Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[Milchshake]

"Trump has not been seen in public since Tuesday and has no public events on his calendar today."

I have no idea how we get *out* of a shutdown, but i do not think that cocooning yourself in AI slop videos and refusing to leave your room is an effective way to win the politics of a shutdown.
That’s a real problem because it’s clear Johnson neither has the ability or inclination to broker a deal without Trumps agreement, and isn’t willingly or able to work with Thune on coming up with something that can get 7 dem votes without losing house or senate Rs. So wild how the speaker of the house is straight up just acting like he's the president's employee.

[Kathandira]

If you don't want ICE and the President to be called Nazi's and Gestapo, how about they stop following the Nazi playbook page for page?

It is really really easy to clutch pearls if you ignore the past 10 years of conservatives name calling and declaring their political rivals their enemies. Not rivals, or opposition, ENEMIES. That is like page one of 'How To Nazi, Core Rule Book'.

[tehdang]

Ah yes, clearly extremely violent rhetoric encouraging violence!

Why Republicans think anyone takes them seriously is beyond me.

also -



A factual statement? ICE has said they use racial profiling, Tom Homan has bragged about it. And we've seen the videos of ICE terrorizing innocent Americans. Why are Republicans so triggered by facts and reality?

It sounds like you're now referring to the webpage as a document of quotes that can be analyzed for their truthfulness and relation to ongoing violence against ICE, and not simply an "enemies list" as you previously called it. Do you no longer dismiss it as an enemies list, and retract "you seem rather unphased by the president publishing lists of political enemies?" It sounds like you want to dive in, instead of dismissing me for seeming unphased by its existence. I have seen Nixon's enemies list, and it's just names and short comments.

You didn't answer my previous post, so I'll repeat "Do you contest any of the quotes? Do you deny that they have been said among violent acts taken against ICE?" This is a good baseline if you wish to retract your prior post, and move forward with analyzing a list of quotes that may be divisive rhetoric concerning ICE that may encourage more violence taken against ICE. Which, I might add, may be any collection of accurate quotes that exhibit divisive rhetoric, and tame quotes that are accurate but being twisted towards an argument.

[Edge-]

If you don't want ICE and the President to be called Nazi's and Gestapo, how about they stop following the Nazi playbook page for page?

No. You see, it's pointing out the similarities to the rise of the Nazi party and fascism that is the real problem. Not the similarities to the rise of the Nazi party and fascism.

The rancid meat on your plate in front of you is not the real problem, can you believe the salad fork is on the right hand side of the setting?

[Kathandira]

It sounds like you're now referring to the webpage as a document of quotes that can be analyzed for their truthfulness and relation to ongoing violence against ICE, and not simply an "enemies list" as you previously called it. Do you no longer dismiss it as an enemies list, and retract "you seem rather unphased by the president publishing lists of political enemies?"

I know that isn't directed my way. But I will stand up and say, Yes this is a list of Trump's enemies. He has been repeatedly calling the Democratic Party a terrorist organization and speaking about how he wants to handle his enemies. 2+2=4, the math is mathing. If you want to deny that, that if your head in the sand.

In the words of Trump. "This is just common sense"

[Edge-]

I know that isn't directed my way. But I will stand up and say, Yes this is a list of Trump's enemies. He has been repeatedly calling the Democratic Party a terrorist organization and speaking about how he wants to handle his enemies. 2+2=4, the math is mathing. If you want to deny that, that if your head in the sand.

In the words of Trump. "This is just common sense"

How dare you understand context and be able to connect one event to another and not treat everything as if it's happening in complete isolation, detached from reality and any other events! Do you realize how incredibly inconvenient that is to downplaying literally everything Donald and Republicans are doing?!

[Kathandira]

How dare you understand context and be able to connect one event to another and not treat everything as if it's happening in complete isolation, detached from reality and any other events! Do you realize how incredibly inconvenient that is to downplaying literally everything Donald and Republicans are doing?!

When his supporters only get their news from a single source, it doesn't surprise me that they only get one narrative. A narrative that conveniently omits facts and details.

[tehdang]

If you don't want ICE and the President to be called Nazi's and Gestapo, how about they stop following the Nazi playbook page for page?

It is really really easy to clutch pearls if you ignore the past 10 years of conservatives name calling and declaring their political rivals their enemies. Not rivals, or opposition, ENEMIES. That is like page one of 'How To Nazi, Core Rule Book'.

If you really think the Third Reich is right around the corner and ICE acts as a sort of secret police for the President, I'd rather hear that and have you own that rhetoric. My only concern here is that Trump has been repeatedly singled out for his rhetoric, but Democrats and members of this forum apply a second standard for their own rhetoric.

You do understand that singling conservatives out for alleged "enemies" rhetoric (maybe you're really referring to Trump and his campaign workers and advisors and officials) is a bit tame beside Nazi and Gestapo. I want to understand why federal officers of the United States are Nazi and Gestapo, but Trump's the one using divisive rhetoric that harms the country. Don't hold political opponents to standards you're unwilling to abide with yourself.

How dare you understand context and be able to connect one event to another and not treat everything as if it's happening in complete isolation, detached from reality and any other events! Do you realize how incredibly inconvenient that is to downplaying literally everything Donald and Republicans are doing?!

I think both parties may assemble lists of quotes into a webpage and argue that they form some kind of whole. This is the first time I've heard a list of quotes characterized as an "enemies list," but you're both not retracting and not defending. You did choose to clutch your pearls with the "you seem rather unphased" at its mere existence, so I think I should know if your perspective has changed. Would you say the same thing about a Democratic leader assembling a list of quotes from Republicans? If you no longer think it's an enemies list and no longer feel like it's remarkable that "[I] seem rather unphased," then this helps me understand why you moved on without comment. I do wonder why anyone would be phased by a list of quotes from a political party on a politically salient subject.

He has been repeatedly calling the Democratic Party a terrorist organization and speaking about how he wants to handle his enemies.

All I can recall was saying this about Antifa, but maybe Stephen Miller or somebody did similar? If it's "repeatedly calling," I'm sure you have sources you could post.

[Edge-]

If you really think the Third Reich is right around the corner

Nobody thinks it's right around the corner, but it's a great way to deflect and downplay the people pointing out many of the similarities to the rise of the Nazi party and fascism I guess.

Anyways, onto other things this administration is doing great - https://www.npr.org/sections/shots-h...ine-guidelines

Remy Sweeney-Garrett desperately wants to get her daughters vaccinated against COVID-19. But so far that's been impossible.

"I'm very worried, and frustrated," says Sweeney-Garrett, 34, who lives in Seattle with her 9-year-old daughter Maxine and 18-month-old daughter Maeve. "And, yeah, I'm angry."

Sweeney-Garrett hasn't been able to get her daughters the shots because the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has yet to issue final guidelines for administering them. The rules are necessary for the federal Vaccines for Children Program to start shipping the vaccines to doctors, health departments and others. About half of U.S. kids are eligible for shots through the program.

"I'm worried about my youngest daughter in particular having to go to the hospital because she is susceptible to respiratory complications," Sweeney-Garrett says. "And it's frustrating because I feel like this is within the control of the people in our government."

The lag by the CDC is very unusual. Typically, the CDC acts within days — sometimes hours — because of the urgency of getting shots into arms before the winter surge.

The delay has created "a lot of confusion both among the public and even among providers around what the status is," says Dr. Susan Kansagra, chief medical officer for the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials.

Just more chaos that only results in harming every-day Americans, and their children, from RFK Jr., Donald Trump, and this Republican administration.

[Xyonai]

"Trump has not been seen in public since Tuesday and has no public events on his calendar today."

I have no idea how we get *out* of a shutdown, but i do not think that cocooning yourself in AI slop videos and refusing to leave your room is an effective way to win the politics of a shutdown.
That’s a real problem because it’s clear Johnson neither has the ability or inclination to broker a deal without Trumps agreement, and isn’t willingly or able to work with Thune on coming up with something that can get 7 dem votes without losing house or senate Rs. So wild how the speaker of the house is straight up just acting like he's the president's employee.

It's very apparent that they either:

A: Don't actually want a deal so they can just continue to halplessly shrug as Trump and his cabinet use this smokescreen/excuse to begin more vigerously gutting federal departments and replace employees with goons.

B: Expect that Dems will cave to political pressure and sign onto whatever they need to to keep things running before they're blamed for the shutdown and lock themselves out of the midterms.

Both aren't unrealistic, both can also be true, but even with coperate media on their side Republicans aren't doing a good job controlling the narriative on this shutdown. At least right now. We'll see how that changes when the lack of paychecks to federal workers and contractors starts having more visible effects on the economy.

[Iphie]

"Trump has not been seen in public since Tuesday and has no public events on his calendar today."

I have no idea how we get *out* of a shutdown, but i do not think that cocooning yourself in AI slop videos and refusing to leave your room is an effective way to win the politics of a shutdown.
That’s a real problem because it’s clear Johnson neither has the ability or inclination to broker a deal without Trumps agreement, and isn’t willingly or able to work with Thune on coming up with something that can get 7 dem votes without losing house or senate Rs. So wild how the speaker of the house is straight up just acting like he's the president's employee.

Wait this is a new event? Like has he fallen of the face of the earth again? When was the previous time?

[Sunseeker]

Nobody thinks it's right around the corner, but it's a great way to deflect and downplay the people pointing out many of the similarities to the rise of the Nazi party and fascism I guess.

To be pedantic, I dont think the Third Reich is right around the corner. I think the Fourth is.

[Kathandira]

If you really think the Third Reich is right around the corner and ICE acts as a sort of secret police for the President, I'd rather hear that and have you own that rhetoric. My only concern here is that Trump has been repeatedly singled out for his rhetoric, but Democrats and members of this forum apply a second standard for their own rhetoric.

I can only speak for myself, and not other posters. But yes, my rhetoric is in direct response to the rhetoric from conservatives/trump supporters. Why would anyone be called the enemy and threatened sit quietly? Why would people allow reckless ICE officers kidnap innocent people, or use fear/bait tactics to hunt down people who commited the crime of overstaying their welcome, without pointing out that they are behaving like the SS officers? Being silent is far worse than speaking out.

You do understand that singling conservatives out for alleged "enemies" rhetoric (maybe you're really referring to Trump and his campaign workers and advisors and officials) is a bit tame beside Nazi and Gestapo. I want to understand why federal officers of the United States are Nazi and Gestapo, but Trump's the one using divisive rhetoric that harms the country. Don't hold political opponents to standards you're unwilling to abide with yourself.

It doesn't take action to be part of the Nazi Party. All it takes is allowing it. That aside, it is not just Trump's rhetoric, he has plenty in his administration who also say it, and agree with him.

[Bwgmon]

Wait this is a new event? Like has he fallen of the face of the earth again? When was the previous time?

The previous time was...late July or early August, I think? He vanished for over a week, and most of the people who raced to provide "proof of life" strengthened the notion that something happened because the photos they posted were found to be months/years old.

IIRC, when Trump came back, a lot of things about his overall condition looked noticeably worse, like more severe bruising, his speech getting slower, etc.

[alach]

Remember when trump told the electorate he would be the president of peace and not the president of war like Biden.
Remember how the War on Drugs turned out?
I hope the 2024 electorate remembers.

[tehdang]

To be pedantic, I dont think the Third Reich is right around the corner. I think the Fourth is.

And if somebody puts a bullet in a federal officer who is, for them and you, an avatar of the Fourth Reich, is it permissible for Republicans to say that the Democrats are encouraging violence?

Trump's opening shop on an obvious case of hypocrisy. The defenses to it are pretty feeble. You think the Fourth Reich is right around the corner, but Republicans would be remiss to think left-wingers would ever use violence based on such a prediction? I don't think that's supportable. It just makes the opposition party to Trump seem just as crazy as him, or close to it. The more logical opposition is winning in 2026 and 2028, launching lawsuits against instances that you think are excessive force, and talking straightforwardly about why ongoing violence and threats of violence properly justify masking.

I can only speak for myself, and not other posters. But yes, my rhetoric is in direct response to the rhetoric from conservatives/trump supporters. Why would anyone be called the enemy and threatened sit quietly? Why would people allow reckless ICE officers kidnap innocent people, or use fear/bait tactics to hunt down people who commited the crime of overstaying their welcome, without pointing out that they are behaving like the SS officers? Being silent is far worse than speaking out.

Yes, I have heard the justification that you're only doing this because the other guy did it first. In fact, I've heard Democrats do this for literally my entire life. We have 60 years of Democrats warning that the Third Reich is just around the corner, but it historically fails to come true. So if we're going off pointing out who did it first, I would transport you to the 1960s and ask you if Democrats should be condemned for their history of using violent rhetoric. Or maybe their lack of foresight in robbing their future like-minded followers of the argument you just presented.

It doesn't take action to be part of the Nazi Party. All it takes is allowing it. That aside, it is not just Trump's rhetoric, he has plenty in his administration who also say it, and agree with him.

I do recall the online campaigns on social media of "punch a Nazi." It has its own internal logic of justifying violence. Democracy is about to end, we have to act now to stop such a terrible future! Words aren't enough! I don't agree with that logic for the premises, but it follows internal logic to the argument.

I'm still trying to square the outright justification of violence (There will be a fascist takeover, so we must stop it before it happens). If it's all so terrible to call it Nazi Gestapo whatnot, isn't the logical inference that lawless action is justified based on allegedly accurate portrayals of what's happening today? Isn't the obvious move for Republicans to single out the extreme rhetoric (justified in your view from its accuracy), and tell the nation that Democrats desire violence to be committed against ICE The Gestapo? In the case of actual violence directed against ICE and other federal officers, isn't this the most obvious political move?

I do think some of the Democrats quoted are doing the *wink wink* *nudge nudge* "fascist" rhetoric, just as the kind of pablum political attacks that they say before having beer and cocktails with their targets the next day. That's why I brought up the history since the 1960s. It's a little comical to think we've had 60 years of fascists, but year 70 is the big moment that was luckily averted for the previous 60. It's in the same vein as hearing "this is the most important election in my lifetime" repeatedly over a half dozen elections. (I've said in previous posts that I support lawsuits and accountability and testing for any allegations of excessive force, which is the true forum for unmasking individuals in law enforcement. The same goes for lengthy detentions after arrest.)

[Edge-]

And if somebody puts a bullet in a federal officer who is, for them and you, an avatar of the Fourth Reich, is it permissible for Republicans to say that the Democrats are encouraging violence?

What's funny to me about this "question" is that we have a number of federal officers who have been killed by far-right lunatics over the years.

But I bet this standard doesn't apply universally.

[Breccia]

It sounds like you're ARK ARK ARK *slaps flippers together*

You support someone who pardoned violent terrorists. Your stance about people saying "maybe they shouldn't wear masks" is irrelevant. You've sided with traitors.

[Kathandira]

And if somebody puts a bullet in a federal officer who is, for them and you, an avatar of the Fourth Reich, is it permissible for Republicans to say that the Democrats are encouraging violence?

Trump's opening shop on an obvious case of hypocrisy. The defenses to it are pretty feeble. You think the Fourth Reich is right around the corner, but Republicans would be remiss to think left-wingers would ever use violence based on such a prediction? I don't think that's supportable. It just makes the opposition party to Trump seem just as crazy as him, or close to it. The more logical opposition is winning in 2026 and 2028, launching lawsuits against instances that you think are excessive force, and talking straightforwardly about why ongoing violence and threats of violence properly justify masking.

Yes, I have heard the justification that you're only doing this because the other guy did it first. In fact, I've heard Democrats do this for literally my entire life. We have 60 years of Democrats warning that the Third Reich is just around the corner, but it historically fails to come true. So if we're going off pointing out who did it first, I would transport you to the 1960s and ask you if Democrats should be condemned for their history of using violent rhetoric. Or maybe their lack of foresight in robbing their future like-minded followers of the argument you just presented.

I do recall the online campaigns on social media of "punch a Nazi." It has its own internal logic of justifying violence. Democracy is about to end, we have to act now to stop such a terrible future! Words aren't enough! I don't agree with that logic for the premises, but it follows internal logic to the argument.

I'm still trying to square the outright justification of violence (There will be a fascist takeover, so we must stop it before it happens). If it's all so terrible to call it Nazi Gestapo whatnot, isn't the logical inference that lawless action is justified based on allegedly accurate portrayals of what's happening today? Isn't the obvious move for Republicans to single out the extreme rhetoric (justified in your view from its accuracy), and tell the nation that Democrats desire violence to be committed against ICE The Gestapo? In the case of actual violence directed against ICE and other federal officers, isn't this the most obvious political move?

I do think some of the Democrats quoted are doing the *wink wink* *nudge nudge* "fascist" rhetoric, just as the kind of pablum political attacks that they say before having beer and cocktails with their targets the next day. That's why I brought up the history since the 1960s. It's a little comical to think we've had 60 years of fascists, but year 70 is the big moment that was luckily averted for the previous 60. It's in the same vein as hearing "this is the most important election in my lifetime" repeatedly over a half dozen elections. (I've said in previous posts that I support lawsuits and accountability and testing for any allegations of excessive force, which is the true forum for unmasking individuals in law enforcement. The same goes for lengthy detentions after arrest.)

I am a firm believer that heroes welcome their consequences. If someone punches a Nazi, they should be tried in court, and possibly fined or jailed. And the person who punched that Nazi, should walk to their cell with a smile on their face.

If the other side who is against that feels that this is inciting or promoting violence, then so be it.

Let me say though, I personally would need to be convinced that the person being called a Nazi is actually taking actions that harm people. Not just words. But rather pushing legislation to remove basic rights, mobilizing troops on US citizens, or deporting citizens unjustly. If that person gets punched, and that is the viewed as promoting violence, then i'm on board with it. There are situations where violence is justified, and that is response to violence itself.

[Iphie]

The previous time was...late July or early August, I think? He vanished for over a week, and most of the people who raced to provide "proof of life" strengthened the notion that something happened because the photos they posted were found to be months/years old.

IIRC, when Trump came back, a lot of things about his overall condition looked noticeably worse, like more severe bruising, his speech getting slower, etc.

Yeah, so if he gets back in a week and disappears in a month time again, we'll know he's getting treatment for something, which keeps him going for a month.