Sounds like voting for the greater of two evils!

"They took her ideas and used them without attribution." I heard Rand say that in a Ford Hall Forum speech, and I did a spit-take. John Hospers (the first LP presidential candidate) wrote a campaign book which had countless footnotes referencing Rand's works. If I could find my copy I'd count them, but my memory says there were hundreds.

Yes, and I don't believe anyone on this site could survive such a deep dive in their life and come out as clean as Trump has. Remember he was a major developer in NY who had to navigate three corrupt groups; the unions, the politicians, and the Italians (you know, the group that doesn't exist, lol), and still they couldn't find any major issues. There's something to be said for that.

I'll take your opinion under advisement because you have me now thinking you may be right.
Trump is a fighter and I'd rather go down fighting than to ever give up.
I'll never give up voting even though I know there will always be an unfair cheat that can hopefully be at times possible to beat.

You and me both, tutor-turtle!

Eight or nine years ago, we were all trying to understand this political anomaly named Trump. Yaron and others in the formal Objectivist movement immediately declared their disdain. They have never missed a chance to distance themselves and follow with a pompous negative certainty without the support of necessary relevant facts. It is ironic, considering our foundations are based on proper metaphysical identification and observable epistemological validation before passing moral judgment or taking action. While I agree that principles should never be compromised, context and perspective need to be objectively evaluated and applied rather than merely blind intrinsic repetition. Regarding Trump, I believe some broad hierarchical recognitions are very consonant with our philosophy.

Throughout the years, he appears to have a proper identification of the nature of his endeavor, playing the cards he's dealt. More than any past politician, however brash, Trump calls it as he sees it within his known knowledge. Be it the emotional motivations of political correctness, the lies of the "fake news," the embedded corruption, the recognition of good and evil on the world stage, the parasitical nations that feed off our teat, etc., etc... For the most part, the transparency of his thoughts has been unmatched and not hidden behind political speak, spins, alternate agendas, backroom deals, or deceit. It is what it is.

Dr. Jerome Huyler noted, "Trump has the sense of life of an individualist. His common sense - born of decades of experience as a businessman and dealing with politicians - tells him that taxes and heavy-handed regulations destroy economies. It is true, as Rand said, that common sense is the child's method of thinking. But it is born of empirical experience," the basis of knowledge acquisition.

We should champion his "America First" mantra. Rand had always said America will never regain its greatness until it changes its altruist morality, and "America First" is just that. It's not some blind German nationalism but an attitude that America's interests need to be selfishly upheld, which is an admirable start, recognizing a necessary fundamental to our ethics. He has attempted to keep open discussions with everyone based on trade and fair exchange. Rand had said, "The trader and the warrior have been fundamental antagonists throughout history." His movement away from aggressive wars, political globalism, and multi-lateral agreements keeps our self-interests paramount. It's the application of the trader principle.

Lastly, his counter-punch mindset and approach align with our moral rightness of retaliation. He may prod or poke but does not usually pull the proverbial trigger until he's attacked with words or actions.

While Trump may not be able to articulate his principles with the scientific factuality of Stephen Hawking or the eloquent philosophical consistency of Rand, he still appears to have an "intuitive" common sense, not only of practicality but also of right and wrong. One needs to look at his children to realize some form of proper values is present. His productivity and financial success must be seated in appropriate fundamentals instead of a chaotic, unprincipled achievement, luck, or theft. And many, if not all (including his adversaries) that have personally engaged with him have echoed his likability, exiting acknowledging he's not how he is portrayed.

A dire threat is facing our country today with the abuses and power of the ingrained bureaucracy weaponized for political purposes. All Americans must unite, led by the voices of reason, to identify and expose this fundamental threat to freedom. It's not about the false alternative of Trump or never Trump; it's about the American system and government's fundamental role, purpose, and responsibilities, regardless of one's political persuasion.

As Objectivists, we need to continually apply our principles in the real world of what is, slowly moving it to where it should be. We need to descend from the "ivory tower" to the first floor of reality and integrate our values with the ever-changing daily events. With proper context and hierarchy, there should be minimal daylight between the abstract and concretes. Are not what's mentioned above consistent with our most basic and broad fundamental beliefs as Objectivists?

It appears that we may have lost the very objectivity we find so sacrosanct.

My understanding of the original design for America was that the FEDERAL government would operate on the funds collected from tariffs. I can only imagine how much better off "we the people" would be if that were the case.

Our Constitutional Republic may have dissolved during the Jimmy Carter period. It was definitely eliminated by Obama. I admire Trump for trying to save Capitalism, but I suspect he will have a lost cause, as he will not have enough support. The issue is that the left will eliminate the opposition while the right wants to co-exist. That is not a winning plan.

Rand hated the Libertarians. "Leebertarian heepies" she called them. Why? Several reasons, as far as I know.

1. They took her ideas and used them without attribution. When mentioning her they sometimes misrepresented her. A questioner at Ford Hall Forum demanded that she show support for them, phrased of course as a question. "Why don't you [support we who agree with you]?" Her response was vitriol.

2. Libertarians include (whether they know it or not) Communists. Rand could always recognize them. Why would Commies join the LP? "The end justifies the means," so it's okay for a Commie to pass himself off as a peaceful Libertarian.

3. The LP serves to dilute the Republican vote.

4. The enemies of the republic that is the United States want to set us against each other. "Let's you and he fight."

Perhaps there is a "plan" behind what ARI is doing. Why did Rand's strikers leave ruin everywhere: Wyatt's Torch, Francisco's silver mines, etc? Those who follow "Q" suggest that Trump is part of a greater plan, a plan that included having Joe Biden as President.

Perhaps Rand is genuinely one of Trumps heroes. He has read The Fountainhead, and has said (in an interview) “It relates to business (and) beauty (and) life and inner emotions. That book relates to … everything,”

Why would ARI scorn Trump? I'm waiting to see what happens next.

He says he is an Objectivist therapist. He advertises as an online therapist. He’s predominant on Facebook.

I'm adding "batshit party girl" to my long list of descriptors for Kamala: Black Stalin, Mattress-back Harris, Kamaliar, Comrade Commula, The Cackle, the trench harpy from California (now the black creature from the DC lagoon), and so on.

I will vote for the lesser of two evils in an election, where I stand nothing to gain, but perhaps a lot to lose. In this election, I stand to lose a LOT if Kamala wins and causes the further destruction of the country I am living in.
I am not fooling myself into thinking that Trump is an objectivist either. He is substantially conflicted intellectually, and harbors a number of inconsistent positions.
1) Immigration. I do think IF we are going to have a country, we have to have borders and immigration rules as far as citizenship- so Trump is right on this IMHO.
2) Tariffs- Trump wants huge tariffs to "bring back manufacturing to the USA", I think returning manufacturing to the USA would cause substantial inflation in pricing as companies spend more for the items that they now get from china and other countries. Plus, many things just arent made here anymore, so paying the huge tariffs to "help with the budget deficit" would cause a lot of inflation next year. Trump is just OUT TO LUNCH on this one.
3) Reducing taxes is great to get votes, but if not part of reducing expenditures, its NOT great. Just means more deficit spending and money printing. Trump is OUT TO LUNCH on this one also.
4) Foreign affairs is a positive for Trump. Other bad actors will not want to risk problems with the USA with Trump in power. Also, he will NOT get us into useless wars, but will end our participation in current wars in Ukraine and Middle east.
5) The left will cause legal issues for Trump on essentially anything he tries to do. But he will SLOW down the progression of the left for the next 4 years, which they will HATE.
6) Hopefully Trump will release the Epstein client list as well as the P Diddy client lists to show the inner working of the elites.
7) Trump will print money instead of STOPPING deficit spending. He is conflicted on this one. There should NOT be deficit spending.

One positive thing of note from Trump is his expressed desire to reduce the size of the federal government. He wants to put Elon Musk in charge of improving government efficiency. Whether he can achieve that when the Deep State will fight both of them tooth and nail is another matter, but that goal is heading in the right direction.

Add to that... When America sneezes, Europe catches cold. Any slow-down by us is amplified all over the world.

We are driving the AI, the chips, the consumption.
And while China has better planners, they have far worse "CCP corrupted people" who do not care if the building is 80% sand or 80% concrete, whatever lets them steal more.

as we fail, it will downward spiral. And it will likely extend beyond my life.

We could still fix things. But the people who control every lever of power would be against it. And they have ALL of the INK, and if you thought 2016 was a flame war on Trump... You only saw them "afraid"... and not "Scared for their lives!"

A collapse of America is going to be very ugly, indeed, on the individual as well as country-wide level. It will be devastating.

Well, I meant to imply that one can throw away their vote in good conscience in MA or CA, and feel fine with the spite.

Not in any others, red or purple.

At the risk of starting a pissing contest, why are you limiting the "stupid and spiteful" to just blue states? There are a helluva lot of red states that could go purple, or purple states that could turn blue, if a bunch of people voted Libertarian. And it wouldn't take many states to turn for Commie-la and Tampon Tim to actually get elected.

"These days, [nothing] is the best we can reasonably hope for from the Federal government." So sad, but so true. It would almost be funny if it was in a fiction novel.

It this website suddenly turns Heel-up Harris and Tampon Tim, I'm outta here faster than two shakes of a bunnies tail.