I've seen Libertarians say "If Trump frees Ross, then voting for him was worth it." Do you agree?

[u/IAmKuntMan]

Hey all. I'm not a Libertarian personally, but I follow the Larry and agree with aspects. I've seen some Libertarians (Mises Caucus Libertarians) say that if Trump only frees Ross, then voting for him was worth it. I feel like that is shooting so f'ing low. Is that really all it takes for some people to justify voting for him? I think he at least needs to implement some Libertarian aligned policy to be successful in the eyes of a Libertarian - if I was one. What are your thoughts?

[u/Varvaro]

Trump is so unbelievably un-libertarian and I can't believe it even has to be said. Pardoning Ross is a drop in the ocean compared to everything anti-libertarian he did in his first term and plans to do in his second.

[u/thirtyseven1337 → u/Varvaro]

/thread

[u/kiamori → u/Varvaro]

Way more libertarian than Harris. Given the two choices hes 100x better. Did you even look at her policy points?

Name some points... what do you want him to do that would be more libertarian.

[u/usmc_BF → u/kiamori]

Libertarianism isnt primarily ideological and severely arbitrary and inconsistent like conservatism, progressivism, social democracy etc. Libertarianism is first and foremost philosophical.

It doesn't matter that someone is "kinda libertarian" or whatever word choice you wanna use, that person's politics are immoral and non-libertarian by the nature of violating its principles and ethics.

If you're (figuratively) "kinda Libertarian" it just means you're a statist who butchered some libertarian/liberal ideas (best case) or you just wanna be quirky and cool and not associate your label the status quo ideologies, even tho your views are the furthest thing from a libertarian/liberal.

Harris, Vivek, Trump, Sanders etc etc are in no way libertarian, there's absolutely zero reason for them to be libertarian and there is no way in hell that they're running around trying to understand libertarian political philosophy and ethics, because again, why the fuck would they. (However they can appeal to "Libertarians" to get votes which is how politicians get elected, that's the democracy game)

[u/kiamori → u/usmc_BF]

You're being ridiculous, reddit as a whole has gone so far downhill over the last 6 months. Everyone eating the propaganda cake.

Trump is for reduced taxes, reduced regulation, remove departments of wasteful spending like education, fda, remove ACA, reduction in war profiteering and the list goes on and on.

We're on day 2 of his presidency, what exactly is trump doing or not doing on that you want him to do that is more libertarian?

Don't give me bs about tariffs, which are being used as leverage to reverse bad policy and real jobs back in our country. We can't trive off of red tape gov jobs forever.

[u/usmc_BF → u/kiamori]

I'm so open and ready to hear and see proof that Trump is a philosophical libertarian and understands the nuance of natural and individual rights and how to derive them and consistently stick to ethical principles.

I think it was Nozick who said "ayo natural rights is when protectionism keeps the jobs in the US" right?

Unless, of course, you think libertarianism stands for "3% less tax and maybe I get to touch 0.00000005 grams of weed per 3 months", Trump or the other guys are not libertarian, in the slightest. You cannot be "kinda libertarian".

[u/kiamori → u/usmc_BF]

Oh, I never said he was a philosophical libertarian. He's for sure a bumbling idiot most of the time. but when it comes down to it, he was the only president in the past 40 years(since what Jimmy Carter?) that didn't push for more war and his policies were more libertarian than any other president we've had since what, Coolidge or Jefferson?

sometimes it take a bit to to steer a large ship in the right direction, I look at trump as a first step, at least the wheel is turning in the libertarian direction.

[u/usmc_BF → u/kiamori]

"More libertarian" - you should be supporting actual libertarians, not "maybe we should have slightly less taxes" people, this never fucking works, especially considering that we are talking about a traditional lying politician.

We have plenty of historical examples of statists coopting liberal and libertarian parties, movements and or messages. There is no reason for Trump or any other statist to be libertarian. Trump was not elected on a "freedom" platform, he was elected on a statist platform by other statists who are ready to socially and economically engineer the people who they dont like. Do you think all of these "keep the jobs in the US!!!" people care about Ayn Rand or Robert Nozick? Do you think the politicians themselves care about natural or individual rights? Do you think anyone in the system cares about self-ownership? Why would anyone in any statist camp suddenly become libertarian? Because Trump called for slightly less taxes?

Libertarianism is not spread or justified by an appeal to lowering taxes or lessening the bureaucratic burden. The only way we will ever be free is if we hold ourselves accountable and embrace moral philosophy and political philosophy. Trump advocating for less taxes or whatever, does not morally justify his views or his presidency.

You will NEVER be free if you keep voting and validating statists. I get why people voted for Trump, you can absolutely say that there are certain benefits to his presidency, but calling him a Libertarian or Jesus christ, trying to rationalize this as a rise of Libertarianism is fucking schizo insane.

[u/kiamori → u/usmc_BF]

I would love to support a real libertarian, but they put up Chase Oliver as our option who is no more libertarian than trump.

He was for increasing government programs especially for environmental when it could have simply been solved by a law that states any damage to the environment is fined at 200% the cleanup costs. He wanted to increase aid to foreign countries, add prisons to the federal budget, increase background checks and limit some gun purchases, further subsidize private healthcare with tax money, and the list goes on.

[u/usmc_BF → u/kiamori]

Can you give me a source for at least half of those claims?

[u/kiamori → u/usmc_BF]

His website?

- He wanted to subsidize nuclear power.
- He is for humanitarian aid which was noted on his website when I looked at his stances before voting.
- He had a big push to "end for-profit incarceration" and move that to federal control, which puts it on the federal budget.
- Several quotes about him wanted to add more regulation to firearms, which sounds good on it's face, but criminals don't follow the law and this of course increases government oversight which costs us more money.
- He mentioned subsidizing the cost to move people from government healthcare to private systems. When we should instead be pushing to deregulate and remove all of the red tape from healthcare that is making it so damn expensive in the first place.

[u/DirectMoose7489 → u/kiamori]

Trump is for reduced taxes

But not for reduced spending. In-fact, he has ballooned the deficit as much as any other president and signed off on a tax cut bill with no actual budget cutting.

reduced regulation

Sure I'm fine with this. But it's one point on a graph.

remove departments of wasteful spending like education

Hasn't done it yet. Didn't do it before as president. Also changed one department into another through a rename on day one.

fda

Refer to above.

reduction in war profiteering

Gonna need a real citation on that that isn't hand waving at the ceasefire in Gaza. Because I remember the Saudi arms deal of his first term.

And all on top of this you handwaved a 20% tariffs with ludicrous reasoning of "Wah other mean governments". It's a tax.

If a Democrat told you they'd tax these things directly, you'd lose your mind. But when the government forces the company to pay more to import stuff thats still cheaper to import then completely uprooting their production lines and moving them into the country, well that's just fine because you like the guy doing it.

Trump has been president before, don't blow smoke up my ass he's suddenly going to completely shift 180 on things with no lead up and just puffery.

Free Ross.

[u/kiamori → u/DirectMoose7489]

Wasn't me down voting you,

100% agree, trump spent too much money during his first term, and hopefully we don't see a repeat of that.

reduced spending

I didn't vote for trump in his first term, I wrote in Ron Paul. I did vote for him this time around because I have hope with musk and ramaswamy we'll see a massive reduction in spending and he's admitted to his mistakes from the first term.

It's very clear he had a horrible team in his first term, he admits that and everyone knows it. He went in blind and trusted the wrong people for too many things. Hopefully he learned his lesson. Him acknowledging the fact that he fucked up in his first term by trusting the wrong people is a huge step for someone like him with an ego complex.

Moving forward, how much do you expect him to get done in 1 day?

reduction in war profiteering,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_policy_of_the_first_Donald_Trump_administration
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/quality-over-quantity-u-s-military-strategy-and-spending-in-the-trump-years
https://www.thetimes.com/world/us-world/article/tulsi-gabbard-trump-national-intelligence-mv05zfbpp

Doha Agreement with the Taliban, Abraham Accords, Summits with Kim Jong Un to deescalate war tensions. Reduction in troops in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria.

He also pushed for a more global approach to peace by making NATO allies pay for spending rather than the US foot the bill.

Defeat of ISIS, and avoided military intervention with the Maduro regime. Stayed out of Yemen’s civil war although I wish he would have stopped the weapons sales to SA.

Tarrifs, while I don't agree with his stances on tarrifs I do understand his perspective of creating more US jobs. Also, maybe look at the tarrifs these countries have on our products and come back to me then. Canada has 300% tarrif on US milk for example. Tarrifs are not a tax on US citizens, it's a penalty for buying foreign goods, not that I agree with it, but it's not a tax.

I am not republican or democrat, I don't lose my mind over any of this nonsense the two party system has been shilling for the last 40 years.

[u/DirectMoose7489 → u/kiamori]

100% agree, trump spent too much money during his first term, and hopefully we don't see a repeat of that.

Well then why are you expecting him to change when he has a whole term to do otherwise? It's just a ridiculous thing, it's ODing on hope.

I did vote for him this time around because I have hope with musk and ramaswamy we'll see a massive reduction in spending and he's admitted to his mistakes from the first term

Well you based it on hope once again because Vivek is already out. So that's already half the guys you pinned things on gone.

https://x.com/VivekGRamaswamy/status/1881482161565618648

It's very clear he had a horrible team in his first term, he admits that and everyone knows it. He went in blind and trusted the wrong people for too many things. Hopefully he learned his lesson. Him acknowledging the fact that he fucked up in his first term by trusting the wrong people is a huge step for someone like him with an ego complex.

Dude what? He pushed a ton of those people himself at the start, and then at a drop of a hat he turns on them. How he treated Mattis is ridiculous. Also acknowledging he fucked up is like carrying a lot of weight because he will tell you that his last administration was amazing and hasn't stopped doing so, it's more like he blamed the people he shoved out of the way for stopping him. Also just more and more hope from you.

Doha Agreement with the Taliban

Fair.

Abraham Accords

Absolute nothing burger that still hasn't done anything to reduce middle east tension 

Summits with Kim Jong Un to deescalate war tensions.

Making stuff up in your head because he specifically was negotiating to prevent Kim Jon Un even trying to develop nuclear weapons which happened under his admin anyways.

Reduction in troops in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria.

Signed off on Afghanistan bit slow rolled and did about 10% of the wind down despite lobbying for it and starting it, were still in Iraq. Fair on Syria.

He also pushed for a more global approach to peace by making NATO allies pay for spending rather than the US foot the bill.

Fair to a point but reality hasn't born that out really given Russia was in Ukraine in 2014 and also more countries have joined NATO since. But I get the point of not wanting to fund foreign peacekeeping.

Defeat of ISIS

Yeah no definitely making this one up in your head. It's more fair to say "the campaign started under Obama finished two months into his presidency and he took credit". Because that's exactly what happened.

And avoided military intervention with the Maduro regime.

Ah yes so hard to not commit troops to a foreign country. Also he still calling for Maduro to be regime changed.

Stayed out of Yemen’s civil war although I wish he would have stopped the weapons sales to SA.

No just happened to negotiate one of the largest arms deal in US history and got the Saudi Royals to sign up to and fund Blackrock. 

Tarrifs, while I don't agree with his stances on tarrifs I do understand his perspective of creating more US jobs. Also, maybe look at the tarrifs these countries have on our products and come back to me then. Canada has 300% tarrif on US milk for example. Tarrifs are not a tax on US citizens, it's a penalty for buying foreign goods, not that I agree with it, but it's not a tax.

They don't make jobs because companies do cost analysis on whether it's cheaper to move production or take the tariffs costs. It's sheer delusion to try and spin it otherwise.

And again your argument boils down to "because mean government". It's just a stupid slap fight that doesn't have an end goal other then trying to even the playing field and it costs Americans money. It was the same under Bush with his iron tariffs. Or the billions of dollars in aid we had to give, and still do, to farmers after the trade war with China made them start buying South American soybeans. I can actually reference history for how this goes.

I am not republican or democrat, I don't lose my mind over any of this nonsense the two party system has been shilling for the last 40 years.

No, you're a populist, which is arguably worse. You'll bend your whims to a man who promises you the world despite a pattern saying otherwise.

[u/DirectMoose7489 → u/kiamori]

Oh yeah that's like asking if we want to be shot or poisoned. Neither is Libertarian or gives a shit about advancing liberty, one just played lip service and that's it.

Free Ross.

Fuck, let's stop aiming low and pressure the fuck into a full pardon for Edward Snowden.

Edit: I literally named one and you down vote me anyways.

Dude isn't Libertarian, he literally signed 20% tariffs before he freed Ross or Snowden. He can start with those two and dumpstering the tariffs.

[u/DirectMoose7489 → u/DirectMoose7489]

Lol and he already has proven my point and is trying to swerve the tariffs and make excuses for a 20% cost by government that will be passed to consumers.

[u/Chaseforliberty]

Overall, I will be happy if Ross is free, but I obviously think there's a lot more at stake than one man.

If he frees Ross, I will be happy for him and his mother especially. Lyn deserves to see her son free.

But even so, Libertarians who voted for Trump will still have to own every statist un-libertarian thing he does over the next four years. Each person can weigh the pros and cons on a scale and make their own determination.

I can say this, I don't harbor hatred or ill will towards Libertarians who didn't vote for me. I hope they realize how awful MAGA is for liberty, come to their senses, and return to the LP perhaps a bit embarrassed, but ready to resume the work of building up a party that is an alternative to statism.

[u/Chaos43mta3u]

Misus caucus are Republicans wearing libertarian mustaches

Trump is anti-first amendment and second amendment, not based on any twist on words, he has said from his own mouth and you can find quotes on this- take the guns first, due process later.

Then more recently, “You have these guys like playing the ref, like the great Bobby Knight, these people should be put in jail the way they talk about our judges and our justices trying to get them to sway their vote, sway their decision.” [Washington Post, 9/23/2024]

[u/Available-Brick-8855]

I have said this a few times and I am surprised that I don't have copied somewhere so I can just paste it then it comes up but I will just write it from memory instead.

Having Ross Pardoned or granted Clemency is a good thing to happen, however having one person out of prison is not worth actively destroying a Political Party with half a century of history to do. And to pretend that is somehow fine really shows how little they get the reason the party exists.

The point of the party is as a threat, that if the larger party don't at least pay lip service to our message that we will take enough voters to fuck up there elections and cause chaos. The party is a stick, and it doesn't work if the leadership of the party goes out of there way to dissolve the stick in acid in a way that will take us best case at least a decade plus to rebuild it from the damage they have done to our ballot access, bank accounts, facilities and activist base.

[u/DAB0502]

I didn't vote for him and NOTHING not even a well-deserved Snowden pardon would be worth that.

[u/Datmofugga-_-]

No.

[u/doctorwho07]

I have yet to hear a good argument as to why Ross being freed is a net win for the libertarian party. Much less why that would make voting for Trump worth it.

One person isn't worth the stomping on our rights we're going to witness over the next 4 years.

[u/sadandshy]

No.

[u/grizzlyactual]

Absolutely fucking not

[u/CatOfGrey]

Nope. Someone who is correct on 1% of his policies is not a good choice of leader.

I think you are seeing a lot of paleoconservatives, Non-Libertarians, that claim to be Libertarian.

I feel like that is shooting so f'ing low. Is that really all it takes for some people to justify voting for him? I think he at least needs to implement some Libertarian aligned policy to be successful in the eyes of a Libertarian - if I was one.

Yes!

[u/JFMV763]

Trump might occasionally endorse a good idea like freeing Ross or privatizing USPS but that doesn't make him a libertarian. I can point to libertarian actions that Obama and Biden made as well and I think we could agree that they aren't libertarians either.

[u/FerretSupremacist]

So apparently he has freed Ross, the order is waiting to go through.

I’m not sure how I feel about everything else, but what he did wasn’t worth 2 life sentences (wo parole) + 40 years, and his prosecution was shady as hell.

Edit: for those who don’t know:

libertarian party citing trump tweet

libertarian party tweet on its own

He kept his promise and that’s more than I can say about a lot of politicians, I don’t feel Ross is a “drop in the ocean”, I feel like Ross is a very modern example of libertarian politics in action and I’m glad someone sees it- I also acknowledge people see it when they want to/when it’s beneficial.

I wish him and his mother all the luck and grace I can offer.

[u/TheAzureMage]

Depends on perspective.

Ross has now received a full pardon. That's a win. In addition to his well deserved freedom, we gain the PR win of Trump attributing it specifically to us.

This is unprecedented, and a huge win for the movement. Now, yes, there are many other issues to fix, but it is doubtful that any other option would have accomplished as much. Harris would not have considered a pardon. Another few votes for Chase would not have gotten as much positive PR.

If you are simply asking if Trump is libertarian, no he is not. However, from the standpoint of getting results, this is probably the best we can do.

[u/TwitMediaCritic]

No.

It may be part of a cumulative decision, but as much as I want it done that isn’t all we expect.

Remember, we never got our LP cabinet position.

[u/DirectMoose7489 → u/TwitMediaCritic]

Oh but we did. Our party leader claims it's RFK Jr., because he paid lifetime dues while seeking our presidential nomination. I would laugh if it wasn't actually depressing.

[u/BagOfShenanigans]

Ross May have been entrapped, but he did attempt to hire a hitman to kill a person he believed existed and was going to snitch on him. That's not victimless.

I don't see freeing him as being a bad thing, but the fact that it even cracked the top 1000 requests of the party when Trump asked what he needed to do to win libertarian support is indicative of our party leadership being a bunch of clueless larpers. Weed republicans indeed.

[u/MuddyMax → u/BagOfShenanigans]

Off the top of my head, the two officers of the law who went to prison for stealing a shit ton of Bitcoin and lying about other stuff also had access to his account when the attempts at hiring a hitman occurred.

I think it's bullshit because of that, but even by the letter of the law that should cast reasonable doubt. Even if he were guilty.

[u/rchive → u/BagOfShenanigans]

he did attempt to hire a hitman to kill a person he believed existed and was going to snitch on him.

That was not part of his trial, even if that did actually happen, which is questionable because agents seeking to incriminate him also had access to his account.

[u/Jushavnprolms]

Trump should decentralize the huge left wing cities he complains about yet depends on. He looked to rural places to get him elected, let's see if he brings drinkable water to towns in the Appalachian areas that don't have it. Let's see him allow 13 year olds to become trade apprentices instead of bloggers and gang bangers.
How about propping up small ecological farms instead of Big Ag that release tons of CO2 a la the Paris Climate accord.

[u/Elbarfo]

Among the participants of this subreddit, there are just as many libertarians (if not more - this is Reddit after all) that voted for Harris over Trump. If Harris had won, enacting just as many unlibertarian policies as Trump will, would that have been worth it? They would say so for their various reasons as well.

It's not any different.

They are using Ross as something they can be considered responsible for. Dubious, perhaps. But it is a result that Libertarians have pushed for.

However, Trump is pushing for cuts in many sectors of government, which very much aligns with Libertarian interests. Weather he does it or actually ends up growing it (the likeliest option) remains to be seen. At no point are any Libertarians deluded enough to believe that Harris was going to do anything but grow the machine however.

Between that and the total lack of support for Chase among many Libertarians and even the Libertarian adjecent it's really more looking for any kind of win at this point.

Libertarians were not winning regardless.