More from NYT:
It was an unexpected sentiment from Mr. Koch, who has for years deployed his vast wealth to champion conservative causes and Republican candidacies, emerging as a major foe of the Democratic Party.
Mr. Koch sounded at times baffled and disappointed by the language and ideas of several Republican presidential candidates in an interview with Jonathan Karl of ABC, which aired on “This Week with George Stephanopoulos.”
He called a plan by Donald J. Trump to temporarily ban Muslims from entering the country “monstrous” and dismissed Senator Ted Cruz’s proposal to carpet-bomb territory held by the Islamic State as “frightening” hyperbole.
Mr. Koch spoke somewhat fondly of former President Bill Clinton, suggesting he held down government spending and regulation compared with his successor, President George W. Bush. He called Mr. Bush “a fine person, and tried to do the right thing but was misguided.”
That prompted a question about Mrs. Clinton. Below is a transcript of the ensuing exchange:
KARL: So is it possible another Clinton could be better than another Republican—
KOCH: It’s possible.
KARL: Next time around?
KOCH: It’s possible.
KARL: You couldn’t see yourself supporting Hillary Clinton, could you?
KOCH: Well, I— that— her— we would have to believe her actions would be quite different than her rhetoric. Let me put it that way. But on some of the Republican candidates we would— before we could support them, we’d have to believe their actions will be quite different than the rhetoric we’ve heard so far.
Hillary is bad news, but would she really be worse than Trump?
The difference between the two is that it is probably easier to see the limits to which Hillary would take interventionism, and with Trump it is not clear at all.
Face it, regardless of who captures the 8-year throne, things are gong to make to be much worse from a freedom perspective.
-RW
This coming from someone who wrote that Mr Stone might be able to plant libertarian seeds within a Trump presidency. It appears that many libertarians prefer status quo to an unknown which may be worse or better. What exactly is the target again and how does any of this get us closer?
ReplyDeleteIt wasn’t that President Clinton wanted to spend less than President Bush, but rather that the Republican controlled Congress was somewhat of an opposition party when he was President and didn’t rubber stamp his proposals as much as they did for Bush.
ReplyDelete