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 20th July 2018, 05:58 PM   #441
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 74,465
So, no evidence cited then? Got it.
__________________
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 20th July 2018, 06:05 PM   #442
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,995
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
So, no evidence cited then? Got it.
Good. So on what are you basing the validity of a distant diagnosis?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 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 20th July 2018, 06:09 PM   #443
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 12,857
Picking up here where the crickets left off...
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
He doesn't have a history of violence or physical aggression - offhanded comments about grabbing women's genitals aside, he hasn't, to my knowledge, been involved in any physical altercations, physical threats, or similar
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
Not so. He explicitly encouraged followers to physically assault protesters who were behaving lawfully. This happened on more than one occasion.
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
Not really the same thing.
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
Not the same thing as what?

He unambiguously encouraged his supporters to beat protesters who were behaving lawfully. Saying that he hasn't been involved in "physical threats" is just wrong.

As well, he's been accused of assault by multiple women.
Since you didn't explain, I'll take the liberty of filling in the blanks:

What you mean EC, is that if you ignore the many instances of Trump encouraging violence, and if you ignore the many accusations of sexual assault, and if you ignore his admission/bragging about sexual assault, then yes, he hasn't been involved in "any physical altercations, physical threats, or similar".

You invented boundaries out of whole cloth as to what does and doesn't constitute violence, and foisted it in defense of Donald Trump -- a person who has repeatedly displayed violent tendencies. What a steaming load of BS.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche 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 20th July 2018, 06:29 PM   #444
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 74,465
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Good. So on what are you basing the validity of a distant diagnosis?
Expertise (not just mine) and the obvious.

You are the one with an unrealistic expectation there needs to be a study.
__________________
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 20th July 2018, 07:08 PM   #445
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 20,293
“The obvious” is right up there with common sense.

:
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 20th July 2018, 07:43 PM   #446
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 74,465
Looks like we need a review again, given people keep bringing up already covered material.

The APA (one or both of them) has a position paper that psychologists/psychiatrists shouldn't 'treat' patients they haven't seen in the office. The word 'diagnose' might be in the statement as well, I'm not going to look it up. It's a given you need some kind of diagnosis if one is going to treat a patient.

It's called 'hallway' medicine in my circles. The point being staff, friends and relatives often ask for medical opinions from health care providers. It's bad medicine to treat people when they ask you for a prescription or a medical opinion 'in the hallway' so to speak.

Every professional knows there are pitfalls to that, or if they don't they should.

So it makes sense that would be one of the positions the APA officially stands by.

It is not, contrary to what some people in this thread believe, an absolute evidence based position that one cannot make a competent diagnosis without seeing a patient in-person. There are exceptions.

A number of examples were given where professionals are asked for their psychiatric expertise about patients without an in-person exam, such as for a patient who might be incarcerated but refusing to be seen. Or even patients that are in the hospital and the hospital has asked for an emergency 72 hour hold, and said patient refuses an evaluation.

In addition, a number of highly qualified professionals have weighed in (and been cited) on this case that there is more than enough evidence in the public sphere about Trump and an in-person exam would not add anything.

The people in the thread stamping their feet and asserting 'there's no science' don't have the expertise to understand what the need for an in-person exam is all about. They lack the expertise to apply the standard.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 20th July 2018 at 07:44 PM.
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 21st July 2018, 10:46 AM   #447
Leftus
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,126
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Yawn... please read the rest of the thread before bringing up material that has been covered ad nauseum.

Thank you.
Hand wave noted.

Your welcome.
Leftus 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 21st July 2018, 11:56 AM   #448
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 74,465
Originally Posted by Leftus View Post
Hand wave noted.

Your welcome.
So not spoon feeding you material covered in the thread ad nauseum is hand waving?
__________________
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 21st July 2018, 09:26 PM   #449
The Norseman
Meandering fecklessly
 
The Norseman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,161
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
All of your fears and criticism of Trump could be ascertained simply by looking at him. I share those fears -to some extent anyway. However, I see no value in elevating the same kind of criticism that a lot of America is engaging in to some kind of authoritative criticism. We gain nothing by such “professional criticism “ and have a lot to lose. With this precedent, I’m sure we will come to a point when the “professional criticism” applies to a non-GOP candidate. We’ll just have to see if there is some consistency at that point.
Look.

The 'Goldwater Rule' was made in 196bloody4.

If there were gonna be a flood of presidents being called insane since then, it would have happened by now, wouldn't you think? Every single pres has been called 'insane' or whatevs since the dawn of time. People have linked to 'studies' which 'show' that ¼ of all presidents have some sort of mental illness. (don't buy it, but whatever).

There have been partisan politics and hate from both sides for the last fifty years and ONE time that a bunch of professionals have stepped forward and said, "this one case is unique and we're really, really worried."

And your biggest fear is that this will suddenly get out of control? Now?

Seriously, this doesn't give you even the slightest pause that the professionals actually are worried for a legitimate reason and are willing to speak out, probably knowing the backlash they'd get and still feeling it was just that important?



Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Looks like we need a review again, given people keep bringing up already covered material.

The APA (one or both of them) has a position paper that psychologists/psychiatrists shouldn't 'treat' patients they haven't seen in the office. The word 'diagnose' might be in the statement as well, I'm not going to look it up. It's a given you need some kind of diagnosis if one is going to treat a patient.

It's called 'hallway' medicine in my circles. The point being staff, friends and relatives often ask for medical opinions from health care providers. It's bad medicine to treat people when they ask you for a prescription or a medical opinion 'in the hallway' so to speak.

Every professional knows there are pitfalls to that, or if they don't they should.

So it makes sense that would be one of the positions the APA officially stands by.

It is not, contrary to what some people in this thread believe, an absolute evidence based position that one cannot make a competent diagnosis without seeing a patient in-person. There are exceptions.

A number of examples were given where professionals are asked for their psychiatric expertise about patients without an in-person exam, such as for a patient who might be incarcerated but refusing to be seen. Or even patients that are in the hospital and the hospital has asked for an emergency 72 hour hold, and said patient refuses an evaluation.

In addition, a number of highly qualified professionals have weighed in (and been cited) on this case that there is more than enough evidence in the public sphere about Trump and an in-person exam would not add anything.

The people in the thread stamping their feet and asserting 'there's no science' don't have the expertise to understand what the need for an in-person exam is all about. They lack the expertise to apply the standard.
Speaking of which, I worked for over three years as an office manager in a chemical dependency treatment agency and it was our policy (and I think even mandated by law but can't remember offhand now) to give three or four tests such as the SASSI, GAIN, MAST, and DAST plus a background history.

We also obtained things like driving history, criminal history, and depending on circumstances, other official paperwork (if they were being seen on a DV charge and alcohol/drugs were involved).

Why? Because clients lie. And we sought outside evidence to include in an evaluation of whether or not they had a problem with drugs/alcohol. When reports were sent to judges and lawyers and so on, we had to note specifically if we could not get those records for whatever reason because they naturally could affect a diagnosis.

Similar in nature to what's happening here. There is a need to obtain third-party records in addition to the formal interview to have an accurate picture of what's going on.

Every situation is different and before anyone asks, no, our agency did not do an evaluation on someone without an in-person interview.

But in this case when the entirety of symptoms are a list of external, observable behavior as well as the chances of lying being much higher with this population versus others, AND it happens to involve a single person with a tremendous amount of power over the nation and the world, I don't see this as an unforgivable sin which will ruin the entire field of psychiatry/psychology for ever and ever amen.
The Norseman 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 21st July 2018, 11:04 PM   #450
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 7,873
Come on, Norseman!
Now the Cubans also support the idea that the "stable genius" in the White House isn't stable at all! Doesn't that prove that the whole thing is a Commie conspiracy?!

Quote:
In fact, if there is one thing that many Cubans can agree on, it is that the sitting U.S. President is, to put it mildly, mentally unstable. As one Cuban confided to me: “A lot of Americans are crazy (when it comes to Cuba). But Trump is the craziest of all the Americans.”
PETER MCKENNA: Sonic attacks on diplomatic staff in Cuba continue to baffle (The Guardian, May 24, 2018)
__________________
/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 22nd July 2018, 08:00 AM   #451
Safe-Keeper
Philosopher
 
Safe-Keeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 8,452
Originally Posted by WilliamSeger View Post
Well, making the case that he's mentally ill has been thwarted by an ingenious defense: If you're not a psychiatrist, then you don't know what you're talking about, but if you are, then you're not allowed to talk about it, and if you do that proves you don't know what you're talking about. And furthermore, having a mentally ill president is either not dangerous or it's a danger voters deserve, so the issue is moot anyway.

And yet, everyone here knows why this thread is still alive.
I came very close to nominating. Well done.
__________________
In choosing to support humanitarian organizations, it's best to choose those that do not have "militant wings" (Mycroft, 2013)
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 22nd July 2018, 08:25 AM   #452
Safe-Keeper
Philosopher
 
Safe-Keeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 8,452
Quote:
He doesn't have a history of violence or physical aggression - offhanded comments about grabbing women's genitals aside, he hasn't, to my knowledge, been involved in any physical altercations, physical threats, or similar
No, never.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/do...ment-violence/
__________________
In choosing to support humanitarian organizations, it's best to choose those that do not have "militant wings" (Mycroft, 2013)
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 22nd July 2018, 09:48 AM   #453
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 74,465
Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper View Post
I came very close to nominating. Well done.
I already did.
__________________
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 22nd July 2018, 10:46 AM   #454
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 12,857
This is for the benefit of Sarah Sanders, Emily's Cat, and anyone else who is utterly oblivious to Trump's many threats of violence, in each instance directed towards protesters who were acting lawfully...

Originally Posted by Thug-in-Chief
I’d like to punch him in the face
...
Maybe he should have been roughed up
...
Part of the problem is no one wants to hurt each other anymore
...
I don’t know if I’ll do the fighting myself or if other people will
...
The audience hit back. That’s what we need a little bit more of.
...
If you do (hurt him), I’ll defend you in court, don’t worry about it
...
I’ll beat the crap out of you
...
Knock the crap out of him, would you? I promise you, I will pay your legal fees
Originally Posted by Sanders
The president in no way, form, or fashion has ever promoted or encouraged violence.
Scroll up for EC's long, thoughtful(?) post in which she make the spectacular claim that Trump has never threatened violence.

I'll leave it up to y'all what this means insofar as his mental health.

link
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche 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 22nd July 2018, 10:59 AM   #455
WilliamSeger
Illuminator
 
WilliamSeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,540
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
This is for the benefit of Sarah Sanders, Emily's Cat, and anyone else who is utterly oblivious to Trump's many threats of violence, in each instance directed towards protesters who were acting lawfully...

Scroll up for EC's long, thoughtful(?) post in which she make the spectacular claim that Trump has never threatened violence.

I'll leave it up to y'all what this means insofar as his mental health.

link
It was disturbing when Trump said he thought he could murder someone and not lose any supporters. It was beyond disturbing when he recently repeated it. (ETA) It was also disturbing when he suggested that "second amendment people" might need to keep Hillary from nominating liberal SC judges.

How often does he have these violent fantasies?

Last edited by WilliamSeger; 22nd July 2018 at 11:01 AM.
WilliamSeger 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 22nd July 2018, 01:04 PM   #456
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 8,025
Originally Posted by WilliamSeger View Post
It was disturbing when Trump said he thought he could murder someone and not lose any supporters. It was beyond disturbing when he recently repeated it. (ETA) It was also disturbing when he suggested that "second amendment people" might need to keep Hillary from nominating liberal SC judges.

How often does he have these violent fantasies?
What is even more disturbing is that he's most likely right.
Stacyhs 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 22nd July 2018, 01:16 PM   #457
WilliamSeger
Illuminator
 
WilliamSeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,540
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
What is even more disturbing is that he's most likely right.
Even I have never insulted Trump followers as much as Trump did himself with that comment. I prefer to think that he would lose at least a few.
WilliamSeger 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 22nd July 2018, 02:19 PM   #458
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 8,025
Originally Posted by WilliamSeger View Post
Even I have never insulted Trump followers as much as Trump did himself with that comment. I prefer to think that he would lose at least a few.
Some. But I think we'd be appalled at how many would make excuses for him. I'm sure Obama's or Hillary's names would come up.
Stacyhs 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 22nd July 2018, 04:01 PM   #459
The Norseman
Meandering fecklessly
 
The Norseman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,161
Originally Posted by WilliamSeger View Post
Even I have never insulted Trump followers as much as Trump did himself with that comment. I prefer to think that he would lose at least a few.
He did say, on video during one of his rallys, something about the uneducated are the ones who love him and vote for him, so... he's exactly right. He can insult them all to their faces and because intelligence is reviled in much of the country, they lap it up and beg for more.
The Norseman 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 22nd July 2018, 10:34 PM   #460
WilliamSeger
Illuminator
 
WilliamSeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,540
More violent fantasies as Trump's mental state continues to deteriorate:

@realDonaldTrump: "To Iranian President Rouhani: NEVER, EVER THREATEN THE UNITED STATES AGAIN OR YOU WILL SUFFER CONSEQUENCES THE LIKES OF WHICH FEW THROUGHOUT HISTORY HAVE EVER SUFFERED BEFORE. WE ARE NO LONGER A COUNTRY THAT WILL STAND FOR YOUR DEMENTED WORDS OF VIOLENCE & DEATH. BE CAUTIOUS!"
WilliamSeger 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 22nd July 2018, 10:49 PM   #461
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 74,465
Originally Posted by WilliamSeger View Post
More violent fantasies as Trump's mental state continues to deteriorate:

@realDonaldTrump: "To Iranian President Rouhani: NEVER, EVER THREATEN THE UNITED STATES AGAIN OR YOU WILL SUFFER CONSEQUENCES THE LIKES OF WHICH FEW THROUGHOUT HISTORY HAVE EVER SUFFERED BEFORE. WE ARE NO LONGER A COUNTRY THAT WILL STAND FOR YOUR DEMENTED WORDS OF VIOLENCE & DEATH. BE CAUTIOUS!"
OK, that is a bad sign.
__________________
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 22nd July 2018, 11:21 PM   #462
alfaniner
Penultimate Amazing
 
alfaniner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 19,987
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
OK, that is a bad sign.
That's like saying somewhere just got nuked and then "Well, that's gonna leave a mark..."

Yikes.
__________________
Science is self-correcting.
Woo is self-contradicting.
alfaniner 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 23rd July 2018, 12:08 AM   #463
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 8,025
Originally Posted by WilliamSeger View Post
More violent fantasies as Trump's mental state continues to deteriorate:

@realDonaldTrump: "To Iranian President Rouhani: NEVER, EVER THREATEN THE UNITED STATES AGAIN OR YOU WILL SUFFER CONSEQUENCES THE LIKES OF WHICH FEW THROUGHOUT HISTORY HAVE EVER SUFFERED BEFORE. WE ARE NO LONGER A COUNTRY THAT WILL STAND FOR YOUR DEMENTED WORDS OF VIOLENCE & DEATH. BE CAUTIOUS!"
Hey, Media! Look over here! SHINY! Don't look at my flip-flopping about the Witch Hunt HOAX or the FISA warrant reveal...SQUIRREL!!

The master of distraction is at it again.
Stacyhs 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 23rd July 2018, 01:57 AM   #464
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 86,260
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
The point was that the longevity of a thread says nothing about the validity of the woo in question. In this case, the specific woo is "distant diagnosis." There are parallels between the kinds of arguments made in support of "distant diagnosis" and the arguments made in support of stuff like stage hypnosis, psychics, aliens, etc.

-Look, here are a bunch of experts that agree!
-I myself am an expert and I'm telling you it's real!
-This is just obvious stuff!
-Why are you so dogmatic in your support of science?

Stuff like that can go on forever . . .
Remote diagnosis is a standard practice in medicine. I think you mean a diagnosis without a one to one interview, but this is also standard, Drs will send case files to other Drs for a professional opinion based on just the case notes. Your objection is much narrower I. e. there is not enough quality "case notes" in this instance.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat 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 23rd July 2018, 02:34 AM   #465
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,186
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Hey, Media! Look over here! SHINY! Don't look at my flip-flopping about the Witch Hunt HOAX or the FISA warrant reveal...SQUIRREL!!

The master of distraction is at it again.
Probably.

My god, I have never realized how much I like and trust the FBI before now. Maude bless 'em. The CIA I could do without, but the FBI and military are supercool in my book for the time being, at least.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb 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 23rd July 2018, 06:50 AM   #466
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 20,293
I saw an interesting article on how psychologists are revisiting some landmark studies. This is not directly pertinent to this case; I just thought that some of you might find it interesting. Personally, I never knew about the coaching of 'guards' in the Stanford prison experiment.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/16/h...rd-prison.html
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 1st August 2018, 01:59 PM   #467
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 12,857
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
This is for the benefit of Sarah Sanders, Emily's Cat, and anyone else who is utterly oblivious to Trump's many threats of violence, in each instance directed towards protesters who were acting lawfully...

Scroll up for EC's long, thoughtful(?) post in which she make the spectacular claim that Trump has never threatened violence.

I'll leave it up to y'all what this means insofar as his mental health.

link
Today the Banana Republican, a regular Mahatma Gandhi in the eyes of some, expressed his support (via retweet) for an angry mob intimidating reporters.

Oh yeah, these examples are "not the same thing" according to EC, whatever the hell that means.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.

Last edited by varwoche; 1st August 2018 at 02:01 PM.
varwoche 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 1st August 2018, 02:12 PM   #468
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 35,760
Not angry mobs, intimidating people. That's awful. Only an absolute madman would tweet in support of something like that. If only we'd known about it before the election, it would have changed everything!
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 1st August 2018, 03:34 PM   #469
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 74,465
The closer Mueller gets to Trump, the more Trump is acting out. Egging on the attacks on the press at his rallies is an example:

Jim Acosta Tweeted a video of the incident.
__________________
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 1st August 2018, 04:15 PM   #470
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 8,025
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
The closer Mueller gets to Trump, the more Trump is acting out. Egging on the attacks on the press at his rallies is an example:

Jim Acosta Tweeted a video of the incident.
One woman was proudly flipping off the camera. Classy. Just classy. What educated Southerners call White Trash.
Stacyhs 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 1st August 2018, 09:04 PM   #471
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,797
Surely this is evidence of psychiatric disability:
Quote:
Because of summer vacation schedules, we had fallen a month behind in updating The Fact Checker’s database that analyzes, categorizes and tracks every suspect statement uttered by the president.

It turns out that’s when the president decided to turn on the spigots of false and misleading claims. As of day 558, he’s made 4,229 Trumpian claims — an increase of 978 in just two months.

That’s an overall average of nearly 7.6 claims a day.

When we first started this project for the president’s first 100 days, he averaged 4.9 claims a day. But the average number of claims per day keeps climbing the longer Trump stays in office. In fact, in June and July, the president averaged 16 claims a day.

Put another way: In his first year as president, Trump made 2,140 false or misleading claims. Now, just six months later, he has almost doubled that total.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...&noredirect=on
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 1st August 2018, 09:22 PM   #472
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,797
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Not angry mobs, intimidating people. That's awful. Only an absolute madman would tweet in support of something like that. If only we'd known about it before the election, it would have changed everything!
We knew everything we needed to know before the election. But too many people -- including journalists and his primary opponents -- treated Trump as an entertaining sideshow rather than an active threat to democratic (small-d) principles.
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 1st August 2018, 09:35 PM   #473
AnonyMoose
Muse
 
AnonyMoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Land of the Frozen Chosen
Posts: 532
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
One woman was proudly flipping off the camera. Classy. Just classy. What educated Southerners call White Trash.
Basket of deplorables indeed.

Proof that not only does Conald Trump have a dangerous mental illness, but so do his voters.

Birds of a feather, and all that.
AnonyMoose 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 1st August 2018, 11:46 PM   #474
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 74,465
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
Surely this is evidence of psychiatric disability:
It is and it's a predictable pattern that appears somewhat, if not outright, obsessive-compulsive
__________________
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 1st August 2018, 11:50 PM   #475
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 74,465
Originally Posted by AnonyMoose View Post
Basket of deplorables indeed.

Proof that not only does Conald Trump have a dangerous mental illness, but so do his voters.

Birds of a feather, and all that.
At this point I don't believe the professional psychiatric community identifies 'ignorant follower' as a disorder. Though there may be many in his base that have a variety of mental disorders contributing to their idolization of Trump.
__________________
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 2nd August 2018, 12:02 PM   #476
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 12,857
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Not angry mobs, intimidating people. That's awful. Only an absolute madman would tweet in support of something like that. If only we'd known about it before the election, it would have changed everything!
Your vague, scattershot defense of the Banana Republican throwing his support behind a frothing, mindless mob is alarming, in that it serves as a reminder that so many people give this imbecile a free pass, no matter how ignorant, dishonest, bigoted, infantile, anti-democratic, and generally unhinged.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche 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 2nd August 2018, 12:23 PM   #477
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 8,025
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Not angry mobs, intimidating people. That's awful. Only an absolute madman would tweet in support of something like that. If only we'd known about it before the election, it would have changed everything!
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
Your vague, scattershot defense of the Banana Republican throwing his support behind a frothing, mindless mob is alarming, in that it serves as a reminder that so many people give this imbecile a free pass, no matter how ignorant, dishonest, bigoted, infantile, anti-democratic, and generally unhinged.
I've asked theprestige several times what Trump would have to do for him not to defend Trump. I've yet to see an answer. I guess that means the answer is 'nothing'.
Stacyhs 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 2nd August 2018, 12:34 PM   #478
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 35,760
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
We knew everything we needed to know before the election. But too many people -- including journalists and his primary opponents -- treated Trump as an entertaining sideshow rather than an active threat to democratic (small-d) principles.
Repeating stuff that everybody already knows doesn't seem like a winning strategy for changing conclusions based on that stuff. Was the Yale group supposed to tell us something new?
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 2nd August 2018, 12:34 PM   #479
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 46,753
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
Surely this is evidence of psychiatric disability:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...&noredirect=on
Naa he has just realizing that he can truly say anything he wants with little consequence, all he has to do it pretend to take it back in a half assed fashion for a few hours and he can then double down on whatever he originally said with no consequence.

They are just finally getting comfortable with the total lack of their statements and positions being at all informed by reality.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle 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 2nd August 2018, 01:07 PM   #480
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 35,760
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
I've asked theprestige several times what Trump would have to do for him not to defend Trump. I've yet to see an answer. I guess that means the answer is 'nothing'.
Pretty much everything Trump does falls into one or more of the following categories: Indefensible but not Catastrophic, Overhyped or Misrepresented, or Special Pleading. So it's kind of a case by case thing. There's a lot about Trump that I don't bother trying to defend, because it's indefensible. For example, at some point last year he wrongheadedly got the idea that EMALS for the Ford class should be canceled. I don't bother trying to defend that, because it's stupid and wrong. I'm relieved that in true Trumpian fashion, he seems to have completely forgotten about it.

The thing is, I don't need to defend Trump, to argue that the Yale group is acting outside the bounds of their profession, and to its detriment, without producing any commensurate value. I haven't been answering your demands because they're irrelevant to that debate.

I do, however, find it interesting that "not kowtowing to the Yale group" translates in your head to "defends everything Trump does". The fact is that I don't defend everything Trump does, and it's beside the point anyway.

Last edited by theprestige; 2nd August 2018 at 01:08 PM.
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
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 11:28 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.