Donald Trump trying to stage a coup and overthrow democracy is 'inevitable'

[Hard_Rom]

Donald Trump trying to stage a coup and overthrow democracy is 'inevitable', says top U.S. historian

http://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/polit...1,ansmsnnews11,ansmsnnews11&OCID=ansmsnnews11

Professor Timothy Snyder, a leading academic at Yale University, said the US President was already displaying “fascistic” tendencies and could be tempted by a new political system that does not rely on elections.

“The conventional way to be popular or to be legitimate in this country is to have some policies, to grow your popularity ratings and to win some elections. I don’t think 2018 is looking very good for the Republicans along those conventional lines." “This means they could be seduced by the notion of getting into a new rhythm of politics, one that does not depend upon popular policies and electoral cycles."

Professor Snyder also claimed Mr Trump was already displaying a number of “fascistic” tendencies, including telling lies, publicly naming his enemies and removing opponents from his rallies – something he said was “without exaggeration, just like the 1920s and the 1930s”.

“They said: 'Don’t worry about the facts, don’t worry about logic, think instead in terms of mystical unities and direct connections between the mystical leader and the people.' That’s fascism. Whether we see it or not, whether we like it or not, whether we forget, that is fascism."

 

[Carnal_Flower]

And he's whining about the very existence of Congress today.

He FAILED miserably on his wall, the spending bill, and can't hack it. Government needs to be "shut down" until this "mess" (that would be democracy) is "fixed."

He's extremely upset that the spending bill is being seen as Democrat victory. Really making him unhinged.

First he calls for a "shut down" to "fix" this little problem called elected representatives, then he reverses himself hours later and proclaims the spending bill a "great victory" for himself.

It's like the stages of denial.

Oh, looks like I'm attacking democracy, or so my aides tell me. Better change tactics.

Hmm, I'll, um . . . LIE, that's it!

It was a great victory! The biggest victory you've ever seen!

Psycho Boy is unravelling

 

[Boxlicker101]

This is a ridiculous idea. One thing the ivory tower type fails to consider is that Trump is too old to stage a coup. By that, I mean he is too old to enjoy the fruits of the accomplishment. In itself, that would be enough, but he is also lacking support and other factors he would need.

I thought Obama might have made such an attempt. He was young, had a scapegoat, a dedicated following and control of both houses of Congress. Trump has none of these things.

As for these other thing: “fascistic” tendencies, including telling lies, publicly naming his enemies and removing opponents from his rallies – something he said was “without exaggeration, just like the 1920s and the 1930s” : all pols do them, including Obama.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

What planet are you on?

Trump has ALL of those things except youth.

You don't think Trump has been cultivating scapegoats?

When did Obama "publically name his enemies?" (By that I assume that's how you're choosing to characterize Trump's hate rallies.)

When did Obama have protesters removed? Did he ever yell "Get 'em outta here!" Was Obama ever sued for inciting violence? Do tell.

More importantly, when did Obama:

--attack the press
--attack the courts
--attack intelligence agencies
--attack the very existence of Congress
--express support for dictators?
--Never acknowledge that he was president for all Americans? Call the people who didn't vote for him "our opponents"
--send out a shill to claim "the president cannot be questioned."
--Describe the press as the "enemy of the people"

I await your reply

And if you can't see any difference in Trump's levels and frequency of lying, there's no help for you.

If you ever saw two seconds of one of his rallies and don't get it, there's no hope

I thought Obama might have made such an attempt. He was young, had a scapegoat, a dedicated following and control of both houses of Congress. Trump has none of these things.

As for these other thing: “fascistic” tendencies, including telling lies, publicly naming his enemies and removing opponents from his rallies – something he said was “without exaggeration, just like the 1920s and the 1930s”: all pols do them, including Obama.

 

[sr71plt]

This is a ridiculous idea. One thing the ivory tower type fails to consider is that Trump is too old to stage a coup. By that, I mean he is too old to enjoy the fruits of the accomplishment. In itself, that would be enough, but he is also lacking support and other factors he would need.

I thought Obama might have made such an attempt. He was young, had a scapegoat, a dedicated following and control of both houses of Congress. Trump has none of these things.

What do you mean Trump doesn't have support? He has truly loony people like you behind him--and the suggestion that Obama might have been making a coup attempt is one of the craziest things you've posted all year. You truly are around the bend, Box.

 

[LincolnDuncan]

This is a ridiculous idea. One thing the ivory tower type fails to consider is that Trump is too old to stage a coup. By that, I mean he is too old to enjoy the fruits of the accomplishment. In itself, that would be enough, but he is also lacking support and other factors he would need.

I thought Obama might have made such an attempt. He was young, had a scapegoat, a dedicated following and control of both houses of Congress. Trump has none of these things.

As for these other thing: “fascistic” tendencies, including telling lies, publicly naming his enemies and removing opponents from his rallies – something he said was “without exaggeration, just like the 1920s and the 1930s” : all pols do them, including Obama.

Is it really your contention that the suggestion that Trump and Co are attempting to destroy democracy and install a dictatorship, ridiculous, because he's too old?

 

[sr71plt]

I don't think that Trump personally is trying for a coup (some of his advisers, on the other hand . . .) I think he's just so ignorant about how any government works that he thinks he has the power to get what he wants just by signing decrees.

 

[Chris_Michael]

I would criticize Trump here, but you dumbass leftists made me regret it last time I tried. So, yay Trump! Lord Emperor Trump will take over the world!!!

 

[Carnal_Flower]

All of you freaks are so weird.

Us so-called liberals never thought or gave a crap about you, until we were forced to by YOUR election of Trump.

We don't think, consider, cogitate, give a shit about the ignorant righties, but MAN do you think about us.

It's like being stalked online by someone who THINKS they're in a relationship with you. No, only in your mind.

Proof: You voted for Trump, you elected Trump. You got your guy. Yet instead of paying attention to him, you hang out outside leftie sites, watch leftie videos, obsess about supposed leftie concerns.

Freak.

I would criticize Trump here, but you dumbass leftists made me regret it last time I tried. So, yay Trump! Lord Emperor Trump will take over the world!!!

 

[Chris_Michael]

All of you freaks are so weird.

Us so-called liberals never thought or gave a crap about you, until we were forced to by YOUR election of Trump.

We don't think, consider, cogitate, give a shit about the ignorant righties, but MAN do you think about us.

It's like being stalked online by someone who THINKS they're in a relationship with you. No, only in your mind.

Proof: You voted for Trump, you elected Trump. You got your guy. Yet instead of paying attention to him, you hang out outside leftie sites, watch leftie videos, obsess about supposed leftie concerns.

Freak.

Uhhh wut

 

[Boxlicker101]

What planet are you on?

Trump has ALL of those things except youth.

You don't think Trump has been cultivating scapegoats?

When did Obama "publically name his enemies?" (By that I assume that's how you're choosing to characterize Trump's hate rallies.)

When did Obama have protesters removed? Did he ever yell "Get 'em outta here!" Was Obama ever sued for inciting violence? Do tell.

More importantly, when did Obama:

--attack the press
--attack the courts
--attack intelligence agencies
--attack the very existence of Congress
--express support for dictators?
--Never acknowledge that he was president for all Americans? Call the people who didn't vote for him "our opponents"
--send out a shill to claim "the president cannot be questioned."
--Describe the press as the "enemy of the people"

I await your reply

And if you can't see any difference in Trump's levels and frequency of lying, there's no help for you.

If you ever saw two seconds of one of his rallies and don't get it, there's no hope

Name a Trump scapegoat.

Here is a lot about Obama's enemies list: https://us.search.yahoo.com/yhs/sea...=10.0&os=Windows+10+Home&p=obama+enemies+list

Obama did not attack the press because of their virtual worship of him.

Those who disagreed with Obama did so in a respectful way, while those who disagree with Trump do so violently and with attempts to disrupt. Obama never had reason to eject anybody, while Trump does.

Here is Obama attacking SCOTUS, which he and Trump both have a right to do:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...2/gIQA4BXYrS_blog.html?utm_term=.5d726be256e5

 

[Chris_Michael]

Apparently, if you vote for somebody, you forfeit your right to criticize them.

Liberals - Can't win if you disagree with them, and you can't win if you try to agree with them.

Ironically, I try to agree with something Carnal-Flower might think, and she accuses me of being a stalker. That's why I criticize the left more than the right. You cannot make a liberal happy. It's impossible. They want to be offended. They want to be the victims. And they want you to keep "oppressing" them.

"NO! Please! Keep disagreeing with me! You cannot agree! You're the oppressor!"

CF has daddy issues

 

[BettyPoop]

Apparently, if you vote for somebody, you forfeit your right to criticize them.

Liberals - Can't win if you disagree with them, and you can't win if you try to agree with them.

Ironically, I try to agree with something Carnal-Flower might think, and she accuses me of being a stalker. That's why I criticize the left more than the right. You cannot make a liberal happy. It's impossible. They want to be offended. They want to be the victims. And they want you to keep "oppressing" them.

"NO! Please! Keep disagreeing with me! You cannot agree! You're the oppressor!"

CF has daddy issues

Andrew Jackson disagreed with you.

 

[Chris_Michael]

Andrew Jackson disagreed with you.

I'll make a note of that for the next time I see him.

 

[needit700]

Two Words!!!

F A K E N E W S!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Carnal_Flower]

Liberals don't CARE about you! We don't care. You think we do, we don't. You care about us--a lot, since you spend so damn much of your time thinking about us!

No, it's not that you are or are not criticizing Trump, it's that you're not paying attention. You don't care. You voted for an idiot thinking it would send a message. It's all still about your big complaints about "us."

Morons.

You, Bitter Boy, JBJ, you are all the same.

Apparently, if you vote for somebody, you forfeit your right to criticize them.

Liberals - Can't win if you disagree with them, and you can't win if you try to agree with them.

Ironically, I try to agree with something Carnal-Flower might think, and she accuses me of being a stalker. That's why I criticize the left more than the right. You cannot make a liberal happy. It's impossible. They want to be offended. They want to be the victims. And they want you to keep "oppressing" them.

"NO! Please! Keep disagreeing with me! You cannot agree! You're the oppressor!"

CF has daddy issues

 

[AnAmericanDarling]

Donald Trump trying to stage a coup and overthrow democracy is 'inevitable', says top U.S. historian

http://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/polit...1,ansmsnnews11,ansmsnnews11&OCID=ansmsnnews11

Professor Timothy Snyder, a leading academic at Yale University, said the US President was already displaying “fascistic” tendencies and could be tempted by a new political system that does not rely on elections.

“The conventional way to be popular or to be legitimate in this country is to have some policies, to grow your popularity ratings and to win some elections. I don’t think 2018 is looking very good for the Republicans along those conventional lines." “This means they could be seduced by the notion of getting into a new rhythm of politics, one that does not depend upon popular policies and electoral cycles."

Professor Snyder also claimed Mr Trump was already displaying a number of “fascistic” tendencies, including telling lies, publicly naming his enemies and removing opponents from his rallies – something he said was “without exaggeration, just like the 1920s and the 1930s”.

“They said: 'Don’t worry about the facts, don’t worry about logic, think instead in terms of mystical unities and direct connections between the mystical leader and the people.' That’s fascism. Whether we see it or not, whether we like it or not, whether we forget, that is fascism."

Personally, as to seeing this as an actual problem, I doubt it ever will be. Trump can put out all his fantasy ideas he wants to about not having elections, but it will never happen because - Democrats or Republicans - will never go for it. It's the very opposition of what this country is supposed to be about: Each person getting their say in.

As for what this board is actually arguing about, I tend to agree with Carnal Flower. Republicans voted for their "man" and they've got him now (and allegedly all his "causes", like repealing Obamacare), yet all they can focus on is Democrats. The whole thing is warped.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Personally, as to seeing this as an actual problem, I doubt it ever will be. Trump can put out all his fantasy ideas he wants to about not having elections, but it will never happen because - Democrats or Republicans - will never go for it. It's the very opposition of what this country is supposed to be about: Each person getting their say in.

As for what this board is actually arguing about, I tend to agree with Carnal Flower. Republicans voted for their "man" and they've got him now (and allegedly all his "causes", like repealing Obamacare), yet all they can focus on is Democrats. The whole thing is warped.

I will always believe the vote was against Trump or Hillary, rather than for either of these disasters.

 

[LincolnDuncan]

No one could be worse than this clown. He's totally inept. Cruz and Christie would have been malicious as hell but this guy might be sadistic.

 

[lovecraft68]

I don't think that Trump personally is trying for a coup (some of his advisers, on the other hand . . .) I think he's just so ignorant about how any government works that he thinks he has the power to get what he wants just by signing decrees.

I'm leaning towards that. His initial decisions were Bannon's now yesterday's allowing church say in politics and defunding PP is all Pence.

Trump will never establish a dictatorship for one reason. If he tried to eliminate congress they would all turn on him because then it would be them having something taken away from them instead of it just being the people they allegedly represent being robbed of their rights