How Canada’s Shifting Political Climate Will Impact its Parties

By Brennan Dubé | Canada

The Conservative Party of Canada

Result Last Election

After nine years in power in Canada, Stephen Harper’s Conservatives were ousted from power and were relegated to second place with 99/338 seats (down from 166 in 2015).

Where They Stand Now

Party leader Andrew Scheer has taken steps towards speaking out against Trudeau’s Liberal government but many brand him as Harper 2.0. This has proven to hinder his ability to form his own identity within the mainstream realm of Canadian politics. The Conservatives are currently trailing Trudeau’s Liberal party in the polls, but only by single digits, and a lot can happen in the next 10 months.

How They Can Capitalize

All across Canada, Liberal provincial governments are collapsing and if this can translate, the federal Conservatives should see this as a positive. In June of this past year, the Ontario Liberals were decimated in Ontario and the Progressive Conservatives took power for the first time in 15 years. Not only did the provincial Liberals lose, but they also fell to third place in the provincial legislature as they now hold a mere 7 seats.

In comparison, the Progressive Conservatives won 76 seats, the New Democratic Party (more left-wing than the Liberals) won 40 seats and the Ontario Green party won their first ever seat in Ontario. In late September, the provincial Liberals in New Brunswick lost control of their previous majority government despite pollsters placing their odds to win at over 80%. The Conservatives beating the Liberals in New Brunswick was very eye-opening as it is commonly known as a Liberal stronghold when it comes to national elections.

Quebec is a place where Liberals have held power in the provincial government 13 of the last 15 years also, but in October the right-wing party, Coalition Avenir Quebec (CAQ), which was only formed in 2011, ended up winning a landslide majority against the Liberals. The CAQ took 74 seats, surpassing the 63 needed for a majority. The Liberals only managed to secure 31 seats, and a far-left party named Quebec Solidaire more than doubled its support from the last election and took 10 seats, tying for third with Parti Quebecois. This win for a conservative party in Quebec meant that a province which has been known to lean Liberal may now be up for grabs in 2019.

The Quebecers are against mass-immigration and have shown much reluctance to be accepting towards the Syrian refugees the Trudeau government has brought in over the past few years. Quebec has been a place that has posed many challenges for Conservatives in the past. If they are able to be more successful there, as well as in other areas like Ontario and New Brunswick where they have seen recent provincial level success, they can surely be competitive with the Liberals come election time.

The Liberal Party of Canada

Result Last Election

Following decimation in the 2011 election and for the first time ever a relegation to third place, the Liberals rebuilt in record time and by the time 2015 rolled around Justin Trudeau led the Liberal party to a majority government securing 184/338 seats.

Where They Stand

Despite approval ratings hovering around 40% and people on the left and right criticizing Trudeau and the Liberal government, they still manage to look like favorites early on heading into next October’s election.

How They Can Capitalize

Despite circumstances looking so poor for the Liberals, they look great. But how could that possibly be? On the negative end of things, the Liberals now face opposition from almost every province in Canada. Since being elected and forming government federally in 2015, the Liberals have lost leadership provincial in four provinces (British Columbia, Quebec, Ontario, and New Brunswick). Currently, no province from British Columbia to Quebec holds a Liberal government.

Moreover, Trudeau and the party have faced much criticism from both the right and the left-wing parties in Canada. The far-left New Democratic party has come out very hard against Trudeau criticizing the government’s recent tax cuts for major corporations and their decision in overriding the Canada postal service agency and forcing them back to work following a major strike. On the right, however, Trudeau has seen constant attacks from the Conservatives who are often critical of the Liberals every decision on social matters and carbon tax policy.

So how, despite the hate from both flanks, is the Liberal party still leading by 5-7 percentage points in most polls? The New Democratic Party is completely falling apart and new leader Jagmeet Singh (who does not hold a seat in the House of Commons), has not been able to reignite the New Democratic party’s energy that they had when they became the official opposition party in 2011. Even he has doubts about next year and many party operatives expect the party to get rocked in 2019, some even predicting they will lose half of their seats.

The Green party may benefit from some lost NDP support, but the Liberals will certainly benefit. The elephant in the room on the right end of the spectrum is Maxime Bernier and the People’s Party of Canada. The party is only a few months old but already has signed up over 35,000 members and has formed electoral district associations in 260 of Canada’s 338 ridings. Bernier’s plan to run People’s Party candidates in all 338 ridings is well on pace. If Bernier is able to get on the debate stage then the People’s Party will definitely continue its boom in support and continue to siphon off Conservative voters. The Liberals will potentially continue to benefit from the growth of the party and can be hopeful about their chances for re-election in 2019.

Another factor for the Liberals is Trump. Whenever Trudeau and Trump had their back-and-forth regarding trade over the summer the Canadian people felt a little more unified than usual, and Trudeau saw his approval ratings tick up. The more Trudeau looks like the leader to take on Trump the better for the Liberals as it makes Scheer and the Conservatives seem completely irrelevant.

The New Democratic Party of Canada

Result Last Election

Following their first ever 100 seat performance in 2011 when they became the official opposition securing 103 seats, the tragic death of party leader Jack Layton put them in rebuild mode. Liberals took much of their support in 2015 and the New Democrats fell to third place, as they won 44/338 seats.

Where They Stand

Current leader Jagmeet Singh is facing dark times as a leader. The party sits 20-25% behind the Conservatives and Liberals in most polls and some analysts believe the party will lose half its seats in the fall election. If the party wants to turn itself around in time for October, they must return to relevancy and change the narrative.

How They Can Capitalize

It was not even 8 years ago that Jack Layton led an orange wave across Canada that resulted in the Liberals falling out of the top two for the first time in Canadian history and it saw the New Democrats form official opposition for the first time in the parties 50-year history. A lot has changed in those 8 years, but not all hope is lost for the New Democrats.

Jagmeet Singh is youthful and when he was first elected as leader many thought he could rejuvenate the New Democrats, and he still can. Firstly, Singh must win his by-election which is taking place early in the new year. After this, he must lead the party back into the national discussion. He should take on Bernier, take on Scheer, take on Trudeau and take staunch stances against the Liberals to prove that his party is truly for progressives and hard leftists.

The People’s Party of Canada

Result Last Election

The party was announced by its leader and only elected official, Maxime Bernier, on September 14th, 2018.

Where They Stand

Former Conservative party leadership candidate Maxime Bernier decided to part ways with the Conservatives in August, citing the party was too ‘intellectually and morally corrupt’ to be reformed. Since September, the People’s Party has signed up a significant 35,000 members (15% of total Conservative party membership) and so far, have set up electoral district associations in 260 ridings. Bernier plans to have the party run candidates in all 338 ridings in 2019.

How They Can Capitalize

Bernier, the libertarian-leaning conservative who has sat in the House of Commons as a Member of Parliament since 2006, decided to start this party on the basis of forming a true conservative alternative to Justin Trudeau and the Liberals. Since its formation, the People’s party has not seen any other sitting elected officials join in, but this could be a good thing for what Bernier is trying to do. He stated that the party will use smart populism, and the rise of populist parties all across the globe as of late may give way for Bernier to pick up considerable support next fall.

Without any other elected officials joining the party Bernier truly looks like an outsider, and outsiders are becoming more and more successful in the age of anti-elitist election politics. While it is very unlikely that Bernier will win in 2019, the party has the potential to do some damage and become mainstream in Canada. To actually win a considerable amount of seats, Bernier must target more than disenfranchised Conservatives. The party needs to target independents and uninspired New Democrats if it wants to broaden its base and survive past 2019. The potential is there, the execution is what will await us.

The Green Party of Canada

Result Last Election

The federal Green party won a single seat last election marking the second time they ever did that. Elizabeth May and the Green party hope to win more seats in 2019.

Where They Stand

The Green party has always been significant in Canada, but never have they been so significant that they dictate hot topics during elections or challenge other parties for the government. They constantly get 3-4% of the popular vote federally while winning one seat each of the last two elections. Things may be changing: in 2017 the British Columbia Green party won 3/87 seats, which was good enough for third place.

They also managed to garner 16.8% of the popular vote in their provincial election. The 3 seats proved to be pivotal as the B.C NDP’s formed a coalition government with the Greens as they needed the Greens 3 seats added with their own to topple the Liberal government. This was huge for the Greens as they demanded hefty policy proposals before agreeing with the B.C New Democrats to merge to oust the Liberals.

In other provinces, the Greens have made major advances as well. In the Ontario election in June, the Greens won their first seat in provincial history in Ontario. In New Brunswick’s election in September, the Greens managed to win 3/49 seats and tally up 12% of the popular vote. Those 3 seats were the most they have ever gotten in New Brunswick history and it is important as it ended up resulting in the Liberals losing the election to the New Brunswick Conservatives. Also, in the province of Prince Edward Island (which is due for a provincial election next fall), the provincial Green party is leading the pack in the polls. While their lead in the polls is slim and still well within the margin of error with the Liberals, this is incredibly significant.

How They Can Capitalize

If the Green party of Canada can copy success from its provincial parties it can definitely make a splash and party history in 2019. Justin Trudeau and the Liberals have been criticized by many progressives for not sticking to his hardcore liberal promises he made on the trail in 2015. If some of these progressives decide to throw their vote to the Greens as a protest then the Green party will see significant boosts.

The party is seemingly getting smarter with how it campaigns as well, and the Greens will be very regionally focused in 2019. To ensure winning more than just one seat the party will focus much of its advertising and campaigning in areas where provincial parties have done well. If this strategy pays off then the Greens can surely win a handful of seats and stun the Canadian political establishment come October next year.

The Bloc Quebecois Party of Canada

Result Last Election

The Quebec separatist party managed to win 10 seats in 2015, which is one of its lowest ever since formation in 1991. Quebec has a total of 75 seats, and the Bloc Quebecois famously only fields candidates in these 75 ridings.

Where They Stand

Currently, the party is in a state of destruction. In 2015, the party won 10 seats and its leader Gilles Duceppe stepped down. Since the 2015 election, the party has gone through massive turmoil. In February of this year, 7 of the 10 Bloc Quebecois MPs quit the party, citing disagreements with the leadership style of new party leader, Martine Ouellet.

Following this, those 7 MPs formed a new party, the Quebec Debout. Since then, party leader Ouellet has stepped down and the short-lived Quebec Debout dissolved as the MP’s all rejoined the Bloc Quebecois. As things stand right now, the Bloc Quebecois do not know who their leader will be for the election in October, they are set to decide upon a new leader in February. This will be their fifth leader since 2011.

How They Can Capitalize

The odds are against the Bloc Quebecois, and if the leader that gets elected in February is divisive, this party will be in danger of potentially losing every single seat they currently have come election day. The first step will be to unify the party in October. The next step needs to be taking strong stances against the Liberals and Conservatives. If the Bloc Quebecois can translate an image to its base that no other major party is listening to Quebecers, then they can broaden their base and bounce back in October.


71 Republic prides itself on distinctively independent journalism and editorials. Every dollar you give helps us grow our mission of providing reliable coverage. Please consider donating to our Patreon. We appreciate your support.

The Social Media Censorship Problem, Solved

Atilla Sulker | United States

With the recent suspending of the accounts of many individuals on social media sites including Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube, people are beginning to question the validity of the move. In fact, some liken it to an attack on free speech and a bold censorship. To the libertarian, this is a major area of concern; before any actions take place, one must evaluate the situation critically.

We must first establish the premise that government tends to gradually prey on our liberties more and more. We are like the frog in the boiling pot, so to speak. If we assign government a small task, the scope of this task becomes larger over time. As a result, we end up with more regulations and fewer liberties. Based on this premise, the goal that the libertarian should be aiming at is to extend free speech as far as possible without violating the non-aggression principle.

The Nature of Rights

It is also important to realize how rights work. Rights are hierarchical, and at the top of the hierarchy is property rights. From property rights stems the freedom of speech and a whole range of other rights. Property rights not only allow the owner of the property to say what he pleases on the property, but also give him the power to use property such as billboards and signs to spread his message. In this way, property rights come before free speech. 

You can not come onto my property and say as you wish. I, as the owner, set the limits as to what people can and can’t say. Though I may allow you to say certain things, you have no initial right to speech on my property; I must grant it to you. We can clearly see the superiority of property rights to free speech.

So how does all this apply to the digital paradigm? I will now begin exploring a term I have coined: “digital property rights”.

Rights and Social Media

Many people use the argument that Facebook and Twitter, among other social media sites, are private companies and they hence have the right to pick and choose who can use their site. If one thinks about this, it is similar to businesses in the physical realm. For this analogy, I will be comparing social media sites to giant apartments.

If I were to rent an apartment, I would have access to a certain area of property, but I’d simply be renting it and would still have to live within a certain set of rules that the property owner sets. The apartment owner has laid out his terms in our contract. He could quite possibly charge me fees for various violations of the contract, whether it be a noise violation, a disturbance of peace, etc.

Connecting this to social media, it becomes clear that accounts operate in this same way. The account user is entering the “digital property” of the site owner. The site owner ultimately has the rights to grant or revoke the right of speech to the user. It is his or her “digital property”; hence, he or she sets the rules. We can think of account restrictions and temporary bans as fees charged to the tenant in the apartment for various violations of the contract. We can think of account terminations as the evictions of the digital realm.

The Implications

So where has this analogy lead us to, and what implications does it have for the libertarian? For one thing, it outlines the importance of the voluntary contract, but beyond this, it shows how fundamental property rights are to the libertarian conscience. It seems that property rights can solve practically any issue, and this is certainly one of them. It can, of course, be applied to areas beyond just social media, including websites and domains.

Now a common objection to the ideas I have laid down would be that these social media sites have conspired with the government to ban certain people, and hence this is not private discrimination, but public discrimination. Though this argument may be convincing, it is important to never lose sight of our goal, which is the diminution of the scope of government. If we were to try and stop social media sites from taking such actions, it would bring in further government intervention, which is not a good means to our desired ends. 

Another objection that I have heard is that these various social media sites are “monopolies”. In assessing this claim, it is important to look at monopoly from an Austrian economist’s perspective. To the Austrian, monopoly is not when a certain firm controls the majority of an industry, but when it has the government’s permission and privilege to do so. Luckily, there are still alternative routes to spread ideas on the internet.

The Only Fair Is Laissez-faire

The private industry is very important in protecting one’s freedoms because incentives for profit are directly linked to the satisfaction of the consumer. Some people think that it is wrong to criticize the censorship of certain social media sites, because they are private. However, one can criticize a private company, yet still believe in its sovereignty. After all, the whole point of privatizing is to ensure greater consumer satisfaction.

Laissez-faire capitalism is the only way to increase the amount of choices in an industry to the greatest extent. With the consumer in control, we will ultimately see the fate of sites like Facebook and Twitter. If the consumer does not like their execution of censorship, they may protest the sites and boycott them. These same protocols exist in any industry. The consumer decides the fate of a company, so if a firm is not pleasing the consumer, they will either have to change their ways or liquidate. This is one of the many benefits of capitalism. Vote with your dollar!

Originally published on Lewrockwell.com


71 Republic prides itself on distinctively independent journalism and editorials. Every dollar you give helps us grow our mission of providing reliable coverage. Please consider donating to our Patreon. We appreciate your support.

Featured Image Source

The American First Amendment: A Poem

Nate Galt | United States

Many misguided young boys think they fight for freedom

But when barked commands to kill people, they heed them

When in the fields, men back home for little money toil

Believing that their liberties are defended, not America’s interests in oil

If bombing those an ocean away brings peace

That is an oxymoron, to say the least

But back home, those liberties for which soldiers believe they fight

Are being stripped by people who don’t care for rights

Only for their fragile sense of self

They wish to ban everything that they can’t help

They want their free-of-judgement safe spaces

By banning unpopular opinions from those same places

When real progressives would die for your right to speech

For whatever one wished to say or preach

Meanwhile, these supposed freedom fighters demand

That those who they disagree with get off their land

But the very law of the land, the Constitution,

Is being up-heaved in a revolution

To stop any speech or proselytization 

Which they deem a danger to this nation

But what is a danger? A mere opinion or thought?

Censorship is an insult to those that fought

Not in Vietnam or Iraq, but to those who said that they see

A possibility for a new country with free speech and liberty.


71 Republic prides itself on distinctively independent journalism and editorials. Every dollar you give helps us grow our mission of providing reliable coverage. Please consider donating to our Patreon. We appreciate your support.

Featured Image Source

Metals Tariffs Could Cost Petroleum Industry $7 Billion by 2023

By Andrew Zirkle | United States

Although oil prices have been taking a steep nosedive over the past few months, there is a new underlying problem that can be expected to hit the oil industry in the next 5-10 years due to the indirect effects of US metal tariffs. Since early 2018, the United States has imposed a 25% steel tariff on all but four countries and a worldwide tariff on aluminum set at 10%. These tariffs, enacted using the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, have been repeatedly been justified by the Trump administration as retaliatory tariffs or tariffs designed to protect the American metal industry. The current near $50pb price of crude oil seems to indicate prices have been unaffected in the short term by the application of these tariffs, however, there it is clear that these measures, if sustained, could have long-term implications on the profitability of America’s rapidly expanding oil industry. The US oil industry, which relies on steel and aluminum for refinery construction as well as tanker and truck construction, has not faced large tariffs since the Bush administration, and those tariffs were short lived. The expansion and long-term growth of US oil processing is incredibly dependent on the on the price of metal and although it’s not apparent yet, the damage that these tariffs could have on domestic oil production in the US is irreversible.1a

Above is an abstract diagram illustrating the effect of import tariffs on crude oil processing firms that need to purchase metal to make investments in production capital. The sections A, B, C, and D, which are above the price but below the demand curve represent the consumer surplus, which shrinks during the tariffs. The monetary loss to the consumers of the metal, which in this case is oil companies, is much larger than the monetary gain for domestic metal producers, which is a producer surplus represented by section A. Section C represents new government revenue collected through taxation and Sections B and D represent deadweight loss: a loss in economic efficiency achieved due to taxation. Although this loss in economic inefficiency is not optimal, there are greater long-term losses that are shouldered only by the oil industry.

The demand for petroleum-based products in the United States is expected to increase in the coming years, and to maintain energy independence, the United States will have to increase its production, transportation and refining capabilities. All over the United States, new refineries are under construction, oil pipelines are being laid and new tanker fleets are being built. All these capital goods are necessary to the health of the petroleum industry, yet companies in the petroleum industry will have to either cancel these projects or increase the price of their product to maintain viable profit margins.

The domestic oil tanker construction industry is already under intense pressure. The International Maritime Organization has set new standards and regulations for the environmental performance of oil tankers. This is causing an excess in tanker scrapping and a new demand for updated oil tankers. The new demand for updated tankers will require the tanker building industry to consume more steel than it normally does. This increased demand for tankers combined with an increased price in steel and aluminum could result in oil companies shouldering a huge price burden when looking to update their fleet.  In the next 5 years, the Aluminum and Steel tariffs will cost the petroleum industry an additional 1.45 Billion dollars, as tanker building companies will struggle to deal with the increase in materials price when building 2020 compliant tankers. Anything transferred by sea between two US ports must be carried by an American built ship, per the US Jones Act of 1920. This means that despite a great increase in materials costs due to tariffs, American petroleum supply chains must continue to rely on US built ships even if they are drastically more expensive. This will likely mean that the domestic seaway petroleum supply chain will contract, meaning that overseas transportation from offshore refineries will become much more expensive and transporting petroleum to areas in the US that can’t produce it locally will become much costlier. The domestic shipbuilding industry will also become much less competitive worldwide, as global supply chains will become much more reliant on shipbuilding in countries like Bangladesh, India, and China, which can build ships for a significantly lower cost due to a lack of trade barriers for raw materials.1b

Refinery construction is also heavily dependent on stable steel and aluminum pricing. The United States sped up refinery construction and upgrades as an aging generation of oil refineries built in the ’60s is rapidly approaching the end of its safe and usable lifespan. Currently, refinery construction costs range between $70,000 and $90,000 per barrel capacity, however, this figure is heavily dependent on the size and type of refinery being built. Steel and aluminum make up a strong majority, around 75%, of the construction materials used to produce refinery components. With these factors considered, as well as the refinery construction and upgrade trends in the United States, the Petroleum industry can be expected to pay an additional 3.5 Billion dollars over the next five years for refinery construction. This number is especially troubling, as oil refining has small and volatile profit margins, especially in refineries that produce less than 100k barrels per day. These smaller refineries are becoming more common in the United States, with 5 of them being built in the last 5 years5 of them being built in the last 5 years.

1c
(Data Courtesy of the USEIA)

The oil industry is also highly dependent on the construction of transportation pipelines used to transport crude throughout the country. Pipeline transportation is by far the most efficient method of transporting crude oil, much more effective than truck transportation. Pipeline construction is accelerating across the country; however, the new tariffs are putting that growth in jeopardy. Pipelines and pipeline components are almost completely composed of the two metals targeted in the tariffs: steel and aluminum. Major pipeline construction in the next 5 years will take a cost hit of 2.2 Billion dollars, a price which may force project delays and cancellations. This development will weaken the transportation capabilities of crude oil companies trying to transport both crude and finished product. The alternatives to pipelines, trucking, and rail, are much less efficient than pipelines and are also affected by the metal tariffs.

Pipeline transportation is another part of the petroleum supply chain that will also take a hit from tariffs. Pipelines have become an increasingly important part of the domestic petroleum industry as more US companies are processing oil in Canada and then using pipelines to ship the crude oil to US refineries. The increased pipeline development in the United States will be hampered due to increased raw materials cost. This increased cost will likely cause current projects to be finished over budget and future projects to be canceled due to rising costs. This new difficulty in above ground transportation will make it much more difficult for US-based companies to take advantage of the new supply opportunities in Canada, and will likely prevent the domestic supply of petroleum products from keeping up with demand.

The United States has had a recent spike in oil production following a lull in oil production in the early 2000s. This recent spike in domestic production was caused by the efforts of the US Government to reduce foreign dependence on oil as well as other market factors including unrest in the Middle East. Overall, the United States has seen positive results from increased oil production. Prices of petroleum products, which used to be heavily influenced by the whims of foreign governments and OPEC, are now stabilized due to a larger part of the market coming under the influence of a market-based competitive domestic market. The upward trend of US petroleum production was expected to continue, however, these new tariffs put that favorable trend in jeopardy. Petroleum refining already has incredibly thin profit margins and with increased costs for construction, repair, and upgrades, planned refinery construction will either be reduced to meet cost goals or will be more expensive to oil companies due to increased material cost. In the first case, domestic oil production will not expand at the same rate as demand and foreign control over the oil market will increase. In the second case, domestic oil will increase in cost which will result in higher prices for petroleum products or more foreign control.

1d
US Oil Avg. Daily Oil Production (Th. of BPD) (Data Courtesy of the USEIA)

Should these measures remain in place, the US petroleum industry can be expected to take a $7.15 Billion profit hit in the next 5 years just due rise in cost to these 3 elements of oil production. Other elements of oil production that rely on steel and aluminum will also cause a rise in production cost, including well construction, offshore installation construction and even the development of fracking technology. Overall, the tariff affects almost every aspect of domestic oil production in a negative way. The United States can expect to lose control of their oil market to foreign producers unless serious protections are put into place for domestic producers. Even if these protections are put into place, the price of oil will rise long-term as domestic supply contracts. In order to continue the healthy growth and development of the US oil industry, steel and aluminum tariffs must be removed or reduced to lower materials cost.


71 Republic is the Third Voice in media. We pride ourselves on distinctively independent journalism and editorials. Every dollar you give helps us grow our mission of providing reliable coverage. Please consider donating to our Patreon, which you can find here. Thank you very much for your support!

Trump’s Border Wall is Another of his Broken Promises

By Josh Hughes | United States

On Tuesday, President Trump and Democratic leaders met in the White House to discuss funding for the border wall. However, the conversation did not go well for either side. Rather than coming to a compromise, both sides kept at a standstill. The president, meeting with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and soon-to-be Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, reiterated how adamant he is about funding for the wall. In fact, he stated that if he did not get $5 billion in funding by the December 21 deadline, the government would shut down.

Despite this threat, the details of the shutdown are not the most important issue here. The part that sticks out the most is that President Trump failed on yet another promise. He has been doing this from the start of his political career. Unlike most politicians, he ran on an often “non-political” ticket. That’s not to say he didn’t run on important issues, but the way he went about addressing them was something many people were unaccustomed to. He was proudly “politically incorrect,” and portrayed himself as a candidate who wouldn’t be like other politicians. Now, nearly two years into his term, he has failed in coming through on many of his campaign promises, despite having a Republican majority in both houses of Congress until the midterms.

Broken Promises

During the president’s campaign, he repeatedly said the United States was going to build a wall across its southern border. He also emphasized a desire to make Mexico pay for it. Two years in, there is no wall, and now he is asking taxpayers to fund his wall. Whether or not the wall is a good idea is up to the reader to decide, but the fact that he has not kept a promise is alarming, but not surprising.

During the campaign, Trump also said that he would balance the budget, and “do it fairly quickly.” On the contrary, the federal deficit is increasing and has neared one trillion dollars. It is unlikely this trend will change in the future, either. The national debt is also continuing to grow.

During the campaign, Trump heralded himself as a champion of gun rights. Many conservatives were relieved that the war on the Second Amendment would be over after the Obama administration. Trump and the NRA struck a friendship that, to many, seemed to usher in an age of complete gun freedom. Yet, he has only stripped gun rights away, recently announcing a ban on bump stocks. Minor restrictions are slippery slopes that lead to the further erosion of rights.  

The List Continues

Other examples of promises broken by President Trump include not taking vacations, pushing for Congressional term limits, pursuing charges against Hillary Clinton, cutting Common Core standards, and defunding Planned Parenthood.

President Trump promised many things that sounded good to conservatives and libertarians. Despite this, he has failed to come through on most of them. With Democrats taking control of Congress in 2019, it will be tough for his promises to pass, even if he wants them to. They simply will face heavy compromises. It will be interesting to see what plan he chooses to finish the last two years of his term, but hope for actions favoring liberty is quite low.


71 Republic is the Third Voice in media. We pride ourselves on distinctively independent journalism and editorials. Every dollar you give helps us grow our mission of providing reliable coverage. Please consider donating to our Patreon. Thank you very much for your support!

Featured Image Source