Uh?

I guess, in my mind, by bastardizing a person's name it is a way to dehumanize them so you can say anything. I think it always weakens an argument. 

Agreed completely.  It's also weirdly insidious, to a point where people aren't even aware that they're doing it.  During the 2016 primaries, it alarmed me to see how many of the more self-described progressive friends in my feed would consistently refer to Bernie Sanders as "Bernie" and Hillary Clinton as "HRC."  The former sounds like a pal, the latter sounds like a corporate entity.  Since they were Bernie supporters and I was a Hillary supporter, I was definitely much more aware of the subtle depersonalization of Hillary as part of the emotional undercurrent in their belief system.

The Trump/Rump thing is both the same and different - it's clearly deliberate, and is very intentionally meant as disrespectful, but it does have the same net effect - if you're inclined to find a pretext to dismiss someone's comments out of hand, their dismissal of "your guy" in such manner will give you the ammunition to do so.

I, of course, loathe Trump, and I do feel that his constant name-calling and dismissiveness of pretty much everybody who isn't a rich, white, straight, non-disabled Christian man has earned him any number of mocking sobriquets that I can easily get on board with, but I definitely admit that I cede the ability to enter a debate unbiased (to the other participants) if I lead with that.

******

I'd say that he's getting a small dose of his own medicine. You can certainly find it immature, but sometimes the way to shut down an obnoxious bully is to stand up to them in terms they understand.

 'Course, with Trump, more effort must be made to show him that he's no Emperor... that he must, as a world leader, act Presidential.

-C!

*****

I'm in awe that anyone could draw such a simple comparison.

Learning much about Trump's 'Merica.

-C!

Take one thing  and one person that people know, the meeting in Trump tower with the Russian lawyer. Kushner was part of a group that met with  someone that has ties to the Kremlin for information on Clinton. Looks like a slam dunk for working with Russians for one side. The other side could argue that Kushner was cleared for Top Secret clearance by the FBI so the worst he did was have bad judgment. 

Most people have their conclusion and use only the information that supports them and disregard any argument to the contrary as partisan. Both sides are guilty of this. When some people read a book they think they know how it will end.  A Trump in Russia's pocket or a Witch hunt story is more interesting but there are only a few people that have enough facts to write the critical chapter to this story and then the people can write the ending.