5 ms·

Given the libertarian/Randian streak that runs through silicon valley, support for Trump doesn't seem too outlandish. Especially when you consider his non-dedic

Given the libertarian/Randian streak that runs through silicon valley, support for Trump doesn't seem too outlandish. Especially when you consider his non-dedication to the typical right-wing 'family values' that aren't really popular in that region of California.

sevenless 10y ago
Isn't a libertarian just what Republicans call themselves in Northern California?
- saboot 10y ago
  Depends if by Northern California you mean SV. Travel further north to the foothills and it's pretty traditional. As someone who grew up in Placer County and now lives in the bible belt the main difference in political culture is that conservatives here are much more into the religious fire and brimstone narratives.
maratd 10y ago
> Given the libertarian/Randian streak that runs through silicon valley, support for Trump doesn't seem too outlandish. What? Exactly what libertarian values does Trump espouse?
- goodcitizen147 10y ago
  Decreased regulation, meritocratic systems, and property rights Why is this being downvoted?
  - api 10y ago
    When he says things like "I will force company X to do Y" I find it hard to take him seriously as a small government or pro-property-rights candidate. My personal prediction is that if elected he will grow the size of government dramatically, quite likely more than Sanders would have if elected and certainly more than Clinton (who is the "conservative" candidate in this election if that means status quo). He will also grow the power of government, which is more important and significant.
    - goodcitizen147 10y ago
      Are you referring to the tariffs he wants to impose to prevent companies from exploiting cheap labor in Mexico or the national security concerns he expressed wrt Apple or something else I'm not aware of?
  - serge2k 10y ago
    > Decreased regulation Unless he gets annoyed and calls up bill gates to shut off the internet. > meritocratic systems Except for Muslims.
- intopieces 10y ago
  He's so inconsistent with his rhetoric that it's hard to say. But the libertarian impression exists in the negative: Clinton's style is decidedly not libertarian, and Trump is a businessman by trade so I think in the mind of voters "it stands to reason."
  - maratd 10y ago
    Just because Clinton isn't libertarian, doesn't mean Trump is. I think the public has a basic capacity for logic and that's as basic as it gets. You know who is libertarian? Gary Johnson.
    - intopieces 10y ago
      > I think the public has a basic capacity for logic and that's as basic as it gets. Trump is literally lying about his opposition to the Iraq war and his supporters don't care. He also picked a running mate who voted for the Iraq war, despite criticizing his opponent for it. I try not to paint an entire populous with a broad brush. But logic doesn't appear to be something that, on average, is exhibited by the voters.
- VodkaHaze 10y ago
  Think he has anything right of center cobbled up together in a neatly packed ball
jbooth 10y ago
You'd think any actual libertarian would be jumping at the chance to get Johnson over the 5% threshold.
- MarkPNeyer 10y ago
  He's polled as high as 12, but they made it 15% after perot. And yes, many of us are.
- crusso 10y ago
  Unless Thiel is actually interested in backing a candidate with a chance of winning - in which case, 5% means nothing.
  - tlrobinson 10y ago
    Being included the debates is not "nothing".
    - crusso 10y ago
      Being included in the debates is not winning. I consider myself to be mostly a Libertarian, but I have no illusions. Short of some beyond comprehension post-singularity-ish event, no Libertarian will ever win the Presidency.
      - dragonwriter 10y ago
        > Short of some beyond comprehension post-singularity-ish event, no Libertarian will ever win the Presidency. Partisan realignments in which a major party is displaced are not "beyond comprehension post-singularity events" (heck, even the kind of electoral reforms that would end duopoly aren't, though they are unprecedented within the US, unlike major realignments) even if its been 150 years since the last one in the US.
        crusso 10y ago
        "unprecedented within the US" I'm at a loss to see how we disagree on my point. The libertarian party won't be upending our two-party system at the national level. Ever.
tlrobinson 10y ago
Trump is definitely not libertarian: https://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection2016 https://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection2016 http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/donald-trump-2016-authoritarian-213533 http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/donald-trump-...
- intopieces 10y ago
  I'm hesitant to believe anyone who says definitively what trump 'is'. Because there is no voting record to speak of legislation wise, everything is just speculation based on what he says. And he says a lot of things.
  - tlrobinson 10y ago
    A voting record is the only way to determine that?
    - intopieces 10y ago
      Well, one way in which we validate people's trustworthiness is whether their word matches their deed. Trump's words are inconsistent among themselves, and he has zero actions to put any of them against.
adventured 10y ago
Trump is the anti-Randian candidate. - He's against free trade. - He's in favor of punishing success, represented for example by his threats toward Amazon. - He panders to religion. Rand was an atheist and was very strongly anti-conservative. - Rand was very strongly in favor of immigration, especially when mixed with Capitalism. - He's in favor of drastically increasing government control over the Internet, represented in his numerous quips about shutting down the Internet or otherwise restricting it. - He has demonstrated a bent against freedom of speech, over and over again. Rand regarded free speech as the the single most important right. - He's in favor of public healthcare systems. Rand was staunchly against all forms of entitlements, and all forms of socialized healthcare. - He's a supporter of Social Security and Medicare. Rand was against both, overwhelmingly. - He's more than fine with significant government regulation of the economy. Rand believed in laissez-faire Capitalism. This list just keeps going. Trump could hardly be more anti-Rand. I'd probably be willing to argue that Sanders is less anti-Rand than Trump is.
- sevenless 10y ago
  I see points of similarity on foreign policy, where they both stood out as less interventionist than other candidates (even Democrats). Trump and Rand both said they'd let America's allies look after themselves.
  - crusso 10y ago
    The poster to whom you're responding was referring to Ayn Rand, not Rand Paul.
- api 10y ago
  > I'd probably be willing to argue that Sanders is less anti-Rand than Trump is. You'd be correct. On social and personal issues Sanders is very compatible with Randian forms of "libertarianism." He supports ending the drug war and womens' reproductive rights (personal sovereignty over one's body) and the right to make personal choices around things like sexuality, religion, etc. His economics are far from Rand's but probably not much further (if at all) than Clinton or Trump. It'd probably be a wash there. There were/are no economic libertarians in this race as competitive candidates. Rand was also not a fan of nationalism, which she regarded as collectivism. I'm not sure how anyone could get nationalism out of Rand except insofar as she believed that a government had a duty to protect its citizens. Beyond that she distrusted the idea of a nation as a component of identity, considering it collectivist.

sevenless 10y ago

Isn't a libertarian just what Republicans call themselves in Northern California?

saboot 10y ago
Depends if by Northern California you mean SV. Travel further north to the foothills and it's pretty traditional. As someone who grew up in Placer County and now lives in the bible belt the main difference in political culture is that conservatives here are much more into the religious fire and brimstone narratives.

maratd 10y ago

> Given the libertarian/Randian streak that runs through silicon valley, support for Trump doesn't seem too outlandish. What? Exactly what libertarian values does Trump espouse?

goodcitizen147 10y ago
Decreased regulation, meritocratic systems, and property rights Why is this being downvoted?
- api 10y ago
  When he says things like "I will force company X to do Y" I find it hard to take him seriously as a small government or pro-property-rights candidate. My personal prediction is that if elected he will grow the size of government dramatically, quite likely more than Sanders would have if elected and certainly more than Clinton (who is the "conservative" candidate in this election if that means status quo). He will also grow the power of government, which is more important and significant.
  - goodcitizen147 10y ago
    Are you referring to the tariffs he wants to impose to prevent companies from exploiting cheap labor in Mexico or the national security concerns he expressed wrt Apple or something else I'm not aware of?
- serge2k 10y ago
  > Decreased regulation Unless he gets annoyed and calls up bill gates to shut off the internet. > meritocratic systems Except for Muslims.
intopieces 10y ago
He's so inconsistent with his rhetoric that it's hard to say. But the libertarian impression exists in the negative: Clinton's style is decidedly not libertarian, and Trump is a businessman by trade so I think in the mind of voters "it stands to reason."
- maratd 10y ago
  Just because Clinton isn't libertarian, doesn't mean Trump is. I think the public has a basic capacity for logic and that's as basic as it gets. You know who is libertarian? Gary Johnson.
  - intopieces 10y ago
    > I think the public has a basic capacity for logic and that's as basic as it gets. Trump is literally lying about his opposition to the Iraq war and his supporters don't care. He also picked a running mate who voted for the Iraq war, despite criticizing his opponent for it. I try not to paint an entire populous with a broad brush. But logic doesn't appear to be something that, on average, is exhibited by the voters.
VodkaHaze 10y ago
Think he has anything right of center cobbled up together in a neatly packed ball

jbooth 10y ago

You'd think any actual libertarian would be jumping at the chance to get Johnson over the 5% threshold.

MarkPNeyer 10y ago
He's polled as high as 12, but they made it 15% after perot. And yes, many of us are.
crusso 10y ago
Unless Thiel is actually interested in backing a candidate with a chance of winning - in which case, 5% means nothing.
- tlrobinson 10y ago
  Being included the debates is not "nothing".
  - crusso 10y ago
    Being included in the debates is not winning. I consider myself to be mostly a Libertarian, but I have no illusions. Short of some beyond comprehension post-singularity-ish event, no Libertarian will ever win the Presidency.
    - dragonwriter 10y ago
      > Short of some beyond comprehension post-singularity-ish event, no Libertarian will ever win the Presidency. Partisan realignments in which a major party is displaced are not "beyond comprehension post-singularity events" (heck, even the kind of electoral reforms that would end duopoly aren't, though they are unprecedented within the US, unlike major realignments) even if its been 150 years since the last one in the US.
      - crusso 10y ago
        "unprecedented within the US" I'm at a loss to see how we disagree on my point. The libertarian party won't be upending our two-party system at the national level. Ever.

tlrobinson 10y ago

Trump is definitely not libertarian: https://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection2016 https://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection2016 http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/donald-trump-2016-authoritarian-213533 http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/donald-trump-...

intopieces 10y ago
I'm hesitant to believe anyone who says definitively what trump 'is'. Because there is no voting record to speak of legislation wise, everything is just speculation based on what he says. And he says a lot of things.
- tlrobinson 10y ago
  A voting record is the only way to determine that?
  - intopieces 10y ago
    Well, one way in which we validate people's trustworthiness is whether their word matches their deed. Trump's words are inconsistent among themselves, and he has zero actions to put any of them against.

adventured 10y ago

Trump is the anti-Randian candidate. - He's against free trade. - He's in favor of punishing success, represented for example by his threats toward Amazon. - He panders to religion. Rand was an atheist and was very strongly anti-conservative. - Rand was very strongly in favor of immigration, especially when mixed with Capitalism. - He's in favor of drastically increasing government control over the Internet, represented in his numerous quips about shutting down the Internet or otherwise restricting it. - He has demonstrated a bent against freedom of speech, over and over again. Rand regarded free speech as the the single most important right. - He's in favor of public healthcare systems. Rand was staunchly against all forms of entitlements, and all forms of socialized healthcare. - He's a supporter of Social Security and Medicare. Rand was against both, overwhelmingly. - He's more than fine with significant government regulation of the economy. Rand believed in laissez-faire Capitalism. This list just keeps going. Trump could hardly be more anti-Rand. I'd probably be willing to argue that Sanders is less anti-Rand than Trump is.

sevenless 10y ago
I see points of similarity on foreign policy, where they both stood out as less interventionist than other candidates (even Democrats). Trump and Rand both said they'd let America's allies look after themselves.
- crusso 10y ago
  The poster to whom you're responding was referring to Ayn Rand, not Rand Paul.
api 10y ago
> I'd probably be willing to argue that Sanders is less anti-Rand than Trump is. You'd be correct. On social and personal issues Sanders is very compatible with Randian forms of "libertarianism." He supports ending the drug war and womens' reproductive rights (personal sovereignty over one's body) and the right to make personal choices around things like sexuality, religion, etc. His economics are far from Rand's but probably not much further (if at all) than Clinton or Trump. It'd probably be a wash there. There were/are no economic libertarians in this race as competitive candidates. Rand was also not a fan of nationalism, which she regarded as collectivism. I'm not sure how anyone could get nationalism out of Rand except insofar as she believed that a government had a duty to protect its citizens. Beyond that she distrusted the idea of a nation as a component of identity, considering it collectivist.