As far as the question goes if a Trump presidency would be good or bad for libertarianism, depends on various factors, themselves depending on exactly what Donald Trump will be doing as president (as opposed to merely spouting campaign rhetoric which is notoriously vapid coming out of any politician’s mouth).
Libertarians may be satisfied, for instance, if Trump really does keep the civility between the United States and Russia, and will keep a more distant approach to foreign policy aggression than others. Hillary Clinton seemed to want nothing more than to incite and provoke Russia’s leader Vladimir Putin, quite possibly sparking an actual war of sorts. Absolutely hilarious, therefore, are the fears of hysterical Trumpaphobics that he would start a third World War. Although far from a non-interventionist peacenik, he has sounded marginally more reasonable than rabid war-hawks among the neocons and Democrats. Flirtations with the likes of John Bolton are cause for concern, of course, but even in that case the most that can be said is that it would simply be more of the same. In the case of the domestic police state, odds are Trump will indeed be more of the same.
Libertarians may also be satisfied with the absolute annihilation of psychological and social tyranny that a Trump presidency may inspire. I’m talking, of course, about the particularly rabid incarnation of political correctness that has run rampant, thanks to the confidence inspired in the wannabe thought police because of the Obama presidency. In the past 8 years, we have this confidence to thank for wonderful concepts like micro-aggressions, safe spaces, and triggering. In so far as these already existed in 2008, they have certainly metastasized into a full blown cancer upon freedom of speech and conscience. If anything, the modern era Orwellian storm troopers of sensitivity, diversity and tolerance will no longer get the political and social support from the White House. And likely not from the majority of Congress and the Senate either. I would go so far as to say that i hope that Trump will squeeze any public education facility that attempts to pressure students, faculty and administration into obedience of the PC bible. They should, after all, have no right to use tax payer money to inflict a regime of psychological terror on political dissidents. People should have the right to be snowflakes, of course, just as long as they realize and accept that their opinions are worth no more than that of others, and can be openly contradicted, mocked, or simply ignored without punishment.
Libertarians may be satisfied that maybe the government-supported hysteria about Climate Change will come to an end, as well as the fascist/mercantilist funding of Climate Change interest groups and green corporations. They may be satisfied that Trump may not worship the ground that the U.N. collectively walks on. Or NATO for that matter.
Libertarians should be particularly satisfied that no rabid gun control despot will have her clutches on the oval office.
But the reason libertarianism may be served by a Trump presidency, is actually the possibility that his campaign rhetoric turns out to be nothing but smoke. What if the promise of Trump turns out to be sham, and the Trump-in-practice turns out to be a blowhard clone of a Bush, Obama, or Hillary Clinton? What this means, in the positive sense for libertarianism, is that it will lead to yet more completely disillusioned conservative Republicans. Yet more worshipers of state realizing that statist populists are just a different variety of clowns from statist aristocracy.
Trump may keep his promise, and his supporters may love him for it. But what does this mean, really, other than more of the same? Rather than a disaster for libertarians, it would simply be business as usual, and therefore libertarians have nothing to lose. In this case, it may actually make a light bulb go off in the heads of Trump hating progressive liberals who will suddenly see the truth about politics and the state and embrace the philosophy of liberty.
Okay, that last part is as likely to happen as an ant becoming conscious of its individuality. Forget about that part.
Because i regard the threat of cultural marxism to be greatest, precisely because it is cultural, and collectivist, and is a political and social movement already spanning decades that will stop at nothing to reach its ultimate aims of leftist totalitarianism – itself nothing short of completely destruction of Western civilization – i regard the Trump presidency to be absolutely superior over a Hillary presidency. Corollary to this is the cultural marxists’ as well as Hillary Clinton’s rabid desire to see the American population disarmed. Which Trump is very unlikely to call for. Like someone said, and i may be paraphrasing: “Guns are the teeth of liberty.” No right to bear arms means kissing the future of liberty goodbye.
I wouldn’t vote for Trump, because i refuse to have blood on my hands if and when it start flowing as a natural consequence of state action. But i am relieved it turned out to be Trump instead of Hillary anyway.
As far as that third party of alleged libertarianism goes: the moment Gary Johnson implied Hillary Clinton to be a wonderful public servant, and his imposter running mate Bill Weld exposed that he was running a campaign on behalf of Hillary right from under the nose of Johnson, he lost any right to expect support from libertarians. It begs the question: how many times must LP candidates prove to be absolute jokes and/or philosophical con men before that party is completely replaced by something genuinely libertarian?