[palata]

> short of a civil war to stop it

Remember that the Trump administration still has large support from the people! If you want a civil war, you need people inside the country who disagree. For some reason they don't (yet), and at the time they do who knows how much damage will have been done.

[krapp]

Please stop spreading propaganda. Most Americans don't support Trump. At best, a third of Americans voted for him in 2024, which means two-thirds didn't.

And he's rapidly losing support within his own base, from people who didn't expect him to go as far as he has, or didn't expect the ramifications to apply to them.

[palata]

> Most Americans don't support Trump.

I didn't say "most americans", did I?

> And he's rapidly losing support within his own base

Weeks (and 3 nazi salutes) after he started, polls were showing that he would probably still be elected: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43206757.

I don't feel like I'm spreading propaganda by saying that the US don't seem very close to a civil war. A majority of the voters elected this government and apparently won't change their mind unless they are impacted personally.

> And he's rapidly losing support within his own base

That depends a lot on what you mean by "rapidly". Relative to how quickly he has destroyed the image of the US abroad, and to the damage he is making inside the country, I wouldn't say that some people from his own base finding that he is going slightly too far counts as "rapidly losing support within his own base".

[Tainnor]

You don't need a majority of people to start a revolution or a civil war, there are plenty of historical examples for that.

[palata]

Sure, but you need quite a few people ready to fight. And if it is the case that Trump would still be elected today, it suggests that all the voters and most of the non-voters (who don't care enought to vote) and at least some of those who would now vote against the nazi-friendly government are not exactly ready to fight.

You need a lot of very unhappy people to get to civil war. And right now it doesn't seem like the US people is that unhappy. Right now the US is mostly hurting the rest of the West.

[JeremyNT]

This shouldn't be down voted.

Trump has more support now than he did in his first term. His support is durable and lasting.

It's difficult to imagine what might cause his supporters to change their options of him. If the election were held again, today, he would still win.

[eterps]

> It's difficult to imagine what might cause his supporters to change their options of him.

It would be helpful if people had more alternatives to vote for, not just one other party that stands for the opposite.

[palata]

That's for sure, but on the other hand, in many countries the people would choose whoever doesn't normalise (and make) nazi salutes...

[eterps]

It's more nuanced than it might appear at first glance. I recommend watching this video, as it demonstrates the subtle complexities involved: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_sVwib2rdE

[palata]

The current government threatens to invade allies (well, ex allies now) and make nazi salutes, but would still win the election.

And those are only two examples out of many. You can put as much nuance as you want, fascism is fascism.

[account42]

It would also help if the opposing site had better arguments than calling those they don't like nazis and fascists.

[account42]

One possibility is that at least some of his "supporters" do not as much as want trump specifically but instead simply vehemently do not want what the Democrats have been doing and are willing to risk some chaos to avoid that. If that's the case (and I think it is) then the best thing that trumps opponents can do is provide real alternatives for people. Or in other words: stop attacking a large part of the population (straight white males) at every opportunity, stop trying to force radical social change, stop trying to cancel everyone with an even slightly differing opinion.