2016 US Presidential Election Thread Part VI

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Godwin's Law, in my humble opinion, is looking more than a little motheaten. Yes, sure, you'll always have the internet commenter who thinks anyone rightwing is Hitler: that kind of commentary can be safely disregarded.

But if the death of six million of (insert despised minority here) is the yardstick for useful analogies to a certain toxic twentieth century political movement, then, well, yeah. God help us. It took even the Nazis quite a few years to get the machine oiled and running, and elections had been cancelled long before that point. The point about fascism, or fascist-like movements, is that once you can actually point to a death camp or suspicious looking train cargo, it's far, far too late.

And I'm not sure political life in America isn't very nearly as polarised as during the sorry days of the Weimar Republic. Not sure of that at all. If there is a crucial difference it is the economic situation - which is hardly fantastic, merely not Weimar-style catastrophic.

Hitler was widely regarded as a joke in the 1920s, though he talked quite openly about what he wanted to do. It took the control of a state apparatus and thirteen years in power to acquire the aura of unique evil. In Trump's case, where he absolutely differs is that I don't think he believes strongly in anything at all except Trump. But you know, that may not be clear to everyone saluting at the rally.
 
Last edited:
And there's where Donald Trump's logic actually works -- you're being far too politically correct if you think a mere mention of Adolph Hitler is taboo or offensive. Nobody is calling Trump out for preparing a genocide.
 
I'm happy to admit there are some similarities, and also willing to admit that he's doing shit like the salute on purpose to stir people up because he's just such a powerful media manipulator, but they're completely superficial, as iYup points out in his later post.

We all know about Godwin's Law. It doesn't just apply to 4chan discussions. Trump is an arsehole, but until he systematically kills six million Muslims then put the lazy, haphazard comparisons to bed. It's reactionary and immediately assures your argument invalid. There are 17 million things to criticise Trump for. Pick one of them, not just call him Hitler cos he's an utter shithead.

So here's the thing to shit on your argument...

They didn't think it would happen in Germany, either.

So while I don't think it will happen here, the similarities frightening me enough to take action.

And may I sternly state for the record that I'm no liberal. But what Trump is preaching is frightening beyond anything we've seen in this country in a long long time.

It must be stopped.
 
What is the use in comparing him to Hitler, though? Trump is a unique politician in a unique political and historical situation. Looking at potential responses to him in the light of Weimar Germany, even if he came out and explicitly said that his highest ambition in the world is to imitate Hitler, only distracts from the need to employ modern methods to stop him. The two situations - Weimar Germany and modern US - being wildly different is the most important point here.

And yes, I get that Trump is manipulating media in a frightening way. But what is lost in that conversation IMO is that there is a massive wing of left-leaning media dedicated to exposing his every misstep whenever and however they can. That is an important counterweight that did not exist as such in Nazi times.
 
What is the use in comparing him to Hitler, though? Trump is a unique politician in a unique political and historical situation. Looking at potential responses to him in the light of Weimar Germany, even if he came out and explicitly said that his highest ambition in the world is to imitate Hitler, only distracts from the need to employ modern methods to stop him. The two situations - Weimar Germany and modern US - being wildly different is the most important point here.

And yes, I get that Trump is manipulating media in a frightening way. But what is lost in that conversation IMO is that there is a massive wing of left-leaning media dedicated to exposing his every misstep whenever and however they can. That is an important counterweight that did not exist as such in Nazi times.

The people who are for Trump don't care about his 'missteps'. They simply do not care.

And while I'm not wholly indifferent to the larger point here, I could as easily say, why compare anything to anything? Every day's a new day, right? Even historians argue over this sort of stuff, to what extent can useful parallels be drawn.
 
Last edited:
Let's just hope that we don't have any Paris-style attacks in the US, or worse, between now and the election (or ever).

I agree that the modern US has little in common with Weimar Germany, but I would caution against underestimating what more mass death on the streets of a major American city could do to a population.
 
What is the use in comparing him to Hitler, though? Trump is a unique politician in a unique political and historical situation. Looking at potential responses to him in the light of Weimar Germany, even if he came out and explicitly said that his highest ambition in the world is to imitate Hitler, only distracts from the need to employ modern methods to stop him. The two situations - Weimar Germany and modern US - being wildly different is the most important point here.

And yes, I get that Trump is manipulating media in a frightening way. But what is lost in that conversation IMO is that there is a massive wing of left-leaning media dedicated to exposing his every misstep whenever and however they can. That is an important counterweight that did not exist as such in Nazi times.


Just like your misunderstanding of the civil war, you're not understanding the overall context. You're missing the big picture by focusing on the smaller details.

This is by no means a "left wing media" thing, if you're paying attention many of the right wing media are doing the same. And when all three agreeing at some level, that should put off alarms.

This IS the closest we have actually had on US soil that fits this overused comparison.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
I mean, you can't take the comparisons to Hitler too far, there are some to be sure. But it's not like there are brownshirts marching around silencing opponents. The campaign rhetoric has a few similarities but that's as far as you can really take it. A comparison to Hitler in power, much less at the end of WWII, is asinine.
 
This IS the closest we have actually had on US soil that fits this overused comparison.


But it's not even close. It isn't 19 fucking 39. Trump is not going to go "lol sucked in I'm actually a fascist" upon being sworn in and systematically murder millions of a minority population. iYup is right - there now exists many platforms for those in opposition to speak out. Trump is not going to be able to wipe out all opposition and run a dictatorship.

Yes, there are similarities. But it is not at all helpful to just yell TRUMP IS HITLER into the wind. There's nowhere to go from there.
 
I mean, you can't take the comparisons to Hitler too far, there are some to be sure. But it's not like there are brownshirts marching around silencing opponents. The campaign rhetoric has a few similarities but that's as far as you can really take it. A comparison to Hitler in power, much less at the end of WWII, is asinine.


Thank you.
 
But it's not even close. It isn't 19 fucking 39. Trump is not going to go "lol sucked in I'm actually a fascist" upon being sworn in and systematically murder millions of a minority population. iYup is right - there now exists many platforms for those in opposition to speak out. Trump is not going to be able to wipe out all opposition and run a dictatorship.

Yes, there are similarities. But it is not at all helpful to just yell TRUMP IS HITLER into the wind. There's nowhere to go from there.


But I don't think that's what anyone is saying. Like lucky said, this isn't a Hitler = Holocaust comparison. This is about an obvious authoritarian who can undeniably lie over and over to the public and still have a blind devotion based on an anger and hatred to Muslims and Mexicans stealing their jobs.

You can't focus on the aftermath of Hitler, but how he was allowed to get there.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
I think it was Irvine a few pages back who asked what evidence there is that anyone outside of the current Trump enthusiasts will be won over to his side. And that is a salient question that bears repeating.

There is nothing to suggest that this will be a case of a critical mass of sheep flocking to a hate-monger. What allowed for that in Germany was the horrendous economic conditions, conditions that were infinitely worse than anything we have seen in the USA since the Great Depression. If you want to talk about "context," that is the most substantial issue at play here.
 
I think it was Irvine a few pages back who asked what evidence there is that anyone outside of the current Trump enthusiasts will be won over to his side. And that is a salient question that bears repeating.

There is nothing to suggest that this will be a case of a critical mass of sheep flocking to a hate-monger. What allowed for that in Germany was the horrendous economic conditions, conditions that were infinitely worse than anything we have seen in the USA since the Great Depression. If you want to talk about "context," that is the most substantial issue at play here.


We're obviously not talking about his presidency, just his campaign and his followers.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Yeah, I don't think anyone is suggesting that Trump is Hitler exactly. It's just that the prospect of electing someone to be president who has even a little bit in common with Hitler(or anyone else like him) is scary.

I am convinced that so much of his campaign has been a lie. His supposed deep Christianity. His anti-Muslim rhetoric. Even the anti-Mexican stuff. Even the decision to run as a Republican. This guy has been in the public eye for decades. And if you listen to anything he's said politically, publicly, at least until Obama came into office, there's very little, imo, to suggest he was anything other than a socially liberal, fiscally conservative/self-serving blue-dog 'third-way' democrat. I was actually surprised when he started his birther stuff about Obama years ago.

But despite this he's running as Christian, authoritarian Republican, using racism and bigotry to harness the anger already present in the electorate for the purposes of acquiring the most powerful office in the country.

In other words, he's willing to throw away what's left of any ideology or principle he ever had, and tell lie after lie in front of the entire nation, all while promoting worship of himself and violence against those that don't worship him, all in the pursuit of power.

This isn't scary to you guys? This isn't ringing at least some bells for you guys?

I personally think there's a good chance that if Trump were elected, he'd turn his back on his base of angry white men very quickly and become the moderate centrist he's always been, but there's still a chance I could be wrong, and that's not a risk I'm willing to take.
 
Last edited:
The better comparison might be George Wallace.


George Wallace's 1968 campaign manager did a Skype call with my racial politics class a few weeks ago and pretty much said that Trump is the modern day Wallace.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
he's running as Christian, authoritarian Republican, using racism and bigotry to harness the anger already present in the electorate for the purposes of acquiring the most powerful office in the country.

In other words, he's willing to throw away what's left of any ideology or principle he ever had, and tell lie after lie in front of the entire nation, all while promoting worship of himself and violence against those that don't worship him, all in the pursuit of power.

This isn't scary to you guys?

This. It's like I've been saying for a long time now, I don't care whether his entire campaign thus far has been an epic trolling of the GOP or a legit thing. The fact remains that he's been, and still is, riling up some of the uglier aspects of our society and giving them a voice, and legitimizing their beliefs, and that is terrifying, and should've been more than enough reason for him to have been kicked out of this race EONS ago.

Even if he doesn't win the nomination or presidency, it's still deeply troubling, because now that those people feel their views have been taken seriously by someone, who knows what they could do next?
 
Hitler himself couldn't be 1939 Hitler today. However, I think what BVS might be getting at is that if Hitler WERE around today, he might look something like Trump. This seems like a fair point to me.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
In any case, Trump isn't anywhere near as smart as Hitler was. He's been debating against idiots to this point, and Hillary is going to make him look like a fool. In the end, it's going to be a landslide like we haven't seen in a long time.
 
But it's not even close. It isn't 19 fucking 39.

No, it isn't. But before 1939 there was 1933. We're not suggesting that after 8 years of Trump being in power there'll be death camps for Mexicans & muslims. But the way Trump is using racist rhetoric and now threatening with violence (by mobilizing his supporters) should he not be the Republican nominee (and who knows, President at the end of the year) should set off some alarms. It should not be tolerated, IMO.
 
I think it was Irvine a few pages back who asked what evidence there is that anyone outside of the current Trump enthusiasts will be won over to his side. And that is a salient question that bears repeating.
When the alternative is Hillary Clinton, I think you would be surprised. Some here are underestimating how weak of a candidate she is.
 
cruz18n-8-web.jpg
 
When the alternative is Hillary Clinton, I think you would be surprised. Some here are underestimating how weak of a candidate she is.




While I agree that Hillary has considerable weaknesses, I think a lot of the "everybody hates her" thought is more a result of 25 years of disinformation disseminated by the anti-Hillary industry. And it is an industry. She has a pretty good track record when it comes to elections -- a big part of 2 successful presidential campaigns, 2 very successful Senate campaigns, she actually got more votes than Barack Obama in the 2008 primary, and had she been the nominee, it seems that her odds of beating McCain were as good as Obama's. I find charges like "liar" and "seriously unlikeable" more about the conditioning we've all undergone since 1992 than anything concrete.

She has issues as a politician, and she admits as such. But I don't see the evidence that anyone, beyond a core segment of the GOP base, actually *hates* her.

For me, indictment is my biggest worry about her. Followed by other concerns we've all discussed. I think Hillary's weaknesses have been covered in depth in here.
 
Hitler himself couldn't be 1939 Hitler today. However, I think what BVS might be getting at is that if Hitler WERE around today, he might look something like Trump. This seems like a fair point to me.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

Like, with Adolph's own line of steaks, wine, and a travel magazine :lol:
 
I find charges like "liar" and "seriously unlikeable" more about the conditioning we've all undergone since 1992 than anything concrete.

She has issues as a politician, and she admits as such. But I don't see the evidence that anyone, beyond a core segment of the GOP base, actually *hates* her.

I'm not sure about conditioning over here, but Clinton being "seriously unlikeable" is not particularly outlandish. My thoughts on her these days are that I struggle to even tag her with the "lesser evil" label.

And how relevant really is her admission of her own issues if she unapologetically palls around with Kissinger, for example?

She is not a good person no matter how much you would like to spin it.
 
I'm not sure about conditioning over here, but Clinton being "seriously unlikeable" is not particularly outlandish. My thoughts on her these days are that I struggle to even tag her with the "lesser evil" label.

And how relevant really is her admission of her own issues if she unapologetically palls around with Kissinger, for example?

She is not a good person no matter how much you would like to spin it.



That's enough, Vlad.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom