Why Libertarians Should Support Bernie Sanders in 2020

[Ethereal]

Libertarians claim to want small government.

Bernie is possibly the best chance for that to happen.

This sounds ridiculous, but it's actually true.

Because even though Bernie advocates for things like universal healthcare and free college, he would have no ability to make either of those things a reality as president.

Only the congress could pass a law establishing universal healthcare and free college.

What Bernie could do as president would be to promote a less aggressive and therefore less expensive foreign policy.

The US currently spends somewhere around $1 trillion on "national security". As president, Bernie could help to reduce that gargantuan amount by decreasing US military intervention overseas.

Another area where Bernie could help to promote libertarian values and small government would be in the area of civil liberties.

For decades, Bernie has been a consistent and vocal defender of civil liberties. As president, Bernie could help reform the US surveillance state and the US war on drugs, both of which Bernie opposes.

A Bernie presidency could mean less war, less spying, and less imprisonment. That would mean smaller government, less taxes, and more liberty.

[FindersKeepers]

As far as I know, most libertarians don't care for "big government" candidates, and that's what Bernie is. If he carried through on his promise to set the minimum wage at $15 an hour, the impact on our economy would be devastating.

I agree he probably couldn't push the single-payer thing through, although if he actually won he might just have enough popular support to get democrats to try. But, all he talks about is implementing program after program after program, and all those come with steep price tags.

You may be right on foreign policy but he supports the loony Green New Deal, so he'd be in bed with Big Energy corporations that push renewables, which would drive up the cost of electric power for the entire nation, just look at what happened to Germany.

Taxes would be HUGE under Sanders, and the economy would likely tank.

[roadmaster]

Bernie is a liar and has always supported communism.

[Cthulhu]

I will never get in bed with a socialist.

The body count is just too damn high.

Castle was a better choice by far.

Sent from my evil cell phone.

[roadmaster]

I admit I have problems with Trump. I also said I didn't expect too much from him but I will never vote for a person who praised Stalin.

[Luther]

No thanks

[IMPress Polly]

Libertarians claim to want small government.

Bernie is possibly the best chance for that to happen.

This sounds ridiculous, but it's actually true.

Because even though Bernie advocates for things like universal healthcare and free college, he would have no ability to make either of those things a reality as president.

Only the congress could pass a law establishing universal healthcare and free college.

What Bernie could do as president would be to promote a less aggressive and therefore less expensive foreign policy.

The US currently spends somewhere around $1 trillion on "national security". As president, Bernie could help to reduce that gargantuan amount by decreasing US military intervention overseas.

Another area where Bernie could help to promote libertarian values and small government would be in the area of civil liberties.

For decades, Bernie has been a consistent and vocal defender of civil liberties. As president, Bernie could help reform the US surveillance state and the US war on drugs, both of which Bernie opposes.

A Bernie presidency could mean less war, less spying, and less imprisonment. That would mean smaller government, less taxes, and more liberty.
I disagree with some of your rationales here (e.g. the idea that no progressive president could get any economic goals passed legislatively), but I do thank you for making an interesting and distinctive argument!

[donttread]

Libertarians claim to want small government.

Bernie is possibly the best chance for that to happen.

This sounds ridiculous, but it's actually true.

Because even though Bernie advocates for things like universal healthcare and free college, he would have no ability to make either of those things a reality as president.

Only the congress could pass a law establishing universal healthcare and free college.

What Bernie could do as president would be to promote a less aggressive and therefore less expensive foreign policy.

The US currently spends somewhere around $1 trillion on "national security". As president, Bernie could help to reduce that gargantuan amount by decreasing US military intervention overseas.

Another area where Bernie could help to promote libertarian values and small government would be in the area of civil liberties.

For decades, Bernie has been a consistent and vocal defender of civil liberties. As president, Bernie could help reform the US surveillance state and the US war on drugs, both of which Bernie opposes.

A Bernie presidency could mean less war, less spying, and less imprisonment. That would mean smaller government, less taxes, and more liberty.

I think what Libertarians need is a defined , well communicated difference in their federal vs. state platforms. For example the Constitution essentially bans federal involvement in human services and education and making drug policy within the states. However , it places no such limitations on the states.
I for example support the federal ban ( given a transfer period, since the feds do these things now whether Constitutional or not) yet believe that we need the states to have effective, graded, education and human service programs. As many of you know I am just about 100% anti-prohibition. Yet I still recognize the state's right to ban certain drugs within them. The feds have no such rights.

[Lummy]

As a practical matter, Bernie is a year older than Biden. That's a deal killer right there. Save your campaign money, Bernie.

[Chris]

All I ever hear out of Bernie is how he wants big government to give things to "little" people. That's not libertarian.

[Tahuyaman]

All I ever hear out of Bernie is how he wants big government to give things to "little" people. That's not libertarian.
Someone is trying to make the case that he's such a proponant of big government he'd receive so much opposition that he'd get nothing accomplished thus shrinking government.

[Chris]

Someone is trying to make the case that he's such a proponant of big government he'd receive so much opposition that he'd get nothing accomplished thus shrinking government.

Sort of a circular theory, keep pushing one direction eventually you circle around in the other direction? :laughing6:

[Captdon]

I think what Libertarians need is a defined , well communicated difference in their federal vs. state platforms. For example the Constitution essentially bans federal involvement in human services and education and making drug policy within the states. However , it places no such limitations on the states.
I for example support the federal ban ( given a transfer period, since the feds do these things now whether Constitutional or not) yet believe that we need the states to have effective, graded, education and human service programs. As many of you know I am just about 100% anti-prohibition. Yet I still recognize the state's right to ban certain drugs within them. The feds have no such rights.

Finally we sort of agree. I want the states to do as they please without breaking the Constitution. I am very liberal on a local basis.

[Ethereal]

As far as I know, most libertarians don't care for "big government" candidates, and that's what Bernie is. If he carried through on his promise to set the minimum wage at $15 an hour, the impact on our economy would be devastating.

I agree he probably couldn't push the single-payer thing through, although if he actually won he might just have enough popular support to get democrats to try. But, all he talks about is implementing program after program after program, and all those come with steep price tags.

You may be right on foreign policy but he supports the loony Green New Deal, so he'd be in bed with Big Energy corporations that push renewables, which would drive up the cost of electric power for the entire nation, just look at what happened to Germany.

Taxes would be HUGE under Sanders, and the economy would likely tank.
The president can't increase taxes or change the country's energy policies, only the congress can.

The president is basically a foreign policy position and that is where Bernie shines.

He will do what Trump promised to do but never did: End these foreign entanglements and focus on America first.

[Ethereal]

I will never get in bed with a socialist.

The body count is just too damn high.

Castle was a better choice by far.

Sent from my evil cell phone.
Will you support Trump then? A man who has brazenly violated the constitution at least three times already? And who has allowed two maniacs - Bolton and Pompeo - to seize control of the most powerful military in human history?

[Ethereal]

I think what Libertarians need is a defined , well communicated difference in their federal vs. state platforms. For example the Constitution essentially bans federal involvement in human services and education and making drug policy within the states. However , it places no such limitations on the states.
I for example support the federal ban ( given a transfer period, since the feds do these things now whether Constitutional or not) yet believe that we need the states to have effective, graded, education and human service programs. As many of you know I am just about 100% anti-prohibition. Yet I still recognize the state's right to ban certain drugs within them. The feds have no such rights.
Yes, federalism is what this country needs. However, I don't think we are at a moment where a federalist message will resonant with enough voters to make a difference. Libertarians need to make a practical decision in 2020 because the Trump administration is trying to drag this country into another catastrophic war in the Middle East. If the US goes to war with Iran, it will be the most anti-libertarian thing to happen since the Iraq war. Virtually every big government policy in existence can be traced back to a war in some way. Our number one priority should be to stop this war from happening. And the only way to do that is to support a president who will obey the constitution. Bernie is the most likely person to do that.

[Ethereal]

All I ever hear out of Bernie is how he wants big government to give things to "little" people. That's not libertarian.

It's a good thing we have a constitution and a separation of powers then, because the president has no power to pass laws. The president does have the power, however, to direct foreign policy and manage various "national security" agencies to the satisfaction of libertarians.

[Chris]

It's a good thing we have a constitution and a separation of powers then, because the president has no power to pass laws. The president does have the power, however, to direct foreign policy and manage various "national security" agencies to the satisfaction of libertarians.

So long as politicians in office follow the Constitution, sure. But that hasn't been the case since the get-go. You might find certainty elsewhere but not in declarations the Constitution is sacrosanct.

Let's cite you for an example:


Will you support Trump then? A man who has brazenly violated the constitution at least three times already? And who has allowed two maniacs - Bolton and Pompeo - to seize control of the most powerful military in human history?

[Tahuyaman]

Pompeo and Bolton are maniacs? Where do people get these crazy ideas?

I can understand disagreeing with them on specific issues for specific reasons, but the simply call them a maniac is lazy.

[Ethereal]

So long as politicians in office follow the Constitution, sure. But that hasn't been the case since the get-go. You might find certainty elsewhere but not in declarations the Constitution is sacrosanct.

Let's cite you for an example:
When it comes to constitutional war powers, Bernie does follow the constitution.

[Chris]

When it comes to constitutional war powers, Bernie does follow the constitution.

He's a politician. I don't trust him. He's also a nationalist, and a populist.

[Cthulhu]

Will you support Trump then? A man who has brazenly violated the constitution at least three times already? And who has allowed two maniacs - Bolton and Pompeo - to seize control of the most powerful military in human history?Dude,I get your position. I just don't agree with it. I'm just not voting for the lesser evil any more. And certainly not for an open socialist. Hence why I support Castle.

I don't like Trump's civil rights violations any more than Obama's.

That's why I'm done with the two party system.

Sent from my evil cell phone.

[Cthulhu]

The other problem is this - Obama said he was not a big fan of wars.

Plenty of action too place on his watch.

People change when they become president.

Sent from my evil cell phone.

[Ethereal]

He's a politician. I don't trust him. He's also a nationalist, and a populist.
His record speaks for itself. He voted against the Iraq war. He voted against the patriot act. He voted to end the US war in Yemen. And Bernie has been consistent for decades. He obviously has ethics.

[Ethereal]

Dude,I get your position. I just don't agree with it. I'm just not voting for the lesser evil any more. And certainly not for an open socialist. Hence why I support Castle.

I don't like Trump's civil rights violations any more than Obama's.

That's why I'm done with the two party system.

Sent from my evil cell phone.
I got zero problem with that. Supporting a third party is a totally legitimate option for libertarians as well. Personally, I'd like to see Justin Amash run for the Libertarian ticket.

[Ethereal]

The other problem is this - Obama said he was not a big fan of wars.

Plenty of action too place on his watch.

People change when they become president.

Sent from my evil cell phone.
Yeah, but Obama was a consummate politician. Bernie has been consistent for like forty years. He's basically the leftwing Ron Paul. Naturally, being president would change him to some degree, but it won't cause him to forfeit his principles entirely the way Obama and Trump did. Bernie has a really good record on foreign policy. And he has forty years of being consistent to bolster his character. That's just how I see it.

[Ethereal]

I'm willing to put the economic debate on hold in order to address the far more pressing problem of Trump's extremely dangerous militarism. The domestic economic debate over socialism versus capitalism would be rendered moot if Trump allowed Bolton and Pompeo to start a war with Iran. We're talking about a total economic meltdown that would result. Gas prices would skyrocket. US debt would skyrocket. The entire Middle East would descend into chaos. The US economy and the global economy would take a nosedive.

[Cthulhu]

Yeah, but Obama was a consummate politician. Bernie has been consistent for like forty years. He's basically the leftwing Ron Paul. Naturally, being president would change him to some degree, but it won't cause him to forfeit his principles entirely the way Obama and Trump did. Bernie has a really good record on foreign policy. And he has forty years of being consistent to bolster his character. That's just how I see it.A fair thing to say. But I'm naturally leery of it. Especially since he's a socialist. But at this point the difference between them and the other two major parties is marginal at this point.

Sent from my evil cell phone.

[Chris]

The other problem is this - Obama said he was not a big fan of wars.

Plenty of action too place on his watch.

People change when they become president.

Sent from my evil cell phone.


Bingo! People change when they become President. I don't trust him. Anyone who talks with a straight face about socializing healthcare and education and more is not to be trusted.

[Tahuyaman]

It’s illogical to ask for libertarians to support a communist influenced socialist to become the president of a democratic and capitalist nation guided by a constitution designed to limit the power of government.

[Dr. Who]

I think that Bernie is sufficiently old and curmudgeonly that he is far less likely than most people to be influenced/pressured/threatened by either special interests or politicians. He has no need to be fawned over or adored by the masses. He came from modest beginnings and his focus has always been the average Joe, not the wealthy.

He voted against the roll-back of Glass-Steagall, has been a major critic of the Patriot Act and voted against each re-authorization. He has also never found a US military intervention that he supported and in fact rejects all US intervention in the ME. He supports a two-state solution in Israel and pretty much loathed the Kissinger days of foreign policy, whom he regards basically as a war criminal. He's a critic of the Clinton foundation and their foreign sources of revenue, including Saudi Arabia who he does not view as a friend of America and disagrees with selling them any arms and thus supporting a humanitarian disaster (Yemen). He is an advocate of increasing the rate of disability compensation for Veterans. He is a proponent of family farms and against the industrial monopolies that are squeezing them out of business. He is against private for profit prisons that encourage States to fill them. Yes, he supports UHC, but so do many people.

[Chris]

I think that Bernie is sufficiently old and curmudgeonly that he is far less likely than most people to be influenced/pressured/threatened by either special interests or politicians. He has no need to be fawned over or adored by the masses. He came from modest beginnings and his focus has always been the average Joe, not the wealthy.

He voted against the roll-back of Glass-Steagall, has been a major critic of the Patriot Act and voted against each re-authorization. He has also never found a US military intervention that he supported and in fact rejects all US intervention in the ME. He supports a two-state solution in Israel and pretty much loathed the Kissinger days of foreign policy, whom he regards basically as a war criminal. He's a critic of the Clinton foundation and their foreign sources of revenue, including Saudi Arabia who he does not view as a friend of America and disagrees with selling them any arms and thus supporting a humanitarian disaster (Yemen). He is an advocate of increasing the rate of disability compensation for Veterans. He is a proponent of family farms and against the industrial monopolies that are squeezing them out of business. He is against private for profit prisons that encourage States to fill them. Yes, he supports UHC, but so do many people.


I think that Bernie is sufficiently old and curmudgeonly that he is far less likely than most people to be influenced/pressured/threatened by either special interests or politicians.

The older the cur the likelier to be corrupt. Power corrupts.


He voted against...

The OP question is not whether you approve but whether he's libertarian enough.

As for non-intervention, it begins at home.