Donald trump

[Albion]

He is an off the charts narcissist. These types are not big on humility. Their behavior does become quite predictable though.

You liked the previous narcissist just fine, though.

 

[JackRT]

You liked the previous narcissist just fine, though.

And who was that? Nixon??

 

[Albion]

And who was that? Nixon??

I guess I never gave much thought to exactly what part of Canada you must live in. Does it have TV and newspapers?

 

[bhsmte]

You liked the previous narcissist just fine, though.

I did state on these boards that Obama did display some narcissist traits, but narcissists come in different shapes and sizes. Trump's narcissist behavior, is basically off the charts and few doubt this. And, although I did vote for Obama in 2008 (primarily because of mccain's choice of palin), he lost my vote in 2012. Just to make my position clear.

 

[bhsmte]

And who was that? Nixon??

Nixon was pure; paranoid personality disorder.

 

[Rubiks]

Donald Trump is the narcissist that all other narcissists are measured by.

 

[Kalevalatar]

I think it's great that the US Americans, finally, have the president they deserve!

 

[Subduction Zone]

Nixon was pure; paranoid personality disorder.

And yet still a far far better president than Trump so far.

When Nixon looks good compared to you, there is something very seriously wrong.

 

[bhsmte]

And yet still a far far better president than Trump so far.

When Nixon looks good compared to you, there is something very seriously wrong.

As a president, nixon was far better. Most presidential scholars agree, nixon was actually our most liberal president, since FDR.

 

[Rubiks]

So he's made inherited a bunch of money... Is that really such an accomplishment?

fixed.

 

[Yonny Costopoulis]

Given what Trump was (as still is) up against, it was likely his vanity that drove him to stay the course long past the point where a decent men would have cried "uncle". What drove a 70 year old man to speak at rallies in ten states during the last three days of the campaign? It's not a character trait we ordinarily see as admirable, but in this case he put it to good use. It allowed him to say what millions of Americans had long hoped for a political candidate to have the guts to say, and not back down in the face of the wrath of all manner of public pressure.

Had Trump never gone into politics, his enormous ego would likely still be the only thing he'd be known for.

Only problem is nothing but con, like Trump University. Trump not drain swamp, Trump filled swamp up.

 

[HannahT]

Ok. So he's made a bunch of money.... Is that really such an accomplishment?

I'm sure to some making/building his brand, etc isn't an accomplishment. He was known for charitable contributions as well, but that really isn't accomplishing anything either.

I personally never really paid much attention to him, because he came across as too obnoxious for my tastes. lol he still is in my mind today as well! I never watched his shows, etc.

Majority of the time - not all of course - politicians don't come in wealthy. They normally get that way while in office, and afterwards. He made his success prior to entering office.

He isn't the first narcissist - lol not even off the charts narcissist - that came into office. Majority of the past administrations were extremely arrogant too. They just played the game, and he ran on not doing that. Some aspects of him grind on my last nerve, but I have to keep an open mind.

For example, I hope they do something better with healthcare. I wish politicians in the past did called out members of congress for NOT doing their job bluntly. I'm speaking besides the normal melodramatics we have seen all to often that don't accomplish anything. They all were trying to do it in a way that was acceptable politically in the past.

They all have it made in that arena (their own healthcare), and so they can afford to drag their feet. Some DEMS can admit ACA isn't doing what it was suppose to do, while others are continuing to sing its praises. GOP seem to be all mouth and no action. Meanwhile, people aren't getting the help they need. Try finding a specialist on the government insurance! Good luck with that - which harms the people it was intended to help. People complain about the President, and yet we have politicians on both sides that are doing squat to help the people that they claim they represent.

I don't want a one payer system, because government can't do anything correctly. They can't respond fast enough, and I don't want to see what happened to that poor child in England happening here. I do think they need to find a system that works for everyone. The poor, the sick, self employed, etc. The rules/laws/regulations that politicians made in the past drives up costs, and they don't have incentive to do anything about it. Heck, most won't even acknowledge that part of the factor.

Despite my distaste for his behavior - I hope he can find ways of moving our country forward. Whining and complaining about everything Trump to me harms progress, and yet it is encouraged. I think because neither side (DEM/GOP) really want to do anything anyway. So, that helps things. I think all the hate enables congress to do nothing.

When you take that one issue of healthcare? People are left in limbo, and have to do without. Congress has no incentive, because they have theirs! I think until there comes a time in which it harms them personally? To heck with the population that has to do without - until they might have to. That aspect reminds me of business. The higher ups don't care until it pains them in some way. They don't do any changes until infringes upon them personally - then they are all on it. I would love to take congress's healthcare, and then see how fast they move on it.

 

[Albion]

When Nixon was in office, the opposition party and most of the media considered him to be evil incarnate. When Ronald Reagan came along and they had someone new to hate, Nixon didn't look all that bad after all. So now he's supposed to be a prince--as compared to Trump, the current object of their hatred.

Therefore, I have no doubt that Trump will be seen by the same crowd as pretty moderate and hardworking, etc. in comparison to whoever the next Republican president turns out to be. They've done the same thing with John McCain, although he didn't make it to the presidency. Oh, he's such a man of principle, a great war hero, blah blah blah, but do you remember what they said about him in only the recent past?

 

[mark46]

As a president, nixon was far better. Most presidential scholars agree, nixon was actually our most liberal president, since FDR.

I would argue that Johnson was more liberal. After all, he passed the Civil Rights Act, Medicare, Medicaid and lots, lots more.

With regard to Nixon, yup, he was more liberal. He started the EPA.

He also instituted price and wage controls, a decidedly liberal idea (and a very, very bad idea). As Uncle Milty (Milton Friedman) said, I can forgive Nixon Watergate, but not price and wage controls.

 

[mark46]

When Nixon was in office, the opposition party and most of the media considered him to be evil incarnate. When Ronald Reagan came along and they had someone new to hate, Nixon didn't look all that bad after all. So now he's supposed to be a prince--as compared to Trump, the current object of their hatred.

Therefore, I have no doubt that Trump will be seen by the same crowd as pretty moderate and hardworking, etc. in comparison to whoever the next Republican president turns out to be. They've done the same thing with John McCain, although he didn't make it to the presidency. Oh, he's such a man of principle, a great war hero, blah blah blah, but do you remember what they said about him in only the recent past?

Of course, you mention only the Republican presidents attacked by the opposition. You make no mention of Johnson, Clinton and Obama.

 

[Albion]

Of course, you mention only the Republican presidents attacked by the opposition. .

Certainly. That was the point of the post--how Nixon is being seen now by the same people who likened him to the Devil throughout the 1950s until the 1970s.

And no, I don't buy for a moment any suggestion that what the Republicans thought of the failed Democrat presidents rose to the level of hatred shown the Republicans by the Democrats. It's just not their style to get that far down into the gutter. They worry about their reputations and so on; the Democrats OTOH pride themselves on being outrageous with a straight face.

 

[mark46]

Certainly. That was the point of the post--how Nixon is being seen now by the same people who likened him to the Devil throughout the 1950s until the 1970s.

And no, I don't buy for a moment any suggestion that what the Republicans thought of the failed Democrat presidents rose to the level of hatred shown the Republicans by the Democrats. It's just not their style to get that far down into the gutter. They worry about their reputations and so on; the Democrats OTOH pride themselves on being outrageous with a straight face.

I thought that you were saying more than that history often changes our views of a leader. Certainly history will likely take (and has taken) a different view of Nixon, Reagan and Clinton than folks had at the time (two sets of impeachment hearings and extended hearings over Iran-Contra). I suspect the same will happen to Bush Jr. I might add Truman to the list.

 

[Albion]

I thought that you were saying more than that history often changes our views of a leader. Certainly history will likely take (and has taken) a different view of Nixon, Reagan and Clinton than folks had at the time (two sets of impeachment hearings and extended hearings over Iran-Contra). I suspect the same will happen to Bush Jr. I might add Truman to the list.

You seem to be assuming that I was speaking of some natural development in history. I wasn't. I was referring to Democratic Party propaganda by which a person like Nixon could be villified in the most extreme and ugly terms, for years on end...and then described in totally different terms later on when it suited the political purposes of those same people to do so.

 

[bhsmte]

I would argue that Johnson was more liberal. After all, he passed the Civil Rights Act, Medicare, Medicaid and lots, lots more.

With regard to Nixon, yup, he was more liberal. He started the EPA.

He also instituted price and wage controls, a decidedly liberal idea (and a very, very bad idea). As Uncle Milty (Milton Friedman) said, I can forgive Nixon Watergate, but not price and wage controls.

Nixon also reached out a hand to china and increased relations with the USSR as well. That was considered considerable at the time.

 

[mark46]

You seem to be assuming that I was speaking of some natural development in history. I wasn't. I was referring to Democratic Party propaganda by which a person like Nixon could be villified in the most extreme and ugly terms, for years on end...and then described in totally different terms later on when it suited the political purposes of those same people to do so.

You are free to believe that the Nixon administration was unreasonably accused. I believe The House at the time of resignation was held by Republicans.

If you are merely taking about rhetoric, then the Republican rhetoric against Clinton and Obama was just as bad, as well as Democratic rhetoric against Reagan.