ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags donald trump , mental illness issues , psychiatry incidents , psychiatry issues , Trump controversies

Reply
Old 5th November 2019, 11:40 AM   #2841
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,462
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post


I think Dr. Lee has donned a white t-shirt, put on her black leather jacket, revved up the motorcycle and hit the ramp at full speed...
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2019, 11:41 AM   #2842
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 86,228
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
Parliamentary governments have a Prime Minister, who exercises executive power and authority. They also usually have a separate Head of State, like QEII, who is (or is supposed to be) a unifying symbol of the nation as a whole. If the U.S. presidency was abolished, someone like Mitch McConnell would likely be the boss. Not much of an improvement.
The PM is just the leader of the party. As for the Queen, she is irrelevant to Canadian politics, really.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2019, 11:53 AM   #2843
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 20,563
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
I think Dr. Lee has donned a white t-shirt, put on her black leather jacket, revved up the motorcycle and hit the ramp at full speed...


Ayyyyyyyyy!
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2019, 12:03 PM   #2844
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,306
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
The PM is just the leader of the party. As for the Queen, she is irrelevant to Canadian politics, really.
Who commands the armed forces? Who appoints heads of government departments? The point is that replacing the President with a Prime Minister wouldn't necessarily get you a statesman.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2019, 12:07 PM   #2845
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 51,937
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
As for the Queen, she is irrelevant to Canadian politics, really.
That reminds me of the character in every slasher film who declares the killer is dead and now everyone's safe.

Do not recommend splitting up to search Canada to prove the Queen isn't there. It won't work out nicely.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2019, 12:10 PM   #2846
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 86,228
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
Who commands the armed forces? Who appoints heads of government departments? The point is that replacing the President with a Prime Minister wouldn't necessarily get you a statesman.
I didn't say it would.

Also it's a lot easier to get rid of a PM than a President. The party has quite a bit of say on what's what.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2019, 02:03 PM   #2847
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 21,503
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
See, here's where recognizing his pathology matters. That is not what he would do.

He will act rash, vengeful, unpredictable. The last thing he'd do is give up and hide in a corner.
I thought that he would leave to be in his own tower, in his own world, in his own gold house? With his followers, so that he wouldn't have to deal with reality?

Originally Posted by Psychiatrist Lance Dodes on the "panicked" state of the "most dangerous person on the planet"
The more pressure Donald Trump is under, the more he will be obviously out of touch with reality. I think in the last moment of his psychotic state as president, rather than lying on the floor shouting in a psychotic way, I think he will make up his own reality. Trump will declare that everybody is evil. He'll leave to be in his own tower, in his own world, in his own gold house. He'll gather his followers around him, so he doesn't ever have to deal with reality. Like a cult leader, Donald Trump will always have the Trump followers and he'll always believe himself to be a god.

The question is which cult leader would he be like?

Jim Jones is not one I'd like with access to the football.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2019, 02:20 PM   #2848
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 39,002
Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
The question is which cult leader would he be like?

Jim Jones is not one I'd like with access to the football.
When you think about it, he's not really like any cult leader. Jones, Rajneesh, Bikram, Hitler... All the notable cult leaders had already established their cults by this point in their lives. Trump's "cult" is more a celebrity thing, really. Like Kim Kardashian or Elon Musk.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2019, 02:35 PM   #2849
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 76,556
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
I think Dr. Lee has donned a white t-shirt, put on her black leather jacket, revved up the motorcycle and hit the ramp at full speed...
Because she commented that Trump eats an unhealthy diet?

Not that she needs credentials for that but psychiatrists are also MDs.
__________________
That new avatar is cuteness overload.
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2019, 02:48 PM   #2850
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 21,503
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
When you think about it, he's not really like any cult leader. Jones, Rajneesh, Bikram, Hitler... All the notable cult leaders had already established their cults by this point in their lives. Trump's "cult" is more a celebrity thing, really. Like Kim Kardashian or Elon Musk.
How do you know it's not just the opportunity. Look at his behaviour and his increasing disconnect from reality.

I am not an expert in psychiatric illnesses, but neither are you. We both can tell that Trump is unwell but we don't know the prognosis, or what he's likely to do. That is why it is important to have him medically checked.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2019, 04:07 PM   #2851
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,462
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Because she commented that Trump eats an unhealthy diet?

Not that she needs credentials for that but psychiatrists are also MDs.
Yes. It's ridculous:

"Trump's self-destructive diet: Psychiatrist says unhealthy food choices may affect his mental health"

What a stupid headline. We don't know what his actual diet is, but even if it's as bad as the worst reports, it reflects the diet of many Americans. We like fried chicken, pizza and Micky D's. And this:

Quote:
Not only will there be generally impaired brain function and brain health, but there is an immediate worsening of mood disorders, such as depression and angry outbursts. Research suggests that much of this damage can be reversed and improvement is possible if one switched to a more balanced diet; without switching, however, the damage only accumulates.
is completely ridiculous and without merit. We'd all be walking depressed rage-zombies or something.

So yeah. She (and Salon) jumped the shark with this one.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2019, 04:36 PM   #2852
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 20,563
I know that he's fat, but I actually don't believe that he eats a 2,500 calorie meal for lunch, unless that's his only meal of the day. He's a rich guy; he probably wants all of that stuff there so that he can take what he likes, and leave the rest.
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2019, 04:52 PM   #2853
ArchSas
Thinker
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 196
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
And this:

is completely ridiculous and without merit. We'd all be walking depressed rage-zombies or something.
Are you sure about that? AFAIK, it's pretty much accepted in modern psychology that diet likely can have an affect on mental health. I certainly remember it being brought up in psych classes and during discussions I've had with medical anthropologists. I'm not in a position right now to find a ton of sources, but a very brief google search of the topic ("diet affect on mental health" brought up a number of scholarly articles, as well as plenty of more pop-oriented takes like this:

https://www.apa.org/monitor/2017/09/food-mental-health
https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/...d-201511168626

Without having observed Trump personally (at the very least to verify his diet), I'd say that Dr. Lee is probably overreaching on her conclusions, but she's making a valid point. Trump eats like crap and is bad shape (both, at least partially, as a result of his weird, somewhat crazy beliefs about diet and exercise, for what that's worth), both of which can have a negative influence on mental health.

Last edited by ArchSas; 5th November 2019 at 04:59 PM.
ArchSas is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2019, 05:16 PM   #2854
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,462
Originally Posted by ArchSas View Post
Are you sure about that? AFAIK, it's pretty much accepted in modern psychology that diet likely can have an effect on mental health. I certainly remember it being brought up in psych classes and during discussions I've had with medical anthropologists. I'm not in a position right now to find a ton of sources, but a very brief google search of the topic ("diet effect on mental health" brought up a number of scholarly articles, as well as plenty of more pop-oriented takes like this:

https://www.apa.org/monitor/2017/09/food-mental-health
https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/...d-201511168626
She cannot say that his diet is contributing to his mental problems, which is the clear implication. She cannot even say what his diet actually is or if he even has mental problems having never met the guy. His diet, if we take the reports about it at face value, reflects the diet of many, even most Americans. To connect his diet with her previous statements about his dangerousness, which again is the clear implication of this article, is ridiculous and without merit.

The general idea that diet can influence mental health is not controversial. Even so, the size of that influence is not currently known to any degree but I think it's safe to say that the Standard American Diet does not turn Americans into the kind of depressed rage-zombie she describes with "an immediate worsening of mood disorders, such as depression and angry outbursts." It's over the top.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2019, 06:58 PM   #2855
Lurch
Muse
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 959
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Yes. It's ridculous:

"Trump's self-destructive diet: Psychiatrist says unhealthy food choices may affect his mental health"

What a stupid headline. We don't know what his actual diet is, but even if it's as bad as the worst reports, it reflects the diet of many Americans. We like fried chicken, pizza and Micky D's. And this:

is completely ridiculous and without merit. We'd all be walking depressed rage-zombies or something.

So yeah. She (and Salon) jumped the shark with this one.
Well, about 40-ish per cent of the US electorate were demonstrably depressed rage-zombies who elected that sack of rotting yams into office.
Lurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2019, 07:35 PM   #2856
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 76,556
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
She cannot say that his diet is contributing to his mental problems, which is the clear implication. She cannot even say what his diet actually is or if he even has mental problems having never met the guy. His diet, if we take the reports about it at face value, reflects the diet of many, even most Americans. To connect his diet with her previous statements about his dangerousness, which again is the clear implication of this article, is ridiculous and without merit.

The general idea that diet can influence mental health is not controversial. Even so, the size of that influence is not currently known to any degree but I think it's safe to say that the Standard American Diet does not turn Americans into the kind of depressed rage-zombie she describes with "an immediate worsening of mood disorders, such as depression and angry outbursts." It's over the top.
OOuuu look over there: squirrel!!!
__________________
That new avatar is cuteness overload.
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2019, 08:53 PM   #2857
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,462
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
OOuuu look over there: squirrel!!!


I’m curious to hear why you think I’m trying to distract from something...I think I addressed my problem with Lee’s statements in that article. I realize you disagree but that does not equate to me distracting from anything.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2019, 08:54 PM   #2858
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,462
Originally Posted by Lurch View Post
Well, about 40-ish per cent of the US electorate were demonstrably depressed rage-zombies who elected that sack of rotting yams into office.


Sick burn, but I’m not sure how that addresses anything I said.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2019, 10:11 PM   #2859
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,306
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
She cannot say that his diet is contributing to his mental problems, which is the clear implication. She cannot even say what his diet actually is or if he even has mental problems having never met the guy.
.....
His diet preferences are well-documented, going back to before he ran for President. He particularly likes fast food because it would be harder for somebody to poison him. A dozen cans a day of caffeinated soda can't be good for anybody. The diet probably didn't make him crazy, but it's certainly part of the big picture.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/09/u...rump-diet.html
https://qz.com/1177604/these-are-don...-and-exercise/
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 01:01 AM   #2860
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,462
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
His diet preferences are well-documented, going back to before he ran for President. He particularly likes fast food because it would be harder for somebody to poison him. A dozen cans a day of caffeinated soda can't be good for anybody. The diet probably didn't make him crazy, but it's certainly part of the big picture.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/09/u...rump-diet.html

https://qz.com/1177604/these-are-don...-and-exercise/


Ok...

Where were the shrinks when all this was known before he was elected?
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 01:51 AM   #2861
The Don
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Sir Fynwy
Posts: 27,334
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
I know that he's fat, but I actually don't believe that he eats a 2,500 calorie meal for lunch, unless that's his only meal of the day. He's a rich guy; he probably wants all of that stuff there so that he can take what he likes, and leave the rest.
The "back of fag-packet" calculation I use is 10 calories per pound per day to lose weight, 15 calories per pound per day to maintain weight for a sedentary person. Of course this varies considerably and it's only a vague guide.

Despite what his doctor might say, Donald Trump is around 300 lbs which means that he'd maintain weight if he consumed around 4,500 calories a day. Bearing in mind that he usually skips breakfast, drinks diet soft drinks and doesn't drink alcohol, 2,500 calories for one of his two meals a day doesn't sound unreasonable IMO.

President Trump also looks like a plate cleaner to me. He seems a glutton when it comes to women, attention and money so IMO it's not too much of a stretch to think that the same is true for food (Two Scoops !!)
The Don is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 07:32 AM   #2862
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 20,563
Thanks The Don. It takes around 2,000 net kcal or so for me to maintain weight, but I forget that this guy weights almost two of me. You might be right. And two scoops of ice cream might be good portion control, but I suspect that they are big scoops ...

And that is scary about this type of diet being normalized in America.
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2019, 12:27 PM   #2863
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,306
New book reports on life in Trumplandia:
Quote:
The author describes senior officials waking up in the morning “in a full-blown panic” over the wild pronouncements the president had made on Twitter.

“It’s like showing up at the nursing home at daybreak to find your elderly uncle running pantsless across the courtyard and cursing loudly about the cafeteria food, as worried attendants tried to catch him,” the author writes. “You’re stunned, amused, and embarrassed all at the same time. Only your uncle probably wouldn’t do it every single day, his words aren’t broadcast to the public, and he doesn’t have to lead the US government once he puts his pants on.”

And food for thought:
Quote:
As he ranted about federal courts ruling against some of his policies, including the 2017 travel ban, the author writes, Trump once asked White House lawyers to draft a bill to send to Congress reducing the number of federal judges.

“Can we just get rid of the judges? Let’s get rid of the [expletive] judges,” the president said, according to the book. “There shouldn’t be any at all, really.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...5a8_story.html
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2019, 12:19 PM   #2864
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 18,587
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Ok...

Where were the shrinks when all this was known before he was elected?

You would have accepted a commentary on Trump's mental health from a professional while the election campaign was going on, would you?

My assumption would be that you would have reacted to that by claiming it to be a partisan move to affect the election. Am I wrong?
__________________
Up the River!

Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2019, 11:03 PM   #2865
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,462
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
You would have accepted a commentary on Trump's mental health from a professional while the election campaign was going on, would you?

My assumption would be that you would have reacted to that by claiming it to be a partisan move to affect the election. Am I wrong?


You are not wrong.

My point in saying that was: if all this stuff was known before the election AND these shrinks felt they had a duty to warn that overrides ethical concerns, where the hell were they? Why wait to speak up until after the election when it’s too late?
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 12:24 AM   #2866
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 9,457
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
You are not wrong.

My point in saying that was: if all this stuff was known before the election AND these shrinks felt they had a duty to warn that overrides ethical concerns, where the hell were they? Why wait to speak up until after the election when it’s too late?
Because nobody thought the idiot was going to win.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 08:40 PM   #2867
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,462
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Because nobody thought the idiot was going to win.
I don’t think that’s a good excuse. If there’s such a big moral imperative to warn us all, it would seem to me that the time for warning was before the election. Afterwards, it smells too much of sour grapes. If Bandy X. Lee, MD et. al. had written their book and made the media rounds before the election it may have made a difference with enough voters in those close States. Before the election is the chance to reach the people that matter -voters; afterwards, the only hope is that the party in power makes a move against their own President...not much of a chance there.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 11:29 PM   #2868
Lurch
Muse
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 959
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
I don’t think that’s a good excuse. If there’s such a big moral imperative to warn us all, it would seem to me that the time for warning was before the election. Afterwards, it smells too much of sour grapes. If Bandy X. Lee, MD et. al. had written their book and made the media rounds before the election it may have made a difference with enough voters in those close States. Before the election is the chance to reach the people that matter -voters; afterwards, the only hope is that the party in power makes a move against their own President...not much of a chance there.
And if they'd issued a warning before the election, the Right would be shrieking "Foul!"

You're in a delicious position, where you get to call either "unfair meddling" or "sour grapes." In neither instance will you offer a concession.
Lurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 11:47 PM   #2869
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 9,457
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
I don’t think that’s a good excuse. If there’s such a big moral imperative to warn us all, it would seem to me that the time for warning was before the election. Afterwards, it smells too much of sour grapes. If Bandy X. Lee, MD et. al. had written their book and made the media rounds before the election it may have made a difference with enough voters in those close States. Before the election is the chance to reach the people that matter -voters; afterwards, the only hope is that the party in power makes a move against their own President...not much of a chance there.
It's an excellent reason. If he'd lost the election, he'd have no political power. He'd go back to being what he'd always been: a narcissistic, pathological liar obsessed with making money, playing golf and playing the big shot .

Originally Posted by Lurch View Post
And if they'd issued a warning before the election, the Right would be shrieking "Foul!"

You're in a delicious position, where you get to call either "unfair meddling" or "sour grapes." In neither instance will you offer a concession.
Exactly.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 06:34 AM   #2870
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 51,937
Anybody stupid enough to vote for an obviously insane person is also too stupid to change their minds after hearing a warning. So issuing a public service announcement about Trump's mental craziness would have achieved nothing. You can't use reason on the unreasonable, they're immune to it. You'd meet with more success using unreason on them: instead of convincing them Trump's obviously insane tell them he's a devil worshipper. He got into it by reading Harry Potter, and now he sacrifices cats in a secret ritual room in Trump Tower.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 07:44 AM   #2871
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,943
If they believe that he has read books, they'll believe anything.
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx
dann is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 08:26 AM   #2872
Safe-Keeper
Philosopher
 
Safe-Keeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 8,606
Originally Posted by dann View Post
If they believe that he has read books, they'll believe anything.
I heard someone claim he has an IQ of 160. I can't even picture him sitting still and concentrating for long enough to take an IQ test.

Eta: oh, and see my sig.
__________________
"He's like a drunk being given a sobriety test by the police after being pulled over. Just as a drunk can't walk a straight line, Trump can't think in a straight line. He's all over the place."
--Stacyhs
Safe-Keeper is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 09:00 AM   #2873
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,462
Originally Posted by Lurch View Post
And if they'd issued a warning before the election, the Right would be shrieking "Foul!"
Maybe, but who cares? From their POV, what they are doing is ethically justified. They are speaking out now as concerned professionals, why not speak out before?

Quote:
You're in a delicious position, where you get to call either "unfair meddling" or "sour grapes." In neither instance will you offer a concession.
I would be in the same position regardless: Professionals shouldn't do what they are doing, period. Before or after the election doesn't matter a whit to my argument nor does Left or Right figure in; it's unethical by their profession's standards no matter what.

As far as "meddling" goes, they are US citizens; they can "meddle" all they want to. It's not like the Yale group are Russian hackers or something. My concerns have nothing to do with whether or not it's unfair but whether or not what they are doing is the right thing to do. Bottom line? If it's the right thing to do now, it was definitely the right thing to do before the election. So why didn't they? "He was gonna lose," seems extremely weak; that was not a foregone conclusion -obviously. They could have made that difference for a few people.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 09:11 AM   #2874
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 39,002
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Anybody stupid enough to vote for an obviously insane person is also too stupid to change their minds after hearing a warning. So issuing a public service announcement about Trump's mental craziness would have achieved nothing. You can't use reason on the unreasonable, they're immune to it. You'd meet with more success using unreason on them: instead of convincing them Trump's obviously insane tell them he's a devil worshipper. He got into it by reading Harry Potter, and now he sacrifices cats in a secret ritual room in Trump Tower.
Does this mean that you reject the premise that Trump won in part because of swing voters who might not vote for him again in 2020?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2019, 09:17 AM   #2875
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 51,937
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Does this mean that you reject the premise that Trump won in part because of swing voters who might not vote for him again in 2020?
I've never believed in "swing voters". I think its more likely that people skip voting in elections when they don't like the candidates, rather than people sometimes voting for one party and other times voting for the other party. I'm sure the latter segment of the public exists, but doubt their numbers are great enough to affect a presidential election.

I think apathy and inertia are stronger forces than political tastes.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:39 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.