Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Evan McMullin

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

It looks like an independent Republican is entering the race: https://www.evanmcmullin.com/

A few issues that concern me so far:
 

"Vulnerable populations, including patients with preexisting conditions, should be protected." - how should they be "protected"?


"While America is a compassionate nation, more government programs aren’t the single answer to addressing the least fortunate.  Those who can work should have to opportunity to work, and those who need the training and education to become productive should receive it." - recieve it, from whom?


"Once our borders are secure, we can begin a national debate on developing a system where law-abiding people can seek a path to legal residence and in some cases citizenship." - amnesty for illegals? 

 

Everything else looks pretty good. What do you guys think?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If either of the majors had a better position than McMullin's I'd say his position is a bad one, but as thing stand I could overlook these.

He's evasive on abortion. He's right that government shouldn't subsidize abortion (or any other medical procedure), but he doesn't quite say whether he wants to outlaw it or not. He seems to want to let both prohibitionists and non-prohibitionists read their own position into his statement.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Reidy said:

If either of the majors had a better position than McMullin's I'd say his position is a bad one, but as thing stand I could overlook these.

He's evasive on abortion. He's right that government shouldn't subsidize abortion (or any other medical procedure), but he doesn't quite say whether he wants to outlaw it or not. He seems to want to let both prohibitionists and non-prohibitionists read their own position into his statement.

What's wrong with outlawing abortion?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, epistemologue said:

What's wrong with outlawing abortion?

The short of it is captured in this Ayn Rand Lexicon entry.

As a stand alone topic, it has been broached several times on this forum. (Search topic results.)

 

As far as elections go, the field has essentially been declared by the national parties to be betwixt Hillary Clinton (D) and Donald Trump (R).

Do you think Evan McMullen (R), tossing his hat in the ring at this time, is likely to cause any more of a stir than Gary Johnson (L) might at this point in the game?

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, epistemologue said:

"Once our borders are secure, we can begin a national debate on developing a system where law-abiding people can seek a path to legal residence and in some cases citizenship." - amnesty for illegals?

If he wanted amnesty, he would've used the word. It's not a particularly difficult word to type out.

Amnesty would be wrong. People who break the law should pay for their crime. The penalty should be as high as a $100 fine.

Edited by Nicky
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Yet another collectivist.  HO-hum! My criteria for a good candidate is one who staunchly defends individual rights.  One who fully understands the Constitution and the purpose of American government as dictated by the Constitution.  There is no candidate out there who fully meets this criteria.  So, from my point of view , I will vote for the candidate who is least likely to impinge upon my current rights by proposing to pass restrictive legislation.  That rules out any Republican, quasi-Republican, conservative, white supremacist, and racist.  However, rather than copping out and NOT voting, I will vote.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...
On 8/24/2016 at 1:05 PM, Yes said:

My criteria for a good candidate is ... One who fully understands the Constitution and the purpose of American government as dictated by the Constitution.

I think that's a great criteria for judging a candidate, and actually Evan McMullin is pretty outstanding by that standard (his moderate policies aside).

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 8/24/2016 at 1:05 PM, Yes said:

Yet another collectivist.  HO-hum! My criteria for a good candidate is one who staunchly defends individual rights.  One who fully understands the Constitution and the purpose of American government as dictated by the Constitution.  There is no candidate out there who fully meets this criteria.  So, from my point of view , I will vote for the candidate who is least likely to impinge upon my current rights by proposing to pass restrictive legislation.  That rules out any Republican, quasi-Republican, conservative, white supremacist, and racist.  However, rather than copping out and NOT voting, I will vote.

Does this not also rule out any Democrat, quasi-Democrat, liberal, etc. as well?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...