Trump Is Dangerous VS Republicans Are Dangerous

[First]

Trump is pro-veteran so I don't see why not, he also has backing from 200+ generals. Really the only disparaging thing he's said is he knows more than generals but he backed down from that to stating military plans in advance is stupid. He argued that hillary/obama doing that is what demoralizes our troops.

Is it possible that Trump only used them to further his cause (i.e. play the media like a record)? If there is even a possibility, then your argument loses credibility.

lol.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) in full effect

 

[First]

His propensity to believe conspiracy theories would be mine to add.

Yeah, this for sure. If you're a conspiracy theorist, much like if you're a white nationalist, that's a pretty clear indication you're just not that well informed and/or most likely don't make very many good decisions in life.

 

[poofyhairguy]

Blackjack200, I appreciate the blow by blow answer and I see where you are coming from. Basically you are saying even if Trump's policies (like deportation or conservative justices) are normal for GOP, his actions and statements so far have not been. That makes sense to me and I appreciate you taking the time to get the point across.

And to be clear I am not trying to normalize Trump, I have just seen so much hyperbole about every Republican administration and how terrible they were the differences in regard to Trump seemed like irrelevant nuance to me.

Thanks again.

 

[trenchfoot]

Trump is pro-veteran so I don't see why not, he also has backing from 200+ generals. Really the only disparaging thing he's said is he knows more than generals but he backed down from that to stating military plans in advance is stupid. He argued that hillary/obama doing that is what demoralizes our troops.

I tend to separate the flag rank folks into two main categories: The guys who came up from the field of battle and the guys who came up from "other than". It's my intuition that the guys who prefer to command combat troops are less inclined to dabble in politics. As a result, I think out of those 200 guys with stars and bars attached to their collars and epaulets who support Trump, most of them are associated with the military industrial complex where politics become a priority, or for reasons other than whether or not Trump is a capable CIC that can lead the nation into war and come out if it with a bent but not broken tallywhacker.

It's not to say that those particular flag rank fellas who are not combat oriented are of less stature. I'm merely mentioning this in the sense that their futures depend on possessing political/business savvy more so than having success in theater whereas the guys leading 11 Bravo's stake their claim to fame and advancement.

You know about the phrase "a battle plan never survives the first encounter" I'm sure, but a plan with contingencies are SOP. Trump may have a valid point about letting the enemy know in advance what our plans are, but there may have been valid reasons for doing just that. In the case that Trump was referring to, I may be wrong, but I think the reason it was let known that an offensive was being mounted was to warn the non-combatants so as to keep their casualties as low as possible.

Of course, the old adage that "All warfare is based on deception" also comes into play, as well as a myriad of other concerns that affect the way we let the enemy know of our intentions.

Eh, just my penny's worth anyway.

 

[Jhhnn]

Is it possible that Trump only used them to further his cause (i.e. play the media like a record)? If there is even a possibility, then your argument loses credibility.

The only thing Trump believes in is the power of bullshit. Like he said, he loves the uneducated.

 

[SP33Demon]

Critical? Yes. Not hostile. They didn't do stuff like this:
http://fortune.com/2016/11/03/donald-trump-katy-tur/

Look how he attacked Megyn Kelly. Who else has done that?



Or how about being a libel bully?
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/25/u...p-lawsuits-american-bar-association.html?_r=0

Has any other Republican regularly sued people for defamation?



In what way? He told Clinton he would throw her in jail.



It is special because it's a hallmark of fascist and authoritarian leaders. Speaking in platitudes is not the same thing as saying that you'll ban Muslims, and then when someone asks you tough questions about it, simply denying you ever said it.

Did Obama deny saying the "If you like it you can keep it" bit? No. He defended it, tried to justify it. I believe he eventually apologized for it, but I'm not sure. Point is, what we see from Trump is completely different.



Willie Horton was not a racial scapegoat. The incident was used to paint Dukakis as weak on crime, and play on racist attitudes, but the message of that commercial was not "black people are why you don't have jobs".



Yeah, that was a bright shining lie. And it became a huge scandal, and Reagan had to come out and admit that his statements were false.



That got him impeached? What point are you arguing? Because my point wasn't 'no one else ever lied' it was that Trump flatly denies things even after they have been brought into evidence, and holds multiple positions simultaneously.



So if fascism ever were to come to the United States, what exactly do you think it would look like? There are troubling parallels between the US over the last couple of years, and rise of fascism in Europe in the '20s and '30s. I think it would be terribly foolish to ignore them.





On his last day of the GOP campaign -- the Indiana primary in early May -- Cruz let loose against Trump, calling the businessman a "serial philanderer," "utterly amoral," and "a narcissist at a level I don't think this country's ever seen.



In the heat of the Republican presidential primary, Marco Rubio called Donald Trump a “con man.” And he doesn’t take it back.

“I’ve stood by everything I ever said in my campaign,” Rubio told the Miami Herald editorial board Monday.

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/pol...arco-rubio/article95752532.html#storylink=cpy
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/election/article62755997.html



Mitt Romney suggested Friday that Donald Trump's election could legitimize racism and misogyny, ushering in a change in the moral fabric of American society.
The 2012 Republican nominee, who has openly opposed Trump's candidacy, went further than he has before in outlining to CNN's Wolf Blitzer how the country's character would suffer in a Trump White House. Trump's rhetoric has caused even some other Republicans to label him a racist, and Romney said he would not be able to paper over his incendiary remarks.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/10/politics/mitt-romney-donald-trump-racism/



After video surfaced last month of Trump speaking of women in lewd and sexually aggressive terms, Kasich confirmed the New York businessman had lost his vote.

"Donald Trump is a man I cannot and should not support," Kasich said in an Oct. 8 statement. "The actions of the last day are disgusting, but that's not why I reached this decision, it has been an accumulation of his words and actions that many have been warning about. I will not vote for a nominee who has behaved in a manner that reflects so poorly on our country. Our country deserves better."
http://www.cleveland.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/10/john_kasich_follows_through_on.html



Stop trying to normalize this shit. It is not normal. Why did you completely mischaracterize the reasons that Cruz, Rubio, Romney, and Kasich broke with or criticized Trump?

And all of them got scalped along with your candidate. Trump has the charisma to say whatever the f he wants, even if it doesn't jive with your libtard POV and people respect that. He's like a walking case of Tourettes. He is like Bill Clinton aka Slick Willie but to the nth degree because he had more stones to call out the establishment and media, something nobody had done on that level before. Bill hid it well behind closed doors so nobody cared but Trump will say it to your face which is why nobody cared because the media would run with it and do exactly what he said they'd do. Rinse Repeat.

Maybe the media will learn their lesson for 2020 but ratings = $$$$$. And greed is a helluva drug.

 

[SP33Demon]

The only thing Trump believes in is the power of bullshit. Like he said, he loves the uneducated.

Then why did half of white males with a college degree vote for him?

 

[zinfamous]

We're going to finally find out what really happened to JFK now.

UH, we already know.



Ted Cruz's dad, from the Grassy Knoll.

 

[Blackjack200]

Blackjack200, I appreciate the blow by blow answer and I see where you are coming from. Basically you are saying even if Trump's policies (like deportation or conservative justices) are normal for GOP, his actions and statements so far have not been. That makes sense to me and I appreciate you taking the time to get the point across.

And to be clear I am not trying to normalize Trump, I have just seen so much hyperbole about every Republican administration and how terrible they were the differences in regard to Trump seemed like irrelevant nuance to me.

Thanks again.

Sure. I sincerely believe we are at a dangerous moment for our democracy. It's possible that four or even eight years could go by and Trump ends up like GWB or how any of the other 16 would have been. I really hope that happens. One of the major ways something like this can get completely out of control is if people persuade themselves that it's a normal phase and will pass. One thing that I've read over and over again is just how quickly it can spiral out of control.

And to be clear, I don't think it's out of control right now. I believe that our courts can still protect us. Even with a 5-4 majority, for all my disagreements with Alito and Roberts, I believe they would protect the republic. That alone might act as a deterrent. I would love nothing more than for 2020 to roll around and everyone is like "Remember when you thought Trump was dangerous? Lol!"

Thanks.

 

[Jhhnn]

Actually I think every point can be tied to modern Republicans before Trump came around. If you don't mind I will take it one at a time:



Every modern Republican is hostile to what they consider the "Liberal Media." Cruz blamed them during the campaign for Trump's rise.



Like not respecting protests? That is very common to many Republicans. Or are you talking not respecting Muslims, because there are plenty of quotes from Republicans pre-Trump after 9/11 that I could dig up.

Heck back during the Bush era the big complaint was how Republicans didn't respect the 5th amendment (like a right to a trial). Trump almost seems like an upgrade on that point.



I don't know why that is special. Republicans have spoken in platitudes for years, and on transparency we wouldn't even know about all the many spying programs the Feds have done without whistleblowers like Snowden.



HW Bush and Willie Horton paved that path decades ago. Or good ole Dick Cheney!

"Asked when the Guantanamo Bay prison would be shut down, Cheney said, "I think that that would come with the end of the war on terror." "



So kinda like the king of all Republicans Ronald Reagan?

“In spite of the wildly speculative and false stories of arms for hostages and alleged ransom payments, we did not, repeat, did not, trade weapons or anything else for hostages. Nor will we.” -Ronnie lying about Iran Contra

“There is no evidence to confirm that [US-supported El Salvador] government forces systematically massacred civilians in the [El Mozote] operations zone.” - Thomas Enders, Ronnie's assistant secretary of state

And lets not forget Nixon's lies.



I am not trying to minimize or needless equivocate. I am trying to separate the rampant hyperbole from the reality of the situation. To me Trump seems like any other modern Republican except he has a bigger mouth and he refuses to stay within Overton's window (which is far removed from what it was even ten years ago).



I think they broke ranks because:

1. He wasn't Religious enough or outspoken about small government (the Cruz Complaint)

2. He was screwing up the post-2012 plan of how the Republicans would reinvent themselves to latinos (the Rubio complaint)

3. He was not part of the party system and he seemed to want to divide the party (the Mitt complaint)

4. He did not follow the party line on NATO and defense hawkishness (the Kasich complaint)

I honestly don't think that Republicans cared that he was vulgar, or saw him as a unique threat. They didn't care about a wall, as many of them pushed deportation. They didn't care about Muslims, as many loved backed waterboarding Muslims when they could. They cared that they couldn't control him and he didn't check the boxes post-Reagan Republicans were supposed to check.

I think you're mostly right. Trump's pitch is the usual Repub pitch minus the veneer of civility. None of it is new. What they mostly transmitted in coded messages Trump broadcasts in plain English. And their base gobbled it up.

They only spoke against Trump because they thought he was too blatant, offended too many sensibilities, that it wouldn't win in the general election.

He weaponized insincerity better than they did. This election is the triumph of lies.

 

[MrSquished]

Trump is special but I would have also placed a Cruz, Carson or Huckabee presidency right up there with the orange one. As in we are fucked.

 

[poofyhairguy]

Sure. I sincerely believe we are at a dangerous moment for our democracy. It's possible that four or even eight years could go by and Trump ends up like GWB or how any of the other 16 would have been. I really hope that happens. One of the major ways something like this can get completely out of control is if people persuade themselves that it's a normal phase and will pass. One thing that I've read over and over again is just how quickly it can spiral out of control.

Fair enough. I don't want it to seem like I was trying to tell people how to feel. I can readily admit Trump is the biggest political wildcard the US has seen in 150 years, and I can understand how his campaign of negativity (make America great again implies it isn't great now) could worry anyone who values political stability or the social benefit of the Overton window.

I personally think the comparisons to 1930's Fascist Europe are completely off base (we aren't anywhere near that level of poverty or desperation nationally), and to answer your question I think 21st century Fascism wouldn't be in your face like that. I think the word fascism is better used to describe Isis than Donald Trump, with stated goals of global domination and a lack of political freedom.

You have to understand that after years of seeing EVER major Republican in my lifetime get compared to Nazis it does feel like the boy who cried Wolf. I remember when W was at the end of his second term some on the left seemed truly worried he wouldn't hand over power, which leads me to conclude that many on the left are too quick to throw around the F word (fascist). I mean constant vigilance against that sort of thing isn't bad in theory, but when the F word or Nazis is used over and over it feels like a mental shortcut for those with only a History Channel derived understanding of our past. I believe in Godwin's Law more than social constructs so maybe that is why it bugs me.

Also if I am being completely honest the authoritarian digs at Trump feel hollow to me since so many of the left are downright militant about pushing a PC perspective (or their own personal hot button issue like BLM or transgender rights). The rage against outsiders in poor uneducated whites is easy for everyone to see, but to me it doesn't feel any different than the rage I see on the left from progressives who feel that socially and economically this country isn't moving leftward quick enough. I know from the left's perspective one is justified rage and one is not, but to me that is the same fallacy as judging historical figures through modern eyes. Social context really matters.

Personally I never took Trump seriously. I always saw it as a Machiavellian stage act, as if he went in day one and said "I am going to get elected the same way I got my reality show ratings- controversy." I think he is no more of a dangerous idiot than W was, and I feel that now he is elected he has run out of populist leverage to use against the Republican establishment and he will have to play ball (ala a second term Bill Clinton) to get anything done. But I could be dangerously wrong about him, I admit that.

Thanks again for the intellectual honesty.

 

[Grooveriding]

With the mass surveillance infrastructure the US has built, and Obama did nowhere near enough to dismantle, I would also be very worried about Trump having that at his disposal. Read every email, hear every call, track every purchase, know every movement etc. etc. of those on whatever crazy list he has in his mind of those who did not pay him sufficient homage ?

I also remember him claiming if he were president he and Putin would get along like great pals and Putin would send Snowden back to the US easy peasy. He also mentioned at one point Snowden deserved to be executed for his disclosures.

Four years from now, unless it can be buried and hidden, there will be a four year laundry list of human rights violations, international relations catastrophes, domestic economic fallout attributable to this dimwit. But he'll find a way to convince his zombies is everyone else's fault, he'll probably have them blaming whoever it is he ends up running against.

 

[Jhhnn]

Personally I never took Trump seriously. I always saw it as a Machiavellian stage act, as if he went in day one and said "I am going to get elected the same way I got my reality show ratings- controversy." I think he is no more of a dangerous idiot than W was, and I feel that now he is elected he has run out of populist leverage to use against the Republican establishment and he will have to play ball (ala a second term Bill Clinton) to get anything done. But I could be dangerously wrong about him, I admit that.

Thanks again for the intellectual honesty.

I don't think you're quite being honest with yourself. Trump has brought the Alt-right into the mainstream and has now ensconced one of their most effective propagandists in the West Wing. The problem with them is that they don't believe in the institutions of govt or Democracy at all. Quite the contrary.

 

[dawp]

and then there is this:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/15/polit...cts-trump-impeachment-erin-burnett/index.html

i think it is a possibility.

 

[Jhhnn]

and then there is this:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/15/polit...cts-trump-impeachment-erin-burnett/index.html

i think it is a possibility.

He'd have to be convicted of a State felony, one where he couldn't pardon himself.

If he were impeached, we'd just end up with Pence which might actually be worse.

 

[SP33Demon]

and then there is this:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/15/polit...cts-trump-impeachment-erin-burnett/index.html

i think it is a possibility.

CNN, seriously? lol

 

[poofyhairguy]

I don't think you're quite being honest with yourself. Trump has brought the Alt-right into the mainstream and has now ensconced one of their most effective propagandists in the West Wing. The problem with them is that they don't believe in the institutions of govt or Democracy at all. Quite the contrary.

Yeah I do fear the Alt-right. I mean the racist frog grows on you but their opinions are too often trying to hard to not be mainstream.

 

[Jhhnn]

Yeah I do fear the Alt-right. I mean the racist frog grows on you but their opinions are too often trying to hard to not be mainstream.

Bannon will do his best to shift the Overton window, make no mistake about it. He & those like him have already moved it. He is perhaps an even greater deceiver than Trump himself.

 

[Bird222]

My fear which is already happening is that he is making it ok to be bigoted and attack people.

 

[poofyhairguy]

My fear which is already happening is that he is making it ok to be bigoted and attack people.

I grant you that is unique to Trump.

 

[Zorba]

Others have already covered most of my concerns, but I'll give a couple more.
1) He stated many times he would only respect the election results if he won, otherwise it was rigged. If he refused to accept a defeat this election, who really cares. But if he refused to accept defeat in 2020, we are basically at the point of hoping for a military coup, or at least having the military not protect him, to get him out.
2) He doesn't seem like the type of guy that will care too much about checks and balances, and short of convicting him on impeachment charges there isn't a whole lot congress or the courts can do to force his hand.

Basically it goes back to temperament. I never had these fears with Obama, W or Clinton.

Blackjack200, I appreciate the blow by blow answer and I see where you are coming from. Basically you are saying even if Trump's policies (like deportation or conservative justices) are normal for GOP, his actions and statements so far have not been. That makes sense to me and I appreciate you taking the time to get the point across.

And to be clear I am not trying to normalize Trump, I have just seen so much hyperbole about every Republican administration and how terrible they were the differences in regard to Trump seemed like irrelevant nuance to me.

Thanks again.

I'll say one big difference too between Trump and say W is that congress is much more extreme today than they were during Bush's term. The tea party movement has thrown out most of the moderates in the house and many in the Senate. We now have a guy that openly admits to wanting to eliminate Medicare as speaker of the house and he is looked at as one of the level headed ones.

 

[pcgeek11]

Lions and Tigers and Bears, Oh My!

 

[buckshot24]

Others have already covered most of my concerns, but I'll give a couple more.
1) He stated many times he would only respect the election results if he won, otherwise it was rigged. If he refused to accept a defeat this election, who really cares. But if he refused to accept defeat in 2020, we are basically at the point of hoping for a military coup, or at least having the military not protect him, to get him out.
2) He doesn't seem like the type of guy that will care too much about checks and balances, and short of convicting him on impeachment charges there isn't a whole lot congress or the courts can do to force his hand.

Basically it goes back to temperament. I never had these fears with Obama, W or Clinton.



I'll say one big difference too between Trump and say W is that congress is much more extreme today than they were during Bush's term. The tea party movement has thrown out most of the moderates in the house and many in the Senate. We now have a guy that openly admits to wanting to eliminate Medicare as speaker of the house and he is looked at as one of the level headed ones.

He said he would accept a clear result, even if he lost.