I don't believe them to be the same, as I will explain. But I do see a remarkable operational similarity between the two than cannot be ignored. Both engage in demonstrably dishonest discourse. Both tend to disrupt otherwise sensible if animated discussions with their lies and nonsense. And both tend to revert to rudeness and hostility when called on it.

They are not the same, though, of course. A troll is basically someone who knowingly seeks to disrupt an ongoing discussion, via some combination of dishonesty (both factual and logical) and rudeness. They do it either for the sheer fun of it, to advance some ulterior agenda, or, in some cases, in their minds (or so I've read), to keep others honest by knocking them down off their pedestals. But they are disruptive, and it is knowing and by design.

Whereas a cultist is someone who, while in fact lying and being disruptive and rude, genuinely thinks of themself as sincere, and in their mind are not attempting to lie or disrupt or be rude. They are just telling it as they think they see it (or want to believe that it is), and so are just advancing a viewpoint that they believe to be valid and worthy (even if, again, it's neither).

This is how trolls and cultists are both similar and different. Similar in behavior, different in motivation. And there are two broad categories of each, the simpleminded and the "thoughtful". The former is the easiest to refute (but often the last to admit or realize it or give up), because they're transparently stupid and dishonest. E.g. a Hannity or O'Reilly in blog form. They lash out wildly and stupidly, and are easily dispatched (even though, sadly, they often refuse to go away once this happens). The latter, though, are much more sophisticated, skilled and tenacious in the art of dissembling, whether they do so consciously or not (cultists being equally adept at lying to themselves as they are to others). E.g. a Condi or Powell.

This site, I think most would agree, although it has its share of more simpleminded examples, tends to attract more "thoughtful" representatives of both types, because of the intellectual quality of both its host (Glenn) and regular commenters. Whereas a site like Daily Kos (of which I am a regular participant and well-known by most regulars), while it certainly has more of the "thoughtful" types, is clearly dominated by the more simpleminded sort. This is, I think, less a reflection of the quality of its host (Kos), front-pagers, or more thoughtful members (of which there are quite a few), than of its sheer popularity, and perceived role as the place for blogging Democrats to hang out, which is bound to attract all sorts, the majority of whom, as in life itself, tend to be of a less than stellar intellectual quality. UT is much more obscure (among both Dems and the general public), and thus only more politically engaged types, who are generally more thoughtful (if not always honest or civil), tend to know about it and take part in it.

Functionally, though, trolls and cultists do and accomplish the same thing, be it willfully or not, and in simpleminded or sophisticated manner, which is to disrupt otherwise honest, reality-based, rational and civil discourse among people who respect and understand what such discourse means and how important it is, by factually and logically lying, and being rude. And I'm guessing that whether or not they realize it initially, sooner or later most of them realize what they're doing, and yet continue to do it. Ultimately, it's an ego thing, not a reality or principle thing. And an ego thing in the negative sense, of course. E.g. wanting "your" side to win right or wrong, making up for a weak ego by blindly following a strong leader and/or disrupting others' discussions, etc. Trolls and cultists behave as they do for different reasons and at different levels of sophistication, but in the end, it all ends up being functionally the same thing, and disrupting, diluting, and even destroying, otherwise thoughtful, and quite important, discourse. They are the intellectual equivalent of viruses.

I'm not calling out anyone specifically here, nor would I want to. These types span the political and ideological spectrum, sadly, and we're all going to have our own opinions of who fits the definition of either. I'm just saying know who and what they are, how they operate, why they might do what they do, and how to spot and deal with them. The result of their actions are basically the same, even if the motivation for and nature of them differ. They must be spotted, and called out for what they are, as each of us sees fit, or else the discussion suffers.

And for a democracy to succeed, the discussion must go on, openly, honestly, thoughtfully and civilly. This country was founded due to such discussions. And it can only succeed if they're allowed to go on, despite the inevitable trolls and cultists.

Am I being excessively harsh or alarming here? Maybe. But I'll leave that for others to decide for themselves. Me, I don't think so, for the reasons stated here. We are not only up against willfully deceitful people on the other side of these issues (along with garden variety idiot trolls just out for cheap fun), but also against what I view as inadvertantly deceitful people on our side of these issues. The latter are now the bigger problem, I believe, and must be engaged.