You object to the comparison because it's an attack. We all know ISIS is bad, so the only reason to comparing these people to them is to make it seem like they're bad too, even though they're trying to say a lot of reasonable things if someone would just listen with an open mind!
Obviously, not everyone on r/DonaldTrump is down to invade the capitol. I'm sure there are plenty of people who support ISIS that don't support their violence either. No group is homogenously made up of cartoon villains. But that doesn't mean we need to be fine with the recruiting grounds for their most violent sects.
To be clear, your rhetorical position is the exact same as mine. You're perfectly fine with the exact same censorship you're ostensibly criticizing. You just want the line to be drawn somewhere else.
That's what they are though. One side of my family are full-on conservative Trump supporters and I know for a fact that's exactly who they are.
It is no exaggeration to say that Trump is playing from a handbook which is poorly scribbled and obviously plagiarized from Hitler's.
"I don't care for Hitler's rhetoric, I just voted for the Nazis because I think he has some good ideas about infrastructure and I like his jobs plan" doesn't exactly come across as sympathetic. Especially not after it becomes obvious where the trains are going.
If you're a conservative or a Republican who supports Trump for his politics alone, or because he was the R and you hate the D, the moral thing to do as of January 6 is to disavow Trump entirely, and look for another candidate who supports his views, or perhaps consider supporting a third party. Not to dig in and continue making excuses for him and his supporters.
I don't agree with a lot of what Trump says, but I don't hold him accountable for others' actions unless he specifically called for violence which I don't think he did in this case. He does say some questionable things, but has always disavowed violence on both sides.
Obama has promulgated lots of anti-police rhetoric, and there are some who would blame him for certain attacks on police. I disagree with things he said, but would not blame him for any of that.
As far as I can tell, Obama is considered "anti-police" simply because he supports BLM, but BLM have legitimate concerns about police violence and systemic racism in law enforcement, and voicing those concerns doesn't make one anti-police. I have yet to find an "anti-police" statement made by Obama which condemns all police and calls them all evil, that is at all equivalent to the vitriol or paranoia in Trump's rhetoric.
It seems like a false equivalence drawn between the two.
I believe Obama used carefully picked statistics to say there is widespread racism in the police. There are likely racist people/cops, but I don't believe there is evidence to suggest widespread racism.
That’s because they aren’t. Most liberals are pro globalisation which is the de facto pro business policy.