"Maybe his second term will go better."

Christ, I hope he doesn't get a second term. Still stunned he got one to begin with.

The Washington Post - Today's WorldView - Is it time to call Trump the f-word?

today

 

If Trump is against “antifascists,” then what is he for? ...

 

Contemporary scholars of fascism caution against explicitly labeling Trump a fascist. 

 

But they point to the erosion underway during his presidency, the steady bending of norms and relentless attacks on those who don’t show absolute loyalty to him, from political rivals to the free press. 

 

“We are still in a democracy and he cannot get away with it but he seems to keep trying,” Federico Finchelstein, a historian at the New School and author of “A Brief History of Fascist Lies,” told Today’s WorldView. ...

 

Finchelstein described Trump’s stunt with the Bible as consummate fascist agitprop.

 

“It was a display straight out of the fascist playbook, connecting political violence with religion,” he said. 

“Goebbels and Hitler would have been proud of Donald Trump. They would have appreciated the ways he lies and presents himself as a leader with a unique connection to the divine.” ...

 

freitasm: Antifa... Because who would be "pro-fascist" anyway?

Who would say of white supremacists and those who came to oppose them, that there were "very fine people on both sides"?

(and then go on to blame the "radical left" for the worst pandemic since 1918, the worst recession since 1929, and the worst race riots since 1968)

In interviews and posts on social media in recent days, current and former U.S. intelligence officials have expressed dismay at the similarity between events at home and the signs of decline or democratic regression they were trained to detect in other nations.

 

“I’ve seen this kind of violence,” said Gail Helt, a former CIA analyst responsible for tracking developments in China and Southeast Asia. “This is what autocrats do. This is what happens in countries before a collapse. It really does unnerve me.”

 

[...]

 

Former intelligence officials said the unrest and the administration’s militaristic response are among many measures of decay they would flag if writing assessments about the United States for another country’s intelligence service.

The New York Times - Opinion - Trump Thinks He’s 2020’s ‘Law and Order’ Candidate. He’s Not.

today

Trump’s plan to campaign as the second coming of Richard Nixon shows the limits of historical analogy. It’s not 1968. ...

 

The immediate reason to discount a political analogy between then and now - between Nixon and Trump - is that Trump isn’t a challenger to the incumbent president - he is the incumbent. ...

 

You can’t promise “law and order” when disorder is happening on your watch. ...

 

Rikkitic:

 

sir1963:

 

The USA talks a big game, but has never delivered .

 

 

But in 1937 it had 'the highest standard of living in the world'.

 

 

 

Don't confuse good luck with good management.

The USA has effectively been sheltered from WWI and WWII, their cities were not bombed, their industry and infrastructure was not destroyed, their citizens (not military) were not disposed and killed. And during, and at the end, they got to sell critical materials to the countries that had to rebuild.

What I find depressing on a personal level is a cartoonist I always enjoyed reading and admired - Scott Adams, the guy who draws Dilbert - is a massive Trump supporter. He said in interviews (like this one I just read: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/comic-riffs/wp/2016/10/28/why-dilberts-scott-adams-risked-his-reputation-by-sparking-controversy-in-the-2016-election/ ) that  - amongst other things - Trump is merely misunderstood and is a great persuader. For that last part I'm inclined to agree. But is he up to the job? Of course not.

Note that I have no issue with Republicans in general - George W Bush, I wasn't overly impressed with, but at least he had some political skills. God, stand him next to Trump and Bush is almost a gentleman by comparison!

However Adams says something along the lines of people need to look at what he's doing differently, although I dunno how you do that with all the ridiculous, petty things he says and does.

He has also said that since coming out with his support for Trump he is not hired as a public speaker anymore, Dilbert merchandising deals etc have all but disappeared, and he reckons his income has dropped by about 40% as a result.

It's a shame as I used to buy quite a few Dilbert books and thought he was a really down-to-earth nice guy, but as awful as it sounds, his unwavering support of Trump (just look at his Twitter feed) has put me off the guy, and I don't think I would ever buy one of his books ever again, nor do I feel pity for him losing money over his undying adoration of Trump. Does that make me a bad person? I feel like it kinda does :(

quickymart:

 

It's a shame as I used to buy quite a few Dilbert books and thought he was a really down-to-earth nice guy, but as awful as it sounds, his unwavering support of Trump (just look at his Twitter feed) has put me off the guy, and I don't think I would ever buy one of his books ever again, nor do I feel pity for him losing money over his undying adoration of Trump. Does that make me a bad person? I feel like it kinda does :(

 

There are reasonable points to be made for points of view. The artist is not the art, bad people can do great things. And if it's only a couple of quirks then I could ignore them - nobody's perfect.

But I do personally agree with you. I also found his support of Trump highly distasteful, not to mention somewhat surprising. Not enough that I won't ever read Dilbert again, but I will furrow my brow and look concerned whilst doing so.

OTOH one person I can no longer ever read is Orson Scott Card. The Ender's Game series are brilliant books exploring an important issue. But also it turns out that OSC is a raging homophobe and all round horrible human being, so I won't ever read them again nor buy anything else he writes now that I know.

That's true, separate the art from the artist. But I find now I look at the newer Dilbert comics and think differently, and in a negative way - not so much for the classic ones, I still find them quite funny - but I also feel bad for thinking what I'm thinking. No doubt Adams is talented but I think his fawning adoration of Trump is going to make his (future) professional life quite difficult. Certainly he's probably finished with a professional speaking career, for now anyway.

Edit: his blog (https://www.scottadamssays.com/) comes across to me as a secondary Trump mouthpiece as well. Interestingly, all comments there are disabled.

One thing that has always fascinated me is how otherwise rational and intelligent people can often hold seemingly irrational and contradictory viewpoints. The human mind is a wonderfully complex thing. 

I honestly cannot fathom how anyone of even minimal awareness can possibly think there is anything good or positive about Trump, who is so transparently shallow and self-serving. But I know many people, not only in America, do. And they are not all illiterate southern rednecks.

I was never a huge Dilbert fan but the cartoons amused me when I saw them. They still would. I  don't really see how one thing relates to the other. Van Gogh is considered one of the greatest artists in the world today. But he was also a troubled soul in his lifetime. I appreciate his paintings but I don't think I would have wanted to have him over for dinner.

I used to quite like Dilbert back in the early 2000s. However at some point it became obvious that Scott Adams had crawled so far up himself he really lost touch. Probably it was around 2005/6 for me.

If Trump had the eloquence of say Kennedy or even Obama or the charm of Bill Clinton or the gravitas of Roosevelt we might at least try arguing in a reasoned manner against his policies and statements but the guy is so crass that he won't listen to any form of discussion that (a) opposes statements he has made or views he has expressed or (b) he doesn't understand (and these are the majority)