We ARE in uncharted waters, here. Donald Trump is such a reprehensible figure and his "movement" so inherently dangerous to the United States that it begs stern commentary.
I think, though, that one of the things that RR has always stood for is a higher standard for criticism. The rule against nicknames, and disparaging remarks has been a foundation for that standard. While it is imperative to not treat Trump as "Normal" - he most assuredly is NOT - there is still room to uphold that standard and maintain constant criticism of the man, his administration, and his policies. I admit I am having a very difficult time keeping from yielding to the urge to name him the buffoon that he is.
I do think, however, that it is imperative to get ahead of this as a community so that it does not get out of hand. We need to be up front about where we are going with this, and why. We have an obligation to our community to keep all viewpoints as accessible as possible within our standards. This is a difficult task.
My sense is that maintaining our current rules is more important than the rhetorical satisfaction of naming Trump what he is. I think we can lead the way as well by considering how we broach the subject.
Those are two cents to get the discussion going. These are my preliminary thoughts. I'm open, as always, to persuasion.
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.
Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich