Saturday, July 9, 2016

Donald Trump vs. Hillary Clinton: Who Is More Evil?

By Robert Wenzel

Here we go again. Every time I put up a post about Hillary Clinton that is not a 100%  condemnation of her the "libertarian" Donald Trump supporters come out in full attack.

Comments that came in after my post, What Real War Hawks Think of Hillary Clinton, included:

Each day you plumb new depths of desperation in your campaign to elect Hillary Clinton President. This is fundamentally incompatible with your claim to be a libertarian. It's one thing to oppose Trump. That is perfectly consistent with libertarian principle. But shilling for a career criminal and sociopath like Clinton is disgraceful and ethically degenerate. Your Trump derangement syndrome has badly compromised your intellectual and ethical faculties.

Just to reiterate what should be obvious to even you - Donald Trump has never voted to send troops to preemptively invade and occupy sovereign nations like Hillary. Trump has never waged illegal, immoral and unconstitutional regime change wars like Hillary has in Libya, Syria and Honduras. Trump has never sold political influence for cash and profits like Hillary has. Trump has never cozied up to repugnant regimes like Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States like Hillary and her husband have. Trump never got an American ambassador killed and then lied to the American people about it like Hillary has. Trump never privately threatened and harassed and publicly villified rape victims like Hillary Clinton has. Trump doesn't support Californicating the entire nation by allowing uncontrolled immigration which will hand exclusive control of the entire nation over to the same degenerate DemocRat fascists who run your home town of Sodom by The Sea. Trump most likely will not nominate SCOTUS appointees who will destroy what is left of our 1st, 2nd, 4th and 5th Amendment rights which Hillary Clinton will surely do. Trump never compromised national security with a hack prone and illegal private server while in high political office like Hillary has. I could go at great length about Hillary's other offences against integrity, ethics and justice but I think this suffices.

You are in danger of becoming a complete fraud Wenzel so please pull back from the brink of insanity and try to act like a libertarian instead of a debased Clinton shill.
^^^ what he said

RW - Are you a Hillary Fanboy?

Dyspeptic said it very well. This is inexplicable. Have you been hired to support the Clinton campaign and have not disclosed it to your readers? Or did Trump offer you some offence on a personal level? Because what you are saying makes no sense.
For the record, I am not a supporter of Hillary.

I have pointed out that she ordered the massacre at Waco, pointed out that she is a psychopath, called her a nutjob on domestic issues and linked to an article that pointed out that "She is a firm advocate of intervening on a preventive basis (e.g. Syria, Libya), as well as on a preemptive or defensive basis.

"She is dedicated to keeping putative rivals to the United States, like China or Russia, in a subordinate position."

I published the Roger Stone piece, Bill Clinton and the Selling of US Security. And I interviewed Robert Morrow, co-author of Clinton's War on Women, about the book.

If this is support for Hillary, then I am guilty.

But as any junior league economist knows, life is about choices and options. Our choice is not between Hillary Clinton and the angel Gabriel, nor for that matter between Hillary and Ron Paul.

The choice is between Hillary and Donald Trump. Hillary has no support in the libertarian community but Donald Trump does. A "Libertarians for Trump" group has even been formed.

I view this as absolutely horrific. Even libertarians admit that Trump is terrible on trade, that he appears to have no understanding of basic economics. That he talks big time infrastructure spending, That he appears to want a government planned industrial policy. That his call for tax cuts appears to be a scam. That he has called for idiotic "energy independence."  That his top economic adviser, like Trump, has called for the Fed to keep interest rates low.

LFTs make their case for Trump based on foreign policy, which is why it is important to understand Hillary's foreign policy perspective.

When I quote warhawks accusing Hilary of being weak, not tough enough, on foreign foes, It is not because I am a champion of Hillary's horrific interventionist policies but to examine if there are limits to her interventions. The warhakws think there are.

That said, we must contrast Hillary's interventions with what might come in a Trump administration, It seems clear as day that Trump will most certainly put US troops on the ground in the Middle East "to fight ISIS" if he is elected. You are in denial if you don't believe this. There is no indication Hillary will do this.

It is clear Trump sees himself as a tough guy that "will do what it takes."

The names leaking as his possible running mate are getting worse by the day.

The latest via WaPo:
After weeks of focusing on a group of current and former elected officials in his search for a running mate, Donald Trump is increasingly intrigued by the idea of tapping retired Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn in order to project strength and know-how on national security, according to four people familiar with the vetting process.

The persons, who spoke with The Washington Post on Saturday, requested anonymity to discuss their private conversations in recent days with Trump’s confidants and campaign aides.

The turn toward a military figure is being driven by Trump himself rather than by his advisers, the people said, and comes as the real estate mogul is telling his friends that national unrest may demand a “tough and steady” presence alongside him on the ticket....

“I like the generals. I like the concept of the generals. We’re thinking about — actually there are two of them that are under consideration,” Trump said Wednesday on Fox News. He then acknowledged that for months he has been “really looking to go more the political route.”
From the blurb to Flynn's forthcoming book:
 A war is being waged against us by radical Islamists, and, as current events demonstrate, they are only getting stronger. This book aims to inform the American people of the grave danger we face in the war on terror―and will continue to face―until our government takes decisive action against the terrorists that want nothing more than to destroy us and our way of life. 
This is mad. There is simply no understanding of blowback and what is fueling the terrorist movement. It appears to fit right in line with Trump's thinking. It is true that Trump is not in favor of nation building  but that doesn't mean he is against war. He just wants to go to war for other reasons.

Policywise there really doesn't seem to be that much different between Trump and Clinton. They are both interventionsits on a grand scale both domestically and on foreign affairs--though they are slightly different when it comes to pet interventions.

What scares me about Trump is that he has a core rabid following. I never want ot see that in a leader that is not in favor of liberty, That's where the domestic enforcers and busybodies for the government come from when a leader starts to crackdown.

Further, Trump appears to have a never backdown attitude and the people surrounding him appear to come out of the same mold, Sessions, Christie and Gingrich are all crack the whip, mad authoritarian interventionists.

There really is no good choice between Trump and Clinton, Either would be terrible. Though Trump scares me just a little more and I think "Libertarians for Trump" is a very bad idea.

Robert Wenzel is Editor & Publisher of and Target Liberty. He is also author of The Fed Flunks: My Speech at the New York Federal Reserve Bank. Follow him on twitter:@wenzeleconomics. Wenzel on LinkedIn


  1. "The choice is between Hillary and Donald Trump"... and "None of the above" by not voting.

    A vote for either is a vote for the System. Why do it? I'll NOT be going to the voting booth with a clear conscience.

    Besides, do you really believe your vote even matters? Even *all* libertarian votes combined? Even if elections were honest?

    The less people vote the less Big Gov receives the legitimacy it craves. Why give it any? It deserves none.

  2. Guys this is not that complicated... Wenzel is simply saying both are evil but Trump seems to be potentially more dangerous than Clinton as he has shown an unusual ability to stir the masses and be a strong leader.

    1. They dont want to hear it, to them if you hate Trump equates wanting Hillary. Even rational people like Rainmondo are now using this line of thinking.

  3. Libertarians for Trump are looking at the Trump of six months ago. That man no longer exists. The system, the establishment first aims to defeat outsiders and when it can't do that it aims to shape them. With Trump the second option is working.

    Most evil is certainly Clinton. Trump is a well meaning over confident ignoramus and sometimes they do far more damage than the obviously evil but in this case I don't think anyone can predict the future circumstances that will develop which will decide that in this case.

  4. The danger Trump presents is that of a politician that has no real political philosophy. He has no record of following any guiding principal that can be used to reliably predict his behavior. Trump will do what he perceives to be the most politically expedient at any given time, this is extremely dangerous, in foreign or in domestic policy matters, there is no telling what this man will do if he is elected. As Mr. Wenzel points out, Trump is surrounding himself with a group of people whose wacko interventionist policies will get us in a lot of trouble if Trump is influenced by them. Bottom line is, there is plenty to worry about no matter who wins in November, Mr. Wenzel is simply voicing his opinion on which candidate presents the greater threat to liberty.

    1. The biggest threat to liberty is the demographic decline of White America and the ethnic balkanization that results from the mass importation of third worlders. This is the situation that will eventually lead to the disarmament of the American people, increasingly militarized police, and violent racial conflict. It will also provide the voting base for more of these Rats to loot us in the name of equality and the diversity coalition.

      If Trump can slow this process down it will buy us some time to organize and put up a fight.

      "Our choice is not between Hillary Clinton and the angel Gabriel, nor for that matter between Hillary and Ron Paul"

      Nor will ancapistan ever be presented as a choice. Hardcore libertarians should ask themselves what general trends serve their long term goals. The demographic decline of white people is not one of them.

  5. The choice is between a proven currupt and corrupter; a proven meddler in foreign countries, by promoting interventionism in foreign countries policy, including covert and overt military.

    Versus a hypothesis.

    I still do not know whether I will even vote.

    1. I have to agree. We know what hillary is. The only thing we know about trump is he will "say" anything to win. What he will "do" is unknown.

      I still do not know if I will vote for trump or not but I know this; even a modest philosophy of stopping the influx of immigrants salivating at my earned paycheck is appealing.