Yes, but it's better when he does it...for reasons.

Hear fucking hear. Conservatives have adopted violence as part of their ideology. If the normal people are not able to prevent them from taking power and are not prepared to physically resist them, conservatives will gleefully kill us wholesale.

Conservatives do not value the lives of humans and animals the way normal people do. They will not spare you because you are their coworker or their relative. They will shrug their shoulders as your existence is made illegal. We have watched conservatives do this exact thing time and time again throughout history.

The left badly needs to realize that other people do not think like them or have the same priorities, goals or worldview as they do.

This is the wrong way to look at it. The left knows that other people are different. It's a core tenant to the idea of liberty.

The understanding that people aren't like them, don't share the same priorities, goals or worldview is it's strength. It can be a heavy burden and painful to understand that people would kill you for allowing them to be different.

But the alternative is only pain and suffering. In the eyes of Trump, there is only one way to gain relevance. And that path is firmly set in, with an edge that would be dead to cross. Because with them you can only think one way. Deviation is NOT acceptable.

So what is the option? Those that know will be slow to act but action will come.

Free Men always fight like badgers and the caged Man will be a slave to his master.

I know quite a few people who are pro gun and dislike Trump with a passion, including myself. I would argue Trump is a symptom of why many people keep guns; a fascist dictatorship is an immediate threat to communities who won’t benefit from the “warm embrace” of such a government. I bought my first AR the day after Trump won in 2016 because it was clear the future was not trending toward the light. It was a rabbit-hole, because I realized I needed enough to equip my family and friends for what’s coming, and I like piecing them together over time so the financial outlay isn’t as high due to the variou parts going on sale over time.

He will decide who is liberal and therefore to be burned at the stake.

My favorite was immediately after the election the travel ban was in effect and they were interviewing someone lucky enough to make it into the country. He was like, "Yay! America."

I know you're not going to shit on the country that just took you in but damn it was sobering to see the juxtaposition.

Of course they're not ultimately safe; nobody is with authoritarians, but they'll be the safest for longer than anybody else. All of those demographics get immense privilege by default, and they'll be wringing their hands as they watch everybody else lose their rights first.

Naturally, there will be exceptions to that generality, and they might even fall along party lines—certainly religious ones (gotta be their brand of Christian™).

He very much targeted punishing legislation at blue states as a whole

The only fun part of a Trump dictatorship would be watching him eat the faces of the leopards. Then it would settle into a proper hellscape for the entire world though, so I think we should take a pass.

... Or you can just realize this isn't reddit and that the post body is there for a reason. That is for OP to add whatever they please.

You're not paying attention if you think bad media headlines are why they look down on "us". Don't get me wrong, i think these things should be criticized and we should expect better but "our" media headlines aren't why they don't like us. Its their media headlines that are telling them how to feel about us.

"Shitty journalism and click-bait headlines" is why my internet consumption has dropped significantly over the past few years. It's also why I'll rarely comment on anything before I read the entire article (unless I'm commenting on a comment). Sites like Newsweek (off the top of my head) are full of misinformation and contain only a sentence or two of information relevant to the actual news story. The rest is in support of the writer's perspective and opinion which is often coming out of left field.

It feels like most of today's generated content is just about a headline and the shares and comments that that headline can generate. Granted, I could just be handing out in the wrong parts of the internet and have built my own inverse feedback loop.

Yeah I agree this is a bit misleading. I'm leaning more towards it's the publisher that is problematic (meditate).

How are you supposed to do a legislative blitz when Republicans have one of the houses of Congress?

What could they do without a majority?

Upvoting because this is just an opinion. Dems know they can beat him again. It's too early to blitz. A calmer approach next August - November will inform the folks in the political middle and it won't fire up Trump's base as much. When children get upset you calmly tell them the consequences; you don't jump up and down, cry and yell back at them.

They did show it, it's just slightly confusing. He retweeted (or retruthed it's apparently called on truth social) that guy Cory Mills. So in the story where they show the post from Cory Mills and the Washington post article below, that's the entry from trump's account of trump retweeting it. Cory Mills is just the original person who shared the article, then Trump reshared the post about Cory Mills sharing that article. Whoever made the story cropped out a slight thing that's above that where it says "Donald J trump retruthed" this, would have been less confusing if they left that in. He often does it this way with the most controversial stuff and calls to violence and things, so he can falsely claim "I never shared that." He thinks retweeting doesn't count.

Here's his truth social account if you want to scroll down just a bit and see for yourself. Get some eye bleach and brain bleach ready after trying to read that mess though, ugh. https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump