Whatever, I’m pretty clear he is a dangerous leader.
Do I detect an air of indifference?
@Barnabas62 can say for sure what he meant, but this doesn't express indifference to me -- sounds more like being weary of trying to figure out what's wrong with this guy.
There are narcissists who care intensely what others think of them (yes, I was surprised too). Search on “vulnerable narcissists”. Trump appears to combine both types.
"The more you know" gif, but in a bad way. I cannot wait for the time when I don't think about the orange menace anymore.
In the past couple of weeks, the US Congress, both the Representatives and the Senate, has approved a nonbinding resolution to end the hostilities in Iran.
All of the sudden Iran has taken pot shots at ships attempting to transit the Strait of Hormuz as well as attacking Kuwait and Bahrain.
And, of course, the Orange Guy and Little Peter have to take their obligatory attacks in response.
Now, I am wondering if Iran thinks it can get away with its actions after misreading what our congress did.
And I am wondering just how far this will go.
We all know Trump did not have to start this scuffle. Just not sure how it will end.
Please remember that the vast majority of people with NPD [narcissistic personality disorder] are women who have experienced severe trauma - personality disorders are usually a result of trauma. People with NPD act out due to deeply painful insecurity and self-loathing. Armchair diagnosing Trump as a "narcissist" (which is not a clinical term) is extremely harmful for people with personality disorders, who already face severe stigma. Personality disorders are illnesses developed as a coping mechanism, not moral failings.
Now, I am wondering if Iran thinks it can get away with its actions after misreading what our congress did.
The fact that this could work as a talking point for the pro-war right does not automatically preclude its being true.
OTOH, with or without the congressional resolution, I suspect that Tehran had already been getting the vibe that America under Trump is a bit of a buffoon state, easier to knock around than usual, without it quite being a case of "Bwahaha, look at the weak pacifist sissies in their congress!! America will now fall into our hands like an over-ripe fruit!!"
And just to clarify, is it established that Iran was the clear aggressor in this latest round of shooting? I can easily believe it, but I haven't read much beyond the headlines.
Tangent alert. Personality disorders are illnesses developed as a coping mechanism, not moral failings. Hmmm ....
I'm so far not too impressed with Trump's coping mechanisms.
Nor my own, come to that ... 'Lord, forgive me for I have coping mechanisms'
As I understand it Iran wants the peace deal to include Israel stopping attacking Lebanon. Israel prefers attacking Lebanon to the peace deal. Trump isn't willing to force Israel to act otherwise.
Please remember that the vast majority of people with NPD [narcissistic personality disorder] are women who have experienced severe trauma
I don't think we should be remote diagnosing medical conditions but this isn't true.
I said in my comment very explicitly that we shouldn't be armchair diagnosing anyone. Cluster B PDs - with the exception of ASPD - are overwhelmingly diagnosed in traumatised women and indeed the diagnosis is often due to medical misogyny in the first place.
Tangent alert. Personality disorders are illnesses developed as a coping mechanism, not moral failings. Hmmm ....
I'm so far not too impressed with Trump's coping mechanisms.
Nor my own, come to that ... 'Lord, forgive me for I have coping mechanisms'
Trump does not have a PD diagnosis as far as we know.
Tangent alert. Personality disorders are illnesses developed as a coping mechanism, not moral failings. Hmmm ....
I'm so far not too impressed with Trump's coping mechanisms.
Nor my own, come to that ... 'Lord, forgive me for I have coping mechanisms'
Trump does not have a PD diagnosis as far as we know.
Some mental health experts have observed narcissistic characteristics in his public behavior; however, none of them that I know of are in a therapeutic relationship with him.
It is unethical to offer a professional diagnosis of a public figure without personally examining them and obtaining consent.
But they can discuss general behaviors that resemble narcissistic traits; explain patterns seen in public communications and analyze public behaviors through the lens of personality disorders. These are observations, not diagnosis.
Please remember that the vast majority of people with NPD [narcissistic personality disorder] are women who have experienced severe trauma
I don't think we should be remote diagnosing medical conditions but this isn't true.
I said in my comment very explicitly that we shouldn't be armchair diagnosing anyone.
Yes, I was agreeing with this.
Cluster B PDs - with the exception of ASPD - are overwhelmingly diagnosed in traumatised women and indeed the diagnosis is often due to medical misogyny in the first place.
That's as maybe, but the majority of people with NPD in particular are men (and generally its not felt to be helpful to discuss trauma separately from the biophysical model as a whole).
Tangent alert. Personality disorders are illnesses developed as a coping mechanism, not moral failings. Hmmm ....
I'm so far not too impressed with Trump's coping mechanisms.
Nor my own, come to that ... 'Lord, forgive me for I have coping mechanisms'
Trump does not have a PD diagnosis as far as we know.
Some mental health experts have observed narcissistic characteristics in his public behavior; however, none of them that I know of are in a therapeutic relationship with him.
It is unethical to offer a professional diagnosis of a public figure without personally examining them and obtaining consent.
But they can discuss general behaviors that resemble narcissistic traits; explain patterns seen in public communications and analyze public behaviors through the lens of personality disorders. These are observations, not diagnosis.
And are we are supposed to take these "discussions of general behaviours that resemble narcissistic traits" any more seriously because the speaker is a mental-health professional?
On-line diagnoses of politicians as having mental-illnesses or personality disorders just screams pseudo-intellectualism.
And, ignorance of actual clinical criteria - because those who are qualified to make such diagnoses are also not going to break professional standards by actually doing so on-line to the general public.
Is it even necessary to find a clinical explanation where observable stupidity, greed and evil will suffice?
It's supposed to give an extra layer of validity to the criticism. If you just say Trump is wrecking the country, people who will like his policies will reply "Are you kidding? He's the best thing that's ever happened to this country!" But everyone agrees that people with psychiatric disorders are unsuitable for certain positions.
The problem is, most people who like Trump are just going to interpret "narcissism" as a mere character flaw, along the lines of "selfishness", and think "How can you say that? Look at the all the GOOD his policies are doing for other people!"
Tangent alert. Personality disorders are illnesses developed as a coping mechanism, not moral failings. Hmmm ....
I'm so far not too impressed with Trump's coping mechanisms.
Nor my own, come to that ... 'Lord, forgive me for I have coping mechanisms'
Trump does not have a PD diagnosis as far as we know.
Some mental health experts have observed narcissistic characteristics in his public behavior; however, none of them that I know of are in a therapeutic relationship with him.
It is unethical to offer a professional diagnosis of a public figure without personally examining them and obtaining consent.
But they can discuss general behaviors that resemble narcissistic traits; explain patterns seen in public communications and analyze public behaviors through the lens of personality disorders. These are observations, not diagnosis.
And are we are supposed to take these "discussions of general behaviours that resemble narcissistic traits" any more seriously because the speaker is a mental-health professional?
Technically no. But they do have more weight if the presenter is careful, evidence based, and transparent about the limits of what they are doing. I would say it is much like a 21st century historian trying to explain what happened when Pompeii was covered with volcanic ash.
Mental health professions have weight in that they understand the subject matter; they can explain patterns; they can give informed interpretations; and they can clarify misconceptions. But their commentary is not authoritive above about a person's inner life. They can see patterns, but this is not a diagnosis.
The problem is, most people who like Trump are just going to interpret "narcissism" as a mere character flaw, along the lines of "selfishness", and think "How can you say that? Look at the all the GOOD his policies are doing for other people!"
I would agree, and additionally the people who like Trump also heavily overlap with those who distrust science in general.
The Supreme Court is handing down its final decisions for the year. By my count as of 1333 eastern standard time it is Trump won one ruling and has lost on three
The Court let stand the civil suit against Carroll v Trump civil suit. Meaning Trump now owes asEugene Carroll about $10bil, considering accumulated interest and penalties
The Court has said Trump cannot fire a Federal Reserve Governor without due process.
The court has allowed Trump some say in how to govern some quasi executive branches
The Court has affirmed the right of states to count mail in ballots that are postmarked by Election Day,
The big one concerning Birthright citizenship has yet to be handed down.
The Court let stand the civil suit against Carroll v Trump civil suit. Meaning Trump now owes asEugene Carroll about $10bil, considering accumulated interest and penalties
Typo alert! The Court let stand the decision on the $5 million verdict. Even with interest, considerably less than $10 billion.
Mind you, it does seem that politicians these days see no difference between a million and a billion. If you aren't talking trillions, you aren't talking serious money!
The Court let stand the civil suit against Carroll v Trump civil suit. Meaning Trump now owes asEugene Carroll about $10bil, considering accumulated interest and penalties
Typo alert! The Court let stand the decision on the $5 million verdict. Even with interest, considerably less than $10 billion.
Mind you, it does seem that politicians these days see no difference between a million and a billion. If you aren't talking trillions, you aren't talking serious money!
Trump is a bit below our radar in the UK at the moment, as we have a nice quiet coup d'etat to occupy our attention and interest...
He still seems to be rather stuck for a way out of the Iran situation
Bone Spurs? Worked once before.
When Trump declared April 7 that the U.S. would suspend bombing Iran for two weeks to allow for negotiations, he said the U.S. had "already met and exceeded all military objectives."
"Total and complete victory. 100%. No question about it," Trump told Agence France-Presse.
Hegseth was similarly triumphant. "Operation Epic Fury was a historic and overwhelming victory on the battlefield, a capital-V military victory," he said during an April 8 Pentagon press conference. "Epic Fury decimated Iran's military and rendered it combat-ineffective for years to come. "
Now that SCOTUS has upheld the Carroll judgement, does this mean that trump is now a registered sex offender and no longer eligible to live in public housing? Yes - I know, but it's a happy thought anyway.
The Carroll verdict, in and itself, likely won't have much impact either way on anyone's opinion of DJT. The original verdict was in 2023, and about half of the electorate was still okay with supporting Trump in 2024. On the other side, there aren't many Democrats who needed the SCOTUS to confirm that E. Jean Carroll's claims against Trump are true.
What could give it some legs is if Trump tries to cajole his donors for the money, or, even better, loot the public coffers. Because Trump's goodwill among the voters who thought "I don't care what kinda creep he is, as long as he manages my tax money better" was already on life support with the Hormuz Crisis and gas prices.
Best case scenario for Trump, Musk or some other relatively obscure techbro pays the settlement by himself, and everyone forgets about it. If Trump has to hit up other donors or the GOP's party coffers, that circulates the resentment a little more widely, though probably not too debilitatingly. Forcing involuntary generosity on the self-conceptualized "taxpayer" would be the response most likely to blowback on Trump and benefit the Democrats.
Now that SCOTUS has upheld the Carroll judgement, does this mean that trump is now a registered sex offender and no longer eligible to live in public housing? Yes - I know, but it's a happy thought anyway.
No, the lawsuit was a civil suit, not a felony. A civil suit only needs a majority vote based on the preponderance of the evidence. If he had been charged with a felony the jury would need to have a unanimous vote based on evidence without a doubt.
Turns out the US had just returned 100 some Venezuelans to Caracos the night before the recent earthquakes. The motel they were placed in collapsed, There are no survivors that I know of.
Not sure if I had heard about Trump's Great American State Fair before a few minutes ago, when I stumbled upon a news article about a MAGA influencer getting arrested for allegedly performing lewd acts in an Uncle Sam costume.
Democrats on social media are crowing about how the accused is getting support from Republicans, though in fairness, I only saw one poster, on-line, alleging it was some sorta political frame-up.
In other news: the Trump DOJ has sued 30 states to obtain their voting rolls. So far, the DOJ is losing every suit. The count now is DOJ 0 to 11 for the states. The eleven have been summarily dismissed in Federal District Courts. I do not know if any has ever gotten to the Appeals Courts.
The Great American State Fair is simply a dud. People are not showing up.
What’s this “American State” thing? I’ve heard of State Fairs, but this looks like a Federal thing, and I’m sure the people who flock to their State Fair wouldn’t be seen dead in it.
Still, I’m English and I’m often plain dead wrong about the USA.
The Great American State Fair is simply a dud. People are not showing up.
What’s this “American State” thing? I’ve heard of State Fairs, but this looks like a Federal thing, and I’m sure the people who flock to their State Fair wouldn’t be seen dead in it.
Still, I’m English and I’m often plain dead wrong about the USA.
Apparently, it's a celebration of all the individual states, and each one has its own pavillion or whatever. Some states have refrained from participating, though.
The Great American State Fair is simply a dud. People are not showing up.
What’s this “American State” thing? I’ve heard of State Fairs, but this looks like a Federal thing, and I’m sure the people who flock to their State Fair wouldn’t be seen dead in it.
Still, I’m English and I’m often plain dead wrong about the USA.
Apparently, it's a celebration of all the individual states, and each one has its own pavillion or whatever. Some states have refrained from participating, though.
It’s sponsored by the Trump administration to mark the 250th. Eleven states declined to participate, so the organizers brought in others to “represent” those states. My state is one not participating, and our governor had to call on the organizers to remove images of our state flag with the red and white bars replaced by a Confederate battle flag.
Not actually pavilion like what you would see at a World's Fair. More like sections, or stages in a long hall. I have been told if a state is not represented, the section that had been set aside for that state will have one or two chairs in it.
Not actually pavilion like what you would see at a World's Fair. More like sections, or stages in a long hall. I have been told if a state is not represented, the section that had been set aside for that state will have one or two chairs in it.
Yeah, I was looking for a more precise word, but google seemed to indicate that "pavillion" gets used with a looser meaning.
It all sounds a bit underwhelming. The 250th anniversary deserves better, but Trump (despite what he may say) doesn't really do 'better'...
And, it should be better. Something organised by a committee of representatives from national museums and heritage groups, as a non-partisan celebration of 250 years. But, as soon as Trump decided to put his name on it, it becomes political ... and hence divisive rather than something to bring the nation together.
Comments
@Barnabas62 can say for sure what he meant, but this doesn't express indifference to me -- sounds more like being weary of trying to figure out what's wrong with this guy.
"The more you know" gif, but in a bad way. I cannot wait for the time when I don't think about the orange menace anymore.
The Narcissist may well be remembered for this more than anything else.
An oozy, stinky swamp, a dead duck...
In the past couple of weeks, the US Congress, both the Representatives and the Senate, has approved a nonbinding resolution to end the hostilities in Iran.
All of the sudden Iran has taken pot shots at ships attempting to transit the Strait of Hormuz as well as attacking Kuwait and Bahrain.
And, of course, the Orange Guy and Little Peter have to take their obligatory attacks in response.
Now, I am wondering if Iran thinks it can get away with its actions after misreading what our congress did.
And I am wondering just how far this will go.
We all know Trump did not have to start this scuffle. Just not sure how it will end.
I don't think we should be remote diagnosing medical conditions but this isn't true.
I don't think you can completely discount trauma as a pathway to narcissism. There are many causes. But this thread is not about how it develops.
The fact that this could work as a talking point for the pro-war right does not automatically preclude its being true.
OTOH, with or without the congressional resolution, I suspect that Tehran had already been getting the vibe that America under Trump is a bit of a buffoon state, easier to knock around than usual, without it quite being a case of "Bwahaha, look at the weak pacifist sissies in their congress!! America will now fall into our hands like an over-ripe fruit!!"
And just to clarify, is it established that Iran was the clear aggressor in this latest round of shooting? I can easily believe it, but I haven't read much beyond the headlines.
I'm so far not too impressed with Trump's coping mechanisms.
Nor my own, come to that ... 'Lord, forgive me for I have coping mechanisms'
In fairness to Trump, are there a lot of other politicians in DC saying "No more aid for Israel until they stop attacking Lebanon"?
I said in my comment very explicitly that we shouldn't be armchair diagnosing anyone. Cluster B PDs - with the exception of ASPD - are overwhelmingly diagnosed in traumatised women and indeed the diagnosis is often due to medical misogyny in the first place.
Trump to my knowledge has not got a diagnosis of NPD. Casually accusing people of being narcissists is harmful.
Just fyi, a personality disorder isn't related to psychosis. Psychosis in terms of mental illness has a highly specific meaning.
Trump does not have a PD diagnosis as far as we know.
Some mental health experts have observed narcissistic characteristics in his public behavior; however, none of them that I know of are in a therapeutic relationship with him.
It is unethical to offer a professional diagnosis of a public figure without personally examining them and obtaining consent.
But they can discuss general behaviors that resemble narcissistic traits; explain patterns seen in public communications and analyze public behaviors through the lens of personality disorders. These are observations, not diagnosis.
Yes, I was agreeing with this.
That's as maybe, but the majority of people with NPD in particular are men (and generally its not felt to be helpful to discuss trauma separately from the biophysical model as a whole).
And are we are supposed to take these "discussions of general behaviours that resemble narcissistic traits" any more seriously because the speaker is a mental-health professional?
It's supposed to give an extra layer of validity to the criticism. If you just say Trump is wrecking the country, people who will like his policies will reply "Are you kidding? He's the best thing that's ever happened to this country!" But everyone agrees that people with psychiatric disorders are unsuitable for certain positions.
The problem is, most people who like Trump are just going to interpret "narcissism" as a mere character flaw, along the lines of "selfishness", and think "How can you say that? Look at the all the GOOD his policies are doing for other people!"
Technically no. But they do have more weight if the presenter is careful, evidence based, and transparent about the limits of what they are doing. I would say it is much like a 21st century historian trying to explain what happened when Pompeii was covered with volcanic ash.
Mental health professions have weight in that they understand the subject matter; they can explain patterns; they can give informed interpretations; and they can clarify misconceptions. But their commentary is not authoritive above about a person's inner life. They can see patterns, but this is not a diagnosis.
I would agree, and additionally the people who like Trump also heavily overlap with those who distrust science in general.
Quite right. I should have said mental mixed-upness.
The Court let stand the civil suit against Carroll v Trump civil suit. Meaning Trump now owes asEugene Carroll about $10bil, considering accumulated interest and penalties
The Court has said Trump cannot fire a Federal Reserve Governor without due process.
The court has allowed Trump some say in how to govern some quasi executive branches
The Court has affirmed the right of states to count mail in ballots that are postmarked by Election Day,
The big one concerning Birthright citizenship has yet to be handed down.
Typo alert! The Court let stand the decision on the $5 million verdict. Even with interest, considerably less than $10 billion.
Mind you, it does seem that politicians these days see no difference between a million and a billion. If you aren't talking trillions, you aren't talking serious money!
He still seems to be rather stuck for a way out of the Iran situation - IIRC, a day or so ago he was once again threatening to 'obliterate' them.
Thank you for the correction. Interest has turned Carroll’s original jury awards — roughly $88.3 million in combined damages — into a substantially larger, near‑nine‑figure liability in official reporting, with Forbes saying the two Carroll judgments now total about $98.5 million after accrued interest ($5.8M on the first judgment and $92.7M on the second). https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2026/06/29/supreme-court-rejects-trumps-request-to-take-up-e-jean-carroll-case/
I take it that he's still not yet managed to open the Strait?
That's great - thanks!
Bone Spurs? Worked once before.
Just sayin'.
What could give it some legs is if Trump tries to cajole his donors for the money, or, even better, loot the public coffers. Because Trump's goodwill among the voters who thought "I don't care what kinda creep he is, as long as he manages my tax money better" was already on life support with the Hormuz Crisis and gas prices.
Best case scenario for Trump, Musk or some other relatively obscure techbro pays the settlement by himself, and everyone forgets about it. If Trump has to hit up other donors or the GOP's party coffers, that circulates the resentment a little more widely, though probably not too debilitatingly. Forcing involuntary generosity on the self-conceptualized "taxpayer" would be the response most likely to blowback on Trump and benefit the Democrats.
No, the lawsuit was a civil suit, not a felony. A civil suit only needs a majority vote based on the preponderance of the evidence. If he had been charged with a felony the jury would need to have a unanimous vote based on evidence without a doubt.
Even a Republican. Congressman protested against this
Democrats on social media are crowing about how the accused is getting support from Republicans, though in fairness, I only saw one poster, on-line, alleging it was some sorta political frame-up.
What’s this “American State” thing? I’ve heard of State Fairs, but this looks like a Federal thing, and I’m sure the people who flock to their State Fair wouldn’t be seen dead in it.
Still, I’m English and I’m often plain dead wrong about the USA.
Apparently, it's a celebration of all the individual states, and each one has its own pavillion or whatever. Some states have refrained from participating, though.
Yeah, I was looking for a more precise word, but google seemed to indicate that "pavillion" gets used with a looser meaning.