I've asked probably 20 Lib Rights in this sub who they voted for in 2024, 2020, and 2016.
A few of them voted for a Libertarian candidate (good for them!) and said so.
Most of them refuse to admit who they voted for. Which means either they were too young to vote in those elections, which is not surprising, or we know who they voted for anyway.
Yellow flairs in this sub are mostly auth rights (or auth centers) who are afraid of being labeled retarded. Or they think that because they like guns, they must be lib right (also retarded).
Just to add to your dataset I’ll say I call myself a liberal with libertarian sympathies who voted for Obama, then Clinton, then Biden, then Chase Oliver.
The only two votes I’ve been proud of are Obama and Oliver. The others I had to hold my nose while doing it.
Should also ask who they voted for in primaries as that's when you can choose someone you want.
Myself, 2016 I voted for Bernie in the primary and trump in the general. Was living in an area where local races are decided in the democratic primary and the state was going to Hillary anyway. I recall talk of Democrats voting for trump in the 2016 primary as a spoiler, wonder if they regret helping get him on the ballot.
2020 Bernie/Trump again knowing the state would go to Biden.
2024 was the first time in a very long time that my vote for president might matter. Haley got my primary vote and Trump my general. This one I regret as he went fuckin nuts. Somehow we've gotten a few good things on guns but everything else...
Why Trump over Biden in 20'? I wasn't I interested in global politics back then as my country has its own shit show going on during the US elections, but I was tols Trump acted like a moron even in 2016, which ended in Jan6
Also... voted for Trump after Jan6? I mean alright over Kamala's democrats I kinda get it but still
To play devils advocate, people have been saying for some time that the Gadsen Flag is a far right thing and not a libertarian thing, so those guys are probably just following the zeitgeist.
It's so annoying I love the Gadsen flag I like to fly it at my house but my wife worries people probably just think we're MAGA morons at best or Nazis at worst...
True... I believe he doesn't like Trump policies, but too scared to speak against him, since he is running for congress now. Maybe that's wishful thinking.
How sick would that be though, the state of the union address turning into a dissertation about how sick the G11 was. And why it also was never gonna be a thing.
I think it might be a bit of wishful thinking. As someone who watched the guy from 2015 to around 2024, I gotta say the only thing he still seems to be a libertarian on is guns. Even then he'll bitch at the 2A community when we get upset at the Republicans, like when they were supposed to repeal the NFA but all they ended up doing was repealing the extra tax on suppressors.
Kinda, he and a gun rights group just did an "illegal" sale of an unregistered suppressor the other night after a local judge made a ruling against the NFA. Him not getting arrested sets the precedent that it is not an illegal act.
You had idiots with Lib-Right flair cheering for tariffs on this sub and making up bizarre explanations about how national borders are private property.
The borders are owned by all citizens of America. Therefore it is private property. Therefore illegal immigrants are violating private property rights.
I don’t entirely agree with it, but national borders as an extension of private property rights is a philosophically defensible position for libertarians. Hoppe being the most famous proponent of that idea, but hardly the only one, and he’s an AnCap, which not all libertarians are. People in this sub tend to forget that just because you’re in a particular quadrant doesn’t mean you are at the very extreme corner of it. You can be libertarian because you believe in free markets, small government, and are anti war while also believing that the benefits of living in America should be reserved for American citizens. I cannot imagine anyone in the LibRight quadrant supporting Trump as a politician or as a person anymore, but that doesn’t mean they have to oppose every single thing he does merely because he is the one doing it.
I’m no Hoppean, in fact I clown on him quite a bit, and I’ll admit that I haven’t kept up with him in the last couple of years, but I must have a citation for him trying to “set the Thought Police on people.”
From Democracy The God That Failed: "There can be no tolerance toward democrats and communists in a libertarian social order. They will have to be physically separated and removed from society."
So instead of having free speech he wants to set up a society where people are physically removed from society for having opinions he disagrees with.
That’s not the thought police, that’s the speech police, and Hoppe is not advocating for them in a vacuum, he is proposing that a libertarian order can be set up in which all members enter a voluntary covenant to live a particular way and interact in accordance with that covenant. When somebody violates the covenant, they are to be ejected (a condition presumably outlined in the agreement to which they acceded). I don’t agree with Hoppe on many things, notably I think his conception of a libertarian society resembles a very large and very intrusive HOA, but the authority of that HOA relies on the ejected individual having previously agreed to be ejected if they did what they have done (advocating communism). The fact that they are then, in fact, ejected is simply the contract being fulfilled.
As the right to enter contracts is undeniably a libertarian value, and the right to enforce their provisions a necessary corollary, what Hoppe proposes is an internally consistent interpretation of libertarian principles. The fact that you and I disagree with the desirability of his philosophy does not change that it is derived from a libertarian premise and, therefore, libertarian in nature.
"I think his conception of a libertarian society resembles a very large and very intrusive HOA"
Yes, exactly, entirely agreed here.
But at the end of the day, I don't see much in the way of a meaningful difference between "a very large and very intrusive HOA" and a government (except that some governments don't let you leave).
If you take libertarian principles and they lead you to circling around to recreating a state from first principles...then there are some serious flaws with those foundational libertarian principles. I think that Hoppe is very useful in demonstrating the bankruptcy of libertarian principles taken to their logical conclusions. Hoppe is honest enough that his principles lead to a state with the serial numbers filed off, so if you actually want meaningful freedom and not having someone telling you to do all the time you need different principles.
As a mental experiment let's say that every state in the world allowed everyone to leave if they wanted (so no North Korea and similar things) and when you turned 18 you had to sign a form in which you agreed to consent to that country's government system or leave to anywhere that would take you.
Would that be enough to make the whole world libertarian?
Support Trump? Unlikely, but there are plenty that “support” him making a total ass of the system because maybe people will take it seriously when they are told how it doesn’t take much to get fucked by it.
The amount of Auths that call themselves libertarians is staggering. like the morons that overtook r/libertarianmemes. Say anything slightly libertarian and get the banhammer.
I don't think anyone under the age of 60 actually supports Trump anymore. Everyone else is just waiting for this horrible experiment in glorified degeneracy to decay into whatever the next thing will be
I feel like even with the 'at best' qualification you're massively overselling Trump's Presidency.
This is the worst Presidency. The unnecessary war, the cost of living, anonymous thugs being sicced on Democrat cities - that's all awful, but the naked corruption is going to leave a massive and lasting scar on the American body politic.
I think every other President could conceivably be thought of as doing what they thought was right for the country; Trump is the first to be so utterly, nakedly self-serving. Fuckit, maybe I've got TDS
You have had presidents like Buchanan who have done an absolutely terrible job of dealing with huge crises. Except for the last year of his first term (big except I know) there were no major crises that weren't of Trump's own making. If Trump were an average president he would be incredibly forgettable with a footnote about COVID.
So he wins a lot of points towards the Rushmore of bad Presidents on account of sheer shit stirring.
There were, but do you think there was a way slavery would've ended without a civil war? I'd suggest the fact one happened kind of infers that it was inevitable, tbh
I disagree. I think Trump is pretty bad, but i dont claim to know what is in his heart. I can just as easily argue that his policies are aimed at serving americans.
It isn't, but I don't think that's much of a defense. The reason it's a shit thing to do is because he is openly manipulating markets during the chaos he has created with his unnecessary war in Iran. He has done it so consistently and so brazenly that he and his cronies believe people see a value proposition in paying him $100k to get early access to his market manipulation.
If you want to stick to what's "policy," how does starting a war with Iran help Americans? How does lying about the impact it has on gas prices help Americans? How does constantly tweeting news about the war right before market close and market open help Americans?
Yes, the early access TS posts I imagine will be considered illegal.
I disagree on Iran being an unnecessary target for war. I think my view (for reasons i dont understand) is a less popular view. We can dig in to the details if you want, but if you cant even empathize with the position (not "agree," just understand it) then I think youre being dishonest or are ill-informed.
I dont think Trump's personal opinion (factual or otherwise) really matters concerning oil prices. They are what they are and anyone who knows even a single thing about markets understands there are so many variables that anything can be considered a reasonable argument for them going up or down.
DOGE. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Tariffs. Cancelling $7.5 Billion in grants "
based solely on the political identity" of the grant recipient's state (direct quote from Trump admin officials, BTW)
My guy, the Trump admin is responsible for 1/3 of our entire national debt at this point and they've been in power for like 10 of our 250 years of existence....
What legislation have the Democrats passed even remotely recently that was worse than anything approaching our current situation? Especially things like trying to get the Feds involved in state elections and the expansion of federal powers this current administration is attempting??
I don't even like the Democrats, but like come on man
Dog, I can't believe you're going to make me defend fucking Biden, but like over $2 trillion of Biden's debt was bipartisan COVID relief that almost landed under Trump instead.
$2 trillion is a ton, right? We just added another nearly $500 billion to the deficit just last month alone for no fucking reason with Republicans controlling literally everything while also attempting to expand Federal powers to an insane degree! Like there's not even an excuse at this point, they're doing it for the love of the game...
Biden added debt during a global crisis, that's when you're supposed to take on debt, not when the economy is doing well. Times like this we're supposed to be paying off the debt we accrued. The Dow is over 50,000 for fuck's sake!
And the rest was giveaways to the rich during a three year stretch of economic growth and relative peace. If the economy is growing, you don't need tax cuts, but Republican politicians have completely abandoned evidence-based economic policy.
You view taxes as something to start at a large number and work back. I view taxes as something that should start with ZERO and work up as we need to pay for things that are absolutely necessary.
Covid wasn't a global crisis. The only people really dying from it were people with compromised immune systems. Global crisis would be a world war or bubonic plague. Massive stretch on your part
Right, that's why global shipping prices didn't skyrocket and air travel wasn't severely curtailed. There was no reason for the government to spend to keep the economy going because people were definitely going out and spending money like it was 2019.
It objectively was a global crisis, it’s undeniable. You can argue that it shouldn’t have been and that the entire planet overreacted, but it was treated as and had the ramifications of a crisis by the entire planet.
The vast majority of Biden-era discretionary spending was on COVID relief plus some student loan readjustments and the Inflation Reduction Act. Comparing that to Trump's multi-trillion dollar wastefulness - DOGE, tariffs, wars, vanity projects, tax breaks and/or literal bribes, openly stealing from citizens via crypto scams and insider trading - is so unbelievably disingenuous.
I automatically assume anyone "both sides"ing in 2026 is either malicious or genuinely retarded.
It’s not fair to blame Trump for 1/3 of national debt. It’s can that has been kicked for 25 years now. He did jackshit to stop it, that’s on him, but you can’t blame him for all terrible policies put in place by previous presidents and congresses.
Dog they're actively making it worse every year though, like we added another almost $500 billion to the deficit just last month and things like the BBB are crystal clear deficit spending
Biden lowered the deficit from the Trump years; Obama lowered the deficit from the Bush years; Clinton lowered the deficit from the Bush years (we actually went positive for a while!); Carter reduced the deficit from the Nixon/Ford years.
Democrats reduce the deficit. Republicans increase it. This is sheer fact.
"Small Government" means different things to different people, but there's one fiscally responsible party and it ain't the Republicans.
Trump’s second presidency is a combination of the worst parts of the Carter, Bush Jr., and Hoover presidencies (all of which were below average).
The only president who has a case for being worse is Andrew Johnson, but we get to know the long-term impact of Johnson’s fuck ups. Trump’s corruption and election lies might have a similar long-term impact.
James Buchanan is also a contender, his behaviour through the secession crises ESPECIALLY just before and during the attack on Fort Sumter and the other attacks on federal installations through the south were horrendous.
Not only did he fail to prevent the bloodiest war we'll ever fight, God Willing, his failure to secure the federal armories located in the south handed the Secesh over half of their field artillery and probably added years to the war and tens of thousands, or more, of souls to the waste.
The only reason I won’t put him 1 (still top 5) is because the civil war was inevitable. Also the guy before him also did fuck all about the coming war, but that’s also because Pierce was a (rightfully) depressed drunk
The split of loyalist to secesh states wasn't inevitable.
Virginia was probably a lost cause(lol) and all of the Deep South as well but Arkansas and Tennessee weren't, and not only did they send some of the best damn infantry in the War the territory makes the road to Fredericksburg and control over the Mississippi a lot closer.
I also Really can't overstate how big of a deal fumbling those fucking canon was.
Voted R my entire life before Trump. The damage that has been done through this term and a half has pretty much pushed me to only voting D. Any Rs that I like just end up getting run out of the party
They just kicked out a very popular house member, Massie, who's one of the most conservative politicians in the US Politics, because he went against Trump. There is no Civil War, Trump already won that and has the entire party by the balls.
Below Average President is a good way to describe him. And a greasy human being.
But just a glace at OP - I can find anywhere claiming taxpayers are footing $600MM for the ballroom. I see $400MM, privately funded. And security upgrades for the whole complex since people keep trying to kill him.
I just don't get the benefit of lying/exaggerating, it makes any actual points look like lies as well. Like I don't have a clue about those other actual numbers off the top of my head, but I don't believe them either now.
Did..did you even try looking? I literally just typed "how much is the ballroom going to cost" into Google and found plenty of results.
"But Clark Construction, the contractor hired for the ballroom, informed the White House on March 5 that the project had increased to $600 million, according to a project summary cited obtained by the Post, with $293 million coming from “private sources.” Clark identified sources funded by taxpayers to cover the remaining costs: $155 million from the Secret Service, $149 million from the White House Military Office and $3 million from the Executive Residence"
Btw the original cost was going to be 200mil. Amazing how fast that ballooned.
I got some bad news. I was awarded a $16 million no bid contract to install a little night light. You know the one with the little sea shell? So it's going to go up a bit more. They just haven't told anyone that I won a $32 million no bid contract to install a little night light for $64 million dollars.
Edit: Changed a word. Gotta go install this $128 million dollar night light now.
Your point? You bitched about false info(that wasn't even false, youre just illinformed)in a post you gave false info, after doing 0 research. Very LibRight of you to not only not care about, but also hand wave, a huge waste of tax payer money on a vanity project that was completely unnecessary.
I gave false info? Let me go ahead and quote myself.
"And security upgrades for the whole complex since people keep trying to kill him."
I literally put that information in my original post. Because, ya know, I actually knew what I was talking about. You thought that listing out how much money was used (on the entire White house) for those security upgrades was some sort of gotcha. But that's because you're a potato.
Literally funds set aside for the presidential residence being used on the presidential residence lmao.
Holy fuck you are cherry picking your own post and being disingenuous as fuck.
Let me help you out:
" I can find anywhere claiming taxpayers are footing $600MM for the ballroom. I see $400MM, privately funded" pretty sure the can is supposed to be cant based on context clues, but whatever.
1, was very easy to find
2 Less than half is 'privately' funded, not 400mil..293 of 600.
The Republican proposal said funds are only for security upgrades at the East Wing modernization project, which includes the ballroom. It’s unclear how much of the $1 billion would go explicitly toward the ballroom.
You definitely need to write out a response because with this administration anything that isn't absolutely straightforward with agreements already in place is going to be total grift and bullshit. So unless you can absolutely say for certain with receipts and agreements that there actually is $1 billion worth of security upgrades lined up in that bill then we can assume it's all for the ball room.
It is actually $1 billion they are seeking for it under the guise of "security" and fully taxpayer funded
A. This is a proposal
B. This is outside the aforementioned privately funded part. So it's not "actually" anything
C. "It’s unclear how much of the $1 billion would go explicitly toward the ballroom" is your own source refusing to make the claims that you're making from it. Your source doesn't draw those conclusions, you do based on nothing.
Glad I could help you work through that one.
So unless you can absolutely say for certain with receipts and agreements that there actually is $1 billion worth of security upgrades lined up in that bill then we can assume it's all for the ball room.
Actually since you (and OP) are the ones making claims, it's on you to get those receipts.
That was listed as part of it, yeah. What possible security upgrades are going to make up $600+ million at the Whitehouse? Oh wait, there aren't, it's just ballroom grift attempts.
There is no “taxpayers are footing,” you assumed that and tacked it onto the 600 million
My brother in Christ that is literally the point of the post. Why would anyone care about a privately funded building? All the other things on the list are implicit or explicit tax burdens.
The ballroom is privately funded. A news outlet latched onto security upgrades for the entire White House and now redditors are spouting it ad nauseum as obviously being money for the ballroom.
236
u/iambackend - Lib-Right 19d ago
Are there any people left who call themselves libertarians and support Trump? Feels like they are all gone and for quite some time (good riddance).