ex-President Trump
I assume it's still acceptable to have a Trump thread in a Politics forum?
So this is an obvious lie - basically aimed at low-info Boomers like my religions aunts. I have two questions:
a) Is anyone here who supports Trump bothered by lies like this?
b) Does anyone know what he's even talking about here? Like is there some grain of truth that he's embellishing on bigly?
I am not sure why you guys think Orban isn't absolutely ok a person, he even voted for Ukrainian aid and for Sweden to join NATO, they were both obviously things he just used to get leverage for Hungary.
I am unsurprised that you admire him, although I assume you would characterize him as too collectivist if I pressed the point
In many ways, he is just a less overtly foolish version of Trump. In other words, he is right in your lane
Luciom, finding some random guy who called Paul Ryan a Nazi doesn't come close to proving that Democrats thought Paul Ryan was as dangerous to American democracy as Trump.
Nor does it come close to proving that Democrats routinely described Paul Ryan in much the same way they describe Trump
It's also worth noting that even in those fringe examples they're not actually mentioning anything to do with policies in the comparisons. They're talking about the way the campaigns were run, specifically the accusations of repeated lying and propaganda. The comparisons are still absurd and uncalled for but it's very different in tone to some of the now more common rhetoric from the left in the post-Trump environment.
Also the second article linked is in essence a much more in-depth version of what I was getting at with the filibuster point. It's purely about political tactics that are technically legal but breaking norms in unprecedented ways. It even goes out of its way to say that it is talking about the GOP being politically extreme in these terms of "politics as warfare" rather than because of extreme policy positions.
I am unsurprised that you admire him, although I assume you would characterize him as too collectivist if I pressed the point
In many ways, he is just a less overtly foolish version of Trump. In other words, he is right in your lane
No I had several doubts recently about him , regarding Trump.
But lately, thanks to Meloni, It was revealed to be just a smart opportunist and that's very fine for me.
He is less collectivist than most European leaders, like Wilders in the NL. He is fairly libertarian on the domestic economy.
He is more a Bolsonaro than a Trump.
Not sure what trump has to do with him aside some vague "actual rightwing" references Trump needs to make to his own base by linking to him.
It's not about Trump, Trump is just the excuse
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make by showing the Republican who might be the most closely aligned to Trump is being compared to Trump. If there were articles about Liz Cheney making similar comparisons you might have a point.
RDS essentially parrots Trump's platform but seems to actually believe in it rather than be saying what he thinks will make him popular. He also has actual experience in how to get things done in politics so it's not hard to imagine why that would be of concern to people who are avidly opposed to Trump's platform.
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make by pointing to the Republican who might be the most closely aligned to Trump being compared to Trump. If there were articles about Liz Cheney making similar comparisons you might have a point.
RDS essentially parrots Trump's platform but seems to actually believe in it rather than be saying what he thinks will make him popular. He also has actual experience in how to get things done in politics s
Ok so it's not Trump, it's normal right-wing policies, as I said.
Many people claim the demonization, the treatment of republicans by democrats as subhumans, is because of Trump.
Instead what's being demonized is a set of policy proposals, and everyone agreeing with them.
If you disagree with strong "climate action" you are Hitler.
If you want strong border controls, you are Hitler.
If you want low tax levels for companies and rich people, you are Hitler.
If you think "trans care" for minors should be banned, you are Hitler.
If you want to abolish DEI from the federal government, you are Hitler.
If you want to nominate federal judges that agree that Roe vs Wade was egregiously wrongly decided, and the Warren and Burger courts have made a lot of mistakes that have to be undone, you are Hitler.
If you think affirmative action is illegal and shouldn't have a place in the country, you are Hitler.
It's not about Trump
Wild keep in mind that the claim is "trump is a threat of democracy because he is authoritarian, see Jan 6 and other stuff". He is also plausibly a sexual assaulter, and so on. A bad person who shouldn't be POTUS inherently no matter his policy proposals.
That's the main claim.
Then the same people claim RDS, who always operated fully within the law, is even more dangerous.
The same people called Ryan Nazi 13 years ago.
At some point you understand it's not about Trump, it's about a deep hatred for the democratic process, democrats actually don't want rightwing position to be allowed in the debate, to have electoral representation, to be dignified as possible choices for civil society.
If you disagree with democrats deeply enough you are Hitler
There will always be some people who make stupid comparisons but with maybe one or two exceptions there are no sensible people who would compare someone to Hitler for having those opinions. A larger number might call someone a fascist for some of them but then I know people who call anyone who wants significant climate action a socialist and who even call a traditional moderately left-leaning publication "basically a communist newspaper" so it's not as if the hyperbole is only coming from one side.
As someone who was completely uninterested in politics pre-Trump, I can say that for me, Trump's campaign and subsequent term as president brought to the forefront how stultifyingly fact free and ignorant average right wing thinking (in the US at least) actually *is*. I cannot imagine myself ever voting for a Trump, no matter how much I agreed with whatever policies he proposed, based on what a total demonstrable moron he is (e.g. "How can CFCs escape my bathroom?" amongst dozens of similar remarks) and the fact that in general, complete disregard for facts and truth seems to be part of his and his supporters' "brand". MAGA is predicated on the premise that they literally do not care if something is true or "alternative facts" as long as it's whatever they want to believe. Straight out of 1984.
IIRC WAPO counted over 10,000 times they fact checked him and he lied about something or other during his term - literally almost 10 times a day. And I know some will argue "all politicians lie", and yes, but for most of them they try to do it economically and with good reason; for him it's an integral part of his brand. Without "alternative facts" there is no Donald Trump.
someone has a hitler complex. someone who doesn't even have a democrat party in their country....
someone has a hitler complex. someone who doesn't even have a democrat party in their country....
The main center left party in Italy is called "partito democratico" and they do exactly the same with any rightwing candidate, except they say fascism instead of Nazism, about any policy proposal they disagree with
As someone who was completely uninterested in politics pre-Trump, I can say that for me, Trump's campaign and subsequent term as president brought to the forefront how stultifyingly fact free and ignorant average right wing thinking (in the US at least) actually *is*. I cannot imagine myself ever voting for a Trump, no matter how much I agreed with whatever policies he proposed, based on what a total demonstrable moron he is (e.g. "How can
Sure, what do you think of Ron de Santis?
Wild keep in mind that the claim is "trump is a threat of democracy because he is authoritarian, see Jan 6 and other stuff". He is also plausibly a sexual assaulter, and so on. A bad person who shouldn't be POTUS inherently no matter his policy proposals.
That's the main claim.
Then the same people claim RDS, who always operated fully within the law, is even more dangerous.
The same people called Ryan Nazi 13 years ago.
At some point you unders
One of the articles you referred to to make this point was arguing specifically contra to the bolded and this is where the disconnect comes from. Your argument seems to be that if it's legal then it's perfectly fine and a part of the democratic process. However there are countless things that are perfectly legal and can make a system significantly less democratic - gerrymandering is a very obvious and hopefully non-controversial example.
Many would argue that the way party politics operated in the US started to shift around the time of Bush vs Gore and the trend accelerated dramatically during the Obama administration with Republicans throwing norms out of the window in order to prevent a Democratic administration from governing. The general tone of discourse on both sides has deteriorated rapidly ever since.
My take on the state of the current political landscape is that the left makes a concerted effort to attempt to win in the court of public opinion but frequently does it in an incredibly counter-productive way, whereas the right makes lots of noise complaining about how unfair the "left" is being while quietly working somewhat effectively to, legally, disenfranchise the actual left from having any real power in government (this is a general take not a US specific one).
I think that if something if constitutional then it's allowed in the democratic process.
Gerrymandering is a good example of something on the fence as sometimes, it is unconstitutional (or illegal under the civil right act).
So when it's legal, it's democratic, otherwise it isn't, and courts fix that.
I think that if something if constitutional then it's allowed in the democratic process.
Gerrymandering is a good example of something on the fence as sometimes, it is unconstitutional (or illegal under the civil right act).
So when it's legal, it's democratic, otherwise it isn't, and courts fix that.
You seem to be implying that "allowed in the democratic process" and "democratic" are the same thing. Is that your position?
You seem to be implying that "allowed in the democratic process" and "democratic" are the same thing. Is that your position?
If the constitution is well crafted, yes.
And the American constitution is very well crafted (leftist SCOTUS rulings non-withstanding).
A well crafted constitution simply doesn't allow any policy that would restrict actual democracy.
Freedom of speech, freedom of the press, judiciary independence , and so on
der führer Glitchkrieging through Georgia on the campaign trail
Very dumb people think this very dumb person is playing 3D chess:
He isn't. He sounds like peepaw on visiting day at the rest home. Sad!
Any other timeline in US history this guy is in supermax for life(or worse). A true American traitor:
At a time when President Joe Biden is rightfully being scrutinized
for his mental acuity, Trump’s missteps should raise similar questions.
Donald Trump’s speeches in recent days have been
littered with odd gaffes, bouts of confusion and verbal trip-ups.
"He called me your highness."
Trump continues stumbling and saying, "I meant to do that",
My late husband died of Alzheimer's. He was compassionate, ethical and principled: a full man.
And he was reduced to meaningless, scrambled word salads like 45 spouts all the time now.
This is too familiar for me, although in 45's case, I'm hopeful his illness
will take him down, given that our government isn't able or willing to do it.
When he finally stands on stage,
indifferently emptying his bowels in public,
his base is NOT going to be able to rationalize THAT away.
Having lost my father to non-Alzheimer's dementia, his staff has to be aware of his progressive cognitive decline.
His speech patterns are identical to my father's in its early stages. This is only going to get worse over time.
Back to the thread, democrats just got a nice gift from radical rightwing extremists.
Some republicans are trying their best to lose in Arizona
C19 derail moved to C19 thread
Wild keep in mind that the claim is "trump is a threat of democracy because he is authoritarian, see Jan 6 and other stuff". He is also plausibly a sexual assaulter, and so on. A bad person who shouldn't be POTUS inherently no matter his policy proposals.
There were these things, but the frequency and scope of scandal during his presidency was bonkers -- as if it was deliberate. They literally tried to ban a third of the world from entering the US based on religion. Certain things were totally finished off like the Department of Education.
The constant attacks and attempts to demonize Americans and dismantling of public institutions via total regulatory capture were disturbing.
Fascism:
A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, a capitalist economy subject to stringent governmental controls, violent suppression of the opposition, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
MAGA is textbook fascism.
[LIST=5]
[*]Dictator
[*]Capitalism w/regulatory capture to choose winners
[*]Violence against out groups
[*]Nationalism
[*]Racism
[/LIST]
There were these things, but the frequency and scope of scandal during his presidency was bonkers -- as if it was deliberate. They literally tried to ban a third of the world from entering the US based on religion. Certain things were totally finished off like the Department of Education.
The constant attacks and attempts to demonize Americans and dismantling of public institutions via total regulatory capture were disturbing.
Fascism:
MAGA i
Lolwat the so called "Muslim ban" was completely constitutional (trump v Hawaii).
They didn't "try", they enacted a perfectly constitutional provisions you disagreed with.
Your reference to that can get added to the list it demonization of policies you disagree with while being perfectly allowed and so democratic
