Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Republicans

Journal damn_registrars's Journal: The real Trump gets just as much support 71

Journal by damn_registrars
I've pointed out more than a few times that Trump - and the GOP under him - is a fascist party that hopes itself to be on the rise. There is plenty of video now of Trump directly borrowing Nazi rhetoric at a rally to get his supporters riled up. Naturally, because like any other fascist - aspiring or otherwise - he cannot allow himself to be wrong in front of a crowd, he had his campaign actually dial it forward rather than back in response to concerns raised by the public.

One odd little twist in that line - a likely whistle for his supporters - he still called his opponents "fascists" in his bit. Not a surprise there, of course, as his party has favored attacking the English Language itself for some time. I expect they'll come up with a cheerier word for their movement than fascism, to better sell it to their supporters.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The real Trump gets just as much support More

The real Trump gets just as much support

Comments Filter:
  • The New Anti-Zionist Intifada (NAZI) sympathizers are very clearly the Democrats.

    I guess all the finger pointing is good aerobic exercise for you, so keep it up.

    • Factional bickering (too bad those guys didn't duke it out the other day) aside, *the Party is what the Party does*... I'll bet that Bush and Clinton are happy to be off the front page for a while. I'm dying to see what comes after Trump/Biden

      Shouldn't there also be a comma after "so", to make it more... emphatic?

      • Does it matter? If the people don't look at ,e.g., the Twitter Files (alongside the rest of the evidence) and realize that the Constitution is so much lingering facade...then, I'm no longer clear what difference anything makes.

        Was that sufficient comma action for you?

        • ... I'm no longer clear what difference anything makes.

          Yay for nihilism! Try not to think about it

          Was that sufficient comma action for you?

          touchy touchy!

    • The New Anti-Zionist Intifada (NAZI) sympathizers are very clearly the Democrats.

      Yet we regularly see neonazis at Trump rallies, and I have yet to see one at a rally for a democratic candidate. Of course history has already established that every single Fascist Leader has been from a right-wing movement, so it is no surprise to see history repeating itself here.

      But don't let me stop you from trying to redefine what it means to be a fascist. You've never been a big supporter of leaving the English Language alone when it conveniences you to do otherwise.

      • Yet we regularly see neonazis at Trump rallies,

        And there were LaRouchies at the edge of the Tea Parties. A percentage of them may be taken at face value; but a percentage may very well be false flags.

        • And can you find a single Nazi at a democratic rally? We see swastikas pop up at rallies for Your Team all the time, not once have I seen one at a rally for the other team.

          • And can you find a single Nazi at a democratic rally?

            Well, the Squat and aficionados sure look like New Anti-Zionist Intifada symathizers, but perhaps it was just some trick of the audio.

            • the Squat

              I have never heard of anyone or any group called that. Please inform me on who this name is a derogatory reference to.

              look like New Anti-Zionist Intifada symathizers

              What makes these people "look like" Nazis? Just because they aren't waving the correct flag does not make them Nazis. We've seen the fascist ambitions from Your Team over and over again - as already stated they come exclusively from right-wing movements - but go ahead, please show me how these people from the "wrong" team are somehow conflated with Nazis.

              • Squad
                • By squad, are you referring to the female Muslim members of congress? If so you've gone way beyond stretching reality when you accuse them of being Nazis. Just because they want Palestine to exist as a free state does not mean they have any intention to eradicate the Jewish population.

                  Really their main grievance against the current state of Israel can be distilled down to one simple question:

                  Why are the Palestinians being punished - repeatedly for decades - for what the Nazis did during World War II?

                  They are doing more for peace than anyone from Your Team.

                  • you've gone way beyond stretching reality when you accuse them of being Nazis

                    New Anti-Zionist Intifada sympathizers, which the record far more than adequately supports.

                    • No. Just because you don't like them doesn't make them Nazis in any way, shape, or form. Call them what you want, but I will call your bullshit on calling them Nazis. They do not resemble Nazis in any meaningful way beyond being human.
                    • I am aware of only one American president who has ever praised Nazis of any kind. That president - unsurprisingly - came from Your Team. Naturally only the Dear Leader from Your Team could ever find a reason to claim that there were "good" neo-nazis marching in support of his cause.

                      But go ahead, keep pretending that fascism in some alternate reality has at some point come from anywhere other than right-wing leaders. I long ago stopped holding my breath for someone to provide an actual example of that
                    • I've called them New Anti-Zionist Intifada sympathizers, which claim their behavior clearly supports.
                    • You're gaslighting extra hard here. I interpret this as due to accuracy on my part.
                    • You are plainly trying to call them Nazis, which they clearly are not.

                      As already established, Nazis are in Your Team, and praised by your Dear Leader. The people you are trying to label as Nazis are not Nazis in any reasonable understanding of the term. Your silly acronym only shows that you hate them for some reason, which is odd considering how much Your Team openly embraces all forms of fascism.
                    • Gaslighting? That is a strange misapplication of that term, there.

                      Your own Dear Leader, when neo-nazis were marching in his support, told us that there were "fine people" in that crowd of neo-nazis. Never before or since have I seen or heard of a POTUS praise a Nazi.

                      Your accuracy makes storm troopers look like William Tell.

                    • You are plainly trying to call them Nazis, which they clearly are not.

                      No, I'm not accusing them of adhering to the tenets of National Socialism. It's a joke. Laugh.

                    • You're failing the hoax quiz https://twitter.com/ScottAdamsSays/status/1561333927565897728 [twitter.com]

                      Until shown otherwise, I'll chalk your failure up to gaslighting.
                    • You might want to look up the meaning of hoax before you go around attaching it to everything that makes your Dear Leader look fallible. It's astonishing to find that there is no limit to how far you will go to defend Trump; you actually have a few people in Your Team who are of at least average intelligence and yet you continue to defend the blithering idiot. Have you looked to see what his policies have actually done for you, personally? Just because Your Team keeps telling you that Reaganomics 3.0 has

                    • joke

                      How was I supposed to tell that by any of your previous context? You have happily thrown all kinds of other atrociously inaccurate labels onto anyone else you don't like, so it is perfectly in character for you to call people Nazis.

                    • How was I supposed to tell that

                      This is /. Serious offerings like the Maslow-3D model are the exception, not the rule.

                    • Who cares if it's Trump? The simple truth is that Your Team has weponized the media and the legal system, and society is impoverished for all Your Team's constant stream of falsehoods.
                    • You give Trump completely different rules for criticism from anyone else currently alive today. He gets all the possible credit, and none of the possible blame. He is indeed your new Messiah, whether you want to admit it or not.

                      Actually, that isn't even fair. There are more things that Jesus said and did that you will disagree with and criticize than there are that Trump did and said.
                    • I've seen you try that before when you've seen your conspiracies fall apart in front of you. Is that the closest you can get to admitting that you're wrong?

                      There are plenty of things that we discuss where there is a range of views and some cannot be simply labeled "wrong" or "right". But your accusation of any current member of congress being a Nazi is simply wrong.
                    • Trump exploded the debt, artfully dodged the blame for his part in the Covid disaster, and did shag-all about The Deep State. But yeah, I'm some kind of sycophant, or something, in your telling.

                    • when you've seen your conspiracies fall apart in front of you

                      Name one that I've seriously endorsed that has been shown completely baseless.

                    • Trump exploded the debt, artfully dodged the blame for his part in the Covid disaster, and did shag-all about The Deep State.

                      Yet if President Lawnchair or Biden had done that you would be screaming for them to be impeached over it. Trump gets a free pass on all of those because he's from Your Team.

                      Granted, it is impossible to ever show change on the third one because there is no agreed upon definition for it and most allegations against it are conspiratorial at best.

                    • when you've seen your conspiracies fall apart in front of you

                      Name one that I've seriously endorsed that has been shown completely baseless.

                      You very enthusiastically supported the conspiracy that the cocaine found in the white house was planted by the DNC to get rid of Harris from VP so they could install someone else. That might have been one of your top scoring counts of lunacy but it certainly wasn't alone.

                    • or Biden had done that

                      Biden HAS done that, and nobody seems to give a GIVE. Maybe the Modern Monetary Theory crack smokers have the right of it. Two ideas existing in tension are that (a) the market isn't "fair", or it would have already exploded, and (b) the oligarch class will keep the market afloat (until they suddenly cannot).

                    • very enthusiastically supported the conspiracy that the cocaine found in the white house was planted by the DNC to get rid of Harris from VP

                      ISTR echoing some speculation, but "very enthusiastically supported" is just your typical mischaracterization. This would be annoying if I were taking you at all seriously.

                    • I am aware of only one American president who has ever praised Nazis of any kind.

                      Well, maybe not exactly "praise", but one president was very friendly with real nazis [jewishvirtuallibrary.org]

                    • You brought it up multiple times, and never had any support for it. You inserted it randomly into discussions. That sounds like very enthusiastic support to me. Granted you have shown stronger support for other random gibberish sold by Your Team, but you were willing to put plenty of energy behind that particular anti-factual conspiracy.

                    • That sounds like very enthusiastic support to me.

                      I am accustomed to you doing whatever the "file system check" (fsck) you want with my posts. Which is why I don't take you seriously.

                    • or Biden had done that

                      Biden HAS done that, and nobody seems to give a GIVE.

                      You did more to prove my point there than not. You happily brushed aside what your Dear Leader did, because he's on Your Team. Yet when you suspect the same of someone who isn't from Your Team, you scream at the top of your lungs that it should disqualify them from the right to breathe American air.

                    • You took a lot of time to tell us how that particular conspiracy was going to up-end the administration, the executive branch, US government, and the entire planet. Then like so many of your other favorite conspiracies it of course failed to materialize into anything at all. You could just accept that Your Team owned you on this one, and that they fed you a sack of lies. I wouldn't expect you to ponder it much harder than that, but you were indeed owned by the people who you so enthusiastically support w

                    • took a lot of time

                      Yeah, sure, whatever. Has there ever been a dead horse that you have left unflogged?

                    • you scream at the top of your lungs that it should disqualify them from the right to breathe American air.

                      But is that enough hyperbole? Can't we crank that up to "deserve to be launched at ludicrous speed into the heart of the sun", or something? You're really falling down on the insane overstatement here.

                    • Is introspection forbidden by Your Team? Clearly you cannot accept that your Dear Leader could ever himself fail at anything, does that extend to ruling out any case of personal responsibility? After all that concept was so very 1990's for your party, and all the folks who embraced it were driven out years ago now for failing the ideological purity tests.
                    • Your own Dear Leader has been happily employing the same rhetoric that other famous fascist leaders used to get their bases riled up to persecute, harm, and kill people they didn't like. Naturally that rhetoric includes renditions of "rules for thee, but not for me".
                    • Investigations of political opponents by Trump: 0

                      Investigations of Trump by Political opponents: 2 impeachments, 3 criminal and 1 civil case (without checking thoroughly)

                      You may lay by your dish.
                    • Not sure what any of that meant.

                    • Investigations of political opponents by Trump: 0

                      Fascists don't use the criminal and civil courts against their opponents, they use the court of public opinion and they whip crowds into an angry mob instead. Your Dear Leader has excelled at exactly that and is stirring hard again.

                      Investigations of Trump by Political opponents: 2 impeachments, 3 criminal and 1 civil case (without checking thoroughly)

                      Your Team lacks the moral fortitude to ever consider that your Dear Leader could be less than perfect. Your Team similarly has zero moral grounds for this as they had previously impeached a POTUS for the high crime of having an affair - which of course is not a crime if your

                    • That was a request for you to look at the profound double standard you apply when it comes to accusations. You have proudly latched on to multiple conspiracies against people who were not from Your Team, and happily buried your head in the sand when allegations came up against people from Your Team.

                      Now you have seen yet another of your conspiracies turn out to be built on nothing whatsoever. I'm asking you to take a moment and reflect on what that might mean in relation to the relationship between Your

                    • Fascists don't use the criminal and civil courts against their opponents

                      "You really don't have the fainest Monkey Fighting clue what you're talking about"--Mikhail_Khodorkovsky [wikipedia.org], probably.

                      to ever consider that your Dear Leader could be less than perfect.

                      What? Evangelicals have totally priced in the blue-collar verbiage, the divorce, the casino ownership, and all that. Once more, your cluelessness is on a tear. They HAVE considered Trump as sinner, and realized that we're electing a President, not a Pastor.

                    • Everyone is a hypocrite, yes. Film at 11. Pointing such out is like noticing typographical errors. I guess all of this huffing about makes you feel better?

                    • They HAVE considered Trump as sinner, and realized that we're electing a President, not a Pastor.

                      Yet you and the rest of Your Team happily brush off all of his sins and pretend they either didn't happen at all, or are of no importance. You do this even when trying to impeach and imprison others for the same sins when the only distinction is which consonant comes after their name.

                    • Everyone is a hypocrite

                      When one realizes their hypocrisy they could learn from it, and attempt to apply more even standards without concern for party affiliation. However you and the rest of Your Team instead wear that hypocrisy as a badge of honor, somehow weaving it into the mythology of your Dear Leader. Your devotion is not much different from the forced devotion of North Korea, except you have convinced yourself that yours is somehow voluntary.

                    • imprison others for the same sins

                      No one is ever judged for sins not their own, unless the Democrats are playing the corporate guilt game, as in the 1619 Project.

                    • When one realizes their hypocrisy they could learn from it,

                      Or, as with Your Team, treat the hypocrisy as an aphrodisiac.

                    • imprison others for the same sins

                      No one is ever judged for sins not their own

                      You deflected that in a really interesting way there. My point is that Your Team says that certain rules are important only towards certain people. Things that Your Team has wanted to impeach or imprison others for they have allowed their own team members off with no more than a warning (and often far less).

                    • I'll take that as you saying you have no interest in learning from your hypocrisy. Not a surprise since Your Team has so enthusiastically ditched the "party of personal responsibility" mantra.

                      Of course that never was a very good word bite.

                    • Your Team says that certain rules are important only towards certain people.

                      Really, really tired of the amorphous generalizations and I will henceforth ignore them all.

                    • so enthusiastically ditched the "party of personal responsibility" mantra.

                      Yet another context-free assertion. I can't quite get to half-caring what you may have meant here, sorry.

                    • Your team used to call themselves "the party of personal responsibility". Now Your Team is much more concerned with who they can place blame on (anyone outside their party), and who they can give credit to (the Dear Leader). Nobody on Your Team ever accepts responsibility for failings at all anymore.
    • And if your entire argument this week for calling assigning the term nazi to those who don't host nazis at their rallies is because of how you think they view the latest Israel / Hamas war, you should take a moment to take stock of what is going on.

      Just because some people don't see the state of Israel as completely innocent in this matter doesn't mean they are siding with Hamas. A mature view on the situation recognizes that both sides are guilty of killing innocent people on the other side. At some
      • "both sides"

        One may need to pause for reflection if one finds oneself equivocating for (a) the atrocities of 07Oct, (b) deliberately discounting Hamas perfidy in putting, e.g. their HQ under a hospital, and (c) overlooking the meticulous IDF efforts not to do more harm than necessary in applying military chemotherapy to the cancer that is Hamas.

        I would not think it joyous for your folly to be visited upon you personally, in the form of violence, from those whose stated goal is the destruction of Western
        • OK we've established then that you are unwilling to consider there being any fault that can be assigned to the flawless folks of Israel, and that you see no valid reason for the existence of Hamas or the state of Palestine. Why not just advocate for carpet bombing the entirety of Gaza then?
          • No one is accusing the Israelis of sainthood, but they are being far more meticulous in their application of chemo to the Hamas cancer than literally anyone else would, now that

            we've established then that you are unwilling to consider there being any[thing but] fault

            applied to the IDF.

            • I guess it doesn't surprise me that you are such an enthusiastic supporter of the Israeli approach to the situation, as they are largely matching the methodology that Your Team would like to apply to the overwhelming majority of Americans:
              • They are not allowed to vote for their representation
              • The overwhelming majority of them have no hopes of geographic mobility
              • The overwhelming majority of them have no hopes of economic mobility

              Don't get me wrong, Hamas is a group that does terrible things. At the same tim

Slashdot Top Deals

PURGE COMPLETE.

Close