politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
This line of analysis really highlights just how incompetent Trump is at being fascist.
Most seasoned politicians are more like Vance and can sell their reactionary policy in all the nice language liberals like to use.
It also highlights how fucked the US is once Trump becomes irrelevant, because any one of the more competent fascists could potentially take his place, and Trump has set the bar so low that just about anyone else will be able to clear it.
Maybe all the wannabe fachos'll all infight to death?
One can hope right?
I've got to disagree. This isn't incompetence, its a deliberate strategy. One candidate plays the Nice Polite Republican and the other whips the base.
Traditionally, you get your aw shucks Good'ole'Boy on the front of the ticket - your Bush, your McCain, your Romney - and the nail-eating red meat psychopath as VP - Cheney / Palin / Ryan. In this particular election, Trump's press is so bad that Vance looks sane by comparison. And the debate was an opportunity to really layer the mask on thick to calm the rubs into thinking he's the normal one.
Just look at the primary ballot. Your options ranged from the vindictive culture-war sadists DeSantis and Christie to the neocon forever war hawks Hailey and Scott, with a few paleocons and grifters sprinkled in the margins.
Then there's the ones who didn't run - Abbot and Cruz down in Texas are both gunning for the Presidency in 2028. All these people suck.
I just don't see anyone on the Dem side of the aisle who is going to do better than Hilary did in 2016, once Trump is off the stage.
Don't you dare bring Abbott into this. I do not wish his bull shit on anyone else.
Non-zero chance he's going to be in Trump's cabinet if Trump wins.
Maybe I could see that? I mean, if Vance rationalizes Trump enough to actually win then I guess it's effective. Trump is just such a sweaty big boy, a lot of libs who would otherwise go along with it just can't get themselves to associate, whereas if Vance was at the top of the ticket I think a lot of libs would be like "fuck me, that doesn't sound so bad".
Idk. If i'm thinking of any other historical example of fascist leaders, they're basically all deeply serious people. Bibi is a good example actually - Harvard educated, military background, exceptional political maneuvering. When he makes his threats you know he has the political capital to actually back it up. Contrast with Trump: he is just so plainly self-obsessed that his fascist message misses the mark for most people. Trump just flubs around in front of a camera and makes demands and only about half of his target audience takes it seriously, maybe less.
Taking a step back even, maybe what you're saying could apply to the duopoly, too. It would certainly explain Harris' shift to the right on immigration and law enforcement: Trump riles up the electorate into pogroms, and the liberal candidate offers a reactionary policy as a concession to placate the bloodlust.
Yea, that's my thing. Trump has created an appetite for reactionary governance, and the democrats just don't have a real response to it except "yea ok, I guess you're right". They'll either lose to the next republican or they'll slide into fascism themselves.
You’re missing one major historical fascist leader: a broke artist immigrant who substituted volume for grasp on reality and was less of a cause of fascism than an embodiment of the reactionary attitude in his country. Trump isn’t like Mussolini or Franco, but he’s very much like Hitler.
In my personal opinion trump isn't ideologically fascist. I would consider him opportunistically fascist.
I believe he wields his rhetoric for his own personal gain. I'm thinking he would just as quickly change his rhetoric if it advantaged him.
None of what I've seen from the current GOP tells me any one of them has the same saucy charisma as trumf. He's not built like them, his defining trait with the GOP is that he's a garbage human being.
I think this way of viewing fascism is misleading. All fascist leaders use it to gain power - it is the willingness to use force against the out-group and hyper-nationalism that helps them solidify their position. It is the belief that doing so will make their country 'great' that is the ideological underpinning, and Trump absolutely fits that description.
I think he's just really bad at it.
That could very well be true. I chose to believe he doesn't really believe he is making the country 'great'. He is simply reading from fascisms playbook, as a result of late capital.
I agree, that some might say he subscribes to palingenetic ultranationalism. Yet, I think that would make him a fascistic collaborator.
Either way its all bad news.