Why comparison of Trump to Hitler is a farce by Democrats

I mean that's kinda what he did. Except instead of "secluding himself to die" he was "trapped in the Play Place slide at one of the McDonalds locations in NYC" and instead of marrying Eva Braun, he "consummated" his carnal "marriage" with the Grimace costume we lent him. Consummated it really hard. Then he kept it. And that's why he broke up with his last wife.

-RealMcDonalds

Whacky hairdos and talking gibberish.

They may not have even consumated the marriage. Therefore, what legit comparison to Trump?

Neither of these two leaders consummate their marriages, therefore they're the same

LOL, MAGA logic just cracks me up.

These clowns really think their inane justifications are rational, it is just hysterical.

No wonder Trump said, "I love the poorly educated".

It is his love for minor children that drew him to Epstein.

I hate Trump, but at least he defeated the Communists.

therefore they're the same

Well, there's a justification. Do you think that because the US "acquired" [we bought it] the Louisiana Purchase in Oct 1803, under the admin of Tommy Jefferson [a Democrat-Republican - which was the precursor to the Democrat Party] and Trump talks about "acquiring" Greenland, that Tommy and Trump are therefore the same? Your argument.

Donald Trump reportedly owned a copy of Adolf Hitler’s speeches and kept them in his bedside cabinet.

A 1990 Vanity Fair article about billionaire businessman stated that Mr. Trump’s then wife Ivana, said her husband owned a copy of “My New Order” – a printed collection of the Nazi leader’s speeches.

I will demonstrate to y'all that just because you may employ what you understand to be a syllogism, it may not be at all, even though that's the tag you put around its neck.

A syllogism is a logical argument in which a number of posits are posed that are assumed to be true, and when they are, they naturally lead to the justification of the conclusion; Here's a simple example;

P1: 2 is a number

P2: 1+1 yields a number

P3: numbers can be added together to yield a sum

C1: 4 is the sum of P1 and P2.

The rule of a syllogism is that all posits must be true and they must yield the conclusion, and that, therefore, the conclusion is conditional on the truth of the posits, and the conclusion must equal the result of each posits to also be true. If P2 = 1-1 is a number, and that condition does exist as a possible posit, however, the C1 statement ends up being false. Posits and conclusions must all be true. Therefore, another game:

P1: Birds fly

P2: Camels walk

P3: Snakes crawl

C1: Therefore, butterflies swim.

And that's your "syllogism."

A striking parallel exists in how both Hitler and Trump responded to electoral defeats by challenging the legitimacy of the results. Hitler ran for president of Germany in 1932 but lost to the incumbent, General Paul von Hindenburg.

Following this defeat, Hitler claimed election fraud and took legal action in an attempt to have the results overturned. According to historical accounts, “He lost by 6 million votes. And you know what he did? He claimed election fraud and he went to court to have the election results overturned. The judge threw him out on his theory, says, you know, there may have been some irregularities, inconsistencies, but not in the dimension of that of 6 million votes”. This refusal to accept electoral defeat foreshadowed Hitler’s broader rejection of democratic norms and institutions.

Donald Trump reportedly owned a copy of Adolf Hitler’s speeches

I currently own and have read Marx & Engels Commuinist Manifesto, Mao Zedong's Little Red Book, and Vladimir Lenin's The State and Revolution. By your logic, that makes me a Communist. Nope. See my post #10. You're a glove's fit.

It's called, by the way, "know your enemy." That's from Sun Tsu's The Art of War. Own that, too.

I'm not Muslim, but I own the Quran, not Bhuddist, but own Tripitaka, and not Wiccan, but own the Book of Shadows.

Get it? I read. A lot. But I keep my own thoughts.

Hmmmmm.

I currently own and have read Marx & Engels Commuinist Manifesto, Mao Zedong's Little Red Book, and Vladimir Lenin's The State and Revolution. By your logic, that makes me a Communist. Nope. See my post #10. You're a glove's fit. 

It's called, by the way, "know your enemy."

lol

The guy whose political rallies display as many Nazi flags as American flags reads Hitler because he thinks that's the enemy.

Yeah ok bro.

See Parallel Events in the Rise to Power of Adolf Hitler and Donald Trump: A Comparative Timeline Analysis

Who the hell is prepyou.eu? Some Brit outfit in Bulgaria selling firearms to who knows who?

And they make damn sure to show thier i.d. in minuscule font needling a magnifier to even see it clearly. But they'll sell you any shyte you want to hear. Hell, American television does that.

Never heard of photoshop?

Don't you know, yet, the internet is fool's gold? Any shit you want to see and hear.

Ok, ok, you have heard of Harvard, right? Trump’s Rhetoric Echoes Hitler - Harvard Political Review

OBTW, I have certificates from Harvard and MIT.

Never heard of photoshop?

Don't you know, yet, the internet is fool's gold? Any shit you want to see and hear.

Oh right, all those Nazi flags we see at Trump rallies... They're all photo shopped.

Strange that photo shop works so well on manipulating live TV.

A striking parallel exists in how both Hitler and Trump responded to electoral defeats by challenging the legitimacy of the results. Hitler ran for president of Germany in 1932 but lost to the incumbent, General Paul von Hindenburg.

Following this defeat, Hitler claimed election fraud and took legal action in an attempt to have the results overturned. According to historical accounts, “He lost by 6 million votes. And you know what he did? He claimed election fraud and he went to court to have the election results overturned. The judge threw him out on his theory, says, you know, there may have been some irregularities, inconsistencies, but not in the dimension of that of 6 million votes”. This refusal to accept electoral defeat foreshadowed Hitler’s broader rejection of democratic norms and institutions.

How about the underaged girls thing, did Hitler like to have sex with young girls too?

Donald Trump reportedly owned a copy of Adolf Hitler’s speeches

I currently own and have read Marx & Engels Commuinist Manifesto, Mao Zedong's Little Red Book, and Vladimir Lenin's The State and Revolution. By your logic, that makes me a Communist. Nope. See my post #10. You're a glove's fit.

It's called, by the way, "know your enemy." That's from Sun Tsu's The Art of War. Own that, too.

I'm not Muslim, but I own the Quran, not Bhuddist, but own Tripitaka, and not Wiccan, but own the Book of Shadows.

Get it? I read. A lot. But I keep my own thoughts.

You forgot to mention that you read them all in their original languages.

BTW, they are spelled "communist" and "Buddhist".

I hate Trump, but at least he defeated the Communists.

What communists would that be?

I will demonstrate to y'all that just because you may employ what you understand to be a syllogism, it may not be at all, even though that's the tag you put around its neck.

A syllogism is a logical argument in which a number of posits are posed that are assumed to be true, and when they are, they naturally lead to the justification of the conclusion; Here's a simple example;

P1: 2 is a number

P2: 1+1 yields a number

P3: numbers can be added together to yield a sum

C1: 4 is the sum of P1 and P2.

The rule of a syllogism is that all posits must be true and they must yield the conclusion, and that, therefore, the conclusion is conditional on the truth of the posits, and the conclusion must equal the result of each posits to also be true. If P2 = 1-1 is a number, and that condition does exist as a possible posit, however, the C1 statement ends up being false. Posits and conclusions must all be true. Therefore, another game:

P1: Birds fly

P2: Camels walk

P3: Snakes crawl

C1: Therefore, butterflies swim.

And that's your "syllogism."

The guy who says "Comparing Trump to Hitler is wrong because Eva Braun" is going to teach us about logic LOL.

But that is not why Trump sued Harvard.

As if Harvard and Trump are on speaking terms. Harvard? I hear they area giving away cereal boxtop JD's.

I think that most tyrannical paranoid megalomaniacs have similar traits...Goes with the territory.

You were beginning to sound a bit like one back there.

And if you read a lot of whacky stuff, then you will will undoubtedly add whacky stuff to your database. Also goes with the territory.

And if you read a lot of whacky stuff...

Perhaps you can get away with that argument for some, but that kind wrinkled shirt is not sure of having a backbone, let alone a strong personal stand on issues. I do have a strong stand on most issues, and not shy about expressing them. Being three quarter centuries around the sun either gives one a backbone, or a worthless life. One's choice when one is young. It's just, by my observation, that most cower from that challenge. Look, I was in the Avalon Ballroom of the Ambassador Hotel in L.A. in June '68 when Bobby Kennedy was assassinated, after having a gun in my face just a month before, wielded by a guy robbing the register of the ice cream shop in which I worked, and within the year, in France, I faced another guy with a gun in my face who objected to Americans in France because we were bungling in Vietnam. I told him we wouldn't be there at all if France had not bungled their effort in their colony. I've faced stress and threat on my life. My database does not have whacky, while facing territory that does.

What communists would that be?

If you need me to draw you a map for every claim I make, then our relationship wont work.