Jay Michaels wrote recently here at American Thinker of the lack of Trump yard signs this election compared to the number of Mitt Romney signs back in 2012.  Back then, in his solidly middle-class neighborhood of “cops, nurses, teachers, plumbers, electricians, landscapers, small business owners, and retirees,” there were Romney signs displayed on the lawns of twenty percent or so of the 130 homes.  Now there are no Trump counterparts.

Michaels concludes that this lack of signage is indicative of less support for Trump, with a supportive theory that it may be a matter of marital political discordance, where wives are less inclined to vote for Trump because of the candidate’s boorish behavior toward women.  However, a quick survey of the many comments following the article will quickly disabuse you of that as the primary cause for the lack of Trump signage.  Far and away, the most frequently expressed reason for failure to publicly demonstrate a citizen’s loyalty and support for The Donald with signs or bumper stickers has nothing to do with domestic disagreement within the home, but rather with liberal Democrat lawlessness.

Comment after comment to Michael’s article reveals a reluctance to publicly declare one’s political stance for fear of signs of being stolen and homes and yards vandalized, or, especially in the case of bumper stickers, with one’s car being keyed by inspired members of that mob of supporters of free speech and inclusivity who support Hillary Clinton.  Those comments came from wide swaths of this country and, quite sadly, represent a reality that this old man never thought he’d live to see: Americans afraid to publicly post their political loyalties for fear of retribution from disagreeable fellow citizens.

Born myself at the start of World War II, I’m a relentless reader of history and novels set in the years leading up to that war, primarily in Europe but in Asia as well.  Because of the knowledge gained in my reading, I’ve always been dismissive of liberal claims that American conservatives were Nazis and fascists.  The comparison is mostly in error, as those European movements were essentially leftist and socialist in nature – admittedly to the right of the Soviet-supported communist movement, but still well to the left of American conservatism.  So I’m reluctant to resurrect that chestnut of an argument that my political opponents are Nazis, but I swear to you: if you know the history of those times, you can’t help but be aware of the similarities in the fanatic, intolerant behaviors between contemporary Democrat liberals and the fascist movements of those foreboding times.

Under the rubric of political correctness, promoted by the Democratic Party, we are witnessing a boa-like crushing constriction of the cherished, constitutionally certified concept of free speech.  More and more we are told that language perfectly acceptable but a short time ago is now threatening to one or another segment of society that the Democrats have singled out for special linguistic and social protections.  To anyone who has studied that period, this language-controlling behavior by Democrats is so parallel to that of those who fomented the deadly socialist movements of pre-WWII Europe that it easily justifies a comparison.

Stealing opposition political signs, vandalizing yards and homes, destroying the paint jobs of cars bearing disliked political messages – all of it conveys a clear message of political intolerance, long incubated by the Democratic Party and now come to full growth in this election year, that should demonstrate to all reading this that these free speech-crushing Democrats, like their European fascist predecessors, need to be crushed themselves.

One question: When was the last time you heard of anyone stealing Hillary signs?  Of course, that lack could be the result of the inability to even find one.