Trump supporters, how do you square this?

PCHawk said:
This post is worth reading. But if anyone wants to save time I can give a shorter answer on why Trump is not Hitler.

He was already president for 4 years.
Click to expand...
You’re free to make that assumption, but it’s not the assumption my post was based on.

I don’t believe for a second anyone’s going to read that long-winded post of mine, but that’s not the summary of it.
 
Fryowa said:
You’re free to make that assumption, but it’s not the assumption my post was based on.

I don’t believe for a second anyone’s going to read that long-winded post of mine, but that’s not the summary of it.
Click to expand...
I didn't mean to insinuate that it was.
 
Fryowa said:
First, let me say that Trump is a POS. I think he's a terrible human being and terrible for the country. Hitler was obviously a POS as well. Nothing I'm about to type should be taken as a defense of Donald Trump or his policies.

Now, some levity...

I 100% understand your point and I agree that on the surface there are some parallels. However, this whole 2nd coming of the Nazis thing that's being thrown around is misguided.

I know you won't do this on my recommendation and don't expect anyone to, but I do recommend that anyone interested in European history and politics in general read the book, "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" by William Shirer. It's a fabulous book that in my opinion has to be the most researched historical account of all time. It's universally accepted and viewed as the most comprehensive study of the beginning, middle, and end of the Nazi party and all it's players. Unfortunately it's also the "Moby Dick" of history books in that it's very long, and requires a good deal of note-taking and study to get through. There are literally hundreds of people mentioned to various degrees and it is very, very tedious to read. Not something you're going to casually knock out in a week and get anything out of.

With that out of the way, I've read it carefully because the topic interests me, and I am confident in saying that Trump has in no way the power to do what Hitler did. First, because he's not the same type of person, and second the United States of now and the Germany of then were two very, very different places under very different circumstances and situations.

1930s Germany was comparatively very small country run with almost monarchistic rule. There was a German version of a parliament, but it was a total puppet at the time of von Hindenburg and his small group of insiders. Germany was in complete shambles after WW1 and Hitler had started at ground zero, murdering and blackmailing people one-by-one until he was made chancellor by a dying (and blackmailed) von Hindenburg. You can admittedly draw some comparisons to 2025 USA, but those comparisons don't go deeper than the surface.

There are a whole lot of differences between these two situations. Some of them in no particular order...

1) 1930s Germany was in shambles as mentioned, with a tiny, mostly powerless military confined to an even tinier geographical area. No navy, no air force, no power inside its borders, let alone outside. Once Hitler took the chancellery and started literally murdering his political opponents, he was able to insert his own military and then begin building it from the ground up into what it became in 1941. The US military of present is the exact opposite of the one Hitler assumed control over. Made up of millions of servicepeople spread over literally millions of square miles, comprised of all different political persuasions. Yes, the US military populous leans towards conservative, but the notion that Donald Trump is going to wave his hand and have millions of service members immediately turn their weapons on the US at his whim is absolutely absurd. He does not have that control. He has what I'd call some level of control over hardcore conservatives, but that does not equal a total and complete takeover of control of the country.

2) As I mentioned earlier, Germany was a small country with a small population who were reeling from the poorly thought out Treaty of Versailles. They were pinned in a corner with no economy, hyperflation, and no access to resources that any country would need to survive. The people were looking to any leader they could to lead them out of it, and almost the whole population was on board with Hitler's message which did not include his plans to take over the world (at that time). As bad as things are in the US, we are not anywhere near that point. Almost exactly half of our 330,000,000 citizens hate Trump with fervor. We are a huge country with a huge and very diverse population of people will all range of ideologies. The exact opposite of 30s Germany.

3) Hitler was driven by VERY different motivations than Donald Trump. Hitler had a deep seeded belief that Jews were responsible for everything wrong in the world, and he viewed their extermination as a divine objective to be carried out as payback for the downfall of Germany, and he'd stop at nothing to get it. Hitler unfortunately was a very smart, calculating, and charismatic person bent on his goal, and wasn't driven by money or personal gain other than being in power. Through his speeches he was effectively able to control the entire population of Germany and get them all on board with his ideas.

Donald Trump is not that. He's quite obviously a buffoon who's first interest is money and being popular, he doesn't give a shit about ideology even though he may say so. He likes the hillbilly contingent cheering for him, the hats, the flags, and of course the money. He knows that the more extreme his speeches get, the louder the hillbillies will cheer. The more money he and his family will make. He doesn't have the smarts or the power over the population that Hitler did, even if you think he does.

There's a very clear distinction that you'd be wise to understand, and that is that Hitler was vastly more dangerous for vastly different reasons. Hitler was a psychopath with a clear, defined rage built up that he would stop at nothing to lay waste in the form of genocide. Unfortunately for the world, that happened at a time in Germany's history where all the stars were aligned for him to be able to take total control over a country on a micro and macro level. That is not the situation in the United States no matter how much you try to convince yourself of it.

Donald Trump is not a psychopath, he's a narcissistic sociopath. Both are bad, but one is much, much worse and is an existential danger. Donald Trump has the ability to make things uncomfortable in the US, but we are lucky that he's a rank amateur when compared to the likes of Hitler. He's in it for the rallies and the hats and the money, and he does what it takes to rile the hillbillies up which happens to be the topics of immigration, gun control, the economy, what have you. If making immigration easier and increasing taxes were the things that would get the hillbillies waving their Trump flags and buying red hats, he'd do that. He's in it for the highest bidder. He doesn't care about ideology because he's for sale.

Hitler was not for sale, and he made it known through his actions. Whether you think so or not, Trump does not have the power to instantly make his military turn its weapons on the population and start bombing our own citizens. He doesn't have the power to round up all liberals and send them to gas chambers. He doesn't have the power to take over Canada.

So before you start slinging around the, "Welp, it's Hitler 2.0 now..." stuff, take note that it makes you sound exactly like the current crop of conservatives who think that if Harris got elected the country would immediately turn into Soviet communist Russia with no individual rights complete with gulags and banning of religion.

Don't be that guy.
Click to expand...

Most excellent analysis, Fry
 
Fryowa said:
First, let me say that Trump is a POS. I think he's a terrible human being and terrible for the country. Hitler was obviously a POS as well. Nothing I'm about to type should be taken as a defense of Donald Trump or his policies.

Now, some levity...

I 100% understand your point and I agree that on the surface there are some parallels. However, this whole 2nd coming of the Nazis thing that's being thrown around is misguided.

I know you won't do this on my recommendation and don't expect anyone to, but I do recommend that anyone interested in European history and politics in general read the book, "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" by William Shirer. It's a fabulous book that in my opinion has to be the most researched historical account of all time. It's universally accepted and viewed as the most comprehensive study of the beginning, middle, and end of the Nazi party and all it's players. Unfortunately it's also the "Moby Dick" of history books in that it's very long, and requires a good deal of note-taking and study to get through. There are literally hundreds of people mentioned to various degrees and it is very, very tedious to read. Not something you're going to casually knock out in a week and get anything out of.

With that out of the way, I've read it carefully because the topic interests me, and I am confident in saying that Trump has in no way the power to do what Hitler did. First, because he's not the same type of person, and second the United States of now and the Germany of then were two very, very different places under very different circumstances and situations.

1930s Germany was comparatively very small country run with almost monarchistic rule. There was a German version of a parliament, but it was a total puppet at the time of von Hindenburg and his small group of insiders. Germany was in complete shambles after WW1 and Hitler had started at ground zero, murdering and blackmailing people one-by-one until he was made chancellor by a dying (and blackmailed) von Hindenburg. You can admittedly draw some comparisons to 2025 USA, but those comparisons don't go deeper than the surface.

There are a whole lot of differences between these two situations. Some of them in no particular order...

1) 1930s Germany was in shambles as mentioned, with a tiny, mostly powerless military confined to an even tinier geographical area. No navy, no air force, no power inside its borders, let alone outside. Once Hitler took the chancellery and started literally murdering his political opponents, he was able to insert his own military and then begin building it from the ground up into what it became in 1941. The US military of present is the exact opposite of the one Hitler assumed control over. Made up of millions of servicepeople spread over literally millions of square miles, comprised of all different political persuasions. Yes, the US military populous leans towards conservative, but the notion that Donald Trump is going to wave his hand and have millions of service members immediately turn their weapons on the US at his whim is absolutely absurd. He does not have that control. He has what I'd call some level of control over hardcore conservatives, but that does not equal a total and complete takeover of control of the country.

2) As I mentioned earlier, Germany was a small country with a small population who were reeling from the poorly thought out Treaty of Versailles. They were pinned in a corner with no economy, hyperflation, and no access to resources that any country would need to survive. The people were looking to any leader they could to lead them out of it, and almost the whole population was on board with Hitler's message which did not include his plans to take over the world (at that time). As bad as things are in the US, we are not anywhere near that point. Almost exactly half of our 330,000,000 citizens hate Trump with fervor. We are a huge country with a huge and very diverse population of people will all range of ideologies. The exact opposite of 30s Germany.

3) Hitler was driven by VERY different motivations than Donald Trump. Hitler had a deep seeded belief that Jews were responsible for everything wrong in the world, and he viewed their extermination as a divine objective to be carried out as payback for the downfall of Germany, and he'd stop at nothing to get it. Hitler unfortunately was a very smart, calculating, and charismatic person bent on his goal, and wasn't driven by money or personal gain other than being in power. Through his speeches he was effectively able to control the entire population of Germany and get them all on board with his ideas.

Donald Trump is not that. He's quite obviously a buffoon who's first interest is money and being popular, he doesn't give a shit about ideology even though he may say so. He likes the hillbilly contingent cheering for him, the hats, the flags, and of course the money. He knows that the more extreme his speeches get, the louder the hillbillies will cheer. The more money he and his family will make. He doesn't have the smarts or the power over the population that Hitler did, even if you think he does.

There's a very clear distinction that you'd be wise to understand, and that is that Hitler was vastly more dangerous for vastly different reasons. Hitler was a psychopath with a clear, defined rage built up that he would stop at nothing to lay waste in the form of genocide. Unfortunately for the world, that happened at a time in Germany's history where all the stars were aligned for him to be able to take total control over a country on a micro and macro level. That is not the situation in the United States no matter how much you try to convince yourself of it.

Donald Trump is not a psychopath, he's a narcissistic sociopath. Both are bad, but one is much, much worse and is an existential danger. Donald Trump has the ability to make things uncomfortable in the US, but we are lucky that he's a rank amateur when compared to the likes of Hitler. He's in it for the rallies and the hats and the money, and he does what it takes to rile the hillbillies up which happens to be the topics of immigration, gun control, the economy, what have you. If making immigration easier and increasing taxes were the things that would get the hillbillies waving their Trump flags and buying red hats, he'd do that. He's in it for the highest bidder. He doesn't care about ideology because he's for sale.

Hitler was not for sale, and he made it known through his actions. Whether you think so or not, Trump does not have the power to instantly make his military turn its weapons on the population and start bombing our own citizens. He doesn't have the power to round up all liberals and send them to gas chambers. He doesn't have the power to take over Canada.

So before you start slinging around the, "Welp, it's Hitler 2.0 now..." stuff, take note that it makes you sound exactly like the current crop of conservatives who think that if Harris got elected the country would immediately turn into Soviet communist Russia with no individual rights complete with gulags and banning of religion.

Don't be that guy.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the thoughtful write up. You make a lot of excellent points. I have that book (it was given to me by my dad), but only read some of it years ago, and stopped. Perhaps I need to pick it back up!
 
Fryowa said:
This. The guy is concerned with the reaction from his followers, not what he’s going to actually do. Big difference.
Click to expand...
Yes.. I'll add that he seems to have a history of making outlandish comments to check on the reaction by his followers, and then he amplifies it if he gets a response. If it's super popular, he may act on it. So, it is not benign, either.

I think the guy is a buffoon, but there is a certain genius in how he tests things with his followers. If they like it, he goes in that direction. It's also pretty terrifying because it's an insane way to lead a country.
 
Westernhawk said:
Yes.. I'll add that he seems to have a history of making outlandish comments to check on the reaction by his followers, and then he amplifies it if he gets a response. If it's super popular, he may act on it. So, it is not benign, either.

I think the guy is a buffoon, but there is a certain genius in how he tests things with his followers. If they like it, he goes in that direction. It's also pretty terrifying because it's an insane way to lead a country.
Click to expand...
I think the president doing things his voters want him to do is the best way to lead the country.
 
PCHawk said:
I think the president doing things his voters want him to do is the best way to lead the country.
Click to expand...
The president doing the right thing for the country is the best way to lead the country, wouldn't you agree? Shouldn't he be looking out for all of his constituents, instead of just the folks who voted for him?

If his followers want ICE to storm an elementary school, should that happen? It did happen today.
If his followers want FEMA money to go to red states and not blue ones after disasters, should that happen?
If his followers want climate change and evolution to be stricken from science education, should that happen? (note that this is currently occurring in the state of Iowa, not at the federal level).

A real leader's job is to lead the country, all of it.
 
PCHawk said:
I didn't want evidence from someone else. I was just trying to hold someone to the standard that they were demanding of others.
Click to expand...
Hey, I'm happy to look up your conspiracy myself. Tell me where I can find scientific evidence about this conspiracy that you keep talking about related to vaccinations. I'll save you the work, since it seems very challenging for you to back up your conspiracy theory. Tell me where I can search for this evidence. Any scientific journals?

People who spread disinformation are dangerous. You're one of them. I'll gladly eat humble pie if you can educate all of us on this conspiracy?

I suppose you also support Iowa's new proposed mandate that educators are not to discuss climate change or evolution in classrooms in Iowa? You may not see the danger in your penchant for spreading misinformation, but when a bunch of you do it, things like this happen. Iowa is getting dumber. I hope you're not on that train, too.

www.kcci.com

State proposal would remove 'climate change' and 'evolution' from Iowa science standards

Some Iowans are raising concern about new proposed state science standards. In the proposal, any mention of "climate change" was changed to the phrase "climate trends". Although the standards would still include the concept of biological change over time, the word "evolution" was erased.
www.kcci.com www.kcci.com

I'm absolutely fine with people having different policy positions, and I'm absolutely fine with people having opinions. I'm not okay with people amplifying disinformation.
 
Westernhawk said:
Hey, I'm happy to look up your conspiracy myself. Tell me where I can find scientific evidence about this conspiracy that you keep talking about related to vaccinations. I'll save you the work, since it seems very challenging for you to back up your conspiracy theory. Tell me where I can search for this evidence. Any scientific journals?

People who spread disinformation are dangerous. You're one of them. I'll gladly eat humble pie if you can educate all of us on this conspiracy?

I suppose you also support Iowa's new proposed mandate that educators are not to discuss climate change or evolution in classrooms in Iowa? You may not see the danger in your penchant for spreading misinformation, but when a bunch of you do it, things like this happen. Iowa is getting dumber. I hope you're not on that train, too.

www.kcci.com

State proposal would remove 'climate change' and 'evolution' from Iowa science standards

Some Iowans are raising concern about new proposed state science standards. In the proposal, any mention of "climate change" was changed to the phrase "climate trends". Although the standards would still include the concept of biological change over time, the word "evolution" was erased.
www.kcci.com www.kcci.com

I'm absolutely fine with people having different policy positions, and I'm absolutely fine with people having opinions. I'm not okay with people amplifying disinformation.
Click to expand...
The problem with the term "disinformation" is who controls the information? If Kennedy gets confirmed and uncovers a shit ton of corruption with Big Pharma, then that will be the new truth. Will you be able to accept that truth even tho it comes from someone you don't trust? If not, will it annoy you to be called a conspiracy theorist?

I know one thing. Pardoning Fauci sure makes it harder to trust the right thing was going on with covid. Also remember, 4 years ago it was a conspiracy theory to say covid was a lab leak and you were banned from social media for talking about it. I don't get how someone can watch that story play out and still use terms like disinformation and conspiracy theory. I also don't get how people have so easily adopted the concept of it being "dangerous" to spread disinformation. What a stupid word to use in that situation.
 
As far as climate change and evolution goes. I'm kinda torn on that. Have you ever seen the stats on what percent of the atmosphere is cabon dioxide and what percent of the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is man made? Also did you know that more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere helps make the planet greener, which is supposed to be good for the planet?

I personally believe there's a good chance we are affecting the climate some. I also think technological advances will take care of it all with time so it's not a huge issue as long as we make sure to work towards that path. But I also think climate change fear mongering is a money grab. My evidence of that is the rich people who pretend to care the most about it have no problem flying private jets and buying beachfront property. Is that not a red flag for you that they're full of shit? Again, that doesn't mean that climate change isn't real. It just means the fear mongering over it is. How many times can these predictions they have been making for decades be wrong before more people question them?

As far as teaching evolution goes. I personally lean towards that theory being correct. But I also think maybe it's kinda strange to teach things to kids that isn't 100% confirmed yet. Kinda like the big bang theory. I remember learning that in school and now they are finding evidence that contradicts that theory. I also learned there were nine planets, but then Pluto gets the shaft. If they're teaching these things as best guess theories, I don't mind it. But I also don't know if I necessarily like the idea of a school pushing my kids down the path of becoming some douche bag activist.

To me it's like teaching religion in school. Just because you believe that shit doesn't mean you can fill my kids heads with things that are educated guesses at best. Teach kids what's already known fact. I guess that's my long winded way of saying I don't really care either way on that issue.
 
Westernhawk said:
The president doing the right thing for the country is the best way to lead the country, wouldn't you agree? Shouldn't he be looking out for all of his constituents, instead of just the folks who voted for him?

If his followers want ICE to storm an elementary school, should that happen? It did happen today.
If his followers want FEMA money to go to red states and not blue ones after disasters, should that happen?
If his followers want climate change and evolution to be stricken from science education, should that happen? (note that this is currently occurring in the state of Iowa, not at the federal level).

A real leader's job is to lead the country, all of it.
Click to expand...
That is the problem right there about misinformation. The Secret Service investigated a threat at the school not ICE. 2 agents left without entering the school. Soooo, ICE storming an elementary school is just more misinformation.
 
 
ajdwhs87 said:
That is the problem right there about misinformation. The Secret Service investigated a threat at the school not ICE. 2 agents left without entering the school. Soooo, ICE storming an elementary school is just more misinformation.
Click to expand...

CHICAGO - After Chicago Public Schools (CPS) initially claimed U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents visited a Southwest Side elementary school Friday morning, it was later confirmed that this was not the case.

Instead, U.S. Secret Service agents were investigating a threat linked to the TikTok ban.

Yeah, it was just the Secret Service that attempted to enter an Elementary School to investigate an
unknown threat concerning Tic Tok

They were blocked by school officials that is why they left without entering the Elementary School

This is your America

Cherish it
 
Last edited:
thedukeofearl said:
CHICAGO - After Chicago Public Schools (CPS) initially claimed U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents visited a Southwest Side elementary school Friday morning, it was later confirmed that this was not the case.

Instead, U.S. Secret Service agents were investigating a threat linked to the TikTok ban.

Yeah, it was just the Secret Service that attempted to enter an Elementary School to investigate an
unknown threat concerning Tic Tok

They were blocked by school officials that is why they left without entering the Elementary School

This is your America

Cherish it
Click to expand...
I'm confused? Why is this a bad thing? Not trying to sound like a jerk at all. I've just gotta be missing something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top