agreed, and noted. just because donald uses fascistic rhetoric doesn't necessarily make him a fascist. mike godwin (of godwin's law fame) posted a link to this article as an example of a "non-godwin" analysis of the similarities.

Nice article... and reminds me of the election in France on Sunday.

ha. that was a VERY qualified assertion i made. i don't even know when my first post here was. i'm pretty sure it was over a decade ago; i followed a link for one of CW's contests. if you can believe it, FTP (of which we're now posting on #434) didn't even exist yet!

You mean: Draft Congress! :)

http://www.chrisweigant.com/2007/09/03/anti-war-slogan-contest-winners/#comments

that's why science is so important. the ability to generate hypotheses and test them empirically is what allows us to tell the difference between what sounds "truthy" and what's factually true. converging lines of evidence allow us to distinguish the popular from the accurate.

I know, right? We learn from experience and "grow from there," and just as those who fail to learn from history are doomed:

Ignore science at your peril... our peril.

And when did either of us backpedal as was suggested?

we both clarified what we initially meant. from the perspective of someone who has convinced himself that we initially meant something different, it would seem like backpedaling. since we didn't, it wasn't.

Those who know enough of history should quite rightly agree with astute observations such as the one made in your post and those Mr. Gerson made in his review. The rhetoric is strikingly similar, and there's no shame whatsoever in recognizing what's obvious, and comparing rhetoric isn't remotely suggesting anything further, which I would not hesitate to do if the need arises. Believe me.

agreed, and noted. just because donald uses fascistic rhetoric doesn't necessarily make him a fascist. mike godwin (of godwin's law fame) posted a link to this article as an example of a "non-godwin" analysis of the similarities:

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/09/opinions/bergen-is-trump-fascist/index.html

And JL ^^^^^ CLICK, CLICK ^^^^^ not kidding here, you simply must check out the post underneath my post... my first day here... and discover who actually posted regarding Trump and a "fascist dictator."

ha. that was a VERY qualified assertion i made. i don't even know when my first post here was. i'm pretty sure it was over a decade ago; i followed a link for one of CW's contests. if you can believe it, FTP (of which we're now posting on #434) didn't even exist yet!

If only people would pay attention to details... really see things as they are... pay attention to what's staring them right in their faces... they'd see what's actually there versus what they want to see.

that's why science is so important. the ability to generate hypotheses and test them empirically is what allows us to tell the difference between what sounds "truthy" and what's factually true. converging lines of evidence allow us to distinguish the popular from the accurate.

JL

ha! take a look at [157]. what michale doesn't realize is that we ARE the cooler heads :D

We're all just calling it like we see it, right? When have any of us ever done anything but call it like we see it!?! And when did either of us backpedal as was suggested?

And the exact same day we were posting about all that similarity in rhetoric, the jerk in question gave a speech to a crowd in Pennsylvania. As CW highlights in his "Three-Dot Tuesday" article, Michael Gerson reviews that speech by Trump at 100 days by stating:

Most of all, Trump used his bully pulpit quite literally, devoting about half his speech to the dehumanization of migrants and refugees as criminals, infiltrators and terrorists. Trump gained a kind of perverse energy from the rolling waves of hatred, culminating in the reading of racist song lyrics comparing his targets to vermin.

Half the speech!?! That very astute observation by Mr. Gerson -- "R" to those who obsess about Party -- made the little hairs on the back of my neck stand up because as anyone who knows history is acutely aware, the Minister of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda and "He Who Must Not Be Named" employed similar rhetoric to portray the "others" as subhuman... Untermenschen.

So no backpedal here. Those who know enough of history should quite rightly agree with astute observations such as the one made in your post and those Mr. Gerson made in his review. The rhetoric is strikingly similar, and there's no shame whatsoever in recognizing what's obvious, and comparing rhetoric isn't remotely suggesting anything further, which I would not hesitate to do if the need arises. Believe me.

My first post on these boards was to suggest the name "Benedict Donald" for Trump because that's how I've always seen Trump... always... as an opportunist like "Been a Dick"... a turncoat who'd sell out his country for his own interests. That was a year ago, and just look how history is playing out now.

http://www.chrisweigant.com/2016/05/13/ftp391/#comment-75291

And JL ^^^^^ CLICK, CLICK ^^^^^ not kidding here, you simply must check out the post underneath my post... my first day here... and discover who actually posted regarding Trump and a "fascist dictator."

Read that and weep... from laughter... all part of a conspiracy, no doubt. ;)

If only people would pay attention to details... really see things as they are... pay attention to what's staring them right in their faces... they'd see what's actually there versus what they want to see. Because those who either can't or won't pay attention to history are doomed to be conned and appear uneducated... oh, I meant to say... doomed to repeat it. :)

ha! take a look at [157]. what michale doesn't realize is that we ARE the cooler heads :D

we ARE the weirdos, mister.
~the craft

I keep coming back, hoping someone... ANYONE.... will say something to mitigate the utter perversity and disgusting-ness of the hysterical claims here..

Since the "hysterical claims" were the handiwork of the guy who stares back at you from any mirror, why not take it up with him? He's the only one here hijacking posts and twisting their meanings in an emotional and hysterical fashion while putting words into people's mouths that they didn't say... a real case of projection of his own modus operandi onto other posters, in my opinion.

Without the Holocaust, there is one of a multitude of dictators you could compare President Trump to..

Like Mussolini... been there, done that... see above. Too bad the "Republican" messiah wasn't reading Mussolini's speeches or those of one of those other "multitude of dictators." No one can change history; it is what it is. We didn't write history, Michale, nor did any of us write Hitler's speeches and put them in a book nor make Trump read them and repeat strikingly similar rhetoric. Those ships have sailed. Posters commenting on similarities in people's speeches has turned into a full blown meltdown by another poster who has admitted he's not a "history buff" and insists that one could only wish to compare speeches in order to elicit the hysterical response he's created all by his lonesome because the only thing he knows that person for is one thing. Sounds like a case of being uneducated. It's so much easier to jump to conclusions when one's knowledge of the subject he's hysterically whining about is limited to "one thing." Realizing that not everyone shares those limitations he admits he has would be a good first step for him. As has been stated on these boards many times, please stop projecting fantasy onto others' reality... everything is not about Michale.

But ya'all choose Hitler, SOLELY and COMPLETELY because of the linkage to the Holocaust..

This is bordering on insanity now... so typical of the right-wing variety derangement one sees everywhere. So JL commented to another poster and mentioned Hitler's speeches whereupon the poster commented back that JL made a very good point about the specifically similar rhetoric contained in the speeches. That's it... nothing more... anything beyond that is full-blown emotional BS and hysterics on another's part. This right-wing "must be a conspiracy" is laughable, ridiculous, and reeking in its ignorance. Trump does love the uneducated; is there any wonder why he loves them so?

And by choosing such linkage, you and Kick denigrate and disrespect each of those 6 millions jews that were brutally slaughtered by Hitler.. You and Kick make their brutal murders nothing but a throw away Party talking point, totally and completely divorced from reality......

I'm going to break the "Melizabeth Killer" rules here to let you know how totally full of excrement you are by saying such a thing when you have no idea whatsoever what you're talking about. I chose nothing; I simply responded to an excellent point on the part of a poster, and you go ballistic and prattle on and on about a nonexistent conspiracy nor did anyone else ever enter my mind when I was responding to JL... everything on the board is not about you.

Not that it's anyone's business, but my SO's grandmother actually lived through the Holocaust (complete with arm tattoo). Her young husband didn't get a tattoo because he was ill and sent directly to the gas chamber; she never saw him again. Their two young boys... twins... were separated from them and sent somewhere else; she never saw them again either and has no idea where they were taken. She was a sad woman, rest her soul, but a strong one nevertheless. She was fascinating too and would talk to anyone about it. She said the question she got asked the most was why she didn't get that tattoo removed; she said that doing so would leave a scar and that she had enough of those and didn't need any more. She also said she didn't want to ever forget about it and would do whatever it took so the world would never stop talking about it and never forget. I was chosen to write down her story because I was the only one who could type as fast as she talked. I'm a badass fast typist, but nowadays I primarily utilize the technology that's putting so many Americans out of their jobs.

If I had told you 5 years ago that you would fully believe and endorse the idea that a freely, fairly and legally elected POTUS was another Hitler, you would have called me totally whacked...

Don't bother denying it, because we both know it's true..

Pardon me for interrupting your rant, but aren't you the one who insisted that Hitler was only known for one thing? Your knowledge is admittedly lacking, and I'd say the problem here is with your ignorance and not JL's very astute and completely factual observation about the political rhetoric of the two jerks in question.

And please.. Spare me the utter and total BULLSHIT that you weren't saying that President Trump was another Hitler. That you were simply saying that President Trump shares some of the same characteristics of Hitler..

You didn't make that distinction when you first made the comparison..

And... BAM... just like that, your reading comprehension problem presents itself... AGAIN. JL simply compared the political rhetoric, and he was dead on correct. I conceded the point and commented about the SPEECHES and their similarities AND NOTHING MORE. I am not known for my short posts because I have technology and am a badass fast typist. If I had wanted to expand the comparison of the two jerks beyond their rhetoric, I had ample means to do so. No, that expansion was all your handiwork. In your admitted ignorance of the subject matter, you completely read something into it that wasn't there and went emotional and hysterical and hijacked our posts.

It was only when it was pointed out how disgusting and perverse the comparison was, did you and Kick back-pedal like crazy...

I didn't backpedal. In fact, I copied the points I made in my response to JL and enumerated them and defended them. Trump and Hitler's speeches have similar rhetoric... the inconvenient truth. I'll say it a thousand times because it's true. Neither did I see JL backpedal. You're hysterical as well as delusional if you think anyone backpedaled, and your dearth of knowledge of history... like your reading comprehension problem... is stunning in its limitations.

Like I said, I had hoped some of the more rational ones would chime in and concede that the comparison was ridiculous and perverse...

Anything else you read into it is something you're going to have to reconcile with yourself, and anyone with two brain cells to rub together can see the similarities in the two jerks' political rhetoric.

Whether Trump means it or not is kind of irrelevant because he's saying the things to people who are hurting, and that's why every beaten down nameless forgotten working stiff who used to be part of what was called the middle class loves Trump. He is the human Molotov cocktail that they've been waiting for. -- Michael Moore

But ya'all choose Hitler, SOLELY and COMPLETELY because of the linkage to the Holocaust..

no, hitler was selected in [46] because the themes lifted from hitler's book are evidence that donald trump can and does read. no other direct evidence that donald is literate and reads books came to mind.

Without the Holocaust, there is one of a multitude of dictators you could compare President Trump to..Pol Pot... Emperor Tito... Josef Stalin.... Idi Amin....

none of whom wrote a book that donald owned and read. this point has been made and clarified well prior to this thread.

But ya'all choose Hitler, SOLELY and COMPLETELY because of the linkage to the Holocaust..
And by choosing such linkage, you and Kick denigrate and disrespect each of those 6 millions jews that were brutally slaughtered by Hitler.. You and Kick make their brutal murders nothing but a throw away Party talking point, totally and completely divorced from reality......

being an individual whose family and wife's family were in fact the victims of that particular genocide, it's nobody else's place to say such things about my motivations, especially someone who has no such personal connection himself.

Frankly, if I had done something so despicable, I would be deeply ashamed...

one would hope so, since there's ample evidence that is in fact the case. this started as a conversation about literacy. yes, donald's rhetoric happens to share some similarities with the content of a book he read. yes, that fact is disturbing, given the identity of the author. however, it's a gigantic leap to infer that anyone was by extension calling donald a genocidal murderer. want to know who turned it into THAT conversation, look in a mirror.

JL

Sadly, it hasn't happened..

that is not the case in general, and it is certainly not the case now specifically.

Bullshit..

Without the Holocaust, there is one of a multitude of dictators you could compare President Trump to..

Pol Pot... Emperor Tito... Josef Stalin.... Idi Amin....

But ya'all choose Hitler, SOLELY and COMPLETELY because of the linkage to the Holocaust..

And by choosing such linkage, you and Kick denigrate and disrespect each of those 6 millions jews that were brutally slaughtered by Hitler.. You and Kick make their brutal murders nothing but a throw away Party talking point, totally and completely divorced from reality......

Frankly, if I had done something so despicable, I would be deeply ashamed...

But that's speaking from a perspective of someone who is not enslaved by Party ideology and dogma...

If I had told you 5 years ago that you would fully believe and endorse the idea that a freely, fairly and legally elected POTUS was another Hitler, you would have called me totally whacked...

Don't bother denying it, because we both know it's true..

And please.. Spare me the utter and total BULLSHIT that you weren't saying that President Trump was another Hitler. That you were simply saying that President Trump shares some of the same characteristics of Hitler..

You didn't make that distinction when you first made the comparison..

It was only when it was pointed out how disgusting and perverse the comparison was, did you and Kick back-pedal like crazy...

Like I said, I had hoped some of the more rational ones would chime in and concede that the comparison was ridiculous and perverse...

But, alas, those cooler heads are remaining silent, which forces me to consider the possibility that there ARE no more rational and cooler heads here.. That the entire community has acquired a scorching case of PTDS...

I'll be checking in from time to time to see if cooler heads and more rational non-hysterical intellect will make it's presence known..

I don't hold out much hope....

But it's the ONLY characteristic that makes Hitler Hitler.. And it's the ONLY characteristic that makes Hitler so widely known..

So... he was being factual when he said he wasn't a "history buff" because otherwise he wouldn't remotely say something like what was quoted above.

Without the systematic genocide, Hitler would be just a run o the mill world leader who lead his country as "the most efficient state Earth had ever known.....

So really NOT a history buff and probably not very well educated to boot to say something like that!

Right off the top of my head... so not necessarily in chronological order:

Mein Kampf
The Nuremberg Laws
The Summer Olympics in Berlin -- Jesse Owens
Nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize (late 1930s)
Time Magazine's Man of the Year (late 1930s)
The Bismarck
The Hindenburg
The Volkswagen -- designed by Porsche

The Evian Conference convened in France by FDR in mid 1938. Regarding the conference, Hitler announced he would send the refugees out on luxury liners if other countries would take them in -- only 2 countries increased their quotas, the Dominican Republic and {?} can't remember the other... so the concentration camps began in late 1939.

Seriously, look up the Evian Conference, I would guess that most people have no idea that Hitler allowed the Jews to leave and immigrate to other countries, and about 1/4 of them did so... but countries had quotas and wouldn't increase them and allow the refugees entry. In mid 1939 before the concentration camps began, a luxury liner with around 1,000 refugees sailed to Cuba and spent around a week trying to gain entry and were denied. They then sailed to the coast of Florida (heard of that, right?) and directly appealed to FDR for entry but were again denied. They finally gained entry in Europe... France, Belgium, the UK... because {I can't remember the name} a Jewish organization paid half a million dollars for someone to take them in. Of course, as Hitler invaded those nations later, many of them were killed where they had fled... because Cuba nor the United States would take them in.

So... we're comparing the speeches okay... just the darn speeches. Some people are history buffs and/or studied history in the military or in college... history minors/majors... and that's all we're talking about... the similarity of the speeches of two people in history... nothing more.

Crack a book, learn something historical, and then get over it.

FDR is more like Hitler than President Trump is.. Yet *NO ONE* here has compared FDR to Hitler..

Why?? Because Party slavery forbids it...

For the thousandth time on this blog, michale has again referred to posters as slaves. Yet, maybe not thousands but at least hundreds of times have people on this board been referred to as slaves by him. Being called a slave over and over when some of us don't even belong to a party, and the guy he accuses us of "hating" because of his Party spent the majority of his pathetic life as a Democrat and praising Democrats, HRC included.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/21/politics/donald-trump-election-democrat/

Who cares what Party he's latched onto for political expediency this year? Anybody? The SOB wouldn't be any less of an SOB if he won the presidency as a Democrat. How many times must this be said for it to sink in? The fact is, Trump could never win as a Democrat, and that's no doubt why he changed both his Party and his rhetoric from the globalist he is... believe him... to the nationalist "voice of the people" socialist and changed his beliefs on a darned dime. Nice of him to admit he's a globalist the other day {like... Duh!}. Next thing you know, the SOB will be admitting he's a Democrat.

Hey, A01... Punk and gang... now there's a way to get a third party started. Let Trump admit he's a Democrat who adopted the rhetoric he needed to get elected by the gullible masses using tailored rhetoric to appeal to their "nationalism" and watch how fast people flee the Democratic Party so as not to be associated with him. .. a Trump by any other Party name would have no less of a foul stench.

Facts can be so inconvenient.

It would like someone saying that Obama is a child-raping pedophile because he has made statements similar to what the prophet Muhammed has made.. Or that Bernie Sanders is a child-raping pedophile because he has made statements similar to what Mao Zedong has made....

Why anyone discussing Mao would choose to discuss pedophilia versus the 78 million people Mao killed is a mystery. Pedophilia versus 78 million deaths when the age of consent in China today is 14 and not sure what it was in Mao's day, but he was born in the late 1800s and died in 1976, surely the laws were different in there somewhere so "pedophilia" is relative. Not making excuses for Mao by any stretch, but international law is complicated.

Could you HONESTLY see yourself having a rational conversation with someone who made such ludicrous and perverse comparisons???

Of course you couldn't...

"Ludicrous and perverse comparisons"? Rational conversation? Like being called a "slave" when you've said many, many times that you belong to no Party? For some reason, bet JL can see that happening because he along with virtually every poster on this board has been referred to as a party slave hundreds if not thousands of times... individually, lumped into a group, labelled and dismissed because it's an easy argument repeated ad nauseam on this board by one person. So... no... it's not really hard to see having a conversation with someone who makes such perverse comparisons because we do it all the time. Rational conversations? How can one have a rational conversation with a poster who keeps calling virtually everyone a Party slave because they may not agree with that poster?

I honestly and truly have better things to do than to waste my time and try to have rational and civilized conversations with people so far off the reservation...

So the guy who calls us slaves all the time is the victim here because he takes issue when we discuss his orange idol's political rhetoric matching the books that guy chooses to read? Somebody call the waaaambulance. :)

Way to keep your eyes on the ball!

Oh, my... but we are a clever punk! :)

That's a very good point, but the post-election circumstances drew the focus elsewhere.

The 2016 presidential election was simply used to educate any trumpling (borrowing your word) who thinks that a 2% loss of voters is inconsequential. President Pathological keeps telling his minions how he won in a landslide when the fact is that he won multiple states by less than 1% margin of victory... the difference in Michigan being merely 2 voters per precinct.

Under those circumstances, even a small shift could cause a seismic event. Heh!

Take it easy on those meds, eh?

Yes! Cutting them in half is mandatory; for some reason, alcohol and pills really do a number... such a cheap date... one drink and crazy! :)

And, don't mix any of them with alcohol, for God's sake!

Would never do that! It would lay me <----{eeek!} out cold.

It's fairly easy not to say "eye" and "ewe" (mostly, with the occasional slip), but not being able to say "me" is a real "killer"!

Heh, this exercise gives new meaning to Melizabeth Killer. :)

I'm watching for the onset among the base -it's already among the CoC Republicans- of reductio ad Hillerium.
When larger factions in the base retreat to "Just think about how much worse it would be with Hillery," that's when the trouble begins.

As an aside, the word "Hitler" appears 132 times in the comments on this page.

it's absolutely different - the former is factually true, while the latter is factually false. donald trump owned a book by hitler, and copied its rhetoric. to my knowledge, no weigantian has ever copied the ideas of jefferson davis or espoused the philosophy of a state's right to legalize human trafficking.

These are the facts of the case. And they are undisputed.

JL

Hitler's wars of aggression killed four times as many people as the Holocaust.

The political tactics that were used that allowed him to get to the point where he could carry out both his wars and his genocide can't be ignored in an honest comparison.

And an illegal war of aggression in Iran alone could result in the deaths of more innocent people than Hitler's atrocities combined, and anybody who doesn't believe Trump is fully capable of issuing the order for such a war is not rational.

When the threat is officially on the table, and Trump has surrounded himself with people who have actively encouraged such a war, you can't pretend it isn't possible...

... just as it would have been with Hillary.

A

no, it is not. there are other genocides in history that are just as grisly and killed millions of people - some even more than the holocaust, depending on how one measures. mass genocide was only one of the multiple factors that made hitler who he was.

The ONLY reason to invoke the Hitler comparison is to link President Trump with the Holocaust

that is not the case in general, and it is certainly not the case now specifically. if donald had learned his propaganda from karl marx, FDR or benjamin disraeli, then it would be their speeches we would be comparing. donald chose hitler for his bedtime reading and as a model for his rhetoric, so that's who we're discussing. anyone who finds that fact uncomfortable can take it up with the reader.

JL

But it's the ONLY characteristic that makes Hitler Hitler.. And it's the ONLY characteristic that makes Hitler so widely known..

Without the systematic genocide, Hitler would be just a run o the mill world leader who lead his country as "the most efficient state Earth had ever known.....

"Most efficient state... Earth ever knew."
"Quite true, Captain. That tiny country, beaten, bankrupt, defeated; rose in a few years to stand only one step away from global domination."
-STAR TREK, Patterns Of Force

No different than any other despot like that scumbag in Venezuala.. Why don't you compare President Trump to him??

Because THAT scumbag doesn't invoke the Holocaust like Hitler does..

Let's face reality, JL... The ONLY reason to invoke the Hitler comparison is to link President Trump with the Holocaust... Just like the Left does with those who don't buy into the SKY IS FALLING fanaticism... They are "deniers", invoking, comparing and linking the denial of the Holocaust...

It's a common Left Wingery trait...

You have a moral problem with me linking and comparing ya'all's Party zealotry and fanaticism to slavery...

Yet your comparison of President Trump with Hitler is no different than the comparison of ya'all's Party fanaticism to slavery....

FDR is more like Hitler than President Trump is.. Yet *NO ONE* here has compared FDR to Hitler..

Why?? Because Party slavery forbids it...

I simply cannot fathom having a rational conversation with a group of people who are so far off the reservation that they, either by commission or omission, would think that President Trump is Hitler...

It would like someone saying that Obama is a child-raping pedophile because he has made statements similar to what the prophet Muhammed has made.. Or that Bernie Sanders is a child-raping pedophile because he has made statements similar to what Mao Zedong has made....

Could you HONESTLY see yourself having a rational conversation with someone who made such ludicrous and perverse comparisons???

Of course you couldn't...

So it is with me.. It's simply not possible to have any rational conversation with someone or someones who has completely, utterly and unequivocally left reality behind and has become consumed by ideology that they simply cannot discuss ANYTHING rationally...

I honestly and truly have better things to do than to waste my time and try to have rational and civilized conversations with people so far off the reservation...

As I said.. There is nothing left for me here...

systematic genocide was not hitler's only defining characteristic. that was the last step in a long sequence of nativist philosophy and escalating political abuses. not believing that donald would do all that hitler did, does not make inconsequential those elements in his speeches that are similar to hitler, and most likely borrowed directly from the book he kept by his bed, which was written by hitler. the only individual responsible for selecting donald's night-time reading material and choosing what sort of rhetoric to espouse in his speeches is donald himself.

JL

That's close enough to being hysterically enslaved by Party dogma and ideology...

And as I watched you with your new love
I haven't see you that happy in years
We've drifted so far apart and it's hard to admit it
But there's nothing left for {me} here
-Lorrie Morgan, I GUESS YOU HAD TO BE THERE

OK.
A restating of the complete rules would be nice too since there was some discussion of variables, and it is thus a responsibility of the game master to which this comment is addressed.

In the spirit of the game, but not to add to the rules, it would be nice if there was condemnation or some sort of reaction for false accusations and lying used in lieu of factual reasoning that is pointed out accurately... even when one disagrees about the subject under discussion.

That should be a concern of all hoping for less disrespectful discourse.

A

Way to keep your eyes on the ball!

142

That's a very good point, but the post-election circumstances drew the focus elsewhere.

A

Take it easy on those meds, eh?

And, don't mix any of them with alcohol, for God's sake!

So, I figured one last hurrah....

And, you were doing so well! :)

Seriously, this can work! It's already made a big difference and that make this Weigantian very, very happy. :)

Practice time has now officially ended. But, we're all going to need more time to get used to it.

And, the whole point was to cut down on the name-calling and otherwise disrespectful discourse. So, if we slip up but our comments remain considerate of others, then that would not necessarily mean we have broken the rule.

It is somewhat distressing that the Trump presidency, particularly if it lasts a full term, will lead too many to believe that any celebrity can run for president.

What is truly sad is how politics has gone from being seen as an honourable profession to something far lesser than that, even by people who used to call themselves cockeyed optimists or at least not susceptible to extreme cynicism.

Very funny, Don.

In point of fact, it has been my experience that when Biden speaks, people who listen actually learn something.

How many politicians or would-be politicians can one say that about?

trump is not being compared to hitler overall, at least not by me.

Neither me nor JL compared Trump to Hitler overall... simply discussed the similarity of their political rhetoric. Anyone reading the thread can plainly see that.

however, it is an emotionally sobering and completely accurate analysis that trump's speeches are derivative of hitler's speeches. he doesn't have to be like hitler in any other way for that to be dangerous.

Some facts are inconvenient, JL. The speeches are similar and contain some of the same rhetoric... anything beyond that is nothing we discussed.

If forced to choose a world leader whom Trump most resembled, speeches notwithstanding, Hitler would not remotely be my choice... that would be Mussolini.

I mean, BOTH put their own citizens in concentration camps..

But you can't, so you don't..

That's not a fair comparison since we were comparing speeches. I don't believe we have compared FDR's speeches to Hitler's, but then FDR didn't keep a book of Adolf's speeches by his bedside (as far as I know).

FDR: So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is...fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance. In every dark hour of our national life a leadership of frankness and of vigor has met with that understanding and support of the people themselves which is essential to victory. And I am convinced that you will again give that support to leadership in these critical days.

Hitler's speeches were full of terror and demonizing of the "others" and stating that Hitler alone could fix the problems of Germany. One is free to research them and compare them to both Trump's and FDR's speeches... wherein one will find similarities to the former.

Ergo, the ONLY reason that someone would compare President Trump to Hitler would be to invoke a hysterical emotional response against President Trump...

BS. The straw man argument won't fly here. That emotional BS is michale's handiwork. JL brought up the similarities in the speeches, and my response was regarding the similarities in their speeches. Projecting the emotional BS onto it and conflating it into a straw man argument in order to knock it down was michale's handiwork and nothing more.

Since you seem to be saying that you don't think that President Trump could act like another Hitler, insofar as ordering the brutal murder of 6 million innocent men, women and children, there is absolutely NO REASON to compare President Trump to Hitler except to invoke a hysterical emotional response against President Trump..

We compared the speeches... nothing more. Our posts said nothing about "the brutal murder of 6 million" blah, blah, blah. That emotional BS was michale's handiwork. The conflating is pathetic and hysterical and a straw man argument and has nothing to do with our posts.

For without the brutality of Hitler's actions in ordering the deaths of 6 million innocent men, women and children, all you have is a 3rd rate tin plated dictator with delusions of god-hood...

Trump has a book of speeches by Hitler that he used to keep at his bedside and read. Trump has several elements in his rhetoric that resembles the rhetoric from that book of Hitler's speeches. Anything beyond those facts are hysterics and emotional baggage that michale added in order to create a straw man argument easier to knock down.

So, why not compare President Trump to any old 3rd rate tin plated dictator with delusions of god-hood..

Because JL correctly pointed out that Trump's bedside book was a book of speeches by Hitler and that Trump's speeches resembled Hitler's speeches. Reading anything more into it is not our handiwork.

Because such a comparison will not invoke the hysterical emotional response against President Trump that you desire...

Michale's hysterical emotional response is one of his own making. Kick agreeing with the subject matter posted by JL has nothing to do with anything but the speeches. JL brought up a good point to which agreement following in my response. It really wasn't about anything beyond that. Anyone taking that personal and getting emotional and hysterical is not our problem. It's Trump's book and Trump's rhetoric; neither of us chose Trump's reading material nor his rhetoric.

"Simple logic."
-Admiral James T Kirk

It really is "simple" when you realize that someone here has hijacked a post in order to project their trollish behavior onto other posters. The one with the trollish behavior would naturally think that other posters were posting for the same reasons he does... which couldn't be further from the truth. Trolls do tend to think everything is about them... especially certain trolls. :)

trump is not being compared to hitler overall, at least not by me. he has not advocated for genocide, and has in fact responded forcefully to try to prevent genocide. however, it is an emotionally sobering and completely accurate analysis that trump's speeches are derivative of hitler's speeches. he doesn't have to be like hitler in any other way for that to be dangerous.

JL

Putting the shoe on the other foot, paying attention to such things would be wise.
Even at just 2%, this represents over a million people, and vocal minorities tend to have an outsized influence.

Now, the previous post by yours truly was just funning you, but here's the commentary about what is copied above. Total FACT! Why would 2% matter?

Pennsylvania - 20 EV - MOV around 3/4 of 1%
Michigan..,.... - 16 EV - MOV around 1/4 of 1%
Wisconsin..... - 10 EV - MOV around 3/4 of 1%

That's 46 EVs that were awarded in three states where the margin of victory was less than 1%. Surely one can see how a small shift is worth a mention when subtraction of those 46 EVs gives one a different election outcome, wouldn't one think?

VOTE TOTALS
Pennsylvania
DJT - 2,970,733
HRC - 2,926,441

Michigan
DJT - 2,279,543
HRC - 2,268,839

Wisconsin
DJT - 1,405,284
HRC - 1,382,536

Subtract those "inconsequential" 2% from DJT's vote totals in those states, and explain why anyone with the ability to perform simple math would think that even a 2% reduction in Trump voters wouldn't merit a little mention. :)

Meds!

In other words, if CW's number was accurate, the number in my comment was dead on balz accurate too unlike the earlier assertions to the contrary.

Hey, Punk! "Balz" is misspelled there. It's B-A-L-L-Z. Two L's, unless you're talking about Hitler... then it's one "L" because Hitler had right-sided cryptorchidism and only had one bal.

Meds! ;)

Is President Trump capable of ordering the deaths of 6 million innocent men, women and children..

no.

Well, carp..

I am surprised, heartened and disappointed, all at once..

But, since you do agree that President Trump is incapable of ordering the brutal murders of six million innocent men, women and children, then my argument above, applies as well...

There is no reason to compare President Trump to Hitler except to invoke a hysterical, emotional and INACCURATE response against President Trump...

And, since it looks like someone will actually be hanging around a little longer, said one will have to go back to the game.. :D

And apologize for the slavery invocation...

Cite???

And, has FDR been compared to Hitler???

I mean, BOTH put their own citizens in concentration camps..

So, if you can find me a cite where one of ya'all compared FDR to Hitler, you will have an argument..

But you can't, so you don't..

Injecting the emotional tone to the conversation is this poster's handiwork. The discussion between this poster and JL wasn't about anyone being "another Hitler" (that's not scientifically possible when considering Hitler's history and demise... meaning there can be no clones). The discussion was simply the book of speeches that Trump kept at his bedside and how Trump's political rhetoric was similar to that of the speeches by Hitler (contained in Trump's book).

EXACTLY...

Ergo, the ONLY reason that someone would compare President Trump to Hitler would be to invoke a hysterical emotional response against President Trump...

Since you seem to be saying that you don't think that President Trump could act like another Hitler, insofar as ordering the brutal murder of 6 million innocent men, women and children, there is absolutely NO REASON to compare President Trump to Hitler except to invoke a hysterical emotional response against President Trump..

For without the brutality of Hitler's actions in ordering the deaths of 6 million innocent men, women and children, all you have is a 3rd rate tin plated dictator with delusions of god-hood...

So, why not compare President Trump to any old 3rd rate tin plated dictator with delusions of god-hood..

Because such a comparison will not invoke the hysterical emotional response against President Trump that you desire...

"Simple logic."
-Admiral James T Kirk

Agreed..

And your newfound confidence in polling has been noted.

My confidence, or in this case, lack thereof, is consistent...

I only use polls because everyone else here places their absolute faith in polls..

At least, the polls that says what they want to hear...

*ANYONE* who thinks that President Trump is another Hitler is so consumed by Party fanaticism and ideological slavery that it will simply be IMPOSSIBLE to take that person seriously on ANY and ALL conversations henceforth...

Injecting the emotional tone to the conversation is this poster's handiwork. The discussion between this poster and JL wasn't about anyone being "another Hitler" (that's not scientifically possible when considering Hitler's history and demise... meaning there can be no clones). The discussion was simply the book of speeches that Trump kept at his bedside and how Trump's political rhetoric was similar to that of the speeches by Hitler (contained in Trump's book).

Anyone who read anything more into those posts is simply hijacking and conflating posts into an emotional argument of their own making, and the party bigotry BS was introduced by the same source from whence it usually comes.

no.

but others in authority could commit crimes against humanity in trump's name, using his words to justify their actions. i refer you back to 'patterns of force'

Go to the booth. See to the Fuhrer at once. He's ill. Turn off that camera.
~Melakon

But, of course, no one here will make THAT argument because FDR had a -D after his name....

FDR has been criticized on this board before... recently too. So the BS above is utter nonsense.

Sanders and Clinton blamed the nations problems on "others" and their corruption, just like Trump and Hitler did..

Oversimplification on the poster's part and doesn't fit with the fact as posted. When did Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton infer that Obama didn't want to release his birth certificate because it might show he was a Muslim? Trump hit that theme many times, once saying: "He doesn't have a birth certificate. He may have one, but there's something on that, maybe religion, maybe it says he is a Muslim." The "othering" of Obama and suggesting he is sympathetic to terrorists is Trump's handiwork. When did Bernie claim that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were the founders of ISIS? Trump did.

Sanders and Clinton and Obama promised to round up all the "fatcats" and squeeze them for more money...

Again, oversimplification. Raising taxes on the rich and rounding up the "others" you demonize on a regular basis and banning them and expelling them from the country are two different things.

Clinton and Sanders claimed that they alone could have saved the nation..

Cite? Neither of them claimed they "alone" could fix the nation or infer that they were the only one who could.

Bernie nor Hillary ran campaign ads saying anything like Trump's that said: "Donald Trump will protect you. He is the only one who can."

See the point??

No matter WHAT Trump is accused of, the SAME case can be made with Clinton AND Sanders..

No, the "SAME" case can't be made using comparisons that are oversimplified.

But I get it... You suffer from PTDS... So, of course your hysterical rhetoric looks completely rational to you...

Flailing at other posters doesn't change very specific facts that are inconvenient.

But ANYONE who has an objective brain cell in their body will tell you that comparing a President to such a despicable and disgusting human being such as Hitler is a sure sign of derangement brought about by Party slavery....

I wasn't comparing Trump to the man Hitler became. I was simply comparing Trump's campaign rhetoric and speeches to those of Hitler that Trump kept at his bedside because JL makes a valid point that they are strikingly similar. The inconvenient truth.

That's because I fully expect Joshua to answer YES to #123 which will be my cue to move on...

So, I figured one last hurrah....

So props to Trump for ending a debate on these boards by admitting he is a globalist. The evidence was there despite his rhetoric... so nice of him to confirm it for the gullible masses who insisted he'd "evolved." He's a globalist... always has been. The nationalism is something new to him... necessary new rhetoric... all part of the con.

“Hey, I’m a nationalist and a globalist,” President Trump said. “I’m both. And I’m the only one who makes the decision, believe me.”

Yes… Believe him.

Who knew? Anyone who was paying attention to Trump and his decades of history. Everyone knows 70-year-old men don't change their long-held globalist views overnight. :)

Better than Hillary is not saying much.

And your newfound confidence in polling has been noted.

A

"Now, if you want to compare President Trump to FDR who rounded up American Citizens and put them in concentration camps, then you might have an argument..
But, of course, no one here will make THAT argument because FDR had a -D after his name...."

Jumping into this conversation...

The closest accurate comparison to Hitler in recent US history would be Bush the Lessor.

I worry a great deal about Trump being worse, but I also know our resident trumpling isn't completely wrong about Democrats... the legality issues and consequences of Yemen, Syria, Libya and drone warfare under Obama can't be ignored, and stretching back to Vietnam almost every US president has ordered or enabled war crimes to occur.

But back to Bush, the last time the US lied about chemical weapons (and acted upon it), it resulted in the war crime of an illegal war of aggression against Iraq that caused the deaths of over a million people, millions of refugees, wasted trillions, massive destruction and horrible, ongoing consequences.
(and implementing torture as US policy sure adds to the comparison)

That is the main reason why I am amazed and dismayed about the lack of skepticism among Democrats about the more recent claims about chemical weapons in Syria, despite the reliance on "evidence" from sources who aren't credible.

A

But the point is not that Trump supporters STILL prefer Trump over NOT-45..

The point is that Trump has GAINED supporters and NOT-45 has LOST supporters.. This is evidenced by the poll shows that Trump would win the Vanity Vote as well as the Electoral Vote...

No matter how you want to spin it, President Trump is continuing to rise and NOT-45 is continuing to fall..

No doubt that last sentence will piss off ALL Weigantians.. :D

"This is why Altohone missed my point on the species - it isn't Homo sapiens corruptus that is the problem - if we were all Homo sapiens corruptus we'd be engaged to make sure we were getting our unfair slice of the pie to the point that everybody would get equal amounts, to the limit of their ability. It is Homo sapiens apatheticus that is the problem."

There is certainly much truth in the problem of the apathetic. However, the corrupt not only help create that apathy (by funding candidates who will maintain the status quo which you could argue makes them the most engaged), they actively encourage it. The fewer voters there are participating, the easier it is for them to control the outcome in their favor.

Hillary spent millions trying to win over Republicans rather than trying to engage the apathetic.

The corrupt represent a very small minority, and they are most certainly the major part of the problem.

And everybody being corrupt wouldn't decrease apathy.

A

In other words, if CW's number was accurate, the number in my comment was dead on balz accurate too unlike the earlier assertions to the contrary.

But using the polling information (which has been a common subject of derision for inaccuracy in your comments, and does not constitute "facts") that was provided after my comment was made, the assertion is now just that the newsworthiness claim is false.

Many would disagree with that opinion.
If Obama's activists had vocally denounced his betrayals three months into his presidency, and if the dissatisfaction had been reported in the media, not only could it have had a positive influence on policy and been good for the country, but it may also have prevented some of the problems his party later faced.

Putting the shoe on the other foot, paying attention to such things would be wise.
Even at just 2%, this represents over a million people, and vocal minorities tend to have an outsized influence.

In this case, adherence to the wishes of that vocal minority would not all be positive, though non-interventionism, maintaining online privacy and reigning in Wall Street would in my opinion be hugely positive... and back during the campaign, you used to agree on two of those issues and touted them as a positive for Trump.

That said, I don't buy your characterization of Hillary... and the polling about a re-running of a campaign involving the two least popular and least trustworthy candidates EVER says more about the lousy choices than anything else... and I don't fault Trump supporters for still not preferring Hillary, because I wouldn't trust her to protect online privacy or reign in Wall Street, and she was and continues to be itching for even more interventionism.

No doubt that last sentence will piss off some Democrats.

A

Since I asked, it's only fair that I show you mine..

*ANYONE* who thinks that President Trump is another Hitler is so consumed by Party fanaticism and ideological slavery that it will simply be IMPOSSIBLE to take that person seriously on ANY and ALL conversations henceforth...

Which simply proves beyond ANY doubt that the claims that President Trump = Hitler are *NOTHING* more than hysterical zealotry brought about by ideological/Party fanaticism...

But, of course, no one here will make THAT argument because FDR had a -D after his name....

Sanders and Clinton blamed the nations problems on "others" and their corruption, just like Trump and Hitler did..

2. Trump, just as Hitler did, promises to round up "outsiders" and expel them.

Sanders and Clinton and Obama promised to round up all the "fatcats" and squeeze them for more money...

3. Trump, just as Hitler did, claims he "alone" can save the nation.

Clinton and Sanders claimed that they alone could have saved the nation..

See the point??

No matter WHAT Trump is accused of, the SAME case can be made with Clinton AND Sanders..

But I get it... You suffer from PTDS... So, of course your hysterical rhetoric looks completely rational to you...

But ANYONE who has an objective brain cell in their body will tell you that comparing a President to such a despicable and disgusting human being such as Hitler is a sure sign of derangement brought about by Party slavery....

Yea, I know, I know... I used 'I' and 'YOU' and 'Slavery'...

That's because I fully expect Joshua to answer YES to #123 which will be my cue to move on...

So, I figured one last hurrah....

The arguments posted were identical straw-man arguments to the exact same kind of straw-man arguments that were posted that prompted the second straw-man arguments..

Checking the definition of "identical" and "straw man," one can easily determine the fallacy of this poster. My post asserted multiple facts:

1. Trump, just as Hitler did, blames the nation's problems on the "others" and their corruption of the nation's ruling political elite.

2. Trump, just as Hitler did, promises to round up "outsiders" and expel them.

3. Trump, just as Hitler did, claims he "alone" can save the nation.

4. I could go on, but those are a few of the main points.

All of those are facts. Facts and straw man arguments are two different things. If anyone would care to dispute what is contained in the post, by all means, have at it.

Comparing President Trump to Hitler *IS* hysterical, no matter how it is spun...

It wasn't "spun." Rhetoric was posted that Hitler and Trump both utilize(d). Those are facts. Berating posters for posting facts doesn't change those facts. Finding political rhetoric of two people to be similar isn't hysterical.

One just has to be a Party fanatic or zealot...

Nonsense. One can compare two people's rhetoric without belonging to any party. Trump can change his party multiple times, but it doesn't change the fact that he's been a con artist for decades... it really doesn't matter what party he's claiming this year. The jumping from party to party is pure opportunism and knowing which voters would be amenable to your rhetoric. The BS and con job that Trump is spewing would never be tolerated in the Party to which he belonged the majority of his life... thus the necessity to relabel himself. A good con knows who his target is and adjusts his rhetoric accordingly. Despite Trump telling the gullible masses that he never knew he was going to run for president, the lying opportunist had already made a short run on the Reform Party ticket of Ross Perot. Trump's party hopping and the fact that he's a con regardless of which party he's claiming lately has been discussed on this board ad nauseam.

The fact of the matter is that those similarities are ALSO shared by FDR, Ronald Reagan, Obama, JFK, General George Patton, General Mattis, General Norman Schwarzkopf, Abraham Lincoln and a host of other leaders..

No, they're not. I posted very specific rhetoric that Hitler and Trump both employed as candidates/leaders of their respective countries. Did Patton, Mattis, or Schwarzkopf have campaign rhetoric? Which one of the presidents you listed above ever campaigned that he "alone" could save the nation? Hitler did. Trump did and does. Which one of the leaders above ever promised to round up "outsiders" and expel them? Hitler did. Trump did and does.

By drawing on the Hitler analogy, the persons making that argument is simply relying on hysterical emotionalism with out an iota of relevant fact...

Perhaps the emotionalism is on the other end of the post because it certainly wasn't posted on my end in that manner... simply a comment to another poster regarding Trump's bedside reading and a comparison of Trump's rhetoric to the very specific rhetoric contained in the speeches in the book at the bedside which was posted in answer to JL because he made a very good point.

Anyone who wishes to dispute the very specific facts posted should endeavor to do so versus flailing miserably to discredit the posters who posted those very specific factual comparisons.

I'm sure we're all acutely aware that facts can be such inconvenient things. :)

OK, let's lay your cards on the table..

Understanding that it is an opinion only...

Is President Trump capable of ordering the deaths of 6 million innocent men, women and children..

YES or NO... No mamby pamby depends-what-the-definition-of-is-is equivocation..

YES or NO...

If the answer is YES, then there is absolutely NO HOPE of having a rational conversation with you ever again...

if donald didn't want to be compared to hitler, he shouldn't have copied his speeches.

SPOCK: Captain, I never will understand humans. How could a man as brilliant, a mind as logical as John Gill's, have made such a fatal error?

MCCOY: What he's saying, Spock, is that a man who holds that much power, even with the best intentions, just can't resist the urge to play God.

it's not even a little bit like saying that. hillary didn't use the kkk's methods. donald did use hitler's methods. he didn't use them to mass murder anyone, thank goodness, but there's still a very real danger inherent in unleashing nativist propaganda on a society desperate for change - especially the kind of propaganda found in the pages of 'My New Order.'

If we fulfill our own greatness, that will all be ended. Working together.
john gill, star trek - patterns of force

This is the root of the problem. "One Demand" would work fine in an environment where citizens were actively engaged in the political process and able to act - Venezuelan citizens would probably jump at the chance to engage in "One Demand" - however they do not have the ability to do so. Our population can act in their own interests but choose to be complacent instead - most don't even bother to vote at all, even once ever four years.

This is why Altohone missed my point on the species - it isn't Homo sapiens corruptus that is the problem - if we were all Homo sapiens corruptus we'd be engaged to make sure we were getting our unfair slice of the pie to the point that everybody would get equal amounts, to the limit of their ability. It is Homo sapiens apatheticus that is the problem.

The arguments posted were identical straw-man arguments to the exact same kind of straw-man arguments that were posted that prompted the second straw-man arguments..

There's nothing hysterical contained in the post.

Comparing President Trump to Hitler *IS* hysterical, no matter how it is spun...

One does not have to be a member of the left wing in order to see the similarities between the rhetoric of Hitler and Drumpf.

No.. One just has to be a Party fanatic or zealot...

Anyone that wants to dispute the similarities would be much better served by actually discussing them versus deflecting to another entirely different person and inferring the poster is hysterical.

The fact of the matter is that those similarities are ALSO shared by FDR, Ronald Reagan, Obama, JFK, General George Patton, General Mattis, General Norman Schwarzkopf, Abraham Lincoln and a host of other leaders..

By drawing on the Hitler analogy, the persons making that argument is simply relying on hysterical emotionalism with out an iota of relevant fact...

about having fingers and toes? if one's goal is to point out that both hitler and hillary are land mammals, then sure.

Hitler was a defective land mammal, being that he only had one testicle and was afflicted with unilateral cryptorchidism. It seems these demagogue types often have testosterone issues.

NOT-45 has two arms and two legs. Just like Hitler...

NOT-45 has ten fingers and ten toes. Just like Hitler.

Choosing to post several straw man arguments containing deflection is weak tea but not at all unexpected from this poster. Deflection, whataboutism, and the straw man argument are handy tools when the contents of a post are true and can't be refuted.

People wonder what happened to calm, rational, non-hysterical political discourse??

The Left Wingery killed it...

There's nothing hysterical contained in the post. It was written calmly and rationally based on facts that are easily seen when one chooses to stop rolling their eyes and actually compare the views of the subjects of the post. Anyone that wants to dispute the similarities would be much better served by actually discussing them versus deflecting to another entirely different person and inferring the poster is hysterical.

One does not have to be a member of the left wing in order to see the similarities between the rhetoric of Hitler and Drumpf. Indeed, one does not even have to be a voter or an American for that matter. :)

And if one wants to make the point that leaders use high sounding rhetoric, then ya'all's goal is achieved..

But to make the leap from using high sounding rhetoric to being the cause of 10 million dead...??

That's a leap that is completely and utterly ridiculous and SOLELY based on Party zealotry..

the point of godwin's law wasn't that all hitler comparisons are invalid,

Yes, that is EXACTLY the point of the godwin law...

Because, unless the comparison-ee is someone who HAS been responsible for the brutal death of 10 million people, the comparison IS invalid...

And the *FACT* that the comparison is borne SOLELY and COMPLETELY from Party fanaticism ALSO indicates that the comparison is invalid..

donald had a book written by hitler, kept it by his bed, and copied hitler's propaganda techniques. from the book. by hitler. it's not rocket surgery ;p

That's like saying, since NOT-45 praised and worked with Robert Byrd, NOT-45 is a flaming KKK'er racist...

Anyone want to concede that???

Of course not.....

There are certain factors common to all great leaders... The fact that SOME of those leaders turned out to be NOT so great, downright diabolical, is a testament to THEM and them alone, NOT to the qualities...

Give an example of a leadership quality that President Trump shares with Hitler and one can tie that exact same quality into a great Democrat leader....

The idea that the trait itself is fully, completely and unequivocally indicative of a Hitler-esque outcome??

Well, that's hysteria that, frankly, is beneath a respected founder of Weigantia....

Yes it is..

But the claim was that the actual number, which is 2%, would be newsworthy..

Obviously that claim is bull-carp...

I found this very interesting

http://therealnews.com/t2/story:18947:Britain%27s-Labour-Party-Leader-Undermined-by-Labour-Members-of-Parliament

part 1 and 2 run together

One of the things mentioned that US corporate media has not covered is that Theresa May currently enjoys a 10 seat majority, but that 25 members of the Conservatives are being prosecuted for violating campaign finance laws.

They note that without that cheating, the referendum for Brexit may never have occurred and that the prosecutions may be the reason May violated her promise not to call a snap election.

They also talk about the far more strict campaign finance laws in the UK, which goes back to the human nature/flawed species comment you made... if people in the UK can do it, so can we.

And, I'm a little rusty on the nomenclature, but I think technically my comment above should be amended to Homo sapiens sapiens v. corruptus or something like that.

Sorry Liz, I'm on my way out and don't have time to edit to stay within the rules.

A

Citizens United is a recent upending of previously agreed restrictions.

Those working against those restrictions (including undermining pre-CU limits like some of the efforts at the state level) have gained the upper hand.

But our history suggests that at least a slightly more rational system for campaign finance can gain sufficient public support.

Neither party (one party pays lip service to the idea) currently supporting those efforts does make it more difficult.

That said, the recent change by the DNC to eliminate the weak corporate/lobbyist restrictions which Obama had implemented is a step in the wrong direction, but there are currently six members of Congress who refuse corporate and PAC money, and two of them are Republicans.

It's not our species... it's the sub-species Homo sapiens corruptus that too many voters believe must be tolerated... and the source... the virulent species altering disease that can infect normal humans over time that must be guarded against.

All very difficult to be sure, but that's no reason not to try.

A

about having fingers and toes? if one's goal is to point out that both hitler and hillary are land mammals, then sure.

the point of godwin's law wasn't that all hitler comparisons are invalid, just the ones that have nothing to do with hitler. donald had a book written by hitler, kept it by his bed, and copied hitler's propaganda techniques. from the book. by hitler. it's not rocket surgery ;p

JL

Less than 10% and greater than 90% are the same thing.

One must ignore the qualifier in the comment to take umbrage.

Don and others used the 10% claim without the qualifier. Perhaps that is from where the anger arises?

Liz- How long does practice last?

A

Here is the problem I have with "One Demand" - it requires a different species than the one we are dealing with.

Sadly, the real world is populated by Homo sapiens sapiens - very much a self serving name. The world required to make "One Demand" work requires a different species: Homo give-a-damn. From even before Juvenal's "panem et circenses" (bread and circuses) and on to today's Kardashians we have shown that the current species is sadly unable to think rationally.

In between chortles, why not actually address the facts?? :D

So, did you hear the 45 has carried out his promise to close the "carried interest" loophole?

Don't know economics, don't use a carried interest loophole (whatever it is), don't give a flying fig about what President Trump does with it..

The simple fact is, President Trump has been doing a bang up job of restoring American prestige, confidence and honor around the globe...

Thanks for the early laugh Michale.

So, did you hear the 45 has carried out his promise to close the "carried interest" loophole?

Well before we go celebrating one thing that 45 has done to stick it to Wall St, let's look into the details.

Carried interest should be taxed as labor (at ~40%) and not capital gains (at ~24%). Hedge funds are making a 16% savings from this loophole.

45's new plan eliminates this loophole - not by actually doing anything about it of course, but by lowering business income rate to 15% - lower than the 24% they have been paying. He's giving them more money! That'll teach them.

Nevertheless, the Isn't-45-just-dreamy-I-want-to-have-his-babies crowd (*cough* Michale *cough*) will probably regale us with his great campaign promise follow though.

There's a reason for that...

It's because it's exactly what the facts indiate.. :D

I wasn't being serious regarding Cuban - my point was that the knee jerk reaction crowd who want anybody but an insider could do better with a competent one instead of a clown.

And the assessment of President Trump being a clown ignores the three accepted facts...

1. Great businessman

2. Bested 19 GOP candidates..

3. Totally devastated NOT-45's campaign...

What a clown.

I wasn't being serious regarding Cuban - my point was that the knee jerk reaction crowd who want anybody but an insider could do better with a competent one instead of a clown.

I can't see how this crowd will regard Biden as an outsider intent on breaking the system.

The common theme, from Michale to Altohone, then out there to Don, is that Washington is corrupt and favors the elites. It is sad that politic team support separates these three because if a third party were possible in this country then there would be a common home for them and many others. Probably enough to win in a landslide. But then, who would pay for all the campaign ads for the new party?

Ouch..

And the ref takes a point away!! :D

And, further.....

"Furthertheless is NOT a word. Stop using it!!"
-Charlie Sheen, SPIN CITY

:D

Further, I was not talking about the person Michael Godwin rolling in ITS grave..

I was talking about the GODWIN principle being dead as a logical and valid principle..

Because once you start making exceptions to the principle SOLELY based on Partisan Ideology, the principle ceases to be a valid widely accepted principle and just because a cheap ideologically based talking point...

GODWIN....

Killed by the Hysterical Left Wingery...

RIP

And the comparisons between NOT-45 and Hitler are ALSO valid as well...

When in doubt, leave it out. :D

But the thing is, I am never in doubt.. :D

3. mike GODWIN is a real person who is still alive, and who agrees that many political comparisons between trump and hitler are valid.

Yep.. He killed the GODWIN principle TOTALLY and COMPLETELY to further a ideological agenda..

Sad....

Yes, it is hard. And, worth the effort. We'll see how it goes but, there will probably be far less confrontation/heat and far more light ...

1. until you can figure out how to do it correctly, STOP USING APOSTROPHES!

2. nobody forced donald to keep a book of hitler's speeches by his bed, much less to copy their style of propaganda.

3. mike GODWIN is a real person who is still alive, and who agrees that many political comparisons between trump and hitler are valid.

JL

To be clear: I don’t personally believe all rational discourse has ended when Nazis or the Holocaust are invoked. But I’m pleased that people still use Godwin’s Law to force one another to argue more thoughtfully. The best way to prevent future holocausts, I believe, is not to forbear from Holocaust comparisons; instead, it’s to make sure that those comparisons are meaningful and substantive. This is something a pleasantly surprising percentage of commentators in this political season have managed to do (like this piece on Trump by New America and CNN analyst Peter Bergen):

~mike godwin

“The world is getting the message,” Trump said last week during a speech at the National Rifle Association leadership forum in Atlanta. “They know our border is no longer open to illegal immigration, and if they try to break in you’ll be caught and you’ll be returned to your home. You’re not staying any longer. If you keep coming back illegally after deportation, you’ll be arrested and prosecuted and put behind bars. Otherwise it will never end.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/amid-immigration-setbacks-one-trump-strategy-seems-to-be-working-fear/2017/04/30/62af1620-2b4e-11e7-a616-d7c8a68c1a66_story.html

Yep.....

Thank the gods, that President Trump was elected...

And, as usual, the claims that were made in comment #94 are backed up with facts..

Aside to Liz..

This is REALLY hard.. :D

It's also imprecise and, given certain person's proclivity to be be aggressively and selectively nuanced and all about what the definition of 'IS' is in pursuit of ideological agenda, will likely lead to MORE confrontation, not less...

But, as I said before... When in Rome.. :D

So much for the claim that 10% of Trump supporters are abandoning President Trump...

The claim that more than 90% of Trump supporters would vote for President Trump again was dead on ballz accurate...

The claim that 10% of Trump supporters are disappointed in President Trump is 1000% bullshit and wishful thinking...

"These are the facts of the case. And they are undisputed."
-Captain Smilin' Jack Ross, A FEW GOOD MEN

NOT-45 has two arms and two legs. Just like Hitler...

NOT-45 has a nose and a mouth. Just like Hitler...

NOT-45 has ten fingers and ten toes. Just like Hitler.

I could go on, but those are a few of the main points..

:eyeroll:

GODWIN is rolling in it's grave....

People wonder what happened to calm, rational, non-hysterical political discourse??

THAT is what happened to it..

The Left Wingery killed it...

This is the problem that the Democrat Party is facing in the here and now...

Nice dodge...

Is there ANYTHING beyond CW's words to support the claim that 10% of Trump supporters have abandoned Trump??

No, there is not..

Ergo the claim that was made is false...

These are the facts..

This is the only thing I could find about supposed new Iranian assistance for the Houthis in Yemen.

Interesting links. Thank you.

It seems a little funky and weak.
And the title of the article isn't exactly reassuring about the content either.

Yep. Guess we'll have to stay tuned.

Not if America wishes to be taken seriously.

It's hard to forget how Elizabeth Warren treated Secretary Geithner during his appearances before her oversight committee in the aftermath of the financial crisis.

She is also the wrong person for 2020.

Mark Cuban? No, he isn't the right choice.

Senator Biden is the guy who the people want but, they just don't know it yet.

Biden For President, Jerry Brown for the US Senate!

AS has been discussed here, basically most Americans support Warren's policies, but are so fed up with Washington screwing them that just enough throw their hands in the air and vote for anybody but an insider. 45 is simply the "murder weapon" - it could be anybody once it becomes clear even to the most committed of 45's supporters that he is too incompetent to fix anything.

Mark Cuban 2020?

if donald did not have the attention span to read a book, how do you explain the similarities between the propaganda of his campaign speeches and that of Adolf Hitler in My New Order, the book his ex-wife ivana said he kept on the night stand? osmosis?

You mean the book of speeches by Hitler that Trump's friend Marty Davis of Paramount gave him because he thought Trump would find it interesting?

Never heard of it. ;)

You know, JL, you make a very good point. The fact that Trump's rhetoric so closely matches the world's most famous nationalist workers' demagogue is obvious. It's very instructive to compare Hitler’s first address as Chancellor of Germany to Trump’s Inaugural address... instructive and disturbing.

Trump, just as Hitler did, blames the nation's problems on the "others" and their corruption of the nation's ruling political elite. Trump, just as Hitler did, promises to round up "outsiders" and expel them. Trump, just as Hitler did, claims he "alone" can save the nation. I could go on, but those are a few of the main points.

On this day in history 1945, the coward Hitler shot himself. What a sorry excuse for a human being.

twenty straight hours forced to sit in front of a television showing nothing but keeping up with the kardashians.

Talk about cruel and unusual punishment! Pretty sure that violates international laws!

Well, this is still practice time.

I'm guessing it should be out.

Is "your" also out since it is the possessive form of "you"?

twenty straight hours forced to sit in front of a television showing nothing but keeping up with the kardashians.

JL

... what should be the penalty for breaking the rule?

:-(

Again, take it up with CW.
The distrust of his numbers is unusual.

A

Let's also refrain from using those words when quoting from comments that use them.

If nothing else, it will force us to think before pressing submit. Heh.