[Rugoz]

Well yes I suppose that's an element where Trump uses slave morality. Hitler thought the Germans were victims too. But Hitler mostly believed in master morality. The weak (disabled etc) were even killed.

Master morality is about believing strength is good and weakness is bad. Trump wants to "dominate" protestors, wants America to be "strong" instead of "weak" in foreign policy and trade etc. He also respects strongmen like Putin and sometimes Fat Kim, and bullies weaklings like Jeb Bush.

Eh no, the morality of the powerful can be anything. Killing the weak could be a part of it, but why should it? After all, the weak are no threat to their power. If it feels good to kill the weak, it would a part of master morality, I suppose. Trump wants to dominate the protesters, but equally the protesters want to dominate Trump, that's the motivation, not the morality. Both are impotent, hence the picture the other as evil.

Here's a a good introduction I think (1 of 3 parts):

[Beren]

Correct, Nixon was a gentleman compared to Trump. I would vote for a Nixon over Trump in a heartbeat.
Watergate would not make it to the top 100 presidential scandals by the end of Trump's first term . Nixon had the decency to resign.

He was a war criminal compared to Trump and became a real menace to democracy while antagonising with the press and anyone else critical of him like crazy. I'm sure he'd be a lot more dangerous figure than Trump today, although he could have a better foreign policy.

[XogGyux]

He was a war criminal compared to Trump and became a real menace to democracy while antagonising with the press and anyone else critical of him like crazy. I'm sure he'd be a lot more dangerous figure than Trump today, although he could have a better foreign policy.

Disagree except for what I put in bold.
If Nixon was an 8 in the scale of dangerous, Trump is a 12.
We haven't even seen his final form yet...

We are desensitized after all these years, but the -attempted- break into the DNC Watergate is not a whole much different than Trump's coordination to acquired emails from hackers. We have long past that... since then Trump has done far worse. So no, do not agree.

[Beren]

Disagree except for what I put in bold.
If Nixon was an 8 in the scale of dangerous, Trump is a 12.
We haven't even seen his final form yet...

We are desensitized after all these years, but the -attempted- break into the DNC Watergate is not a whole much different than Trump's coordination to acquired emails from hackers. We have long past that... since then Trump has done far worse. So no, do not agree.

Right, you do not agree, I didn't even expect you to, no matter what, of course, although Trump is not even a professional politician obsessed with his political career as Nixon was, he's just a con man successfully having conned himself into the presidency. He's also not worse than Dubya, who dragged the US into the Iraq War and made the Patriot Act, was.

[XogGyux]

Right, you do not agree, I didn't even expect you to, no matter what, of course, although Trump is not even a professional politician obsessed with his political career as Nixon was, he's just a con man successfully having conned himself into the presidency. He's also not worse than Dubya, who dragged the US into the Iraq War and made the Patriot Act, was.

I don't think it matters whether he was a professional politician or not or what their obsessions lies.
A wolf eats meat, people.
A hippo eats vegetables, not people.
Yet a hippo is far more dangerous.
Their drives are not really a big issue.
So I don't care if Nixon was obsessed with his political career or Trump about his vanity and image perception. Trump has undoubtedly eroded more of the US's protections, international relationship, morale, etc. that Nixon ever did. Granted, Nixon had significantly more friction than Trump does but the end result I think stands on itself.

[Beren]

I don't think it matters whether he was a professional politician or not or what their obsessions lies.

That's the main difference between them, though, that Trump doesn't have the political experience, know-how, background, connections, or even the motivations, etc. to be so dangerous as Nixon was. However, you can claim indeed that he's a bull or hippo in a china shop, but Nixon was a professional burglar in this case, and that's what Watergate was literally about.

[wat0n]

He was a war criminal compared to Trump and became a real menace to democracy while antagonising with the press and anyone else critical of him like crazy. I'm sure he'd be a lot more dangerous figure than Trump today, although he could have a better foreign policy.

His foreign policy was more aggressive than Trump's for sure, but I would say Trump is more of a threat to democracy than Nixon - although it's not su much due to their character but because of the state of the public debate in America.

[XogGyux]

That's the main difference between them, though, that Trump doesn't have the political experience, know-how, background, connections, or even the motivations, etc. to be so dangerous as Nixon was. However, you can claim indeed that he's a bull or hippo in a China shop, but Nixon was a professional burglar in this case, and that's what Watergate was literally about.

Well. I measure things by their results. I don't care of John has top of the line west point grades, an IQ of 180 and exemplary sniper training if Tom is a crazy lunatic with a propensity for violence and a bomb attached to his chest, it is Tom the guy that I am worried about.
A lunatic with followers is just as dangerous if not more so than a brilliant man with a plan.

[Beren]

A lunatic with followers is just as dangerous if not more so than a brilliant man with a plan.

What if they're both lunatics, though, with different methods and characters? However, my last argument is that it was a really hard, complex and long-lasting job to bring down Nixon, while Trump seems falling spontaneously under such pressure that was pretty common under Nixon.

[XogGyux]

What if they're both lunatics, though, with different methods and characters? However, my last argument is that it was a really hard, complex and long-lasting job to bring down Nixon, while Trump seems falling spontaneously under such pressure that was pretty common under Nixon.

Yeah, we have been hearing the "falling spontaneously Trump" for a while. From one scandal to the next. From the early White house leaks, to the constant replacement of his staff, to the Comey Firing, To the muller report, to the Iran tensions and the exit of generals and Bolton, To the impeachment, to the Pandemic and to the protests and I am sure i am missing a dozen other big issues, it is hard to keep track yet you keep seeing the same sort of support for him. Less than half the country, but the they are the ones that consistently vote and live in the key states... So don't understimate, we are precisely in this position right now because everybody (probably even trump himself) understimated what could happen.
It only takes a few mistakes and he could be the next president for another 4 years, or who knows... dictatorship is not off the table at this point.

[jimjam]

General Milley’s decision to join Mr. Trump's self serving photo stunt “was an egregious display of bad judgment, at best,” said Paul D. Eaton, a retired major general and veteran of the Iraq war, who now serves as a senior adviser at VoteVets.org. “At worst, Milley appears confused about the oath he took to support and defend the Constitution — not a president. I suggest the general get quickly unconfused, or resign.”

[Beren]

Yeah, we have been hearing the "falling spontaneously Trump" for a while...yet you keep seeing the same sort of support for him... So don't understimate...It only takes a few mistakes and he could be the next president for another 4 years, or who knows...dictatorship is not off the table at this point.

His presidency has been eroding and his approval ratings have been stable negative since the beginning, however, distribution of votes also matter due to the electoral college system. At the moment he seems spontaneously falling, nonetheless, under pressure that was nothing special in Nixon's time. The US may be closer to a dictatorship today than it was when Nixon was president, but it doesn't have anything to do with Trump and his rather limited political abilities, you're right that he could rather utilise the mistakes of his opponents.

[XogGyux]

His presidency has been eroding and his approval ratings have been stable negative since the beginning, however, distribution of votes also matter due to the electoral college system. At the moment he seems spontaneously falling, nonetheless, under pressure that was nothing special in Nixon's time. The US may be closer to a dictatorship today than it was when Nixon was president, but it doesn't have anything to do with Trump and his rather limited political abilities, you're right that he could rather utilise the mistakes of his opponents.

Well, you have to put everything in its context. Trump is in a better position today to abuse the current political situation than Nixon was back then. In other words, Trump's chaotic self-serving, idol-impersonating figure serves him well whether this is a calculated move or just happened by "political selection" is irrelevant as far as I am concerned.
I think we should all ignore the stupid approval ratings and the polls.

[Beren]

I think we should all ignore the stupid approval ratings and the polls.

In my opinion they clearly show at least that Trump doesn't have majority support and lacks the initiative and real momentum. Unlike the last time he's rather in defense and it's not really up to him whether what happens next or if he remains president.

[jimjam]

He is doomed.
Pat Roberson, if he manages to Pisss of Trump, he will make Pat's life a living hell .

Permit me to write Donald's Tweetie for simpletons regarding Pat Robinson:

"Robinson should have retired 10 tears ago when he stopped making sense and joined the fake news libs. Plus you can't stand within 10 feet of the man when he is shedding really really super amounts of dandruff. He used to make sense but, now, is a big time dud and loser."
Bunkerbitch@tweetieland.

[XogGyux]

In my opinion they clearly show at least that Trump doesn't have majority support and lacks the initiative and real momentum. Unlike the last time he's rather in defense and it's not really up to him whether what happens next or if he remains president.

We could have shown the same thing when he lost the popular vote. Yet he still has the nuclear launch codes and the ability to nominate judges.

[Beren]

We could have shown the same thing when he lost the popular vote. Yet he still has the nuclear launch codes and the ability to nominate judges.

He could have been beaten the last time as well, but he was let take the initiative and win, which seems different this time. This time he's like a rat in a hole.

[XogGyux]

He could have been beaten the last time as well, but he was let take the initiative and win, which seems different this time. This time he's like a rat in a hole.

You know what, this is one point in which I would LOVE to be proven wrong. I mean it. I hope you are right but as far as I am concerned It is best to prepare as if the worse is to come.
Remember Aesops' fables? The Tortoise and the Hare. Overconfidence and arrogance cost us the election last time. And it is hard to imagine Trump as the "hero" in the analogy, but as far as this analogy goes, he was the turtle.
Personally I don't want him just to lose. I want him to lose big, in a humiliating way so that nobody else in the right keeps Cozying up to him, so nobody in FOX gives him a microphone and a platform in which to continue to inject hate, racism, nationalism and lies (well you know, more than the "usual" lies). Preferably, I want him to take Mitch McMoron and Linday Grandshit with himself when he falls into the pit of forgetfulness.

[Drlee]

Well, you have to put everything in its context. Trump is in a better position today to abuse the current political situation than Nixon was back then. In other words, Trump's chaotic self-serving, idol-impersonating figure serves him well whether this is a calculated move or just happened by "political selection" is irrelevant as far as I am concerned.
I think we should all ignore the stupid approval ratings and the polls.

What Trump has and Nixon did not have, is the unwavering support of every republican save one. Nixon did not "decide" to resign. The day before his resignation three respected republicans, Goldwater of Arizona former presidential candidate, Rhodes of Arizona, House Republican leader and Scott of Pennsylvania Republican leader in the Senate, went to Nixon and told him that he no longer had the support of his party sufficient to stave off impeachment. Can anyone even imagine McConnell or Graham having the integrity not to mention the courage to do that now? Unthinkable.

Trump is broken because the republican party is broken. In some ways he is not to blame.

[XogGyux]

What Trump has and Nixon did not have, is the unwavering support of every republican save one. Nixon did not "decide" to resign. The day before his resignation three respected republicans, Goldwater of Arizona former presidential candidate, Rhodes of Arizona, House Republican leader and Scott of Pennsylvania Republican leader in the Senate, went to Nixon and told him that he no longer had the support of his party sufficient to stave off impeachment. Can anyone even imagine McConnell or Graham having the integrity not to mention the courage to do that now? Unthinkable.

Trump is broken because the republican party is broken. In some ways he is not to blame.

I don't disagree with that. Decide, forced to resign, whatever semantics. When you put the whole picture in context I don't think it even comes close, Trump is worse and he has been systematic in quickly dismantling whatever poses a threat to him, whoever puts friction. Has done so with most of his senior staff, many of his congress people and is doing it to Sessions and Murkowski. This in turns ensures that the next time there is an scandal, fewer of his "side" can dare utter a word in opposition. Even if it is a bland/weak voice such as that of Sessions or Murkowski.