The Trump Presidency

Status
Not open for further replies.
spidergoat said:
Except that to qualify as a mental illness it would have to cause Mr. Trump significant social and personal impairment, which it doesn't.
Click to expand...
In the first place, with enough money at hand there are several clinically significant personality disorders that do not wreck their victim's lives - and may even bolster their appearance of success etc.

In the second, the degree of impairment suffered by Trump is one of those long distance evaluations one is not supposed to make. How do you know he isn't significantly impaired, socially and personally? Several people who know him well say he is. Maybe they're wrong, but they should be listened to by American citizens and voters.

In the third, his character flaws are of interest politically, not just personally. Personally, he's of little interest unless you're trying to get him to pay for something. It's because he has his hands on the wheels of power that his quirks of character become matters of concern. And that's legitimate.
 
If they don't cause impairment, then they aren't a mental illness. How do I know Trump isn't impaired? There's no evidence that it has any negative consequences to him, he's rich, married with children, and the president. Character flaws also aren't mental illness.
 
joepistole said:
Oh, hogwash!. If you had been paying attention to the discussion you would know there are a host of mental illnesses with effects ranging from mild to severe impairment. It's very clear to any observer that Trump suffers from narcissistic personality disorder. Once again for your edification:


http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-...ality-disorder/basics/definition/con-20025568
Click to expand...
Just any observer isn't qualified to make such a judgement. Says the guy that wrote the DSM entry for the subject.
 
spidergoat said:
If they don't cause impairment, then they aren't a mental illness.
Click to expand...
Several people who know him well say they do cause impairment - personally and socially.
spidergoat said:
How do I know Trump isn't impaired? There's no evidence that it has any negative consequences to him, he's rich, married with children, and the president.
Click to expand...
And your argument is what - that a sociopath can't get rich, a rich one can't get married and father children, and running a successful long con on a gullible public is beyond them?
spidergoat said:
Character flaws also aren't mental illness.
Click to expand...
Depends. Personality disorders are often "flaws", or "eccentricities", among the wealthy.
 
And Trump's Russia problems continue to mount. We've learned some new things about Trump's Russia involvement today. Back in July, some things Russia didn't like were mysteriously dropped from the Republican Party platform. It's been a bit of a quandary as to why those items were deleted. The folks who wrote the platform blamed the Trump campaign. The Trump campaign denied they were involved, and that's where it stood until today. Now we learn that Trump's national security advisers met with Russia's ambassador during the convention. Sessions wasn't the only Trump campaign member to meet with the Russian ambassador. And we learn that it was Trump who ordered the missing items deleted from the Republican Party platform. And we have learned of a secret meeting between Trump's key national security advisers and Russia's ambassador tool place in Trump Tower just 2 months ago. Hmm....it's not getting any better for Trump. Why is Trump so secretive about his Russian associations?

It was just a few days ago that the Republicans leading the investigation of Trump's campaign's collusion with Russia said there was no evidence.
 
Last edited:
I find it odd that Putin's press people use the same terms Trump uses and in the same way.
 
17156151_1878091422458748_2165553466545964976_n.jpg
 
iceaura said:
It's very important to make sure that Trump is seen as the normal Republican he is, from a policy and basic ideology perspective as well as his electoral base. The real problem here, the more serious danger, is the Republican Party.
Otherwise, blame for the effects of the nasty that the Republican Party has become will be offloaded unto Trump when he's kicked to the curb, he'll be a scapegoat.
Click to expand...
A reasonable strategic proposal from your side: Everything evil Trump is doing is blamed to Republicans, so that after the globalists get rid of Trump (with many Republicans participating in this) the Democrats can be happy and use this to fight the Republicans.

In fact, it will not help. Above parties will be split along the new line of confrontation, globalists vs. pro-Americans. And don't forget, the electoral base of the deplorables will not go away. And those who have already lost their trust into the mass media will not start to trust them, while more people will loose trust. So the power of the mass media will continue to decrease.

The advantages of the Trump time for the world will remain: Eurasia gets some more time to unify against the US. The strategic partnership Russia/China/Iran will strengthen, independent on what Trump will do, because whatever Trump offers, nobody can be sure that this remains valid for long time. Many small countries in this region will recognize that the US will remain unpredictable for a longer period of time, because it is not clear at all who will win the fight between pro-Americans and globalists, independent on who wins the next elections, and it makes no sense to rely on an unpredictable US if the other players are much more predictable.

Note: All these points do not even depend on what Trump is actually doing. If he follows the Kissinger trick to try to create an alliance with Russia against China and Iran or not does not matter, because the US does not have to offer anything which would make such a split attractive for Russia. All the US can offer is less confrontation. Russia's answer would be simply "fine, thanks", but it would not offer anything in return, because it does not depend on it. And even if the globalists succeed getting rid of Trump, this will not change much. Because it does not make the US more predictable. Now everybody knows that there is a deep split in the American elites, and this split will not go away, and continue to make the US behavior unpredictable in the long range.
 
Schmelzer said:
A reasonable strategic proposal from your side: Everything evil Trump is doing is blamed to Republicans, so that after the globalists get rid of Trump (with many Republicans participating in this) the Democrats can be happy and use this to fight the Republicans.

In fact, it will not help. Above parties will be split along the new line of confrontation, globalists vs. pro-Americans. And don't forget, the electoral base of the deplorables will not go away. And those who have already lost their trust into the mass media will not start to trust them, while more people will loose trust. So the power of the mass media will continue to decrease.

The advantages of the Trump time for the world will remain: Eurasia gets some more time to unify against the US. The strategic partnership Russia/China/Iran will strengthen, independent on what Trump will do, because whatever Trump offers, nobody can be sure that this remains valid for long time. Many small countries in this region will recognize that the US will remain unpredictable for a longer period of time, because it is not clear at all who will win the fight between pro-Americans and globalists, independent on who wins the next elections, and it makes no sense to rely on an unpredictable US if the other players are much more predictable.

Note: All these points do not even depend on what Trump is actually doing. If he follows the Kissinger trick to try to create an alliance with Russia against China and Iran or not does not matter, because the US does not have to offer anything which would make such a split attractive for Russia. All the US can offer is less confrontation. Russia's answer would be simply "fine, thanks", but it would not offer anything in return, because it does not depend on it. And even if the globalists succeed getting rid of Trump, this will not change much. Because it does not make the US more predictable. Now everybody knows that there is a deep split in the American elites, and this split will not go away, and continue to make the US behavior unpredictable in the long range.
Click to expand...
Well that is what you hope. That is what your Putina wants. But that doesn't make it so. Trump will be blamed for the evil he does, and the Republicans who follow him will be blamed for the evil they do. Your "pro-America part is a fiction. Pro-America is just another name for national socialism. You had better hope the world doesn't go down the road of national socialism. Because if we do, the odds your beloved Mother Russia becomes the world's largest piece of charcoal rises exponentially.
 
Schmelzer said:
A reasonable strategic proposal from your side: Everything evil Trump is doing is blamed to Republicans, so that after the globalists get rid of Trump (with many Republicans participating in this) the Democrats can be happy and use this to fight the Republicans.
Click to expand...
We assign blame to the people who voted for Trump and support him in Congress and have favored his agenda for decades now: these people are known as "Republicans", because that's the political Party they belong to and/or consistently vote for.
Schmelzer said:
In fact, it will not help. Above parties will be split along the new line of confrontation, globalists vs. pro-Americans.
Click to expand...
There is no such line, in the US. The factions you describe do not exist.
Schmelzer said:
And don't forget, the electoral base of the deplorables will not go away. And those who have already lost their trust into the mass media will not start to trust them, while more people will loose trust. So the power of the mass media will continue to decrease.
Click to expand...
The deplorables are organized and coordinated by the mass media, and the power of the mass media to do that was well demonstrated by Trump's victory - the mass media was his only way of communicating with his constituency, as he had no electoral support where he lived or worked, and very little backing from established Party power. The ability of coordinated fractions of the mass media to isolate people from reality and override all other influences on the ordinary voter was Trump's big advantage. Trump is a candidate of the mass media, and a demonstration of the increasing power of those who are consolidating its ownership.
Schmelzer said:
And even if the globalists succeed getting rid of Trump, this will not change much.
Click to expand...
Trump, like all Republicans, is in league with the international corporate capitalist "globalists".
 
Schmelzer said:
A reasonable strategic proposal from your side: Everything evil Trump is doing is blamed to Republicans, so that after the globalists get rid of Trump (with many Republicans participating in this) the Democrats can be happy and use this to fight the Republicans.

In fact, it will not help. Above parties will be split along the new line of confrontation, globalists vs. pro-Americans. And don't forget, the electoral base of the deplorables will not go away. And those who have already lost their trust into the mass media will not start to trust them, while more people will loose trust. So the power of the mass media will continue to decrease.

The advantages of the Trump time for the world will remain: Eurasia gets some more time to unify against the US. The strategic partnership Russia/China/Iran will strengthen, independent on what Trump will do, because whatever Trump offers, nobody can be sure that this remains valid for long time. Many small countries in this region will recognize that the US will remain unpredictable for a longer period of time, because it is not clear at all who will win the fight between pro-Americans and globalists, independent on who wins the next elections, and it makes no sense to rely on an unpredictable US if the other players are much more predictable.

Note: All these points do not even depend on what Trump is actually doing. If he follows the Kissinger trick to try to create an alliance with Russia against China and Iran or not does not matter, because the US does not have to offer anything which would make such a split attractive for Russia. All the US can offer is less confrontation. Russia's answer would be simply "fine, thanks", but it would not offer anything in return, because it does not depend on it. And even if the globalists succeed getting rid of Trump, this will not change much. Because it does not make the US more predictable. Now everybody knows that there is a deep split in the American elites, and this split will not go away, and continue to make the US behavior unpredictable in the long range.
Click to expand...
You need to keep in mind whilst working out how to predict outcomes that less than 60% of eligible voters actually voted in the 2016 election. Approx 95 million voters chose not to vote for any one.. apparently.
src: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/14/us-election-2016-voter-turnout-fell-to-58-per-cent-this-year-est/

Now even if the figures are not accurate ( as they are estimations and not facts) the point is that a large percentage of the USA do not actively participate in their democracy. It is they that will determine the outcomes not the parties, when they finally get motivated enough to do something about their governance. IMO

That point of general apathy (inertia) is nearly passed due to the insanity coming out of the White House IMO
 
Oystein said:
You know, I'm really starting to look back fondly at the G. W. Bush presidency.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Republicans have a way of making their GOP predecessors look better. Dubya was such a disaster he managed to make Poppy look like a reasonably good president instead of barely competent.
 
Tiassa said:
Yeah, Republicans have a way of making their GOP predecessors look better
Click to expand...
Amnesia plays a very large role.

But one disturbing thread of truth in that is that we are seeing continuation of a kind, further progress of an agenda. Reagan looked better than HW because Reaganomics had not taken full effect yet. Things were better, under W, than the prospects now - because the full consequences of W's administration had not taken hold under W. And each intervening Dem digs us decreasingly out of the increasingly deep mudhole.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top