In the TV comedy Kim’s Convenience, there is an episode in which a mother comes with her young son into the convenience store run by Mr. Kim, a Korean immigrant who believes in being stern when bringing up his own children. The mother’s child-rearing philosophy is that one must never use the word ‘No’ with children because its stifles their creativity or something. Mr. Kim is horrified as the child runs berserk in the store, toppling racks, breaking things, and so on with the mother not able to prevent him, and when he orders the child to stop, the mother remonstrates with him for using the ‘No’ word.
I was reminded of this episode when serial sex abuser Donald Trump (SSAT) went to a tear this weekend on his social media site, issuing volleys of deranged missives on all manner of things.
Here’s one where he is urging Republicans to shut down the government unless they get all his demands.
The Republicans lost big on Debt Ceiling, got NOTHING, and now are worried that they will be BLAMED for the Budget Shutdown. Wrong!!! Whoever is President will be blamed, in this case, Crooked (as Hell!) Joe Biden! Our Country is being systematically destroyed by the Radical Left Marxists, Fascists and Thugs – THE DEMOCRATS. UNLESS YOU GET EVERYTHING, SHUT IT DOWN! Close the Border, stop the Weaponization of “Justice,” and End Election Interference – WE MUST HAVE HONEST ELECTIONS. It’s time Republicans learned how to fight! Are you listening Mitch McConnell, the weakest, dumbest, and most conflicted “Leader” in U.S. Senate history? HE’S ALREADY GIVEN THE DEMOCRATS EVERYTHING, THEY CAN’T BELIEVE HOW LUCKY THEY GOT. WE NEED NEW, & REAL, REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE, NOT A CLONE OF MITCH, & WE NEED IT NOW!!!
In that above link, there is also has an angry rant that Chief of Staff of the armed forces Mark Milley should be executed for treason because in the days before SSAT finally left the White House, there was palpable fear that he would do something truly crazy like start a war so that he could declare an emergency and stay in office and Milley was reassuring people on background that it would not happen.
Then SSAT says that all Senate Democrats should resign because of the allegations against New Jersey senator Robert Menendez and that, should he win the presidency again, he will order the investigation of NBC, MSNBC, and even the internet provider Comcast because he thinks they have been unfair to him. He then went on a rant against the practice of automatic voter registration, something that is being done in both Democratic and Republican states.
The point is that he was not simply presenting arguments about all these things. His rants are over-the-top, like what one might hear from someone suffering from paranoid delusions. To read those screeds is like listening to someone who is seriously mentally disturbed.
What to make of all this? Chauncey DeVega interviewed various mental health professionals to see what explanations they had to offer. One of them, Dr. Justin Frank, a former clinical professor of psychiatry at the George Washington University Medical Center, says that SSAT has “a classic God complex driven by a persecutory delusion” and discusses what he observed during the interview SSAT gave to Kristen Welker on NBC.
“When most people feel angry or defiant, they become more focused. Such is not the case with Donald Trump. He was wearing his mug-shot face, but the eyes were uncomprehending. When talking to a reporter who’s not on his payroll, he often looks like he’s struggling to listen – especially when he anticipates that he won’t like what hears. But in this interview, he was unable to muster even the semblance of a conversation.
In my opinion, Trump’s incessant, word-salad repetition reflects chronic substance abuse or impending dementia, which is consistent with the blank eyes. His blotchy red and puffy face (and constant sniffling) are not new but underscore a clinician’s natural suspicion that he is not cognitively healthy. His cartoon character menacing and bellicose posture is second nature to him.”
SSAT’s acolytes may think that his behavior is all part of some shrewd game plan of his to ramp up anger among his followers and to create the impression of such widespread chaos that his own misdeeds get buried in the mud. But even if one does not go as far as Frank in ascribing pathology, it seems clear to me that SSAT’s increasingly deranged behavior is similar to that of the child in Kim’s Convenience and may have similar causes. No one in his immediate circle or in the Republican political establishment is willing to say no to him even when he continues to utter rampant and obvious falsehoods, and his MAGA base cheers him on. Is it any surprise that he is exhibiting paranoid behavior even if it has not (as yet at least) reached the level of a full-blown psychotic breakdown?
FIFY
He may be insane (or whatever the actually politically acceptable way of saying that is) but he remains the Republican party’s best, arguably only hope for beating Biden in the next election.
… SSAT’s increasingly deranged behavior … may have causes.
Let’s not have anyone call him a “Rebel Without a Cause” then!
… he is exhibiting paranoid behavior even if it has not … reached … a full-blown psychotic breakdown…
Does Trump™ set the pattern for, or just reflect, the condition of the US?
Conveniently overlooking his repeated demands to ‘lock her up’, impeach Biden and every single person involved in all of the charges he’s going to stand trial for -- including the judges, he says
before taking a breath, forgetting what he just said and says he will
Clearly what he meant to say was ‘don’t prosecute ME, prosecute THEM’.
I’m beginning to have a glimmer of hope that Trump will totally implode shortly before the election leaving the Republicans with no candidate for president of any kind.
OTOH, it might happen early enough that he can seem to recover for a while. Then the Republicans can blame Biden and/or socialism for driving Trump over the edge.
Once his supporters realise that SSAT’s brain is already too far gone, with no chance of regaining that spark they once adored, they’ll drop him. Only a few died-in-the-brain supporters won’t see it and they’ll be all he has left. Once his political enablers realise they can no longer manoeuvre him, they’ll transfer their career hopes to another puppet candidate.
This could be a long wait….
Trying to diagnose what motivates that organism’s behavior is akin to trying to determine which ingredient in a cesspool makes it smell bad.
I want Comcast investigated because they keep raising my bill to criminally high prices.
@EigensprocketUK, 6:
About six months ago I tried to cut through a conversation like this with the following two questions:
1. Are you prepared, here and now, to bet [arbitrary stake] that Trump WILL NOT be the Republican candidate?
2. Are you prepared, here and now, to bet [arbitrary stake] that, assuming he’s the candidate, that Trump will garner FEWER than FIFTY MILLION votes?
I’m not, in either case. I think he’ll be the candidate, and I think completely regardless of anything that happens between now and the election there are at least fifty million people who’ll vote for him anyway. I’d be delighted to be wrong on either count… but I wouldn’t bet on it.
Would you?
Trump is not insane, his problem is senile dementia.
@10, Chigau:
not a doctor, but it’s getting toe-curlingly obvious. This just in:
https://boingboing.net/2023/09/26/donald-trump-glitches-out-says-jeb-bush-was-president-who-got-us-into-iraq-war-video.html
anywere normal, he’d be at home or in an institution receiving the care someone in that state needs. But gerontocrats openly falling to bits and yet hanging on by their fingernails seem to be the fashion all over the world it seems.
BTW, wouldn’t want to be in the shoes of one of his carers…
Ron #9: My last line was “this could be a long wait…”, so perhaps that covers what you’re asking.
Damn auto carrot turned Roj into Ron. Sorry, SonofRojBlake.
To answer the question: no, in fact this is barely less coherent than when he was president. This is what they embraced way back then, he is just going all caps a little more often.
Well, duh. A lot of it clearly is performative.
Hamming it up for the base, for the image.
@ Morales
How is that “clear”? How is your assertion of this clarity consistent with the Frank quote? How would a Trump who actually was suffering mental illness appear different?
Silentbob, what, no personal condemnations?
No accusations of trollishness?
No desire to see me depart the blog, but rather a desire to engage with me?
No pretence at a consistent attitude?
Ok, you deserve cookies. So.
Because I’m not a dolt. Because I’m familiar with shock jock techniques.
Wrong question. Proper question would be “How is the Frank quote consistent with your assertion?”
Because he explicitly wrote “In my opinion”, though I did not.
He need not appear different in order to suffer mental illness.
(‘when you hear hoofbeats, think horses not zebras’ )
PS Alex Jones about Sandy Hook: “Why did Hitler blow up the Reichstag — to get control! Why do governments stage these things — to get our guns! Why can’t people get that through their head?”
Nobody pretends he’s mad or senile, do they? They know it’s performative.
Actually, quite a few people do believe (rightly or not) that Alex Jones is not quite right in the head; possibly a sociopath, whether or not he’s being deliberately performative as well.
Then there’s Herschel Walker. And James Caviezel.
Raging Bee, “quite a few people do believe (rightly or not) that Alex Jones is not quite right in the head”
Are you one of them?
I don’t know enough to have an opinion, and I don’t much care either. And that’s not really relevant — I was merely disputing your claim that “Nobody pretends he’s mad or senile.”
Well, other than he himself, Bee:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/mar/30/alex-jones-sandy-hook-claims-psychosis
(Court did not buy that)
@eigensprocket
Franklin Roosevelt was unable to act as president. Nobody did anything about it.
Ronald Reagan was having dementia problems. Nobody did anything about it.
Dianne Feinstein is barely hanging on. Nobody is doing anything about it.
Serial Sex Abuser was not coherent seven years ago. Dude got elected, is still around.
I think you are silly.
@mano and @#1 catman
It is my personal belief is that psychology is a destructive and criminal exercise that is harmful to everybody. Those who do believe in it, they say that do not diagnose someone who you aren’t treating, do not do it certainly via a sample over a video which is ‘not therapeutic’, and do not accept anyone’s opinion on any kind of official diagnosis who is not psychologically-holy and annointed-by-them.
All y’all are pretending that being rational and atheist is the way to go. You don’t need to call the man (psychology-blessed) names. Although if you do perhaps you don’t violate Mano’s terms and conditions on if it is okay to insult someone; it’s not insult if it’s declared as (magically-sanctified) clinical?
It is enough to accurately describe his behavior as contrary to rational behavior and harmful to this nation.
Just for laughs I searched the internet for ‘blotchy red cheeks and constant sniffles’. It’s Slapped Cheek Disease.
I’m honestly not sure if this is a wacky AI Google result or an actual medical site or not. But it made me laugh.
seachange:
Nah. It’s a way to go.
One could be either religious or irrational or both.
It’s informative that you imagine other people think there is but one way to go for every one.
Letsee… so far, it’s bought him a lifetime of luxury and wealth and admiration and sexy indulgences, and is now in his twilight years where he still gets widespread attention (such as this very post) and deference. He’s a news maker, a mover and shaker, and he likes it. And he’s quite an old man, now. So far, so good.
So, how irrational is that, if that is what one likes?
As for the nation, he’s shown where it was weak by relying on ethical norms and some sort of gravitas and some sort of shame — nevermind civic duty — in its bigger cogs. Now, it is known that this can happen and therefore next time there won’t be such disbelief that someone could be so shameless and selfish and get away with it.
[OT + PS]
What’s quite ironic for me is how he won back in the day because of the electoral college system, which was ostensibly created so that shysters and dishonourable demagogues such as he could not get the Presidency.
(He did not lose because of it, of course. In both elections he lost the popular vote)
@ 26 Morales
This is obviously false. Even leaving aside these things probably don’t make up for being despised by those around you and spending your life in a world of cheating and backstabbing, there are others as self-indulgent, greedy and narcissistic as he, and it doesn’t bring them riches. His advantage was inherited.
During which period of his life has he not been living in luxury and wealth and admiration? When did he not have the attitude? How old is he, now?
Heh. Whether or not it was inherited, it was. That’s the point!
I do like how a life filled with sycophants and enablers and yes-men and that sort of thing is in your estimation “being despised by those around you and spending your life in a world of cheating and backstabbing”. Maybe, but I reckon that when people grovel towards you, it’s kinda hard to remember that they despise you.
I dunno how many people on this little planet do not live ” in a world of cheating and backstabbing”, but I certainly do. That’s our world.
Heh, you are the one who railed at my supposed hyperliteralism.
So. Not talking about others, are we? We are talking about him.
Not saying anyone who acts as he does will have such a luxurious life or be able to indulge such venal vanity, but saying he does and he has and he can.
Realism can be a bitter pill, no? 😉
Again: how exactly is that supposedly irrational, if that is what one likes and what one desires?
@Silentbob, 28:
Are you kidding? You think Trump gives two shits what other people, little people think about him? He very, very obviously doesn’t give two shits about his own family. You’re projecting your own dependence on the approval of others onto someone who very clearly lacks any empathy at all.
@John Morales, 29:
I don’t. I find basically everyone in my life to be decent and trustworthy. There’ve been exceptions, of course, but those people are easy enough to deal with and remove from my life, I find.
On the other hand, having you state clearly and unambiguously that you live “in a world of cheating and backstabbing” (a) explains a lot and (b) comes as no surprise. You only display a tiny slice of your personality here, but based on that I have no difficulty believing that everyone who knows you IRL hates you.
sonofrojblake:
In what world do you live, then?
(In the UK: https://www.bbc.com/news/business-65545247 )
Yes. I like to call it “planet Earth”.
What, you imagine that people who practice realism are hated?
Actually, people who know me IRL quite like me.
Because, believe it or not, genuine people who are basically honest and friendly and helpful and entertaining and non-judgemental are often valued by others, and therefore I was and remain valued by others. IRL.
I’m going with “not”.
Of course, sonofrojblake.
Once again it has become about me, instead of about the subject at hand.
A familiar syndrome; when I say something you think reflects badly on me, you believe me. When I say something that might reflect positively, you disbelieve me. Typical of most ordinary people, of course.
Fundamental attribution error, confirmation bias, tall poppy syndrome, psychological projection, and so forth. Many reasons why those jaundiced towards me fantasise about my life and project their fears onto me, not that I pretend to know which applies.
But I do notice. Consider others may, too.
It could also be said that ‘Once again it has become about sonofrojblake, instead of about the subject at hand’ given your argument with him about the worlds you live in. Your usual silly framing at any pushback -- other people’s disputatious comments indicate an obsession with you, while your own are given a free pass.
More relevant though is that in #26, you said his behaviour earned him the various perks of his life:
A claim that is, well, wrong. His behaviour didn’t get that, his dad’s money did.
Ah, Holms. Gotta get a start on your quota of pointless personal pronouncements, right? Well, this is your first one for this thread.
Only if “… but based on that I have no difficulty believing that everyone who knows you IRL hates you.” is referring to sonofrojblake.
So, yeah, it could be said also, but unlike my own observation, it would not be congruent with the facts.
Let me guess: it could also be said that ‘Once again it has become about sonofrojblake, instead of about the subject at hand’. Defs not about me, eh?
I did not claim “earned”, I used the word ‘bought’.
Yes, he has behaved thus his entire life, and so far, so good.
Well, I thought his fraudulent activities and his grifting were things he personally did, but apparently he did not get his wealth and influence thereby.
It was all daddy!
(heh, the stories people tell themselves!)
John: If Holms’ pronouncements are so pointless, why are you responding to them?
Pointing out bad reasoning is pointless? I suppose that makes sense if you don’t want to improve.
You misunderstand, I was not saying that specific criticism was or was not about you, I was being more general than that. Sonof’s comment was critical of you, and you frame all such as obsession over you; but if that is applied consistently, then that also means all comments from you critical of others are obsessive of them.
A distinction that not only does not refute my point, but makes it stronger. Buying requires money, and the money came from his dad. I’ll take the admission and see you in the next one.
[OT + meta]
Raging Bee, because they are either about me or to me, and I like to set things on record.
They’re retorts, in other words. ]
Quite separate from my other comments as a regular commenter.
I don’t have to respond to them (nor indeed I could not respond to them) did they not exist.
(I am responding to your direct question now, quite evidently)
Ah, my dear Holms; once again, you want to do the old dance.
I do like a willing bauble with which to play, so hey! All good.
No, speculating about how hated I must be IRL is pointless.
Speculating about my character is pointless.
Whining about the way I comment is pointless.
Polluting threads with your incessant yammering about me and my tendencies and my habits and my character and so forth is pointless.
Well, other than to elicit retorts from me, a point which you at some point ironically but gleefully tried to present as evidence of my ungoodness, even as when I cease such retorts you likewise caper around claiming vindication by my silence.
Retorting without surcease for literally hundreds of comments until Mano feels he has to shut a thread down is pointless. which I noted hundreds of comments before the end.
I could go on, but since we’ve both been there you know full well that, if anything, I’m selling things short. Then there’s the bub and there’s the rub.
The current trio.
Again, I don’t want a repeat of that, and it’s been established it’s up to me to stop the pointless back-and-forth. Thus your quota. It’s trite and therefore predictable.
<snicker>
Cargo cult pedantry is kinda cute.
(So, your point was made weakly, according to you)