Except Hitler never ran for a presidency. In Germany.

isadore;1808842 wrote:gosh a ruddies, so you want to be an American Financier.

If I could legally coerce the general population, it would make me more than a financier.

There's a reason banks offer interest back on savings accounts. Because they're getting WAY more in interest on credit lines.

Now, imagine a bank could force you to take out a loan and pay them interest on it.

Welcome to taxation.

isadore;1808845 wrote:Gosh a ruddies, Trump is at a point when he can be stopped, now when he is a candidate, before he rises to power. Hitler was a similar point, running for President. He was using many of the same type attacks and appeals that Trump is using. It is not a logical fallacy.

Um ... it's precisely a logical fallacy, because the crux of your argument falls on the assumption that people rightly loathe the legacy of Hitler.

Now, were you to demonstrate the problem with his views themselves, that would be different, but that also would nullify any need to compare him to Hitler, which is precisely why the comparison, when used for the purpose of weighting a position, is logically fallacious.

CenterBHSFan;1808888 wrote:Except Hitler never ran for a presidency. In Germany.

He did. He ran for president in 1932 against Paul von Hindenburg. He didn't win, but he ran.

Blegh! I was thinking Chancellor. My bad!

If you want more of the same but at a higher level of corruption ....Hillary your bitch

Irrelevant news: Hillary's aide, Huma Abedin, has dropped her Weiner.








... I'll let myself out

CenterBHSFan;1808914 wrote:Irrelevant news: Hillary's aide, Huma Abedin, has dropped her Weiner.








... I'll let myself out

Really man? You're better than this.








She cut off her Weiner.

isadore;1808845 wrote:Gosh a ruddies, Trump is at a point when he can be stopped, now when he is a candidate, before he rises to power. Hitler was a similar point, running for President. He was using many of the same type attacks and appeals that Trump is using. It is not a logical fallacy.

When you have nothing of substance to offer the debate, always go for the Hitler comparison - that's the playbook, right? Hitler and the Nazis in from 1920-1933, along with the state of Germany during that time bear no resemblance to the Trump today or the US now.

A weak, weak argument.

Dr Winston O'Boogie;1808920 wrote:bear no resemblance to the Trump today

I think Hitler and Trump both liked/like to blame issues on foreignors. The first thing you need to rally the troops is a easily recognizable common enemy

CenterBHSFan;1808914 wrote:Irrelevant news: Hillary's aide, Huma Abedin, has dropped her Weiner.








... I'll let myself out

Relevant news though ---- Hillary's aide's mother is the editor of a terrorist sympathizing publication. Isn't that special, especially if Huma's a few months away from being the potus chief of staff. Mind numbing.

CenterBHSFan;1808888 wrote:Except Hitler never ran for a presidency. In Germany.

gosh a ruddies I am glad you got to learn something.

O-Trap;1808909 wrote:If I could legally coerce the general population, it would make me more than a financier.
There's a reason banks offer interest back on savings accounts. Because they're getting WAY more in interest on credit lines.
Now, imagine a bank could force you to take out a loan and pay them interest on it.
Welcome to taxation.

Gosh a ruddies, if you don’t think the major financial institutions of our nation have the power to coerce, you are delusional. They have extensive power over you and I. Plus they are too large to fail.

O-Tap wrote:] Um ... it's precisely a logical fallacy, because the crux of your argument falls on the assumption that people rightly loathe the legacy of Hitler.
Now, were you to demonstrate the problem with his views themselves, that would be different, but that also would nullify any need to compare him to Hitler, which is precisely why the comparison, when used for the purpose of weighting a position, is logically fallacious.

Dr Winston O'Boogie;1808920 wrote:When you have nothing of substance to offer the debate, always go for the Hitler comparison - that's the playbook, right? Hitler and the Nazis in from 1920-1933, along with the state of Germany during that time bear no resemblance to the Trump today or the US now.

A weak, weak argument.

Gosh a ruddies there is no logical fallacy. There may be a mistaken presumption on my part of a certain level of knowledge of the readers such as yourself. Then you would be able to see how Hitlerian is rightly descriptive of Trump and his campaign.
-guarantee jobs and prosperity to a large but specific racial sector of the nation that is been damaged by recent economic and social trends. Manipulate their patriotism with a nationalistic slogans and appeals.
-blame their problems on elite conspiracy, hated minority and foreigners.
-tie your campaign a pseudo worship of the police and the military
-use demagogic speechifying with outlandish often false charges against your opponents, labeling them crooks and traitors using the new media of the time. Hitler, radio, Trump 24 hour news and internet.

isadore;1808950 wrote: There may be a mistaken presumption on my part of a certain level of knowledge of the readers such as yourself. Then you would be able to see how Hitlerian is rightly descriptive of Trump and his campaign.
-guarantee jobs and prosperity to a large but specific racial sector of the nation that is been damaged by recent economic and social trends. Manipulate their patriotism with a nationalistic slogans and appeals.
-blame their problems on elite conspiracy, hated minority and foreigners.
-tie your campaign a pseudo worship of the police and the military
-use demagogic speechifying with outlandish often false charges against your opponents, labeling them crooks and traitors using the new media of the time. Hitler, radio, Trump 24 hour news and internet.

Hitler:
Nearly fulfilled his pre-political promise to wipe out the Jews - killing millions of them and other groups. He purposefully targeted millions of upstanding members of German society who had zero violent intent.

Trump:
Proposes temporarily banning immigration from countries that support and produce terrorists until we are satisfied that proper vetting is in place. He is trying to eliminate entry of people intent on killing innocents.

This is Godwin's Law - "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazism or Hitler approaches 1"

http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-submits-email-questions-hillary-clinton-written-answers-oath-due-september-29/


Written answers from Hillary, under oath (that's funny), due by Sept. 29. The questions can be found in the article linked above.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/state-finds-30-deleted-clinton-emails-on-benghazi/article/2600533

...and then more evidence of more lies.

No wonder she is in hiding.

isadore;1808950 wrote:Gosh a ruddies, if you don’t think the major financial institutions of our nation have the power to coerce, you are delusional. They have extensive power over you and I. Plus they are too large to fail.

They are treated as though they are too large to fail ... by the actual governing entities, which are the ones that are actually able to force behavior.

Banks can coerce so long as you initially VOLUNTARILY opt into an agreement with them, but no one bank can force you to say yes to them and no to their competitors.

Government can do this, however. In fact, government can make it illegal to compete with them in the first place, and then, they can force you to give them a cut of your income with threats of imprisonment (or violence, if you resist imprisonment).

There is a chasm between what a bank can force you to do and what a governing body (which controls law enforcement and military) can force you to do. To suggest otherwise is either intentionally obtuse or naive.

isadore;1808950 wrote:Gosh a ruddies there is no logical fallacy. There may be a mistaken presumption on my part of a certain level of knowledge of the readers such as yourself. Then you would be able to see how Hitlerian is rightly descriptive of Trump and his campaign.

isadore;1808950 wrote: -guarantee jobs and prosperity to a large but specific racial sector of the nation that is been damaged by recent economic and social trends. Manipulate their patriotism with a nationalistic slogans and appeals.
-blame their problems on elite conspiracy, hated minority and foreigners.
-tie your campaign a pseudo worship of the police and the military
-use demagogic speechifying with outlandish often false charges against your opponents, labeling them crooks and traitors using the new media of the time. Hitler, radio, Trump 24 hour news and internet.

You've just described a good portion of the candidates from both major parties since I've been old enough to follow politics. Just because two people have something in common, it doesn't follow that they have all things in common. As such, yes. You are consistently committing a logical fallacy. If you don't care, I can't make you, but you are. Your implication that voting for Trump is equitable to voting for Hitler is only useful because of the general public's disdain for Hitler in regard to things Hitler did that Trump has not done (ordered mass genocide).

Textbook reductio ad hitlerum, to a tee. Your comparison might as well be an example of it for an introductory philosophy course.

Trump is a terrible and dangerous candidate. Your insistence on using this talking point amounts to whiffing at a baseball sitting on a tee.

Dr Winston O'Boogie;1808967 wrote:Hitler:
Nearly fulfilled his pre-political promise to wipe out the Jews - killing millions of them and other groups. He purposefully targeted millions of upstanding members of German society who had zero violent intent.

Trump:
Proposes temporarily banning immigration from countries that support and produce terrorists until we are satisfied that proper vetting is in place. He is trying to eliminate entry of people intent on killing innocents.

This is Godwin's Law - "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazism or Hitlerapproaches 1"

gosh a ruddies Trump is Hitlerian. We can see how he was progressed to a point analogous to where Hitler was in 1932.

Nazi Party Platform 1932 election
We demand the following:
1.A union of all Germans to form a great Germany on the basis of the right to self-determination of peoples.
2.Abolition of the Treaty of Versailles.
3.Return lands lost in World War I and colonies to give German adequate living space.
4.German blood as a requirement for German citizenship. No Jew can be a member of the nation.
5.Non-citizens can live in Germany only as foreigners, subject to the law of aliens.
6.Only citizens can vote or hold public office.
7.The state insures that every citizen live decently and earn his livelihood. If it is impossible to provide food for the whole population, then aliens must be expelled.
8.Guarantee for jobs and benefits for workers.
9.No further immigration of non-Germans. Any non-German who entered Germany after August 2, 1914, shall leave immediately.
10.A thorough reconstruction of our national system of education. The science of citizenship shall be taught from the beginning.
11.That German citizens and owners must publish all newspapers in the German language.
12.Eliminate the Marxist threat.
https://www.ushmm.org/educators/lesson-plans/why-did-germans-vote-for-the-nazi-party/resources/party-platform
Gosh a ruddies of course part is specific to Germany of the time and Trump’s attack are on Muslims and Mexicans instead of Jews.

O-Trap;1808987 wrote:They are treated as though they are too large to fail ... by the actual governing entities, which are the ones that are actually able to force behavior.

Banks can coerce so long as you initially VOLUNTARILY opt into an agreement with them, but no one bank can force you to say yes to them and no to their competitors.

Government can do this, however. In fact, government can make it illegal to compete with them in the first place, and then, they can force you to give them a cut of your income with threats of imprisonment (or violence, if you resist imprisonment).

There is a chasm between what a bank can force you to do and what a governing body (which controls law enforcement and military) can force you to do. To suggest otherwise is either intentionally obtuse or naive.



You've just described a good portion of the candidates from both major parties since I've been old enough to follow politics. Just because two people have something in common, it doesn't follow that they have all things in common. As such, yes. You are consistently committing a logical fallacy. If you don't care, I can't make you, but you are. Your implication that voting for Trump is equitable to voting for Hitler is only useful because of the general public's disdain for Hitler in regard to things Hitler did that Trump has not done (ordered mass genocide).

Textbook reductio ad hitlerum, to a tee. Your comparison might as well be an example of it for an introductory philosophy course.

Trump is a terrible and dangerous candidate. Your insistence on using this talking point amounts to whiffing at a baseball sitting on a tee.

Gosh a ruddies, talk about obtuse or naïve. If you don’t think banks could intimidate the government into action then you are one or both the above. Too big to fail. That is intimidation. And they can in many cases be thhe only source of many necessary funds and service. American government can be changed and policy altered. Taxes can be cut, or even eliminated and the same can be true of any government power. Anyone can be released from imprisonment. We have the vote, we ultimately control the government. We have the power.
Of course as expected you play down the obvious similarities between the two men shown by me. Trump 2016 is a position analogous to Hitler in1932 before he had the power to commit genocide. In your way of thinking Hitler was not Hitlerian in 1932 because he had not ordered mass genocide. Gosh how about Commander in Chief Trump in 2017 with the Nuclear codes.

FatHobbit;1808931 wrote:I think Hitler and Trump both liked/like to blame issues on foreignors. The first thing you need to rally the troops is a easily recognizable common enemy

I don't think that is unique to Hitler and Trump. I have no love for Trump, but c'mon..... it's a far cry to talk about restricting immigration or refugee settlement, and another to do what Hitler did. Really, Americans would not stand for that, not even if the orders came from the king BHO himself.
There have been several episodes of anti immigration fervor in this country, but none has remotely approached Nazi Germany. To imply such just shows ignorance. If anything resembles Nazi Germany, it is the restriction of free speech in the name of political correctness.

isadore;1809022 wrote: Gosh a ruddies of course part is specific to Germany of the time and Trump’s attack are on Muslims and Mexicans instead of Jews.

Silly me, all this time I thought we were being attacked by muslim terrorists, mexican drug cartels, and illegal alien criminals.

QuakerOats;1809106 wrote:Silly me, all this time I thought we were being attacked by muslim terrorists, mexican drug cartels, and illegal alien criminals.

gosh a ruddies, at least you began with an honest statement, "Silly me."

Just like Hitler Trump and his supporters use the criminal acts of a few members of members of a group to justify the repression of a whole group. Hitler used Marinus Van der Lubbe, a Dutch Communist bricklayer starting the 1933 Reichstag fire to justify the repression of leftists and the 1938 assassination in Paris of a German diplomat by a Jewish teenager as justification for the Kristallnacht repression of the Jews.

HitsRus;1809080 wrote:I don't think that is unique to Hitler and Trump. I have no love for Trump, but c'mon..... it's a far cry to talk about restricting immigration or refugee settlement, and another to do what Hitler did. Really, Americans would not stand for that, not even if the orders came from the king BHO himself.
There have been several episodes of anti immigration fervor in this country, but none has remotely approached Nazi Germany. To imply such just shows ignorance. If anything resembles Nazi Germany, it is the restriction of free speech in the name of political correctness.

Gosh a ruddies you don't compare 1945 Hitler but to 1932 Hitler. That is the stage Trump is in.

You're just being ridiculous now, Isa.

CenterBHSFan;1809158 wrote:You're just being ridiculous now, Isa.

Why would you even engage that retard in conversation?

superman;1809162 wrote:Why would you even engage that retard in conversation?

I'm bored and will be bored for the next 40 minutes or so lol