The Bigly 2016 US Presidential Election Thread, Part XV

[BVS]

Originally Posted by gump

I mean, her campaign manager just went on national TV to say that her candidate lying about an indictement is not a big deal because "the damage is done".

In other words: FACTS DON'T MATTER!

They've already heard it; indictment 99% likely, Obama is Muslim, and Trump is well respected in Atlantic City.

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by DaveC

i was 100% with this until the very end, when the author just decided to needlessly stick on a label he doesn't know the actual meaning of.

for the millionth friggin time: DONALD TRUMP IS NOT A FASCIST.

define it for me.

also, i went to go early vote this morning and decided to wait because the line was too long and i had to get to work. all black people, too. tons of 'em. the people who forced Hillary upon us and will burn my fair city down if Trump wins. those people. all voting.

[BEAL]

I'm glad you got out of there with your life.

[Danny Boy]

I voted like a week ago.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

[Hewson]

Originally Posted by BVS

FACTS; indictment 99% likely, Obama is Muslim, and Trump is well respected in Atlantic City.

Reading your post through orange glasses

[Hewson]

Originally Posted by Danny Boy

I voted like a week ago.

I'm waiting till Tuesday.
Just following the old election day tradition.

[LuckyNumber7]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

define it for me.

also, i went to go early vote this morning and decided to wait because the line was too long and i had to get to work. all black people, too. tons of 'em. the people who forced Hillary upon us and will burn my fair city down if Trump wins. those people. all voting.

He's a conman and a populist.

[DaveC]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

define it for me.

donald trump has not once advocated removing the system of democracy and popular representation entirely and ruling with a junta as an effective autocrat.

that's one of the most basic tenets of fascism.

therefore, donald trump is not a fascist.

it's really not complicated.

repeatedly calling him a fascist associates the very real, scary as hell, actively destroy the entire social fabric of the united states to turn the state into a war machine and send anyone who doesnt agree to real live death camps kind of fascism with cartoonish strongman buffoons like trump; this gives openings to actual scary fascists to get a toehold into mainstream politics, cause hey, if trump was a fascist and you almost elected him, and i'm a fascist too but i'm a lot smarter, more calm and charismatic, what's the harm in voting for me?

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by DaveC

donald trump has not once advocated removing the system of democracy and popular representation entirely and ruling with a junta as an effective autocrat.

that's one of the most basic tenets of fascism.

it seems the article is quite aware of this, to read further about the fascistic impulses and agenda he would bring to the white house:

Some — including many who will be voting for Trump — will argue that even if the unstable, sleepless, vindictive tyrant wins on Tuesday, he will be restrained by the system when he seizes power. Let’s game this out for a moment. Over the last year, which forces in the GOP have been able to stand up to him? Even his closest aides have been unable to get him to concentrate before a debate. He set up a policy advisory apparatus and then completely ignored it until it was disbanded. His foreign-policy advisers can scarcely be found. He says he knows more than any general, any diplomat, and anyone with actual experience in government. He has declared his chief adviser to be himself. Even the criminal Richard Nixon was eventually restrained and dispatched by a Republican Establishment that still knew how to run the country and had a loyalty to broader American institutions. Such an Establishment no longer exists.

More to the point, if Trump wins, he will almost certainly bring with him the House, the Senate, and the Supreme Court. A President Clinton will be checked and balanced. A President Trump will be pushing through wide-open doors. Who can temper or stop him then? A Speaker who reveals the slightest inclination to resist him will be swiftly dispatched — or subjected to a very credible threat of being primaried. If the military top brass resist his belief in unpredictable or unethical or unlawful warfare, they will surely be fired. As for the administration of justice, he has openly declared his intent to use the power of the government to put his political opponent in jail. As for a free society, he has threatened to do what he can to put his media opponents into receivership.

What is so striking is that this requires no interpretation, no reading of the tea leaves. Trump has told Americans all of this — again and again — in plain English. His own temperamental instability has been displayed daily and in gory detail. From time to time, you can see his poll ratings plummet as revelations that would permanently sink any other candidate have dented his appeal. And then he resiliently and unstoppably moves back up. His bond with his supporters is absolute, total, and personal. It was months ago that he boasted that he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and his supporters would still be with him. And he was right. This is not a mark of a democratic leader; it is a mark of an authoritarian cult.

[DaveC]

that's cool. still not even close to fascism.

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by DaveC

that's cool. still not even close to fascism.

that's a helpful response, thanks for the discussion.

[Hewson]

Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7

He's a conman .

This.
I firmly believe were he to win, he wouldn't build a wall, he wouldn't ban Muslim immigration, frankly he wouldn't do a damn thing, bad or good.
I think he'd spend 4 yrs living in the White House treating it like a big frat party.
This whole thing is nothing but a big ego stroke for him. Its just gone farther than even he imagined it would.

[LuckyNumber7]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

that's a helpful response, thanks for the discussion.

He gave a helpful response. Just because he's rejecting the tile of a bad name for Trump doesn't mean he's defending him. Fighting misinformation is important, regardless of what side anyone plays for.

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by Hewson

This.
I firmly believe were he to win, he wouldn't build a wall, he wouldn't ban Muslim immigration, frankly he wouldn't do a damn thing, bad or good.
I think he'd spend 4 yrs living in the White House treating it like a big frat party.
This whole thing is nothing but a big ego stroke for him. Its just gone farther than even he imagined it would.

his words and promises tell us otherwise, but i think and hope you're right.

a lot has changed since the primaries.

[LuckyNumber7]

Originally Posted by Hewson

This.

I firmly believe were he to win, he wouldn't build a wall, he wouldn't ban Muslim immigration, frankly he wouldn't do a damn thing, bad or good.

I think he'd spend 4 yrs living in the White House treating it like a big frat party.

This whole thing is nothing but a big ego stroke for him. Its just gone farther than even he imagined it would.

I don't think that'd mean that he wouldn't have an incredibly irresponsible foreign policy with devastating impacts, but I entirely agree. He's full of shit. And I've said it all along -- the most insulting part about Donald Trump is that he thinks everyone is a fucking idiot. Sadly, tons of his supporters are, as they're willingly conned by Trump.

[DaveC]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

that's a helpful response, thanks for the discussion.

in your terms, one would have to actually have power to be a fascist, so perhaps that's the distinction -- Trump is a fascist-in-waiting.

i already gave you one of the most basic tenets of fascism, i'm not sure what else you want here. donald trump doesn't hold that belief so he's not a fascist. there's no debating it. it's like insisting on labeling someone a christian when they simply don't believe in jesus christ.

"donald trump has not once advocated removing the system of democracy and popular representation entirely and ruling with a junta as an effective autocrat."

advocating for change in a system doesn't require being in power and i'm not sure why you would say otherwise. there are lots of real-life fascists who openly promise the destruction of democracy and representative government as the first thing they would do, because they consider the people having a voice in government to be extremely harmful to (their vision of) the state.

trump is not a fascist and it is actually dangerous to insist on labelling him as one.

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7

He gave a helpful response. Just because he's rejecting the tile of a bad name for Trump doesn't mean he's defending him. Fighting misinformation is important, regardless of what side anyone plays for.

fascists don't ever call themselves fascists, and by his definition one would have to actually have power to be a fascist. so if we'd like to refine and define further and call him a neo-fascist, or say that his campaign has fascist impulses or features but he is not himself a fascist for the following reasons.

here's a discussion:

Is Donald Trump a fascist? An expert on fascism weighs in.

history never repeats itself in exactly the same ways, and old definitions need updating. but that doesn't mean that there aren't parallels, patterns, similarities, blueprints, connections, and playbooks that can be drawn between the past and the present.

in fact, the unwillingness to call Trump fascist, or neo-fasacist, or proto-fascist, is the denialism that's the central concern of the article:

The most frustrating aspect of the last 12 months has been the notion that we have been in a normal, if truly ugly, election cycle, with one extremely colorful and unpredictable figure leading the Republican Party in an otherwise conventional political struggle over policy. It has been clear for months now, it seems to me, that this is a delusion. A far more accurate account of the past year is that an openly proto-fascist cult leader has emerged to forge a popular movement that has taken over one of the major political parties, eroded central norms of democratic life, undermined American democratic institutions, and now stands on the brink of seizing power in Washington.

[BVS]

Originally Posted by Hewson

This.
I firmly believe were he to win, he wouldn't build a wall, he wouldn't ban Muslim immigration, frankly he wouldn't do a damn thing, bad or good.
I think he'd spend 4 yrs living in the White House treating it like a big frat party.
This whole thing is nothing but a big ego stroke for him. Its just gone farther than even he imagined it would.

I don't think he'd build a wall, if it were feasible or would work we'd have one already. I don't think he'd do any of the things that got him elected. But I do see him throwing his power around as soon as someone bruised his ego, be it someone in the media or a foreign leader; and that's what scares me the most.

[DaveC]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

no, not really helpful.

fascists don't ever call themselves fascists

fascists proudly call themselves fascists all the time.

and by his definition one would have to actually have power to be a fascist.

still no idea where this comes from because i didn't say that at all.

so if we'd like to refine and define further and call him a neo-fascist, or say that his campaign has fascist impulses or features but he is not himself a fascist for the following reasons, that would be fine and helpful and a good discussion.

you're seriously trying to shoehorn this label onto him and the only reason i can think of is hyperbole. as i've said, it's dangerous because it diminishes real-life every-citizen-a-slave-to-the-state fascism as just being equivalent
to the unfocused blathering shit that trump calls words. fascists in general aren't stupid and will use a political opening if they are provided one.

it's no different than insisting on calling bernie sanders a communist because he's farther left than most american politicians. he's a far-leftist (for america, anyways) for sure, but obviously not even close to an actual communist. you can't just slap the most extreme label you can think of on these people and call it a day.

but it's not as much fun as being dismissive.

someone pointing out that you're wrong doesn't equate to dismissiveness.

[Irvine511]

i refined my earlier post based off your later post which didn't appear until after i posted.

i find the article much more persuasive than i find your posts.