5 ms·

Once you bought into "whatever means necessary", what evidence would it take to change your mind?

CamperBob2 3y ago
I'm not necessarily saying that I buy into that position myself, just that I've found myself surprisingly sympathetic to it. At this point, I agree with those who suggest that America cannot survive a competent Trump. So given the hypothetical future appearance on the campaign trail of a similar character with all of his faculties intact, I may have to revisit the question.
- MrPatan 3y ago
  And how will you tell such a monster appeared? Through your independent research? Or because the TV told you?
  - CamperBob2 3y ago
    A worthy question, but one that goes too far afield for this thread IMHO.
  - ModernMech 3y ago
    I'd listen to the people who correctly called Trump out as being an authoritarian wannabe. They were completely right, and he proved that beyond any doubt on 1/6. Those who spent spent 4 years apologizing for him, and still are to this day, should be ignored when those predictions are made.
    - CamperBob2 3y ago
      Keeping in mind that we're talking about someone who ran a full-page ad in the New York Times that called for the death penalty for the Central Park Five. Few people listened to Trump himself when he told us who he was. When confronted with the NYT ad, reactions from over 30% of the electorate fall into one of four categories: "Wait, what? I never heard of that. Must not be a big deal," "Fake news, the ad never actually accused anyone by name," "Meh, he didn't really mean it," and "Hell yeah, fry 'em all and let God sort 'em out." So it's not clear that anyone else's warnings could have made a difference. It was up to the Deep State to stop him. They failed. Not much of a Deep State, I guess. Only Trump's own incompetence saved us from a horrific outcome... and that won't scale, as people like to say around here.
      - ModernMech 3y ago
        The people who correctly called out Trump from what he was were: - people who had spent a lot of time in authoritarian dictatorships and recognized his personality in the dictators of those countries. - people who are familiar with history, and saw that he mirrored the personalities of historical dictators. - people who are familiar with cluster B personality disorders, who correctly recognized his narcissistic psychopathy. - people who were close to him, like his family, who warned us about how he treats people close to him. - people who went into business with him, who were unilaterally screwed over by his business practices. - Hillary Clinton. Listening to any of these people, or even better, all of these people, would have saved us from this whole mess. Notably, all of these people are saying the same things today, and he's still the front runner of the Republican party. So really, the problem isn't Trump anymore, it's that a lot of people actually want a dictatorship, because they perceive they can use it to their political advantage. That's where we are now. There are no more excuses about who the man is. Trump wants to be a dictator, and Republicans like that idea. There's no more assumed good faith to be had here.
        CamperBob2 3y ago
        So really, the problem isn't Trump anymore Exactly, that's my point. It has been clear for a long time who Trump is and what he stands for. Long before he ever ran for office. A great many people are either fine with his positions, indifferent to them, or vote without bothering to inform themselves about the candidate they're voting for. Once that cohort grows to dominate the electorate, there's nothing (legal) that anyone else can do. Hence the "fair means or foul" part of the question. But it may not matter: he can't be stopped by fair means if he actually does represent the values of the electorate, and if he is stopped by foul means, his supporters will pick someone even worse.
        MrPatan 3y ago
        Amazing. A collection of "People who don't like his personality", plus his literal political opponent, are your best sources on how to identify the next Hitler. Let me say that again: If a democrat you like says somebody is Hitler, then all is fair to stop him. Brilliant! I hope you're getting paid for this.

I'm not necessarily saying that I buy into that position myself, just that I've found myself surprisingly sympathetic to it. At this point, I agree with those who suggest that America cannot survive a competent Trump. So given the hypothetical future appearance on the campaign trail of a similar character with all of his faculties intact, I may have to revisit the question.

MrPatan 3y ago
And how will you tell such a monster appeared? Through your independent research? Or because the TV told you?
- CamperBob2 3y ago
  A worthy question, but one that goes too far afield for this thread IMHO.
- ModernMech 3y ago
  I'd listen to the people who correctly called Trump out as being an authoritarian wannabe. They were completely right, and he proved that beyond any doubt on 1/6. Those who spent spent 4 years apologizing for him, and still are to this day, should be ignored when those predictions are made.
  - CamperBob2 3y ago
    Keeping in mind that we're talking about someone who ran a full-page ad in the New York Times that called for the death penalty for the Central Park Five. Few people listened to Trump himself when he told us who he was. When confronted with the NYT ad, reactions from over 30% of the electorate fall into one of four categories: "Wait, what? I never heard of that. Must not be a big deal," "Fake news, the ad never actually accused anyone by name," "Meh, he didn't really mean it," and "Hell yeah, fry 'em all and let God sort 'em out." So it's not clear that anyone else's warnings could have made a difference. It was up to the Deep State to stop him. They failed. Not much of a Deep State, I guess. Only Trump's own incompetence saved us from a horrific outcome... and that won't scale, as people like to say around here.
    - ModernMech 3y ago
      The people who correctly called out Trump from what he was were: - people who had spent a lot of time in authoritarian dictatorships and recognized his personality in the dictators of those countries. - people who are familiar with history, and saw that he mirrored the personalities of historical dictators. - people who are familiar with cluster B personality disorders, who correctly recognized his narcissistic psychopathy. - people who were close to him, like his family, who warned us about how he treats people close to him. - people who went into business with him, who were unilaterally screwed over by his business practices. - Hillary Clinton. Listening to any of these people, or even better, all of these people, would have saved us from this whole mess. Notably, all of these people are saying the same things today, and he's still the front runner of the Republican party. So really, the problem isn't Trump anymore, it's that a lot of people actually want a dictatorship, because they perceive they can use it to their political advantage. That's where we are now. There are no more excuses about who the man is. Trump wants to be a dictator, and Republicans like that idea. There's no more assumed good faith to be had here.
      - CamperBob2 3y ago
        So really, the problem isn't Trump anymore Exactly, that's my point. It has been clear for a long time who Trump is and what he stands for. Long before he ever ran for office. A great many people are either fine with his positions, indifferent to them, or vote without bothering to inform themselves about the candidate they're voting for. Once that cohort grows to dominate the electorate, there's nothing (legal) that anyone else can do. Hence the "fair means or foul" part of the question. But it may not matter: he can't be stopped by fair means if he actually does represent the values of the electorate, and if he is stopped by foul means, his supporters will pick someone even worse.
      - MrPatan 3y ago
        Amazing. A collection of "People who don't like his personality", plus his literal political opponent, are your best sources on how to identify the next Hitler. Let me say that again: If a democrat you like says somebody is Hitler, then all is fair to stop him. Brilliant! I hope you're getting paid for this.