President Donald Trump's Final Days...

[deepsepia]

Originally Posted by charliels531

I rely on my wife, who is a mental health professional, for the insight. "Mental illness" includes personality disorders, which are up to now untreatable

{snip}


But how can I disagree with a fellow Pacific Northwesterner?

you can disagree with my neighbors -- my country went for Trump in 2016, roughly 7000 votes to 6000.

"Personality disorder" might be a diagnosis, but it its not impairing his function then its hard to call it mental illness. I've worked with plenty of obsessive types, and they're far better at all kinds of precise things than I am.

Originally Posted by charliels531

You raise a much deeper issue, which I am not prepared to address, which is whether the election of a president of the United States can be shown to be other than random. There are many people wiser than myself who have pointed out that any person capable of securing the nomination of a major party is capable of being elected, given that our presidential election system is based upon the system of electing the Holy Roman emperors. And Warren Harding and Wendal Wilkie are evidence that the nomination process itself is random.

My great grandfather was a big Wilkie supporter . . . he was an impressive guy; smart and generally well liked. He behaved admirably after Japan attacked in 1941, and is notable for being one of the last Republicans to push racial equality.

I think Trump is a tremendous talent. He is the only candidate I've ever seen talk his way into the Presidency. Even allowing for dirty tricks, its a huge achievement-- the guy has just one trick, but its a good trick.

He's a fraud and a traitor, of course-- don't think I'm going soft on him. But he's not crazy and he is plenty talented.

[charliels531]

Originally Posted by deepsepia

you can disagree with my neighbors -- my country went for Trump in 2016, roughly 7000 votes to 6000.

"Personality disorder" might be a diagnosis, but it its not impairing his function then its hard to call it mental illness. I've worked with plenty of obsessive types, and they're far better at all kinds of precise things than I am.

Impaired function is probably the most subjective diagnostic standard, but I think you made my point for me. Many people with personality disorders function quite well in certain limited areas. I don't want a mentally healthy cardiologist.

My great grandfather was a big Wilkie supporter . . . he was an impressive guy; smart and generally well liked. He behaved admirably after Japan attacked in 1941, and is notable for being one of the last Republicans to push racial equality.

That's why I pick him and Harding to show the randomness of the process. Harding was a totally incompetent career politician who never expected to be nominated, but was and was elected. Willkie (I had to check the spelling) was the opposite--Very smart, competent, and never elected to office, he walked into the convention, made a speech, and was nominated over Thomas Dewey and Robert Taft. Considering what came later, he, Lincoln, and Teddy Roosevelt were the three best people ever nominated by the Republicans.

[frank07]

[Arturo2nd]

Originally Posted by deepsepia

The aim of the indictment is obviously not that Mueller imagines Putin will turn over these individuals. Interestingly, the Russians do really seem to care about indictments-- it does make it difficult for these folks to travel or own property abroad, which Russians tend to want to do.

Mueller's brief is is to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 election, the Trump campaign's connection to it, and issues emerging out of same.

This is clearly another brick in that wall, and casts Trump's trashing of NATO allies and upcoming meeting with Putin in an even more dubious light.

At this point, Mueller is representing that "Guccifer 2.0" was a GRU agent, who was in frequent communication with Trump's man, Roger Stone. Its also noteworthy that the indictment appears to indicate coordination with Wikileaks, although its identified in the indictment only as "Organization #1"

There is a _lot_ in this indictment beyond some Russians who'll likely never see a US courtroom

The timing is really interesting. Must drive the Republicans and Trump crazy. In spite of all the pressure, lies, and tweets, the train continues to roll. I believe that Mueller and Rosenstein are only presenting those charges that are scrupulously documented. Manafort is about to be crushed. Cohen is probably already singing. Trump can stop it at anytime, but there is already enough evidence against him for obstruction of justice charges. Quashing the investigation guarantees that Trump will find himself a criminal defendant unless he resigns and Pence pardons him.

The New York charity lawsuit is a separate action under state jurisdiction. I am hearing that Trump, Don Jr, Eric, and Ivanka have all been recommended for criminal charges.

AS for the DNC lawsuit, I would be more sympathetic if their network security not been childishly inept. They could have been hacked by Nigerian treasury officials.

[Arturo2nd]

The queen had to earn her keep today. Charles must really be a dolt if she won't hand these unpleasant duties off to him.

[laberbacke]

Originally Posted by deepsepia

you can disagree with my neighbors -- my country went for Trump in 2016, roughly 7000 votes to 6000.

"Personality disorder" might be a diagnosis, but it its not impairing his function then its hard to call it mental illness. I've worked with plenty of obsessive types, and they're far better at all kinds of precise things than I am.



My great grandfather was a big Wilkie supporter . . . he was an impressive guy; smart and generally well liked. He behaved admirably after Japan attacked in 1941, and is notable for being one of the last Republicans to push racial equality.

I think Trump is a tremendous talent. He is the only candidate I've ever seen talk his way into the Presidency. Even allowing for dirty tricks, its a huge achievement-- the guy has just one trick, but its a good trick.

He's a fraud and a traitor, of course-- don't think I'm going soft on him. But he's not crazy and he is plenty talented.

Trump couldn't have been elected thirty years ago, though - Bush Sr. had a good laugh when he was told that Trump lobbied to become his VP back in 1988. That he blew right through the safeguards and checks and balances without any effort and planning, shows just how rotten and precarious the democratic pillars in the United States have become. He's nowhere near as smart and patient as Hitler, Franco, or Mussolini, and yet he became President with relative ease.



What should keep you up at night is not Trump, but the likely smarter, more patient Republican who will succeed him after the middling interregnum of another ineffective Democrat in the 2020ies. Trump may be America's Wilhelm II, but that successor may become America's Hitler. Except that Hitler never had 10.000 nuclear warheads at his command.

[deepsepia]

Originally Posted by charliels531

Impaired function is probably the most subjective diagnostic standard, but I think you made my point for me. Many people with personality disorders function quite well in certain limited areas. I don't want a mentally healthy cardiologist.

Personality "disorder" that doesn't impair functioning -- or indeed which enhances it-- that's not an "illness". Its an attempt to find a medicalize something as ordinary as "not a nice person".

IMO that's a very bad idea. Calling something a "disease" which doesn't impair function begs the question "why?" The world has plenty of completely sane, really unpleasant people. They don't have "a disease". They just suck as human beings.

You do want a mentally healthy cardiologist. You may not want a nice one, but you do want someone who is responding to objective reality, not personal demons. One might add that we can insist on better behavior from sane people who are just unpleasant. The "asshole surgeon" is very much a reality and a tradition of the specialty, and because these folks are sane but just unpleasant, we can say "hey, its no longer OK to heap abuse on your residents"

Originally Posted by charliels531

That's why I pick him and Harding to show the randomness of the process. Harding was a totally incompetent career politician who never expected to be nominated, but was and was elected.

Harding was pretty ordinary, as you say, but the fact that ordinary men rise sometimes isn't evidence that all leadership is random. Looking at the Presidents, they are nearly all very ambitious and talented men, who worked very hard with the resources that they had to make their way in the world. Whether we're talking Eisenhower or Nixon, either of the Roosevelts, Bush 41, Reagan or Woodrow Wilson, these are all men who were talented and worked for many years to get the brass ring. Other equally talented men surely didn't. . . but that doesn't suggest that the victory is random.

Trump, uniquely, read the mood of country differently than his competitors, and saw opportunity where no one else did. That's highly adaptive. He didn't win because of some random fluke. He won because he made his opportunity and found his allies, and this was very much his design. I believe him when he raged at Steve Bannon-- Bannon's departure hasn't made one iota of difference in Trump's ability to talk to his audience.

Originally Posted by laberbacke

Trump couldn't have been elected thirty years ago, though -

Absolutely true. Which is to the point-- Trump read the changing public mood better than other people did. He also changed the public mood. There's a line about what a "demagogue" is -- someone who "radicalizes their followers", Trump did more than a little of that. But mostly, he just read a mood which others ignored. He turned the Republican Party 180 degrees on things like trade; that's his read and his politics.

He also built a personal brand to exploit this sentiment. Other cranky yappers have made themselves some money talking to Trump's cranky fans-- Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck. Trump saw that he could go much, much further

There's a line of Danton's de l'audace, encore de l'audace, et toujours de l'audace that describes Trump. Obama may have talked about "the audacity of hope" -- but he is in fact a very middle of the road and personally conservative man, a norm-supporter, not a rule breaker. The most "audacious" thing about Obama is that he thought a black man could be President-- beyond that, he's as conventional as a university President.

Trump, by contrast, is an awful person with shabby ambitions who soils everyone who embraces him, unless they're already pretty shabby themselves. He's in his element with other brutal misogynists, and for all his railing against Latinos and Africans, he's very much a character like Mugabe or Duterte, though Mugabe dresses better . . .

Trump is not our misfortune; rather he's the guy who looked at the inflamed abscess of American political life and said to himself "oh I like this, let's have more of that".

[laberbacke]

Originally Posted by deepsepia

Trump is not our misfortune; rather he's the guy who looked at the inflamed abscess of American political life and said to himself "oh I like this, let's have more of that".

Excellent analysis. The 62 million disgruntled citizens who elected Trump won't go away, if and when he does. The issues that make these people angry still persist. There is a cancer metastasizing in the American body politic and it's been growing for a long, long time, with the earliest cancerous cells reaching back to the very founding of the country. That cancer doesn't go away just by surgically removing one single metastasis.


The country's remaining greatest hope for a turnaround may be its youth. Unfortunately it is a generation that may be the "wokest" ever, but is much too busy spending hours on instagram and snapchat every day to get their behinds to the voting booth once every two years.

[deepsepia]

Originally Posted by laberbacke

Excellent analysis. The 62 million disgruntled citizens who elected Trump won't go away, if and when he does. The issues that make these people angry still persist. There is a cancer metastasizing in the American body politic and it's been growing for a long, long time, with the earliest cancerous cells reaching back to the very founding of the country. That cancer doesn't go away just by surgically removing one single metastasis.

Yes. The revolutionary Tom Paine is best known for his pamphlet "Common Sense", but at the same time he wrote another one, much less well known, called "African Slavery in America" [1776] He's clear enough that trying to find some accommodation between "liberty" from British rule while simultaneously enslaving others will poison the nation

Originally Posted by laberbacke

The country's remaining greatest hope for a turnaround may be its youth. Unfortunately it is a generation that may be the "wokest" ever, but is much too busy spending hours on instagram and snapchat every day to get their behinds to the voting booth once every two years.

I don't think youth are the hope, so much as age is the cure. Trump will likely be the last President born before 1950; he may indeed be the last President born before 1960. The crankiest Americans are growing older and while they vote in large numbers, nature will cure what an appeal to reason can't . . .

[LadyLuck]

Originally Posted by laberbacke

That he blew right through the safeguards and checks and balances without any effort and planning, shows just how rotten and precarious the democratic pillars in the United States have become.

Precisely what safeguards and checks and balances might you be referring to? You declare your candidacy and file the necessary paperwork, you campaign, you win primary elections, you secure your party's nomination and you go to the general election. Same process every presidential candidate has followed in my lifetime and well before. If the pillars are rotten and precarious they've been so since the ink was still wet on the Constitution.

He's nowhere near as smart and patient as Hitler, Franco, or Mussolini, and yet he became President with relative ease.

He was fortunate in that he faced a largely incompetent field of candidates in the primary season only to face an even more incompetent opponent in the general election. Timing is everything. You don't have to be as smart as Hitler if you're running against Hitlery.