Sidebar

The policy and politics of Trumpism

Status
Not open for further replies.
NationalTitles18

NationalTitles18

TideFans Legend
May 25, 2003
29,896
35,259
362
Mountainous Northern California
TIDE-HSV said:
Also, in the same interview:

Anyone not worried by that kind of talk isn't really paying attention...
Click to expand...
True, but a number haven't been worried about it until Trump became POTUS. While I welcome them to the fold, they may want to reconsider 1. their reasoning for the change of heart and 2. not caring so long as the person they support is in office.
 
TIDE-HSV

TIDE-HSV

Senior Administrator
Staff member
Oct 13, 1999
84,625
39,853
437
Huntsville, AL,USA
NationalTitles16 said:
This is one of, perhaps the most, damaging actions he has proposed. His fans eat it up, never considering the chilling impact on free speech.
Click to expand...
As an attorney, I chuckle at it. I'd love to see him on the stand, under oath, and in discovery. If there were ever anyone who couldn't stand the exposure of discovery, it is he...
 
L

LA4Bama

All-SEC
Jan 5, 2015
1,624
0
0
Los Angeles, CA
NationalTitles16 said:
True, but a number haven't been worried about it until Trump became POTUS. While I welcome them to the fold, they may want to reconsider 1. their reasoning for the change of heart and 2. not caring so long as the person they support is in office.
Click to expand...
This. Trump is the worst yet, but from a longer view of things, he is also just the next stage in the decline of a democracy that was already becoming dysfunctional and teetering into crony capitalism and rule by executive and judicial fiat. I see frequent comparison to Hitler, but to me the better comparison may be Bismarck, and I shudder to think what happens when we really get our Hitler in another generation. Because as bad as Trump is, he is far from being a true totalitarian. And NT16 is exactly right. Both sides have been rushing headlong into authoritarian tactics so long as it is for their side. We should not forget all the Marxist totalitarian regimes were leftists reacting to failed authoritarian welfare states like Trump seems to imagine.
 
81usaf92

81usaf92

TideFans Legend
Apr 26, 2008
35,375
31,736
187
South Alabama
LA4Bama said:
This. Trump is the worst yet, but from a longer view of things, he is also just the next stage in the decline of a democracy that was already becoming dysfunctional and teetering into crony capitalism and rule by executive and judicial fiat. I see frequent comparison to Hitler, but to me the better comparison may be Bismarck, and I shudder to think what happens when we really get our Hitler in another generation. Because as bad as Trump is, he is far from being a true totalitarian. And NT16 is exactly right. Both sides have been rushing headlong into authoritarian tactics so long as it is for their side. We should not forget all the Marxist totalitarian regimes were leftists reacting to failed authoritarian welfare states like Trump seems to imagine.
Click to expand...
We would have to lose a war first and lose major real estate due to it to get a Hitler. Bismarck was the German rise to becoming a world power just like Teddy was our rise. Had Versailles not been so punitive then Hitler would've never been able to take power because it's entirely possible that the German economy wouldn't have broken had the sanctions not been so severe. Germany was heading upward while the old Powers (UK and France) were heading downward, but Versailles brought Germany below them. The comparison that most relates to us is the last years of the Roman republic or the last years of Pax Romana.

The point is Hitler's rise was never a sure thing when Bismarck was alive. It wasn't until TOV was signed that things shifted in favor of extremist ideologies. The Romans on the other hand were more predictable because the divides kept getting wider and wider as time went on.

I agree Trump is the beginning, but the beginning of what is the question.
 
Last edited:
L

LA4Bama

All-SEC
Jan 5, 2015
1,624
0
0
Los Angeles, CA
81usaf92 said:
We would have to lose a war first and lose major real estate due to it to get a Hitler. Bismarck was the German rise to becoming a world power just like Teddy was our rise. Had Versailles not been so punitive then Hitler would've never been able to take power because it's entirely possible that the German economy wouldn't have broken had the sanctions not been so severe. Germany was heading upward while the old Powers (UK and France) were heading downward, but Versailles brought Germany below them. The comparison that most relates to us is the last years of the Roman republic or the last years of Pax Romana.

The point is Hitler's rise was never a sure thing when Bismarck was alive. It wasn't until TOV was signed that things shifted in favor of extremist ideologies. The Romans on the other hand were more predictable because the divides kept getting wider and wider as time went on.

I agree Trump is the beginning, but the beginning of what is the question.
Click to expand...
Yes, I agree. I'm not suggesting things will happen exactly as in 1900-1935. And Bismarck is in other ways nothing like Trump, who is typically American as compared with Bismarck's typically German ways. But as analogs they are closer than the Trump Hitler comparison. But we don't have to have a war to go further in the direction of a totalitaria state. We simply need dysfunctional governance and a crisis, a deep depression, say, or a secessionist movement. And as for territory, if you think of the whole world and the reaches of our military, it is absolutely possible, even likely, we see a contraction. I'd like to hope we are past having another true Hitler or true Stalin, but I hope we reverse course before we have a chance to find out.

I would also add that as things get less and less functional, you can't rule out some whackado actually using a nuclear weapon.
 
Last edited:
Jon

Jon

Hall of Fame
Feb 22, 2002
15,647
12,574
282
Atlanta 'Burbs
Like seeing them call them what they are Liars, no more "misspoke" or "didn't presnt the full details" no they are liars who are lying. And even the Evangelical one is a Liar, WWJD? Not that

http://shareblue.com/pence-lied-led-the-flynn-vetting-process-knew-about-foreign-ties/


Pence lied: Led the Flynn vetting process, knew about foreign ties

Donald Trump's transition team vetted Michael Flynn and knew about his financial ties to foreign governments, but approved him for a sensitive national security position anyway. And Vice President Mike Pence, who was in charge of the entire process and lied about it afterwards, has finally been implicated in this growing scandal.


The Trump administration is digging itself in even deeper over the scandal surrounding former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn.
In addition to his contacts with the Russian government, including being paid several thousand dollars for an appearance on state-owned television and his attendance at a dinner party with Vladimir Putin, Flynn also lobbied on behalf of the Turkish government. He later registered as a foreign agent after he was removed from the Trump administration.
Back in March, speaking to Fox News, Vice President Mike Pence claimed that he was just then learning the news, saying, “Hearing that story today was first I heard of it.”

But this is demonstrably false, as MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow laid out on her show.
Pence took over as head of the presidential transition team from disgraced Gov. Chris Christie in early November 2016. A week later, Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD), the Ranking Member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, sent Pence a letter in response to news reports that Flynn had lobbied on behalf of a foreign entity, requesting more information on Flynn’s business dealings and partners.
White House officials later admitted to the Associated Press that they knew that Flynn would have to register as a foreign agent before he officially became the National Security adviser.
Click to expand...
 
U

uafanataum

All-American
Oct 18, 2014
2,917
1,366
182
TIDE-HSV said:
Also, in the same interview:

Anyone not worried by that kind of talk isn't really paying attention...
Click to expand...
Many people on this board have called for a change of rules in Congress. Some haveas recently as last week called for something more closely resembling a parliamentary system. Many of the things Trump says I disagree with and I certainly did not vote for him, but I actually have no problem with this.
 
TIDE-HSV

TIDE-HSV

Senior Administrator
Staff member
Oct 13, 1999
84,625
39,853
437
Huntsville, AL,USA
LA4Bama said:
Yes, I agree. I'm not suggesting things will happen exactly as in 1900-1935. And Bismarck is in other ways nothing like Trump, who is typically American as compared with Bismarck's typically German ways. But as analogs they are closer than the Trump Hitler comparison. But we don't have to have a war to go further in the direction of a totalitaria state. We simply need dysfunctional governance and a crisis, a deep depression, say, or a secessionist movement. And as for territory, if you think of the whole world and the reaches of our military, it is absolutely possible, even likely, we see a contraction. I'd like to hope we are past having another true Hitler or true Stalin, but I hope we reverse course before we have a chance to find out.

I would also add that as things get less and less functional, you can't rule out some whackado actually using a nuclear weapon.
Click to expand...
Yes, and if not him, then there's the North Korean leader...
 
TIDE-HSV

TIDE-HSV

Senior Administrator
Staff member
Oct 13, 1999
84,625
39,853
437
Huntsville, AL,USA
uafanataum said:
Many people on this board have called for a change of rules in Congress. Some haveas recently as last week called for something more closely resembling a parliamentary system. Many of the things Trump says I disagree with and I certainly did not vote for him, but I actually have no problem with this.
Click to expand...
Did you really read it? I agree about congressional rules, but that's not Trump's problem. His problem is the Constitution itself. If you don't see it, I'll dig up other quotes making it clear. He wants no constraints on executive power...
 
U

uafanataum

All-American
Oct 18, 2014
2,917
1,366
182
TIDE-HSV said:
Did you really read it? I agree about congressional rules, but that's not Trump's problem. His problem is the Constitution itself. If you don't see it, I'll dig up other quotes making it clear. He wants no constraints on executive power...
Click to expand...
went back to previous page and cannot find link so I have been responding based upon quotes others have posted. Usually people post links on this board so maybe I am overlooking.
 
81usaf92

81usaf92

TideFans Legend
Apr 26, 2008
35,375
31,736
187
South Alabama
LA4Bama said:
Yes, I agree. I'm not suggesting things will happen exactly as in 1900-1935. And Bismarck is in other ways nothing like Trump, who is typically American as compared with Bismarck's typically German ways. But as analogs they are closer than the Trump Hitler comparison. But we don't have to have a war to go further in the direction of a totalitaria state. We simply need dysfunctional governance and a crisis, a deep depression, say, or a secessionist movement. And as for territory, if you think of the whole world and the reaches of our military, it is absolutely possible, even likely, we see a contraction. I'd like to hope we are past having another true Hitler or true Stalin, but I hope we reverse course before we have a chance to find out.

I would also add that as things get less and less functional, you can't rule out some whackado actually using a nuclear weapon.
Click to expand...
I get what you are saying, and we are heading somewhere new. I just think the German situation required foreign influence whereas the Roman one was a natural process in which the rich just continued to get fat, wealthy, and more powerful and the poor just got poorer. I believe our situation is more like Rome, and I believe Trump is just a sign of things to come
 
CharminTide

CharminTide

Hall of Fame
Oct 23, 2005
7,319
2,032
187
More historical insight from our President. Link

President Trump during an interview that airs Monday questioned why the country had a Civil War and suggested former President Andrew Jackson could have prevented it had he served later.

"I mean had Andrew Jackson been a little bit later you wouldn't have had the Civil War. He was a very tough person, but he had a big heart," Trump said during an interview with the Washington Examiner's Salena Zito.

"He was really angry that he saw what was happening with regard to the Civil War, he said 'There's no reason for this.'"

The president further questioned why the country could not have solved the Civil War.

"People don't realize, you know, the Civil War, if you think about it, why? People don't ask that question, but why was there the Civil War? Why could that one not have been worked out?"
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

New Posts

Latest threads

TideFans.shop - NEW Stuff!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a> <br /> <!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \--> <p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.

Top Bottom