O’Malley goes Godwin's Law on Trump

[Mr. Morden]

And why is Martin O'Malley relevant?

He's relevant because he seems to be testing the waters for a 2020 presidential run, and this is the 2020 presidential election board.

[Mr. Morden]

*bump*

Here's one of O'Malley's most recent tweets (not about Trump, but about the House GOP trying to gut the ethics office):

https://twitter.com/MartinOMalley/status/816305625311412224

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Maybe this is O'Malley's shtick for 2020: To use more provocative language in his attacks on the GOP than most of his rivals will.  I mean, obviously the other Dems are criticizing the same things about Trump and the GOP, but O'Malley seems to be trying to set himself apart by using language like "fascist" and "authoritarian".

[anthonyjg]

*bump*

Here's one of O'Malley's most recent tweets (not about Trump, but about the House GOP trying to gut the ethics office):

https://twitter.com/MartinOMalley/status/816305625311412224

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Maybe this is O'Malley's shtick for 2020: To use more provocative language in his attacks on the GOP than most of his rivals will.  I mean, obviously the other Dems are criticizing the same things about Trump and the GOP, but O'Malley seems to be trying to set himself apart by using language like "fascist" and "authoritarian".

I don't think this'll work, I feel like people will be sick of divisive language four years from now.

[Mr. Morden]

O’Malley’s recent tweets continue the trend:

https://twitter.com/MartinOMalley/status/820095055516106756

You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://twitter.com/MartinOMalley/status/820476452478939137

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Someone should create a Martin O'Malley tweet generator.  Just randomly create a sentence that includes "Trump", "racist", "fascist", "Nazis", etc.

[Kingpoleon]

Well he's not wrong, I'll give him that.

Actually, he isn't. Anti-Trump Republicans wants us to believe everything was awesome with the party before Trump "hijacked" it. But, in fact, Trump's GOP is a logical consequence of the direction Republicans were already following for years. I'm surprised a Democrat is picking up this garbage.

His anti-free trade tirade and anti-immigration are against the policies of Reagan and the Bushes. His universal healthcare plans are unprecedented for Republicans. His populist, anti-rich campaign is completely against what every Republican, from Reagan to Romney, has promised. His idiotic foreign policy was the Democratic stance for far too long.

Authoritarian populism was a Democratic ideology. Now, Trump has changed that. Sure, the Bush-Romney GOP had many flaws, but being too much like Trump was not one of them. There is a reason no living GOP nominee besides Dole endorsed Trump. It is because they inherently disagreed with him

I am not surprised that Atlas is falling for the Democratic narrative. Far too many people of both parties listen to MSNBC, CNN, Hannity, and Limbaugh. It has created a partisan narrative far beyond what would naturally occur - one where there are echo chambers, not discussions. Proverbs 18:17 says, "The first to speak in court sounds right - until the cross-examination begins." Reasonable and calm discussions would certainly be better than the echo chambers we have now.

[Mr. Morden]

*bump*

O'Malley is the true trendsetter of the 2020 presidential campaign.  Months after he started calling Trump fascist, Bernie Sanders now says that Trump is moving the country in an "authoritarian" direction:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/06/22/sanders-warns-of-authoritarian-direction-under-trump/?utm_term=.1b5ab756a5fd

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Mr. Morden]

*bump*

O'Malley's use of hyperbolic language to describe Trump and associates continues, now saying "They knowingly committed treason"...though I guess it's not totally clear if he includes the prez himself in this, or just Don Jr. and the other campaign officials in the Don Jr.-Russia meeting:

https://twitter.com/MartinOMalley/status/884588185887674368

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Higgins]

I really like Martin O'Malley for his stances on climate change, he's a real pusher for technological advances in the solar market and I like that. I think he'd be a good Energy Secretary. I'm sure he's going to run in 2020 because he'll get a fair shake during the debates.

This. He's too unknown to win an election, but he'd make a good Energy Secretary.

[TheLeftwardTide]

O'Malley was a good governor, but a very unpopular one because of his high-tax policies. He doesn't really have a future in electoral politics.

The last Marylander on a presidential ticket was Spiro Agnew...yeah...
The only Marylanders who have even a remote chance of becoming president are Larry Hogan and Chris Van Hollen.

[Mr. Morden]

*bump*

And now O'Malley calls Trump "unfit for office":

https://twitter.com/AlexWitt/status/919560641010073600

I think it's an interesting question: re: how far will the 2020 Dems go in saying that Trump is unsuited to the presidency.  Will they call him fascist, mentally unwell, etc.?  O'Malley is already going there, and as long as one of the candidates is willing to do it, the media will ask all the others if they agree.

[Stranger in a strange land]

Godwin's Law doesn't apply when we're talking about ACTUAL White Nationalists, Fascists, and Neo-Nazis. GODWIN HIMSELF SAID SO.

In fact, in the current political environment, it's arguable whether Godwin's Law should even apply at all anymore.

[136or142]

*bump*

And now O'Malley calls Trump "unfit for office":

https://twitter.com/AlexWitt/status/919560641010073600

I think it's an interesting question: re: how far will the 2020 Dems go in saying that Trump is unsuited to the presidency.  Will they call him fascist, mentally unwell, etc.?  O'Malley is already going there, and as long as one of the candidates is willing to do it, the media will ask all the others if they agree.

Just because it's extreme doesn't make it untrue that Trump is unsuited to the Presidency or is mentally unwell (it's been debated elsewhere on this board whether Trump is a fascist and I argued that he's an 'aspirational fascist' or whatever term was used.)  

If you are denying these things, I don't think that makes it so.  I think you are suffering from 'normalcy bias.'

The normalcy bias, or normality bias, is a belief people enter when facing a disaster. It causes people to underestimate both the possibility of a disaster and its possible effects, because it causes people to have a bias to believe that things will always function the way things normally function.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Martin O Malley had a large roster of good accomplishments when he was Governor... and Larry Hogan is trying to roll those accomplishments back.

[Mr. Morden]

*bump*

And now O'Malley calls Trump "unfit for office":

https://twitter.com/AlexWitt/status/919560641010073600

I think it's an interesting question: re: how far will the 2020 Dems go in saying that Trump is unsuited to the presidency.  Will they call him fascist, mentally unwell, etc.?  O'Malley is already going there, and as long as one of the candidates is willing to do it, the media will ask all the others if they agree.

Just because it's extreme doesn't make it untrue that Trump is unsuited to the Presidency or is mentally unwell (it's been debated elsewhere on this board whether Trump is a fascist and I argued that he's an 'aspirational fascist' or whatever term was used.)  

If you are denying these things, I don't think that makes it so.  I think you are suffering from 'normalcy bias.'

No, I'm not denying it.  I'm just saying that it's unusual for presidential candidates to talk about the opposing party's president in such stark terms, and I'm legitimately curious as to how far the 2020 Dems will go with this.  For now, O'Malley's going farther than the others tend to.  I don't hear Elizabeth Warren using the "f-word" (fascist) to describe Trump, nor Kamala Harris talking about Trump's mental health.  If, tomorrow, you asked them those questions straight up, they'd probably skirt the issue, saying that Trump is ideologically extreme and that he has serious character problems and so forth, but they probably wouldn't put it in the terms that O'Malley does.

But I'm not sure that that's going to last forever.  Maybe two years from now, Dem. primary voters will be pushing the presidential candidates to condemn Trump in stronger terms than they have so far.

[136or142]

*bump*

And now O'Malley calls Trump "unfit for office":

https://twitter.com/AlexWitt/status/919560641010073600

I think it's an interesting question: re: how far will the 2020 Dems go in saying that Trump is unsuited to the presidency.  Will they call him fascist, mentally unwell, etc.?  O'Malley is already going there, and as long as one of the candidates is willing to do it, the media will ask all the others if they agree.

Just because it's extreme doesn't make it untrue that Trump is unsuited to the Presidency or is mentally unwell (it's been debated elsewhere on this board whether Trump is a fascist and I argued that he's an 'aspirational fascist' or whatever term was used.)  

If you are denying these things, I don't think that makes it so.  I think you are suffering from 'normalcy bias.'

No, I'm not denying it.  I'm just saying that it's unusual for presidential candidates to talk about the opposing party's president in such stark terms, and I'm legitimately curious as to how far the 2020 Dems will go with this.  For now, O'Malley's going farther than the others tend to.  I don't hear Elizabeth Warren using the "f-word" (fascist) to describe Trump, nor Kamala Harris talking about Trump's mental health.  If, tomorrow, you asked them those questions straight up, they'd probably skirt the issue, saying that Trump is ideologically extreme and that he has serious character problems and so forth, but they probably wouldn't put it in the terms that O'Malley does.

But I'm not sure that that's going to last forever.  Maybe two years from now, Dem. primary voters will be pushing the presidential candidates to condemn Trump in stronger terms than they have so far.

I don't know, Trump is an 'aspirational fascist' who is deranged and completely ignorant of public policy.  His supporters claimed they liked his 'telling it like it is' (which really meant nothing more than telling them what they wanted to here), so I'd like to hear Democratic candidates be completely truthful about Trump. 

I think Elizabeth Warren has said she isn't going to run for President and I don't know what Kamala Harris has said.  Hillary Clinton made a number of comments during the 2016 campaign that clearly hinted that she thought Donald Trump was mentally unbalanced, even though she didn't say outright 'he's deranged.'

[Mr. Morden]

I think Elizabeth Warren has said she isn't going to run for President

She hasn't.  She said she isn't running right now, but that's present tense, not future tense:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=233345.msg5772512#msg5772512

You must be logged in to read this quote.

She has pointedly refused to make any kind of promise that she's going to serve her full Senate term if she's reelected next year, and she's acting like a presidential candidate:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/02/us/politics/democrats-president-2020.html?mcubz=3
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/19/us/politics/bernie-sanders-elizabeth-warren-democrats-presidential-election.html

So nothing's certain at this early stage, but is she one of the 10 most likely people to end up joining the race for the 2020 Democratic nomination?  I'd say yes.

[136or142]

I think Elizabeth Warren has said she isn't going to run for President

She hasn't.  She said she isn't running right now, but that's present tense, not future tense:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=233345.msg5772512#msg5772512

You must be logged in to read this quote.

She has pointedly refused to make any kind of promise that she's going to serve her full Senate term if she's reelected next year, and she's acting like a presidential candidate:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/02/us/politics/democrats-president-2020.html?mcubz=3
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/19/us/politics/bernie-sanders-elizabeth-warren-democrats-presidential-election.html

So nothing's certain at this early stage, but is she one of the 10 most likely people to end up joining the race for the 2020 Democratic nomination?  I'd say yes.

Oh, odd.  I thought she had made a comment that she thought she could be most effective as a United States Senator.

[politics_king]

Well he's not wrong, I'll give him that.

I've always loved your signature, lol. That ass-hat deserves it over and over again in hell, if there is one, allegedly.

I liked O'Malley, his stance on the Environment is very intriguing but, he just doesn't move the needle. He could be a good U.S. Senator one day, he should be more focused on that and his team around him should be too.