But yeah, the resemblance stops at the rhetoric, theres tons of things that are different which break the hitler comparison.
I mean, okay, what's the bar for being "Hitlery enough"? What is a comparison to you? Because it's sure not an '=' to me.
I mean, look, if you think that any of the rhetoric about Sanders drawing Clinton leftward has merit, doesn't it stand that even a Trump who loses the election could be bad overall? And if many of the reasons that Hitler were bad, such as the xenophobia, egotism (even by political standards), willful misunderstanding of facts, exploitation of outrage, and endorsement of "justified" violence, are traits which Trump shares and which make a considerable contribution to his success so far, why is it an illegitimate comparison to draw? Because he doesn't hate Jews? Because he doesn't exist in a literally identical political atmosphere?
Pointing out differences between Trump and Hitler won't stop me drawing the comparison. Please explain why the similarities I
am drawing are untrue or unimportant. If you'd like, I can write an essay explaining why I think they matter, at some point. Probably not immediately, kind of taking a break from writing a different essay entirely to write this post >______>
But, point is, it's a good comparison, as long as you don't treat it like some kind of implied equals sign and you don't get drawn into the same hysteria about Hitler's evilness that made Godwin's Law a necessity in the first place.