What does the future hold for Donald Trump? - threadbans in OP

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120630080#Comment_120630080

He can apply for an appeal, doesn't mean he gets one.

The can also file a motion to freeze his assets, including property.

looksee

The whole Make America Great Again was very much in line with the ambitions of the Third Reich - looking back on past glory and trying to recreate it regardless of cost. What did the 'Again' refer to in Trump's case? What period was he looking back to? He said himself, the 40s and 50s of his childhood. A child of a wealthy family, wealth was given to him, that is all he remembers. There was prosperity but the price of that prosperity included racial and social inequality which are still not included in the MAGA philosophy. MAGAFM - Make America Great Again For Me would be nearer his intentions.

everlast75

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120630080#Comment_120630080

A lot of the time the appellant must lodge the money in court, or make a partial payment to the plaintiff - that amount being the aspect of the award he/she is not appealing.

Much like the Nazi German, he relied upon driving his people into collecive hysteria with grand rallies.

Obama had larger rallies, by far.

He delvied into Goebbel's playbook of lying enough until it was the truth.

A politician lying? When did that become new with Trump? And just throwing around Joseph Goebbels to add a faux veneer of fascism is a very weak strategy.

What about the Russia hoax - the lies that continued over and over again until it was regarded as The Truth by opponents of Trump. It turned out Trump was right about that vortex of lies.

So if you want to talk about lying, at least put it in context. And don't randomly introduce Goebbels to make your point seem relevant. It doesn't work.

He fostered a cult of personality around himself that persists to this day.

Then Trump failed, because 90+% of the US public do not unquestioningly praise Donald Trump from dawn till dusk.

Look at North Korea or what happened under Mao Zedong if you want to see what an actual Cult of Personality looks like.

All you're really saying is that he has a hardcore "base" of supporters.

Yet again you take something utterly banal and add layers of propagandised hyperbole to it.

He refused to condemn actual Neo-Nazies, going as far as stating that there were good people "on both sides".

After the whole "fine people on both sides", when Trump was at a press conference 2-days later, he condemned "in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry, and violence. It has no place in America".

He encouraged the "othering" of people, infamously starting with people from Muslim states. Who were blanket banned from entering the US for a time.

Only you are referring to those countries as "Muslim states". If we had a ban on German migration into the US, you wouldn't call it a ban on a "Christian state".

The countries were initially identified as “countries of concern” under the Obama Administration - and these included restrictions on people entering the US from Yemen, Somalia, Libya, and Syria. Was the Obama Administration proto-fascistic in its approach, then?

So there's nothing about a Trump dictatorship about this either.

Had Trump banned the entry of people from Muslim-majority states throughout the entire world, you'd have the ghost of a point.

He encouraged a monsterous program that stole young children from their families at the border without any plan in place to reunite them later. A good few still have not been reunited with their parents (and might never be).

Deterrence strategies matter. Better not to have people coming in the first place if they fear family separation. So let's put that factor on the table.

Second, there may very well be situations in which the lives of children are at danger given the chaotic situation at the border. In these situations, children may need to be protected and later reunited with their families.

In fact, Trump Administration "encouraged" the practice so much that they ended the practice in June 2018.

There's nothing about this that indicates a Trump dictatorship either. This is just thrown in randomly, an argument from emotion.

He finished things off with his own attempt to "storm the Reichstag". There was even an attempt to blame it all on "Antifa" (another "other", this time a vague alt-left boogieman).

He didn't order people to storm the US Capitol.

He soon released a video asking them to go home, as causing violence was against the law and order he was trying to promote as part of its presidency. I don't support the events of January 6, but to call it his version of storming the Reichstag is silly.

So whatever way you cut it, your attempt to frame Trump as wanting to herald in his own dictatorship fails utterly, as is your consistent approach of selectively choosing words and phrases linked to Nazi Germany and then gluing them to anything Trump-related as a means of discrediting the man.

And here's the kicker - even if you were right about half of these points, it still wouldn't follow that Trump was trying to establish some kind of dictatorship.

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120630444#Comment_120630444

Both sides.

I don't expect the Democrats to do this at all.

everlast75

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120630348#Comment_120630348

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120630369#Comment_120630369

any chance you could address this?

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120630134#Comment_120630134

Well said.

What I would say is that he was just too deeply flawed as an individual to do any of this, had there been an opportunity. There is no territory that the USA can just claim the same way several Balkan countries or even Ireland can.

More than that, if you look at any coup in history, you'll see that they only succeed when the perpetrators are skilled, disciplined and experienced and even then a healthy dollop of luck is needed. Ordering a horde of decadent, entitled bigots to storm the seat of government is the relative equivalent of injecting bleach.

I remain firmly convinced that Trump would absolutely take a second term, even if it mean sacrificing millions of lives. He's easily the worst leader the developed world has seen since the middle of the twentieth century.

Quin_Dub

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120630515#Comment_120630515

Largely fact free nonsense.

Just to pick out a few -

What about the Russia hoax - the lies that continued over and over again until it was regarded as The Truth by opponents of Trump. It turned out Trump was right about that vortex of lies.

We've already been through this - No , he absolutely categorically has not been "proven right" and the article you link to is utter nonsense and the Durham report doesn't say any of the things it claims, at all.

He didn't order people to storm the US Capitol.

He soon released a video asking them to go home, as causing violence was against the law and order he was trying to promote as part of its presidency. I don't support the events of January 6, but to call it his version of storming the Reichstag is silly.

He didn't "soon release" anything - Hours and hours after it all started , after multiple people begged and pleaded with him to do something , ANYTHING to make it stop, he released a video where he told them he loved them.

Even his fuckwit sons knew it was a terrible thing , but even their begging couldn't get him off his fat arse in front of the TV where he was gleefully watching the riots unfold.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120630611#Comment_120630611

Even if what you say is true - and I contest some of what you say - that still wouldn't justify the conclusion that Trump wanted to usher in a dictatorship to end democracy in the United States as we know it.

In other words, it's a non sequitur.

Quin_Dub

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120630637#Comment_120630637

Again, I refer you to me earlier question.

What do you think would have happened if Trump had succeeded in illegally overturning the 2020 Election and took office as President?

Do you think that normal service would have been restored and that Trump would have adhered to oversight and laws etc. that he might not agree with , that if the House or Senate voted down something he wanted to do that he would simply accept that decision??

Do you think that it it completely beyond the bounds of all possibility that Trump would have been emboldened by his now proven ability to ignore the law and that he would have made changes to Election laws to ensure that his "side" would always win or even that he might seek to change the law to allow him to remain on as President?

Or that he would simply ignore the law and do as he pleased because he had shown that he could???

Do you believe that a scenario like that is completely and utterly impossible?

Now - It didn't come to pass , because the structures held - He didn't get away with his schemes , but that wasn't because he stepped back , it was because others stepped forward to stop him.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120630663#Comment_120630663

What do you think would have happened if Trump had succeeded in illegally overturning the 2020 Election and took office as President?

The US Constitution is too robust to have even allowed this to happen.

There's a reason it didn't happen.

So whilst its tempting to engage in speculation, that's all it is - total speculation. It would never have materialised in reality, nor could it.

MisterAnarchy

Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini Ive heard it all now, the delusion and hyperbole has reached peak levels.

Such comparisons are insulting to the millions that were killed or exterminated by these horrific evil regimes.

They killed their political opponents, they sent millions of their own people to die in war, they committed mass genocide.

I think too may people have been watching the film "The Death of Stalin", which may I remind people is a black comedy.

ancapailldorcha

Actually, on the subject of saying positive things about Trump, I've got two.

Firstly, he showed us what modern evangelical Christianity is all about: Selfishness and hatred. They couldn't care less about anyone else and now they've stopped pretending to be better than they are.

Secondly, how weak the US constitution is at protecting the liberties of the American people. It's still significantly better than here in the UK but the fact that a former president was able to incite a fascist coup, consequence free, capture the key offices of state that are supposed to hold him to account and arbitrarily strip women of their rights via corrupt supreme court appointments shows it is nothing to admire.

Quin_Dub

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120630665#Comment_120630665

Indeed and the world is thankful for it - But that does not for a moment negate the fact that Trump tried to do it and would have happily done so and would still do it today if given the chance.

The fact that he didn't get to become a dictator because the Constitution held firm and the laws of the US were adhered to is not evidence that he didn't want to become a dictator.

The point being made is that Trump couldn't care less about the US Constitution and has shown that he is perfectly happy to ignore it and any other laws if it gets him what he wants. That is a textbook definition of dictatorship.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120630671#Comment_120630671

It never ceases to amaze me how spectacularly preposterous it is to compare Donald Trump to genocidal maniacs like Stalin, Mao, and Hitler.

"Oh well, Donald Trump may not have started a genocide or killed millions of people or starved a country to death or implemented eugenics, but well, the comparison stands" - what an awful, almost sad and desperate form of argument.

Leroy42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120630671#Comment_120630671

But they didn't start that way. They moved to that end by being allowed to chip away, by people excusing their breaking the rules and norms, by agreeing that something had to be done and if that meant a bit of rule-breaking well the end justified the means. He called for a political opponent to be locked up for goodness sake. And his supporters accepted that she was guilty without trial or evidence purely because they wanted to get rid of a political opponent.

Trump publicly and very aggressively tried to overturn the democratic will of the US. That he didn't succeed is not because he didn't want to, or didn't do everything he could think of to succeed, it is because others stepped up to stop him.

Ao it isn't hyperbole to suggest that he would have accepted the POTUS position had the likes of Pence not stood their ground or had some of the governors he put pressure on folded. And once he had succeeded if overturning one democratic decision, why do you think he would stop there? Do you really think the 8-year limit would have just been accepted?

MisterAnarchy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120630689#Comment_120630689

Firstly, he showed us what modern evangelical Christianity is all about: Selfishness and hatred.

What a sweeping and racist statement.

Burty330

"Trump refused to condemn actual Neo-Nazies"

Most people don't know the difference between objective fact and narrative. ^ That's a narrative.

The truth is this

It’s fine, you’re changing history, you’re changing culture, and you had people – and I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally – but you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists, okay? And the press has treated them absolutely unfairly. Now, in the other group also, you had some fine people, but you also had troublemakers and you see them come with the black outfits and with the helmets and with the baseball bats – you had a lot of bad people in the other group too.

Racism is evil. And those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs, including the KKK, neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and other hate groups that are repugnant to everything we hold dear as Americans.

Fair comments that apparently are not good enough. But when Robert Byrd says he's no longer a KKK member thats totally fine because we all know who he had under his wing.

Byrd grew up in West Virginia, which is where he got involved with the KKK.

“Many of the ‘best’ people were members — even senators and other high officials,” he wrote in his autobiography. “It was with such background impressions, therefore, that I sought to become a member of the KKK in the early 1940s.”

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120630665#Comment_120630665

SO the best you can come up with is that he was stopped from subverting democracy and trying to steal the election.

Not that he didn't try to, or that he could be trusted not to, or what he might be capable of if he thought he could get away with it.

Do you even remember why you are posting here defending him?

The thread is about "What does the future hold for Donald Trump".

Even you say you he should not have a second term - don't you? That's a possible future.

As have many other posters, and listed the reasons, his personal flaws which manifest in court cases, the above documented attempts to subvert the democratic election.

And let's also add - found liable in a court of law for sexual assault.

Yet here you are countless post after post defending him.

Laughable pretence.

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120630741#Comment_120630741

So you're just happy to abuse that word despite complaining about "the left" allegedly doing it. How disingenuous.

Flaneur OBrien

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120630736#Comment_120630736

I'd like to say that thankfully he wasn't given the chance, but it's more to do with what drives him.

All he cares about is enriching himself. He doesn't have a grand philosophy like the others mentioned. All he cares about is money, money, money.

His constant grifting tells you all you need to know. Why can't an apparent "billionaire" afford an attorney? Why does he need his followers to donate to pay his bills?

It's mad that his supporters can't see that.

duploelabs

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120630665#Comment_120630665

But that logic, there's be no prosecutions for attempted murder

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120630752#Comment_120630752

Oh I'm perfectly willing to accept other criticisms of Trump and so on, and grifting is for sure part and parcel of US political culture. I see the entire nomination approach as generally attempts by many candidates to line their own pockets.

But that's an entirely separate point from the allegation that Trump wanted to establish a dictatorship and end democracy in the US as we know it.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120630750#Comment_120630750

If someone made your comment about a Muslim-majority country, you'd be the first to condemn them as racist.

I think it's similarly wrong for you to make the same kind of comment about people in the United States.

Quin_Dub

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120630748#Comment_120630748

ANYBODY that was at that parade is a racist white-supremacist , there were no "fine people" there simple as that.

If you turned up to that event in support of what was happening you are not a "fine person" , not holding a tiki-torch doesn't make it ok - his inability to see that is where the problem has always been in regard to that event.

Just like his refusal to condemn the QANON nutters because they vote for him - when asked about them he said "Well, they say nice things about me".

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120630775#Comment_120630775

So when Trump condemns the people you claim he supported, you just deny his words.

...and I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally.

It seems facts don't matter at this stage.

It's just whatever you want to believe about Trump is considered "fact".

MisterAnarchy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120630750#Comment_120630750

You have just said this about a quarter of the US population

"He showed us what modern evangelical Christianity is all about: Selfishness and hatred. They couldn't care less about anyone else and now they've stopped pretending to be better than they are."

Thats a vile and racist statement in the true meaning of the word.

Try and substitute another religion in there and see the response you would get.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120630797#Comment_120630797

The people accusing Donald Trump of racism seem to have no problem with other forms of racism.

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120630797#Comment_120630797

State of this.

Christians aren't a race. The idea that my race changes if I start attending mass is absurd.

I'd also like a source for the claim that a quarter of Americans are evangelical Christians.

Leroy42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120630741#Comment_120630741

It is neither racist nor sweeping. Evangelical, if it was any other religion it would be called fundamentalist, want their view of the world to be the view taken by society as a whole. So much so that they were willing to ignore nearly all their morals in their support of Trump because he could deliver to them a rigged SCOTUS to enable them to overturn the will of the wider public and condemn many women to massive pain and suffering. Those that do not agree with them, are not only happy to have them prosecuted in this life, they are happy to see them tortured for all eternity in the most extreme ways.

VinLieger

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120630797#Comment_120630797

Lol calling Christianity a race, youve accidentally said the quiet part loud I think.....