Not unless you can point to some actual examples of that happening, he isn't.
I said example of mentality, not action. That's why leftists/democrats always call others nazis; it's an implicit position and threat that they want to kill them.
Must be nice to be able to read your opponent's mind.
Sure. It's got nothing to do with the many, many similarities between the way Trump talks about immigrants and Muslims and the way Hitler talked about the Jews, or with his bestie actually doing a Nazi salute on national television, or with the growing number of Nazi flags spotted at right-wing rallies in the USA...it's all our way of imagining an excuse to kill people. Brilliant.
When someone clearly says something, I generally accept what they say is what they believe. Like what was stated in post #18. That's not mind reading, that's just reading.
Case in point, in your mind Trump supporters are like Nazis and it's perfectly justifiable to call them such.
No, you don't. We have all seen the lengths you will go to in order to convince yourself Trump didn't really mean all sorts of things he's said.
Not all of them. But the ones who use Nazi flags and Nazi salutes? Yeah, it is perfectly justifiable to call them such.
You make an excellent case for why Trump and his cult deserve to be compared to Nazis, although I don't think you intended to.
Correction: I don't let people like you tell me what Trump says or what he 'really' means.
Just taking your claim at face value, you therefore condone the action of declaring war against and killing them.
Trump and Trump supporters don't support or promote killing people. If they did, they would begin by labeling those they wanted to kill with labels that begin to garner an acceptance of killing them. For example, using label 'Nazis" or "Deplorables", which are terms intended to dehumanize those being labeled as such.
You can rationalize it all you want. But the fact remains, your track record fundamentally does not match up with your claim that, "When someone clearly says something, I generally accept what they say is what they believe." That's my point here.
Whatever happened to "I said example of mentality, not action"? See your very own post 28 above. And in any case, no, I do not condone vigilante justice against other Americans, no matter how abhorrent I find their beliefs. I won't try to speak for Politruk, but I think he was just being hyperbolic. That's the way I read it, anyway.
That may well be the most unintentionally funny thing I've ever read here.
How about rapists and drug-pushers? Vermin? Marxists? Radical left thugs? Trump has used every last one of those at various times.
You're confusing that with accepting your interpretation and assertions of what people say.
But you do condone calling them Nazis and deplorables, knowing full well that kind of labeling and divisiveness easily leads to violence.
Ah, yes, hyperbolic. Funny how that exact assessment for Trump doesn't fly with you, but you'll use it when convenient for your side.
And the proposed solution is kicking such illegal immigrants out of the country, or if citizens, locking them up. A mandate the American people clearly voted for. Neither is in the slightest way objectionable.
You're entitled to your opinion, but I don't think I am.
If it "easily leads to violence," just where are the stories of roving gangs of Democrats beating up on poor, defenseless victims who did nothing but, say, wear a t-shirt with a swastika on it or something?
My side doesn't have a history of fomenting violence with its rhetoric: Trump does.
Not only is this the very definition of moving the goalposts, it isn't even true. Some of the people Trump called "vermin" or "Marxists" were guilty of nothing but disagreeing with him. How is using language like that "not in the slightest way objectionable" when they did nothing illegal or wrong?
And you responded that Trump just wanted to kick them out of the country (which is exactly what the Nazis said about the Jews at first, but I digress). Either it's always wrong to use "terms intended to dehumanize those being labeled as such" or it isn't. But here, whether you mean to or not, you are effectively arguing that it's OK for Trump to do so because he "only" intends to either deport them or throw them in jail - including citizens who have committed no crime at all.
Well...I'm perfectly fine agreeing with your assertion you're not entitled to your opinion.
This is why there are no conservative comedians, or at least no successful ones.Well...I'm perfectly fine agreeing with your assertion you're not entitled to your opinion.
You literally said you're not entitled to your opinion. I'm just going to agree with you and leave it at that.
You know perfectly well what I meant. Grow up.You literally said you're not entitled to your opinion. I'm just going to agree with you and leave it at that.
Thought we agreed I'm not a mind reader? You said I'm entitled to my opinion, but you don't think you are.
Oh, I already "got" your gift for selectively twisting some things around while taking others at absolute face value to fit your ideology. It's kind of hard to miss.
all murder is horrificThread subject: Horrific murder of a trans man
Correct response: This is awful. I hope justice is served.
Deplorable Response: This is triggering the hell out of me because transphobia...must blame liberals immediately and then sealion all over the thread.
and yet no mention of this
That story has nothing to do with the one in the OP, and no one has said that woman doesn't deserve to spend the rest of her life in prison.
More to the point, there are no funny ones.
Idiot
What woman?
The gaslighting is strong in this one.
