RE: Why I was wrong about Stefan Molyneux
doesn't sound like you're really offering any better alternative at all, just complaining about someone's opinions. you barely even mention anything concrete about trump's policies except for eminent domain and protectionism. you call him a psycho, and claims he wouldn't have the moral legitimacy to "rule", based on what?? i'm not really concerned with your opinion on molyneux, but maybe back up your serious accusations with some facts if you want to be taken seriously.
here are his positions on different areas of policy: https://www.donaldjtrump.com/policies/ i agree, they're not all conducive to smaller government and more liberty, which i'm all for. but if you're willing to be intellectually honest, i don't see how you can make a case for clinton over trump. that said, i doubt it'll matter much anyway. and in regards to his "morality" however you imagine yourself to be an accurate judge of that, why don't you look into any written or said about him over the past few decades. from what i can see, he actually doesn't seems too bad on the whole, unless you buy into sensationalized shit that passes as journalism nowadays.
He's not making a case for Clinton over Trump, the point of the article is he believes Stef is advocating a violation of the NAP by voting, a position Stef used to hold. Why does someone have to provide alternatives when pointing out someone is violating a principle? And wanting to rule over other people is itself immoral, not to mention Trump's advocating murder, such as killing a suspected terrorist's entire family.
nowhere in my comment am i referring to your analysis of stefan's position--i only refer to yours. well, i suppose it doesn't matter much now that he's president :)