Im_CIA

This goes back to my point about frankness and distrust in politicians. Trump is different from from the career politicians because, for better or worse, he is out in the open and wears his personality on a sleeve when the norm is to play kabuki theater until your hand is caught in the cookie jar. Also, yeah you can tie all sorts of corruption to Trump, but constantly crucifying of the guy with every sin known to man cuts both ways: people against Trump will simply shrug off any false or over-hyped accusation( remember the Mueller report?), and his supporters would remember all the false accusations and dismiss the substantial ones as the boy that cried wolf. OK now this a dumb generalization. Feel free to quantify the Ds and Rs https://apnews.com/article/sexual-misconduct-metoo-a3377d14856e4f4fb584509963a7a223

ebled No. This is an abstract example. Pundit A and Pundit B can be Paxton and any of the other people that article quoted. The Author having no issue with calling Trump a facist isn't a problem because the whole point of the article is the subject of debate and whether or not the definition fits. But lets say that I agree, Trump is a facist. Somehow this means that all conservative flows empty into the same unified delta of White Supremacy. Like I said before, political science is soft and has no rule set or axioms that could construct such brief and blanket answer, especially regarding tens of millions of people.

One pundit writes an article on why Trump is a facist, another pundit writes an article on why he isn't. A layperson reads the professional viewpoint that he finds most agreeable and then appeals to its authority. Many such cases. I think you are framing this whole thing entirely wrong. The classical hard logic of "If X is Y then Z" can't be definitively applied to soft political science, which is a sum of infinitely granular and nebulous parts.

Oh come now, that's half of all politicians in existence except that they are better at hiding it. Cumo sexually assaulted his underlyings and tried to cover up piles of dead elderly. You could say his career is over now that the cat is out of the bag, but you don't know what kind of person he was outside of the public eye. The appeal of Trump is that his frankness actually makes him appear more trustworthy than a soft-spoken career politician spin doctor, which ties back into populism.

I found a pretty good article that mulls over this issue after the capitol riots. Many pundits don't seem to think that Trump falls into the traditional defenition of the word. https://www.vox.com/22225472/fascism-definition-trump-fascist-examples >We should reserve the term “fascism” for leaders or movements that are not merely authoritarian. Fascists were revolutionaries, they aspired to control the state, economy and society (totalitarian vs authoritarian), had large, organized mass movements behind them (which included institutionalized paramilitaries alongside control of the military as well as extensive secret police and intelligence services) and of course came to power after democracy had largely failed. So to my mind Trump (and the Republican party) remain better characterized as pseudo-authoritarian rather than fascist — both because of their particular features/characteristics and because for all its weaknesses and flaws, American democracy (at least thus far) has not deteriorated to the point where constraining institutions no longer operate. If you examine Trump in a broader sense then you'll notice that he fits rather snugly into the populist peg. Given that trust in the government is at an all time low, it doesn't take much to explain why people would support an political outsider with radical ideas and common man bluster.

3816

Why are you lumping conservatives into one monolith? If you ask liberals what they want the answer will be different from state-to-state, county-to-county, city-to-city, even house-to-house. Conservatives are no different. Some people don't even know what they want, or what they want changes on the time of day and whether or not it's raining outside. Or maybe they don't want anything and all their beliefs are reactionary.

Now that BTG is gone it's time to transition this thread into its ultimate form: Last Pony Wins

Finished the 2011 anime years ago. WOULD THE REAL SLIM-SANJI please stand up

I guess I could STAND to watch more.. but not sober. Not yet

But there ghosts elsewhere

Can someone sell JoJo to me? I can only enjoy when I'm in a group or if I'm under the influence of narcotics. Got through part 1 that way.

No, Hu is on first and completely healthy.

Ko Ching is an alternate because of his leg injury.

No, Kotch is pitching

Seems like a good thing in my eyes

Pete Chya is the coach

I would put money against you on that, but I think gambling isn't allowed. @The Britain?

I don't even remember saying that.

I need to stop day drinking for those.

Yes, but only mine. You must heed my wisdom.

It's not a lack of care. Modifying the gravity gun and having a whole custom entry (apparently even one of the lines the rebel said in the beginning came from HL Episode 2) doesn't show all lack of care. From your arguments so far it just seems that you disagree with the direction that the writing is taking. You want him to be goofy Freeman instead of shell-shocked Freeman.

Linux rejected him, many such cases

There once lived man called Gold D. Roger and he was KINGOFTHEPIRATES

Hu is on First, Watt is on second, Ida Don Kno is on Third.