I actually was in college when Goldwater ran. Some budding campaign person made a deal with the manufacturer of mountain dew to pack it in special cans that said 'goldwater" on the outside. I wound up buying over 100 cases of it to resell in the dorm I was in for 10 c a can. I did big time damage to the soda machine in the basement which was charging 25c a can. It was a fun time

cool. I am more of the entrepreneur engineering type than the intellectual type, so I did move on from Reason after a couple of years to start and sell a number of companies based on my inventions.

LOL! That 'un brightened me up.

I have never seen a candidate that was devoid of flaws and Clinton and trump have more than their share. However, when the perfect becomes the enemy of the good the result is the terrible. With all his flaws Trump is likely to do far less harm than Clinton and he may actually do some good. Trump may be an egotistical megalomaniac but HRC is a criminal and puts her personal interests ahead of the country to an extent that is disturbingly close to treachery. In a perfect world we would have a choice between two perfect candidates. But our world is far from perfection.

Took the words right out of my mouth.
(Very unsanitary)
I don't understand why that so very hard for some to understand. It seems so obvious to me. If Trump doesn't win, it is very likely that freedom and justice and the pursuit of happiness will be kaput after 4 or possibly 8 years of a felonious, lying, bribing politician(s).

The best of this scenario is H> isn't following the legacy of an assassinated hero as Johnson was. Furthering Camelot was a big part of his win along with the fear of Goldwater.

I'm for Trump I hope he wins and has a good hair day for a change.

Small world. I was movie editor of Reason Magazine from 1972 to 1978. I joined the LP in 1972 and am a life member.

Hi WDonway,
The obvious rational choice after 8 years of destruction from with in, is Trump.
The issue that is causing the worst, most corrupt, lying, leftist statist to be a serious contender for the white house is as you say " --the vast majority of the Liberal-Left media, academia, and commentators" include the main stream networks and any "entertainment" affiliated with ex. SNL, They ignore the total hypocracy of these communists with a different name.
Also I have been impressed by Trump's verbal exposure of many Clinton's corrupt
transgression's that are now on the record from the debates.

Trump is not facing propaganda any worse than that of half a century ago. The propaganda against Goldwater was identical, that he would get us into a nuclear war. Remember Lyndon Johnson’s “Daisy” and “Ice Cream” ads from 1964?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DhkY...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5CHY...

The difference today is that fewer people are buying into the propaganda. Even if Hillary wins (doubtful), it won’t be by the landslide that Lyndon Johnson enjoyed.

I agree. They are panicked that their jig might be up by exposure to the light of day. I voted for Trump a few days ago

its like hiring a big bruiser as a bouncer at a bar- most patrons wouldnt want to tangle with him and he would seldom have to fight. Put a weak person with no confidence as a bouncer and he will be challenged until finally he has to fight

If you consider the people and organizations against Trump, he must strike fear in their hearts or the media and left/right establishment wouldn't be unified against him. I support him mostly to disrupt the establishment. I think that makes me an old beatnik.

Or maybe she would order a no-fly zone and be astonished that Russian planes don't follow her instructions. War with Russia ensues.

Jeb Bush was too low energy, plus he was the "third" bush" and no one wanted that. As to propaganda, look at the charge that Trump would get us into nuclear war. If anyone is going to stumble into nuclear war it would be hillary. Trump would pick up the phone and find a negotiated solution to the problem. Hillary would just do nothing until it was too late, and then declare we have to fight

I think propaganda is much less persuasive than it was 50 years ago, as evidenced by the near-universal distrust of government now compared to then. And Trump’s primary victories were more the product of his ability to get free media attention than the relatively small amount of money he spent (compared to his overall wealth). If money were the deciding factor, Jeb Bush would have had a lot more to show for his $100 million war chest.

Well then you know how I felt when I talked with that couple. My error, perhaps my semantics were wrong as I had no intention of trying to tell anyone how to do anything. My apologies. Do what "you" must.

I will change my affiliation back to Libertarian right after the election. I just changed to Repub so I could vote in the primary for Trump, but I have been Libertarian for a long time. I was actually one of the founders of Reason magazine. That was way back as I remember in the 70's. Its almost 50 years later now, and I suspsect another 40-50 years will be required to actually elect a libertarian president when the establishment weakens and falls of its own weight

I prefer Trump to Hillary, but my motivation and main goal will not change regardless of who wins. That goal is to grow the Libertarian Party to the point that it will become a major player in setting the nation’s policies and priorities. This means continuing to grow our vote totals in this and future elections.

I would agree with this, IF Trump wins. If he does not, it means that corruption is being ignored in favor of socialism, entitlements, and political correctness.

This is true. I feel inspired actually, but if Trump loses it will mean to me that even with $50million of his own money when no one believed in him, he still lost. That will be very demotivating for me.

Here’s progress: The highest federal income tax bracket is about 40%, compared to 70% when Goldwater was running. Distrust of government has never been higher. Membership in both major parties is down considerably. Corruption in government is much more obvious than in the 1960’s, when it was widespread but hidden. The military draft hasn’t been used in decades. Laws restricting private sexual conduct have been overturned. Anti-drug laws are being relaxed. All in all, things are not totally going south.

Things are different now. Propaganda is much more persuasive, rational thinking is at an all time low, and political candidates arent going to spend their own money in the future IF Trump loses the election this time. If he had not spend his own money, he would never have gotten the nomination

I'm rather put off by anyone telling me what I "must" do, especially here in the Gulch where we are encouraged to think for ourselves.

Others in the future are more likely to be inspired by Trump (and to some extent Sanders) rather than discouraged. Both candidates have exposed glaring weaknesses within the political establishment that can be exploited by future candidates seeking to throw out the current crop of "leaders".