Why do you think tens of millions of Americans support a fascist candidate…

@SumKindaMunster Read this article, which agrees with you, with a large BUT.

https://theconversation.com/is-donald-trump-a-fascist-no-hes-a-new-brand-of-authoritarian-241586

And because you claim to value unbiased sources:

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-conversation/

@SW-User Oh right sure. The strawman who never reads anything I provide and then changes the subject every time I prove him wrong....the guy who makes up new accounts every several months, then lies about it...that guy wants me to read something...

Tell ya what.

Why don't you summarize it for me and I will pick it apart at my leisure.

@SumKindaMunster No I won't be doing that. It's there for you to read for yourself if you wish.

And what have you provided for me to read? Apart from the Daily Mirror article?

Plus I never changed the subject. The media did not "lie", there is no evidence that he converted to Islam, despite possessing an Al-Qaeda manual, and, most important of all, he was NOT an illegal immigrant, which was the main thrust of the racially motivated riots.

Just like gun violence, it will be a cold day in hell before we see another race riot here.

@SW-User Already read it. So basically you are saying Trump ISN'T a fascist and is instead an authoritarian, and in fact, according to the article is a NEW type of authoritarian although when they expand on that it doesn't sound new at all.

As far as the 3 things they say Trump engages in that make him authoritarian, I could EASILY provide specific examples of how the Democrat party in its current form embodies those behaviors and engages in them in a much more obnoxious and repressive manner.

@SumKindaMunster So, in other words, deflection is your go-to.


And yes, even I don't believe he is a fascist.

@SW-User The point being its very difficult to take such accusations seriously when the Democrat party and their confederates are engaging in way more dangerous and detrimental behavior.

@SumKindaMunster OK in that case, tell me how the Democrats are actually far more authoritarian right now than Trump is, was, or ever will be.

And denying the 2020 result doesn't count.

Oh, and sources as well, please.

@SW-User 1) Undermine electoral integrity - Democrats in multiple states including Colorado have kicked Trump and RFK Jr off their ballots. Only through court orders did they relent. Democrats oppose voter ID laws, undermining the confidence in the election process. Democrats give out money to get people to the polls. All perfectly legal, but the point is how this undermines electoral integrity.

2) Weaken the legislative and judicial branches - Democrats want to expand the Supreme Court to include justices THEY select because they are so butthurt that the court has a Conservative majority. Democrats routinely call out Trump appointed judges in an attempt to undermine their authority.

3) Attack their enemies - Do I really need to demonstrate this one? Democrats routinely call people racists, fascists, and White supremacists for merely disagreeing with them. They routinely call Trump a facist which you admit is not true. Biden just called Trump supporters "garbage".

As far as sources go, do you own research. These are well known, you don't need me to provide a "source" to know these things.

@SumKindaMunster No sources. I can't say I'm surprised...

And I'll counter with one sourced argument, where for once the SCOTUS realised what the Republicans were doing in trying to restrict voting in heavily Democratic Butler County.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-supreme-court-wont-block-pennsylvania-provisional-ballots-decision-2024-11-01/

You won't catch Dems doing that.

Offering money to vote? Two words for you: Elon Musk

And as for the SCOTUS, we all know what McConnell did with Merrick Garland.

I also think it's clear, particularly with the slew of fake Republican polls showing Trump surging ahead, that the Republicans are laying the groundword to reject the result whether Kamala wins by 272 to 268, or wins in a convincing landslide.

which he then immediately clarified and apologised, but Harris did the right thing and distanced herself from his comments.

Puerto Rico a floating isle of garbage? Trump may not have said it, but you won't catch him apologising for that.

Finally, attack enemies? If Trump somehow wins, I think we're all going to find out exactly what that means.

@SW-User "No sources" he whines...then posts multiple things...with no sources...

No source.

No source.

No source.

Of course grown adults don't need a "source" for an opinion. A source is not necessary when the information is well known, or easily discovered.

Quoting a source is really only necessary in a public debate in 2 circumstances.

1. You are directly quoting somebody
2. You are sourcing specific data to make your point.

@SumKindaMunster No, quoting a source is necessary when you are stating something as fact.

As in:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/elon-musks-1-million-a-day-election-giveaway-sparks-legal-doubts/ar-AA1sE6Ur (undermining electoral integrity)

And:

https://time.com/6074707/republicans-courts-congress-mcconnell/ (Republicans, not Democrats, packing the SCOTUS)

My comment about Trump refusing to accept defeat is my own opinion, but we all know it's true.