this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2024
1307 points (97.3% liked)
People Twitter
5268 readers
732 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a tweet or similar
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You forgot a bunch of things..
I live here in Australia, and knew very little of president trump.
I LITERALLY saw 10mins of Trump on TV months before the election, and my first reaction by the way he was speaking was "he's going to overthrow the election". It took a foreigner like me 10mins to realise that shit..
If you watch his speeches now, his language again, is the same as what facscists use. He uses words like calling everyone crooked, etc, WITHOUT EVIDENCE. He calls the election a sham. Why do you think he's saying this?
What's disturbing is the number of people that is willing to say "oh, he's a populist" or "he's joking" when he makes statements. Yeah.. He was joking about the last election being a sham...
I'll tell you EXACTLY what I saw. I saw without context a guy trying to overthrow an election.
What I see now is a guy who has every intention to extend his term beyond the maximum and interfere with the next election to delay jail.
You're going to need to cite some sources here, because those look heavily slanted and sensationalized accounts of what actually happened.
On Jan 6, he wasn't out there leading the charge or anything remotely close to that. He gave one fiery speech, then returned to the White House and watched everything unfold on the TV, and it seemed that he was excited because they were doing this for him. From the accounts I saw, he didn't seem to be trying to orchestrate something, he was just excited to see so much support.
And yeah, he'll probably pardon and free them. But not so they can overthrow the government or something, but because he likes their support. You need to remember, he's a narcissist, not a dictator.
Of course. He can't fathom that he didn't win, because he's a narcissist and all he sees are his rallies and yes men. He's accustomed to being on top, and he likes surrounding himself with people who will suck up to him and do what he wants.
This is certainly dangerous, but he's not driven by hatred or desire for power like Hitler or Stalin were, he's starved for attention and he wants that again. I don't believe he actually has a plan for the country, he just does whatever he thinks will get him attention. People like tax cuts, so he pushed for them. People like jobs, so he wants to increase demand for those. And so on.
That's certainly dangerous, but it's not fascist. He's dangerous because he's largely incompetent and makes rash decisions. That may work in real estate and other businesses he's been in charge of, but it doesn't work as President.
I highly doubt that.
And yes, he tried to overturn the election, and he tried to accomplish that through the courts because he truly believed he won and was desperate to prove that. I don't think he expected Jan 6 to happen as it did, nor do I think he wanted to stay in power that way, because that means he cheated and didn't win.
And yeah, he wants to extend his term beyond the maximum. But he wants to extend it by winning the election, not by taking it. That's the difference between a narcissist and a dictator, and it what makes him both dangerous and less of a threat.
Regardless, I don't have much power here, and who I vote for and who most people vote for will have absolutely zero impact on the election because only votes in 7-ish states actually determine the election. So whether I vote for Harris or one of the third party and independent candidates literally makes no difference in the election. The closest thing to actually mattering is the popular vote, and if Trump soundly loses both, I guess that's more funny than if he wins the popular vote but loses the electoral college.
https://www.sir.advancedleadership.harvard.edu/articles/who-was-responsible-for-january-6th
Yep, how about from Harvard law school. It was incitement, and lots of people were injured. YES, he's dangerous.
He doesn't need to hold a knife to be dangerous. Many dictators and mob bosses work using threats and lackies to do their work.
And I've been threatened at least 3x in my life.
I also intervened when a junkie held up a pipe threatening to hit someone in a road rage incident.
In all 4 of these cases, people like yourself will claim that they weren't dangerous simply because they don't directly say they're going to harm the other person. But they were obviously intended to have life-threatening undertones which any reasonable person would back down from. No, it's threats and intimidation.
Trump regularly highlights judges families and such, and it has the same intention
Again, he has absolutely been upfront that next election he's trying to change things to extend his term and become a dictator, and he will only extend power to people who follow him.
Mob bosses will always be careful what they say. Even if you watch him speak, it feels like he's an actor in the untouchables