Let's make fun of Trump, bash him, etc. while we can!

[Eric the Green]

This guy knows how to have fun and make a good video

Joe Goes To A DONALD TRUMP RALLY

https://youtu.be/4GQtzUYSXEI

[Eric the Green]

These Psychologists Issue Nation Dire Warning About Donald Trump (VIDEO)
March 27, 2016
Marc Belisle Extra


The Republican party wavers on one of the greatest moral questions it has ever faced, whether to try to stop the fascism rising in its party in the form of presidential front-runner Donald Trump. Meanwhile, a group of American experts who usually stay well out of politics, has weighed in with a dire warning for the country. Vanity Fair recently polled psychologists for their expert opinions on whether they could diagnose Trump as psychologically … off. Of course, publicizing their opinions is extraordinary, since the American Psychiatric Association says it is unethical for psychologists to comment on public figures, and on individuals they have not personally examined. It underscores their concern for the public good.

Psychologists Diagnose Trump

Vanity Fair quotes clinical psychologist Ben Michaelis’s diagnosis: “Textbook narcissistic personality disorder.” Another clinical psychologist, George Simon told Vanity Fair,

“He’s so classic that I’m archiving video clips of him to use in workshops because there’s no better example of his characteristics, … Otherwise, I would have had to hire actors and write vignettes. He’s like a dream come true.”

Narcissistic personality disorder can be described simply as a pathological need to puff oneself up, and to put others down. Mayo Clinic publicizes an in-depth description of the traits of someone with narcissistic personality disorder.

“If you have narcissistic personality disorder, you may come across as conceited, boastful or pretentious. You often monopolize conversations. You may belittle or look down on people you perceive as inferior. You may feel a sense of entitlement — and when you don’t receive special treatment, you may become impatient or angry. You may insist on having “the best” of everything — for instance, the best car, athletic club or medical care.”

There are few people in the public eye who more perfectly fit that description than Donald Trump. His entire life has been about a sense of entitlement over his use of the fortune loaned to him by his father. His career has been about plastering his name across ostentatious and gaudy buildings and products that he, ultimately, had little to do with building.

Trump’s Twitter feed, his debate performances, his manipulation of the media, are all a study in monopolizing conversation. He has demanded special treatment in the Republican primary debates, seeking to change the rules to suit him. He steamrolls debate whenever he’s criticized, angrily shouting down any accusation, even when the charge is totally true and his rebuttal is nonsensical.

Trump has defended criticism of his business record by hawking products, such as Trump steaks, that were failures, and which have not been commercially available for years. He has belittled his opponents viciously, if insubstantially, calling Jeb Bush “low energy” and Marco Rubio “little Marco,” (literally belittling the Senator from Florida).

Trump owns gold-plated vehicles and penthouses. He bought one of the world’s largest yachts when he was in extreme debt, and ultimately sold it to a Saudi prince. He is in a league of his own for needing to have the “best” things.

Just how incredibly dangerous Trump’s personality is if he were to get into the White House became scarily clear on NBC’s Morning Joe recently when host Mika Brzezinski asked Trump about his foreign policy team,

“Who are you consulting with consistently so that you’re ready on day one?”

Trump replied,

“I’m speaking with myself, number one, because I have a very good brain and I’ve said a lot of things. … My primary consultant is myself, and I have a good instinct for this stuff.”

It should go without saying that this response is absolute insanity. The tautology of his implication that he can learn by studying what he has said shows that he does not learn, and doesn’t care. He doesn’t need anyone but himself, and he trusts himself to a disturbing, anti-social degree.

Grasping foreign policy well enough to be a decent president of the United States is one of the most complex things a human being could possibly be asked to understand. No individual is intelligent enough to accomplish it on their own. The expertise and well-formed worldview of advisers is crucial, as any decent business executive who has avoided more bankruptcies than he has caused, would know. The ability to pick quality advisers is a key trait in a successful executive. But Trump doesn’t need advisers because Trump has Trump.

The lack of seriousness inherent in that statement is extremely alarming. Trump could walk into a G20 meeting, a mediation between Saudi Arabia and Iran, a confrontation between Russia and Baltic NATO allies, a pan-Asian trade conference, and have no clue about any of the relevant actors, but decide that whatever his “good brain” and his “good instinct” tells him is the right thing to do. A leitmotif of the Trump campaign is that America gets screwed over on the world stage. The people supporting him because they’re worried about that ain’t seen nothin’ yet.

Just ask the psychologists.

Watch Donald Trump tell Mika Brzezinski who his adviser is:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W7CBp8lQ6ro

[pbrower2a]

One of the greatest theoretical physicists, Stephen Hawking, has publicly stated that Donald Trump is a callous, dangerous demagogue.

Unfortunately the concerns that the greatest theoretical physicist of his time, Albert Einstein, went unheeded in Germany about 85 years ago.

[radind]

(06-02-2016, 07:25 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: One of the greatest theoretical physicists, Stephen Hawking, has publicly stated that Donald Trump is a callous, dangerous demagogue.

Unfortunately the concerns that the greatest theoretical physicist of his time, Albert Einstein, went unheeded in Germany about 85 years ago.

Also ignored was the warning of Dietrich Bonhoeffer.

Quote:http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsou...effer.html

… "After years of political instability under the Weimar republic, most Christian institutions were relieved with the ascent of the nationalistic Nazi dictatorship. The German Evangelical Church, the foremost Protestant church in Germany, welcomed Hitler's government in 1933. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, however, although a member of the German Evangelical Church, was not complacent. In his April 1933 essay, The Church and the Jewish Question, he assailed Nazi state persecution.”…

[Odin]

Trump Wants Revenge: His Hunger to Be President Is All About Gaining Power to Settle Petty Personal Scores

[pbrower2a]

(06-02-2016, 07:38 AM)radind Wrote:

(06-02-2016, 07:25 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: One of the greatest theoretical physicists, Stephen Hawking, has publicly stated that Donald Trump is a callous, dangerous demagogue.

Unfortunately the concerns that the greatest theoretical physicist of his time, Albert Einstein, went unheeded in Germany about 85 years ago.

Also ignored was the warning of Dietrich Bonhoeffer.

Quote:http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsou...effer.html

… "After years of political instability under the Weimar republic, most Christian institutions were relieved with the ascent of the nationalistic Nazi dictatorship. The German Evangelical Church, the foremost Protestant church in Germany, welcomed Hitler's government in 1933. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, however, although a member of the German Evangelical Church, was not complacent. In his April 1933 essay, The Church and the Jewish Question, he assailed Nazi state persecution.”…

Hitler promised bread and circuses. So did Nero, Caligula, and Commodus, arguably the three most entertaining, and three of the most memorable (for all the wrong reasons) of Roman emperors.

To anyone voting for Donald Trump because he will be more entertaining -- go to Wal*Mart and buy yourselves some entertainment. Wal*Mart has plenty of $5 racks of video and audio.

[Kinser79]

(06-02-2016, 04:27 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: Hitler promised bread and circuses. So did Nero, Caligula, and Commodus, arguably the three most entertaining, and three of the most memorable (for all the wrong reasons) of Roman emperors.

To anyone voting for Donald Trump because he will be more entertaining -- go to Wal*Mart and buy yourselves some entertainment. Wal*Mart has plenty of $5 racks of video and audio.

Good thing that Trump hasn't promised bread and circuses then. He's promised to fix the trade and build a wall. I'm going to go on a limb here and say I think a real estate developer might know how to build a wall.

[Kinser79]

(06-02-2016, 07:25 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: One of the greatest theoretical physicists, Stephen Hawking, has publicly stated that Donald Trump is a callous, dangerous demagogue.

Unfortunately the concerns that the greatest theoretical physicist of his time, Albert Einstein, went unheeded in Germany about 85 years ago.

Stephen Hawking should stick to physics. As for Einstein, his warning that the Germans could be building a nuclear bomb was heeded. In fact until 1945 it was expected that the Germans were ahead of the US in that area. Your history is bad and you should feel bad for attempting to use that bad history for justification for your political line.

[Kinser79]

(06-02-2016, 12:58 AM)taramarie Wrote: Ugh......that title. I am staying out of this one.

Eric the Ignoramus, et al. Probably feel the need to have this thread so they are on record as being against President Trump. Problem is, if he really is the boogeyman they claim him to be they would be rounded up for threads like this.

[Cynic Hero '86]

Trump Would advance the interest of Millennials, Xers and the superior and higher quality human material in this country in general.

[Galen]

(06-03-2016, 09:36 PM)taramarie Wrote:

(06-03-2016, 09:30 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: Eric the Ignoramus, et al.  Probably feel the need to have this thread so they are on record as being against President Trump.  Problem is, if he really is the boogeyman they claim him to be they would be rounded up for threads like this.

I just feel that it is unnecessary and that title is just childish. Politics has become clownish and pathetic. Address the issues, talk them out. Not "lets make fun of him and bash him." Wtf. How old are we? Does this make the bashers look any better than the person they are bashing? I may not like the man but even i think this is pathetic.

I am inclined to agree about American politics in general.  Given the past experience with Clinton people are willing to take a chance with Trump.  You also have to realize that Americans in general are getting tired of the Empire and the costs that it imposes on them.  Then there is small matter of the illegals who end up on the dole far more often than the native population.  This America First policy is in many ways a return to attitudes that were common prior to the Second World War.

[Galen]

(06-03-2016, 09:30 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote: Trump Would advance the interest of Millennials, Xers and the superior and higher quality human material in this country in general.

This is not a certainty but Clinton would definitely be a continuation of the status quo which as the economy gets worse in the coming months will be increasingly unpopular.

[Galen]

(06-04-2016, 12:05 AM)taramarie Wrote:

(06-03-2016, 11:56 PM)Galen Wrote:

(06-03-2016, 09:36 PM)taramarie Wrote:

(06-03-2016, 09:30 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: Eric the Ignoramus, et al.  Probably feel the need to have this thread so they are on record as being against President Trump.  Problem is, if he really is the boogeyman they claim him to be they would be rounded up for threads like this.

I just feel that it is unnecessary and that title is just childish. Politics has become clownish and pathetic. Address the issues, talk them out. Not "lets make fun of him and bash him." Wtf. How old are we? Does this make the bashers look any better than the person they are bashing? I may not like the man but even i think this is pathetic.

I am inclined to agree about American politics in general.  Given the past experience with Clinton people are willing to take a chance with Trump.  You also have to realize that Americans in general are getting tired of the Empire and the costs that it imposes on them.  Then there is small matter of the illegals who end up on the dole far more often than the native population.  This America First policy is in many ways a return to attitudes that were common prior to the Second World War.

I also despise clinton too. Interestingly enough the NZ First party here in NZ is becoming increasingly popular with younger folk. Sounds like something similar happening in America too.

That is interesting.  Looks like James Dale Davidson and Lord William Rees-Mogg were right but about twenty years early.  This seems to be a general theme emerging in the western world these days and it is not unexpected.  If they are right then it would not be unexpected to see organizations like the EU to go the way of the League of Nations.

[Galen]

(06-04-2016, 12:24 AM)taramarie Wrote:

(06-04-2016, 12:21 AM)Galen Wrote: [quote pid='2172' dateline='1465016177']
IThat is interesting.  Looks like James Dale Davidson and Lord William Rees-Mogg were right but about twenty years early.  This seems to be a general theme emerging in the western world these days and it is not unexpected.  If they are right then it would not be unexpected to see organizations like the EU to go the way of the League of Nations.

And this has historically happened before? Prior to ww2? What was the cause for it to happen in America back then and is it similar to what is causing it now?

Foreign policy in the United States was far less interventionist prior to the Second World War.  The term isolationist, most often used as a pejorative, originates from the thirties and the anti-war protests led by the Lost.  In fact America had a foreign policy close to modern Switzerland.  Trade with anyone but no entangling alliances with no one which dates from George Washington.
[/quote]

[Galen]

(06-04-2016, 12:43 AM)taramarie Wrote:

(06-04-2016, 12:40 AM)Galen Wrote:

(06-04-2016, 12:24 AM)taramarie Wrote:

(06-04-2016, 12:21 AM)Galen Wrote: [quote pid='2172' dateline='1465016177']
IThat is interesting.  Looks like James Dale Davidson and Lord William Rees-Mogg were right but about twenty years early.  This seems to be a general theme emerging in the western world these days and it is not unexpected.  If they are right then it would not be unexpected to see organizations like the EU to go the way of the League of Nations.

And this has historically happened before? Prior to ww2? What was the cause for it to happen in America back then and is it similar to what is causing it now?

Foreign policy in the United States was far less interventionist prior to the Second World War.  The term isolationist, most often used as a pejorative, originates from the thirties and the anti-war protests led by the Lost.  In fact America had a foreign policy close to modern Switzerland.  Trade with anyone but no entangling alliances with no one which dates from George Washington.

Oh wow now that is interesting. Now that definitely needs to return. Makes me wonder if we had something similar here in my country. Should look that up.
[/quote]

I am inclined to agree with you.  I don't remember New Zealand having a particularly aggressive foreign policy but having anything to do with the US is turning into a definite liability for them.  The rest of the world seems to be catching on to this and are starting to drop the dollar as a result.

[Eric the Green]

My answer to Tara: NO!
The important thing is for the best candidates to win. That includes Hillary Clinton. To "despise" BOTH Hillary and Trump is to not understand the difference. As Hillary says, the choice is clear!

Let's get on with it. Pundits are praising Hillary's latest speech knocking the Donald. Worth posting!

[Galen]

(06-05-2016, 02:11 AM)taramarie Wrote: No I despise them for different reasons. I know the differences and both are unpleasant to me.

Here we have the sanest answer of them all.  That is the thing about voting for a ruler.  You lose no matter which one you choose.

Consider the words of one of the great wits of the twentieth century:

“The major problem—one of the major problems, for there are several—one of the many major problems with governing people is that of whom you get to do it; or rather of who manages to get people to let them do it to them.
To summarize: it is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it.
To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.”
― Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

[Eric the Green]

(06-05-2016, 02:57 AM)Galen Wrote:

(06-05-2016, 02:11 AM)taramarie Wrote: No I despise them for different reasons. I know the differences and both are unpleasant to me.

Here we have the sanest answer of them all.  That is the thing about voting for a ruler.  You lose no matter which one you choose.

Consider the words of one of the great wits of the twentieth century:

“The major problem—one of the major problems, for there are several—one of the many major problems with governing people is that of whom you get to do it; or rather of who manages to get people to let them do it to them.
To summarize: it is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it.
To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.”
― Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

But the job must be done, and government must happen.

Those who rule us, should never be left off the hook of a watchful people, no matter who it is, or how pure in motive or in love with "freedom" they claim to be.

[Galen]

(06-05-2016, 02:59 AM)Eric the Obtuse Wrote:

(06-05-2016, 02:57 AM)Galen Wrote:

(06-05-2016, 02:11 AM)taramarie Wrote: No I despise them for different reasons. I know the differences and both are unpleasant to me.

Here we have the sanest answer of them all.  That is the thing about voting for a ruler.  You lose no matter which one you choose.

Consider the words of one of the great wits of the twentieth century:

“The major problem—one of the major problems, for there are several—one of the many major problems with governing people is that of whom you get to do it; or rather of who manages to get people to let them do it to them.
To summarize: it is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it.
To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.”
― Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

But the job must be done, and government must happen.

No it doesn't.  If people were as incapable as you think then humanity would have disappeared of the face of the earth long ago.

[Eric the Green]

(06-05-2016, 03:03 AM)Galen Wrote:

(06-05-2016, 02:59 AM)Eric the Obtuse Wrote:

(06-05-2016, 02:57 AM)Galen Wrote:

(06-05-2016, 02:11 AM)taramarie Wrote: No I despise them for different reasons. I know the differences and both are unpleasant to me.

Here we have the sanest answer of them all.  That is the thing about voting for a ruler.  You lose no matter which one you choose.

Consider the words of one of the great wits of the twentieth century:

“The major problem—one of the major problems, for there are several—one of the many major problems with governing people is that of whom you get to do it; or rather of who manages to get people to let them do it to them.
To summarize: it is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it.
To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.”
― Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

But the job must be done, and government must happen.

No it doesn't.  If people were as incapable as you think then humanity would have disappeared of the face of the earth long ago.

You think people are incapable of running a state. How then can you be confident they can run a market? There, I turned your hero on his head fer ya.