9 ms·

Peter Thiel to serve as Trump delegate

88 points by coolandsmartrr 10y ago

pieter1976 10y ago
I guess this is on HN because people are surprised that not all programmers are atheist members of the Democratic party.
- djrogers 10y ago
  Or all gay people? Honestly I think it's far more interesting that he has multiple Congressmen as his delegates, given some of the lines that are rumored to have been drawn inside the party about supporting him.
- mc32 10y ago
  I think the interesting part would be to see if his cabinet is more pluralistic and diverse in composition than that of the other candidates --who by and large pick apparatchiks. Remains to be seen, but if he does, I hope it would pressure other candidates to be more politically inclusive.
- partiallypro 10y ago
  Everyone that knows about Peter Thiel knows he's an outspoken libertarian, critic of the GOP and DNC, and that's he's homosexual. The surprise isn't that he's not a Democrat (everyone knew that) it's that Trump isn't exactly the libertarian on...any issue (at least not openly.) There is the assumption that Trump will be a major disruption to the establishment, that I have seen some libertarians and liberals both embrace. I have a hard time believing Thiel actually embraces Trump, and it's more that he was going to be a delegate and will now be legally bound to cast his first ballot for Trump. I am frankly a fan of Thiel, a lot of people here at HN love Musk but I think Musk is a corporate welfare queen; and Thiel is not.
  - oarsinsync 10y ago
    > I think Musk is a corporate welfare queen Can you elaborate on that?
    - beeboop 10y ago
      People dislike that he's benefiting a lot, directly and indirectly, from government subsidies. I usually point out that oil&gas get a tremendously larger amount of subsidies, but some people counter that by saying Tesla is different because it wouldn't be feasible without the subsidies. I am not sure I see the logic in that, if anything it seems like an argument for it to have subsidies because it's creating value that wouldn't be possible otherwise.
      - partiallypro 10y ago
        > I usually point out that oil&gas get a tremendously larger amount of subsidie Oil and Gas do not get direct subsidies, they get to write off capital expenses. That's completely different. You can downvote me all you want, but writing off capital expenses is available to every business and this is always included in the "oil and gas subsidies" number people tout, because it fits an agenda of corporate welfare for everyone else. Corporate welfare should be abolished. The Oil & Gas sector did get a bailout in the early 90s, and it shouldn't have. The auto industry also shouldn't have been reaped rewards from government bailouts.
      - drewrv 10y ago
        Not just oil and gas, the auto industry and aerospace (i.e. his direct competitors) have received tons of subsidies and bailouts over the years. To expect Musk to get by without any subsidies would be to hold him to a higher standard than anyone else in his industry.
    - maratd 10y ago
      All of the companies he's involved in receive government dollars, directly or indirectly through subsidies. Tesla, Space X, and SolarCity. That's 3 out of 3. Hence the moniker. To be fair, all of those industries have had and will continue to have heavy government involvement. He didn't create the problem, although he seems to be attracted to industries which have those sorts of problems.
  - uola 10y ago
    Not a fan nor particularly informed on Thiel. But my brief impression is that he (also) considers himself some kind of realist. Trump is less conservative on many issues and presumably will push the republicans in that direction. While I (unsurprisingly as a European) am far to the left in terms of what the government should do, I hate people who take advantage. But Musk mostly just had good timing (when both the space and car industry in the US was loosing momentum) and as long as you don't pretend he did it all by himself I don't see a problem with it. On the other hand you could claim that Palantir is part the military industrial complex.
  - harryjo 10y ago
    > welfare queen is a deeply offensive term, and even undermining to the point you are trying to make about Musk.
- untog 10y ago
  Or that supposedly intelligent people are able to justify supporting Trump. I think this goes beyond mere party politics - the man is incompetent and utterly unqualified for the job. I've heard numerous arguments (including in this thread) about Trump being a "wrecking ball" to the political establishment and I think it's telling about the audience of HN. If you were living on the poverty line, depend on government programs or, hell, are Muslim, you might not want to play so fast and loose with the current system. We're lucky that we can afford to risk such an idea.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - tallon 10y ago
    This just shows how little you know about Trump's policies.
- rdtsc 10y ago
  Surprisingly I can see people here being anti-establishment more than Democrat or Republican. Both Trump and Sanders are presenting themselves as such. I have heard more than one time, if Sanders doesn't win, people claim would switch to vote for Trump. Sounds crazy right, well not so crazy if you partition candidates by "entrenched in political establishment" vs "anti-establishment". As much as Republicans hate Trump. He is probably their best chance at survival. And this is coming from talking to a "rich old white guy" -- the stereotypical Republican. His comment was that based on current trajectory, Republican party will fizzle away.
  - crispyambulance 10y ago
    Regardless of whether the democratic nominee is Sanders or Clinton, _MANY_ republicans will hold their nose and vote democrat if the republican choice is Trump. You can't say the same for Sanders supporters. Traditional liberals aren't going to vote Trump under any circumstances.
    - venomsnake 10y ago
      I have seen so far a lot of claims about the current election proven false. I think we are in black swan territory.
      - api 10y ago
        While I can't vote for Trump, I definitely understand the sentiment. With the exception of a few large mostly coastal cities, the entire country has been in a low grade depression since 2001. Parts of the American interior are nearing collapse of civilization levels of decline. This is really really dangerous. It's the classic precondition of totalitarianism. Existing politicians in both parties are doing nothing about it. Being occupants of coastal cities (DC) and largely upper class, many don't even seem to realize there's a problem.
        selimthegrim 10y ago
        Which parts of the American interior do you nominate?
a_small_island 10y ago
It should say 'Peter Thiel', not PayPal co-founder, imo.
- uiri 10y ago
  The title isn't wrong. The original article uses 'PayPal co-founder' and HN guidelines suggest using the original title unless it is misleading (which, in this case, it is not). While Peter Thiel may have name recognition on HN and in Silicon Valley, he is better known as a co-founder of PayPal in political circles and the rest of the US.
  - Aloha 10y ago
    If he's known at all in the rest of the US.
  - tashoecraft 10y ago
    I agree the title isn't wrong, but I believe most hacker news readers know who Peter Thiel is. There were many Paypal cofounders, however. A change in the title isn't needed, but would have simplified some things.
- ErikAugust 10y ago
  Right, Peter Thiel is not just a PayPal co-founder - he is: * co-founder of Palantir * the first major investor in Facebook * running a $2 billion VC fund * an outspoken libertarian * openly gay I must say that I have no idea what is going on.
mdorazio 10y ago
Am I missing something here? Being a pledged party delegate is very different from being a true supporter of a candidate. It just means that you intend to cast your delegate vote for a particular candidate. There's essentially no one but Trump left in the Republican Primary, so is it really surprising that Peter Thiel, a Republican, would pledge for him?
- venomsnake 10y ago
  Actually the surprising thing is getting involved at all. Right now even whiff of support for Trump is toxic.
  - vox_mollis 10y ago
    Toxic in what sense? Edit: It seems you mean career toxicity. Thiel, being able to write his own ticket, would founders really be unwilling to work with him on the basis of his political positions?
    - oarsinsync 10y ago
      What happened to Chris Christie's political career after endorsing Trump would be one sense of the toxicity
      - googlryas 10y ago
        Yes, because he was ascendant in NJ before that. What will happen to Christies career when Trump appoints him AG?
    - fullshark 10y ago
      I don't know about private citizens but Chris Christie has rock bottom approval levels. http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/03/christies_trump_endorsement_doesnt_sit_well_with_n.html http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/03/christies_trump...
    - venomsnake 10y ago
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
Aloha 10y ago
I just want to send a wrecking ball to Washington DC - I'm not really picky which wrecking ball it is (Trump or Sanders). So while I'd prefer Sanders, its clear to me that there are some fundamental problems with our economy - both of the two wrecking ball candidates have touched on something in common, which is average americans have lost in the balance of free trade - and that government is far more accessible to the rich and powerful than it is to the common man. In the end, we lived thru 8 years of GWB - and very frankly, I have enough faith in our system of government to feel that its self regulating that we could put pretty much anyone in the office of president and they'd not be able to fuck it up too much. Yes, I expect to get downvoted for tacit support of Trump.
- illumin8 10y ago
  If you truly believe that someone who is part of the wealthy elite will ever do anything to reduce significant problems like income inequality, immigration reform, and expansion of the police state, you're insane.
  - venomsnake 10y ago
    You don't get it. He don't expect Trump to play chess for his team. He expects Trump to blow the chessboard.
  - maratd 10y ago
    > reduce significant problems Those voting for him aren't interested in reducing problems or fixing them. They gave up on that a long time ago. They're interested in breaking the system which gave birth to those problems. Will Trump break that system? Maybe. It's a complex system and if he implements any of his wonderful solutions which he put forward so far, it will break a lot of eggs. I'm not entirely sure breaking the system will be a net positive ... but I understand why people would want to vote for him. And it's perfectly rational for them to do so, if what they want is to break the system.
  - willholloway 10y ago
    I would normally agree, but not in the case of Trump, because more than anything Donald just wants to be worshiped and adored. A Trump Presidency will be bread and circuses for sure. His ambition is to be a populist tyrant in the mold of Julius Ceasar. I've been enjoying watching a Randian Superhero in action, a completely self-interested man, a man that never gives anything away for free, a man that sees a pledge as just another opportunity to renegotiate better terms for himself. He threatens the power of the Senate more than anything, and by Senate I mean the broad based aristocratic ruling class. His enemies list will be long, and he will retaliate against anyone who so much as dares to dislike him with the full power of the executive branch. It turns out that a majority of GOP voters never really believed in the Conservative principles their betters told them they cared about, save the resentment against rich liberals and poor minorities scrounging government benefits. And he is smart. He saw the opening and he went for it. He can echolocate his opponents weakest point, and mercilessly exploit it for his own advantage. And after he puts anyone in his way down for the count, he becomes gracious the minute they no longer threaten him. He trains his opponents to be scared to go after him, because he hits back hard. Trump, a chauvinist if there ever was one, has effectively made today's media cycle all about Bill Clinton's rape allegations and Hillary's "enabling". A competitor, a dominator, a man without any altruism or thought for collective good, and a genius at manipulating the modern media landscape. If he had more experience with equities and modern finance, rather than mere real estate deals and debt, I would almost think he could bring about some actual beneficial economic reforms for the middle class. He would bully his enemies and the enemies of the masses from the bully pulpit like no other, because at his core, he is a brute, a bully. I would almost want to see him in the presidency just to see what a smart outsider could accomplish in the office if he wasn't such a fascist with a torture fetish. And in the end I think it will be his overreach that will make him the ultimate embarrassed loser this fall. Even when he had the nomination wrapped up through his polarizing tactics to boost his resentful thug vote, he couldn't help himself with more statements sure to alienate female voters. Even this fervent Sanders supporter has to concede that Trump is just a smarter candidate. Trump adapts, his reality and truth is flexible and situational. I still hold out hope for a Sanders upset...
unchocked 10y ago
Is Thiel a neoreactionary? Trump is actually a great candidate for the neoreactionaries: an apolitical strongman with barely veiled ambitions for unchallenged sovereignty. I'm surprised Mencius Moldbug isn't on the delegate slate as well. FWIW, I've had some success persuading conventional Republicans to write in Hillary Clinton as a protest candidate in the upcoming California primary.
- davidw 10y ago
  I thought he was a Libertarian, actually. I'm pretty surprised - I would have thought the proto-fascism of Trump would be poison for that crowd. Not that they'd be big Hillary fans either, but stuff like "hey, let's not pay our debts" or building walls or targeting a particular religion... that's not small government stuff.
- xyience 10y ago
  Thiel is a libertarian. If you're up for reading... http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2007/12/why-i-am-not-libertarian.html http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2007/12/why-i-a... dives into some differences. The key one IMO being that no neoreactionary should actually vote. Trump is of course the obvious best candidate from one branch of the NRx perspective, but him taking office doesn't fundamentally change things. Another branch of NRx could argue Hillary is the "best", too, but the reasoning may be surprising. The underlying reason for which I think Thiel might support Trump is that Trump is ultimately a businessman, like Thiel, and one in the messy business of real estate development at that. (For a fun fairly anti-Trump piece that could also read as support: http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/03/19/book-review-the-art-of-the-deal http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/03/19/book-review-the-art-of-...) A common NRx thread is that pretty much any chief executive (which includes military generals) would do a better job at being President (and even better King) than the more traditional list of possibilities like lawyers and professors.
  - mikeyouse 10y ago
    > A common NRx thread is that pretty much any chief executive (which includes military generals) would do a better job at being President (and even better King) than the more traditional list of possibilities like lawyers and professors. Which is immediately disproven by the disastrous presidency of our first "MBA President" GWB. (See the fellating articles before people realized how awful he would be at managing the country[1]) [1] - http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2004/08/the_first_mba_president.html http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2004/08/the_first_mb...
pinaceae 10y ago
Peter Thiel: "Since 1920, the vast increase in welfare beneficiaries and the extension of the franchise to women — two constituencies that are notoriously tough for libertarians — have rendered the notion of “capitalist democracy” into an oxymoron." http://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-thiel/education-libertarian http://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-thiel/education... Fits right in with Trump. How's the seasteading going btw?
api 10y ago
Does Thiel support Trump or is he just legally or contractually bound to cast a vote for him because he's a Republican party delegate? I smell click bait. Of course the real question is why Thiel would be a Republican delegate at all. Does he not have better things to do than carry water for a bunch of dimwits and apparatchiks?
jboydyhacker 10y ago
This is surprising mostly because Thiel is a libertarian. Trump has staked out policy positions that provoke a much stronger central government. To be specific. - Increased federal regulation. Especially especially around restrictions of foreign trade. China/ Korea etc. -Speech restrictions. Trump has advocated new laws against the press and others than disparage him (i.e. those small hands jokes for example or like Bill Maher- called him son of a chimp and was sued- trump lost and wants to change the laws so he'd win) -Intervention in leading American business sourcing and investment decisions. Carrier AC is an example and of course Apple. - Pro Gun control. This is in direct contrast to libertarian views. They dont want any rules from the government on gun control. Now one could argue that Trump has a non interventionist military policy which is a traditional libertarian view. However, Bush ran on that platform in 2000 but becasue he was so inexperienced he ended up started several large wars including Iraq which was a dramatic failure. Trump is less experienced than Bush was so it's possible he is at a high risk of entering new wars as well. There is zero about trump that has anything to do with being a libertarian. That's the puzzling part.
- LyndsySimon 10y ago
  > Pro Gun control. This is in direct contrast to libertarian views. They dont want any rules from the government on gun control. While he has certainly made pro-gun-control statements in the past, Trump's currently stated position on guns is fairly strongly pro-gun.
- tryitnow 10y ago
  My best guess is that Thiel secretly supports neoreactionary politics. He's gone on record saying he's opposed to democracy and thinks things started to decline when women got the vote. Neoreactionaries like the idea of government by CEO. So Trump's strongman misogynistic views would be a natural fit if Thiel has indeed become more neoreactionary. The problem is that neoreactionaries are secretive, so Thiel is never going to come out and say he's a neoreactionary.
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  > This is surprising mostly because Thiel is a libertarian. Its not that surprising. While there is a lot of genuine libertarianism, there are also plenty of what superficially seem to be libertarians that don't really oppose authoritarian government, they only oppose the way they perceive their present government using authority, and would be quite happy with an authoritarian government that also shared their policy preferences. Right-libertarians that turn out to really be right-authoritarians that just don't want a government left of their own position to exercise authority are common enough that I'm not surprised when another one pops up.
ScottBurson 10y ago
I wonder if Thiel is still as enthusiastic about Trump after The Donald's recent comment about printing money to pay off the national debt.
SilasX 10y ago
Could we close and merge the other submissions on this: https://hn.algolia.com/?query=thiel&sort=byDate&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=story https://hn.algolia.com/?query=thiel&sort=byDate&prefix&page=... Note: this is one of the few that doesn't have "Thiel" in the title.

pieter1976 10y ago

I guess this is on HN because people are surprised that not all programmers are atheist members of the Democratic party.

djrogers 10y ago
Or all gay people? Honestly I think it's far more interesting that he has multiple Congressmen as his delegates, given some of the lines that are rumored to have been drawn inside the party about supporting him.
mc32 10y ago
I think the interesting part would be to see if his cabinet is more pluralistic and diverse in composition than that of the other candidates --who by and large pick apparatchiks. Remains to be seen, but if he does, I hope it would pressure other candidates to be more politically inclusive.
partiallypro 10y ago
Everyone that knows about Peter Thiel knows he's an outspoken libertarian, critic of the GOP and DNC, and that's he's homosexual. The surprise isn't that he's not a Democrat (everyone knew that) it's that Trump isn't exactly the libertarian on...any issue (at least not openly.) There is the assumption that Trump will be a major disruption to the establishment, that I have seen some libertarians and liberals both embrace. I have a hard time believing Thiel actually embraces Trump, and it's more that he was going to be a delegate and will now be legally bound to cast his first ballot for Trump. I am frankly a fan of Thiel, a lot of people here at HN love Musk but I think Musk is a corporate welfare queen; and Thiel is not.
- oarsinsync 10y ago
  > I think Musk is a corporate welfare queen Can you elaborate on that?
  - beeboop 10y ago
    People dislike that he's benefiting a lot, directly and indirectly, from government subsidies. I usually point out that oil&gas get a tremendously larger amount of subsidies, but some people counter that by saying Tesla is different because it wouldn't be feasible without the subsidies. I am not sure I see the logic in that, if anything it seems like an argument for it to have subsidies because it's creating value that wouldn't be possible otherwise.
    - partiallypro 10y ago
      > I usually point out that oil&gas get a tremendously larger amount of subsidie Oil and Gas do not get direct subsidies, they get to write off capital expenses. That's completely different. You can downvote me all you want, but writing off capital expenses is available to every business and this is always included in the "oil and gas subsidies" number people tout, because it fits an agenda of corporate welfare for everyone else. Corporate welfare should be abolished. The Oil & Gas sector did get a bailout in the early 90s, and it shouldn't have. The auto industry also shouldn't have been reaped rewards from government bailouts.
    - drewrv 10y ago
      Not just oil and gas, the auto industry and aerospace (i.e. his direct competitors) have received tons of subsidies and bailouts over the years. To expect Musk to get by without any subsidies would be to hold him to a higher standard than anyone else in his industry.
  - maratd 10y ago
    All of the companies he's involved in receive government dollars, directly or indirectly through subsidies. Tesla, Space X, and SolarCity. That's 3 out of 3. Hence the moniker. To be fair, all of those industries have had and will continue to have heavy government involvement. He didn't create the problem, although he seems to be attracted to industries which have those sorts of problems.
- uola 10y ago
  Not a fan nor particularly informed on Thiel. But my brief impression is that he (also) considers himself some kind of realist. Trump is less conservative on many issues and presumably will push the republicans in that direction. While I (unsurprisingly as a European) am far to the left in terms of what the government should do, I hate people who take advantage. But Musk mostly just had good timing (when both the space and car industry in the US was loosing momentum) and as long as you don't pretend he did it all by himself I don't see a problem with it. On the other hand you could claim that Palantir is part the military industrial complex.
- harryjo 10y ago
  > welfare queen is a deeply offensive term, and even undermining to the point you are trying to make about Musk.
untog 10y ago
Or that supposedly intelligent people are able to justify supporting Trump. I think this goes beyond mere party politics - the man is incompetent and utterly unqualified for the job. I've heard numerous arguments (including in this thread) about Trump being a "wrecking ball" to the political establishment and I think it's telling about the audience of HN. If you were living on the poverty line, depend on government programs or, hell, are Muslim, you might not want to play so fast and loose with the current system. We're lucky that we can afford to risk such an idea.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- tallon 10y ago
  This just shows how little you know about Trump's policies.
rdtsc 10y ago
Surprisingly I can see people here being anti-establishment more than Democrat or Republican. Both Trump and Sanders are presenting themselves as such. I have heard more than one time, if Sanders doesn't win, people claim would switch to vote for Trump. Sounds crazy right, well not so crazy if you partition candidates by "entrenched in political establishment" vs "anti-establishment". As much as Republicans hate Trump. He is probably their best chance at survival. And this is coming from talking to a "rich old white guy" -- the stereotypical Republican. His comment was that based on current trajectory, Republican party will fizzle away.
- crispyambulance 10y ago
  Regardless of whether the democratic nominee is Sanders or Clinton, _MANY_ republicans will hold their nose and vote democrat if the republican choice is Trump. You can't say the same for Sanders supporters. Traditional liberals aren't going to vote Trump under any circumstances.
  - venomsnake 10y ago
    I have seen so far a lot of claims about the current election proven false. I think we are in black swan territory.
    - api 10y ago
      While I can't vote for Trump, I definitely understand the sentiment. With the exception of a few large mostly coastal cities, the entire country has been in a low grade depression since 2001. Parts of the American interior are nearing collapse of civilization levels of decline. This is really really dangerous. It's the classic precondition of totalitarianism. Existing politicians in both parties are doing nothing about it. Being occupants of coastal cities (DC) and largely upper class, many don't even seem to realize there's a problem.
      - selimthegrim 10y ago
        Which parts of the American interior do you nominate?

a_small_island 10y ago

It should say 'Peter Thiel', not PayPal co-founder, imo.

uiri 10y ago
The title isn't wrong. The original article uses 'PayPal co-founder' and HN guidelines suggest using the original title unless it is misleading (which, in this case, it is not). While Peter Thiel may have name recognition on HN and in Silicon Valley, he is better known as a co-founder of PayPal in political circles and the rest of the US.
- Aloha 10y ago
  If he's known at all in the rest of the US.
- tashoecraft 10y ago
  I agree the title isn't wrong, but I believe most hacker news readers know who Peter Thiel is. There were many Paypal cofounders, however. A change in the title isn't needed, but would have simplified some things.
ErikAugust 10y ago
Right, Peter Thiel is not just a PayPal co-founder - he is: * co-founder of Palantir * the first major investor in Facebook * running a $2 billion VC fund * an outspoken libertarian * openly gay I must say that I have no idea what is going on.

mdorazio 10y ago

Am I missing something here? Being a pledged party delegate is very different from being a true supporter of a candidate. It just means that you intend to cast your delegate vote for a particular candidate. There's essentially no one but Trump left in the Republican Primary, so is it really surprising that Peter Thiel, a Republican, would pledge for him?

venomsnake 10y ago
Actually the surprising thing is getting involved at all. Right now even whiff of support for Trump is toxic.
- vox_mollis 10y ago
  Toxic in what sense? Edit: It seems you mean career toxicity. Thiel, being able to write his own ticket, would founders really be unwilling to work with him on the basis of his political positions?
  - oarsinsync 10y ago
    What happened to Chris Christie's political career after endorsing Trump would be one sense of the toxicity
    - googlryas 10y ago
      Yes, because he was ascendant in NJ before that. What will happen to Christies career when Trump appoints him AG?
  - fullshark 10y ago
    I don't know about private citizens but Chris Christie has rock bottom approval levels. http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/03/christies_trump_endorsement_doesnt_sit_well_with_n.html http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/03/christies_trump...
  - venomsnake 10y ago

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

Aloha 10y ago

I just want to send a wrecking ball to Washington DC - I'm not really picky which wrecking ball it is (Trump or Sanders). So while I'd prefer Sanders, its clear to me that there are some fundamental problems with our economy - both of the two wrecking ball candidates have touched on something in common, which is average americans have lost in the balance of free trade - and that government is far more accessible to the rich and powerful than it is to the common man. In the end, we lived thru 8 years of GWB - and very frankly, I have enough faith in our system of government to feel that its self regulating that we could put pretty much anyone in the office of president and they'd not be able to fuck it up too much. Yes, I expect to get downvoted for tacit support of Trump.

illumin8 10y ago
If you truly believe that someone who is part of the wealthy elite will ever do anything to reduce significant problems like income inequality, immigration reform, and expansion of the police state, you're insane.
- venomsnake 10y ago
  You don't get it. He don't expect Trump to play chess for his team. He expects Trump to blow the chessboard.
- maratd 10y ago
  > reduce significant problems Those voting for him aren't interested in reducing problems or fixing them. They gave up on that a long time ago. They're interested in breaking the system which gave birth to those problems. Will Trump break that system? Maybe. It's a complex system and if he implements any of his wonderful solutions which he put forward so far, it will break a lot of eggs. I'm not entirely sure breaking the system will be a net positive ... but I understand why people would want to vote for him. And it's perfectly rational for them to do so, if what they want is to break the system.
- willholloway 10y ago
  I would normally agree, but not in the case of Trump, because more than anything Donald just wants to be worshiped and adored. A Trump Presidency will be bread and circuses for sure. His ambition is to be a populist tyrant in the mold of Julius Ceasar. I've been enjoying watching a Randian Superhero in action, a completely self-interested man, a man that never gives anything away for free, a man that sees a pledge as just another opportunity to renegotiate better terms for himself. He threatens the power of the Senate more than anything, and by Senate I mean the broad based aristocratic ruling class. His enemies list will be long, and he will retaliate against anyone who so much as dares to dislike him with the full power of the executive branch. It turns out that a majority of GOP voters never really believed in the Conservative principles their betters told them they cared about, save the resentment against rich liberals and poor minorities scrounging government benefits. And he is smart. He saw the opening and he went for it. He can echolocate his opponents weakest point, and mercilessly exploit it for his own advantage. And after he puts anyone in his way down for the count, he becomes gracious the minute they no longer threaten him. He trains his opponents to be scared to go after him, because he hits back hard. Trump, a chauvinist if there ever was one, has effectively made today's media cycle all about Bill Clinton's rape allegations and Hillary's "enabling". A competitor, a dominator, a man without any altruism or thought for collective good, and a genius at manipulating the modern media landscape. If he had more experience with equities and modern finance, rather than mere real estate deals and debt, I would almost think he could bring about some actual beneficial economic reforms for the middle class. He would bully his enemies and the enemies of the masses from the bully pulpit like no other, because at his core, he is a brute, a bully. I would almost want to see him in the presidency just to see what a smart outsider could accomplish in the office if he wasn't such a fascist with a torture fetish. And in the end I think it will be his overreach that will make him the ultimate embarrassed loser this fall. Even when he had the nomination wrapped up through his polarizing tactics to boost his resentful thug vote, he couldn't help himself with more statements sure to alienate female voters. Even this fervent Sanders supporter has to concede that Trump is just a smarter candidate. Trump adapts, his reality and truth is flexible and situational. I still hold out hope for a Sanders upset...

unchocked 10y ago

Is Thiel a neoreactionary? Trump is actually a great candidate for the neoreactionaries: an apolitical strongman with barely veiled ambitions for unchallenged sovereignty. I'm surprised Mencius Moldbug isn't on the delegate slate as well. FWIW, I've had some success persuading conventional Republicans to write in Hillary Clinton as a protest candidate in the upcoming California primary.

davidw 10y ago
I thought he was a Libertarian, actually. I'm pretty surprised - I would have thought the proto-fascism of Trump would be poison for that crowd. Not that they'd be big Hillary fans either, but stuff like "hey, let's not pay our debts" or building walls or targeting a particular religion... that's not small government stuff.
xyience 10y ago
Thiel is a libertarian. If you're up for reading... http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2007/12/why-i-am-not-libertarian.html http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2007/12/why-i-a... dives into some differences. The key one IMO being that no neoreactionary should actually vote. Trump is of course the obvious best candidate from one branch of the NRx perspective, but him taking office doesn't fundamentally change things. Another branch of NRx could argue Hillary is the "best", too, but the reasoning may be surprising. The underlying reason for which I think Thiel might support Trump is that Trump is ultimately a businessman, like Thiel, and one in the messy business of real estate development at that. (For a fun fairly anti-Trump piece that could also read as support: http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/03/19/book-review-the-art-of-the-deal http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/03/19/book-review-the-art-of-...) A common NRx thread is that pretty much any chief executive (which includes military generals) would do a better job at being President (and even better King) than the more traditional list of possibilities like lawyers and professors.
- mikeyouse 10y ago
  > A common NRx thread is that pretty much any chief executive (which includes military generals) would do a better job at being President (and even better King) than the more traditional list of possibilities like lawyers and professors. Which is immediately disproven by the disastrous presidency of our first "MBA President" GWB. (See the fellating articles before people realized how awful he would be at managing the country[1]) [1] - http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2004/08/the_first_mba_president.html http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2004/08/the_first_mb...

pinaceae 10y ago

Peter Thiel: "Since 1920, the vast increase in welfare beneficiaries and the extension of the franchise to women — two constituencies that are notoriously tough for libertarians — have rendered the notion of “capitalist democracy” into an oxymoron." http://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-thiel/education-libertarian http://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-thiel/education... Fits right in with Trump. How's the seasteading going btw?

api 10y ago

Does Thiel support Trump or is he just legally or contractually bound to cast a vote for him because he's a Republican party delegate? I smell click bait. Of course the real question is why Thiel would be a Republican delegate at all. Does he not have better things to do than carry water for a bunch of dimwits and apparatchiks?

jboydyhacker 10y ago

This is surprising mostly because Thiel is a libertarian. Trump has staked out policy positions that provoke a much stronger central government. To be specific. - Increased federal regulation. Especially especially around restrictions of foreign trade. China/ Korea etc. -Speech restrictions. Trump has advocated new laws against the press and others than disparage him (i.e. those small hands jokes for example or like Bill Maher- called him son of a chimp and was sued- trump lost and wants to change the laws so he'd win) -Intervention in leading American business sourcing and investment decisions. Carrier AC is an example and of course Apple. - Pro Gun control. This is in direct contrast to libertarian views. They dont want any rules from the government on gun control. Now one could argue that Trump has a non interventionist military policy which is a traditional libertarian view. However, Bush ran on that platform in 2000 but becasue he was so inexperienced he ended up started several large wars including Iraq which was a dramatic failure. Trump is less experienced than Bush was so it's possible he is at a high risk of entering new wars as well. There is zero about trump that has anything to do with being a libertarian. That's the puzzling part.

LyndsySimon 10y ago
> Pro Gun control. This is in direct contrast to libertarian views. They dont want any rules from the government on gun control. While he has certainly made pro-gun-control statements in the past, Trump's currently stated position on guns is fairly strongly pro-gun.
tryitnow 10y ago
My best guess is that Thiel secretly supports neoreactionary politics. He's gone on record saying he's opposed to democracy and thinks things started to decline when women got the vote. Neoreactionaries like the idea of government by CEO. So Trump's strongman misogynistic views would be a natural fit if Thiel has indeed become more neoreactionary. The problem is that neoreactionaries are secretive, so Thiel is never going to come out and say he's a neoreactionary.
dragonwriter 10y ago
> This is surprising mostly because Thiel is a libertarian. Its not that surprising. While there is a lot of genuine libertarianism, there are also plenty of what superficially seem to be libertarians that don't really oppose authoritarian government, they only oppose the way they perceive their present government using authority, and would be quite happy with an authoritarian government that also shared their policy preferences. Right-libertarians that turn out to really be right-authoritarians that just don't want a government left of their own position to exercise authority are common enough that I'm not surprised when another one pops up.

ScottBurson 10y ago

I wonder if Thiel is still as enthusiastic about Trump after The Donald's recent comment about printing money to pay off the national debt.

SilasX 10y ago

Could we close and merge the other submissions on this: https://hn.algolia.com/?query=thiel&sort=byDate&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=story https://hn.algolia.com/?query=thiel&sort=byDate&prefix&page=... Note: this is one of the few that doesn't have "Thiel" in the title.