This was one of the most bizarre and fascinating interviews I’ve seen in a long time.  Dave Smith interviewed Robert Kennedy Jr. on his podcast.  At times, it was more of a heated debate than an interview.

If there’s been one small area where I’m a tiny bit critical of Dave, it is that he doesn’t push hard enough when he has guests where he has significant disagreements.  I remember when he had a woman from Reason on his show and he seemed to take it a bit too easy on her.  Still, I understand not wanting to be rude to guests on your show.

When Dave had Tucker Carlson on his show, there are obviously areas where Dave could have challenged Tucker, but I’m glad he didn’t.  It would have been easy to get bogged down in some argument about libertarianism when Tucker probably has a slightly different definition of what constitutes a libertarian.  It is good that they focused on the issue of foreign policy and hammering away at the deep state.

I was surprised at how forceful Dave was with RFK Jr.  I don’t think Dave was rude at all, but he definitely made it clearly known when he disagreed.  It was mostly about Israel and Gaza.  This is an important issue, and like many libertarians, I am not sure how RFK can be so right on Ukraine and other important areas and yet be so wrong on his support for U.S. government funding of Israel.

When Dave asked Kennedy about the Israeli lobby, I thought Kennedy was going to get up and walk out of the interview.  Dave asked him about Israeli influence on U.S. government policy, and there was a pause of at least 5 seconds.  After the incredibly uncomfortable pause, Kennedy answers, “I don’t know.”  He then goes on to say that he hasn’t been in political office.  It’s kind of a strange response.  I have never been in political office, but I can easily recognize that there is a military-industrial complex.  I can see that big pharma has great influence on U.S. government policy.  I’m sure Kennedy can easily see those things too.

Overall, I thought Kennedy did a poor job of explaining his position.  He rambled on about a lot of things that didn’t directly answer the objections to his position.

I have been turned off of Kennedy since shortly after the October 7^th attacks in Israel because of his stance.  Kennedy has repeated the establishment narrative and seems to offer no criticism of killing tens of thousands of innocent people in Gaza.

I have also been critical that Kennedy seemed to disappear from the alternative media world after this.  He gained back some credibility with me for going on Dave’s podcast, even though I disagreed with much of when he said.  I give him credit for at least facing some hard questions.

And if That Wasn’t Enough

The podcast episode was even more bizarre than that though.  At the beginning of the podcast, Kennedy said that he heard that Dave had considered running for president on the Libertarian Party ticket.  He complimented Dave and said that he’s glad he doesn’t have to go up against him.

Dave explained that he had considered it but that he decided against it this time around for family reasons.  Then Kennedy made an offer to Dave to be his running mate.  I believe this came completely unexpected to Dave.  You normally don’t get offered a spot to run for vice president of the United States when you are interviewing someone on a podcast.

Maybe Kennedy was only half serious when he made the offer.  After that, they get into all of the Israel/ Gaza talk, and it gets quite heated at times.  There was no name calling, and it mostly remained civil, but there was complete disagreement on the issue.

After over an hour of debate on the topic, Dave starts wrapping up the podcast and saying that he at least appreciates Kennedy for coming on the show.

What is Kennedy’s response after an hour of debate?  He reiterates his offer to Dave to be his running mate.

Are you serious?

When I watched this, I was partly in shock, and I was partly laughing.

And then Dave responded about it being dangerous to be on a Kennedy ticket.  Dave basically joked about Kennedy being assassinated, but then said that he would actually be good life insurance because he is no LBJ.  Kennedy responded, “That’s exactly why I want you.”  He said Dave is a worse version of himself that nobody will want.

Kennedy was exactly correct on this point.  That’s the same reason I say that Trump should pick someone like Tucker Carlson or Vivek as his running mate.  It will be his best protection against assassination or impeachment.

Should Dave Consider?

It seems that Dave Smith has declined the offer as far as we know.  He still has the same family reasons as before as a reason for not running for president.  Perhaps, running as VP would be a little less intense, but it is obviously still demanding.

I have no idea if Kennedy wants to run on the LP ticket.  It is a way to get relatively easy ballot access.  Even though it makes it easier and cheaper to get on state ballots, there is a big question of whether he would get the LP nomination, even with Dave’s support.

Or maybe Kennedy really just wants Dave on his ticket as an independent candidate.

Let’s just say that Kennedy wants to stay as an independent and is serious about having Dave as a running mate.  And let’s say Dave decides he can handle this and his family is ok with it.

Would this be beneficial to liberty?

Let’s say that Kennedy wants to run on the Libertarian Party ticket with Dave and Dave’s family is ok with it.

Would this be beneficial to the Libertarian Party?

Those are two separate questions.  They are not necessarily the same thing.  It could be harmful for the LP but beneficial for the cause of liberty.

The Mises Caucus took over control of the party just a couple of years ago.  There hasn’t been a presidential cycle yet with the Mises Caucus in control.  So, it might not look good if the first candidate nominated is someone who was just recently a Democrat and still holds most of the same positions as when he was a Democrat.

You might see some of the Mises people quit the party over it.  Some might endorse it because they agree with Dave’s message.  It is really hard to say.  It makes it harder to make a case for principled candidates in the future.

With that said, there is a case for Dave to be Kennedy’s running mate, regardless of whether it is or isn’t on the LP ticket.  I think Dave would only do it and should only do it if Kennedy agreed that Dave can openly state his positions even on issues where they disagree.

They could just be open with the media and say they have a big disagreement over Israel policy and also some economic issues.  But for the sake of the country and uniting against the deep state, they are running together.

If Trump asked me to be an advisor on foreign policy or economics or COVID vaccines, I wouldn’t necessarily say “no” just because I have so many disagreements.  If there is a chance he will listen to me, maybe I would consider it.  If I could explain my views in public, then it could serve to educate others.

And that is the key to this whole thing.  We gain greater liberty by educating others on the morality and benefits of liberty.  If tens of millions of people got a dose of Dave Smith (truth telling), then this would be a great advancement in liberty.

I don’t care about maximizing the number of votes.  I highly doubt this ticket would win the election.  But imagine if 15 million people enthusiastically supported the ticket and all of these people get familiar with Dave’s hardcore libertarian views.  This could be a great win for the prospects of liberty in the future.

Conclusion

I understand that hardcore libertarians don’t want to compromise their principles.  And I am not telling Dave to compromise his principles.  I don’t think Dave as Kennedy’s running mate would necessarily be selling out his principles.  If anything, he might help move Kennedy in the right direction while influencing millions of people.

If you have someone offering you a major platform for your libertarian views, I don’t think it is necessarily an unlibertarian thing to accept it, as long as you continue to tell the truth.