Stop Normalizing Trump

[Aldebaran]

It's not a strawman argument. You believe a narcissist can just turn off his narcissism and kick back and and focus on himself?

Nice attempt at telling me what I believe, as if I was the topic of the thread.

You don't even understand thr basis of narcissism..let alone a clinically significant example.

Not everyone subscribes to your opinions, but some of us appreciate you sharing them.

It's not about him thinking about himself, it's about everyone else thinking about him. Like at it's basic level you miss that.

Fact check: Online dictionary says definition is "a person who has an excessive interest in or admiration of themselves."
Therefore, your claim is un-factual, misleading, false, untrue.

 

[Aldebaran]

My argument is supported by observation of his behavior. It’s not hard to recognize for anyone who has dealt with narcissistic behavior before.

It also ends with you stating an opinion.
I deal with facts.

 

[comana]

It also ends with you stating an opinion.
I deal with facts.

Just because you refuse to see doesn’t negate the facts.

 

[Aldebaran]

Just because you refuse to see doesn’t negate the facts.

Is it bothering you that I don't subscribe to your opinions? Are you intolerant of those who believe differently than you?

 

[rambot]

Nice attempt at telling me what I believe, as if I was the topic of the thread.

Yeah. All I did was use the words you posted and wrote yourself.

Not everyone subscribes to your opinions, but some of us appreciate you sharing them.

I'm curious aldebaran.

To you, what is the difference between a GOOD opinion and an opinion?

Fact check: Online dictionary says definition is "a person who has an excessive interest in or admiration of themselves."

What a sad response....

using an online dictionary suddenly as if its relevant in a discussion on traits. Read something relevant and detailed.

 

[childeye 2]

Yes, you are.

If you have a forthright intention to correct me, my post is on the record, and you can simply show me how I mischaracterized Trumps followers. I would be most grateful. Otherwise, it's just another blank assertion.

 

[Aldebaran]

Yeah. All I did was use the words you posted and wrote yourself.

Too bad you couldn't quote me as saying what you claim.

I'm curious aldebaran.

To you, what is the difference between a GOOD opinion and an opinion?

More relevant is the difference between an opinion and a fact. So far, you've only offered opinions.

What a sad response....

using an online dictionary suddenly as if its relevant in a discussion on traits. Read something relevant and detailed.

Facts are relevant. Since your assertion was opposite of factual, I corrected you. Sorry if it made you sad.

 

[comana]

Is it bothering you that I don't subscribe to your opinions? Are you intolerant of those who believe differently than you?

You can believe what you want. Your posts tell me you do not have a clear understanding of narcissistic behaviors. That is all.

 

[Aldebaran]

If you have a forthright intention to correct me, my post is on the record, and you can simply show me how I mischaracterized Trumps followers. I would be most grateful. Otherwise, it's just another blank assertion.

As you wish.....

Here is your mischaracterization of Trump's followers, and your denial of doing so.

Well yeah, I agree it's definitely hyperbolic on its face, but I don't see it as jesting. I think he really believes it because he's talking about how smart "his" people are.

And here's the rub. Smart people would not be so blind in their loyalty to a single person that they would vote for that person even if that person would shoot someone on fifth avenue. But "HIS" "SMART" people are so blind in loyalty to him, that they would vote for him even if he tried to put himself above the constitution and get his party to reject the valid votes of the people.

Like I said on record, it's definitely hyperbole (the shooting someone part). But I'm not mischaracterizing what he meant about his followers.

 

[Aldebaran]

You can believe what you want. Your posts tell me you do not have a clear understanding of narcissistic behaviors. That is all.

Then vote for kamalla if you wish. The DNC convention, the rallies, the millions of dollars in ads--all about her. Narcissistic. (unless you want to disregard what the definition of that word is).

 

[childeye 2]

And it was hilarious! Totally had us all dying with laughter because it was true in a way.

I thought he was going to be my little protest vote telling the Republican party during a primary season what kind of political policy I wanted going forward because clearly the Republicans had not yet gotten the message we cared about policies and not how they looked on television.

What none of us expected, including Donald J. Trump himself, was for him to become the teflon man....

What he said he said in a hilarious way, but there was an air of truth to it, which is what makes comedy humorous.

Looking at his body language and demeanor, it looks to me like he believes he is declaring a fact. In other words, I don't think he's joking. When I first saw him say that, I didn't believe him. But now it's clear he was at least partly right.

I can agree somethings can be funny because they're true. I just don't find it funny when people trip and fall.

 

[IceJad]

50%? just look at the Red and Blue state map during any election.

That is still not an answer to my question. So let me reframe it. What do you mean when you say "However, it is important to note that to 50% of Americans, his behavior is normal."

 

[childeye 2]

As you wish.....

Here is your mischaracterization of Trump's followers, and your denial of doing so.

All I see is my original post and my denial that I mischaracterized Trump's followers.

To show me where I mischaracterized Trump's followers, you need to first show where in the post the mischaracterization occurs, by highlighting the actual words where it occurs, and then explain your reasoning as to how you arrived at the conclusion that those highlighted words are a mischaracterization of what Trump meant about his people.

 

[Aldebaran]

All I see is my original post and my denial that I mischaracterized Trump's followers.

To show me where I mischaracterized Trump's followers, you need to first show where in the post the mischaracterization occurs, by highlighting the actual words where it occurs, and then explain your reasoning as to how you arrived at the conclusion that those highlighted words are a mischaracterization of what Trump meant about his people's loyalty.

Do you really need everything explained to you? Ok.

Well yeah, I agree it's definitely hyperbolic on its face, but I don't see it as jesting. I think he really believes it because he's talking about how smart "his" people are.

You may not have seen it as jesting, but it was. But you're right about one thing--his people are smart enough to realize when he's jesting.

And here's the rub. Smart people would not be so blind in their loyalty to a single person that they would vote for that person even if that person would shoot someone on fifth avenue.

Here you mischaracterize his voters as blind.

But "HIS" "SMART" people are so blind in loyalty to him,

And then you do it again.

that they would vote for him even if he tried to put himself above the constitution and get his party to reject the valid votes of the people.

Something that never happened.

 

[IceJad]

I definitely didn't get your point. It looked to me like you were drawing a false equivalency between the two candidates, when we've never had a Presidential candidate like Trump before, who tried to corrupt an entire party into rejecting the valid votes of the people, and who has been successful to some extent.

My intention is to drive home the stark difference between a person who defends the vote of the people and a person who tries to undermine the vote of the people.

False equivalency? My my, bold statement indeed. I can go into my observations of both Kamala and Trump. Their failings and strengths. But that would diverge from my true goal - to see why a nation slowly tears itself apart.

I now see why Americans are so divided and hateful toward one another. At the root of it all is still the prejudice of your choice is wrong and I'm right. That the other side is perceived to be a genuine threat. Regardless of which side of the spectrum people sit on. You may not say it out openly but one hardly needs to probe further draw a conclusion. This rally around the flag is a strong indicator.

Such strong opposition towards the each other that ironically blinds all to the reality that all are acting exactly alike.

 

[childeye 2]

Fact check: Online dictionary says definition is "a person who has an excessive interest in or admiration of themselves."
Therefore, your claim is un-factual, misleading, false, untrue.

Having admiration of self and seeking admiration from others are both traits so the claim is neither nonfactual, misleading, false or untrue.

1. Need for excessive admiration. The narcissist isn’t satisfied with a compliment or pat on the back when others offer them as a part of natural conversation. They demand that others admire their appearance, accomplishments, skills, or existence. The admiration of others is what feeds the narcissist. “Isn’t it amazing how the color of this shirt sets off my eyes?” Boasting is second nature to narcissists, and compliments are typically recounted innumerable times to others as proof of their superiority.

 

[childeye 2]

False equivalency? My my, bold statement indeed.

I was simply stating and explaining my misunderstanding of your point. If you sensed any intended offense, it's probably because I don't like that Trump tried to overturn the vote of the people by cheating.

I can go into my observations of both Kamala and Trump. Their failings and strengths. But that would diverge from my true goal - to see why a nation slowly tears itself apart.

I now see why Americans are so divided and hateful toward one another. At the root of it all is still the prejudice of your choice is wrong and I'm right. That the other side is perceived to be a genuine threat. Regardless of which side of the spectrum people sit on. You may not say it out openly but one hardly needs to probe further draw a conclusion. This rally around the flag is a strong indicator.

Such strong opposition towards the each other that ironically blinds all to the reality that all are acting exactly alike.

Like I said, my intention is to drive home the stark difference between a person who defends the vote of the people and a person who tries to undermine the vote of the people. It's not a matter of opinion since the attempt to undermine the vote of the people was a historical event.

 

[rambot]

Too bad you couldn't quote me as saying what you claim.

Considering I quoted you and repeated it, I can only assume you are interested in an honest discussion.

More relevant is the difference between an opinion and a fact. So far, you've only offered opinions.

No. It's not. And no I have not. Though you are welcome to find a clinical manual that contradicts anything I've written about clincial narcissists

Facts are relevant. Since your assertion was opposite of factual, I corrected you.

You quoted a online dictionary definition you don't even bother to link to, of a medical condition and seem to think that's relevant and on par.

Sorry if it made you sad.

Your desperation is what makes me sad and your belief that you've "game set and matched" this discussion just by replying.

The rest of your post also suggest you arent really interestsd in a discussion that is based on knowledge or is intellectually honest.

I'm out of this one. Feel free to put the last word

 

[Aldebaran]

Having admiration of self and seeking admiration from others are both traits so the claim is neither nonfactual, misleading, false or untrue.

1. Need for excessive admiration. The narcissist isn’t satisfied with a compliment or pat on the back when others offer them as a part of natural conversation. They demand that others admire their appearance, accomplishments, skills, or existence. The admiration of others is what feeds the narcissist. “Isn’t it amazing how the color of this shirt sets off my eyes?” Boasting is second nature to narcissists, and compliments are typically recounted innumerable times to others as proof of their superiority.

And that "admiration" comes in the forum of lawsuits, indictments, slander, assassination attempts......
I can see how all that would be hard to walk away from, especially if a bullet went where an assassin intended.

 

[childeye 2]

Do you really need everything explained to you? Ok.

Well yes because you made a blank assertion, so you need to fill in the blanks. I appreciate it.

You may not have seen it as jesting, but it was.

Well, I have already stated the shooting of someone was definitely hyperbole, or a metaphor. So, if that's the jest you're referring to, then I haven't mischaracterized his followers.

I certainly didn't believe he was going to shoot someone on fifth avenue, and I could see he was simply making a point about the loyalty of his people. But I don't believe he was joking about the loyalty of his people because his demeanor and his words sounds like and looks like he actually believes they are that loyal.

That's what I was asking about when I asked you if you feel he really believed what he said, that his people were that loyal. But you said he was joking, which would indicate to me that you don't think he really believes his people are that loyal. That part is still unclear to me. So, do you think Trump truly believes his people are that loyal to him?

But you're right about one thing--his people are smart enough to realize when he's jesting.

Aldebaran, you're mistaken here, I never said that, nor did Trump.

You're supposed to be explaining why you feel MY words mischaracterize his followers, but here again you simply assert I said these things which I never said, and then proceed to comment on them, as if I said them. You need to watch out about doing that.

Here you mischaracterize his voters as blind.

Okay I think this is probably the heart of your claim. I don't see this as a mischaracterization. I think Trump believes his people are so loyal they would vote for him no matter what he did. I think you're taking offense at the word "Blind".

I'm saying that since Trump's sentiment is intimating that he could do a bad thing that everyone knows is blatantly wrong to do, and still not lose a vote, then he is expressing that his followers are so loyal to him, it amounts to a form of following blindly ---> as in his people trusted him so much that they would ignore when he did something wrong and vote for him anyway.

And then you do it again.

Yes, but this time I do it in the context of his people showing that they are still willing to vote for Trump despite his setting up fake electors and wanting Pence and other Republican officials to reject the votes of the people, which goes against the constitution. His people are ignoring that he did a blatantly wrong thing and voting for him anyway, just like Trump claimed. Therefore, there is no mischaracterization.

Something that never happened.