International Skeptics Forum

International Skeptics Forum (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumindex.php)
-   USA Politics (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   Continuation Donald Trump has 'dangerous mental illness', say psychiatry experts at Yale... Pt 2 (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=330170)

Leftus 18th July 2018 06:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger (Post 12365342)
There is so much out there on Trump besides what one sees on the media. It would be a mistake to think people assessing Trump as having a personality disorder were only going by a few newsreels and The Apprentice.

So you've met the man? Shared a meal with him? Wrote a letter on your hospital letterhead with your diagnoses and treatment plan and sent it to him?

Out there? Where? In the Media? Or is there some secret access the Yale Group for truth had access to that is unfiltered?

Leftus 18th July 2018 07:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 3point14 (Post 12366082)
There doesn't appear to be a process in place to assess the mental health of the president, therefore, if he were literally exhibiting the symptoms of paranoid delusion, how would the USA protect itself by having the president assessed psychologically? As far as I can see, there's no mechanism for this.

Mental health is a sticky subject. There is no mechanism in place to force anyone to undergo a mental evaluation short of threats of self harm. And if we go that route, why limit it to mental health. If you aren't getting your cardio in, who and when do we send in those to rush us to the gym?

Quote:

There doesn't appear to be a process that could be successful to remove him from office if he were a loon. I know that, technically, there is, but the grossly partisan nature of US politics makes it impossible.

The president could be psychologically broken beyond repair to the point that they were a danger to the US and to the world and there's literally nothing that could be done about it.
Besides the 25th amendment? All it takes is the VP and the majority of the cabinet. I just can't support a coup d'état based on a biased Yale conference.

Fudbucker 18th July 2018 07:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roboramma (Post 12366073)
He doesn't subscribe to "that particular belief system", he subscribes to some of the same beliefs as other people who are characterised as conservatives (by themselves and others), and doesn't subscribe to other beliefs that are characterised as conservative.

The fact that conservatives are wrong about some things doesn't mean they are wrong about all things. The same is true of liberals. The same is true of everyone.

I honestly don't know what belief system Trump supporters are operating under, other than delusion at this point. The man obviously should not to be president, and after Monday whatever doubts there were about his unfitness (and there were no doubts) were finally laid to rest for any fool to see. I do know that that belief system is as divorced from reality as most of the stuff conservatives believe.

What do you think about people who still support Trump? Are they level-headed people? I don't think so. I think it's obvious they're not thinking clearly. If they were, they wouldn't support him.

phiwum 18th July 2018 08:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue (Post 12365453)
I've mentioned this before but its disheartening watching the discussion go through the stages

1. I hate X.
2. I hate people who support X.
3. I hate people who don't hate X.
4. I hate people who don't hate X enough.

And Trump is so much of a decisive dumpster fire in a bad suit that we've reached:

5. I hate people who don't take every opportunity to say how much the they hate the people who don't hate Trump enough.

The end game of this should be a better world for all of us. Not crowing the winner in the "Who can hate Trump the most and bring it up the most" contest.

Not entirely new. Back in the day, there was graffiti stating "Damn John Jay! Damn everyone who won't damn John Jay!! Damn everyone that won't put lights in his windows and sit up all night damning John Jay!!"

Pretty funny, that.

Fudbucker 18th July 2018 08:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by phiwum (Post 12366341)
Not entirely new. Back in the day, there was graffiti stating "Damn John Jay! Damn everyone who won't damn John Jay!! Damn everyone that won't put lights in his windows and sit up all night damning John Jay!!"

Pretty funny, that.

At the same time, we have a mentally unbalanced President who, if this were a time of war, would fit the definition of "traitor". People in power should not be sitting on their hands about this, which is precisely what the GOP is doing. There were a few strong condemnations after Monday, some mealymouthed attacks, and a lot of silence. Lack of outrage over things that are outrageous should be called out.

xjx388 18th July 2018 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger (Post 12365887)
**By the way, I don't believe you've presented a single study that the in-person interview is required. It's a professional consensus and as such, subject to challenge. It was never determined by some RCTs or anything close. So right there you don't have supporting evidence. Did you just assume it existed?

I do assume that the APA has good reasons to insist upon an in-person exam. And I should clarify here, again, that an "in-person exam," isn't just a brief interview, it's an ongoing assessment over time in the context of a therapeutic relationship. But even so: If it is a long-standing consensus of professionals as to the best practice, so much so that it is part of the standard of practice, then it takes more than a mere contrary opinion to challenge it. "Distant diagnosis," hasn't been subject to any scientific scrutiny at all, there isn't even a consensus about it. If they want to argue that an in-person evaluation isn't necessary or particularly reliable, fine -do that arguing in the literature where it can be peer-reviewed and validated.

Quote:

On to the rest of your post. You don't practice medicine by looking up some study about every possible presentation a patient might arrive with.
You most certainly do if the presentation is one you aren't familiar with; you don't just wing it because you're smart. Every doctor I've ever worked for or interacted with has a shelf of reference material. They attend hours of CME every year.

Quote:

Yes, I might have an evidence based protocol for a patient presenting with abdominal pain. But if a patient presents with an arm bent in the middle where it shouldn't be, I'm not going to find a study that says said patient needs a splint and an X-ray.
In the case of a broken bone, there are still evidence-based treatment options based on the exact type of fracture. IOW, doctors don't just say, "Yup that's broken. Set it and cast it." The diagnosis of the type of fracture is important to determining the best course of action.

Quote:

And suppose the patient with abdominal pain then tells me they think they swallowed a chicken bone. Is there a study for that? Of course not. :rolleyes:
Uh, there are plenty of studies for the diagnosis and management of swallowed objects. Like I said, every thing practitioners do is guided by peer-reviewed research, case studies, etc. That forms the basis of guidelines. Their residencies, practicums, etc help them internalize those guidelines.

Quote:

You have to put a lot of pieces together.
Yes! And in the case of mental health, you don't get all those pieces by watching someone on TV and reading their tweets.

Quote:

Say this is a little kid and the mom thinks s/he swallowed something. I do have a protocol for a young child with abdominal pain. Guess what is on it? Don't rule out something in the chest.

I have no doubt there is one or more study that says how many small kids with an abdominal complaint actually have a problem in the chest. How many doctors do you suppose go looking that up when they see a kid with a 'tummy ache'?

None! You know that because you learned that is something to consider. Know where I learned it? In my clinical in a children's hospital ED when I was in nursing school, long before I ever became a nurse practitioner.
And you learned it because medical research figured that out. Someone didn't just make that up one day; that guideline came about because of observation, studies, etc that were published in the literature.

Quote:

There is no study that tells you what to do if you are following your algorithm and there is no step for what you find next. You just can't write an algorithm for any and every thing you are going to see. If you could then one wouldn't need a practitioner, you could use a computer.
When your algorithm isn't working, you find another way. Sometimes, that means reading books, looking up research, consulting specialists, etc. It almost never means, "come up with your own ideas and implement them." That only happens in the areas where medicine doesn't have good answers yet and the resulting findings
end up being peer-reviewed and published in journals to further medical knowledge.

Quote:

Trump's symptoms are not hard to recognize, the diagnosis in his case is not complicated despite posts in this thread claiming it is. When you read that crap on the internet that a narcissistic personality disorder is hard to diagnose, it says that to prevent every Tom, Dick and Harriet from diagnosing every conceited person with narcissism.
This is an assertion. Where are the citations for professionals saying, in effect, "This stuff is really obvious; you don't even need to get to know the person." I can find every medical guideline and study ever written on the internet. I can find the full text of the DSM-V. What I can't find is any support at all for diagnosing mental health conditions without ever interacting with a patient. If you can, I'm all ears.

Quote:

It boggles my mind that anyone would question Trump's problem is pathologic. OMG, look at yesterday! Putin may very well have the pee tape and all kinds of incriminating financial records, but overlying that is the blatant inability of Trump to consider for even a fraction of a second that he didn't win fair and square. That eats at him.
This is just your interpretation of the events. You can't know what's in his head; you aren't a mind reader. In any case, pathology is irrelevant. We don't need to know that he is mentally ill in order to see what a **** show that "summit," was. Plenty of bi-partisan non-professionals have commented on just how bad that was. What are you gaining by slapping an irrelevant label on it?

Quote:

The two things he repeats more than anything is 'no collusion' (because that would mean he didn't win fairly) and it didn't affect the outcome.

Blatantly obvious pathologic narcissism, and if you weren't going by some rule you read on the internet, you would admit it.
First off, that's begging the question in the form of, "when did you stop beating your wife." Has it been established that there was collusion and that Trump was involved in it? Has it been established that Russian interference was responsible for Trump's win?
Nope. As such, it remains possible that he is simply covering his butt, he is manipulating the public, he didn't collude/doesn't believe the Russians actually influenced anything despite their interference, etc. None of that has "mental illness" as a prerequisite. Even if he did collude to get the Russians to give him a win, what do politicians do when confronted with accusations of bad/illegal/immoral behavior? Most of them lie, obfuscate and deny. They don't have to be mentally ill to do so.

But more importantly, you continue to fundamentally misunderstand (or misrepresent) and minimize the situation. The Goldwater rule isn't just some "rule . . . on the internet." It is a part of the actual ethics code of the mental health profession and has been debated and reaffirmed. As such, the assertions of a handful of professionals are not persuasive to me. In effect, you are arguing that ethics codes don't mean much, that they are rules professionals can pick and choose from. But that ain't the way it works. If they are going to break ethics they better have a good reason that is supported by science or, at the very least, a consensus of the experts responsible for guiding the profession.

xjx388 18th July 2018 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fudbucker (Post 12366374)
At the same time, we have a mentally unbalanced President who, if this were a time of war, would fit the definition of "traitor". People in power should not be sitting on their hands about this, which is precisely what the GOP is doing. There were a few strong condemnations after Monday, some mealymouthed attacks, and a lot of silence. Lack of outrage over things that are outrageous should be called out.

But it's a mistake to slap mental illness labels on those you disagree with. Call out all you like, but no one is listening when you use rhetoric like "delusion," "not thinking clearly," etc. If you want to debate Trump's fitness, actual actions, etc leave the name calling out and make actual arguments in the appropriate threads.

I know, wishful thinking . . .

WilliamSeger 18th July 2018 09:27 AM

What Trump has demonstrated in the last few weeks with his trade war, the G7, the EU, NATO, and now Russia, is that he cannot see and does not care about anything other than maintaining his own fragile ego. He is doing very damaging things that make no rational sense in terms of economics, national security, or politics, but he has justified them with a measurable increase in his pathological lying and/or delusions.

I read somewhere that a psychological "diagnosis" isn't just a label applied to past behavior; it's a prediction about future behavior. If we treat the Yale group's "prediction" as a science experiment, what have we learned?

LSSBB 18th July 2018 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fudbucker (Post 12365886)
You didn't do it while President and standing next to Ho Chi Minh at a press conference during the battle of Hue.

Otherwise, spot on.

This.

Fudbucker 18th July 2018 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xjx388 (Post 12366468)
But it's a mistake to slap mental illness labels on those you disagree with. Call out all you like, but no one is listening when you use rhetoric like "delusion," "not thinking clearly," etc. If you want to debate Trump's fitness, actual actions, etc leave the name calling out and make actual arguments in the appropriate threads.

I know, wishful thinking . . .

Are we back to pretending trump is normal? I wonder how some of you go through life. You seem to need a team of psychiatrists to tell you the most obvious things about people.

JoeMorgue 18th July 2018 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fudbucker (Post 12366803)
Are we back to pretending trump is normal?

No but you can be pretty far off center and it not be a matter of mental illness.

Fudbucker 18th July 2018 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue (Post 12366810)
No but you can be pretty far off center and it not be a matter of mental illness.

Trumps narcissism has been on display for years. This is really not a tough call to make.

Skeptic Ginger 18th July 2018 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leftus (Post 12366249)
So you've met the man? Shared a meal with him? Wrote a letter on your hospital letterhead with your diagnoses and treatment plan and sent it to him?

Out there? Where? In the Media? Or is there some secret access the Yale Group for truth had access to that is unfiltered?

Yawn... please read the rest of the thread before bringing up material that has been covered ad nauseum.

Thank you.

theprestige 18th July 2018 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 3point14 (Post 12366082)
I really, really still want to know what mechanism is in place to remove the president if he or she is obviously a totally broken loon.

Impeachment, the 25th Amendment, and quadrennial elections.

Quote:

There doesn't appear to be a process in place to assess the mental health of the president, therefore, if he were literally exhibiting the symptoms of paranoid delusion, how would the USA protect itself by having the president assessed psychologically? As far as I can see, there's no mechanism for this.
Impeachment, the 25th Amendment, and quadrennial elections.

Quote:

There doesn't appear to be a process that could be successful to remove him from office if he were a loon. I know that, technically, there is, but the grossly partisan nature of US politics makes it impossible.
Impeachment, the 25th Amendment, and quadrennial elections.

Quote:

The president could be psychologically broken beyond repair to the point that they were a danger to the US and to the world and there's literally nothing that could be done about it.
Impeachment, the 25th Amendment, and quadrennial elections.

Skeptic Ginger 18th July 2018 12:58 PM

Re remedy and the 25th Amendment, just like mental illness in any workplace, the disability is rarely if ever cause for dismissal. Rather, one has to document the behavior and base dismissal on specific acts.

Trump's getting there. But just when you see the GOP legislators freaking out at his actions, a day or two later enough gaslighting goes down to dampen the motivation for action.

It's going to take the Nov election and maybe even then all we can do is control the damage until 2020. After all, Pence is a scary prospect the way he hero worships Trump. Anyone who doubts Pence has issues (different from Trump's NPD) too should be reminded of this water bottle episode:

This Video Of Mike Pence Copying Donald Trump Is So Bizarre & I Can't Stop Laughing

Skeptic Ginger 18th July 2018 01:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xjx388 (Post 12366459)
I do assume that the APA has good reasons to insist upon an in-person exam.

So no studies then, even though you ask others for studies?

Quote:

Originally Posted by xjx388 (Post 12366459)
You most certainly do if the presentation is one you aren't familiar with; you don't just wing it because you're smart. Every doctor I've ever worked for or interacted with has a shelf of reference material. They attend hours of CME every year.... [Snipped a whole bunch of nonsense conflating research with education and experience.]

Oh for pity's sake. You keep conflating research with education and experience.

Quote:

Originally Posted by xjx388 (Post 12366459)
But more importantly, you continue to fundamentally misunderstand (or misrepresent) and minimize the situation. The Goldwater rule isn't just some "rule . . . on the internet." It is a part of the actual ethics code of the mental health profession and has been debated and reaffirmed. As such, the assertions of a handful of professionals are not persuasive to me. In effect, you are arguing that ethics codes don't mean much, that they are rules professionals can pick and choose from. But that ain't the way it works. If they are going to break ethics they better have a good reason that is supported by science or, at the very least, a consensus of the experts responsible for guiding the profession.

Been answered.

xjx388 18th July 2018 01:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WilliamSeger (Post 12366488)
What Trump has demonstrated in the last few weeks with his trade war, the G7, the EU, NATO, and now Russia, is that he cannot see and does not care about anything other than maintaining his own fragile ego. <snip>

Actually, what he has demonstrated is that he sucks at being President. Why do you feel the need to inject mental health?

Quote:

I read somewhere that a psychological "diagnosis" isn't just a label applied to past behavior; it's a prediction about future behavior. If we treat the Yale group's "prediction" as a science experiment, what have we learned?
Absolutely nothing. Diagnosis isn't a predictor of future behavior.

Skeptic Ginger 18th July 2018 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xjx388 (Post 12366468)
But it's a mistake to slap mental illness labels on those you disagree with.

No one in this thread is doing that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by xjx388 (Post 12366468)
Call out all you like, but no one is listening when you use rhetoric like "delusion," "not thinking clearly," etc. If you want to debate Trump's fitness, actual actions, etc leave the name calling out and make actual arguments in the appropriate threads.

I know, wishful thinking . . .

Actually, 'delusion' is common terminology for describing Trump's beliefs.

Skeptic Ginger 18th July 2018 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xjx388 (Post 12366847)
...
Absolutely nothing. Diagnosis isn't a predictor of future behavior.

Yes it is. And I have given examples in this thread.

xjx388 18th July 2018 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger (Post 12366846)
So no studies then, even though you ask others for studies?

I'm not sure why you think I need to present studies for a well-established standard of care. If you want to argue that that standard is not well founded, then yes, you do need to show evidence for that. If you want to say that your alternative methodology is equal to or better than the established standard, then yes, you do need to show evidence for that.

Does an astronomy defender need to prove that the earth is round to flat earthers? I don't think so.


Quote:

Oh for pity's sake. You keep conflating research with education and experience.
What are medical providers educated in? What do they have experience in doing? Applying medical research to the diagnosis and treatment of problems in the body.

Practitioners don't get to just make stuff up and justify it with their education and experience.

xjx388 18th July 2018 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger (Post 12366848)
No one in this thread is doing that.

Uh, here's Fudbucker doing just that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fudbucker (Post 12366320)
I honestly don't know what belief system Trump supporters are operating under, other than delusion at this point. ...snip...

What do you think about people who still support Trump? Are they level-headed people? I don't think so. I think it's obvious they're not thinking clearly. If they were, they wouldn't support him.

Effectively: "They don't agree with my thinking so they must be delusional and not thinking clearly."

Skeptic Ginger 18th July 2018 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xjx388 (Post 12366870)
I'm not sure why you think I need to present studies for a well-established standard of care. If you want to argue that that standard is not well founded, then yes, you do need to show evidence for that. If you want to say that your alternative methodology is equal to or better than the established standard, then yes, you do need to show evidence for that.

Does an astronomy defender need to prove that the earth is round to flat earthers? I don't think so.


What are medical providers educated in? What do they have experience in doing? Applying medical research to the diagnosis and treatment of problems in the body.

Practitioners don't get to just make stuff up and justify it with their education and experience.

You went off on this side track before. It's not supporting your case.

xjx388 18th July 2018 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger (Post 12366838)
Re remedy and the 25th Amendment, just like mental illness in any workplace, the disability is rarely if ever cause for dismissal. Rather, one has to document the behavior and base dismissal on specific acts.

Yes! We agree! Mental illness is irrelevant. It's the specific acts that matter and that he should be judged on.

Quote:

Trump's getting there. But just when you see the GOP legislators freaking out at his actions, a day or two later enough gaslighting goes down to dampen the motivation for action.

It's going to take the Nov election and maybe even then all we can do is control the damage until 2020. After all, Pence is a scary prospect the way he hero worships Trump. Anyone who doubts Pence has issues (different from Trump's NPD) too should be reminded of this water bottle episode:

This Video Of Mike Pence Copying Donald Trump Is So Bizarre & I Can't Stop Laughing
LOL. Now Pence has issues . . . now that this particular Pandora's Box is open, I guess we should brace ourselves for just this kind of attack.

xjx388 18th July 2018 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger (Post 12366874)
You went off on this side track before. It's not supporting your case.

I think it is. Am I wrong? Are practitioners NOT trained in applying medical research to health problems?

Skeptic Ginger 18th July 2018 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xjx388 (Post 12366877)
Yes! We agree! Mental illness is irrelevant. It's the specific acts that matter and that he should be judged on.

The two are not mutually exclusive.

Quote:

Originally Posted by xjx388 (Post 12366877)
LOL. Now Pence has issues . . . now that this particular Pandora's Box is open, I guess we should brace ourselves for just this kind of attack.

In case you missed it:
Quote:

Pence has issues (different from Trump's NPD)

WilliamSeger 18th July 2018 03:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xjx388 (Post 12366847)
Actually, what he has demonstrated is that he sucks at being President. Why do you feel the need to inject mental health?

I'm still baffled why you defend the professionalism of a profession that you apparently consider useless. Personally, I'd just like to make some sense out of what appears to be otherwise inexplicable behavior -- "he sucks" is a little too vague. And then there's this:

Quote:

Originally Posted by xjx388 (Post 12366847)
Absolutely nothing. Diagnosis isn't a predictor of future behavior.

Yes it is, when the diagnosis is that someone has a personality disorder: Either it's an accurate predictor of future behavior, or it must not be an accurate diagnosis. Yes, that's my layman's understanding, but I'll point out again that you have yet to explain any concept of "personality disorder" that would refute that understanding, much less the science behind requiring an in-person interview to reach that professional conclusion.

Meanwhile, I'm predicting that Trump will continue to "suck" in a very specific way: He will continue putting the maintenance of his own fragile ego above any other interests, including the national interests. Nothing much will matter to Trump except in how he perceives HE is being perceived by his base, so he will continue to misunderstand important situations and make important decisions in an information vacuum. Other world leaders who understand Trump's personality disorder will continue to take advantage of it. The "great deals" he promised will not be replacing all the deals he's breaking because the only negotiating skills he knows are blatantly insincere flattery and bullying. And the more he "sucks" the more he will be criticized, so the narcissistic rages will become more frequent. "Diagnosis is prognosis."

Fudbucker 18th July 2018 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xjx388 (Post 12366872)
Uh, here's Fudbucker doing just that.



Effectively: "They don't agree with my thinking objective reality so they must be delusional and not thinking clearly."

That's better.

xjx388 18th July 2018 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WilliamSeger (Post 12367000)
I'm still baffled why you defend the professionalism of a profession that you apparently consider useless.

Don't know where you got that from, but it's pretty ridiculous.
Quote:

Personally, I'd just like to make some sense out of what appears to be otherwise inexplicable behavior -- "he sucks" is a little too vague. And then there's this:
How is his behavior inexplicable? I can explain it very easily: He is in way over his head and has no idea what the hell he's doing.

Quote:

Yes it is, when the diagnosis is that someone has a personality disorder: Either it's an accurate predictor of future behavior, or it must not be an accurate diagnosis. Yes, that's my layman's understanding, but I'll point out again that you have yet to explain any concept of "personality disorder" that would refute that understanding,
It's your claim; you support it.

Quote:

Meanwhile, I'm predicting that Trump will continue to "suck" in a very specific way: He will continue putting the maintenance of his own fragile ego above any other interests...
You don't need a diagnosis to make any of those predictions. All you need is to observe his actual behavior thus far, which is the best way to try and figure out what he will do later.

Skeptic Ginger 18th July 2018 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WilliamSeger (Post 12367000)
...

Meanwhile, I'm predicting that Trump will continue to "suck" in a very specific way: He will continue putting the maintenance of his own fragile ego above any other interests, including the national interests. Nothing much will matter to Trump except in how he perceives HE is being perceived by his base, so he will continue to misunderstand important situations and make important decisions in an information vacuum. Other world leaders who understand Trump's personality disorder will continue to take advantage of it. The "great deals" he promised will not be replacing all the deals he's breaking because the only negotiating skills he knows are blatantly insincere flattery and bullying. And the more he "sucks" the more he will be criticized, so the narcissistic rages will become more frequent. "Diagnosis is prognosis."

Exactly.

He also imagines he's great so he will claim the Kim and Putin meetings were great successes even though they weren't. He claims he got NATO strengthened when he weakened it and so on.

And you'll hear his followers repeat his successes even when there was no success. He's so good at believing that he becomes convincing.

Skeptic Ginger 18th July 2018 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xjx388 (Post 12367008)
Don't know where you got that from, but it's pretty ridiculous.How is his behavior inexplicable? I can explain it very easily: He is in way over his head and has no idea what the hell he's doing.

No, that doesn't explain much of anything. It may be true, but it does not explain or predict his behavior. See the above post for things one can actually predict and explain about Trump.

Quote:

Originally Posted by xjx388 (Post 12367008)
You don't need a diagnosis to make any of those predictions. All you need is to observe his actual behavior thus far, which is the best way to try and figure out what he will do later.

And it's that thinking which explains why you have the predictions and explanations wrong.

3point14 18th July 2018 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leftus (Post 12366268)
Mental health is a sticky subject. There is no mechanism in place to force anyone to undergo a mental evaluation short of threats of self harm.]

I'm pretty sure my employer could remove me from my position based on my mental health.

Quote:

And if we go that route, why limit it to mental health. If you aren't getting your cardio in, who and when do we send in those to rush us to the gym?



Besides the 25th amendment? All it takes is the VP and the majority of the cabinet. I just can't support a coup d'état based on a biased Yale conference.

I don't actually view that as a viable proposition in the current US political climate.

3point14 18th July 2018 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theprestige (Post 12366826)
Impeachment, the 25th Amendment, and quadrennial elections.


Impeachment, the 25th Amendment, and quadrennial elections.


Impeachment, the 25th Amendment, and quadrennial elections.


Impeachment, the 25th Amendment, and quadrennial elections.


I think US politics is too partisan for that to actually happen. Which party is going to give the other that much ammunition?

Fudbucker 18th July 2018 04:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 3point14 (Post 12367056)
I think US politics is too partisan for that to actually happen. Which party is going to give the other that much ammunition?

Uh, the GOP? Trump is the leader of the party. He embarrasses the country daily. And then there's the Mueller and Cohen investigation

Roboramma 19th July 2018 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fudbucker (Post 12366320)
Quote:

Originally Posted by Roboramma
He doesn't subscribe to "that particular belief system", he subscribes to some of the same beliefs as other people who are characterised as conservatives (by themselves and others), and doesn't subscribe to other beliefs that are characterised as conservative.

The fact that conservatives are wrong about some things doesn't mean they are wrong about all things. The same is true of liberals. The same is true of everyone.

I honestly don't know what belief system Trump supporters are operating under, other than delusion at this point. The man obviously should not to be president, and after Monday whatever doubts there were about his unfitness (and there were no doubts) were finally laid to rest for any fool to see.

What are you talking about? I wasn't talking about "what belief system Trump supporters are operating under". theprestige isn't "Trump supporters", he's just himself and I'm sure he has very different beliefs than other people who voted for Trump.

I made a very specific point that he believes different things from what other conservatives believe and so I don't understand why you say it's a character flaw when he distances himself from evangelical christians who he clearly doesn't agree with.

Can you address that point?

Quote:

I do know that that belief system is as divorced from reality as most of the stuff conservatives believe.
Maybe so, but his beliefs are still different, and so holding him to account for the beliefs of others, which he disagrees with, is not particularly useful.

Quote:

What do you think about people who still support Trump? Are they level-headed people? I don't think so. I think it's obvious they're not thinking clearly. If they were, they wouldn't support him.
This is a complete non-sequitur that has nothing to do with what I asked you about. I'm happy to answer, but I hope you will actually address the original question that I asked you.

I don't know much about the people who support Trump, and I don't really care enough to try to understand why they do, but I think that it's likely different in different cases. Some are certainly not thinking clearly. Others have been influenced by the ideology of the community that they are living in, forming political opinions based not on what's true but what helps group coherence (which I think is a bad thing, but it's pretty common). Others are making a more jaded determination that Trump will move things in a direction that they want with respect to one or two issues that they care about and they don't care about the effect that he has with regard to other issues. I disagree with them both about those particular issues (generally anyway) and about the idea that his impact on other issues is negligible enough not to worry about, but I can understand that starting from their premises on those issues their stance can make sense. I think their starting premises are wrong.

3point14 19th July 2018 02:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fudbucker (Post 12367062)
Uh, the GOP? Trump is the leader of the party. He embarrasses the country daily. And then there's the Mueller and Cohen investigation

His position seems utterly unscalable at the moment. Nothing can touch him for any length of time, all his party fall in line like good little paid for politicians.

Trump doesn't seem to be in any danger of falling off his perch and he's being backed by his party.


In the event he were certifiable, or in the event there were a similar president who was being a loon, I can't see that their own party would assist in removing them. Without at least some of the presidents own party participating, the president cannot be removed. It's all too partisan now for the mechanism to work.

Fudbucker 19th July 2018 07:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 3point14 (Post 12367383)
His position seems utterly unscalable at the moment. Nothing can touch him for any length of time, all his party fall in line like good little paid for politicians.

Trump doesn't seem to be in any danger of falling off his perch and he's being backed by his party.


In the event he were certifiable, or in the event there were a similar president who was being a loon, I can't see that their own party would assist in removing them. Without at least some of the presidents own party participating, the president cannot be removed. It's all too partisan now for the mechanism to work.

Maybe. Trump has been getting more pushback lately. The GOP wasn't happy with child separation policies and now this. They may finally lose their patience one of these days, but Trump would have to really screw the pooch for that to happen.

carlitos 19th July 2018 07:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger (Post 12366838)
Anyone who doubts Pence has issues (different from Trump's NPD) too should be reminded of this water bottle episode:

We all have issues. Are you offering a diagnosis of Pence here, or just "saying whatever you want," or what exactly?

Ron_Tomkins 19th July 2018 07:42 AM

Hey guys, just dropping by to see how your plan to make a case in this forum that Donald Trump is clinically insane so that then somehow you can go from there to get him impeached, is going.

Fudbucker 19th July 2018 07:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roboramma (Post 12367342)
What are you talking about? I wasn't talking about "what belief system Trump supporters are operating under". theprestige isn't "Trump supporters", he's just himself and I'm sure he has very different beliefs than other people who voted for Trump.

He's an admitted Trump supporter. Whatever thought processes that allowed him to reach the conclusion that Trump should still be supported are deeply flawed.

Quote:

I made a very specific point that he believes different things from what other conservatives believe and so I don't understand why you say it's a character flaw when he distances himself from evangelical christians who he clearly doesn't agree with.

Can you address that point?
A. The salient point is that he is a Trump supporter. When I deal with flat-earthers, I don't care what they particularly believe about different things. I care about their flat-earth belief and what inspires it. It's fascinating to come across otherwise normal people who believe outlandishly stupid things, like "the Earth is flat", "What global warming?" and "MAGA!".

B. I don't think it's a character flaw to distance yourself from despicable people. If one keeps distancing oneself from a certain type of person (e.g., conservatives), it's evidence that maybe you're not as compatible with that belief system as you thought.

Quote:


Maybe so, but his beliefs are still different, and so holding him to account for the beliefs of others, which he disagrees with, is not particularly useful.
I'm holding him to account for his own Trump beliefs. This is a skeptic's forum. When people believe crazy stuff, we call them out on it.

Quote:

This is a complete non-sequitur that has nothing to do with what I asked you about. I'm happy to answer, but I hope you will actually address the original question that I asked you.

I don't know much about the people who support Trump, and I don't really care enough to try to understand why they do, but I think that it's likely different in different cases. Some are certainly not thinking clearly. Others have been influenced by the ideology of the community that they are living in, forming political opinions based not on what's true but what helps group coherence (which I think is a bad thing, but it's pretty common). Others are making a more jaded determination that Trump will move things in a direction that they want with respect to one or two issues that they care about and they don't care about the effect that he has with regard to other issues. I disagree with them both about those particular issues (generally anyway) and about the idea that his impact on other issues is negligible enough not to worry about, but I can understand that starting from their premises on those issues their stance can make sense. I think their starting premises are wrong.
I care.

Fudbucker 19th July 2018 07:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ron_Tomkins (Post 12367638)
Hey guys, just dropping by to see how your plan to make a case in this forum that Donald Trump is clinically insane so that then somehow you can go from there to get him impeached, is going.

It's not going well. The inmates are running the GOP asylum.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:31 AM.

Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2015-20, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.