[kirinan]

While I think Trump is a bad choice, I think comparing him to Hitler is overzealous and irresponsible. There are no doubt similarities between the two but Hitler wrote an entire book about the "Jewish Peril" and how it was destroying society and needed to be dealt with. It was clear that Hitler had an agenda that was anti-semetic, and the charisma/ability to execute on it. Trump is a racist and a bigot, but he is far from someone that would be able to implement a "Final Solution". By drawing the comparisons to Hitler, we oversell Trump and what he is and at the same time bring Hitler and his actions to a lower level which they never be at. We should sell Trump for what he is: someone who uses the racism and ignorance of the American people to cover up the fact that he has no idea what he is doing.

[creshal]

> Trump is a racist and a bigot, but he is far from someone that would be able to implement a "Final Solution".

Why? Hitler didn't implement it himself either, he had staff for that. He just told them to get cracking.

(That doesn't mean Trump will, but dismissing the possibility for grounds of incompetency seems a too easy way out.)

[kmiroslav]

You should take a look at how Hitler looked like in the early 30s as he was beginning his ascension toward Chancellorship.

There are a lot more resemblances with Trump than you think.

[throwanem]

There really aren't. In any case, the same was said about George W. Bush during both his runs for the Oval Office, and while I don't say he was a particularly worthwhile president, in hindsight the Hitler comparison was every bit as erroneous as even an elementary knowledge of 20th century history would suggest.

[Aloha]

anyone who has read this has not read Mein Kampf - Hitler laid out his plan in total in his book.

[jasonlaramburu]

No he didn't. He blamed Germany's defeat in WW1 on the Jews.

[hubert123]

so wanting ur borders secured is now literally Hitler. Okay. Well you should talk to Clinton because building a wall was her position a few years ago until her party forced her further far left. What exactly makes him racist? What exactly makes him a misogynist? I never got an answer for that.

[kmiroslav]

> so wanting ur borders secured is now literally Hitler.

I never said anything even remotely close to that.

[smacktoward]

Among the very few specific policy proposals Trump has put forward, these are the most prominent:

* Building a giant wall along the U.S.'s southern border to keep Mexicans out

* Rounding up and deporting Hispanics currently in the U.S. on a mass scale never before seen in history

I mean, yes, he's not proposing herding Hispanics into gas chambers, but he absolutely is talking about making American policy tilt harder against one particular race than it ever has in the past. Maybe that doesn't make him Hitler, but it definitely makes him something.

[Impossible]

Although I don't want to turn this into oppression olympics, and at the risk of getting downvoted heavily, I want to point out that mass deportation of Hispanics wouldn't compare against hundreds of years of slavery of African Americans, forced mass migration and slaughter of Native Americans and the placing Japanese Americans in internment camps.

This is in no way saying "its not that bad of a policy" its still a horrible thing to propose, but saying "American policy tilt harder against one particular race than it ever has in the past" is ignoring a lot of history, unless you're talking about very recent events.

[H0n3sty]

No, he proposed deporting illegal immigrants, which happen to be predominantly from Mexico. Many people of other backgrounds who are in the US illegally will be deported as well.

It's interesting that a presidential candidate can differentiate themselves from other candidates (and receive so much hatred) by stating that they will enforce the law when elected.

Making everyone obey the law is not tilting policy against one group just because that group has abused it disproportionately.

[tomp]

He wants to enforce the law. Hardly the worst thing a politician could say (in fact, saying he wouldn't enforce the law would be much worse, IMO).

Also, your first point isn't entirely correct; there already is a wall; Trump just wants to extend it (again, to enforce the law).

[bentlegen]

> ... but Hitler wrote an entire book about the "Jewish Peril" and how it was destroying society and needed to be dealt with

https://www.amazon.com/Crippled-America-Make-Great-Again/dp/...

[cnp]

Trump's bibliography is revealing:

Crippled America, Time To Get Tough, The Art of the Deal, The Art of the Comeback, The America We Deserve The Trump Card: Playing to Win in Work and Life by Ivanka Trump, The Way to the Top, How to Get Rich, Think Like a Billionaire, The Best Golf Advice I Ever Received, Why We Want You To Be Rich, The Best Real Estate Advice I Ever Received, Think Big and Kick Ass, Never Give Up, Think Like a Champion, Midas Touch

[kafkaesq]

By my reading he wasn't attempting to set up Trump in direct comparison to Hitler. His focus was more on comparing the their manipulative rhetorical styles and negative psychological tactics. And on the need for people in his "camp" to stop pretending that they can be silent in the face of what Trump is doing -- without being effectively complicit in it.

[MrZongle2]

While I think Trump is a bad choice, I think comparing him to Hitler is overzealous and irresponsible.

I think it's just plain lazy.

In Presidential elections, we generally have terrible choices (even if this doesn't become obvious until much later). This year is particularly noteworthy.

Painting one side as evil incarnate is neither insightful nor productive, and the type of fodder easily available on hundreds of other sites.

[MrZongle2]

Judging by the downvotes, I'd say that partisan politics is alive and well on HN. Pathetic.

[justjico]

Some downvotes come from Republicans too.

[DasIch]

Trump isn't planning industrialized murder but he's certainly fine with deportation on a never before scale. Apart from that both are strikingly similar.

[triangleman]

In 1954 Eisenhower approved Operation Wetback, rounding up over 1 million Mexicans and forcefully deporting them to Mexico. I am not sure anything Trump has proposed thus far would approach that scale, although he did make reference to it during a debate.

[drzaiusapelord]

I find the left is fairly hysterical when it sees itself potentially out of power. There is literally anti-Trump graffiti near my home, in a solid democratic state. Someone just defaced his Hollywood star. This is all accepted by lefties as justifiable. I think the left is more accepting of hysterics and hyperbole because it gets results with the rank and file. Romney was painted as this wall street shark that would destroy America during the election when he was a pretty much middle of the road guy who probably would have been a better steward of the economy than Obama. Obama just middle-of-the-road'd him out with the 'why change horses midstream' narrative. Trump is, of course, Hitler to them. Its all so tiresome and the kind of narratives adults should grow out of, but seemingly never do.

Here in Chicago we had Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders tell us that if Rahm gets re-elected his billionare friends will take over and destroy the city. Warren and Sanders never once mentioned their friends, the Daley family, and how the Daley dynasty left Chicago with debt it cannot ever pay off. Meanwhile, Rahm is raising taxes for pension perks for public sector unions and other lefty causes. More welfare, more section 8 housing, more tax raises on business, more anti-business legislation, more police in poor areas, etc. He did literally the opposite of what they claimed. Why do we let Warren and Sanders hysterically lie to us like this? Why do we let the left dominate this angry narrative and excuse them for it when its discovered to be a falsehood? The billionaires taking over narrative works, that's why, even when its clearly bullshit.

No idea about what a Trump presidency would be like, he clearly is playing the Tea party playbook here to get motivated GOP primary voters out there, but I imagine he'd be a milquetoast president probably unable to do much unless he maintains GOP majority in congress, and even then in-fighting in the GOP would be pretty rough on him. Honestly, a gridlocked congress that is ineffective would probably be best. There's a lot of federal meddling that is questionable to me that we've accepted as the status quo. Stopping that could only help.

I also think we also over-value what the presidency is. Its not a dictator. Without the support of congress, the president is fairly powerless outside of war powers and even those are limited without congress post-Nixon/Johnson. One of the wonders of the US is how well the founders got the balance of power right from early on. These decisions still pay dividends today.

That said, Clinton with a GOP majority congress is ideal to me. This scenario has enough gridlock to keep big government away a bit, enough gridlock to get good compromises, and Clinton's left-leaning stance on social issues are better, to me at least, than strict right-wing nonsense about alienating certain ethnic or religious groups. I also think SCOTUS has a strong right-wing advantage and it would be nice for Clinton to even that out.

[swiftisthebest]

What did he do that proves he is racist or bigoted?

[mikeash]

Well, he wrote a bunch of stuff about how everything is terrible because of the Jews, then he set out to murder them all.

Oh wait, you mean Trump? Tons of examples if you look. Criticizing a judge for being Mexican is one recent example.

[lizardskull]

"Mexico is not a race."

[mikeash]

In a world where Obama is "black" but not "white," race is whatever people want it to be.

[antisthenes]

That's what most debates end up like on the internet.

Parties just endlessly change definitions of terms until it fits their narrative.

[mikeash]

It's hard to avoid when the topic is race, since there are no real definitions to begin with, and nearly everything about it is arbitrary.

[giaour]

The question asked was, "What did he do that proves he is racist or bigoted?" If you want to be pedantic and say that Trump is bigoted against an ethnicity instead of a race, then fine.

Why, pray tell, should I find ethnic bigotry less repugnant than racism?

[justjico]

Right, also the judge is American.