Given some of the comments at my recent post, Is Hillary Clinton Ill?, I see I need to expand on what I was thinking when I wrote that post.
In the post I write:
I hope libertarians recognize that from a libertarian perspective this is a plus for Hillary over Donald Trump.
A great leader that can barely get out of bed is much preferable to an energetic leader who can rally the masses.This led to the following comments and exchanges:
My point is not that terrible things can't come out of a presidency where a president is ill, but that there is a certain kind of evil that only comes about because of a high energy "can do" leaders.
A Hillary Clinton presidency would be absolutely horrific, but she couldn't launch a wave in a baseball stadium. Operatives can do terrible things behind the scenes when a president is ill and not fully functional, BUT that president is not going to rally the masses in positively dangerous directions.
I have said before that I truly fear the leader, not moving a country in the direction of liberty, who fills stadiums.
There have been all too many comparisons of Trump with Mussolini and Hitler, a few accurate, many far off base. But Trump can sure rally a crowd the way they did.
I fear leaders who can do this. When you have two interventionists who have no leanings toward free markets, private property and peace, every time, I'll take the low energy,in poor health interventionist who has no ability to fill a stadium.