Trump tweets videos from Britain First...

[hollodero]

...Britain First - Jayda Fransen is their deputy leader - is a right-wing extremist group from Britain, distinctly anti-Islamic and partly in support of a "Holy war" against Islam. Amongst things like mosque invasions, gathering in front of muslim's houses and wearing "party uniforms", threatening right-wing populist Nigel Farage's family (even this guy's not right enough), harassing women with headscarfs and other delightful stuff they have a history of posting forged or misleading photographs and videos. In short, a distinct extremist hate group.

Now the president of the United States shares their stuff on twitter. Britain First is so delighted. I am so disgusted.

Once again, dear conservatives. This really is your guy? This is the way the US should go because the liberal alternative would be so unbearable (or for whatever reason)? All things considered and with yet another cherry on the top, isn't it high time to denounce that presidency? I'm getting a really hard time understanding any different reaction.

This isn't conservativism. This is extremism and hate-mongering. This is as dangerous as it is disgusting. And I feel many still are in silent acceptance.

[*bfine32*]

This is petty behavior from POTUS and as I've said before he should be subject to censure.

[GMDino]

(11-29-2017, 11:48 AM)hollodero Wrote: ...Britain First - Jayda Fransen is their deputy leader - is a right-wing extremist group from Britain, distinctly anti-Islamic and partly in support of a "Holy war" against Islam. Amongst things like mosque invasions, gathering in front of muslim's houses and wearing "party uniforms", threatening right-wing populist Nigel Farage's family (even this guy's not right enough), harassing women with headscarfs and other delightful stuff they have a history of posting forged or misleading photographs and videos. In short, a distinct extremist hate group.

Now the president of the United States shares their stuff on twitter. Britain First is so delighted. I am so disgusted.

Once again, dear conservatives. This really is your guy? This is the way the US should go because the liberal alternative would be so unbearable (or for whatever reason)? All things considered and with yet another cherry on the top, isn't it high time to denounce that presidency? I'm getting a really hard time understanding any different reaction.

This isn't conservativism. This is extremism and hate-mongering. This is as dangerous as it is disgusting. And I feel many still are in silent acceptance.

Trump is a disgusting piece of excrement.  He is either truly vile or uses these things to cover up the other stuff he does.

How ANYONE is proud of him as the POTUS (especially the "give him a chance" crowd) is beyond me unless they themselves agree with the vile things he does and says.

[hollodero]

(11-29-2017, 12:10 PM)bfine32 Wrote: This is petty behavior from POTUS and as I've said before he should be subject to censure.

Yeah you said that and I didn't forget it. You seem like a person on the edge of saying what I, in my humble opinion of course, would consider to be the right thing to say. However, I think by using the word "petty" you're still diminishing the issue. This isn't just petty, it's hate-mongering demagogry and with the sheer number of people in the strange belief that he's some kind of saviour figure, I'd say it's a bit more substantially dangerous than that.
And I wouldn't know what a censure would really accomplish. It looks like a formality, and Trump world isn't impressed with those.

The person who murdered Labour politician Jo Cox was shouting Britain first while doing it. While I, as much as I dislike them, can't really blame Britain First for that, it just shows what this kind of atmosphere can harbor. Quite a lot of people on Breitbart are shouting for taking matters in their own hands these days, and things like those sure aren't discouraging.- 

- Can I ask you and everyone the question that is asked in those surveys. Do you approve or disapprove of Trump's presidency. 35% or something around that still approve, and I guess around 80% of declared Republicans say they approve. Something I find quite the stunning stance.

[*bfine32*]

(11-29-2017, 12:27 PM)hollodero Wrote: - Can I ask you and everyone the question that is asked in those surveys. Do you approve or disapprove of Trump's presidency. 35% or something around that still approve, and I guess around 80% of declared Republicans say they approve. Something I find quite the stunning stance.

I think we get into a can of worms when we say "approve or disapprove". He does things that I approve of and things that I disapprove of; just as every President before him has done.

I wish he would be banned from ever using twitter again while he is the sitting POTUS; however, I've come to realize that I do not get everything I want. IMO he is not a politician and that's what America wanted. Perhaps in NOV 20 they will decide they want a politician back in office. I know I will be looking at the alternatives.  

[hollodero]

(11-29-2017, 12:16 PM)GMDino Wrote: Trump is a disgusting piece of excrement.  He is either truly vile or uses these things to cover up the other stuff he does.

Can't disagree with that description. As for the cover up, maybe this is about Flynn. Bad investigation news seem to trigger these things.
I don't think he believes much. He seems to say what the Breitbart propagand folks tell him is opportune. I hate bringing up Breitbart every other post, but it seems like they are calling the shots on these - and all - matters these days.

(11-29-2017, 12:16 PM)GMDino Wrote: How ANYONE is proud of him as the POTUS (especially the "give him a chance" crowd) is beyond me unless they themselves agree with the vile things he does and says.

Yeah I don't know. I can attest that most European leaders (and, as it seems, finally almost everybody) consider him to be just utterly moronic and that's the attitude so far. Thousand legends rank around that one. So external pride... maybe somewhere else, but I doubt it. - I don't think he's purely vile, I think he's a mouthpiece for truely vile people and doesn't have the intellectual capacity to be anything else. There was this DACA moment when he asked "does anyone really want them out immediately?"... as if in a short moment of humanity he himself couldn't quite believe his own supporters.
As for the Trump supporter (and/or the "non-denouncer"), true or not, what I use to say to my folks is that the US-American's strictly dualistic political brain lead to a form of tribalism that would make Hitler look acceptable compared to someone from the other side. I also used to make clear this was a stark exaggeration, but I'm not so certain any more.

[hollodero]

(11-29-2017, 12:34 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I think we get into a can of worms when we say "approve or disapprove". He does things that I approve of and things that I disapprove of; just as every President before him has done.

That is legit, it is a can of worms, and especially since you're not a Trump voter I respect your not wanting to break it down like that. However, that's how the question is asked in your surveys, and the answers are what's widely discussed.
And what I get is something like "35% approve", and I'm always shocked about how many there are. But many probaly hold a more nunaced view. (I don't, I agree with Rex.)

(11-29-2017, 12:34 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I wish he would be banned from ever using twitter again while he is the sitting POTUS; however, I've come to realize that I do not get everything I want. IMO he is not a politician and that's what America wanted. Perhaps in NOV 20 they will decide they want a politician back in office. I know I will be looking at the alternatives.  

Please look at the alternatives. It's all one can ask for (realistically). We do need leadership from a non-Trumpian America still.

[Dill]

(11-29-2017, 11:48 AM)hollodero Wrote: Once again, dear conservatives. This really is your guy? This is the way the US should go because the liberal alternative would be so unbearable (or for whatever reason)? All things considered and with yet another cherry on the top, isn't it high time to denounce that presidency? I'm getting a really hard time understanding any different reaction.

This isn't conservativism. This is extremism and hate-mongering. This is as dangerous as it is disgusting. And I feel many still are in silent acceptance.

I just have to disagree with you on this one, Hollo.

Many are in open support. Still.

[Dill]

(11-29-2017, 12:44 PM)hollodero Wrote: As for the Trump supporter (and/or the "non-denouncer"), true or not, what I use to say to my folks is that the US-American's strictly dualistic political brain lead to a form of tribalism that would make Hitler look acceptable compared to someone from the other side. I also used to make clear this was a stark exaggeration, but I'm not so certain any more.

What a vile exaggeration and defamation of US voters.

So long as the opponent is not Hillary, there is NO WAY any American would vote for Hitler. Ever!

[Belsnickel]

(11-29-2017, 01:35 PM)Dill Wrote: What a vile exaggeration and defamation of US voters.

So long as the opponent is not Hillary, there is NO WAY any American would vote for Hitler. Ever!

Obviously using Hitler in name was a rhetorical tool, but you don't think a Hitler-like figure would garner a fair number of votes in today's political climate?

[*PhilHos*]

(11-29-2017, 01:41 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Obviously using Hitler in name was a rhetorical tool, but you don't think a Hitler-like figure would garner a fair number of votes in today's political climate?

Considering some people are unabashed Communists and Nazis in today's America, I would be more surprised if Hitler didn't get ANY votes.

[Belsnickel]

(11-29-2017, 03:25 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Considering some people are unabashed Communists and Nazis in today's America, I would be more surprised if Hitler didn't get ANY votes.

Communists wouldn't vote for Hitler, Hitler killed communists in his camps. They'd probably vote for Stalin, though. There has just been a shocking number of people feeling the love for authoritarian types.

[CKwi88]

(11-29-2017, 01:41 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Obviously using Hitler in name was a rhetorical tool, but you don't think a Hitler-like figure would garner a fair number of votes in today's political climate?

If Hitler-like means a candidate openly calling for genocide I doubt it.

But if we're talking Hitler-like as in the guy that used propaganda to fan the flames of ultra-nationalism by making the population feel like victims of bad deals by other countries...

That doesn't sound familiar at all

Using Hitler is a waste though. People can't seem to have an objective discussion once his name shows up. 

[*PhilHos*]

(11-29-2017, 03:33 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Communists wouldn't vote for Hitler, Hitler killed communists in his camps. They'd probably vote for Stalin, though. There has just been a shocking number of people feeling the love for authoritarian types.

I didn't mean they'd vote for him, just that in a country where there used to be figurative witch hunts over communism, the fact that there are people who are openly and proudly communist just goes to show that a guy like Hitler would most certainly get votes.

[*bfine32*]

(11-29-2017, 04:06 PM)CKwi88 Wrote: Using Hitler is a waste though. People can't seem to have an objective discussion once his name shows up. 

Agreed and I fully understand those that choose to dismiss the equivalence. It's sorta like using Jeffrey Dahmer as an example of the negative effects of alcohol. 

[hollodero]

(11-29-2017, 01:30 PM)Dill Wrote: I just have to disagree with you on this one, Hollo.

Many are in open support. Still.

Oh sure, I am not talking about those though. The Breitbartian crowd aren't conservatives to me. Maybe it's not so easy to make such a distinction, but I'm used to it. In my view, the Bannon wing along with the respective fanbase took over the conservative party, and they could because those I call conservatives, probably not with the best of feelings, went along in the end. Because of tradition, Hillary or whatever.
Whilst the open supporters gradually start to hate the traditional conservative GOP almost as much as the Democrats.

(11-29-2017, 01:41 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Obviously using Hitler in name was a rhetorical tool, but you don't think a Hitler-like figure would garner a fair number of votes in today's political climate?

I do. Dill does also, he just loves messing around with my words. It brings him joy, so.

(11-29-2017, 04:06 PM)CKwi88 Wrote: If Hitler-like means a candidate openly calling for genocide I doubt it.

But if we're talking Hitler-like as in the guy that used propaganda to fan the flames of ultra-nationalism by making the population feel like victims of bad deals by other countries...

That doesn't sound familiar at all

Using Hitler is a waste though. People can't seem to have an objective discussion once his name shows up. 

Right, of course that's an exaggeration, just meant to make my point about voter affiliation. Trump isn't Hitler. That's probably the nicest thing I could say about him. 
As for people following him... I don't know, I get surprised so often. I'm certain he would get very few votes if he were an open Hitler. But my guess is some would go along with some sort of concentration camps for, you know, Hillary, Dems and muslims and whatever else is annoying. Of course not everyone, but a considerable amount of people.

Seeing how many go along with all the propaganda lies, the hateful paranoid rhetorics and the lack of basic human decency I don't think assumptions like that are too much of a stretch.

[Dill]

(11-29-2017, 01:41 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Obviously using Hitler in name was a rhetorical tool, but you don't think a Hitler-like figure would garner a fair number of votes in today's political climate?

How "Hitler-like"?  If we are looking at markers like xenophobic immigration/militaristic foreign policy, impatience with civil rights/rule of law, hatred of the Luegenpresse, willingness to use government to attack political enemies, autarkic economic policy, nationalism, misogyny, blame-shifting, anger-sharing with supporters and racism/public vilification of "out" groups, then I suggest that may have already happened.  For people who primarily associate Hitler with genocide and anti-semitism, these markers are may be unknown, meaningless, or not really that bad when considered individually.

(PS I was indirectly agreeing with Hollo.)

[*michaelsean*]

(11-29-2017, 05:20 PM)Dill Wrote: How "Hitler-like"?  If we are looking at markers like xenophobic immigration/militaristic foreign policy, impatience with civil rights/rule of law, hatred of the Luegenpresse, willingness to use government to attack political enemies, autarkic economic policy, nationalism, misogyny, blame-shifting, anger-sharing with supporters and racism/public vilification of "out" groups, then I suggest that may have already happened.  For people who primarily associate Hitler with genocide and anti-semitism, these markers are may be unknown, meaningless, or not really that bad when considered individually.

(PS I was indirectly agreeing with Hollo.)

Everyone primarily associates Hitler with genocide, anti-semitism and of course starting a war that killed over 100 million people. To primarily associate him with anything else would be non-sensical. “When I compared you to Hitler I was referring to vegetarianism”.

[*bfine32*]

(11-29-2017, 10:59 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Everyone primarily associates Hitler with genocide, anti-semitism and of course starting a war that killed over 100 million people. To primarily associate him with anything else would be non-sensical. “When I compared you to Hitler I was referring to vegetarianism”.

This hits the nail on the head. Folks look for the extreme and then suggest they were just comparing the medium.

I have voiced my disapproval on a sig that has been allowed to flourish on these boards for about a year. There is one that compares Trump to Manson and the establishment on this board allows it. I have no idea why they condone this overt example of hate speech   

[GMDino]

(11-29-2017, 11:15 PM)bfine32 Wrote: This hits the nail on the head. Folks look for the extreme and then suggest they were just comparing the medium.

I have voiced my disapproval on a sig that has been allowed to flourish on these boards for about a year. There is one that compares Trump to Manson and the establishment on this board allows it. I have no idea why they condone this overt example of hate speech   

While this is completely off topic I'll defend myself rather than ask anyone else to do it.

The sig came out of a discussion about Trump being an outsider and people wanting an outsider until they got one..  I made a comment in that thread that given the parameters for that anyone could be a outsider and among the people listed I said Manson as an extreme version of an outsider.

That one name evoked a ridiculous response that ignored the gist of the thread and why I said what I said.

(04-17-2017, 12:17 PM)bfine32 Wrote: As I said a 100 times: Everybody wanted a Washington outsider until we got one. 

(04-17-2017, 12:35 PM)GMDino Wrote: I believe a sane, rational, non con artist would be more accepted.  But some just want to focus on the "outsider" part of the equation.

Manson (either one) is an outsider.

*I* am an outsider.

The vast majority of this country are outsiders.

The one that have the millions of dollars to get elected is barely an outsider given all his political connections anyway.

(04-17-2017, 12:38 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Trump was the perfect outsider. A successful businessman that had expressed Political views in the past. Comparing him to Manson lets me know you really have no legitimate counter.

(04-17-2017, 01:42 PM)bfine32 Wrote: He was the "perfect outsider' as far as credentials especially when someone uses extreme hyperbole to place him in the same category as Charles Manson. I gave specifics as to what made him the perfect outsider. A successful businessman that had expressed his political views in the past. I did not say he was the perfect Candidate; perhaps that is where the disconnect lies.  

(04-17-2017, 01:44 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I see you follow Dino in the misunderstanding of perfect outsider compared to perfect candidate.

As to Dino comparing Trump to Manson: Of course he did.

(04-17-2017, 02:02 PM)GMDino Wrote: Dino said that "outsider" applies to...everyone outside.

Manson (either one), me, you....etc.

But it's easier to focus on taking one thing and making it all about that than addressing the actual context of the post.  And the beat goes on...

So now we have an "outsider" who can't get anything done (art of the deal my arse) and hasn't shown a willingness to learn the job or even act presidential in any way at all.  Including his tweet storm today.  (Some of which he deleted.  I guess he thinks no one can see them after that?)