47: USA's fall into Fascism

[Pommer]

They have antifa and radicals in general.

Cool story, bro.

 

[ozso]

Cool story, bro.

Prove it's not true.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Neither is it a credit to the Democrats that the only time Donald J Trump lost a Presidential Election, he ran against a fail old man.

I’ve heard it for forty years, “oh I’d vote for a woman for President, but not that woman!”
Somehow, whenever a woman runs for the Presidency, she’s not quite “right”.

There’s a fair amount of “I ain’t having a woman president telling men what to do!”, enough but probably not as much as we might think. Hopefully.

That part in bold is certainly a mindset that does exists (to a certain degree) in some southern conservative circles.

But like you said, I don't think it's as pervasive as some like to claim (which to me, often comes across as a cop-out and weak defense)

In the case of both Hillary and Harris, I do truly feel like those were bad candidate selections by the democrats.

In the case of Hillary, she made some major tactical errors in her campaigning. She was banking exclusively on the coastal states and spent almost zero time/money campaigning in the "fly over states", until the last possible minute. (at which point it was too late)

Hillary Clinton literally never campaigned in Wisconsin, and barely stepped foot in Pennsylvania and Michigan (and not until way late in the game). It's what became labeled among Democratic strategists (like Axelrod and Carville) as "The Midwest Problem"

Harris's tactical error was a slightly different one. Rather than making a calculated decision on a stance for a few of the contentious issues, she tried to do the "political chameleon" routine...where when she was in Michigan, she'd express some more pro-Palestinian/Israel-critical positions, and then when in the southern states, she'd tout the fact that she was part of an administration that supports Israel. It's not as if the people in those respective states can't see what she was saying when she was in the other states.

Obviously, Democrats were divided on that issue, so what should've happened was to meet with her team determine "okay, which position is going to alienate the fewest people", and bite the bullet. I've mentioned it before, but she needed to have her "Sister Souljah moment" on that issue (named after that exact kind of dilemma Bill Clinton was faced with, where he had to say "Okay, I know I'm not going to please everyone no matter which way I go, so let's pick the position that ruffles the fewest feathers".

 

[Oompa Loompa]

The USA is not going to even start falling towards fascism anytime soon. It is NOT happening at all.

I don't know. 2020-2022 seemed like a rather fascist time to me.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

The USA is not going to even start falling towards fascism anytime soon. It is NOT happening at all.

Well Trump is certainly authoritarian though I am not sure we can say he is far right. He champions an ultranationalist political ideology and its movement. He certainly has a dictatorial leadership style. While all that can be concerning, what really is disturbing its the way he is suing his power, even serious about a third term. Also the dismantling of our government and social safety nets.

But one does not need to be a fascist to do that kind of damage. Right now most of what we see is uncertainty. The stock market reflects that. Soon most of us will experience the pain of his present decisions and orders. I would wager that even many of the people who voted for him will be rejecting him and his movement.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Cool story, bro.

You quoting me? Don’t think so.

 

[stevil]

This was a great clip on Rümeysa Öztürk

 

[stevil]

Justice is supposed to be blind, in that it should matter if you are rich, poor, white, non white, Christian, non Christian, Republican, Democrat.

To this point, there is supposed to be an independence for the DOJ to operate. Sure the head of DOJ is appointed by the president, but the president isn't to have any further involvement in the DOJ, certainly isn't to instruct the DOJ on who to investigate.

Well, under Trump, that isn't the case.

Trump directs DOJ to investigate former administration officials who criticized him

President Trump signed executive orders Wednesday targeting two former aides who criticized him. Escalating his retribution campaign, the president directed the Justice Department to investigate Miles Taylor, a former Homeland Security official, and Christopher Krebs, a top cybersecurity...

www.pbs.org

President Trump signed executive orders Wednesday targeting two former aides who criticized him. Escalating his retribution campaign, the president directed the Justice Department to investigate Miles Taylor, a former Homeland Security official, and Christopher Krebs, a top cybersecurity official. Both were appointees in Trump’s first term.

The president accused Taylor, without evidence, of treason.

Donald Trump, President of the United States: I think it's a very important case. And I think he's guilty of treason, if you want to know the truth. But we will find out.

This guy Krebs was saying, oh, the election was great. It was great. That was a very corrupt election. They use COVID to cheat. And we're going to find out about this guy too.

So now the wannabe fascist dictator is directing his DOJ to go after people who he perceives to be political enemies, or simply people that discredit his narratives.


Is USA going the way of China, where the people cannot speak up in fear of retribution from the government?

 

[iluvatar5150]

I don't know. 2020-2022 seemed like a rather fascist time to me.

Sounds right. That is the period in which your boy staged a massive fraud and tried to steal an election.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Despite a court order, White House bars AP from Oval Office event​

Last week’s federal court decision forbidding the Trump administration from punishing the AP for refusing to rename the Gulf of Mexico was to take effect Monday.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

Sounds right. That is the period in which your boy staged a massive fraud and tried to steal an election.

I was thinking about the draconian covid lock down and people getting arrested and losing their jobs for saying what is now considered true. Like, "COVID vaccines don't prevent infection, masks are not effective, and the virus was leaked from a Wuhan lab." Yes. That was a very totalitarian and fascist time under Biden.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

I was thinking about the draconian covid lock down and people getting arrested and losing their jobs for saying what is now considered true. Like, "COVID vaccines don't prevent infection, masks are not effective, and the virus was leaked from a Wuhan lab." Yes. That was a very totalitarian and fascist time under Biden.

Who was arrested for saying that?

 

[Oompa Loompa]

Who was arrested for saying that?

I am not even going to waste my time regurgitating all the examples that you were given over the last four years. You know darn well all the people who were arrested, people who were canceled, and businesses that were closed for nothing more than having the audacity to tell the government that they reject their false propaganda and their nonsense directives. If you choose to do a "CTRL ALT DEL" on your memory of the COVID year and throw it down the memory hole, I don't blame you. I wish I could, but I can not. But please don't gaslight me, or play dumb by asking such a silly question to pretend that you have no idea what I an talking about.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

I an not even going to waste my time regurgitating all the examples that you were given oflver the last four years.

Just one person who was arrested in the United States for saying

"COVID vaccines don't prevent infection, masks are not effective, and the virus was leaked from a Wuhan lab."

You made that claim. Be a man and back it up with some facts. Don’t shy away from your own argument at the slightest pushback.

 

[wing2000]

This thread is to document the steps USA is falling through in it's journey towards Fascism

April 14, 2025: President Trump, with cameras rolling in the White House, openly mocked an order of the US Supreme Court 'to “facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador.'

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a949_lkhn.pdf

And he joked: “We want to do homegrown criminals next…. The homegrowns.”

Today, it's the illegal immigrant falsely accused of being a terrorist. Tomorrow, it could be you.

 

[Richard T]

Use of Executive Orders gives the president the power to put things through without having to bother themselves with congress. Basically a way to grab power
In the first 60 days of Trump's second term he has already issued 107 EOs

Executive Orders | The American Presidency Project

www.presidency.ucsb.edu

Executive Orders by President, Average Per Years in Office​
President	Term	Total Orders	Avg/Year	Yrs in Office	EO Number Range
George Washington (F)	Total	8	1	7.85	unnumbered
John Adams (F)	Total	1	0.25	4.00	unnumbered
Thomas Jefferson (D-R)	Total	4	0.50	8.00	unnumbered
James Madison (D-R)	Total	1	0.13	8.00	unnumbered
James Monroe (D-R)	Total	1	0.13	8.00	unnumbered
John Quincy Adams (D-R)	Total	3	0.75	4.00	unnumbered
Andrew Jackson (D)	Total	12	1.5	8.00	unnumbered
Martin van Buren (D)	Total	10	2.5	4.00	unnumbered
William Henry Harrison (W)	Total	0	0	0.08	unnumbered
John Tyler (W)	Total	17	4.3	3.92	unnumbered
James K. Polk (D)	Total	18	4.5	4.00	unnumbered
Zachary Taylor (W)	Total	5	3.7	1.35	unnumbered
Millard Fillmore (W)	Total	12	4.5	2.65	unnumbered
Franklin Pierce (D)	Total	35	9	4.00	unnumbered
James Buchanan (D)	Total	16	4	4.00	unnumbered
Abraham Lincoln (R)	Total	48	12	4.12	unnumbered
Andrew Johnson (D)	Total	79	20	3.89	unnumbered
Ulysses S. Grant (R)	Total	217	27	8.00	unnumbered
Rutherford B. Hayes (R)	Total	92	23	4.00	unnumbered
James Garfield (R)	Total	6	11	0.55	unnumbered
Chester Arthur (R)	Total	96	28	3.46	unnumbered
Grover Cleveland - I (D)	Total	113	28	4.00	unnumbered
Benjamin Harrison (R)	Total	143	36	4.00	unnumbered
Grover Cleveland - II (D)	Total	140	35	4.00	unnumbered
William McKinley (R)	Total	185	41	4.53	unnumbered
Theodore Roosevelt (R)	Total	1,081	145	7.47
William Howard Taft (R)	Total	724	181	4.00
Woodrow Wilson (D)	Total	1,803	225	8.00
Warren G. Harding (R)	Total	522	217	2.41
Calvin Coolidge (R)	Total	1,203	215	5.59
Herbert Hoover (R)	Total	1,003	251	4.00	5076 - 6070
Franklin D. Roosevelt (D)	Total	3,721	307	12.12	6071 - 9537
Harry S. Truman (D)	Total	907	117	7.78	9538 - 10431
	I	504	133	3.78	9538 - 10029
	II	403	101	4.00	10030 - 10431
Dwight D. Eisenhower (R)	Total	484	61	8.00	10432 - 10913
	I	266	67	4.00	10432 - 10695-A
	II	218	55	4.00	10696 - 10913
John F. Kennedy (D)	Total	214	75	2.84	10914 - 11127
Lyndon B. Johnson (D)	Total	325	63	5.17	11128 - 11451
Richard Nixon (R)	Total	346	62	5.55	11452 - 11797
	I	247	62	4.00	11452 - 11698
	II	99	64	1.55	11699 - 11797
Gerald R. Ford (R)	Total	169	69	2.45	11798 - 11966
Jimmy Carter (D)	Total	320	80	4.00	11967 - 12286
Ronald Reagan (R)	Total	381	48	8.00	12287 - 12667
	I	213	53	4.00	12287 - 12499
	II	168	42	4.00	12500 - 12667
George Bush (R)	Total	166	42	4.00	12668 - 12833
William J. Clinton (D)	Total	364	46	8.00	12834 - 13197
	I	200	50	4.00	12834 - 13033
	II	164	41	4.00	13034 - 13197
George W. Bush (R)	Total	291	36	8.00	13198 - 13488
	I	173	43	4.00	13198 - 13370
	II	118	30	4.00	13371 - 13488
Barack Obama (D)	Total	276	35	8.00	13489 - 13764
	I	147	37	4.00	13489 - 13635
	II	129	32	4.00	13636 - 13764
Donald J. Trump - I (R)	Total	220	55	4.00	13765 - 13984
Joseph R. Biden, Jr. (D)	Total	162	41	4.00	13985 - 14146
Donald J. Trump - II (R)	Total	107	** see note	0.17	14147 - 14253

Yes, a great list. Not all EO are equal though, some are extremely minor. I wonder if there is a list with how many EO are ruled unconstitutional by each President?

 

[DaisyDay]

Yes, a great list. Not all EO are equal though, some are extremely minor. I wonder if there is a list with how many EO are ruled unconstitutional by each President?

That would be mildly interesting to know. The Supreme Court is actually hear arguments about Donald's EO rescinding birthright citizenship as though the amendment weren't clear.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Based on seeing the Democrats doing what the Republicans did and vice versa for decades this is my take on it:

Trump's just pushing boundaries to see what's possible. The presidents after him will be much worse in the sense of ignoring established rules and traditions.

So the question to ask is: Is it okay for a Democrat to do what Trump is currently doing?

Because if he gets away with it, they will.

 

[stevil]

Trump's just pushing boundaries to see what's possible.

an interesting attempt to trivialise what is going on. The usa people need to be much more carefull about who they vote in. Knowing a person thinks they are above the rules and will bring disrepute and disgrace to the office and divide the people and likey try to create a constitutional crisis. They should not vote that type of person in.

So the question to ask is: Is it okay for a Democrat to do what Trump is currently doing?

I don't see this as Democrat vs republican. This problem is unique to Trump regardless of what party he affiliates to. Trump is an entitled elite. Who doesn't care about rules or common people. He has spent his whole life trampling over people that get in his way. The most shocking thing to me is the amount of Republicans in office that continue to enable him. It is much worse in his second term than the first. And the first ended with an insurrection attempt.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

an interesting attempt to trivialise what is going on.

Not so, it is a reflection of how the people that treat our lives as a game of monopoly see the situation. The regular people being trivial collateral damage and such.

I don't see this as Democrat vs republican.

Based on discussion with many others, you're in the minority. Thus the way I phrased the question.