Donald J Trump, your thoughts on his Presidency

[That Aud Smell]

Jason Stanley summarizes his “formula for fascism”—a “surprisingly simple” pattern now repeating in Europe, South America, India, Myanmar, Turkey, the Philippines, and “right here in the United States.” No matter where they appear, “fascist politicians are cut from the same cloth,” he says. The elements of his formula are:

1. Conjuring a “mythic past” that has supposedly been destroyed (“by liberals, feminists, and immigrants”). Mussolini had Rome, Turkey’s Erdoğan has the Ottoman Empire, and Hungary’s Viktor Orban rewrote the country’s constitution with the aim of “making Hungary great again.” These myths rely on an “overwhelming sense of nostalgia for a past that is racially pure, traditional, and patriarchal.” Fascist leaders “position themselves as father figures and strongmen” who alone can restore lost greatness. And yes, the fascist leader is “always a ‘he.’”

2. Fascist leaders sow division; they succeed by “turning groups against each other,” inflaming historical antagonisms and ancient hatreds for their own advantage. Social divisions in themselves—between classes, religions, ethnic groups and so on—are what we might call pre-existing conditions. Fascists may not invent the hate, but they cynically instrumentalize it: demonizing outgroups, normalizing and naturalizing bigotry, stoking violence to justify repressive “law and order” policies, the curtailing of civil rights and due process, and the mass imprisonment and killing of manufactured enemies.

3. Fascists “attack the truth” with propaganda, in particular “a kind of anti-intellectualism” that “creates a petri dish for conspiracy theories.” (Stanley’s fourth book, published by Princeton University Press, is titled How Propaganda Works.) We would have to be extraordinarily naïve to think that only fascist politicians lie, but we should focus here on the question of degree. For fascists, truth doesn’t matter at all. (As Rudy Giuliani says, "truth isn't truth.") Hannah Arendt wrote that fascism relies on “a consistent and total substitution of lies for factual truth.” She described the phenomenon as destroying “the sense by which we take our bearings in the real world.... [T]he category of truth verses falsehood [being] among the mental means to this end.” In such an atmosphere, anything is possible, no matter how previously unthinkable.

[LGR4GM]

I think outside of the strong arm on the Economy (which is part of fascism, economic control, as opposed to what we have) the rest of fascism is dangerously close to what we are seeing. 

[LGR4GM]

Anyone wanna talk about what would happen if Donald Trump issued an executive order to end or modify section 1 of the 14th amendment? 

Edited October 30, 2018 by LGR4GM

[Hank]

35 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Anyone wanna talk about what would happen if Donald Trump issued an executive order to end or modify section 1 of the 14th amendment? 

You mind telling me what that is? I'm too lazy to look it up. 

[LGR4GM]

4 minutes ago, Hank said:

You mind telling me what that is? I'm too lazy to look it up. 

https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/30/politics/donald-trump-ending-birthright-citizenship/index.html

Quote

"It was always told to me that you needed a constitutional amendment. Guess what? You don't," he said, adding that he has run it by his counsel. "You can definitely do it with an act of Congress. But now they're saying I can do it just with an executive order," Trump said.

 

[SwampD]

12 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/30/politics/donald-trump-ending-birthright-citizenship/index.html

 

If only he would have done that 10 years ago, then we wouldn't have had to hear all that Kenya bullspit.

I can't see this flying with his base. Although, I bet his Russian backers will be pleased.

Edited October 30, 2018 by SwampD

[LTS]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

Anyone wanna talk about what would happen if Donald Trump issued an executive order to end or modify section 1 of the 14th amendment? 

I'm honestly not sure how I feel about it.  I've not given it a lot of thought.

My "feeling" is that those born in the United States who are not children of US citizens should not automatically become a US citizen.  They should retain citizenship of their parents.

Whereas those born in the US of parents who are US citizens should be US citizens.

I'm certainly open to discussion and my opinion could easily be swayed.

[LGR4GM]

14 minutes ago, LTS said:

I'm honestly not sure how I feel about it.  I've not given it a lot of thought.

My "feeling" is that those born in the United States who are not children of US citizens should not automatically become a US citizen.  They should retain citizenship of their parents.

Whereas those born in the US of parents who are US citizens should be US citizens.

I'm certainly open to discussion and my opinion could easily be swayed.

And do you think the president has the right to change that with an executive order? 

[LTS]

2 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

And do you think the president has the right to change that with an executive order? 

No. You know I wasn't really thinking about that aspect of it when I responded which was foolish of me.

Executive orders are abused already and they need not be expanded further.  

 

[North Buffalo]

Its amendment 14 to the Constitution that gave former slaves citizenship and article V of the Constitution prohibits the President from making changes via executive order.

So no it would be illegal. Also plenty of court precedents protecting or prohibiting such a change.

[JujuFish]

7 hours ago, LTS said:

I'm honestly not sure how I feel about it.  I've not given it a lot of thought.

My "feeling" is that those born in the United States who are not children of US citizens should not automatically become a US citizen.  They should retain citizenship of their parents.

Whereas those born in the US of parents who are US citizens should be US citizens.

I'm certainly open to discussion and my opinion could easily be swayed.

Follow this line of reasoning backwards.  Are your parents both citizens? What about the parents of your parents? Or their parents? Or their parents? What if there was an adoption at some point, were the biological parents citizens?  If there is even a single break in this line of citizenry, then you're no longer a citizen.  Hell, might as well say anyone who isn't a native isn't a citizen.

[Weave]

Over the last 3 fiscal quarters business investment grew at a rate of 5.1%.  In the 3 fiscal quarters prior to the tax bill passing, the business investment rate was.............. 5.0%.  That tax bill was quite the stimulus for business investment.

And while corporate tax revenue dropped 31%, our deficit has grown 17% since 2017.

So what are we getting for this deficit if we aren't getting business investment?  Stock buybacks. Class A shareholders are profiting from the corporate tax savings.  Not exactly what we were promised.

And those tariffs?  The Tax Foundation estimates that they will increase the amount consumers pay for goods by 42 billion dollars and result in 94,000 full time equivalent jobs getting eliminated.

Even his economic promises were empty.  He's the least fiscally conservative Conservative we've ever elected.

 

[LTS]

4 hours ago, JujuFish said:

Follow this line of reasoning backwards.  Are your parents both citizens? What about the parents of your parents? Or their parents? Or their parents? What if there was an adoption at some point, were the biological parents citizens?  If there is even a single break in this line of citizenry, then you're no longer a citizen.  Hell, might as well say anyone who isn't a native isn't a citizen.

Let me follow my line of reasoning all the way to one critical point: there is a mechanism by which people can become citizens of the United States. Your premise and entire line of reasoning is based on the idea that there is no other way to become a citizen of the US except by birth, which is of course, not true. Indeed, the initial colonists must have all been granted citizenship when the United States was formed as they were certainly not born here.  So, it seems that this problem was solved at the outright.

A child born of non-US citizens while they residing in the US should be given the citizenship of the parents.  If the parents become US citizens before the child can legally become a US citizen on its own then the child should be granted citizenship in conjunction with the parent.

I don't think that's really a complicated solution.

Edited October 31, 2018 by LTS

[5th line wingnutt]

https://www.thenewneo.com/2018/10/30/can-trump-end-birthright-citizenship-with-an-executive-order/

I did not know that @Neo had a blog.

Let's be more like Europe.

[Weave]

1 hour ago, 5th line wingnutt said:

 

Let's be more like Europe.

Until the subject is health care, taxation, corporate regulations, or labor rights.  Just citizenship.  Innit?

I had to suppress a literal LOL at this.

[SwampD]

7 hours ago, LTS said:

Let me follow my line of reasoning all the way to one critical point: there is a mechanism by which people can become citizens of the United States. Your premise and entire line of reasoning is based on the idea that there is no other way to become a citizen of the US except by birth, which is of course, not true. Indeed, the initial colonists must have all been granted citizenship when the United States was formed as they were certainly not born here.  So, it seems that this problem was solved at the outright.

A child born of non-US citizens while they residing in the US should be given the citizenship of the parents.  If the parents become US citizens before the child can legally become a US citizen on its own then the child should be granted citizenship in conjunction with the parent.

I don't think that's really a complicated solution.

I have no problem with the way it is now,… as it is equally as arbitrary as what you are suggesting.

[LGR4GM]

12 hours ago, Weave said:

Over the last 3 fiscal quarters business investment grew at a rate of 5.1%.  In the 3 fiscal quarters prior to the tax bill passing, the business investment rate was.............. 5.0%.  That tax bill was quite the stimulus for business investment.

And while corporate tax revenue dropped 31%, our deficit has grown 17% since 2017.

So what are we getting for this deficit if we aren't getting business investment?  Stock buybacks. Class A shareholders are profiting from the corporate tax savings.  Not exactly what we were promised.

And those tariffs?  The Tax Foundation estimates that they will increase the amount consumers pay for goods by 42 billion dollars and result in 94,000 full time equivalent jobs getting eliminated.

Even his economic promises were empty.  He's the least fiscally conservative Conservative we've ever elected.

 

Literally what any sane economist said would happen. I read countless ones with different political leanings all saying this is what would happen. 

2 hours ago, 5th line wingnutt said:

https://www.thenewneo.com/2018/10/30/can-trump-end-birthright-citizenship-with-an-executive-order/

I did not know that @Neo had a blog.

Let's be more like Europe.

Draw up an amendment to the Constitution then and get it ratified. 

[Eleven]

20 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

And do you think the president has the right to change that with an executive order? 

Even Trump knows he can't change it with an executive order.  He's sowing division before the midterms and that's all.

[LTS]

4 hours ago, SwampD said:

I have no problem with the way it is now,… as it is equally as arbitrary as what you are suggesting.

Yeah, I don't have a huge problem with it either.  Just thinking of how I would do it if I had to address it I suppose.

[5th line wingnutt]

6 hours ago, Weave said:

Until the subject is health care, taxation, corporate regulations, or labor rights.  Just citizenship.  Innit?

I had to suppress a literal LOL at this.

I was being sardonic. I don't give a hoot about what Europe does.

[JujuFish]

17 hours ago, LTS said:

Let me follow my line of reasoning all the way to one critical point: there is a mechanism by which people can become citizens of the United States. Your premise and entire line of reasoning is based on the idea that there is no other way to become a citizen of the US except by birth, which is of course, not true. Indeed, the initial colonists must have all been granted citizenship when the United States was formed as they were certainly not born here.  So, it seems that this problem was solved at the outright.

A child born of non-US citizens while they residing in the US should be given the citizenship of the parents.  If the parents become US citizens before the child can legally become a US citizen on its own then the child should be granted citizenship in conjunction with the parent.

I don't think that's really a complicated solution.

That is not my premise and if that was the implication you took, then I have not been clear enough.  The point is that if you're restricting birthright citizenship to only those who have citizen parents, then the logical repercussion is that anyone who cannot prove their lineage with respect to citizenship can no longer be a true citizen.  If, say, your great grandmother was never a US citizen, then by your birthright logic her child (your grandmother/father) isn't a citizen and thus logically their child (your mother/father) isn't a citizen and thus logically their child (you) isn't a citizen.

It's faulty logic and a terribly slippery slope.

[Hank]

For what it's worth, when a military servicemember stationed in Germany has a baby in a local hospital (not a hospital on a military base) that baby is a German citizen. 

[SwampD]

1 hour ago, Hank said:

For what it's worth, when a military servicemember stationed in Germany has a baby in a local hospital (not a hospital on a military base) that baby is a German citizen. 

I think that's interesting.

 

[Eleven]

1 hour ago, Hank said:

For what it's worth, when a military servicemember stationed in Germany has a baby in a local hospital (not a hospital on a military base) that baby is a German citizen. 

And also an American citizen, unless you're contemplating men having babies.

Edited October 31, 2018 by Eleven

[Hank]

51 minutes ago, Eleven said:

And also an American citizen, unless you're contemplating men having babies.

You misunderstand. Army guy and American wife. That child is a German citizen with  German birth certificate. They'll also have naturalization paperwork and have duel citizenship, but a German birth certificate.