So... who wrote the NYT op-ed?

[Dill]

(09-11-2018, 07:27 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Secondly, it is to point out that fallacy employed by those that constantly criticize Trump by engaging in the same tactics he employs. The Left hates that Trump hates so they reciprocate with guess what.....Hate.

1.  The whole "People who hate Nazi'/slaveowners/pedophiles are just as bad as the Nazis/slaveowners/pedophiles" logic is ridiculous, but it is one of the favorite arguments of Nazis, slave owners, and pedophiles.

You make a valid point here. Hate is not a "tactic" and whether hate is a proper/improper response to someone's actions depends upon what those actions are. If Nazis hated Jews enough to kill millions, and Jews hate Nazis BECAUSE they killed millions, they are not simply employing a tactic, "just like" the Nazis. Certainly people hate Nazis. But people don't criticize Nazis because they hate them. They criticize Nazis for what they did or would do.  The point is appropriate when people argue that "hate" is the ground of Trump criticism, not Trump's actions. The locial analogy does not make Trump defenders "like Nazis."

To make your point effectively, you had to use examples of people whose actions everyone could legitimately agree to hate--so bad no one would dispute your examples or suggest that "hate" is the only reason people object to Nazis etc.  The point simply doesn't appear clearly in an example like "Bengals fans hatred for Steelers fans is no different from Steelers hatred of Bengals." 

I don't see why people cannot refer to Nazis and slave owners in political arguments, especially as a matter of education. The assumptions underpinning their beliefs are still with us and in various forms reappear in contemporary political arguments. But all readers cannot keep examples analytically separate from the topic at hand. So you have to go the extra mile NOT to imply that people who are NOT Nazis or slaveowners ARE Nazis or slaveowners or whatever. I don't think you meant to do that, but your final clause in the sentence above can be read that way.  And presto, you lose readers.