EDIT: not in the sense that B. was an evil fascist, but in the more important sense of "Freedom and liberation are an unending task"
The experience of living my formative years under Berlusconi makes me optimistic on Trump. "The Donald" does not control the media landscape to the degree that Berlusconi did (or could have done); his conflicts of interest are minor; his platform is much more confusing and badly put together; and even most of his own footsoldiers don't take him too seriously, which is why he had to get a fundie for VP. Silvio was in a much better position, with more fanatical followers and widespread support from the establishment, and stil achieved very little, because the country stubbornly refused to bow to his demands. I expect Americans will similarly drag their feet. You can't dig a moat if people won't pick up their shovels.
In the final analysis, if he were to be elected, I think he would be a fairly typical Republican president, and one that seriously toned down the GOP's cultural conservatism.
From looking at his history and my take on his personality, if he were to take office he would want to 'win' at the job.
I think that for him 'winning' at president would be measured by economic metrics and his approval numbers.
I went into the cycle outraged at the fascistic overtones of his campaign, and fearful. Now I think it was mostly showmanship and an effort to win the votes of the rubes in the GOP base.
I think he would approach the job as being CEO of America, and focus on economic growth and negotiating better 'deals' for the country.
He will quickly find that the ISIS problem is intractable, and that he has seriously overpromised on that front. The situation is going to escalate no matter who takes office. There is no sizable cohort in America working on de-escalating tensions with the Islamic world, no peace movement to be found.
The West has a serious empathy deficit in regards to the Middle East. It just can't see past the religious identity of the terrorists, and see it as essentially a desperate and weak revenge effort by people that feel transgressed against and humiliated. This blind spot means more aerial killer robots, and more pissed off people on the other end of those hellfires.
Both Trump and Hillary will inevitably play right into the hands of the extremists, and the diabolical ISIS plan of eliminating the grey zone will no doubt work, as Europe's social cohesion is on the brink and repression against the Muslim population will no doubt increase due to these grotesque asymmetric terror attacks. This is a very sad state of affairs for liberalism, and the chance for peace in our time.
Tragically, it's going to be counterproductive military action from the West, and insane, lunatic barbarism from the Islamic side in response.
The current phase of this conflict really kicked off when I was just 17, on 9/11/2001, it heated up during my 20's and got seriously out of control around when I turned 30.
Lately I've been pondering the fact that I've never been the victim of a terror attack, and I've never fought in a conflict overseas. My entire interface with the horror show has strictly been through the media, and just the images and knowledge has effected me very negatively. I could have just avoided the news and lived in safe and tranquil ignorance. Instead I've endured this impotent worry, a feeling of something terrible happening to people all around the world that I could do nothing to save.
I'm now resigned to this stupid conflict continuing for my entire life.
But I am appalled by your blithe assessment of Trump's possible first term. I think you are failing to appreciate how easy it is for the right person to whip up resentment. It has happened elsewhere. We are not immune. The downside could be huge.
From an Adam Gopnik piece, referred to upthread:
"Those who think that the underlying institutions of American government are immunized against it fail to understand history. In every historical situation where a leader of Trump’s kind comes to power, normal safeguards collapse. Ours are older and therefore stronger? Watching the rapid collapse of the Republican Party is not an encouraging rehearsal. Donald Trump has a chance to seize power."
By far the biggest problem is that his personality cannot tolerate losing or insult. I don't think he would accept "losing" to ISIS and would possibly escalate things to obscene levels—he seems to be a big fan of nuclear weapons.
Domestically, he is entirely intolerant of criticism. He's made it abundantly clear that he would like to make criticizing him illegal and openly encourages his supporters to beat up protestors. Keeping free speech alive will require a vigorous defense of separation of powers, and even then I'd be concerned about his supporters taking things into their own hands.
That's not going to happen. The GOP's 2016 platform is its most anti-LGBT platform ever, and it's going to gain traction because a GOP president isn't going to do anything to block the GOP's legislative agenda. Even if Trump doesn't personally do anything to advance the GOP's anti-LGBT agenda, the fact that he won't even try to stop it will cause untold damage to our rights. He's not going to veto his own party's bills.
Also, remember that some of the most important advances to LGBT rights in the last few years have been the result of Obama using Title IX and the EEOC to fight discrimination. Trump isn't going to continue that.
My take from watching the RNC was what seemed to me to be a new found inclusiveness of the GOP, with Peter Thiel's prominent speaking spot, and several speakers including Trump himself vowing to include and defend LGBTQ Americans.
I took it as the strength of the civil rights movement and it's victories over the last eight years. Just from watching the convention I took away that the LGBTQ movement has won, and even the historically adversarial GOP seemed to have to concede.
It seemed that the GOP had changed, but from the party platform it seems that the producers of the RNC and the rank and file power base of the GOP are at odds.