Buttload of Faith: the 2016 Presidential Primary Thread (Pt 2)

I don't throw around the term fascist lightly and resent being lumped in as part of a trend that predates Trump and you can scroll back through my decade of posts if you like to verify that.

and if we're acknowledging the low stakes here re: how much ilx impact has irl, I think my usage of fascist degrades the term about as much as your voice on ilx inhibits Trump's fomentation of violence.

xp

That quote was from Robert Paxson and you left out:

"marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline" - yes
"humiliation" - yes
"or victimhood" - yes

i didn't leave it out - that was the first thing on the list

ok sorry. I do think that's three yesses, though.

lol shakey i took yr challenge and discovered this:

fascism is a pretty specific historical political phenomenon - and while there have arguably been fascist regimes from both the left (I'm thinkin Peron here) and the right (everyone else) - any and all claims to fascism in America are usually inaccurate and overheated hyperbole.
― Shakey Mo Collier, Tuesday, March 6, 2007 5:56 PM (8 years ago) Bookmark

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-fascism#United_States

and in 2007 I was correct

Trump is quite unusual

If anything I would think that post is evidence that I don't throw the term around lightly

I actually think a debate about the degree to which pre-Trump Republicans have been fascist is worth having - the 2000 stopping of the vote count, the invasion of Iraq, disregard for existing political structures (extreme congressional obstructionism, government shutdowns), disregard for democratic principles (extreme gerrymandering, voter law shenanigans).

http://www.azquotes.com/picture-quotes/quote-fascism-was-really-the-basis-for-the-new-deal-ronald-reagan-65-35-51.jpg

the 2000 stopping of the vote count, the invasion of Iraq, disregard for existing political structures (extreme congressional obstructionism, government shutdowns), disregard for democratic principles (extreme gerrymandering, voter law shenanigans).

these were all implemented democratically and/or challenged and held up in court

https://youtu.be/GlI2rjPIRI0

whether or not trump is fascist just kinda depends on how you want to use that word so everyone's right. also who cares. he is clearly a nationalist and appeals to white-identity voters, aka the gop base. I don't think his actual political views are concrete enough to be called anything. trumpist.

he's a nationalist who, as president, would definitely be willing to commit treason if someone offered him enough money

"you and I live in a world that we don't understand much of"

ain't that the truth

xxp

anybody else check out Frum's piece in the Atlantic - nice rundown

I agree that the term 'fascist' is and has been thrown out a bit too casually about people/movements that don't fit a strict definition of the term or, in some cases, even approximate it. That said, based on the evidence he's been all-too-happy to lay out before us, Trump is a fascist.

link, ET?

let me google that for you

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/01/the-great-republican-revolt/419118

thx

http://i.imgur.com/NWKLStd.jpg

This is Jeb Bush throwing "a fist in the air."

Why is he doing this if he doesn't want to do this?

XP Check out the sex-face on this tortoise.

This is Jeb Bush throwing "a fist in the air."

look out!!! he's going to smite that poor lone supporter!!!

I like to think of myself as an "accuracy in language matters" guy. However, one of the main tools we use in the contemporary age to keep the undercurrent of white nationalism that exists in this country from metastasising into an organized militant minority capable of launching an effective national intimidation campaign, while still maintaining freedom of speech, is by making it socially unacceptable to espouse those views.

Supporting a guy who we label as a gross far-right nutbag gets an eye roll and a decision not to talk about politics at dinner from yr average American. Supporting a guy we label as reasonably comparable to Hitler gets people to stop employing you or buying your wares and your kids to stop answering your calls.

If calling Trump a fascist, somewhat incorrectly, galvanizes people and makes support for him socially unsustainable, fuck it, let's go ahead and risk misusing a word.

Trump cannot get elected, but someone smarter and more charismatic following Trump's model... probably still couldn't get elected at first. But if they cross the ~35% threshhold and start recruiting brownshirts, especially if those brownshirts' day jobs are with a militarized police force, they don't really need to, the other ~20% can be gained through making it physically dangerous to speak against them. I mean, do you really think there's a majority of Americans who would be willing to risk their personal safety and that of their families to speak up for the safety of abstracted Latinos and Muslims? I don't think it's a likely scenario, but it's a plausible one.

I think it's important to show that guy (who's totally out there) that it can't get past a certain point.

calling people fascist and comparing them to hitler doesn't quite have the edge that it used to.

if you could go back in time and call baby Trump a fascist, would you?

why bother? he'd still just spit up all over me

I don't mean lefty dorkuses on the internet like me calling him a fascist, I mean major media voices regularly and calmly referring to him as "fascist presidential candidate Donald Trump."

tbh I was really hoping a smart person would respond with "you sound like a fucking loony Coast to Coast caller, here's why that's impossible..." and comfort my ailing mind

"Say, I'm from out of town. Do you know a Mr. Ayak, by chance?"

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/12/21/how-donald-trump-is-breathing-life-into-americas-dying-white-supremacist-movement/

"Gov. Christie is a pro at the political head fake: indicating to a conservative audience that he'll do something to make them happy, only to do nothing at all."

http://www.wnyc.org/story/christies-head-fakes/

kinda reminds me of a Democratic president who's done similar things to liberals...

the thought of chris christie making an athletic move with a basketball is kind of a stretch, but ok

lock thread

i'm still feeling confident about voting for that "head faking" wind bag over everyone else (in the republican primary)

ugh why

I think I'm going to bern my Republican primary vote on Christie. I'm curious if he learned anything from #Bridgegate. Maybe he'll be a crook and get impeached after two years.

― rap is dad (it's a boy!)

not in the general election, mind you. that will depend on the outcome of bernie vs hillary

haha that's as good a reason as any I suppose.

also he's a pretty #darkhorse candidate and it would be funny to see him make a run and be like lol i'm voting for that guy

― rap is dad (it's a boy!)

yeah i'm just kidn of grasping at straws

Christie winning in New Hampshire would definitely add some extra lolz to the campaign

They'd have to move up that indictment-unsealing sched

speculating for a sec on Cruz getting the nomination - what would his strategy in the general election be? He seems smart enough to know that what he's currently peddling to the GOP base wouldn't sway enough of the general electorate, but how could he conceivably pivot away from all the noxious crap?

There's very little indication that he wants to that I've seen: "Ted Cruz doesn't give a shit what you think of him" is basically his angle.

"what he's currently peddling to the GOP base wouldn't sway enough of the general electorate, but how could he conceivably pivot away from all the noxious crap?"

Isn't that just as true of Trump, though? (I mean the "wouldn't sway," not "smart enough.")

Among the likeliest candidates, Republican nomination poll rankings are roughly the opposite of general-election poll rankings. That is, Trump and Cruz are leading the GOP primary crowd, but Rubio and Christie are more competitive vs. Clinton and Sanders.

Trump probably thinks he can persuade Mexicans, Muslims, and Asians that he doesn't hate them (after all, he knows some and they are "great people"), and he also has shown he can stake out non-insane-right-wing positions on stuff like raising taxes on the rich and abortion that could conceivably appeal to the center. I'm not saying he has a chance of successfully doing this, but this is probably what he thinks.

Cruz doesn't appear to have a moderating or conciliatory bone in his body.

there is murmuring in the political press that Cruz is too smart to believe much of what he says and is following his only conceivable path to the nomination-- and they will probably latch onto this secret gay marriage tape as proof of that

Cruz is super-ambitious. He'll bend himself into pretzels if he thinks it will get him into power. Once he's in power he'll use any underhanded trick to get what he wants. It is best to believe that he has already revealed most of what he wants to do. If the press delude themselves about that, they are fools.