Trumpy the Clown cries like a little baby.

Author: Greyparrot ,

Posts

Total: 32
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 10,592
3
3
8
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
3
8
Watch this orange freak lose it...totally unhinged and unfit!

HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,272
3
3
2
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
2
--> @Greyparrot
lol so a conman spews lies to his cult followers and they start chanting to prove their cult status. Hilter got that kind of response too. 
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 10,592
3
3
8
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
3
8
--> @HistoryBuff
Hitler was an orange freak cry baby too.
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,272
3
3
2
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
2
--> @Greyparrot
Hitler was an orange freak cry baby too.
no, hitler was a man who loved power and control who built a cult of personality. Trump is a con man who loves power and control and has built a cult of personality. 

Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 10,592
3
3
8
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
3
8
--> @HistoryBuff
Nah bro, Hitler was an incompetent Buffoon, roundly mocked throughout the world. Paranoid, superstitious, and just all around clownish.
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,272
3
3
2
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
2
--> @Greyparrot
Nah bro, Hitler was an incompetent Buffoon, roundly mocked throughout the world. Paranoid, superstitious, and just all around clownish.
ignoring the morality of the shit he did, hilter was actually quite clever. He managed to outmaneuver his enemies diplomatically as well as militarily. He made critical mistakes in his strategy, but he did better than most would in his place. 

Trump on the other hand is an idiot. He has alienated america's allies. made a buffoon of himself in front of the world and bungled a global crisis. Hitler was obviously more "evil" than trump, but he was a much more effective statesman and strategist. 

Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 10,592
3
3
8
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
3
8
--> @HistoryBuff
Lol, you obviously don't know history at all, and it shows.
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,272
3
3
2
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
2
--> @Greyparrot
Lol, you obviously don't know history at all, and it shows.
no. Hitler was able to annex tons of land without firing a shot. He got a non aggression pact with the russians so that he could attack west with his rear secured. He demolished the french army (which was larger  and better equipped) extremely quickly. He then came very close to conquering russia (which no one else, not even napoleon could do)

He went from being a nobody, to being arresting for treason, to controlling most of Europe in about 20 years. That kind of rise is extremely impressive. Again, he got alot of stuff wrong, and was obviously evil. But trump, by comparison is a complete idiot. Trump was handed vast resources, he didn't earn it. Once managing to con his way into leadership he alienated america's allies, made concessions to their enemies (or just bungled shit entirely) all in an attempt to personally profit. 

Trump is a lousy statesman or leader. He is just a conman who has built a cult of personality and sold out his followers. 

Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 10,592
3
3
8
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
3
8
--> @HistoryBuff
You're completely discounting the Hillarys and Bidens of Europe that Hitler dealt with.

I can't believe you're fan-fictioning Hitler of all people.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 10,592
3
3
8
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
3
8
--> @HistoryBuff
 It's worth remembering that Hitler was actually an incompetent, lazy egomaniac and his government was an absolute clown show.

     In fact, this may even have helped his rise to power, as he was consistently underestimated by the German elite. Before he became chancellor, many of his opponents had dismissed him as a joke for his crude speeches and tacky rallies. Even after elections had made the Nazis the largest party in the Reichstag, people still kept thinking that Hitler was an easy mark, a blustering idiot who could easily be controlled by smart people.

     Why did the elites of Germany so consistently underestimate Hitler? Possibly because they weren't actually wrong in their assessment of his competency—they just failed to realize that this wasn't enough to stand in the way of his ambition. As it would turn out, Hitler was really bad at running a government. As his own press chief Otto Dietrich later wrote in his memoir The Hitler I Knew, "In the twelve years of his rule in Germany Hitler produced the biggest confusion in government that has ever existed in a civilized state."

     His government was constantly in chaos, with officials having no idea what he wanted them to do, and nobody was entirely clear who was actually in charge of what. He procrastinated wildly when asked to make difficult decisions, and would often end up relying on gut feeling, leaving even close allies in the dark about his plans. His "unreliability had those who worked with him pulling out their hair," as his confidant Ernst Hanfstaengl later wrote in his memoir Zwischen Weißem und Braunem Haus. This meant that rather than carrying out the duties of state, they spent most of their time in-fighting and back-stabbing each other in an attempt to either win his approval or avoid his attention altogether, depending on what mood he was in that day.

     There's a bit of an argument among historians about whether this was a deliberate ploy on Hitler's part to get his own way, or whether he was just really, really bad at being in charge of stuff. Dietrich himself came down on the side of it being a cunning tactic to sow division and chaos—and it's undeniable that he was very effective at that. But when you look at Hitler's personal habits, it's hard to shake the feeling that it was just a natural result of putting a workshy narcissist in charge of a country.

     Hitler was incredibly lazy. According to his aide Fritz Wiedemann, even when he was in Berlin he wouldn't get out of bed until after 11 a.m., and wouldn't do much before lunch other than read what the newspapers had to say about him, the press cuttings being dutifully delivered to him by Dietrich.

He was obsessed with the media and celebrity and often seems to have viewed himself through that lens. He once described himself as "the greatest actor in Europe," and wrote to a friend, "I believe my life is the greatest novel in world history." In many of his personal habits he came across as strange or even childish—he would have regular naps during the day, he would bite his fingernails at the dinner table, and he had a remarkably sweet tooth that led him to eat "prodigious amounts of cake" and "put so many lumps of sugar in his cup that there was hardly any room for the tea."

He was deeply insecure about his own lack of knowledge, preferring to either ignore information that contradicted his preconceptions or to lash out at the expertise of others. He hated being laughed at but enjoyed it when other people were the butt of the joke (he would perform mocking impressions of people he disliked). But he also craved the approval of those he disdained, and his mood would quickly improve if a newspaper wrote something complimentary about him.

Little of this was especially secret or unknown at the time. It's why so many people failed to take Hitler seriously until it was too late, dismissing him as merely a "half-mad rascal" or a "man with a beery vocal organ." In a sense, they weren't wrong. In another, much more important sense, they were as wrong as it's possible to get.
Hitler's personal failings didn't stop him from having an uncanny instinct for political rhetoric that would gain mass appeal, and it turns out you don't actually need to have a particularly competent or functional government to do terrible things.

We tend to assume that when something awful happens there must have been some great controlling intelligence behind it. It's understandable: how could things have gone so wrong, we think if there wasn't an evil genius pulling the strings? The downside of this is that we tend to assume that if we can't immediately spot an evil genius, then we can all chill out a bit because everything will be fine.

But history suggests that's a mistake, and it's one that we make over and over again. Many of the worst man-made events that ever occurred were not the product of evil geniuses. Instead, they were the product of a parade of idiots and lunatics, incoherently flailing their way through events, helped along the way by overconfident people who thought they could control them.
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,272
3
3
2
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
2
--> @Greyparrot
I can't believe you're fan-fictioning Hitler of all people.
I am accurately describing his accomplishments. He was a flawed person. He isn't a genius of history. But he accomplished lots of things and pretending like that isn't true while pretending that trump (a giant failure of a leader) is somehow great, is really sad. 

His government was constantly in chaos, with officials having no idea what he wanted them to do, and nobody was entirely clear who was actually in charge of what.
i'm sorry, are you describing hitler or trump. because this is definitely a description of trump's government. 

Dietrich himself came down on the side of it being a cunning tactic to sow division and chaos—and it's undeniable that he was very effective at that. But when you look at Hitler's personal habits, it's hard to shake the feeling that it was just a natural result of putting a workshy narcissist in charge of a country.
it's a similar tactic that Borris johnson uses today. Comes across as a bit boorish and dumb, but he does it to get people to underestimate him. 

Hitler was incredibly lazy. According to his aide Fritz Wiedemann, even when he was in Berlin he wouldn't get out of bed until after 11 a.m., and wouldn't do much before lunch other than read what the newspapers had to say about him, the press cuttings being dutifully delivered to him by Dietrich.
again, are yo describing hitler or Trump? He loves watching the news about himself. Never reads his briefings. etc. He is also very lazy. 

He was deeply insecure about his own lack of knowledge, preferring to either ignore information that contradicted his preconceptions or to lash out at the expertise of others. 
this is getting eerie. this is another perfect description of trump. 

Keep in mind, i never said hitler was a genius. He was flawed, and he definitely made mistakes. But he undeniably had accomplishments. Trump flails from one train wreck to the next. But your descriptions of hitler's flaws could be repeated almost verbatim and I would have no idea you weren't talking about trump. 
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 10,592
3
3
8
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
3
8
--> @HistoryBuff
I would have no idea you weren't talking about trump. 

That's fine, because your misconceptions about both people are expected.
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,272
3
3
2
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
2
--> @Greyparrot
That's fine, because your misconceptions about both people are expected.
i haven't given any misconceptions. Hitler turned a beaten down germany into a superpower (albeit briefly). He outmaneuvered his enemies on multiple occasions. 

Trump flails around trying to get people to love him, but sold out all his policy plans and just went with generic republican ones. As a result he has failed at pretty well everything. The only success of his presidency is funneling more money to the rich and cutting services and policies designed to help the poor or middle class. Which to me is a failure, but since that is what he was trying to do it is a success to him. 

Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 10,592
3
3
8
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
3
8
--> @HistoryBuff
Many of the worst man-made events that ever occurred were not the product of evil geniuses. Instead, they were the product of a parade of idiots and lunatics, incoherently flailing their way through events, helped along the way by overconfident people who thought they could control them.
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,272
3
3
2
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
2
--> @Greyparrot
Many of the worst man-made events that ever occurred were not the product of evil geniuses. Instead, they were the product of a parade of idiots and lunatics, incoherently flailing their way through events, helped along the way by overconfident people who thought they could control them.'
I agree. I don't see how it is relevant though. The only thing trump has had to deal with that is even in the same league is Covid and he has massively fucked that up. And the republican party did manage to control him. They got him to ignore the virus and try to keep the country "business as usual" even as hundreds of thousands died. And that is a solid chunk of the reason trump is likely going to lose. 

The ironic part is that all trump had to do was advocate for basic safety measures and he could have come off like a hero. If he had advocated for social distancing and everyone wearing masks when this shit started, he would probably be sailing to re-election. Instead he called it a chinese hoax, kept telling people it would magically go away, refused to wear a mask in public etc. 

SirAnonymous
SirAnonymous's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 3,221
3
7
10
SirAnonymous's avatar
SirAnonymous
3
7
10
--> @Greyparrot @HistoryBuff
I'm going to agree and disagree with both of you. Hitler was definitely incompetent at a great number of things, but he had a political savviness that Trump lacks. He read the French and English leaders excellently and was able to annex multiple countries while they sat on their hands. True, those guys weren't exactly hard to hoodwink, but it still required some ability to do it that easily. On the flip side, the comparisons between Trump and Hitler are ludicrous. Yes, there are a few superficial similarities, but it really diminishes the evil of Hitler and the crimes he perpetrated to compare him to Trump or Trump to him. Trump is narcissistic blowhard who's figured out how to trigger the media, to the glee of his fans. He seems to be in it for the attention and adulation he receives. Hitler was a genocidal maniac with delusions of conquering a European empire designed for the promotion of the "Aryan race". One is responsible for the Holocaust and for starting the European front of the bloodiest war in the history of humanity, and the other is not. Comparisons between the two are hyperbolic, hyperpartisan, and totally irresponsible.
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,272
3
3
2
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
2
--> @SirAnonymous
Comparisons between the two are hyperbolic, hyperpartisan, and totally irresponsible.
It depends on how you are comparing them. If you just scream "trump is like hitler!!" then yeah it definitely is. If you break it down by characteristic (ie they're both lazy, they both built a cult of personality etc) then it can be a useful exercise. 

But I grant that virtually no one actually does it that way or would want to. They would pretty well all mean it in the hyperpartisan way. 

SirAnonymous
SirAnonymous's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 3,221
3
7
10
SirAnonymous's avatar
SirAnonymous
3
7
10
--> @HistoryBuff
If you break it down by characteristic (ie they're both lazy, they both built a cult of personality etc) then it can be a useful exercise. 
Yeah, there are similarities. There are also similarities between kleptomaniacs and mass murderers. Both are criminals, neither care about how their crimes affect other people or even take some pleasure in it, both have mental problems, etc. However, it would be grossly inappropriate to compare the two. The kleptomaniac may share some negative qualities with the mass murderer, but the incredible differences in scale make such a comparison rather inappropriate. The same is true of Trump and Hitler.

HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,272
3
3
2
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
2
--> @SirAnonymous
Yeah, there are similarities. There are also similarities between kleptomaniacs and mass murderers. Both are criminals, neither care about how their crimes affect other people or even take some pleasure in it, both have mental problems, etc. However, it would be grossly inappropriate to compare the two. 
I disagree that it would be inappropriate to compare the 2. If you are attempting to profile or understand criminal behavior then understanding what aspects of personality overlap between different types of criminals and which don't is very valuable information. Again, the context of the comparison is very important. If you are comparing them in order to make a kleptomaniac appears as "guilty" or "evil" as a mass murderer then that is obviously wrong. 

The kleptomaniac may share some negative qualities with the mass murderer, but the incredible differences in scale make such a comparison rather inappropriate. The same is true of Trump and Hitler.
I disagree. They are both world leaders whose decisions affect countless millions of lives. It is perfectly reasonable to compare the two. If the intention is to make trump appear as evil as Hitler, then obviously that is wrong since they aren't in the same league. If the intent is to examine how "strong men" leaders functioned in the 20th and 21st centuries, or how world leaders have used cults of personality, then it is perfectly valid to compare the two. Context is important. 
SirAnonymous
SirAnonymous's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 3,221
3
7
10
SirAnonymous's avatar
SirAnonymous
3
7
10
--> @HistoryBuff
Yes, context is very important. Let's examine the context of your initial comparison:
lol so a conman spews lies to his cult followers and they start chanting to prove their cult status. Hilter got that kind of response too. 
There isn't a lot of context provided here. Yes, you could say that you technically didn't compare them beyond spewing lies and having cult-like followers. However, Trump is often directly compared to Hitler, and comparisons with Hitler are inherently charged to begin with. You didn't provide a lot of context, and it would be really easy to misunderstand what you meant. At the very least, you should be more careful with your words if you choose to compare them. Godwinning a thread is generally looked down on for a reason. There's almost always a better way to communicate your meaning without invoking Hitler, which serves little purpose beyond triggering people.
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 10,592
3
3
8
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
3
8
--> @SirAnonymous
Cardi B has a cult of personality too, just like Trumpy the Clown.

Oh and Hitler of course.
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,272
3
3
2
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
2
--> @SirAnonymous
lol so a conman spews lies to his cult followers and they start chanting to prove their cult status. Hilter got that kind of response too. 
There isn't a lot of context provided here. Yes, you could say that you technically didn't compare them beyond spewing lies and having cult-like followers. However, Trump is often directly compared to Hitler, and comparisons with Hitler are inherently charged to begin with.
True. But i was specially just comparing their cult of personality in this comment. And both Trump and Hilter engaged in this, so it is an apt comparison. 

There's almost always a better way to communicate your meaning without invoking Hitler, which serves little purpose beyond triggering people.
The name of this topic that greyparrot chose is "Trumpy the Clown cries like a little baby.". This Topic started off stupid. No matter how I communicate, it isn't likely to improve when the author starts it that way. 
SirAnonymous
SirAnonymous's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 3,221
3
7
10
SirAnonymous's avatar
SirAnonymous
3
7
10
--> @HistoryBuff
The name of this topic that greyparrot chose is "Trumpy the Clown cries like a little baby.". This Topic started off stupid. No matter how I communicate, it isn't likely to improve when the author starts it that way. 
You got me there.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 15
Posts: 4,526
3
3
3
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
3
--> @Greyparrot @HistoryBuff
Hitler was of the day, when Empire building was still in fashion and discrimination wasn't so frowned upon, and his achievements although brutal, were nonetheless remarkable.

Whereas Trump is an inept and intellectually deficient bloke who bought a Presidency.

The comparison to make is between the German people of the time and the American people of today....As David Icke would say: Humans have a tendency to outsheep the sheep......Baaaa
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,272
3
3
2
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
2
--> @zedvictor4
Whereas Trump is an inept and intellectually deficient bloke who bought a Presidency.
I wouldn't say he bought it. He was outspent by Clinton. He is an effective showman and con man. He was able to read the atmosphere of anger at the establishment and effectively use that to position himself as an outsider that would bring change. However, because he is a conman, he didn't actually do that after he won. 

The comparison to make is between the German people of the time and the American people of today....As David Icke would say: Humans have a tendency to outsheep the sheep......Baaaa
I guess that is an interesting comparison. The german people we getting desperate. The years after WW 1 went really badly for them and they needed someone to try something extreme to fix their problems. So they handed power to fascists. The american people were getting desperate because years of Right wing (democrat) and further right wing (republican) economic policy has gutting the middle class. So they turned to a populist who promised them to try new things to fix the problems. They elected Obama for the same reason. But both failed to carry out their promises.