I'm voting Trump for laughs

[Brian4Liberty]

I say, if you're going to vote, vote for Trump.

Why this sacrilege, you ask? Because none of the candidates are worth a damn. There is, however, one distinguishing factor with Trump: the impossibly remote chance that he is not an element of planted, scripted political theater.

Ah, the lesser of evils debate. Apparently you have come to enough of a conclusion to muster enough excitement to make a choice and create a thread on it.

Can't say I have reached that level of enthusiasm about any of the evils. I could do a pros and cons analysis, but once again, the lack of enthusiasm prevents it.

Here's the closest I have come:

Where did the Ron Paul supporters go?

You have focused on the anti-establishment aspect, so my $.02 still stands. What they would actually do in office remains a mystery to me.

Position: Anti-establishment. This is more of a vague concept, but it was extremely popular this year. Ron Paul was the only anti-establishment candidate for two election cycles. Now, many put on this mantle, some more than others. Interestingly enough, the media attempts to label candidates that are clearly part of the establishment and call them anti-establishment. Rubio and Fiorina come to mind. Classic Orwellian double-speak. The establishment makes it pretty clear who they oppose, so this one is easier to observe.

Candidates: Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Bernie Sanders, Donald Trump

[Brian4Liberty]

I would really like to see a "No confidence in any of the above" selection on the bottom of the vote card just to see what the percentage would reveal.

Great idea. But that stat would already be reflected by third-party and write-in votes. The establishment would not like that, and their media does not report it, which explains why that option does not exist.

[osan]

Correct. If a yes vote is cast for him even if for "$#@! and giggles" then the one who casts that vote is complicit in whatever consequences may come of it. I will seek another option to pulling the switch on the trolley.

Meh... I don't really see this as necessarily true. Complicity in this case predicates on the reasons for having cast a given vote.

Besides, your position tacitly presupposes that there is some radical difference between these clowns. There are differences, that's for sure, but they are irrelevant because no matter which of these fools you elect, the fundamental result will be the same: we will be screwed. Whether they put out the right eye or the left matters no whit; you're still out an eye.

Honestly, it would seem that you and many others are taking this way too seriously. How could you? To do so is to lend credibility to these schmucks - talk about COMPLICITY. The only things that need be taken so seriously all relate to physical realities such as declarations of martial law, more draconian legislation and its enforcement, etc. This third-rate clownery cannot be regarded seriously by rational men, in sé. Participation in the game as a form of entertainment... now that's what I'm talking about. Participation on the assumption that you are going to change something fundamentally for the better... that's just craziness. Mass civil disobedience and bullets are the only things that stand the least hope of seeing the changes we would like.

[osan]

OP is right. None of the other candidates are worth a damn. But neither is Trump. I will not vote for Trump.

In the words of the former First Lady who passed away this morning, "Just Say No."

Raises an interesting question: what if we massively refused to participate? My immediate impulse is to conclude that Theye would then do whatever the hell they wanted, any complaint to be met with "you didn't participate, thereby making the voice of your pleasure heard loudly and clearly."

[TheTexan]

Theye would then do whatever the hell they wanted

We certainly wouldn't want that to ever happen.

[osan]

I would really like to see a "No confidence in any of the above" selection on the bottom of the vote card just to see what the percentage would reveal.

It would be small, IMO. Why? Because people are either brainwashed into believing their ballots at this level of choice count for something, or they are too frightened to "throw away a vote". It is largely the same mechanism that drives people to vote for the one they believe is most likely to win: fear of losing. Better the party win, even if represented by a scumbag, than let the enemy carry the day.

[osan]

Against the current candidates, I was all for voting for Trump for $#@!s and giggles, but my giggling stopped when he called for Snowden's execution.

Just one reason I am not confident he will prove to be anything notably different from the rest.

Is this true? First I've heard of it. If so, that's pretty foiged up.

[invisible]

Last time I checked, this was still Ron Paul Forums. So here we have an entire thread specifically dedicated to telling people to vote for someone that Ron Paul himself said is an awful candidate.

[openfire]

Cruz isn't good but he's better than Trump. So yeah, just no.

Cruz = Goldman Sachs.

[Christian Liberty]

Cruz = Goldman Sachs.

I understand that and I'll note that I did not say Cruz is good, but Trump is clearly worse in just about every way. That said my metric would be a bit different than most here. I am not casting a vote in the primaries and I'll be writing in the name of a theonomist in the general election if I make it to the polls, so I'm not promoting Cruz, but I do think Cruz is more Christian than Trump is.

[erowe1]

Cruz = Goldman Sachs.

What's that mean? Like something about Jews or something?

[openfire]

What's that mean? Like something about Jews or something?

If you don't understand the implications of having a President beholden to the owners of the Federal Reserve, then there isn't much I can do to help you.

But keep playing the antisemitism card.

[cajuncocoa]

Raises an interesting question: what if we massively refused to participate? My immediate impulse is to conclude that Theye would then do whatever the hell they wanted, any complaint to be met with "you didn't participate, thereby making the voice of your pleasure heard loudly and clearly."

I could turn that around on you: if we massively participated in this idea to vote for Trump, they will read it as "we agreed with and supported everything Donald Trump proposed." And I know all of us don't. I don't. So either way, "they" will make a wrong assumption. I prefer the one that allows me to sleep with a clear conscience.

[erowe1]

If you don't understand the implications of having a President beholden to the owners of the Federal Reserve, then there isn't much I can do to help you.

How will he be more beholden to banks than Trump?

And why do you act like that's the only issue out there?

[openfire]

How will he be more beholden to them than Trump?

And why do you act like that's the only issue out there?

I don't know if Trump will be, but I know that Cruz will be.

It's not the only issue, but I think it's the most important issue:

"I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men." -Woodrow Wilson, after signing the Federal Reserve into existence

[Danke]

I don't know if Trump will be, but I know that Cruz will be.

It's not the only issue, but I think it's the most important issue:

"I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men." -Woodrow Wilson, after signing the Federal Reserve into existence

I have no position. But I know that quote is disputed as to whether it is authentic or not.

[erowe1]

"I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men." -Woodrow Wilson, after signing the Federal Reserve into existence

Fake quote.

[Occam's Banana]

Whether he is an "insider" or an "outsider" (or "entertaining" or "boring," or a "populist" or a "plant," or X or Y or Z) one thing is absolutely certain: Donald Trump is an authoritarian.

There is neither jot nor tittle to indicate a Trump presidency would be anything other than an exercise in "will to power" authoritarianism (to whatever degree).

However gratifying the schadenfreude one may derive from Trump's candidacy (and of reactions to it), such gratification is wholly orthogonal to the advancement of liberty.

Enjoy it if you will, but do not mistake it for evidence that Trump will be any less injurious to the cause of liberty than he might be to his political nemeses.

In short: Vote $#@! Trump

[fcreature]

If you don't understand the implications of having a President beholden to the owners of the Federal Reserve, then there isn't much I can do to help you.

Cruz is certainly a scumbag in his own right, and I will not be voting for him however I can tell you with 100% certainty that he would be infinitely superior to Trump. Cruz at least acknowledges the existence of the Constitution and of our rights. At the very least I know that Cruz has read libertarian, free-market, and Austrian economic theory. I have doubts that Trump has even ever read the Constitution. Cruz is by no means a libertarian and is definitely beholden to the banks, but he does have a history and a record which suggest he'll at least be somewhat in the right direction.

What does Trump have?

[AuH20]

[openfire]

Fake quote.

But the premise is true.

[openfire]

What does Trump have?

No puppet strings.

[erowe1]

No puppet strings.

He's a puppeteer.

[Christian Liberty]

Frankly I care more about the life issue than even the Federal Reserve, and Cruz does seem to be genuinely pro-life.

Not as much as I would like (I would like a President who would have all the abortion clinics burned down, screw the godless constitution, but that's not going to happen) but I do think that unlike Romney types, that Cruz actually is against abortion. Trump is not.

Again, I'm not saying Cruz is good, and I'm not voting for him, but I do think he's clearly preferable to Trump.

[fcreature]

No puppet strings.

Assuming that were true (which it's not), how is that in and of itself, a good thing?

[pcosmar]

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=-F60upSgbSg
[/video]

So he is a nationalist and a socialist.

as opposed to a Marxist socialist.

so what else is new?

[phill4paul]

Whether he is an "insider" or an "outsider" (or "entertaining" or "boring," or a "populist" or a "plant," or X or Y or Z) one thing is absolutely certain: Donald Trump is an authoritarian.

There is neither jot nor tittle to indicate a Trump presidency would be anything other than an exercise in "will to power" authoritarianism (to whatever degree).

However gratifying the schadenfreude one may derive from Trump's candidacy (and of reactions to it), such gratification is wholly orthogonal to the advancement of liberty.

Enjoy it if you will, but do not mistake it for evidence that Trump will be any less injurious to the cause of liberty than he might be to his political nemeses.

In short: Vote $#@! Trump

His executive orders would rival the tax code in size.

[AuH20]

So he is a nationalist and a socialist.

as opposed to a Marxist socialist.

so what else is new?

Nationalism acts a natural bulwark against global integration. There will never be a libertarian revolution because daily life doesn't afford one the necessary time to find this hidden path. Hamsters literally can't get off their personal wheels to appraise the situation.

Libertarians want to stick their heads in the sand while this menacing shadow has almost swept across the land. We need to do something. Nationalism brings in incredible numbers to this critical fight that are we incapable of swaying over by logical means. It's either nationalism as a short term measure or it's global technocracy. Pick your poison.

[Joeinmo]

I agree ...vote Trump ...the establishment wanted Cruz from the very beginning - it was pretty obvious from the day Cruz announced

[pcosmar]

Pick your poison.

I would rather avoid poison.

But I will watch your Nazi State.. and I will testify before the final judge exactly what i see.

I am an observer. and I am a witness.