One reason this blog is called Libertarian Nationalist is because one of its missions is to make it clear that libertarianism, for all its virtues and flaws, simply can't exist outside of the framework of a nation, or at least a state of some sort that keeps it from falling to pieces due to its own structural inconsistencies, or being brought down by immigrants/colonists/invaders eager to lap up the products of free market capitalism without doing any of the producing. Our Founding Fathers pretty much understood that dynamic, which is why they came up with a government and a Constitution, instead of going all Rothbardy. They knew that you couldn't preserve freedom outside of a state, simply because any such society would be devoured by the most nearby state ASAP. Not only does freedom need a state, it needs one powerful enough to fight other states. Just ask Norway 1940. So, seriously, folks. I'm all for open carry and old curmudgeons living in cabins and refusing to do paperwork, but that doesn't translate logically into the conclusion that the state isn't necessary. That's the stuff of heavy dorm room discussions and everybody I know has grown out of all that except for a few useful idiots to be found mostly among our liberals and libertarians. The libertarian kind can be recognized by their tendency to email me with their insight that "libertarian nationalist" is an oxymoron. A little such sperginess can be a good thing, but that's crossing the line.
Now, the reason so many of us on the non-useful-idiot faction of libertarianism and the quite similar traditional right — you have to go back at least to Barry Goldwater way before the hijacking of conservatism by the Bushes and other neocons — have moved speedily to Trump is simply because he always seems to talk in terms of what is good for Americans. Not various American pressure groups, but basic working class Americans. He seems to want to keep our basic institutions healthy. He doesn't have to natter on and on like Hillary about the importance of the family, because it's implicit in his whole rhetoric and demeanor that he thinks families are great. Somewhat unlike Hillary, again, who talks family but who seems to have rented her daughter.
Ironically, Hillary fits just about any definition of neocon, while Trump is the opposite. And this really frustrates and confuses many "conservative" institutions. Lawrence Murray discusses one of them at The Right Stuff: