Roger Stone Has Op-ed Published: How Donald Trump Can Win (the US Presidency)

roger stone

Posted to Saint Peters Blog

August 9, 2015

How Donald Trump Can Win

Presidential campaigns are always won with big-picture ideas articulated with simple, memorable and disciplined messaging. Even in a primary, voters respond more favorably to a candidate with a grand vision of what our country should be than to policy wonks. Just ask President Gingrich.

Although I resigned from his campaign effort last week I remain convinced that Trump and Trump alone has the stature, experience and guts to take on the entrenched special interests and save America from further decline under the failed policies of the Bush/Clinton combine. I have wanted Trump to run for president since 1988.

Donald Trump soared in the polls this summer by delivering exactly that kind of message: make America great again. He wants to fix the immigration problem, create jobs, make our enemies respect us, and take care of our veterans.

In a political climate dominated by special interests, Trump is a breath of fresh air. He’s widely known as a savvy businessman with enough of his own money to ignore the lobbyists and donors seeking influence. Trump isn’t beholden to the SuperPAC funding billionaires. He is a billionaire. Rather than fall for the Left’s divisive class politics, voters got behind Trump immediately. They know only a successful business leader can bring jobs back to the U.S. instead of China. He was the only candidate with the courage to say what they were thinking and they loved it.

Read the rest here.

Roger has announced that he is considering running for the US Senate for the Libertarian Party of Florida. It is unclear whether he quit or was fired recently from Donald Trump’s Presidential campaign for the Republican Party’s candidacy.

36 thoughts on “Roger Stone Has Op-ed Published: How Donald Trump Can Win (the US Presidency)

  1. Jim Polichak from Long Island

    Trump has a slightly better chance of being elected next year as Ross Perot has – should Perot decide to run again. Jesse Ventura has a better chance even if he doesn’t run.

  2. paulie

    I think he has a real chance. Consider that Perot actually led both Bush and Clinton in the polls before dropping out. Wasted vote miscalculation wouldn’t have entered the picture if he stayd in the race and continued to poll competitively. The reason nn-duopoly candidates usually drop as the election gets close is that they are seen as not having a chance so the “lesser/greater evil/spoiler” BS card is played against them, but that can’t happen if they still poll competitively or lead close to election time, and Trump has the money and name recognition wher he could compete. Consider also that more people are sick of the duopoly now than in 1992.

    I don’t think even Trump can beat the rigged game by the Republican establishment party bosses, but I think it’s possible. Maybe he can pull enough leverage to stage a hostile takeover.

  3. paulie

    Cross-posting for those reading this post only, with apologies to our regulars who read this on the other post:

    How are the views that Stone expresses in this article (the original post we are commenting on) even remotely compatible with libertarianism?

    Consider: https://tucker.liberty.me/trumpism-the-ideology

    http://reason.com/blog/2015/07/13/the-idiocracy-candidate

    https://reason.com/blog/2015/07/13/hey-donald-trump-sanctuary-cities-are-sa

    http://reason.com/archives/2015/07/06/trump-and-the-myth-of-immigrant-crime

    http://reason.com/blog/2015/06/30/donald-trump-is-a-blowhard-idiot-especia

    Then there’s the rank idiocy of endorsing someone you know is a dirty trickster.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Scorpion_and_the_Frog

    You lay down with the dogs, you wake up with the fleas. Come on now folks, have some sense.

    The part where Stone disagrees with Trump’s campaign tactics is the only part he gets right, but consider the rest of the article and what it says or implies about Stone’s own views – especially in light of thee other links.

  4. Robert Capozzi

    Any G2 on whether Bloomberg is still considering an independent run? A 4+-way contest could be wild.

  5. Robert Capozzi

    I’ve seen attack TV ads on Bloomberg in recent weeks, so someone thinks he might go.

    If not 4, why not 5? Might be a slight opening for GJ and the challengers of the cult of the omnipotent state to break out, at least a bit.

  6. wredlich

    The reported firing/resignation is phony. Stone and Trump have been connected for decades. It’s just another play to get keep Trump’s reality TV show (presidential campaign) going.

  7. paulie

    That’s possible, but note that they are not claiming to no longer be associates or friends nor is Stone saying anything other than that he supports Trump; in this article he says explicitly that he does still support him. The alleged firing or quitting depending on who you believe is because there was a disagreement among Trump staffers and Stone was allegedly on the losing end of it. Since his strategy is not being followed he is no longer involved with the campaign at this time, or so he and Trump say. It’s entirely possible that this strategic disagreement is real, although it is also possible that it is staged.

  8. paulie

    See the links above. He’s straight up fascist. So if Stone is really a convert to libertarianism why does he like this guy? And what about other supposed libertarians such as Rockwell and Root who also like Trump… why?

  9. Andy

    “paulie

    August 11, 2015 at 1:50 pm

    See the links above. He’s straight up fascist. So if Stone is really a convert to libertarianism why does he like this guy? And what about other supposed libertarians such as Rockwell and Root who also like Trump… why?”

    I don’t think that Lew Rockwell really likes Donald Trump. I think that he thinks that Donald Trump is a loose canon who is making the Republican primaries more entertaining than they would be otherwise.

    FYI, I’ve read that Trump is against the War on Drugs. He’s not a libertarian, but his view on the drug war is apparently more in line with libertarians.

  10. paulie

    I don’t think that Lew Rockwell really likes Donald Trump. I think that he thinks that Donald Trump is a loose canon who is making the Republican primaries more entertaining than they would be otherwise.

    I found the tone of a lot of Rockwell’s comments to seem very approving of Trump. Stone is clearly supportive of Trump here. Root doesn’t directly say he is supporting Trump, but he strongly implies it. I just don’t see why anyone who is even remotely libertarian leaning sees Trump as anything but anti-liberty.

    FYI, I’ve read that Trump is against the War on Drugs. He’s not a libertarian, but his view on the drug war is apparently more in line with libertarians.

    Not sure if he still holds that position, since a lot of his views have supposedly changed, but een if he does I did not say, and did not mean to imply, that he is anti-liberty on every single issue.

    However, he is anti-liberty on most issues, including the ones that are central to his campaign; he has an authoritarian personality that is autocratic in nature; he is bellicose and very prone to retaliation and one-upmanship with escalation, which are very dangerous qualities in a commander in chief with nuclear capabilities; and he has a personal history of crony corporatism and eminent domain abuse.

    So why do any libertarians or anyone who is even in the general vicinity of libertarianism even remotely like this guy?

  11. Robert Capozzi

    Yes, like me, one can find many of Trump’s views to be toxic, and yet on some level appreciate how his (apparent) “straight talk” and anti-political politics are shaking up the political world, which surely needs to be shaken.

    Chemotherapy is poisonous, yet sometimes it can cause cancer to go into remission.

    Best case: Trump is chemo for our collective cancer.

  12. Andy

    Paul said: “So why do any libertarians or anyone who is even in the general vicinity of libertarianism even remotely like this guy?”

    I don’t think that Trump is generally liked by libertarians. A few libertarians do find him to be entertaining though.

  13. Andy

    Paul said: “I found the tone of a lot of Rockwell’s comments to seem very approving of Trump.”

    I’ve followed Lew Rockwell for years and I seriously doubt that he’d support Donald Trump. I take his comments to mean that he finds Trumps’ “loose canon” personality to be entertaining and that he’s shaking things up in the Republican primary. This does not indicate support for his views, or that Rockwell thinks that it would be a good thing if Trump were elected President.

  14. paulie

    I see it more as a case of jumping from the frying pan into the fire.

    Germany certainly had some very serious problems prior to Hitler, but Hitler was not the right solution to them by any means.

    That’s not to compare Trump to Hitler. Hitler never successfully developed nukes, for example.

  15. Harry Tuttle, Heating Engineer

    The Libertarian Party (99.999% of the group of individuals who comprise the LP) doesn’t know anything about political strategy. It excludes members of our Idiocracy who know anything about strategy like the dangerous chemical dihydrogen oxide excludes oil. Roger Stone knows a little bit about political strategy, and the LP is “gearing up” to mount an inconsequential attack against him, rather than work with him. Ideally, he will proceed as if they didn’t exist. By “gearing up,” I mean “incessantly bickering amongst themselves about inconsequential irrelevancies.”

    The Jeffrey Tucker piece is the best thing written about Trump, and, in my opinion, Stone was wrong to value Trump politically. (I think Stone made the right choice in dumping him, since he couldn’t “correct” his course. I also think Stone was right in not totally burning his bridges with Trump.) Stone has been duly-chastened, and I hope he helps make the LP into the viable political party it currently is not. He need not compromise principle to do this.

    He’s a better speaker when he’s speaking for himself, anyway.

  16. paulie

    Paulie’s remark on Trump spelling his name on Earth with nuclear craters visible from space is high comedy. My vote for 2nd best thing written on the Trump candidacy, after Tucker’s piece.

    Thank you. I only hope it’s comedy.

  17. paulie

    Roger Stone knows a little bit about political strategy

    He knows a lot about dirty tricks and double crossing, creating fake third parties to play games and split votes, hostile takeovers of political parties and using deception etc. He’s been doing it since at least high school. Look at what he did to Warren Redlich and LPNY, and that was *after* Stone supposedly came over to the LP. Stone continues to be proud of what he did there, and he is to this day defending anti-liberty turd Donald Trump. He also worked to undermine the GJ12 campaign in the crucial final days, using a bunch of anonymous accounts to spread a very negative and distorted interpretation of GJ finances far and wide. Speaking of not knowing political strategy, why would any party or person in its right mind trust this guy?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Scorpion_and_the_Frog

    Don’t be that frog, because Stone is all too obviously that scorpion.

    And as for his supposed brilliance in political strategy, even if he could be trusted not to double cross us, which he clearly can’t be, what’s his winning batting average been lately? Not very good at all from what I understand.

    and the LP is “gearing up” to mount an inconsequential attack against him

    Unfortunately, the LP seems to be largely oblivious to him, and there is very little by way of a counterattack against his destructie infiltration against the LP.

    The Jeffrey Tucker piece is the best thing written about Trump, and, in my opinion, Stone was wrong to value Trump politically.

    They’ve been friends and allies for decades, and Stone still supports him regardless of whether he was fired, quit, or made the whole thing up and is still working with Trump.

    Stone has been duly-chastened

    I’ve seen no evidence of that.

    I hope he helps make the LP into the viable political party it currently is not.

    Except that he’ll sting us even if it brings him down too. It’s in his nature; he can’t help himself. And we knew he was a scorpion when we decided to let him hitch a ride on our back.

  18. Harry Tuttle, Heating Engineer

    Paulie: You raise a lot of good points. I like Stone’s book on LBJ and believe it contains a lot of truth, and also believe it to be a fairly libertarian eye-opener. That book has probably done a lot to push joe-voter towards libertarianism. If the LP continues to be a “perfect is the enemy of the good” situation, it will never amount to anything.

    And we knew he was a scorpion when we decided to let him hitch a ride on our back.

    “We” didn’t decide anything. Stone is free to call himself a libertarian, Libertarian, anarchist, voluntaryist, liberal, bon vivant, hobosexual, or whatever. Sadly, if he called himself a hobosexual, he’d probably have more electoral success than if he called himself a big-L Libertarian.

    In that regard, I appreciate that a famous author calls himself a big-L Libertarian, and writes small-L libertarian books. I’m sure that, like all things big-L, there was probably betrayal and heartbreak associate with Stone’s involvement in the LP. He may even be the guilty party, as you assert.

    That said, everyone who involves themselves in the LP makes it either:

    more successful (even if only by building the network by one node)
    or
    less successful

    I don’t know if Stone provides positive or negative value, but I know he provides value. Perhaps he’ll destroy the LP. If so, it deserves to be destroyed, so a real libertarian movement can rise out of the ashes, or so the US can become a dictatorship, fail, and begin rebuilding. ie:

    “Those you cannot teach to fly, teach to fall faster.”

    ? Friedrich Nietzsche

    In any event, Stone is self-interested (he probably won’t get screwed by the LP as bad as Andy has been, and as bad as LP donors have been since every dollar they donate has been sent through Redpath and Kohlhaas), and he understands at least elemental basics of political strategy (which the LNC very, very clearly doesn’t understand). That’s a big plus, in my opinion. I’m not overly impressed with the NY LP, they have been about as loyal to LP activists as a rabid dog could be expected to be.

    I’m glad Stone remains friends with Trump; maybe Trump will give him some money to write another book. I also think Trump would probably pursue an interesting and comical course, were he to be elected(that might, as Paulie notes, reduce the most socialist cities in the USA to radioactive dust). In any case, it would likely invalidate the idea of coercive politics in many Americans’ eyes, more effectively accomplishing the same long-term goals the LP has. (Since the LP has no viable short-term goals, and no honesty or loyalty, either.)

    I’m mostly glad that there’s a public figure of some intelligence in the LP, since before that arrival, the LP’s strategic IQ was ~0. On his departure from the Kampf Trump, Stone criticized Trump (his candidate) for “veering off message,” and for “not buying scientific polls.” If Stone contractually-demands the same from any future LP candidate he works for, the LP will possibly be far, far, far, far better off than it is now.

    Best wishes, Stone. Best wishes “LP.” May the future of America be small-L libertarianism!

  19. paulie

    That book has probably done a lot to push joe-voter towards libertarianism.

    LOL.

    “We” didn’t decide anything.

    We do if we embrace him as the LP.

    He may even be the guilty party, as you assert.

    No “may” about it.

    I don’t know if Stone provides positive or negative value,

    Shouldn’t be too hard to see. See what he did to LPNY. Less well known but equally bad, his undermining role in the crucial closing days of GJ12.

    Perhaps he’ll destroy the LP. If so, it deserves to be destroyed

    Allowing termites to eat the foundation of a house doesn’t mean the house deserves it.

    so a real libertarian movement can rise out of the ashes,

    It’s a mistake to believe that the LP is preventing any type of real libertarian movement from rising. The LP still does more to recruit new people to the movement than other movement organizations even when those people don’t for the most part stay in the LP.

    or so the US can become a dictatorship, fail, and begin rebuilding. ie:

    “Those you cannot teach to fly, teach to fall faster.”

    Friedrich Nietzsche

    Nietzsche was wrong. The fall of terrible dictatorships often leads to even worse ones. Revolutions usually happen, not as many people suppose when things get to their absolute worst, but when things are already moving in the direction revolutionaries want and they get frustrated with progress in their direction being too slow.

    he understands at least elemental basics of political strategy

    His winning record hasn’t exactly been impressive in recent years.

    I’m not overly impressed with the NY LP, they have been about as loyal to LP activists as a rabid dog could be expected to be.

    They ran a real libertarian for Governor and came close to ballot retention. Stone wanted them to run a carnival sideshow, relying on an empty promise of establishment support for the Republican AG line in return. When Redlich had the temerity to check whether the offer was genuine and found that it wasn’t, Stone got really mad and plotted his revenge. He tried without success to take over the state party, then created a disposable new party for the carnival sideshow. The whole objective of all this was to help the Republican beat the Democrat. Stone’s strategy was to have the LP campaign on issues that would win votes primarily away from the Democrat as opposed to winning votes primarily away from the Republican. The Democrat ended up beating the Republican 2-1, so all alt parties put together did not come close to covering the spread. The Greens retained ballot access, the LP came close but didn’t. Stone issued a vicious personal dirty tricks attack on Redlich. And LPNY is the rabid dog in this scenario?

    I also think Trump would probably pursue an interesting and comical course, were he to be elected

    About as hillarious as Hitler with nukes.

    reduce the most socialist cities in the USA to radioactive dust

    Think bigger. Nuclear war has the capabilty of ending all human life, and maybe all or almost all life on earth altogether, not just reduce cities to dust.

    In any case, it would likely invalidate the idea of coercive politics in many Americans’ eyes,

    Because, say, Germany and Russia are now libertarian paradises?

    If Stone contractually-demands the same from any future LP candidate he works for, the LP will possibly be far, far, far, far better off than it is now.

    See above regarding the scorpion and the frog, and about his recent (lack of) winning record.

  20. Jed Ziggler

    Yeah I don’t care how nutty Invictus is, he’s still not a snake like Stone. If those are the only two choices, please nominate Augustus Invictus. Hopefully someone else steps up though.

  21. Andy

    None Of The Above appears to be the best choice for the LP of FL US Senate nomination right now, unless some other candidates emerge.

  22. Andy Craig

    Nixon’s Pet Ratf*cker will wait until the day of the deadline, and then announce he won’t be converting his exploratory campaign to a real one after all, leaving LPF stuck with Emperor Adolf Crazypants as the nominee by default. Thereby eliminating a perceived spoiler threat for what is likely to be a relatively weak non-incumbent GOP nominee.

    I don’t know that that’s the plan, but going with assumption widely shared here that Stone is clinically incapable of sincerity and must be in this to hurt or undermine the LP somehow, that would be the most effective way to do so I think.

    @ Andy – it’s a state run primary election, so NOTA won’t be an option. The party can refuse to support, and even denounce, the winner of the primary, but they’ll still be on the November ballot as the Libertarian nominee.

  23. Andy

    One can pay a filing fee or collect petition signatures to get on the Florida primary ballot if one runs under the banner of a ballot qualified party.

    The filing fee is low enough to where most candidates prefer to pay the filing fee rather than collecting the petition signatures.

  24. Andy

    Is the primary binding on the Libertarian Party of Florida? I am pretty sure that in some states where the LP of FL has a primary, that it is not binding, in that the real nomination takes place via party convention.

  25. paulie

    Is the primary binding on the Libertarian Party of Florida?

    Yes.

    I am pretty sure that in some states where the LP of FL has a primary, that it is not binding, in that the real nomination takes place via party convention.

    There are states that have non-binding primaries but Florida is not one of them.

    One can pay a filing fee or collect petition signatures to get on the Florida primary ballot if one runs under the banner of a ballot qualified party.

    $10,000 fee or a number of signatures that as a practical matter would cost even more.

Leave a Reply

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