Is A Move Or Trip To Oklahoma In Willis Hart's Future?

After hearing about a recent ruling by the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, it occurred to me that the Libertarian blogger Willis Hart might want to either move or vacation there to take advantage of the unanimous decision that says oral sex with an unconscious person is not rape.

In Oklahoma, it's legal to have oral sex with someone who's completely unconscious, the state's highest criminal court has ruled. ...the Court... found that a teenage boy was not guilty of forcible sodomy after having oral sex with a teenage girl who was so intoxicated after a night of drinking that she had to be carried to his car. "Forcible Sodomy cannot occur where a victim is so intoxicated as to be completely unconscious at the time of the sexual act of oral copulation", the judges ruled on March 24. ...some legal experts note that Oklahoma's forcible sodomy law only prohibits oral sex with someone who's unable to provide consent because of mental illness or mental disability, not because of intoxication or unconsciousness. Therefore... the court's ruling was appropriate. The state has a separate rape law that protects victims who are too drunk to consent, but only in cases of vaginal or anal penetration, not oral sex. (Here's Why Oral Rape is Not Rape in Oklahoma by Samantha Michaels. Mother Jones 4/28/2016).

So the judges DID NOT say that intoxication equals consent. If they had I'd definitely not be surprised if Willis hopped on a plane ASAP to get to OK for some "consensual sex". But getting to orally rape a woman after getting her liquored up doesn't sound bad (if you're a raper).

Willis, if he doesn't move to OK, may be scheduling an OK vacation very soon, I think. I say this due to many many commentaries Willis has authored for his blog in which he laments the fact that the man sometimes gets charged with rape when two drunk people have sex and the woman "has second thoughts" the next day (OST #136).

BTW, given Willis' constant and long-lasting hand-wringing over a problem (false rape charges) that represents 2-8 percent of accusations, while not seemingly caring much (or at all) about the fact that that less than half of incidents of rape are even reported and only three percent of rapists actually receive prison time, it's no surprise he's "racking his brain" regarding drunken sex possibly being "non-forcible rape".

Willis Hart: Non-Forcible Rape? I'm really racking my head on this one, folks. The ONLY thing that I could come up with is a 20 year-old having consensual sex with a 17 1/2 year old, some borderline statutory rape type of situation. I really think that Mr.s Ryan and Akin need to take a minute and flush this bad boy out a little. Agreed? (9/4/2012 AT 7:29 PM).

Yeah, if a man gets a woman drunk and has sex with her, might that be "non-forcible rape"? Because highly inebriated or unconscious women don't resist (at least not much). But that likely didn't occur to the Hartster because, in his mind, if a woman is too drunk to say NO, that's the same as saying YES... provided the man is drunk as well, I'm gathering (from his many posts on the subject).

See also: Rape-publicans will soon be descending on Oklahoma to sexually assault underage girls (4/30/2016 commentary from the blog Disaffected And It Feel So Good).

OST #139

On The Racist Blogger Willis Hart Criticizing Beyonce (Using Foul Language) For "Buck-Dancing & Jiving with Some Idiotic Blond Weave"

Another racist post from the Libertarian blogger Willis Hart, this time his ire directed at the incredibly successful singer/performer Beyoncé Knowles.

Willis Hart: On the Fact that Beyonce Can Do One Fucking Minstrel Show After Another (Buck-Dancing and Jiving with Some Idiotic Blond Weave) and Not Be Called a Coon (Her Fist in the Air Stunt Evidently Giving Her Some Street-Cred) but Ben Carson, a Noteworthy Pediatric Neurosurgeon, Gets Called One Simply for Having an Opinion. Yep, this unfortunately passes for logic among groups such as the New Black Panther Party, Black Lives Matter, etc.. And the thing is, they don't even understand what cooning is, for Christ sakes (the fact that it involves behavior and NOT opinions)! How embarrassing and quite a drop-off from Frederick Douglass, Booker T. Washington, Ed Brooke, Thomas Sowell, etc., wouldn't you say? (3/7/2016 AT 3:44pm).

Actually, no, I would not say. Ben Carson is being criticized for saying ridiculous things... such as comparing women who get abortions to slaveholders, saying ObamaCare is worse than slavery, Jews could have prevented the Holocaust if they had guns, being gay is a choice because prison turns people gay, there's no such thing as a war crime, and many more (source).

As for Willis saying "they don't even understand what cooning is"... first, who the hell is this "they"? Sounds like he's implying that the New Black Panthers (who are unaffiliated with the "old" Black Panthers) and Black Lives Matter (or affiliated individuals) have referred to Carson using this slur? Who knows? I Googled (and results were returned), but when I searched the pages for the word "coon", I found it was not present.

Perhaps if I looked harder/longer I could find something, but I'm honestly not going to waste my time with such bullshit. Bullshit because Willis is the one who doesn't know what "cooning" means. According to a 10/7/2015 Mediaite article "within the black community... Coonery [applies when] poor Blacks embarrass bourgeoisie Blacks".

So, Carson, being a "bourgeoisie Black", CAN'T be guilty of "coonery". Neither can Beyonce, as the term applies to poor Blacks only. When used by middle class & wealthy Blacks. When used by Whites "they are slurring all black people". So, when Willis suggests Beyonce is a coon, he's slurring BOTH Beyonce and Ben Carson.

An offensive term Willis Hart uses (although he dishonestly attempts to put the word into Black mouths) BECAUSE HE'S A RACIST!

The ONLY reason he refers to Beyonce's performances as "minstrel shows" is because she is Black. The ONLY reason he describes her performances (the non-audio aspects) as "buck dancing and jiving" is because she's Black. And the ONLY reason he criticizes her "idiotic blonde weave" is BECAUSE SHE IS BLACK! I mean, does anyone think that he would level similar criticisms against a White performer? Of course not.

As for the criticisms of Ben Carson "for having an opinion", the criticisms (such as I noted above) have to do with his political statements and are not related to his career as a "noteworthy pediatric neurosurgeon", you fucking racist dumbass!

Image: Beyoncé Knowles performs during the 2/7/2016 Super Bowl 50 halftime show. It was the performance of Formation that PO'd (White racially-biased) Conservatives like WTNPH, because the music "video also featured imagery closely aligned with the #BlackLivesMatters movement". (Why the Beyoncé controversy is bigger than you think).

OST #138

Willis Hart To Win Nobel Peace Prize?

Is the Libertarian blogger Willis Hart a potential future Nobel Peace prize winner? He just might be, if the organization he writes one of his "notes" to takes his advice.

Willis Hart: Note to ISIS... Hey guys, I have a suggestion. Instead of engaging in mass-executions and suicide attacks, you try a little something different. Like, I don't know, maybe construct a functional sewage system, hire a few traffic cops, build and maintain a half-way reliable electrical grid - you know, basic civilization stuff. No, it isn't as exciting as playing soldier or as psychologically comforting as thinking that there's a actually a god who rewards murder and mayhem with an afterlife of unlimited jail-bait but you gotta grow up sometime, fellas'. (4/11/2016 AT 4:22pm).

OK, so now that Willis has pointed out the flaw in the logic of ISIS, I'm sure they're going to change their ways and follow Mr. Hart's advice ASAP. Because you know someone high up in the ISIS ranks reads Contra O'Reilly.

Anyway, now that Willis has solved the ISIS/terrorism problem, I'm positive that, in appreciation, the citizens of the world will demand that he be awarded a Nobel Peace prize. You know, because, unlike Obama, he actually brought about peace.

Or, he is about to. Now that ISIS is aware of what they're doing wrong (thanks to Hart's note), it's only a matter of time before they start behaving themselves and doing exactly what Willis has prescribed. Because they will recognize the wisdom behind his words. Also because (upon realizing that they've been wrong all along) will be greatly ashamed. And realize they DO need to grow up and stop fantasizing about martyring themselves in the name of Allah (by blowing themselves up/murdering others) and receiving their "jailbait" reward in the afterlife.

Although the Koran states that believers receive "companions of equal age [who are] well-matched... pure beings" known as Houri. However, "some scholars argue that the promise of 72 virgins is a mistranslation". Also (however), according to Ibn Warraq (referring to The Syro-Aramaic reading of the Koran) "the context makes it clear that it is food and drink that is being offered, and not unsullied maidens or houris".

But Al-Tirmidhi (824–892) did write that an "houri is a girl of tender age". So, jailbait? This might very well be what ISIS suicide bombers believe they're going to be rewarded with in the afterlife. Anyway, given that they're fanatics, they'd probably want to chop off Willis' head... as opposed to reading and following the advice he gives in his "note".

I suppose I could be wrong, however, and that when Gary Johnson is elected president, he will appoint the Nobel-Peace-prize-winning Willis Hart to a prominent cabinet position (or Gary might even select him as his VP). In order to take advantage of his extraordinary wisdom.

By the way, there is also the fact that all the territory occupied by ISIS is actually parts of other countries, ruled by other people. If ISIS fighters put down their weapons and started constructing functional sewage systems, hiring traffic cops, and building and maintaining reliable electrical grids... they'd be shot and killed. Or arrested, tried and executed. You can't start acting like a government when you're not one. Because the actual government views your militia as belligerents.

I mean, when/if they win the war, then they likely would do these things (as their goal is to set up a strict Islamic state/Caliphate). They have to win the war FIRST, however. Are they "playing soldier", as the dense Hartster puts it, or are they freedom fighters? Yeah, I think that (at least in their view), they're the later. And freedom fighters have to win first BEFORE doing things governments do.

In other words... Willis again shows how much of a total moron he is. Oh, and "murder and mayhem"? They view us (the United States, Europe & allies) as the ones engaging in this, and they're only retaliating.

OST #137

How Many Women Has Willis Hart Raped?

Which is the bigger problem, fabricated rape charges resulting from a woman having drunken sex and regretting it later (or simply regretting having sex, drunk or not), or actual rapists getting away with their crimes sans punishment?

Me, I'm going with the latter, given the fact that less than half of incidents of rape are reported, only three percent of rapists actually receive prison time, and Republican politicians think that women can't get pregnant from rape (even though there are 32k rape pregnancies in the US per year)!

Yes, it is true that 2-8 percent of rape charges may be false, but on college campuses across the nation, surveys show that students think 50 percent of the charges are fabricated! Almost certainly explaining why less than half of rapes are reported (because women fear not being believed).

Yet, despite these facts, the misogynist blogger Willis Hart has authored literally dozens of commentaries lamenting the huge problem that exists of women lying about getting raped. And, no, that it's a "huge problem" isn't something he's actually written, but given the huge number of commentaries he's written on the subject, I think it's fair to assume he thinks it is.

Commentaries such as the following.

Willis Hart: On the Assertion that Women Should Be Believed Absolutely... It's ludicrous and it's patronizing. Of course women lie and they probably do it as often as men do [Link]. That and do we really and truly want to put men away for 20 years just 'cause the woman had some second thoughts the next day? Come on! (4/21/2016 AT 8:31pm).

Willis' link is to a Science Direct article titled "Gender differences in lying". According to the abstract "aversion to lying has been consistently observed in sender–receiver games [and] women have demonstrated greater aversion to lying for a small monetary benefit" (what the actual article says I don't know because there is a $35.95 price attached).

Note the article (at least according to the abstract) concerns lying when there is a monetary benefit to be gained. The article has NOTHING to do with rape. Yet Willis (king of strawmen and non sequiturs) makes such a connection.

Frankly Willis' obsession/fixation on the topic of women lying about being rape (which is very rare and very outside the norm) is something I find disturbing. And it makes me wonder, has Willis Hart been "falsely" accused of rape? I would not be surprised if he had, given commentaries such as the following.

Willis Hart: On the Notion that Whenever Two Consenting Albeit Impaired Adults Have Drunken Sex Only the Fellow Is Considered a Rapist... How is THAT not sexist; a) to the man in terms of unfairness and b) to the woman for treating her like an infant, or at the bare minimum a double-standard? It sure as hell seems like those things to me. (3/24/2016 AT 10:26pm).

Add to this the fact that this obvious misgonyist also frequently blogs about how people who believe that patriarchy is a real thing are "conspiracy nutcases", gender pay inequality is a "discredited meme" and that "radical feminists" are the source of these "thoroughly discredited concepts"... and I've got to wonder.

Wonder, because Willis seems really pissed at all the lying bitches. So, while Willis Hart may have raped zero women, the number could also be one or more. Surely this would explain why he hates women so much. Although the reason could simply be that he's a typical Libertarian female-hating asshole.

The Libertarian "goddess" Ayn Rand authored fictional novels in which the male "hero" raped and the women liked it. Perhaps Willis, as a Libertarian who "worships Ayn Rand" (a paraphrase of his words) thinks that is how sex should work. That if a man wants a woman he gets her liquored up and when she "consents" he takes her.

I could be wrong, but I think that it's quite likely that Willis has raped and that his victim regretted getting raped... and that explains all these commentaries about something that (while it does happen) is rare. Much more frequently a woman who was raped is disbelieved, even though she's telling the truth. And that Willis suggests otherwise? IMO that makes him a rape-enabler. Not that his blog specifically enabled any rapes, but his mindset (that this is a HUGE problem) surely isn't conducive to creating an environment where the real problem (that women are disbelieved when they are telling the truth) gets addressed and dealt with.

And, btw, who the hell does Willis think is asserting that Women should be believed ABSOLUTELY? I mean, is legislation about to be passed that would lock men up immediately (without a trial) if they are accused of rape? No. All I've heard some people say is that we should act as if women are telling the truth when the say they're raped (but investigate/have a trial). Absolutely nobody is saying what Willis suggests some (unnamed) people are (absent sourcing). This is another of the Harster's fucking strawmen, in other words.

Supporting Document
[DSD #22] Drunkenness Equals Consent, Women Lying About Being Raped When They Had Drunken Sex And Regretted It Later Is A Big Problem, Rape Culture Is A False Meme (A catalog of numerous commentaries by WTNPH in which he argues that women lying about being raped is a HUGE problem).

Image: The "minstrel" Marc Lamont Hill tweets fact about rape that the misogynist Willis Hart rails against frequently on his Libertarian blog.

OST #136

Does Willis Hart Subscribe To The Cockamamie Economic Theory Known As Anarcho-Capitalist Libertarianism?

Either the Libertarian blogger Willis Hart subscribes to it, or admires/used to admire another blogger he thinks subscribes/subscribed to Anarcho-Capitalist Libertarianism (the truest/purest form of Libertarianism).

Willis Hart: On Going from an Anarcho-Capitalist Libertarian Who Worshiped Ayn Rand and Who Thoroughly Despised the Progressive Left to Somebody Who Essentially Signs-Off on Every Cockamamie Leftist Notion Under the Damned Sun from Demonizing Fossil Fuels to Playing the Race-Card to Demagoguing on Income Inequality, Class Warfare, etc... That is exponentially far from normal behavior and, yes, when you throw in the whole Jersey McJones alter-ego, it's damned near psychotic. (4/19/2016 AT 5:25pm).

OK, so Willis previously said "I am hardly an anarcho-capitalist". But I also do not recall Rational Nation (the individual Willis is referring to) voicing any support for anarcho-capitalist Libertarianism (AKA neo-feudalism on steroids). Fact is, when I linked to the WTNPH commentary on the RNUSA blog, the Rational guy said "I am not now, nor have I ever been an Anarcho-Capitalist Libertarian".

So neither RN nor Willis was/is an Anarcho-Capitalist Libertarian? No, I'm not buying it. Not in regards to Hart. For a few reasons. First, (as I already noted) anarcho-capitalism is the purest form of Libertarianism. And, as Noam Chomsky pointed out "the idea of free contract between the potentate and his starving subject is a sick joke". But it's a joke I know Willis believes. Although, instead of a joke, in a Libertarian's mind this is how the world should be - and would be a Randian utopia (because punishing the poors, whom Ayn Rand hated with a passion, is one of the primary goals of the sick ideology known as Objectivism).

Secondly, we do know that Willis Hart hates Progressives with a passion. So with this praise of who he believes Rational Nation used to be, he transfers to Nation his hatred. And (I'm theorizing) that we aren't dealing with just one instance of transference. It's everything Willis attributes to (the imaginary) past Rational Nation that really applies to him.

Which means he is the Anarcho-Capitalist Libertarian. Perhaps he changed his mind? Given the fact that Hart is a person who has been getting more and more radical over time, I find it quite likely that he has "progressed" to the most insane form Libertarianism.

And Willis is likely with Rand in her hate for the poor (as well as anyone who believes in democracy and disagrees with the idea that society should be organized to benefit the plutocrats). And he most likely agrees with Ayn Rand's views concerning the less fortunate (she thought they should die. A feeling she held so strongly that she killed millions of poor "moochers" and Statists in her revenge porn* novel "atlas shrugged").

Why? Because he said Rational Nation worshipped Rand (it's transference again. Remember I said everything Hart said he used to admire in the Rational guy is, in reality, qualities he admires in himself). Willis Hart is the guy who is an Anarcho-Capitalist Libertarian who worships Ayn Rand and who thoroughly despises the Progressive Left.

And he also very frequently whines constantly about "demonizing fossil fuels" (AKA acknowledging the scientific community's consensus on climate change), "playing the race-card" (acknowledging racism exists not just as a fringe issue, but as a systemic problem) and "demagoguing on income inequality" (not bowing down and worshipping at the feet of the wealthy as he does).

Conclusion? The behavior being exhibited by the Harster is exponentially far from normal and, yes, when you throw in the whole Jersey McJones alter-ego delusion (Willis believing that the blogger Jersey McJones is a sock puppet of Rational Nation), it's almost certainly a sign of psychosis.

(*Revenge of the overtaxed plutocrats).

Image: A simple depiction of why Libertarians love the psychotic anarcho-capitalism idea; it's a system under which worthless scumbag poors are forced to submit to their wealthy superiors... or die.

OST #135

Demolishing BS From A Total Moron Re The Fact That Blacks Are Arrested Disproportionately To Whites 4 Committing The Same Crimes (Moron Sez They Aren't)

A 9/02/2015 HuffPo article by Kim Farbota says "there is a common conservative narrative that indicates the disproportionate incarceration of black people is not the result of systemic racism, but rather of shortcomings within the black community". The Libertarian blogger Willis Hart is one such Conservative, making just such a case in a recent blog post.

Willis Hart: On the Fact that the Black Arrest Rate Is Nearly Identical to the Statistics Derived from the National Crime Victimization Survey... This all but demolishes the charge that blacks are arrested disproportionately to the crime that they commit in that it makes no sense whatsoever that victims would falsely accuse black folks as opposed to trying to nail the true perpetrator. It also seems to point out that, while, yes, there are no doubt some biased cops out there, the vast majority of those in law enforcement are simply doing their jobs and apprehending who they're supposed to. Unless of course you're paranoid. (4/17/2016 AT 4:33pm).

"Black people commit more crimes than white people" is also a factor in the Conservative narrative (as per the HuffPo article) and it's basically the argument Willis makes in his post.

However...

(1) If a black person and a white person each commit a crime, the black person is more likely to be arrested. This is due in part to the fact that black people are more heavily policed. Black people, more often than white people, live in dense urban areas. Dense urban areas are more heavily policed than suburban or rural areas. When people live in close proximity to one another, police can monitor more people more often. In more heavily policed areas, people committing crimes are caught more frequently. This could help explain why, for example, black people and white people smoke marijuana at similar rates, yet black people are 3.7 times as likely to be arrested for marijuana possession. (The discrepancy could also be driven by overt racism, more frequent illegal searches of black people, or an increased willingness to let non-blacks off with a warning). (2) When black people are arrested for a crime, they are convicted more often than white people arrested for the same crime. ...whether or not a defendant can afford a reputable attorney. The interaction of poverty and trial outcomes could help explain why, for example, while black defendants represent about 35% of drug arrests, 46% of those convicted of drug crimes are black. (This discrepancy could also be due to racial bias on the part of judges and jurors.) (3) When black people are convicted of a crime, they are more likely to be sentenced to incarceration compared to whites convicted of the same crime. When a person is convicted of a crime, a judge often has discretion in determining whether the defendant will be incarcerated or given a less severe punishment such as probation, community service, or fines. One study found that in a particular region blacks were incarcerated for convicted felony offenses 51% of the time while whites convicted of felonies were incarcerated 38% of the time. (Black Crime Rates: What Happens When Numbers Aren't Neutral by Kim Farbota. The Huffington Post 9/2/2015, Updated 1/19/2016).

Yeah, that all sounds totally fair. Also note that that the article refers several times to victimless drug crimes. So, while Willis says "I would legalize marijuana immediately", he totally ignores victimless crime in his comparing of Black Arrest rates and the Statistics derived from the National Crime Victimization survey.

Gee, I wonder why. Perhaps because looking at victimless drug crimes (and how African Americans are arrested at a much higher rate than Whites for these crimes) doesn't fit his narrative. That narrative being that "law enforcement are simply doing their jobs" in arresting Blacks who are much more criminally inclined than Whites. And, no, racism absolutely is not a factor... unless you're "paranoid".

"White people are more likely to deal drugs, but black people are more likely to get arrested for it" according to a 9/30/2014 Washington Post article by Christopher Ingraham. So, more "paranoia"?

Jonathan Rothwell of the Brookings Institute: Arrest data shows a striking trend, [which is that] arrests of blacks have fallen for violent and property crimes, but soared for drug related crimes. As of 2011, drug crimes comprised 14 percent of all arrests and a miscellaneous category that includes "drug paraphernalia" possession comprised an additional 31 percent of all arrests. Just 6 percent and 14 percent of arrests were for violent and property crimes, respectively. (link).

Which isn't to say that I think there is no disparity when it comes to arrests of Black people for crimes in which there is a victim. What statistics derived from the National Crime Victimization Survey is the Hartster referring to?

Perhaps I could figure this out if I did a little more digging, but I'm not inclined to do so, given the fact that I've already demolished Hart's racist BS simply by pointing out the FACT that he totally ignores victimless crimes (drug crimes, traffic violations AKA "driving while Black", etc).

Image: Here's a pretty astonishing chart on the skyrocketing number of arrests of black Americans for nonviolent drug crimes. What it shows is that Blacks are far more likely to be arrested for selling or possessing drugs than whites, even though whites use drugs at the same rate. While other crimes are down. So it's clearly drug arrests driving the disparity, yet WTNPH ignores this fact... for some reason (his racism).

OST #134

Hillary Clinton Will Be Convicted, Go To Prison Over Her eMail Server, & End Up Campaigning From Behind Bars (All Of This Occurring B4 Voting In November)

I think it's finally happened. The Libertarian blogger Willis Hart has completely lost his marbles. By which I mean he's flipped his lid; gone totally bonkers. And who knew that it would be delusions concerning the 2016 potus hopefuls that would push him over the edge?

Willis Hart: On the Fact that, While I'm Not a Huge Trump Supporter (Johnson's My Candidate), I Do Take Some Solace from the Likelihood that at Least the Dude Won't be Forced to Run his Campaign from a Prison Cell or from a Pre-1990 Time-Machine in Which the Old Soviet Union Still Exists... Yep, there is that. (4/16/2016 AT 9:43pm).

My Theory as to WTF Willis is talking about?

Obviously, Hillary Clinton is the one who is going to be forced to run her campaign from behind bars. Because an indictment is coming soon (maybe Willis reads NewsMax?). But she's also going to be convicted and imprisoned - and all of this before voting in November! Because we all know how speedy the justice system operates. At least in the fevered imagination of someone afflicted with (Hillary) Clinton Derangement Syndrome, apparently (SWTD #333).

As for running a campaign from a "pre-1990 time machine in which the old Soviet Union exists", maybe he's referring to Ted Cruz? Or, is this a "Bernie Sanders is a Commie" reference? What Willis is talking about is unclear.

In any case, I guessed that Willis read about the coming Hillary Clinton indictment on NewsMax because they recently ran a story in which Ronald Kessler (an individual who WTNPH praises as "a 2-time winner of the Peabody award and an individual who has consistently criticized presidents from both parties") was reported to have said (on NewsMax TV's The Steve Malzberg Show) that a Hillary Clinton indictment is coming "definitely before November".

Although Kessler thinks Obama will pardon her, but the "damage will have been done". By this I'm guessing what Kessler thinks will happen is that HRC will be indicted, she will lose the election (the damage), she will be convicted, and then Obama will pardon her.

Unless he's with Willis in believing that HRC will receive a trial of UNPRECEDENTED speed, be convicted and campaign from behind bars. I'm unclear as to what Kessler means. He says the pardon will come too late... so does that mean he's saying a pardon can't save her campaign (meaning he thinks an indictment, trial and conviction will ALL occur before voting in november).

If that's the case, then I'd say that CDS has driven him just as insane as it appears Willis is. If not? Then my assessment is that CDS has only resulted in a level of insanity somewhat lesser than the Hartster's.

In any case, note that Willis said he was "not a huge Trump supporter", by which I take it he means he's somewhat the Trump supporter? Does he think Trump would be a good 2nd choice behind Gary Johnson? And perhaps Willis feels this way because Trump's racism, bigotry and misogyny are in line with his own? I'm guessing yes, given the fact that Willis referred to Trump's racism, Islamaphobia and misogyny as "impolitic statements".

Image: Photoshopped image produced by a an individual suffering from CDS (Clinton derangement syndrome).

Supporting Document
[DSD #21] The "Small l Libertarian" Who Suffers From A Bad Case Of (Hillary) Clinton Derangement Syndrome (A catalog of MANY commentaries by WTNPH in which he criticizes HRC, specifically in regards to the email controversy).

OST #133