Here’s what’s psychologically wrong with Donald Trump forums forums Politics and other things Here’s what’s psychologically wrong with Donald Trump

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 22 total)
  • Author
  • #26638

    If you find yourself completely baffled by Trump’s behavior, that’s because mentally-healthy people generally find NPD-rooted behaviors incomprehensible.  The narcissist violates social norms that healthy people hold instinctively and therefore assume (usually correctly) that others hold—while at the same time he creates a semblance of normalcy, because being able to do so is part of the disorder.  Because the rest of us cannot relate to, often cannot even imagine how a narcissist thinks and feels, it seems outside the realm of plausibility, and so his semblance of normalcy will fool us.  Not only Trump voters but fellow Republicans and even Putin have shown signs of buyer’s remorse with Trump.  That’s because he fooled them all.  Narcissists can do that.

    So, since he’s a textbook case, let’s hit the textbook.  The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) – the American Psychiatric Association’s guidebook for mental health diagnosis – gives diagnostic criteria for all mental illnesses.  Between the fourth and fifth editions, the criteria for NPD changed, so I am going to use both to paint a fuller picture.  If you’ve been following the presidential news for the last few months, you’ll likely be able to think of at least one and probably several examples of Trump demonstrating every single diagnostic criterion below.

    From DSM-IV:

    A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy.
    1. An exaggerated sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)
    2. Preoccupation with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
    3. Believes he is “special” and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)
    4. Requires excessive admiration
    5. Has a sense of entitlement
    6. Selfishly takes advantage of others to achieve his own ends
    7. Lacks empathy
    8. Is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him
    9. Shows arrogant, haughty, patronizing, or contemptuous behaviors or attitudes

    From DSM-5

    A. Significant impairments in personality functioning manifest by:
    1. Impairments in self functioning (a or b):
    a. Identity: Excessive reference to others for self-definition and self-esteem regulation; exaggerated self-appraisal may be inflated or deflated, or vacillate between extremes; emotional regulation mirrors fluctuations in self-esteem.
    b. Self-direction: Goal-setting is based on gaining approval from others; personal standards are unreasonably high in order to see oneself as exceptional, or too low based on a sense of entitlement; often unaware of own motivations.
    2. Impairments in interpersonal functioning (a or b):
    a. Empathy: Impaired ability to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others; excessively attuned to reactions of others, but only if perceived as relevant to self; over- or underestimate of own effect on others.
    b. Intimacy: Relationships largely superficial and exist to serve self-esteem regulation; mutuality constrained by little genuine interest in others’ experiences, and predominance of a need for personal gain
    B. Pathological personality traits in the following domain:
    1.      Antagonism, characterized by:
    a.      Grandiosity: Feelings of entitlement, either overt or covert; self-centeredness; firmly holding to the belief that one is better than others; condescending toward others.
    b.      Attention seeking: Excessive attempts to attract and be the focus of the attention of others; admiration seeking.

    This explains a lot of stuff!

    Andy Brown

    “Not only Trump voters but fellow Republicans and even Putin have shown signs of buyer’s remorse with Trump.”

    I’ve been researching the possible link and reasons why other mentally defective people like bacon with his adult onset Asperger’s Syndrome are so attracted to a narcissist. So far I’ve found that both narcissists and people with Asperger’s Syndrome are goal minded to a fault, and both can view other people more as functions or vehicles to achieve that goal instead of as people with feelings. However a critical difference between the two is that a narcissist doesn’t care if they hurt you or your feelings (and the truly malignant ones may even take delight in doing so), whereas someone with Asperger’s like features would prefer not to. This seems to fit the drumpf-bacon paradigm.

    Distinguishing narcissism from Asperger’s syndrome can be complex. Is this an either/or diagnosis? Can there be elements of both?

    With Asperger’s and NPD, a lot of the criteria overlap. The difference is that while all people with Aspergers are narcissistic (not NPD, but self-centered; it’s a central trait), all people with Narcissistic Personality Disorder are definitely not aspergers, and can be the total opposite: super smooth and charming.—dont-confus_b_316169.html

    The conclusion for me so far is that drumpf is purely narcissistic and bacon is mostly Asperger’s although some of his traits do fit NPD.

    Now dork on the other hand suffers from a newly defined mental illness described in this article and also heavily documented in other articles:

    Largely intuitive to most of us, it is clear from the election year dogma supported by mostly rhetoric that the conservative denial of evolution, denial of climate change, their disordered thinking like being for small government that’s invasive of the bedroom (being anti-contraception and anti-abortion), their anti social behavior (any dork post reads anti-social, not one attempt all year to discuss it’s always an attempt to berate a person or derail the thread with alternate facts) or like being anti-gay, sexist, etc. Not to mention extreme paranoia of almost every right wing voter in the country.


    I hate that Planned Parenthood kills so many babies. Trump does too. That’s one reason I support Trump. There are others.


    Trump is anti-abortion only as far as it gets people like you to support him…and he finds that support advantageous. Remember that he supported and donated to the Clintons at one time. Trump is an opportunist who will say anything that weak-minded people want to hear.

    Can’t wait to hear what you have to say when Trump implodes. Take the time to read Skep’s link above.


    We’ll see according the legislation he supports and especially by who he nominates for the Supreme Court.

    Remember that there was health care legislation that was supposed to be cheaper, and in which one could keep their plan?

    At any rate, I think you’ve come up with a winning strategy for the Democrats. Paint Trump supporters as “weak-minded.” Or possibly “weak-minded AND deplorable.”

    The idea that Trump will implode, be impeached, resign, or otherwise won’t last, I think are manifestations of denial that began when Trump announced his candidacy. It’s gone from: he’s a joke and has no chance to win the nomination to Hillary will massacre him to let’s wait for the recounts to maybe the faithless electors will save us to “Putin did it” and now it’s implosion or impeachment, etc.

    It’s all just wishful thinking. He’s not going to implode. Barring a catastrophe he will serve his term, and if he chooses to run again, he will have done a good enough job that he will easily be reelected.


    I thing Trump is gonna get used hard. He won the lottery, so to speak. Like any naive winner, he walks into the old boys club, thinking he’s something now.

    They will validate that, rape and pillage, watching for the breakdown, and when it happens, slink away, leaving Trump holding the bag.

    He is not a real Player. Dangerous because he thinks he is. The real, hard core, old fucking school oligarchs? Trump has nothing on them.

    Re: followers, in a general sense, it’s mostly authoritarian behavior. Most of his support will easily follow another authority, and the real players know that and will enjoy a happy puppet, who will fall hard.

    Andy Brown

    “Barring a catastrophe”

    The catastrophe has begun ace.

    You’re just too blinded by stupidity to see it. You are the big fool now buddy.


    “Paint Trump supporters as “weak-minded.” Or possibly “weak-minded AND deplorable.”

    Some of them – I think many of them – are. Others are simply Hillary haters, and simply voted Not Clinton. Some are opportunists, seeing that a Trump will primarily help their personal position in life and their own pocketbook, America and average citizens’ rights be damned.

    I think you fit in most of those categories, Bacon.


    There are also a whole pile of them who oppose economic norms in play for a long time now.

    They see Trump as painful medicine. What they didn’t see was a better future either way, so they spiked the ball in protest. That will harm people, they know that, don’t care.

    The Mark Blythe and Thomas Frank videos I put here explain that dynamic.

    Honestly, I believe it’s a mistake to paint Trump voters with one broad, negative brush. Where it’s warranted, and there are specifics, issue based pushback is good. Needed.

    But, blanket, “deplorables” is more of a loser overall. Not good. That’s just tribalism, and to a large degree identity politics, both of which aren’t solid answers economically.

    The social faction is what we’ve all discussed for years. Valid. Economically, it’s not.

    One way to see this is to examine the GOP play. For years, they have traded social regression for economics that run counter to labor and the middle class interests. It’s a squeeze play on the poor, struggling.

    Today, we can see Dems taking social progress and doing much the same thing. It’s not so brutal as the GOP, but it’s not progressive, and definitely not serving labor and the middle class to the degree needed, nor often claimed by the party.

    This is being ignored, and it’s a mistake.

    The mistake is inability to make a rational class argument, and that’s precisely what is needed right now.

    Yes, and that is why you guys are pissed at me, and or not understanding me very well right now too. It’s OK. I got time and can take heat. You all know that.

    But, I’m just not gonna shut up about it. I and many others have no reason to do that at all.

    Our politics need a class reframe. Social framing, as it stands right now, is good. No need to change that, but we can always improve on it.

    But the squeeze plays need to end. The income inequality is a class matter, and it impacts a very solid majority of the nation. Failure to resolve it, or even address it properly will be used and abused. We won’t reach a state where there are good times ahead.

    This is the work Dems needed to do and didn’t, and that work remains on the table, valid, and will actually escalate given the GOP and Trump and how we know most of that will play out. Painful for more people than before!

    And our breakdown is telling:

    Roughly a third of us are Bacons. Lost, no real change there. It’s a party for them right now too. Sucks, but they are no more right about it than they were before. Just have a favorable politics in play right now.

    The shorter we can make that, the better. No change there either.

    But, the Dem base is roughly a third too! It’s split, into people like me, who are making a class argument, solid progressive, New Deal type politics, and the moderates, who hold most of the party power right now.

    Indies are 40 percent! Progressive ideas dominate there, majority share easy.

    This is where the class argument resonates. Support for that out there exceeds the entire Dem party base, inclusive of the split.

    It’s also the reason for losing that 1000 seats over the last two cycles too.

    A solid class argument will bring a voting bloc that can win a lot. It could bring party membership way up too, and that’s not needed, but would be a great thing.

    Finally, it will highlight the social regressives as the minority bloc they are, leaving a very reasonable, and in my view, winnable economic position.

    For this to happen, the Democrats need to take it left, embrace people funded politics, and manage dependence on big money down. This can be done by winning back seats lost, a clear party growth play. The rest can come from a few non-performers losing primaries. From there, the resulting debate will be reasonable, far more balanced and attentive to most people and their interests, while sidelining the GOP, who really is playing two negative cards.

    All of this is precisely why I’m not on board with mere Trump opposition. It’s not enough, and the party isn’t in solidarity anyway. We’ve got a ton of Dems voting for, when a real opposition effort would be against period, like the GOP did with us when in the same position.

    Centrism is toxic in this way, and it’s allowing the GOP to bleed off frustrated people.

    Effective opposition would not only frame the GOP clearly, in terms of those negative cards, but would bolster Dems with a real change argument that has teeth as it would be rooted in class, not identity politics.

    In all of that, we don’t let identity politics go. They are valid. But, we do set the “who is most needy?” arguments aside, make a class play, and tack those extras on top of that where it’s possible to do.

    And effective opposition means solidarity in denying the GOP and Trump. They have the power to do it anyway. Why burn people on compromise votes at this time when we need growth?

    The answer to that is the remainder of what effective opposition means. We couple opposition with clear ideas –solutions that a majority of the nation, GOP or not, will find increasingly compelling as the Trump policy vision plays out for the worst.

    eg: The ACA

    They want repeal because it sucks. And it does, there is not even a reasonable argument otherwise. It was, and remains a start. We know it sucks too, so let’s fix it and do Medicare for All, part E. Advantage: Dems / Progressives

    The party leadership is wanting to “save health care” which is good, but isn’t actually on board with the better and necessary solution advocacy. Advantage: GOP

    People will pay attention to that difference, and will vote FOR, if it’s on the table in a meaningful way, and will do so with excitement, high turnout. If there is no FOR in the equation, plenty will vote not to make it worse, but we lose the momentum associated with better, or FOR.

    Mid-Terms, given this choice, will either be another major league beating, which none of us needs to see, or a growth spike, similar to what the GOP saw in 2010.

    Go ahead and beat that “Trump and the GOP sucks” drum, but don’t forget positive advocacy people are craving for, and we’ve got a shot at an early comeback with teeth.

    Trump sucks advocacy on it’s own could result in a generational bad time, because “we suck less” isn’t a winner in this climate and given a solid majority of Americans are not seeing the economic future they need to see.


    “I think you fit in most of those categories, Bacon.”

    How about just take my word for it that I voted in good faith, with good intentions, and for what I felt was the greatest good for our county?

    I’ll be happy to return the favor.


    I believe you did. And it puzzles me how someone like you who seems to have a least half a brain chooses to stay blind to Trump’s immaturity, self-serving narcissism, incompetence, and lack of intellectual curiosity.

    Is it rabid partisanship? Is it bullheadedness? Is it weak-mindedness? What is it that causes you to give Trump such a wide pass?

    And if you start citing “alternative facts” you won’t have to tell me the reason – I’ll know.


    At least half a brain?

    I think that’s the nicest compliment I’ve received on this board.

    Have you ever seen a marriage where perhaps one of the partners seems “beneath” the other? One of those situations in which you can’t figure out what she sees in him? Or Him in her?

    But they see something we don’t see. Perhaps it’s an illusion, but perhaps it’s very real.

    I go with my gut feelings and instincts. I don’t know a lot about the details of politics, but I know right from wrong and I have a pretty good BS detector. There are some specific policy issues as to why I chose Trump, but overall, my instincts said not only that he was right, but that Hillary was wrong–not a close or even distant second.

    I’m sure he’ll do things I don’t like and disagree with. Nobody gets everything they want. But my instincts still tell me that he’s right for the job and that he’s doing fine so far. What I’m most worried about is trade restrictions and punitive tariffs. They won’t serve the working person well in the long run and I hope he doesn’t go down that road.

    I’m happy he’s lifted restrictions on the pipeline, that he’s working on cutting the fat in the bloated Federal bureaucracy, that he’s promised Supreme Court Justices that are Constitutionalists, that he’s taking action to prevent terrorists from sneaking into our country, that he is striving to get a grip on the illegal immigration situation, that he wants to work with Russia to destroy ISIS, that he’s chosen what appears to be an all-star team of advisers, etc. I just frankly do not see what you see. I don’t see things falling apart. I see things being put back together.

    I’m not willfully ignorant or turning a blind eye. I see a man who could have had an easy life who has made a huge sacrifice and is now working tirelessly to make our country “great again” (or greatER if that’s offensive).

    Thanks again for the compliment. I will hold you to that.


    Huge sacrifice?


    Dude, Trump SCORED! He’s elected President, owes billions around the world, just invited a bunch of corporatists into play ball, will be profiting from the office, and right now is enjoying Democrats actually confirming his people!

    Maybe it takes a while to ramp up opposition. Ahem. I digress.

    What sacrifice?

    Do you mean having access to all those contracts, being able to direct in ways that will benefit him and his holdings? Hell, he didn’t even enjoy a full vetting and apparently is going to seat a bunch of people with little to no ethics review.

    It’s a fucking party!

    Trust me, this isn’t a sacrifice on his part AT ALL. It’s a huge opportunity, and in those transition team meetings, that’s exactly what he pitched.

    Now, for you, some of that pitch should be red meat! “Let’s show them what corporate America can really do!” I wouldn’t blame you for that. It’s truth, and we are going to see what they can do too.

    Frankly, the outcome on all that will be an awesome vetting of your rhetoric here. I don’t expect a positive on it. I do expect a lot of the regrettable.

    There is no sacrifice here at all. None. It’s an opportunity and Trump will maximize it too. That doesn’t mean good for us, but it absolutely means good for Trump and corporations. Bet your ass.


    Bacon, I’ve never thought you were stupid. Ill-intentioned, ill-informed, as rigid as Fred Phelps, as zealous and single minded as Paul Hill, usually pedantic, and almost as self-important as Trump. But not stupid.

    “Stupid” is a description I reserve for Dork.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 22 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.