“Wannabe Dictator” (I prefer “Would-be”) suggests a maturity Trump lacks. Can we call him a wannabe despot?
Apart from Washington, which presidents in U.S. history do you feel did NOT take advantage of all powers they were able to?
IN the way that Trump is? Most of them, with the exception of a few like Jackson.
Yes, presidents use their granted powers according to tradition, and they generally push at the edges. But few use the bully pulpit in quite such a bullying way.
Every president within recent history, for example, could choose whom to take questions from at press conferences. That was a power they had. They all, with the exception of Trump, acted more-or-less within the tradition of taking questions from established media whether or not those established media sources were friendly to them.
Do you really not see a difference here? Or do you consider that not to be a presidential power?
There are a lot of other similar examples–places where Trump is pushing past what others have done in defiance of tradition. But if we can’t even agree on this relatively straightforward one, I’m not sure the advantages of listing others.
Me, I’d get together with some friends and go to the place. We’d all order more food than we know we’re going to eat, since not leaving any food on the table might be a giveaway. Then, when we’d all eaten our full, we’d start talking in loud, obnoxious voices about how much we loved Trump, how evil Muslims and gays are, and how them uppity womenfolk don’t make no sammitches for us no more. The manager comes to throw us out, we complain angrily that we haven’t been allowed to finish our meals and refuse to pay, and my buds and I get to leave with a nice free meal under our belts.
Be * creative, * folks.
When we’re talking about assumption of dictatorial powers, I’m afraid I don’t see snubbing reporters at press conferences as a “presidential power,” with abuse potential raising any serious concern.
In 2003, commentators were aghast that Bush denied Helen Thomas not only a chance to ask a question, but her trademark “Thank you, Mr. President.” In my opinion, the expectation that Bush somehow owed her this was equally misplaced.
I am very disturbed at things Trump has done, like attacking the judiciary. But that’s not dictatorial; it’s assholish.
The owner of this particular restaurant appears to be an asshole who puts his personal politics above his food. I would not trust him to serve meals to the public. Therefore, I would not, under any circumstances, eat there, or recommend that anyone else eat there.
Then the sign works, and I can go enjoy my meal in peace. Would you feel the same about an owner who put up a sign stating “Klan Members Not Welcome Here?”
[not saying Trump voters = Klan members (in every case) but that *is *putting “his personal politics above his food,” as you say]
The goalposts are moving a little, but crucial, bit.
Most presidents deliberately confine themselves according to tradition, even when doing so is not of immediate advantage to themselves. They don’t do this always, but they do this constantly, in myriad trivial ways.
Trump pushes somewhat harder against presidential limits than most of his predecessors; in addition, he breaks tradition without a second thought. In all cases he does so in order to exercise greater power.
That doesn’t make him a dictator. It does suggest that he longs for dictatorial powers, and will attempt to achieve them, more than his predecessors, which is as far as I’m willing to go with the point.
Do you disagree? Do you think that he’s no more interested in consolidating executive power at the expense of the other branches than Bush, Obama, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, and Carter?
Hahahaha. Which must be why the asshole owner took the sign down. Or was it because of customer complaints?
Politics? It was Democrats who created the Klan, but no political party is currently claiming an association with them. Of course, the Democrat collective has been trying to tie the Klan to the GOP, but only the Democrat collective believes that horseshit. It appears that many voters do not find the Democrat collective’s claim to be credible.
Banning Klan members is not a “political” issue.
This asshole restaurant owner is claiming that Trump voters are Nazis. Since that is not true, who would want to be served food made by a delusional asshole? Besides the usual haters who enjoy the company of fellow haters, that is?
Personally, I do not want to hear political rambling, babbling, or protest speeches, while dining.
The “check” on him may end up being his own laziness and disorganization. I can see him issuing dictatorial edicts, followed by edicts that contradict earlier edicts, and his minions being too confused to actually oppress anyone.
I get such laughter out of your posts. You’re really claiming that the 1860’s (which is when the KKK was created) bear any relation to today? But hey, it was Democrats who did it, so let’s blame them for it. From 150 years ago.
Because we all know that the overwhelming majority of racists currently are Democrats.
/sarcasm off
I agree completely. He’s not a dictator, but he’s the kind of leader that, if dictatorial powers were within his grasp, he’d seize them. (“I love democracy. I love the Republic. These powers you give me I will lay down when this crisis is over!”)
I don’t think he’s the first president about whom that could be said, but he’s the first in my living memory for certain.
And the Nazi Party/National Socialist German Workers’ Party was created in 1920.
The OP asked the question:
So, would you continue to eat at this restaurant?
My answer is no, I would not continue to eat at a restaurant owned, and operated by an asshole.
Are you familiar with Godwin’s Law?
Godwin’s Law does not dispute the validity or otherwise of references or comparison to Hitler or the Nazis. As such a comparison or reference may sometimes be appropriate in a discussion, Godwin has argued that overuse of the Nazi comparison should be avoided as it waters down the impact of any valid usage. In its purest sense, the rule has more to do with completely losing one’s sense of proportion rather than just mentioning Nazis specifically. The law was initiated as a counter-meme to flippant comparisons to the Nazis, rather than to invoke a complete ban on comparisons.
Calling Trump supporters Nazis is a bit over the top. It pales in comparison to how bad it is to be a Trump supporter. So I’ll forgive the owner, and enjoy his restaurant, as I like the fact he’s calling out the people who are destroying our beloved country, even if he went too far with his language.
Isn’t that the same reason voters have chosen to remove the Democrat Party as the majority party in the U.S. Congress, and so many state legislatures, and from the White House?
The Democrat collective is free to only associate with fellow Democrats, and Hillary-worshippers, if that makes them feel better about themselves. Isolation might work this time. However, that strategy will probably lead to even more of those weepy-eyed, stunned faces-in-the-crowd that identified Democrat Hillary supporters after the last general election. What happened? That wasn’t supposed to happen? We don’t understand. How could this happen? We told people how to vote. Why didn’t the voters believe us? Why didn’t the voters trust us? What happened?