Tag: trump 2020

Is Bill Weld the Best Thing Libertarians Can Get?

Jack Parkos | United States

The mainstream libertarian movement is dying. It could be speculated that libertarianism will never come to significance under today’s system. Mainstream libertarians have abandoned private property rights and decentralization for a so-called “socially liberal, fiscally conservative” platform focused on “tolerance” and weed.

Bill Weld puts the final nail in the coffin. Bill Weld was the vice presidential candidate under Gary Johnson in the 2016 Presidential Election and has joined the Republican Party in a possible attempt to primary Trump in 2020.

As a libertarian, I can only stand back and laugh at what’s happening. If Bill Weld is the best we can do, then is libertarianism dead? While he is running in the Republican Party, he no doubt has the views of the Libertarian Party. Many of his views are an insult to libertarianism.

Admittedly, Bill Weld does hold some good views, such as decentralizing education and being more dovish on foreign policy. However, he does have some views that many libertarians cannot get behind.

Weld’s Blatant Anti-Libertarian Agenda

Bill Weld has been quoted as comparing AR-15’s to “weapons of mass destruction,” and is indeed pro-gun control. Even many mainstream Republicans are fine with the AR-15. In an interview, he was quoted as saying,

“The five-shot rifle, that’s a standard military rifle. The problem is if you attach a clip to it so it can fire more shells and if you remove the pin so that it becomes an automatic weapon. And those are independent criminal offenses. That’s when they become essentially a weapon of mass destruction. The problem of handguns is probably even worse than the AR-15.”

That statement sounds more like something one would hear from the Democratic Party, but this is coming from a so-called “libertarian” running in the Republican party. It’s an embarrassment to all libertarian whether they support the party or not.

A Right to Abortion

There is plenty more he can be criticized for. Bill Weld has little respect for property rights or the Constitution. On the issue of abortion, he stated that the federal government must ensure everyone has access to abortion.

“I think it’s OK for the government to be involved in ensuring clinic access because that’s guarding a fundamental constitutional right of the individual. So that’s not the nanny state; that’s good government, not bad government.” However, Weld is wrong, this is a nanny state. Furthermore, nowhere in the Constitution does it state abortion as a right. Weld is buying into the leftist lie that abortion is somehow a “right”.

Endorsing a Violation of Property Rights

Weld and Johnson ran a campaign in 2016 that seemed to be simply social liberalism and not libertarianism. Weld’s running mate Gary Johnson supported forcing a baker to bake a cake for a gay wedding, furthermore, explaining that he would force a Jewish baker to bake a cake for a Nazi. This is a complete violation of property rights, a key tenet of libertarianism. Much speculation points to Bill Weld holding similar views to Johnson based on his past rhetoric, one, in particular, being his support for affirmative action.

Furthermore, Weld supports an open borders policy. Right now, under a massive welfare state and the current state of politics, immigration restrictions are needed. This isn’t an anti-libertarian stance but rather an overall net gain for liberty. Moreover, he compared Trump’s immigration plans to Nazi Germany, making holocaust references and comparing Trump’s wall to the Berlin wall. This is all from the leftist playbook.

An Endorsement of the Opposing Side

Perhaps worst of all was when Bill Weld practically endorsed Hillary Clinton for president in 2016.

“Having said that, I’m not taking back anything I said about the massive difference between the two establishment party candidates. One would be chaos for the country, I think. And the other would be a very business-like and capable and competent approach to our affairs.”

In this interview, Bill Weld explains how Trump would be chaos for the country and that Hillary would run it better. Furthermore, he endorsed Obama for president as well. No libertarian in their right mind would endorse Hillary or Obama, so why did Weld support them? It could be said that Trump was maybe the better option for libertarians as many thought that way. However, he did not have to support either of the candidates in any elections. After all, Ron Paul didn’t.

Ron Paul is retired from politics, and right now there does not appear to be another charismatic libertarian to lead the movement. Rand Paul will likely not run for president either.  However, libertarians should not look to Bill Weld to be a leader of the movement.


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.

Featured Image Source

Advertisements

Snatching Defeat From the Jaws of Victory

Jack Shields | United States

Donald Trump did not win the 2016 election. This isn’t some article telling you about how Russia rigged the election. I recognize that Trump became President fair and square, winning 304 electoral votes. But Trump did not win the election so much as Hillary Clinton lost the election. Trump got lucky and won the Republican primary because he was the most unique candidate in the field of 17. While campaigning, Trump would say or do things that would completely destroy any other candidate’s chance of victory. From making fun of John McCain for being captured in Vietnam to a tape being leaked of him bragging about sexually assaulting women, it seemed impossible for him to become the 45th President of the United States. Yet Hillary Clinton was so unappealing, so corrupt, and so strangely unable to visit the mysterious lands of Wisconsin, that Trump was able to win the election in spite of himself.

With Trump’s approval ratings at historic lows, no wall built, and the Blue Wave in the 2018 midterms, you would think that the Democrats would have learned their lessons from the 2016 election and would be preparing for their easy path to the White House in 2020. But the Democrats have learned all the wrong lessons from both their defeat in 2016 and their victory in 2018. And it is because of this that they are set to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory and ensure the reelection of President Trump.

Learning the Wrong Lessons

Coming away from the last two elections, the Democrats believed that they needed to become more radical. To them, Hillary didn’t lose because she was unlikable and corrupt. She lost because she was moderate. This mindset has caused the party to go sprinting as far left as they can. Presidential candidate Kamala Harris has been quoted as saying she wants to do away with private health insurance. Another candidate, Elizabeth Warren, has proposed a wealth tax. New York recently legalized late term abortions, and the Democratic Virginia Governor is supporting infanticide as a bill is proposed legalizing late term abortions in his state. And many are supporting Alexandria Ocasio- Cortez’s Green New Deal, which is Marxism with a hint of environmentalism. This is the exact opposite lesson than the one Democrats should learn. Americans may hate Trump, but this does not mean they love socialism. Most people do not like socialism. Polls show that most Americans do not support late term abortions. And the results of the 2018 Blue Wave consisted of suburban voters leaving the Republicans for moderate Democrats, not radicals. The American people want a moderate, not a Harris, not a Warren, and certainly not a Sanders. If they have the choice of Socialism or Trump, they will do just as they did with Clinton in 2016 and re-elect him. As Ben Shapiro said on his show, “All [the Democrats] had to do was not be crazy, and they can’t do it.”

This radicalism has resulted in former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz seriously considering running as an independent. An independent has a serious chance of performing at the level Ross Perot did in 1992, costing President George H. W. Bush his reelection with the unpopularity of both parties. But as seen in the 2000 election with the defeat of Vice President Gore, a third party candidate would only need about 3% of the vote to derail a candidate. If the Democrats picked a candidate perceived as a moderate such as Beto O’Rourke or Joe Biden and pitched the candidate as a return to normalcy, they’d be set to cruise to the White House. But instead, they seem hell bent on alienating moderates and giving Trump a second term.

The next mistake the Democrats have made is their embrace of intersectionality. The idea that what victim groups you fall into determines how important your opinion is has consumed the Democratic base. Just recently, a Women’s March in San Francisco was canceled due to the fact that too many of the participants are white. Your skin color or gender is now one of the most important qualities in determining if you will be the Democratic nominee. The best example of this is Beto O’Rourke. I’m not big on giving the Democrats advice; I want them to lose. But if I was a Democrat, I’d want Beto to be the candidate. He ran a close campaign as a Democrat in Texas, and now the GOP is worried about losing the state in 2020. He would easily defeat Trump with suburban voters turning on the Republican party. But they won’t do that. The Democrats are already criticizing Beto for being a white male. The base will not let a non-intersectional candidate win. While that might work in a primary, it will not win you the general. As long as the media push Kamala Harris because she is the intersectional candidate, Trump’s chances get better every day. With Democrats caring about skin color and gender so much that they will throw away their best chance at flipping Texas for a Senator who has accomplished nothing in the Senate and jump-started her career by sleeping with a 60-year-old married man simply because she is black and female, get prepared for four more years of Trump.

2020 should be a blowout for the Democrats. Come January 20, 2021, we should be talking about the brutal beating Trump suffered and how the parties have realigned in favor of the Democrats with Texas and Georgia now officially going blue. All that needs to happen is for Democrats to pick a moderate and focus on Trump’s behavior. But they just can’t help themselves. Democrats are allowing their party to be consumed by socialism and the religion of Intersectionality. It is looking more and more like when 2021 comes, we will be talking about how once more the Democrats managed to find a way to grasp defeat from the jaws of victory.


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.

Featured Image Source

2019: The Next Act of Political Theater Begins

By Mason Mohon | @mohonofficial

2018 was a political year, as most years are when one invests their time in politics. But the human mind has a tendency to think of what is right before it as exceptional and important, while it may just be regular. And overall, that’s what 2018 was politically. The political processes that began continued, and some ended. Yet this is what happens every year, and while many of the events were, by all means, important, they weren’t necessarily so important that 2018 trumps every other year.

Continue reading “2019: The Next Act of Political Theater Begins”

Hillary Clinton 2020? Third Bid in Play, Says Ex-advisor

By Ryan Lau | @agorisms

Less than a week after the decisive 2018 midterms, the 2020 campaign season is already beginning. On Monday, West Virginia State Senator Richard Ojeda announced a 2020 bid against President Trump. Last week, Ojeda lost his House race, but now believes himself ready to run again.

Now, more significantly, a familiar name in politics is entering the realm of discussion once more. That’s right: we may see a Hillary Clinton 2020 run. After losing in the 2008 Democratic primary and 2016 general election, a close former advisor believes she is going to make another bid for the office.

Ex-advisor Mark Penn and Democratic politician Andrew Stein wrote an article Sunday in the Wall Street Journal detailing her potential run. They believe that this time, Hillary will run on a distinct platform: the “Hillary 4.0”. This, they believe, will set her apart from her three moderate incarnations of the past. In order to win the nomination, they believe she will need to portray herself as more liberal than ever before.

Due to claims of Russian interference and a popular vote win, Clinton did not believe the election was fair. Thus, she may be dissatisfied still with the loss and unwilling to end her political career to defeat by an outsider.

Throughout the campaign season, Penn and Stein detail, she had high approval ratings. Among Democrats, she had 75% support. However, much of this may have been because of the alternative: Donald Trump. Many of the progressive members of the Democratic Party voiced strong words against Clinton. As a result, she may find it difficult to regain their support a third time. This is especially true when candidates such as Bernie Sanders, Tulsi Gabbard, and Kirsten Gillibrand have speculated runs. Nonetheless, they believe her desire to be the first female president will prevail.

Conway Encourages Hillary Clinton 2020

Interestingly, the announcement drew sarcastic support from Kellyanne Conway. The first woman to successfully manage a presidential campaign, she believed Clinton to be an easy target. As Trump has already defeated her once, she believes that he can do so again.

Conway took to Twitter on Monday to voice her support for a Hillary Clinton 2020 bid, saying: “Dear God, please, yes”.


Get awesome merch. Help 71 Republic end the media oligarchy. Donate today to our Patreon, which you can find here. Thank you very much for your support!

Featured Image Source

Nikki Haley Resigns as U.S. Envoy to the United Nations

By Eli Ridder | United States

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley will leave her post at the end of the year. United States President Donald Trump announced the news Tuesday as he accepted her resignation.

Ms. Haley, the former governor of South Carolina, will depart the envoy role after representing the United States on the Security Council since January of 2017.

Nikki Haley shaking hands with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Betanyahu
U.S. Permanent Representative to the UN, Ambassador Nikki Haley meets Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at his office in Jerusalem, June 7, 2017. (Source: US Embassy in Tel Aviv)

The move comes not long after several stories were published about questionable private flights and accepting large gifts.

Many describe Haley as a fierce presence on the Security Council. In her position, she typically works on everything from North Korean sanctions to the Syrian civil war.

Some have reported that her resignation was prompted by her aspirations to run for President. Haley has since responded that she intends to vote and campaign for the President in his 2020 reelection bid. However, the previously mentioned scandals may serve as a bit of a roadblock in her effectiveness as a campaigner.

Axios first reported this news.


More To Follow

Get awesome merchandise. Help 71 Republic end the media oligarchy. Donate today to our Patreon, which you can find here. Thank you very much for your support!