as quickly as I can).

    I never considered myself as “living” in the prisons I had to sleep in! 🙂

  30. Tony From Long Island

    I rather believe that “natural born” means born on US soil. However, as you say, there is not definitive guideline.

    If it means having one American parent, the “birther” crap is even worse and disgusting than it already is. Clearly the president’s mother was an American citizen.

  31. Tony From Long Island

    Gene, Of course it was bogus. Weld may be many things, but he isn’t stupid.

  32. JamesT

    Welldists seem to fail to realize he’s playing both sides of the fence. Classic politician.

  33. Anthony Dlugos

    Tony,

    You wanna really keep yourself up at night?

    Imagine the nightmare catastrophe of a federal government magically filled one day with only radicals and purists, attempting to dismantle that which they CLAIM* to hate.

    My god. By lunch of the first day of the administration, they’d be arguing about what the NAP says about crouton size in the Ceasers salad.

    *i say CLAIM with an arched eyebrow because, as a rudimentary knowledge of psychology will tell you, they no more hate the state than the cuckold hates their cheating wife. Indeed, it’s a perverse love affair betwixt folks like Andy and an all-powerful state. Paradoxically, it gives their life meaning. They would no more dispense with it than the cuckold would get a divorce. The shame gives their life meaning.

  34. Anthony Dlugos

    Just so everyone is aware, I don’t care what Weld says, I give it no better than 50/50 odds that he’s still in the party on January 1, 2017. An ex-governor & justice department attorney has options, not the least of which is sitting on their ass doing nothing.

    Nor do I place any stock in the proclamations of loyalty to the LP of your garden-variety purist/radical.

    Like Chris Rock said, “a man is as faithful as his options.”

  35. George Dance

    Reason had a good comment on this story: “While it seems plain that people in Weldworld are whispering to reporters, it’s equally clear that the national media is hearing what they want to hear whenever the veep candidate says anything ambiguous. When he tried to make a post-“Aleppo moment” point to MSNBC’s Chuck Todd last week that foreign-policy paper qualifications do not equal foreign policy judgment, scores of media outlets immediately misrepresented the remarks as gushing over Clinton’s fitness for the presidency. As with Donald Trump’s PTSD comments, we are officially in context-abandonment season, particularly when a new soundbite plays into a pre-existing narrative or suspicion.”

    Cue the claims that Reason (like Cato) is shilling for the establishment.

  36. Thomas Knapp

    I wouldn’t say that Reason is “shilling for the establishment.”

    On the other hand, key personnel at Reason — Nick Gillespie in particular — have made a career of gushing that we’re at a “libertarian moment.” In Nick’s case, for about six months out of every year for most of a decade regardless of whether or not the gushing is justified. Johnson/Weld is their latest enthusiasm. Uusually their man-crushes aren’t on LP candidates, so I guess that’s an improvement of a kind.

  37. George Dance

    TK: “Maybe the party will survive the destructive force of Johnson/Weld 2016, maybe it won’t.”

    Hey, it survived Charles Jay, Jim Davidson, and the rest of the Boston Tea Party. If it could survive them, it could survive anything.

    Including an all-time record vote, a magnitude of greater publicity, and thousands of new members, donors, and registrants.

  38. Gene Trosper

    “Welldists seem to fail to realize he’s playing both sides of the fence. Classic politician.”

    Good. The LP could use some political smarts to learn how to actually win elections and successfully lobby for political change.

  39. George Dance

    Tom Knapp: key personnel at Reason — Nick Gillespie in particular — have made a career of gushing that we’re at a “libertarian moment.” In Nick’s case, for about six months out of every year for most of a decade regardless of whether or not the gushing is justified.”

    Yes; they’re predicting/promoting a paradigm shift. That’s mostly social – politics lags behind, as usual. But undeniably changes are happening; the change in attitudes to cannabis legalization and same-sex marriage being just the most publicized. A majority of Americans now identify as “socially liberal,” or “inclusive” to use the PC term for one thing.

    Johnson/Weld is their latest enthusiasm. Uusually their man-crushes aren’t on LP candidates, so I guess that’s an improvement of a kind.

    Admittedly they’re just this year’s Rand Paul. But of course it’s an improvement that the LP is getting the attention rather than the Republican Liberty Caucus.

  40. Andy

    “Anthony Dlugos
    October 5, 2016 at 15:59
    Just so everyone is aware, I don’t care what Weld says, I give it no better than 50/50 odds that he’s still in the party on January 1, 2017. An ex-governor & justice department attorney has options, not the least of which is sitting on their ass doing nothing.

    Nor do I place any stock in the proclamations of loyalty to the LP of your garden-variety purist/radical.

    Like Chris Rock said, ‘a man is as faithful as his options.'”

    A person who is not faithful to the cause of liberty is not a person that anyone should support.

    It really shows everyone how low Anthony Dlugos’ standards are that even he says that he doesn’t expect Weld to stick around the party long after the election. Remember, never follow any political of philosophical advice from Anthony Dlugos.

  41. Andy

    ” political of philosophical advice ”

    Should read, “political or philosophical…”

  42. whocaresidont

    “Yes; they’re predicting/promoting a paradigm shift. That’s mostly social – politics lags behind, as usual. But undeniably changes are happening; the change in attitudes to cannabis legalization and same-sex marriage being just the most publicized. A majority of Americans now identify as “socially liberal,” or “inclusive” to use the PC term for one thing.”

    You’re going to anger that portion of the Ron Paul/LRC crowd who insist such social progress is non- or even anti-libertarian, that they are the only real pure proponents of liberty, and that America is dying due to integration, the failure to stone homosexuals and those who talk back to their parents, as well as the reluctance of cops to get in a few licks with the night stick to keep fleet-footed urban youth in their place and other such PC liberal degradation of American values.

  43. wolfefan

    Here’s a portion of Weld’s original statement explaining why he intends to focus on Trump: ” “I think Mr. Trump’s proposals in the foreign policy area, including nuclear proliferation, tariffs, and free trade, would be so hurtful, domestically and in the world, that he has my full attention,” At least with regard to these three issues, Weld is upholding a libertarian agenda as I understand it. Nuclear proliferation, high tariffs, and trade barriers are all things that most Libertarians oppose, aren’t they?

  44. Andy

    wolfefan said: ” At least with regard to these three issues, Weld is upholding a libertarian agenda as I understand it. Nuclear proliferation, high tariffs, and trade barriers are all things that most Libertarians oppose, aren’t they?”

    Consider that Weld has been a long time warmonger who fully supported Bush and the war in Iraq. He also supports the Trans-Pacific Partnership which is not a legitimate free trade deal.

    You are putting lip stick on a pig with this guy.

  45. langa

    You’re going to anger that portion of the Ron Paul/LRC crowd who insist such social progress is non- or even anti-libertarian, that they are the only real pure proponents of liberty, and that America is dying due to integration, the failure to stone homosexuals and those who talk back to their parents, as well as the reluctance of cops to get in a few licks with the night stick to keep fleet-footed urban youth in their place and other such PC liberal degradation of American values.

    Of course, Ron Paul has never advocated any of those things, but hey, you wouldn’t be much of a troll if you let the truth get in the way of a good smear, now would you?

  46. Tony From Long Island

    Anthony D said: ” . . . . . . .Tony, You wanna really keep yourself up at night?

    Imagine the nightmare catastrophe of a federal government magically filled one day with only radicals and purists, attempting to dismantle that which they CLAIM* to hate.

    My god. By lunch of the first day of the administration, they’d be arguing about what the NAP says about crouton size in the Ceasers salad. . . . . .”

    They would all join the “reform” party. There would be nothing to satisfy a purist. They would find something wrong with any political system, even one they had complete control of. That’s a conclusion I reached long ago.

  47. Tony From Long Island

    Hmm, “ass-chewing” really isn’t what came to mind when I watched it. She asked pointed questions and he answers without hesitation.

    So Gov. Weld prefers Clinton to Trump if a choice had to be made. All American’s should prefer Clinton to Trump. One is a flawed but experienced and qualified candidate and the other is a buffoon who can not go more than a few hours without saying something ridiculous, incendiary, offensive, factually incorrect or dangerous. He has brought out the worst in American discourse. He is a classic type-A personality who is also a narcissist. He will apologize for NOTHING because in his eyes, he is never wrong.

    He is reckless with his tongue and clueless about foreign policy. His statement about Russia not going into Ukraine was almost as stupid as Gerald Ford saying “There is no Russian domination of Eastern Europe and there never will be during a Ford Administration.”

    I don’t find anything wrong in the slightest by saying one candidate is better than the other while still arguing why Gary Johnson should get your vote. I am likely to vote for Gov. Johnson.

    To paraphrase USA Today: Everyone should vote – just not for Donald Trump.

  48. Anthony Dlugos

    Can the Delusional Caucus make up its mind? Is Weld a Republican carpetbagger or Democratic plant trying to help get Hillary elected?

  49. Tony From Long Island

    Anthony, what is your opinion on choosing one over the other? You and I seem to agree on some things. I’m curious how you feel about the two

  50. Anthony Dlugos

    Tony,

    As you probably know, the LP has a substantial number of paleocons masquerading as Libertarians. Among other things, they hate the state more than they love liberty, they have a soft spot for patriarchy, and it would not be unwise for you to assume many of them are gonna vote for Trump this fall and get a secret thrill about it.

    Were we to have had a VP nominee suiting their paleocon predilections, someone who would have been sympathetic to Trump’s incoherent rants and open mic night act, I can assure you they would not be complaining.

    Witness the Mises crew’s support of Trump. Of course, they hide that behind the “it’s only tactical” line, in the drawer where they keep their signed copies of the Ron Paul Newsletter.

  51. Thomas Knapp

    Anthony,

    Congratulations! The idea that the paleos might not let the door hit them in the ass on their way out of the LP is something I hadn’t really thought of. Finally, an up side to Johnson/Weld 2016!

  52. Anthony Dlugos

    Tony,

    I’d guess closer to republican carpetbagger, I just wouldn’t use that term. He’s a qualified man with options. Only a fool would expect an ex-governor to stay in our party. The solution is not to run him out or prevent his entry in the first place; the solution is to build a party strong enough that he doesn’t want to leave.

    What about you?

  53. Andy

    “Anthony Dlugos
    October 6, 2016 at 14:33
    Can the Delusional Caucus make up its mind? Is Weld a Republican carpetbagger or Democratic plant trying to help get Hillary elected?”

    You act as though there is some kind of big difference between the Republican establishment and the Democratic establishment. They are just two heads of the same dragon.

    Weld is a Council on Foreign Relations ruling establishment guy. He does not really give a rat’s ass about the Libertarian Party or movement.

  54. Tony From Long Island

    Actually Anthony, I was wondering about your opinion with regard to Clinton over Trump or vice versa if you had to choose one.

    As to Weld’s intentions, I don’t think he has any “agenda.” So, I choose neither of those

    I’m sure Tin Foil Hat Andy will jump in about Weld being in some secret society (CFR! CFR!! CFR!!!!)

  55. Thomas Knapp

    “Only a fool would expect an ex-governor to stay in our party.”

    Only a fool would expect that an ex-governor should BE in our party unless he had decided that we were right and our ideas were worth turning into policy.

    Absent that, he’s not only of no use to us, he’s an unmitigated detriment.

    The party has purposes.

    Masturbating in public with visions of electoral victory in our heads if only we can fool people into thinking we don’t stand for what we stand for isn’t one of them.

    Above and beyond Bill Weld already having proven himself a lying and untrustworthy sack of shit long before we nominated him, that was the main reason he was and is a bad and harmful choice for the VP nomination.

  56. Tony From Long Island

    TK ” . . . . Only a fool would expect that an ex-governor should BE in our party unless he had decided that we were right and our ideas were worth turning into policy. . . . . ”

    Do you mean ALL of the ideas? A majority of the ideas? Some of the ideas? Because I, for one, don’t want to see any candidate who agrees with his or her party’s platform 100%. It would seem less than genuine. There has to be some individuality.

  57. Thomas Knapp

    “Do you mean ALL of the ideas? A majority of the ideas? Some of the ideas?”

    That’s the judgment call the delegates have to make every time.

    In retrospect, if they bothered to closely examine the candidates’ rhetoric from this election cycle, I’d be interested in whether or not the delegates who nominated them could identify even one plank of the platform that Johnson and Weld both unreservedly support.

  58. Anthony Dlugos

    Tony,

    Not gonna lie…I’d get some satisfaction seeing Hillary have a nervous breakdown after losing to Trump…but I know in my head that we’d be safer under Hillary.

    One boneheaded statement by Trump as president and a trade war could be ignited, and then we could be back in the late 1920’s.

    Hillary being bought and paid for by Wall Street has its temporary advantages.

  59. Tony From Long Island

    I forgot to ad that Trump has spouted conspiracy theories endlessly since the beginning of his campaign. So many that people forget them! Remember the one about dipping the bullets in pigs blood before shooting muslims? The man is bat-shit crazy.

    Remember him impersonating his own publicist in the 90’s and declaring how great Trump is in the sack?

    He’s also an international embarrassment to the United States. My friends in Europe are dumbfounded that this clown is where he is.

  60. langa

    You act as though there is some kind of big difference between the Republican establishment and the Democratic establishment. They are just two heads of the same dragon.

    Exactly. The idea that the Democratic Party is dedicated to promoting progressive ideas is totally false. The idea that the Republican Party is dedicated to promoting conservative ideas is totally false. Both parties are dedicated to promoting the same ideas — namely, imperialism abroad and plutocracy at home. They only claim otherwise to fool the ignorant rubes that make up their rank-and-file.

  61. Darcy G Richardson

    “Both parties are dedicated to promoting the same ideas — namely, imperialism abroad and plutocracy at home. They only claim otherwise to fool the ignorant rubes that make up their rank-and-file.” — langa

    Precisely. The only thing worse than the corrupt duopoly is a once ideologically-based third party — the country’s leading alternative party, at that — trying desperately to become one of them, or at least hoping to make it an awkward threesome.

    Welcome to the new American nightmare.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *