Trump Suggests Protesting Should be Illegal in the USA

So he is against his own rallies then.



He's a jerk. These kinds of statements are meant to get publicity.

Diana Hignutt said:

The man is a total fascist.

Click to expand...

Nope. He's a narcissist (*). There is no twisted political logic at work here. Trump is addicted to what makes him look good and ferociously slaps down what makes him look bad.

Given this week's news cycle I'd say he's about due for yet another rally in which he indulges himself with the 2016 election results.

-cb

( * )

REF: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/06/the-mind-of-donald-trump/480771/

George Simon, a clinical psychologist who conducts seminars on manipulative behavior, says Trump is “so classic that I’m archiving video clips of him to use in workshops because there’s no better example” of narcissism. “Otherwise I would have had to hire actors and write vignettes. He’s like a dream come true.”

Click to expand...

Bit of warning here. Can't put a diagnosis on Trump; ethics, Goldwater rule, and that Trump himself doesn't seem to be negatively affected by it.

REF: https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/article132860614.html

I'd very much be interested in Kavanaugh's opinion on the legality of protesting...


...and Trump is so very Putin.

SWest said:

I'd very much be interested in Kavanaugh's opinion on the legality of protesting...

Click to expand...

Now, we can't force a nominee to engage in hypotheticals like that.

cbenoi1 said:

Nope. He's a narcissist (*). There is no twisted political logic at work here. Trump is addicted to what makes him look good and ferociously slaps down what makes him look bad.

Click to expand...

The two (being a narcissist and being a fascist) aren't mutually exclusive. Trump may not yet be espousing the full-blown flavor, but he's definitely an authoritarian with some leanings in that direction. If the rest of the government lets him go down that path, he very well might.

Did anyone else think the "in the old days, we used to throw them out" part to be a bit odd. Not only because it's not true of government, but because of the "we" part. Trump wasn't part of government until two years ago, so I don't know where that particular pronoun comes from.

Roxxsmom said:

Did anyone else think the "in the old days, we used to throw them out" part to be a bit odd. Not only because it's not true of government, but because of the "we" part. Trump wasn't part of government until two years ago, so I don't know where that particular pronoun comes from.

Click to expand...

He's revising history again, priming his base to approve a massive curtailing of civil rights, which he'll convince them never actually existed.

Are we really this inured to danger signs at this point? I can't be the only one who finds this hair-raising.

SWest said:

...and Trump is so very Putin.

Click to expand...

No, he's not mentally stable enough to be a true Putin.

But he's trying. He admires men like him (and Erdogan, and KJU, and even historical despots like Hitler I suspect) and aspires to be them, but frankly lacks the capacity to do so on multiple levels. In the meantime, those indulging his tantrums and authoritarian fantasies are doing irreparable damage to the nation they supposedly swore an oath to protect from enemies foreign and domestic.

Brightdreamer said:

No, he's not mentally stable enough to be a true Putin.

But he's trying. He admires men like him (and Erdogan, and KJU, and even historical despots like Hitler I suspect) and aspires to be them, but frankly lacks the capacity to do so on multiple levels. In the meantime, those indulging his tantrums and authoritarian fantasies are doing irreparable damage to the nation they supposedly swore an oath to protect from enemies foreign and domestic.

Click to expand...

This is exactly it. Trump is not the problem. The problem is the controlling party eager to enact his every whim.

cbenoi1 said:

Nope. He's a narcissist (*). ... Given this week's news cycle I'd say he's about due for yet another rally in which he indulges himself with the 2016 election results.

Click to expand...

Pretty much this. ^

cbenoi1 said:

... Bit of warning here. Can't put a diagnosis on Trump; ethics, Goldwater rule, and that Trump himself doesn't seem to be negatively affected by it....

Click to expand...

Not to debate that here but both the Goldwater Rule and the opinion put forth by one of the DSM-V editors that Trump isn't suffering are not a consensus among professionals.

Roxxsmom said:

The two (being a narcissist and being a fascist) aren't mutually exclusive. Trump may not yet be espousing the full-blown flavor, but he's definitely an authoritarian with some leanings in that direction. If the rest of the government lets him go down that path, he very well might.

Click to expand...

Not only are they not mutually exclusive, being a sociopath and a narcissist are probably common traits among fascist dictators.

Roxxsmom said:

Did anyone else think the "in the old days, we used to throw them out" part to be a bit odd. Not only because it's not true of government, but because of the "we" part. Trump wasn't part of government until two years ago, so I don't know where that particular pronoun comes from.

Click to expand...

Much of what Trump appears to experience is fantasy. But it wouldn't surprise me if he isn't conflating his fantasy memory with what he admires among the dictators he knows (Putin, Dutarte, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman, Xi, Erdogan...).

NY Mag: Trump’s Favorite World Leaders Are All Male Dictators

lizmonster said:

This is exactly it. Trump is not the problem. The problem is the controlling party eager to enact his every whim.

Click to expand...

Oh gawd yes! And his followers, and the failure of the Democrats to win enough seats in Congress.

I do hope that will change and we can restore the country to normalcy soon. And if we do get a majority in both the House and the Senate, I do hope Democrats will take the gloves off and stop acting timid.

lizmonster said:

He's revising history again, priming his base to approve a massive curtailing of civil rights, which he'll convince them never actually existed.

Are we really this inured to danger signs at this point? I can't be the only one who finds this hair-raising.

Click to expand...

Sadly a larger group of people than I would have ever imagined think things are going well.

My {expletive} brothers-in-law literally broke out a "But her e-mails--!" this past weekend. They also think the Cheato is good for business even if "he's a moron, sure!".

MaeZe said:

Not to debate that here but both the Goldwater Rule and the opinion put forth by one of the DSM-V editors that Trump isn't suffering are not a consensus among professionals.

Click to expand...

The problem is not whether professionals can or cannot diagnose a public personality without an interview and publish the results, or get a consensus on the DSM-V list of criteria.

The problem is what GRU shrinks are telling Putin about how to best manipulate Trump.

-cb

Roxxsmom said:

T
Did anyone else think the "in the old days, we used to throw them out" part to be a bit odd. Not only because it's not true of government, but because of the "we" part. Trump wasn't part of government until two years ago, so I don't know where that particular pronoun comes from.

Click to expand...

No, the 'we' isn't odd at all.
He doesn't mean government - he means rich old white guys. The 'we' who forcibly relocated inconvenient Indian tribes, who used government troops to break strikes and civil rights protests, and bully-boys to harass competitors and drag protestors out of buildings so they could be beaten in back alleys.
The 'we' who are 'his' kind of people.

MaeZe said:

So he is against his own rallies then.



He's a jerk. These kinds of statements are meant to get publicity.

Click to expand...

Trouble is, how do you tell the difference between 'publicity seeking' and 'testing the waters' aka 'planting the thought'?

But if you're protesting with a gun...?

frimble3 said:

Trouble is, how do you tell the difference between 'publicity seeking' and 'testing the waters' aka 'planting the thought'?

Click to expand...

IIRC, this isn't the first time the idea has been mentioned, of curbing right to protest (much as Russia has done, coincidence of coincidences), so I don't think there really is a line between "publicity seeking" and "water testing" at this point - it's both an attention grabber and an idea they are interested in actively pursuing (see also: wanting to emulate successful authoritarians.)

Introversion said:

But if you're protesting with a gun...?

Click to expand...

I think this is the TeaOP equivalent of the Zen question about one hand clapping.

frimble3 said:

Trouble is, how do you tell the difference between 'publicity seeking' and 'testing the waters' aka 'planting the thought'?

Click to expand...

He's not testing the waters, he lives in an alt-world where the universe revolves around him. "We used to throw them out" is simply part of his delusional thinking. Todays he's on about saying CNN and the NY Times would be out of business without him (Trump stories).

It's ludicrous. But I'm pretty sure Trump fluctuates between the state cbenoi1 described

Given this week's news cycle I'd say he's about due for yet another rally in which he indulges himself with the 2016 election results.

Click to expand...

and when he's high on himself like he is this evening, he shores up his ego with imagining his enemies failing all around him.

If you understand the pathology of narcissism as severe as Trump's is, his behavior makes more sense. If you imagine he's an evil genius and all this is calculated, you'll start seeing all kinds of plot holes in that explanation.

USA 101: Land of the Free.

When the actual President doesn't know what freedom means, the USA has failed at being the USA.

Introversion said:

But if you're protesting with a gun...?

Click to expand...

Well, that would depend entirely on if you were protesting against him (Bad!) or protesting for him (Fine!), wouldn't it?

Diana Hignutt said:

I think it comes back to the concept of the trial runs of fascism explored in this thread:

https://absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?337660-The-Trial-Runs-of-Fascism

Click to expand...

Agreed.

Whether or not he was just spouting random BS, someone either planted that statement in his head, or is now thinking "Hm, good idea!"

Look for your GOP acquaintances to start explaining to you that protesting was always, strictly speaking, illegal, and he's just calling for enforcement of current laws.