What do you Americans make of this Trump derangement syndrome (TDS)?

[Neil]

ie: The excessive need for some folks to go to excessive extreme lengths to dislike, and to voice their dislike, and virtue signal their dislike for Trump? The level of irrational illogical hatred is bizarre. If you put aside the medias smearing and look solely has his policies in the US? Surely he's not doing a particularly bad job?

[blind2d]

ie: The excessive need for some folks to go to excessive extreme lengths to dislike, and to voice their dislike, and virtue signal their dislike for Trump? The level of irrational illogical hatred is bizarre. If you put aside the medias smearing and look solely has his policies in the US? Surely he's not doing a particularly bad job? What part of "he's a fascist bigot who preys on women and harms minority groups actively while promoting the worst parts of American culture possible and putting children in concentration camps" do you not understand, Neil?

[EvilNed]

ie: The excessive need for some folks to go to excessive extreme lengths to dislike, and to voice their dislike, and virtue signal their dislike for Trump? The level of irrational illogical hatred is bizarre. If you put aside the medias smearing and look solely has his policies in the US? Surely he's not doing a particularly bad job? I agree. The amount of attention the media gives him is INSANE. I watch Bill Mahr sometimes and Trump is all they ever talk about. And it's been like that for years! Everyone keeps saying "He'll be impeached by the end of this year, bla bla bla" but none of it ever comes to fruition. There's like some kind of group delusion going on that he's the anti-christ or something like that. But people did vote for this guy and to be honest I'm sure quite a lot of people who did are happy with what he's doing. And the economy is booming, which is what a lot of people wanted.

[shootemindehead]

I'm not a Yank, but I agree that sometimes the attention he gets is overwrought, to say the least, especially in an online environment. The US media thrives on his clickbait nature too, but the news media over there isn't for disseminating news. It's for making money, so depending on their "customer base", the slant of the items on offer will have a different flavour. But he doesn't shy away from drawing it to himself either. He's a complete narcissist and loves it. The fact that he, as a bored billionaire, simply decided to run for the highest political office in the land shows that clearly enough. And his bunkum posted daily on Twitter reveals his self obsessive nature to a, frankly, depressing level. As for "not doing a particularly bad job" - and even if we set aside dodgy tax decisions, filling the swamp instead of "draining it", cosying up to Wall Street instead of "tackling it" and the fact the he's stirring up shit in the Middle East (despite his campaign promises to the contrary) and nearly brought the region to a war footing yet again, all with the nodding agreement from a cabinet full of neocons who fucked the region before - it's hardly what I would call a ringing endorsement. The economy may be "booming" as Ned put it, at least on the surface anyway. But, no doubt, a deeper analysis would reveal more data on true satisfaction levels. His supporters from the Rustbelt haven't seen any changes. But, in any case, I'd say that has fuck all to with Trump. He's just inherited an up tick period that's pretty global. It would have been "booming" under Clinton too. I wonder, though, will he own the next bust like he claims credit for the current boom? I think we'll all be left waiting for that particular tweet.

[Neil]

What part of "he's a fascist bigot who preys on women and harms minority groups actively while promoting the worst parts of American culture possible and putting children in concentration camps" do you not understand, Neil? The bit that's primarily concocted and made up by an insanely left wing bias set of activist journalists? Rhetoric like "concentration camps" is exactly the kind of low brown virtue signalling antics they use! You realise these very processes were under effect by previous presidents, and indeed put in place by previous presidents? And in truth MADE worse by the actions of previous presidents. Look into the figures of illegal immigrants bringing in children, who when tested do not even belong to them. And look at how many families illegally crossing are now kept together instead of split up. And look into how many photos taken of children supposedly separated from families come from Obama's period in office. And if we move onto the next bit of commonly used rhetoric, "fascist" - You realise Obama spent record amounts year after year refusing to turn over information. Isn't suppressing information more of a fascist act? While I'm not heralding Trump as a model president, many of his policies actually make real sense and are doing the US a lot of good. Meanwhile the gutter press concoct insane, out of all reason, negative bile about him. Hence "Trump Derangement Syndrome!" I fully expect him to get re-elected next year, no matter how low the press (or Google) sink... Note: Even the mayor of London, Sadiq Khan - who's is an idiot like Trump said he was - decide it was a good thing to declare Trump as a fascist as some ridiculous virtue signal!

[blind2d]

The bit that's primarily concocted and made up by an insanely left wing bias set of activist journalists? Rhetoric like "concentration camps" is exactly the kind of low brown virtue signalling antics they use! You realise these very processes were under effect by previous presidents, and indeed put in place by previous presidents? And in truth MADE worse by the actions of previous presidents. Look into the figures of illegal immigrants bringing in children, who when tested do not even belong to them. And look at how many families illegally crossing are now kept together instead of split up. And look into how many photos taken of children supposedly separated from families come from Obama's period in office. And if we move onto the next bit of commonly used rhetoric, "fascist" - You realise Obama spent record amounts year after year refusing to turn over information. Isn't suppressing information more of a fascist act? While I'm not heralding Trump as a model president, many of his policies actually make real sense and are doing the US a lot of good. Meanwhile the gutter press concoct insane, out of all reason, negative bile about him. Hence "Trump Derangement Syndrome!" I fully expect him to get re-elected next year, no matter how low the press (or Google) sink... Note: Even the mayor of London, Sadiq Khan - who's is an idiot like Trump said he was - decide it was a good thing to declare Trump as a fascist as some ridiculous virtue signal! Lots to unpack here, unfortunately. :/ (I expect better from you, Neil) Firstly, you realize that leftist and liberal are two different things, right? Liberals and even some conservatives hate him just as much as we leftists do (and everyone hates liberals). Next, "low BROWN"?? Typo or Freudian slip? YOU decide, AMERICA! Vote on your phones now! (And if that was an intentional "joke"/some attempt at baiting me... really?) I won't deny that other Presidents suck: the very nature of the office is to be evil, unless maybe you're just an idiot like Carter. JFK might've been alright, IDK. Anyhow, yeah, 95% of all Presidents at LEAST have committed horrible atrocities during their time in office. I'm not pro-Obama at all, but Trump certainly didn't stop the camps, or ICE ("Build that wall!", remember?), so... how exactly is he not doing bad? Thirdly, ...seriously? The man who is buddies with David Duke, who has called people on the alt right "fine people", pardoned Apello, buddies with Bannon, patron saint of the alt right, has a copy of Mein Kampf on his bedside table... Obama seems more fascist to you? I've looked up "fascist" in the dictionary and other sources multiple times over the last half a year, and there's like nothing inherently fascist about "suppressing information". (But muh FrEeZe PeAcH!) Fascists LOVE spreading information: usually false: that makes them look good. It's called propaganda, perhaps you've heard of it. Fascists suppress people, minority groups especially, not "information", typically, unless again it doesn't help them. What is a "model president"? I thought we were against dictators, yeah? I know I am. WHICH policies? Lying about wanting to help LGBTQ+ people, and actively making life harder for people like me in this country? Never mind all this birth control garbage. But I suppose you don't need to worry about that in your ivory tower, right? Like Shootem said, he hasn't actually helped the Rust Belt. We're still poor and struggling here in Ohio. Fuck the billionaires man, if they're going to be making more money, why the fuck should I care? Is there a point when they'll just start handing out more to poor fucks like me? What "good" is he doing my country, by being an absolute slimeball who cons people and doesn't even pay his workers? If he gets re-elected, we're all pretty fucked. I mean, can you actually prove Trump isn't a fascist, Neil?

[Neil]

If he gets re-elected, we're all pretty fucked. I mean, can you actually prove Trump isn't a fascist, Neil? Another thing to add to your "fascist" list, along with Obama seemingly censoring more than Trump, you realise on the topic of minority groups and the like, Obama deported more immigrants than Trump is? Is/was Obama more fascist that Trump? Nope... Just pointing out how outlandish and unfounded such terms are to either individual. Just seems some folks seem compellted to throw the term "fascist" and "nazi" around as if it means something... When typically in the context of the individuals in question it certainly does not. Lefties seems to need to up their ante though. Why do I have to prove Trump is not a fascist? I'm not the one making a claim so it's for those declaring Trump is a fascist to provide compelling evidence to that effect. Finally, why would we we be more fucked in the coming four years, that the last four years? Or is, "If he gets re-elected, we're all pretty fucked," just more uping the ante talk? Personally given the alternatives, I've done a 180 on Trump over the past few years and hope he does get back into office in 2020... And to underline all this? I have no doubt groups of people under every president can highlight things they are not happy with and policies they believe are negative to them or other. But what I don't understand is this strange brewing mindset - specifically with lefties at the moment - that seems to be getting more and more aggressive, extreme and accusatory, declaration people they do not share some values or opinions with. It's seemingly getting more and more the case that people will be screamed down as "nazi" and "fascist" simply for not having the values seemingly earmarked by lefties as "the socially acceptable ones". And this is even proving to be the behaviour and ethos being demonstrated by silicon valley too now alarmingly. Hence the brewing legal actions against Facebook, Twitter and Google etc. ps: This is not meant to be an I'm right you're wrong type comment. Simply dumping my views ...and the fact the he's stirring up shit in the Middle East (despite his campaign promises to the contrary) and nearly brought the region to a war footing yet again, all with the nodding agreement from a cabinet full of neocons who fucked the region before - it's hardly what I would call a ringing endorsement.. How much military action has the US seen in the past 3-4yrs? Compare that to the years leading up to that? As for stirring up "shit" in the Middle East? You don't think Iran are mainly behind the current nonsense?

[EvilNed]

It's become a business to deride and mock Trump. The media seems to be able to spin every single story into a negative-Trump story. Many people seem to argue that internet hackers, or trolls, or bots, were responsible for an unusually aggressive and falsified presidential campaign. However I see many similiarities between what happened then and what is happening now. Mocking Trump is no longer about the truth, it's simply a revenue source at this point. I'm not saying I'm for or against him. I don't know enough. But I know he's not a fascist. A fascist is openly anti-democratic. People like to call back to the nazis or fascists all to often. You have to remember that the nazis or fascists didn't sieze power in a coup and then revoked personal freedoms - they were openly anti-democratic from the start and never hid their disdain for democracy as an inefficient form of government.

[shootemindehead]

How much military action has the US seen in the past 3-4yrs? Compare that to the years leading up to that? It's still involved in regions it shouldn't be in, because it has stuck its nose in where it doesn't belong far too often. Just because it hasn't been involved in any shooting wars doesn't let it off. Since the 2000's it has been directly responsible for the fucked up nature of the Middle East, more than any other actor. As for stirring up "shit" in the Middle East? You don't think Iran are mainly behind the current nonsense? Yes, stirring up shit again, in a region it has no business in, by groups that have been responsible for the absolute disaster that was the Iraq war and the terrible fallout that generated. FFS, the likes of John Bolton shouldn't be near any cabinet. And no, I don't think Iran was behind the current nonsense. They, literally, have absolutely NOTHING to gain. They may have shot down a US spy plane over their airspace, but they're damn right to do so. The US shouldn't be in anyone else's airspace. What would America have done, if the roles were reversed.

[MinionZombie]

I'd wager a fair bit of the 'not doing too bad' bits are either down to inherited legacy (this is often the case when it comes to econmics, with a government inheriting either a good or bad situation) or staffers and civil servants doing what they can to work around Trump's worst impulses and petulant reactions (such is the word from inside the White House). The man has proven himself to be quite inadequate for the job simply through his own personality, the way he deals with people, his self-obsession, his crassness, his arrogance, how he promises one thing but enacts the total opposite, his poor grasp of economics (e.g. tariffs against China have much more of an impact on Americans than China), and just generally acting like a petulant toddler so often. Obama gets overly lionised, and the requirements of the job certainly compromised him in certain regards (e.g. increased drone strikes), but I'd much, much, much, much, much prefer to have someone like Obama in the White House. At the very least, Obama has a level head and is the sort of person you can talk to and have a reasoned debate with. Trump, on the other hand, is no such thing. There's a lack of respect for the role of President which oozes from Trump. His posturing over Iran (after he withdrew from that agreement!) smacks more of "Can I start a war and look strong, thereby guaranteeing a second term?" than anything else. The pathological attack on "Obama Care" alone speaks volumes about his nefarious methodology ... and everytime I hear of a Trump supporter learning that "Obama Care" and the Affordable Care Act are the same thing, only to become crestfallen at the risk to their improved medical benefits, I just shake my head wearily. This all said, it is also true that the media and ardent anti-Trumpers routinely get carried away. Every tiny little thing, from a spelling mistake to a weird walk etc, get picked apart to the nth degree in a way that is unbecoming of everyone involved. But this is all wrapped up in the global drive towards the extreme - the further right the right go, the further left the left go, and soon they're both occupying very similar territory on the political circle: both on the extreme side of things with the calm, collected, reasonable centre ground abandoned to everyone's detriment. Undoubtedly there is a huge amount of virtue signalling going on, and it has been the case for years now, affecting so many realms of socio-political discourse, and even the far right are getting in on the act (look at the James Gunn situation). One extreme reaction begets another, and nobody is covering themselves in glory. The more the left wrap themselves in utter anti-Trump obsessiveness, the less credible they appear, because reason and measure have been tossed out the window (how many times have we heard that Impeachment is about to happen?), and the more the right wrap themselves in nationalism and fear and anger, the more the reasonable and often unheard majority of people will suffer and go unrepresented. There is a shocking lack of communication in this day and age, with bids for high office more of a personal dose of self-aggrandisement and power pleasure than any sense of duty or respect for high office (e.g. Trump, or Boris Johnson). Nothing can be discussed without resorting to absolutes and insults and bullshit and bluster ("I'm right, you're wrong" sorta stuff instead of finding common ground folks can agree on before debating the minutiae in a respectable, reasoned, informed manner). This has been proven repeatedly for the right and the left, both of which have been skewing ever more extreme for years now as the trend has gone. We've been dunked into a storm of chaos and obfuscation, while all our problems that need fixing are swept aside with political trolling, virtue signalling, the march to the extremeties of political discourse and leadership, as well as bigger self-inflicted problems (e.g. Brexit - I'm not a great fan of the EU, but I voted remain and believe that making changes and improvements from the inside would have been the best course of action ... I knew that Brexit would just produce years of waffle and strife while much more immediate problems were left unattended to - huh, sure enough!). So, in short, yes there is a definite problem of media over-obsession and doom-mongering, which is beyond pathetic and actually harms genuine criticism of Trump and no doubt feeds his sense of ego and self-importance (*slow clap*), but at the same time, Trump has proven time and again that he is a poor leader who does not possess the skills or mentality to carry out the job.

[Neil]

The man has proven himself to be quite inadequate for the job simply through his own personality, the way he deals with people, his self-obsession, his crassness, his arrogance, how he promises one thing but enacts the total opposite, his poor grasp of economics (e.g. tariffs against China have much more of an impact on Americans than China), and just generally acting like a petulant toddler so often. Define "inadequate for the job"? Isn't the job mainly ensuring the US and its people are doing well. And next, the US and its world ties/relationships are doing well? I'd say, if you look at how "he's then doing the job," compared to the previous few administrations, he's seemingly no less capable, certainly not inadequate, and possibly it could be argued doing rather well in some aspects? And just today? The first US president in North Korea? Be it show boating or not, surely its better to be talking and engaging with North Korea than not surely? ps: As regards the EU - "but I voted remain and believe that making changes and improvements from the inside would have been the best course of action" - That was tried (eg: Cameron coming back empty handed with his requests for change & reform), and did not happen, and will not happen. Hence the vote to leave before it implodes a few years taking us financially with it. I agree it would be nice to reform the EU. But that will not happen. Look at it now... Imagine what it will be like in a another 4-5yrs? Best to get out sooner rather than later...

[MinionZombie]

Define "inadequate for the job"? Isn't the job mainly ensuring the US and its people are doing well. And next, the US and its world ties/relationships are doing well? I'd say, if you look at how "he's then doing the job," compared to the previous few administrations, he's seemingly no less capable, certainly not inadequate, and possibly it could be argued doing rather well in some aspects? And just today? The first US president in North Korea? Be it show boating or not, surely its better to be talking and engaging with North Korea than not surely? ps: As regards the EU - "but I voted remain and believe that making changes and improvements from the inside would have been the best course of action" - That was tried (eg: Cameron coming back empty handed with his requests for change & reform), and did not happen, and will not happen. Hence the vote to leave before it implodes a few years taking us financially with it. I agree it would be nice to reform the EU. But that will not happen. Look at it now... Imagine what it will be like in a another 4-5yrs? Best to get out sooner rather than later... I've already explained why I don't think Trump is adequate for the job. As for North Korea - far too early to make a judgement, frankly (much like Obama getting the Nobel Peace Prize before he'd even got going on his first term). Trump will certainly like the optics and the grand world stage aspect of it, mind, that's for sure. A leader should lead by example, by making cogent arguments that are well put together to make their case squarely and fairly ... to lead by antagonising the other side(s), to act rashly, to make brash sweeping statements, to put little thought into the impact of grand policies, isn't quality leadership. I simply do not feel that Trump has any kind of grasp on diplomacy, and he certainly doesn't command respect. From a leader you need a temperate, steady hand on the tiller, and you just don't get that with Trump. Nor will we from Boris Johnson (or Jeremy Corbyn, for that matter). As for the EU: I also partly blame the EU, which too often shows off its own arrogance or sticks its fingers into business it shouldn't really be getting involved in, for the vote (slim a margin as it was) towards Brexit, but I stand by my previous statement. The scope of it has become too large and as such the problems of any government are exacerbated, but throwing the UK into the great and complex unknown instead of sensibly improving it from the inside wasn't the right move (something which has come about for a multitude of reasons).

[blind2d]

[QUOTE=Neil;324041]Another thing to add to your "fascist" list, along with Obama seemingly censoring more than Trump, you realise on the topic of minority groups and the like, Obama deported more immigrants than Trump is? Is/was Obama more fascist that Trump? Nope... Just pointing out how outlandish and unfounded such terms are to either individual. Just seems some folks seem compellted to throw the term "fascist" and "nazi" around as if it means something... When typically in the context of the individuals in question it certainly does not. Lefties seems to need to up their ante though. Why do I have to prove Trump is not a fascist? I'm not the one making a claim so it's for those declaring Trump is a fascist to provide compelling evidence to that effect. Finally, why would we we be more fucked in the coming four years, that the last four years? Or is, "If he gets re-elected, we're all pretty fucked," just more uping the ante talk? Personally given the alternatives, I've done a 180 on Trump over the past few years and hope he does get back into office in 2020... And to underline all this? I have no doubt groups of people under every president can highlight things they are not happy with and policies they believe are negative to them or other. But what I don't understand is this strange brewing mindset - specifically with lefties at the moment - that seems to be getting more and more aggressive, extreme and accusatory, declaration people they do not share some values or opinions with. It's seemingly getting more and more the case that people will be screamed down as "nazi" and "fascist" simply for not having the values seemingly earmarked by lefties as "the socially acceptable ones". And this is even proving to be the behaviour and ethos being demonstrated by silicon valley too now alarmingly. Hence the brewing legal actions against Facebook, Twitter and Google etc."" Yes, Neil. Everyone knows this. But it's not an argument against. "Oh, this person isn't AS BAD, therefore they're good!" - that's how dumb you sound. And Obama was way kinder to (legal specifically of course, since y'know, authoritarianism is cancer) women and LGBT+ people. Notice you've completely ignored this fact. But Trump is a bit more fascist than Obama, who again is not a model person either. That's all I want you to agree with me on. Also I gotta wonder who you've been listening to lately, because you're spouting some conservative bullshit, man. Well it seems to me that you've got a horse in this race (i.e. if you weren't a Trump supporter, you'd probably not be so focused on the guy, and what the media/populace is doing/saying about him). Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you were neutral on Trump, you wouldn't mind anyone calling him ( a person who behaves like a fearmongering would-be dictator with emphasis on national pride and the military/"rule of law") a fascist. Because, again, that's what a fascist is, by definition. Look it up if you don't believe me. I'll wait. Hmm, I wonder why a planet dying of capitalism's evil would be worse off in a few years rather than at this very moment, hmm... Do you even understand how time works? Like I'm sorry, but you seem again to be cloistered in your little privilege box, casting out judgments on everyone you deem different (or lesser) than yourself. Which is... Not good behavior. So you've done a 180 on Trump, because....??? Capitalists did a capitalism? Which he had precious little to actually do with? Or are you just a big fan of pointless barriers? For some reason... Is it fear? Do you fear THE OTHER? Are you paranoid people are going to ruin your stuff? Or take it from you? Why? Okay, so... "acceptable social values"? I mean, I'm not personally okay with people getting killed or harassed or imprisoned just for being themselves and trying to have good lives, without intentionally hurting anyone else. Are you saying sexual harassment (a thing of which Trump is definitely guilty of, but since he's a white man with good lawyers, he's not going to jail for) is okay, Neil? It's fun how you've ignored most of the points I actually brought up and just stuck to your guns... And when I say "fun", I mean "annoying and worrying, as I really want to like you, but if you like a barely-closeted racist (Trump) and misogynist (Trump again), then I'm worried we can't be friends anymore".

[shootemindehead]

Define "inadequate for the job"? Isn't the job mainly ensuring the US and its people are doing well. And next, the US and its world ties/relationships are doing well? I don't want to try and jump in on Mini's contribution here (he's well able to yap for himself ), but who's "doing well"? The Rustbelt people Trump targeted with false promises haven't seen their lot change. There are still huge swathes of folk that have to work two or more jobs to simply make their modest ends meet. People are still ending up on the streets because they cannot afford their health bills etc <- take a trip to San Francisco and talk to the street people there about that one. Meanwhile uber billionaires get handy tax breaks on the likes of jet fuel etc. Companies that rake in obscene money each year still end up paying no taxes at all due to loopholes that remain open and could easily be closed if the political will was there. You know, there's something very wrong about a system that lets billionaires off of paying taxes, but screws Joe Bloggs the janitor to the wall if he steps out of line. I can guarantee you that their are multitudes of Americans who would say that they are NOT doing well. On the "world ties/relationships" front, I don't know how anyone with eyes and ears could suggest that Trump has been a good ambassador for his country. The leaders of other nations may pay lip service to him and afford him the pleasantries of his office. But, I'd wager that every one of them is still bemused at how he got to his position and sniggers behind his back in some capacity or another. The fact of the matter is, though, that while Trump has been treated cordially when abroad, he has done little to actually strengthen any ties between his nation and others. Because I don't think he cares all that much about such things. He's that not that diplomatically minded to be of such care. His sabre rattling in the Middle East shows clearly that he's not bothered about international relations in the slightest. Absolutely no country wants tensions over there to be escalated, especially in Europe where they've been forced to deal with the ISIS fallout from the Iraq invasion over the last x amount of years. Nobody wants more wars over there, outside of the neocons (who are STILL in the White House) and some in Israel. ps: As regards the EU - "but I voted remain and believe that making changes and improvements from the inside would have been the best course of action" - That was tried (eg: Cameron coming back empty handed with his requests for change & reform), and did not happen, and will not happen. Hence the vote to leave before it implodes a few years taking us financially with it. I agree it would be nice to reform the EU. But that will not happen. Look at it now... Imagine what it will be like in a another 4-5yrs? Best to get out sooner rather than later... Get out to what though Neil? That's the problem. I find it remarkable that Britain wanted to leave - outside of the anti-immigration crowd anyway (but they won't get what they're looking for outside of the EU either ) - as Britain of all the countries involved had the BEST package in the EU. I could understand if Italy left or Greece. But Britain never even signed up to the Euro. They could also pick and choose many of the EU directives they wished to follow too. They weren't really in the EU, in the way that other member states were tied in. But leaving the market, which nearly everyone is opposed to, has the possibility to be disastrous for your country, which will be left adrift and at the mercy of the US, who's already eyeing up your NHS and TTIP will be back on the table no doubt. These will be part of the "deals" on offer to a possibly floundering Britain and if the likes of Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson is at the head of the negotiation table, I can't see him putting up too much opposition to any so called deals that America will furnish. Their idea of a deal will be what's best for America and Britain can take it or leave it. The EU has loads of problems, no doubt and I'm not a fan. The fact that my country and one other are the only ones that put referenda to the people regarding EU treaties is a major worry and should be to everyone. However, the future outside of it for Britain isn't one of automatic sunlit uplands, despite what the likes of Nigel Farage would have you believe. Plus, I wholly distrust the characters that are pro-Brexit - Johnson, Farage, Mogg et al - as they have nothing to fear if the whole game of chance goes belly up. Their millions will insulate them from any negative situations, if and when they happen. Everyone without such cushions will find things much harder indeed. And it is a game of chance, make no mistake, as there is NOBODY involved that has produced any data or proposals on what will happen when you do eventually leave. It's remarkable, and depressing, that Britain has spent the last few years tinkering with slight alterations to a silly deal and bickering with each other, when that time should have been spent on producing realistic projections on what Britain will do, once leaving becomes a reality. Anyway, I'm out of this. As I said, I'm not a Yank so the question's not directed at me. I'd like to know what the other US contributors (besides B2D) think on the issue though.

[EvilNed]

Well it seems to me that you've got a horse in this race (i.e. if you weren't a Trump supporter, you'd probably not be so focused on the guy, and what the media/populace is doing/saying about him). Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you were neutral on Trump, you wouldn't mind anyone calling him ( a person who behaves like a fearmongering would-be dictator with emphasis on national pride and the military/"rule of law") a fascist. Because, again, that's what a fascist is, by definition. Look it up if you don't believe me. I'll wait. That's not at all what a fascist is. And only fascists should be called fascists, because otherwise you look like you don't know what you're talking about. If Trump is a fascist, then we need a new word to call the fascists - because there's quite clearly people who are worse than Trump. Anyone who values a healthy and adult debate would refrain from calling anyone who's not a fascist a fascist. There are real fascists out there. Also, both Obama and Bush Jr. were fearmongering. All US presidents to date have put emphasis on national pride, and most (except maybe Jimmy carter) has put emphasis on the military. As for would-be dictatorial behavior... I've not seen anything of the like from Trump.