Serious Question: Is Trump a Nazi?
Yes there can be bad years. But at most it ends after 8 years. Far from a dictatorship.
A bit of digression. While certainly not the full story, my daughter is now facing an HIB charge from a Trump supporting kid. Part of it comes from the other child saying that my daughter was being "mean" to her. My daughter claims all she was doing was arguing against his support for Trump and it got heated on both sides.
Trump may very well hold nazi/fascist positions. How can someone say deport all the muslims and not be compared to a nazi. its textbook.
Calling Obama a terrorist is stupid and isnt germane to the discussion.
No one is claiming that Trump is a goose stepping, card carrying, hitler worshiping member of the nazi party. The whole premise of the OP is asking if he holds views that can be shown to be similar enough that the label of Nazi fits.
There is more than enough similarity in my opinion to label him at least a sympathizer.
algebra2 said:
Trump is not a Nazi, Obama is not a terrorist... When wingnuts on both sides resort to this type of name calling, I just shake my head.
MGonz said:
Hoops, not the difference between saying he is "recruiting of antisemites and racists" a reasonable statement and a good way of opposing him and shoshannah's over the top assertion that he is a Nazi and we are just like Germany of 1932. DJT would be a disaster as president, he panders to racists, but there is zero chance that he would be able to impose a dictatorship. Saying absurd things like that is very counterproductive. So lets get real.
On a continuum from terrorist Obama to Nazi Trump, which would you say is closer to reality?
MGonz said:
A bit of digression. While certainly not the full story, my daughter is now facing an HIB charge from a Trump supporting kid. Part of it comes from the other child saying that my daughter was being "mean" to her. My daughter claims all she was doing was arguing against his support for Trump and it got heated on both sides.
what is HIB?
eta: Harrassment , Intimidation, Bullying..
that a political argument can get a HIB charge is a WTF problem. im sorry your daughter has to experience it.
The larger point is that calling Trump a Nazi is inflammatory in a useless sort of way. Call him out on specific policies and point out that his positions represent the lowest and meanest in America as opposed the the kind of nation we should try to be.
I think our greatest moments are cases such as West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943) where, in wartime, the SCOTUS affirmed that the Constitution protected students from being forced to salute the American flag and say the Pledge of Allegiance in school.
Or a case in 1979, I believe, where the courts affirmed the rights of people to protest on behalf of Iran even though Iran was, at that time, holding our embassy personnel hostage.
I suppose people who live in a world governed by fear might disagree.
hoops said:
Trump may very well hold nazi/fascist positions. How can someone say deport all the muslims and not be compared to a nazi. its textbook.
Calling Obama a terrorist is stupid and isnt germane to the discussion.
No one is claiming that Trump is a goose stepping, card carrying, hitler worshiping member of the nazi party. The whole premise of the OP is asking if he holds views that can be shown to be similar enough that the label of Nazi fits.
There is more than enough similarity in my opinion to label him at least a sympathizer.
hoops said:
MGonz said:
A bit of digression. While certainly not the full story, my daughter is now facing an HIB charge from a Trump supporting kid. Part of it comes from the other child saying that my daughter was being "mean" to her. My daughter claims all she was doing was arguing against his support for Trump and it got heated on both sides.
what is HIB?
eta: Harrassment , Intimidation, Bullying..
that a political argument can get a HIB charge is a WTF problem. im sorry your daughter has to experience it.
Well, I get accused of it all the time here 
And sometimes a complaint gets made to the MOL principal.
It's OK, if she goes to a nice progressive college, everyone can just stay in their designated safe spaces and avoid any meaningful debate at all. Problem solved.
MGonz said:
It is really the over the top type reaction of shoshannah and others that will be responsible for getting DJT elected if he (G-d forbid) is elected. Basically saying that if you do not concede that DJT is a Nazi you are supporting him is an awful way to proceed and will just push the undecided into his camp. I think that is actually a lot of what has been seen in recent polls. Everyone calm down and relax and oppose him in rational, not hysterical, terms.
This is misguided. Most people I know are personally, deeply stressed and frightened. This country will never get over it if he's elected - or it will be a long time, beyond our lifetimes, by the time we do.
this is a good point. I have a real concern that if Trump is elected, it will embolden thugs to carry out vigilante acts against "dangerous" people like Latin Americans and Muslims. He doesn't have to personally carry out any dictatorial acts as president to give encouragement to violent people with a grudge. We already see his supporters beating people up at his campaign events, sometimes people who are doing nothing more than holding a sign. He's the one talking about wishing people at his events had punched someone, or "joking" about the "2nd Amendment people" taking action. He may think it's a big joke, but unfortunately there are a lot of people ready to take him up on those ideas.
So Trump's not a Nazi. But he is a guy who has the capacity to inspire violent people to beat up on some of the vulnerable members of our society. It may turn out to be a distinction without a difference.
tjohn said:
The larger point is that calling Trump a Nazi is inflammatory in a useless sort of way. Call him out on specific policies and point out that his positions represent the lowest and meanest in America as opposed the the kind of nation we should try to be.
shoshannah said:
MGonz said:
It is really the over the top type reaction of shoshannah and others that will be responsible for getting DJT elected if he (G-d forbid) is elected. Basically saying that if you do not concede that DJT is a Nazi you are supporting him is an awful way to proceed and will just push the undecided into his camp. I think that is actually a lot of what has been seen in recent polls. Everyone calm down and relax and oppose him in rational, not hysterical, terms.
This is misguided. Most people I know are personally, deeply stressed and frightened. This country will never get over it if he's elected - or it will be a long time, beyond our lifetimes, by the time we do.
You are really just proving MGonz right with this post, you know.
I assume most of the people you know are like you. Shrill and over the top. Probably the biggest think people find when they become president is how little direct power they have. That will probably shock DJT more than anything. In his company he can say the word and people will follow. In government it is the rules and bureaucracy that will castrate him. As maddening as they can be, it is exactly for threat of the like of DJT that 200+ years of rules and bureaucracy evolved.
shoshannah said:
MGonz said:
It is really the over the top type reaction of shoshannah and others that will be responsible for getting DJT elected if he (G-d forbid) is elected. Basically saying that if you do not concede that DJT is a Nazi you are supporting him is an awful way to proceed and will just push the undecided into his camp. I think that is actually a lot of what has been seen in recent polls. Everyone calm down and relax and oppose him in rational, not hysterical, terms.
This is misguided. Most people I know are personally, deeply stressed and frightened. This country will never get over it if he's elected - or it will be a long time, beyond our lifetimes, by the time we do.
tjohn said:
The larger point is that calling Trump a Nazi is inflammatory in a useless sort of way. Call him out on specific policies and point out that his positions represent the lowest and meanest in America as opposed the the kind of nation we should try to be.
I think our greatest moments are cases such as West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943) where, in wartime, the SCOTUS affirmed that the Constitution protected students from being forced to salute the American flag and say the Pledge of Allegiance in school.
Or a case in 1979, I believe, where the courts affirmed the rights of people to protest on behalf of Iran even though Iran was, at that time, holding our embassy personnel hostage.
There is more than enough similarity in my opinion to label him at least a sympathizer.
Yes, good rulings.
Yes, students are legally protected from being forced but in
reality they're not. In NJ, our politicians mandated by state
law that the pledge be imposed daily on our students. The local
school or community is not allowed to decide whether to pledge or
not to pledge. Invariably, students partake in the pledge due to
social pressure and of being conditioned at a very young age to accept the
pledge.
In reality the pledge is a loyalty oath, to be recited daily in
our schools. Conditioning children and getting them used to reciting
the pledge starts early, when they are five or six years old, before
they have the mental capability to decide on their own. Consequently,
just about every American accepts the pledge as a normal event,
without thought. Exceptions are the Amish and Jehovah Witnesses.
What would the founders of our nation have said if then someone
put forth that a daily loyalty pledge be presented and recited by the
young? Would they have been aghast? They were a very bright bunch and
I'm sure pledge would not have escaped them. If they thought a pledge
good idea they would have implemented one.
ice said:
shoshannah said:
MGonz said:
It is really the over the top type reaction of shoshannah and others that will be responsible for getting DJT elected if he (G-d forbid) is elected. Basically saying that if you do not concede that DJT is a Nazi you are supporting him is an awful way to proceed and will just push the undecided into his camp. I think that is actually a lot of what has been seen in recent polls. Everyone calm down and relax and oppose him in rational, not hysterical, terms.
This is misguided. Most people I know are personally, deeply stressed and frightened. This country will never get over it if he's elected - or it will be a long time, beyond our lifetimes, by the time we do.
You are really just proving MGonz right with this post, you know.
No, shoshannah really isn't.
My question to MGonz would be: If someone decides to vote for Trump to spite the people who are deeply fearful, how receptive to a rational argument do you think he or she was in the first place?
In enough cases to potentially make all the difference I definitely think enough. People react poorly to shrill hyperbole.
"shrill hyperbole" is the perfect description of the DJT campaign. Every one of his speeches is shrill hyperbole.
MGonz said:
I assume most of the people you know are like you. Shrill and over the top. Probably the biggest think people find when they become president is how little direct power they have. That will probably shock DJT more than anything. In his company he can say the word and people will follow. In government it is the rules and bureaucracy that will castrate him. As maddening as they can be, it is exactly for threat of the like of DJT that 200+ years of rules and bureaucracy evolved.
shoshannah said:
MGonz said:This is misguided. Most people I know are personally, deeply stressed and frightened. This country will never get over it if he's elected - or it will be a long time, beyond our lifetimes, by the time we do.
It is really the over the top type reaction of shoshannah and others that will be responsible for getting DJT elected if he (G-d forbid) is elected. Basically saying that if you do not concede that DJT is a Nazi you are supporting him is an awful way to proceed and will just push the undecided into his camp. I think that is actually a lot of what has been seen in recent polls. Everyone calm down and relax and oppose him in rational, not hysterical, terms.
Excuse me? Nice reductionism.
You are right. The president has little power—if he follows the rules. It's not clear that DJT will do that. He's shown already how he can inspire people in his company, in his family, in his campaign, and among his supporters to work outside the legal and ethical boundaries.
The rules will hogtie him. It will not matter what he or his supporters say.
the rules haven't hogtied our presidents from doing some pretty terrible stuff.
MGonz said:
The rules will hogtie him. It will not matter what he or his supporters say.
This is exactly what many of his voters and Republican leaders are counting on. What short memories they have. How did Reagan sell arms to Iran? Was he following the rules? Was he stymied by bureaucracy? How did FDR lock up Japanese-Americans? Did the "rules" hogtie Nixon from bombing the hell out of Cambodia?
Really the only extraordinary threat that DJT could entail is if there was an end to democratic elections. Absent that the system is self correcting. So he would be an awful president and we might be seriously harmed during a Trump administration. But it is not an existentialist threat. No one benefits when people make absurd claims.
MGonz said:
People react poorly to shrill hyperbole.
Would this explain why you are on your 5th, 6th maybe 7th MOL login name?
MGonz said:
In enough cases to potentially make all the difference I definitely think enough. People react poorly to shrill hyperbole.
I don't think that people like being told what to do period, especially in a presidential election when they are relatively high information.
Maybe people respond well when their peers share thoughts, but I think people especially don't like being told what to do by people who are younger than they are.
I remember once canvassing for John Kerry in Moosic, Pennsylvania (I was 25 then) and meeting a man working in his garage. I gave my little pro-Kerry spiel and then asked, as I had been advised to, "Do you know where your polling station is?"
The man stopped his work and said "I've lived here longer than you've been alive. Do you think I don't know where my polling place is?" I can't remember exactly what he said next, but his final words were "I'm not voting. They're both idiots."
Maybe the one thing people like less than being told how to vote is how to feel. As if the person telling them to have a certain reaction knows all of the experiences that person has gone through. I think maybe one thing people like less than getting orders from people younger than they are is getting orders from someone richer than they are.
So shrill or no, it might not make a difference.
MGonz said:
The rules will hogtie him. It will not matter what he or his supporters say.
What about what his supporters might do?
ml1 said:
this is a good point. I have a real concern that if Trump is elected, it will embolden thugs to carry out vigilante acts against "dangerous" people like Latin Americans and Muslims.
Isn't that a real threat? There is evidence that it has already begun.
ice said:I still don't think DJT has much of a chance to win - either the debates will do him in or the nation will finally come to its senses in the wee hours. But it is a huge mistake to put all of his supporters in any 'bucket', especially buckets with labels like deplorables or nazis. Much of his support comes from people who are just desperate for change in their lives and their families' lives. Given the state of affairs for many Americans, that is certainly not deplorable and most certainly should not invite one to conjure up visions of masses of DJT supporters raising their arms in a "Heil Trump!".
There is good change and bad change. If Bernie Sanders had won the Democratic Nomination and was proposing the type of change in which he believes and was being supported by people "desperate for change in their lives" and some of those people were calling for all Wall Street Executives to be sent to prison what would be your reaction?
In that case, I would advise Bernie's opponents not to bucket all of his supporters as socialist loony tunes. Just like I would advise Clinton's supporters to point out specific flaws in Trump's candidacy rather than call all his supporters deplorables of nazis. I would advise Bernie's opponents to point out the gaping flaws in what Bernie was proposing. When the nation has gone down the wrong path for so long, there are all sorts of legitimate reasons to be desperate for change. I happen to think Bernie was the worst candidate of all, but I certainly understand why many people desperate for change supported him, and I realize that demonizing them all in the same way may have had the opposite effect of what was intended..
What we need now is pragmatism. Doesn't sound very sexy but it is the only way to actually solve some issues.
I do not believe that Hillary Clinton or anyone associated with her campaign called Trump a Nazi. It was the OP who introduced that term.
Hillary did use the term "basket of deplorables" . It was a mistake and she walked it back somewhat, but it seemes to me that she took more flak for that than Trump took for calling her a "bigot".
My main point is that "change" can be good or bad. While my politics are "Left" I consider myself "Conservative" by nature because I really dislike change.
I think that there are a portion of Trump supporters that want the kind of change that would be harmful to certain racial and religious minorities. I think that many if not most of his other supporters would have a hard time articulating what kind of change they think Trump would accomplish.
There may be a significant number of Hillary Clinton supporters whose idea of significant change is having a female President.
Sponsored Business
Promote your business here - Businesses get highlighted throughout the site and you can add a deal.
For Sale
Free Items
Advertisement
Never say zero.
Dictatorships often come in incremental steps. The Roman Republic had very strong civil safeguards for its citizens but we see what happened. Some of their civil safeguards were stronger than ours.
For example, supposed Trump decided to disregard SC rulings. Trump would argue that he is doing what is best for our republic. That he won't let nine un-elected judges weaken America with nonsense. Absent impeachment, his disregard would stand. Or he could also ask congress to change the law, increasing the SC to fifteen justices. Roosevelt tried that but he failed because there was still decency in the congress. Would we still have that decency? Or would the congressional Republicans be salivating at the possibility of appointing eight hard core conservatives? Seven new Scalia like justices could be interesting.
He could also tell his EPA to disregard environmental offenders. Or tell his justice dept to be very selective in following up on civil rights violations.
He may not be a dictator but his actions can be dictates. The only thing that can stop a president from going overboard is congress or not being re-elected.