US Politics: Town Hell

[Kalbear]

5 minutes ago, DMC said:

I never said he'd disappear.  In fact I acknowledged multiple times he wouldn't.  All I said is eventually he might get bored of it because he's old, entitled, lazy, and in ill health.  Do you disagree that he's not all of those things?

I don't think he's ever left anything because he was bored, no. He's left because he got a better offer or was paid off or was forced to leave.

Quote

If you watch that video and don't think he was clearly humiliated...well, agree to disagree.  And again, stop acting like you're an expert on what someone with narcissistic personality disorder would do and then further asserting that dictates Trump's political behavior.  Even professional psychologists would be reticent to make that diagnosis to someone they've never met let alone contend that diagnosis can predict his future political behavior (unless they wanted to get a quote/citation in some half-informed article about Trump).

It's been an excellent way to frame all his behaviors so far. There's a reason that people who have been around narcissistic sociopaths get triggered around Trump, including those in my life. It's not particularly subtle, either. I'm not claiming to be an expert, but I certainly have seen and experienced his kind. 

Meanwhile, the rule about psychiatrists not diagnosing people remotely seem to also have been thrown out.

Quote

 

"What makes Donald Trump so dangerous is the brittleness of his sense of worth. Any slight or criticism is experienced as a humiliation and degradation. To cope with the resultant hollow and empty feeling, he reacts with what is referred to as narcissistic rage.

"He is unable to take responsibility for any error, mistake, or failing. His default in that situation is to blame others and to attack the perceived source of his humiliation. These attacks of narcissistic rage can be brutal and destructive."

 

It's a far better way to predict his future behavior than applying the rules of politicians to Trump. So yeah, psychiatrists disagree with me about his feeling of humiliation - but they absolutely agree with me with respect to his future behavior.

[IheartIheartTesla]

I didnt watch the dueling town halls, but I do recall during the 2008 town hall debate between McCain and Obama, the latter stayed behind after to chat with voters while McCain couldnt wait to get out of there (a bit odd, since McCain seemed to thrive on town halls, his preferred format). It just kind of cemented his empathetic nature as well.

[Kalbear]

Here's the red sweater moment that I liked:

 

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, Kalibear said:

Meanwhile, the rule about psychiatrists not diagnosing people remotely seem to also have been thrown out.

They're saying he's incompetent to engage in political behavior, not trying to predict his political behavior.

2 minutes ago, Kalibear said:

It's a far better way to predict his future behavior than applying the rules of politicians to Trump. 

I think trying to evaluate Trump's future political behavior based on his past political - and professional - behavior is more valid than playing armchair psychologist and relying on a template of NPD, yes.  I'm just a crazy empiricist that way.

[Kalbear]

Just now, DMC said:

They're saying he's incompetent to engage in political behavior, not trying to predict his political behavior.

They literally said what he'll do!

Just now, DMC said:

I think trying to evaluate Trump's future political behavior based on his past political - and professional - behavior is more valid than playing armchair psychologist and relying on a template of NPD, yes.  I'm just a crazy empiricist that way.

His past political and professional behavior is to stick around and fight and fight and fight until the opponent pays him to leave. He's never left because he was 'bored'. He's left because he was broke. If you're wanting to be an empiricist, shouldn't you be looking at what he's actually done?

[Ormond]

5 minutes ago, DMC said:

I never said he'd disappear.  In fact I acknowledged multiple times he wouldn't.  All I said is eventually he might get bored of it because he's old, entitled, lazy, and in ill health.  Do you disagree that he's not all of those things?

If you watch that video and don't think he was clearly humiliated...well, agree to disagree.  And again, stop acting like you're an expert on what someone with narcissistic personality disorder would do and then further asserting that dictates Trump's political behavior.  Even professional psychologists would be reticent to make that diagnosis to someone they've never met let alone contend that diagnosis can predict his future political behavior (unless they wanted to get a quote/citation in some half-informed article about Trump).

As an academic personality psychologist I partially disagree with that. The idea that one has to have personally met someone before doing some evaluation of their personality isn't much backed up by science. We have way, way more data on what Trump is like and what his reactions to things would be than any psychiatrist or psychologist could possibly get in a normal diagnostic interview. There is nothing magic about psychiatrists that lets them more accurately diagnose someone based on small amounts of interview data compared to other human beings. 

I personally don't think extreme narcissism should be considered a mental disorder -- I think it would be better to just think of it as one of the ways to have a nasty evil personality rather than be considered akin to a "mental illness". But I do think that one can make general predictions about what extreme narcissists would do in certain situations.

One can't accurately predict anyone's future behavior completely because we can't accurately predict exactly what environmental pressures he or she will be under, and behavior is always a joint product of personality and environment. But one can say that if someone is in a similar environment, they will be likely to behave in ways similar to what they did in the past, and I think an extreme narcissist like Trump probably fits that truism even more than the average person. 

[DMC]

Just now, Kalibear said:

His past political and professional behavior is to stick around and fight and fight and fight until the opponent pays him to leave. He's never left because he was 'bored'. He's left because he was broke. If you're wanting to be an empiricist, shouldn't you be looking at what he's actually done?

That's your interpretation.  I don't know why he moves on - that would be an assumption you can't empirically determine.  All you can determine empirically is that he does swiftly move on from past failures.  This goes for his presidency too.  He doesn't follow through with anything, he just throws shit at the wall, sees what he can get away with, and then if there's significant pushback he moves onto some other batshit thing he thinks will help.

2 minutes ago, Kalibear said:

They literally said what he'll do!

All they said he'd do is:

Quote

He is unable to take responsibility for any error, mistake, or failing. His default in that situation is to blame others and to attack the perceived source of his humiliation. These attacks of narcissistic rage can be brutal and destructive.

How do you extrapolate that to what he political decision he'd make in a given situation?  There's little to no basis there.  Also BTW, it's interesting they said he'd attack the perceived source of his humiliation when you said he wasn't capable of humiliation.

2 minutes ago, Ormond said:

But I do think that one can make general predictions about what extreme narcissists would do in certain situations.

I don't think it's appropriate for psychologists to be making any type of predictions on an individual's political behavior based on a psychological diagnosis.  In fact I'd say that's irresponsible.  Professionally, I don't piss in your sandbox.

[Mindwalker]

Graham solicited campaign contributions in the halls of Congress during an interview, which is a federal felony, but of course Barr won't allow for any consequences...

[Ormond]

3 minutes ago, DMC said:

I don't think it's appropriate for psychologists to be making any type of predictions on an individual's political behavior based on a psychological diagnosis.  In fact I'd say that's irresponsible.  Professionally, I don't piss in your sandbox.

Good grief, behavior is behavior is behavior. The idea that political behavior is some separate realm that psychologists should have nothing to say about is just incredible to me. It is irresponsible for anyone to say they can predict any kind of behavior completely accurately because, as I've already said, you can never completely understand all the myriad factors involved, especially in not being able to predict the future environment. But political behavior is no different than any other kind of behavior that way, in or out of sandboxes. 

[Kalbear]

Just now, DMC said:

That's your interpretation.  I don't know why he moves on - that would be an assumption you can't empirically determine.  All you can determine empirically is that he does swiftly move on from past failures.  This goes for his presidency too.  He doesn't follow through with anything, he just throws shit at the wall, sees what he can get away with, and then if there's significant pushback he moves onto some other batshit thing he thinks will help.

We literally have record after record of why he moves on. This isn't an interpretation. He took $250m from Deutsche Bank to stop litigating his financial responsibilities with them, and then he moved on. He did this with all of his casinos that went bankrupt. He did that with Trump University. I don't see how this is an interpretation.

Meanwhile, do you have any evidence of any time that he's left something because he got 'bored'? Even his wives he didn't leave because he got bored - he left Ivanka because she humiliated him, he left Marla because  she had too much plastic surgery and was fake. 

Now, I'll agree with you that if he actually has to do, like, work - no, he'll nope the fuck away from that life. But being the opposition leader and holding rallies and doing his best hits and campaigning and shilling? Getting applause and money? That ain't work for him. 

Just now, DMC said:

All they said he'd do is:

How do you extrapolate that to what he political decision he'd make in a given situation?  There's little to no basis there.  Also BTW, it's interesting they said he'd attack the perceived source of his humiliation when you said he wasn't capable of humiliation. 

I agreed that I got that wrong! Though it's basically what I meant - many people when humiliated cower away and shirk and leave; that isn't Trump's style at all, his style is to immediately go to anger. 

And you extrapolate that because that's how he does everything. There is no 'political' decision for him - it's always just about Trump. It's the easiest thing to extrapolate. He has always been a counterpuncher, he has always reacted with rage and anger when he is humiliated (again - agree, I got it wrong!), and he has done this when it has been actually problematic for him politically. Because he doesn't care! That's not an issue for him, because there is no separation of political vs. personal. There's just Trump. 

Just now, DMC said:

I don't think it's appropriate for psychologists to be making any type of predictions on an individual's political behavior based on a psychological diagnosis.  In fact I'd say that's irresponsible.  Professionally, I don't piss in your sandbox.

Okay, but 700+ psychiatrists and an actual one on this board disagree with you. 

[Ormond]

2 minutes ago, Kalibear said:

 

Okay, but 700+ psychiatrists and an actual one on this board disagree with you. 

Just to be clear, I am definitely NOT a psychiatrist or a clinical psychologist and I am coming at this as a personality psychologist. 

Of course Political Psychology is its own subfield, though most of what it deals with is more closely related to social psychology than personality psychology.

https://pprg.stanford.edu/what-is-political-psychology/

 

[The Anti-Targ]

Think everyone understands that Trump won't go quietly into that good night. What is less clear is exactly how he will rage against the dying of his light.

[DMC]

13 minutes ago, Ormond said:

It is irresponsible for anyone to say they can predict any kind of behavior completely accurately because, as I've already said, you can never completely understand all the myriad factors involved, especially in not being able to predict the future environment.

Exactly.  It's based on myriad of environmental factors that experts on political behavior study for a living - just as psychologists study an individual's personal behavior for a living.  This also gets into the psychological/economic debate among political behaviorists.  I'm not rigid one way or another - and I am trained in political psychology - but when it comes to analyzing a single individual's political behavior I definitely do not try to get into their mind.  In such situations I definitely prefer empirical observation because political behavior is public, it's position taking, and it often has little to no correlation to a politician's personal behaviors or inclinations.

17 minutes ago, Kalibear said:

Meanwhile, do you have any evidence of any time that he's left something because he got 'bored'?

Admitting failure, taking a payoff, and moving on is getting bored depending on one's interpretation.

19 minutes ago, Kalibear said:

But being the opposition leader and holding rallies and doing his best hits and campaigning and shilling? Getting applause and money? That ain't work for him. 

Again, I agree with this.  That still doesn't mean he has a chance in 2024.  And if he realizes he doesn't have a chance, he may get bored.  That's all I said.

20 minutes ago, Kalibear said:

There is no 'political' decision for him - it's always just about Trump.

His political decision making is demonstrably what he can get away with and whether it's worth any effort to try.  How you can't allow for the possibility he might determine he can't get reelected and it's not worth the effort to try at the age of 78 is beyond me.

21 minutes ago, Kalibear said:

Okay, but 700+ psychiatrists and an actual one on this board disagree with you. 

Again, the 700+ psychiatrists were not weighing in on what Trump would do in 2024 in the event he loses convincingly.  Or ultimately trying to predict any political decision he made.  In fact I don't think even Ormond has yet.

[TrackerNeil]

1 hour ago, Chataya de Fleury said:

The response to the mother of the trans kid was really rehearsed, and Pete Buttigieg would have been able to give a MUCH better answer, but Pete will have a Cabinet role, so it’s all good.

If Biden wins, he'd better not start pulling senators from endangered seats to fill out his Cabinet. Pete's fine because he's not a current officeholder, but no appointments for Liz Warren, Amy Klobuchar, Tammy Baldwin, etc. We nearly lost the ACA over promoting a US senator, back in 2009.

[Jaxom 1974]

27 minutes ago, TrackerNeil said:

If Biden wins, he'd better not start pulling senators from endangered seats to fill out his Cabinet. Pete's fine because he's not a current officeholder, but no appointments for Liz Warren, Amy Klobuchar, Tammy Baldwin, etc. We nearly lost the ACA over promoting a US senator, back in 2009.

Problem is...Warren, Klobuchar, Duckworth, Baldwin...those are all the kinds of women the Cabinet and the Country likely needs...but I get your point.

[Ormond]

10 minutes ago, DMC said:

Exactly.  It's based on myriad of environmental factors that experts on political behavior study for a living - just as psychologists study an individual's personal behavior for a living.  This also gets into the psychological/economic debate among political behaviorists.  I'm not rigid one way or another - and I am trained in political psychology - but when it comes to analyzing a single individual's political behavior I definitely do not try to get into their mind.  In such situations I definitely prefer empirical observation because political behavior is public, it's position taking, and it often has little to no correlation to a politician's personal behaviors or inclinations.

 

There's been a long debate within personality psychology over the last 40 some years about the degree of prediction that's possible from personality measures. The concluding consensus is that it one does not get good prediction of a single instance of behavior from personality measures because in any particular instance there are too many random environmental factors involved and having the personality data only raises prediction slightly above chance levels. But personality measures start predicting behavior well when you aggregate or average behavior over many instances. You can't predict well from personality measures who will be late for a meeting on any particular day, but you can get pretty good prediction of who will be late the most times over the course of a couple of months from knowing personality scores.

I don't see any reason why it wouldn't be the same for political behaviors. It would be very difficult to predict single behaviors but easier to predict average behaviors over a longer period of time. 

I think all of the social sciences -- psychology, political science, sociology, anthropology, economics -- have things to learn from each other, and they all have things to learn from their overlap with neuroscience and biology. Someone barging in from one field without paying attention to what those who have been studying an issue for a long time, thinking they can understand things better, is being silly and offensive. (Some behavioral economists the last couple of decades seem to have been particularly guilty of that, in my experience.) But we can all learn from each other how to get a fuller understanding of human behavior if we respectfully investigate what they other fields have to offer. 

[All Cats Are Bad]

"They didn't want to arrest him" said Trump to a cheering crowd after Marshalls and a bunch of deputized civilians gun down the bodyguard who shot that Patriot Prayer guy. 8 year old in the line of fire, 21/22 witnesses claim cops didn't identify themselves before just firing, rolled up in unmarked cars, cops had conflicting stories later.

I am so joining the SRA.

[DMC]

1 minute ago, Ormond said:

I don't see any reason why it wouldn't be the same for political behaviors. It would be very difficult to predict single behaviors but easier to predict average behaviors over a longer period of time.

Right.  That's where I think psychology has a lot to offer for political behavior and particularly has with the emergence of political psychology as a subfield over the past twenty years.  My point is when evaluating a politician's political decision making - not in the aggregate and not the public's political behavior - I prefer to rely on the individual's past political decisions and the environment she will be confronting.  What I don't think is appropriate or responsible is a psychologist asserting "because this politician publicly exhibits narcissism, then he should likely do ______ politically."  One could argue most if not all politicians are "narcissists" or sociopaths in their political decision making, so I don't see why it's useful in such a case.

6 minutes ago, Ormond said:

I think all of the social sciences -- psychology, political science, sociology, anthropology, economics -- have things to learn from each other, and they all have things to learn from their overlap with neuroscience and biology.

Of course.  Again, this got wrapped up into an argument on whether Trump had a chance to get the nomination in 2024 if he lost convincingly.

38 minutes ago, TrackerNeil said:

no appointments for Liz Warren, Amy Klobuchar, Tammy Baldwin, etc.

I think Warren and Duckworth are fine - and very good candidates for Treasury and Defense, respectively.  If they lose those seats they deserve it.  Don't nominate a shitty candidate like Martha Coakley in Massachusetts again.  Baldwin and Klobuchar I'd agree with, but I don't want Klobuchar in the Cabinet anyway.

[Ormond]

9 minutes ago, DMC said:

 

Of course.  Again, this got wrapped up into an argument on whether Trump had a chance to get the nomination in 2024 if he lost convincingly.

 

And that particular issue of course has more to do with the social psychology and sociology of the Republican party as a whole rather than Trump's personality.

[DMC]

1 minute ago, Ormond said:

And that particular issue of course has more to do with the social psychology and sociology of the Republican party as a whole rather than Trump's personality.

Yep.  Plus the political behavior of the GOP in government, organization, and the electorate.  Which is where I was arguing from originally then Kal got me distracted.