Home | About | Donate

Donald Trump's Dangerous Demagoguery


#1

Donald Trump's Dangerous Demagoguery

Lauren Carasik

Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump's recent attack on a federal judge presiding over fraud lawsuits against Trump University ignited a firestorm of controversy.

The bigoted attack on the judge's heritage was hardly surprising since white nationalism is part of his appeal. His vitriol also elicited condemnation for his flagrant disregard for judicial independence and the rule of law.


#3

Did anyone else learn nothing from this article?


#8

The Republican leaders can apparently live with Trump's racism but what is really scaring them is Trump's lack of a national campaign organization and lack of money to fund a national campaign and his falling well behind Hillary Clinton in the polls. He is not running any ads while Clinton is running tons of ads defining Trump in a very negative way. The Republicans don't care that much about Trump losing but they do care about losing seats in the Senate and in the House and even at the state level. The dump Trump movement seems to be taking off. There is a growing likelihood that he will not be the nominee of the Republican Party. By changing the rules of the convention the Republicans could finally dump Trump.


#11

"Racialised and nativist hostility" has historically increased in sync with income and wealth inequality. Seeing how Clinton's corporate paymasters will require her to keep widening the income and wealth inequality gap if she is elected, a Clinton presidency will also increase "racialised and nativist hostility".


#12

Wow... your level of education suggests that you're a perfect caricature of the pro-Trump crowd... as is your unfounded outburst. It reflects tribalism rather than a capacity to listen to the messages imparted by the behavior of "your leader."


#13

Will starting a war with Russia or China help end racism? Will concentrating even more wealth in the hands of even fewer American end xenophobia? Will destroying more countries using "smart power" to cause "regime change" put an end to demagoguery? Will selling out the environment and control of our own country through horrible trade deals, help nativist hostility? Will the continuation of a corrupt political system stop the exploitation of white disaffection? Will electing a woman by itself, help bring about policies that help women?


#14

Exposing the character of the big chimp Trump really has hit a nerve with you, hasn't it? And people pretend there isn't a right wing pro-Trump squad occupying these threads.


#15

He's not just a buffoon. He's a dangerous demagogue and specifically the type that endorses, elicits, and invites violence in his followers. Being a sociopath & narcissist, Trump will easily wash his hands of any accountability for what his "fans" put into motion.

In any case, this thread so far has mostly not exactly covert Trump supporters.

Not a word on Sanders... just the game of who is the worse evil, Hillary or Trump with most C.D. posters picking his majesty. Very Progressive... NOT!


#16

The initiatives you mention are indeed horrifying. I happen to believe (as do others) that both parties now effectively SERVE The Beast. The kind of fortune it wields makes it just as easy to purchase candidates on "both sides" of the aisle as otherwise financing only 1 side. Either way, Militarism and monetary means of control win.

In the unlikely event that Trump actually took an "isolationist" stance as opposed to rushing in for W. W. III, what is the likelihood that this new M.C. for "Brand America" will have the opportunity or capacity to outweigh the TRUE powers behind the throne?

If these maniacs want war (which is what events suggest), regardless of which figurehead gets to play America's version of Royal Family for photo-ops and such, these individuals will HARDLY be the ones calling the actual shots or designing actual policies.

Hillary lends a patina of normalcy and civility to the otherwise unthinkable acts of mass destruction. Trump would be a more naked version of the primitive Neanderthal ape who only cares about his own banana.

I want to see Sanders, Stein--or a powerful new coalition that "just says no" to the imbeciles U.S. citizens are expected to "choose between" take over!


#17

After Hedges relentless attacks on Sanders, with barely a mention of Clinton or Trump until late in the race, I wouldn't mind not seeing any more of his arm-chair revolutionary rants.


#18

100% agree, but it's just that Clinton will be full steam ahead on wars and trade deals. Trump at least says he wants no part of that, which is why he's hated by the "leadership" (and Clinton is liked). For those reasons alone, I will take the disaster of Trump over Clinton. Also, I think Trump can increase the likelihood of a new coalition.

I know Bernie says "stop Trump at all costs", and I can't see myself voting for Trump, but I'm starting to think it's should be "stop Clinton at all costs"

Attacks on Trump like this article (which is like shooting fish in a barrel), without mentioning Clinton's issues, make me feel like I'm being played.


#20

Yes... but now that Warren is being touted as a potential VP nominee, Wall Street is pulling back on their campaign donations. So say my "liberal" friends who continue to advise me that I must hold my nose and vote for HRC if the alternative is Trump.


#21

Hedges has been wallowing in the Sea of Despond for some time now, hasn't he? Methinks he could use a little joy in his life, maybe a morning on the Blackfoot with a bet on the side.

Hedges was brutal from the start on his attacks on Bernie Sanders and did not give him any latitude for the millions he mobilized to care, to try and 'turn around this ship of state called America', as Harry Belafonte said.

Contrast Hedges to Noam Chomsky, who in an interview with Abby Martin, honored Bernie's heroism in battling unforgiving odds and then challenged his movement to 'go on' after the election cycle:

"Take, say, the Bernie Sanders campaign, which I think is important, impressive. He's doing good and courageous things. He's organizing a lot of people. That campaign ought to be directed to sustaining a popular movement which will use the election as a kind of incentive but then go on, and unfortunately it's not. When the election is over the movement is going to die, and that's a serious error.

The only thing that's gonna ever ever bring about any meaningful change is ongoing, dedicated, popular movements which don't pay attention to the election cycle. It's an extravaganza every four years, you have to be involved in it so fine we'll be involved in it but then we go on. If that were done you could get major changes."

I don't know what Hedges' path forward is. He sounds like he's spoiling for the type of revolution where streets flow with blood and that way madness lies.


#23

I cannot respect ANY argument FOR Trump.

The ONLY principled opposition to the Clinton War/$ machine is voting 3rd party.

Period.

Too many use cases against Clinton TO MAKE a case FOR Trump.

There is nothing Progressive about Trump.

Anyone should be able to understand that this guy is a first class con-man stealing $ from hundreds of people naive enough to enroll in his "University."

He is a walking Right Wing Ad for Hate Crimes.

He has ZERO understanding of foreign policy. I mean, the guy blames Mexicans for what NAFTA and GATT wrought?

And so many who have no day jobs sit here pretending to like Sanders mostly so they can then substitute TRUMP.

The whole thing is a ridiculous canard. I really despise the kind of deception that traffics as "just opinions" on sites like this one.


#24

Do you not care at all about climate change. We are right now in the midst of a climate change emergency. We have had 13 straight months of record global temperatures. Somehow we quickly jumped from just below 1C to 1.4C, at least temporarily. This isn't the 1960s or 1970s anymore, Climate change is here. Like many people Bernie Sanders has said it is the greatest threat we face. He wasn't exaggerating. You do understand that Donald Trump is climate change denier. And that he has threatened to rip up the Paris climate agreement. Do you understand the implications of that? The effects of climate change can even play a role in increasing the chance of war. It seems to have played a role in the war going on in Syria. Fights over water resources could occur more frequently. Millions of climate migrants could destabilize countries. The number of failed states could multiply. There seem to be dozens of reasons why Sanders says that Trump must be stopped. Preventing him from rolling back action on climate change may be at the top of the list.


#25

There is zero good in the Trumpzone. But Clinton only gets any kind of pass on the lesser evilism card. And it is a really hard call as regards which really is the lesser (greater) evil. If elected, Clinton is more likely to prevail as she has sold out wholeheartedly to the MIC, Wall St etc. - whereas Trump has too many enemies in the corridors of power. In the inverted totalitarianism model the dictators are a shadowy bunch who will not appreciate a Trump making the show too overt and being the gung ho bigotted fuckwit he is. He has too big an ego to knuckle down. I suspect he'll be is own undoing if elected... or meet with a nasty accident.
Moreover - what a disastrous non-choice of candidates! It's rot bottom when the discussion centres on the finer points of who is the worse. The whole fuckin circus is a con. Anyone with meaningful values would get nowhere. Why can't people get it? Why do they go on believing in this pantomime?
I see some people here sick that Hedges didn't support Sanders - like his situation is Hedge's fault! Grow up! Chris Hedges got it right from the start when he predicted that the Sanders supporters would in part be led to the Clinton church - something already in action. But why not shoot the messenger just cause you now feel pissed? Learn!!!


#26

The one guaranteed "good in the Trumpzone" is that at least a few liberals who support Obama and Clinton will make at least a little noise to protest Trump's antisocial actions.

Ever since the advent of the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) in 1985 we have witnessed the same liberals whining at GOP actions while remaining silent or actually approving those same actions when a Clinton, an Obama or other Democrat takes the same action.

Recall Bill Clinton not missing a beat in pushing Bush 41's NAFTA through, and Obama refrying the Heritage Foundation's corporate welfare program (introduced to Congress by the Newt as healtcare reform during the 90s) rebranded as the Affordable Care Act (ACA).


#27

I do not understand the vitriol directed against Trump. What is wrong with a spirited debate? I think the freedom to speak out offensive ideas is essential for democracy. I think us people can use our own minds and consciences to consider all the different points. Nobody is totally good or bad. I think this website is doing a good job to present different views and allow our comments.


#28

Do you get paid by Clinton for responding too? I thought only for posting, anyway, neither of them will do anything about it.


#30

I'm not a deception agent, this is just me. I know they both will do heavy damage; I just think Trump will do less. I plan to vote Green, same as 4 yrs ago...