Am I the only one | Imamother

Fox

Sun, Jul 30 2017, 2:45 pm

All of these conversations can be summed up by actress Debra Messing's stupid tweet.

When she read that Steve Bannon is proposing a tax increase on people earning $5 million or more (44 percent instead of 39.6 percent), she issued the following tweet:

Quote:

THIS IS DISGUSTING. https://t.co/YjZDKgi4C7
— Debra Messing (@DebraMessing) July 26, 2017

Apparently Debra, like so many others, is on autopilot when it comes to the Trump administration. If it comes from Trump, it must be bad! Resist!

Or maybe we've all misjudged her. Maybe she earns $5 million per year and is genuinely disgusted that she'll have to pay more in taxes. If that's the case, she's one of the few Trump opponents who's being completely honest!

PinkFridge

Sun, Jul 30 2017, 4:31 pm

Fox wrote:

As for culture, Trump is more of an effect than a cause. However, today's headlines show that Claremont McKenna College has punished students who shut down a speech by Heather Mac Donald, unlike Middlebury College last spring. Kid Rock, an entertainer with no discernible platform other than a pro-Trump stance, is significantly ahead of the Democratic incumbent in the Michigan Senate race. Oh, and Barnes & Noble finally capitulated and agreed to sell Milo's book in their stores. So culture-wise, conservative ideas seem to be selling!

I've heard that Kid Rock makes Trump look well, not like a choir boy but not terrible by comparison.
I think that the failure of repeal and replace is going to be a problem. But 2018 elections are over a year away.

MagentaYenta

Sun, Jul 30 2017, 4:31 pm

allthingsblue wrote:

To all those who said they fell for trump and voted for him, but now regret it, did you not see the gigantic red flags?????

The military has established criteria for assessing leadership. I wish the republican party understood this.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion......html

Since President Trump’s inauguration, an unusual amount of attention has been paid to the 25th Amendment to the Constitution. That's the measure, ratified in 1967, that allows for removal of the president in the event that he is "unable to discharge the powers and duties" of the office. What does that mean, exactly? Lawyers surely have some ideas. But as a psychiatrist, I believe we need a rational, thorough and coherent definition of the mental capacities required to carry out “the powers and duties” of the presidency.

Although there are volumes devoted to outlining criteria for psychiatric disorders, there is surprisingly little psychiatric literature defining mental capacity, even less on the particular abilities required for serving in positions of great responsibility. Despite the thousands of articles and books written on leadership, primarily in the business arena, I have found only one source where the capacities necessary for strategic leadership are clearly and comprehensively laid out: the U.S. Army’s “Field Manual 6-22 Leader Development.”

The Army’s field manual on leadership is an extraordinarily sophisticated document, founded in sound psychological research and psychiatric theory, as well as military practice. It articulates the core faculties that officers, including commanders, need in order to fulfill their jobs. From the manual’s 135 dense pages, I have distilled five crucial qualities:

Trust

According to the Army, trust is fundamental to the functioning of a team or alliance in any setting: “Leaders shape the ethical climate of their organization while developing the trust and relationships that enable proper leadership.” A leader who is deficient in the capacity for trust makes little effort to support others, may be isolated and aloof, may be apathetic about discrimination, allows distrustful behaviors to persist among team members, makes unrealistic promises and focuses on self-promotion.

A good leader 'demonstrates an understanding of another person’s point of view' and 'identifies with others’ feelings and emotions.'
Discipline and self-control

The manual requires that a leader demonstrate control over his behavior and align his behavior with core Army values: “Loyalty, duty, respect, selfless service, honor, integrity, and personal courage.” The disciplined leader does not have emotional outbursts or act impulsively, and he maintains composure in stressful or adverse situations. Without discipline and self-control, a leader may not be able to resist temptation, to stay focused despite distractions, to avoid impulsive action or to think before jumping to a conclusion. The leader who fails to demonstrate discipline reacts “viscerally or angrily when receiving bad news or conflicting information,” and he “allows personal emotions to drive decisions or guide responses to emotionally charged situations.”

In psychiatry, we talk about “filters” — neurologic braking systems that enable us to appropriately inhibit our speech and actions even when disturbing thoughts or powerful emotions are present. Discipline and self-control require that an individual has a robust working filter, so that he doesn’t say or do everything that comes to mind.

Judgment and critical thinking

These are complex, high-level mental functions that include the abilities to discriminate, assess, plan, decide, anticipate, prioritize and compare. A leader with the capacity for critical thinking “seeks to obtain the most thorough and accurate understanding possible,” the manual says, and he anticipates “first, second and third consequences of multiple courses of action.” A leader deficient in judgment and strategic thinking demonstrates rigid and inflexible thinking.

Self-awareness

Self-awareness requires the capacity to reflect and an interest in doing so. “Self-aware leaders know themselves, including their traits, feelings, and behaviors,” the manual says. “They employ self-understanding and recognize their effect on others.” When a leader lacks self-awareness, the manual notes, he “unfairly blames subordinates when failures are experienced” and “rejects or lacks interest in feedback.”

Empathy

Perhaps surprisingly, the field manual repeatedly stresses the importance of empathy as an essential attribute for Army leadership. A good leader “demonstrates an understanding of another person’s point of view” and “identifies with others’ feelings and emotions.” The manual’s description of inadequacy in this area: “Shows a lack of concern for others’ emotional distress” and “displays an inability to take another’s perspective.”

The Army field manual amounts to a guide for the 25th Amendment. Whether a president’s Cabinet would ever actually invoke that amendment is another matter. There is, however, at least one historical precedent. The journalists Jane Mayer and Doyle McManus tell the dramatic story in their 1988 book, “Landslide: The Unmamaking of the President 1984-1988.”

Before he started his job as President Reagan’s third chief of staff, in early 1987, Howard Baker asked an aide, James Cannon, to put together a report on the state of the White House. Cannon then interviewed White House staff, including top aides working for the outgoing chief of staff, Donald Regan. On March 1, the day before Baker took over, Cannon presented him with a memo expressing grave concern that Reagan might not be sufficiently competent to perform his duties. Reagan was inattentive and disinterested, the outgoing staff had said, staying home to watch movies and television instead of going to work. “Consider the possibility that section four of the 25th Amendment might be applied,” Cannon wrote.

After reading the memo, Baker arranged a group observation of Reagan for the following day. On March 2, Baker, Cannon and two others — Reagan’s chief counsel, Arthur B. Culvahouse Jr., and his communications director, Tom Griscom — scrutinized the president, first at a Cabinet meeting, then at a luncheon. They found nothing amiss. The president seemed to be his usual genial, engaged self. Baker decided, presumably with relief, that Reagan was not incapacitated or disabled and they could all go on with their business.

Much has changed since the Reagan era, of course. Because of Trump’s Twitter habits and other features of the contemporary media landscape, far more data about his behavior are available to everyone — to citizens, journalists and members of Congress. And we are all free to compare that observable behavior to the list of traits deemed critical for leadership by the U.S. Army.

marina

Sun, Jul 30 2017, 7:52 pm

Quote:

I mentioned consumer and business confidence; a robust stock market; and rolling back regulations. These things all can be demonstrated to lead to an increase in investment and employment, statistically speaking.

Will these factors benefit every single underemployed or unemployed person in America? No. Are they all due 100 percent to actions taken by Trump? No. Nevertheless, a reasonable Trump voter looks at the information and says, "Okay, well, I wanted him to improve the business climate in the U.S., and it looks like that's happening. Maybe I'd like more improvement, but I wasn't expecting a miracle."

Under Obama, the Dow reached new heights, businesses were happy and consumer confidence rose. There is no shortage of articles and data on this. So the reasonable Trump voter, being as reasonable as he or she is, must surely have been waiting for something absolutely more fabulous than just the regular old Obama-era growth.

Right? The only other option is that the Reasonable Trump Voter is so clueless and unaware of the last 8 years of economic success that he or she actually thinks Trump somehow gets the credit for this.

I've met reasonable trump voters. But what you're describing is a simple-minded person who can't critically analyze historical information.

marina

Sun, Jul 30 2017, 7:58 pm

Quote:

Crime statistics won't be available for years, but many Trump voters are simply happy that he is discussing crime problems forcefully and specifically as well as challenging the BLM narrative. It's not so much that they expect him to reduce crime significantly; they just don't want a leader like London Mayor Sadiq Khan, who seems to feel terrorism is equivalent to a parking problem.

Again, you're not describing a reasonable voter. Instead, you're painting a picture of a buffoon who is happy with platitudes and chants and empty promises, someone who doesn't really care about the data.

I'll take offense, on behalf of all reasonable trump voters.

marina

Sun, Jul 30 2017, 8:05 pm

Quote:

Politifact? Robert Lichter at George Mason University debunked their analysis way back in 2013.

Sorry, what? Lichter debunked Politifact's analysis of Trump's 2017 successes all the way back in 2013?

Or are you talking about the study where the university just tallied up all the politifact ratings and found that republicans were rated as less truthful more times than democrats?

And from that tally, you consider everything politifact ever writes to be debunked? Because everyone knows that all good neutral and objective reports must have republicans lying exactly as much as democrats.

Goodness, I shudder to think what you must think of Breibart and Fox.

marina

Sun, Jul 30 2017, 8:07 pm

Fox wrote:

Quote:

THIS IS DISGUSTING. https://t.co/YjZDKgi4C7
— Debra Messing (@DebraMessing) July 26, 2017

Yes, when I think of stupid tweets, Debra Messing is exactly who comes to mind.

MagentaYenta

Sun, Jul 30 2017, 8:33 pm

marina wrote:

Yes, when I think of stupid tweets, Debra Messing is exactly who comes to mind.

Ok I'm gonna assume that Messing is someone from Hollywood or a pop culture celeb of some sort, Fox seems to focus on those people. But frankly I'm not in tune to that whole culture so I could give a rip about what she says.

I am concerned about what our president tweets for a variety of reasons.

smileforamile

Sun, Jul 30 2017, 10:11 pm

Delete

Last edited by smileforamile on Thu, Jul 11 2019, 10:29 am; edited 1 time in total

Fox

Mon, Jul 31 2017, 12:20 am

marina wrote:

I've been unable to locate any of these articles from anywhere other than significantly left-of-center publications. The ones I found were more in the line of apologetics: "Things under Obama weren't as good as expected, but here's why it wasn't his administration's fault."

marina wrote:

I've met reasonable trump voters. But what you're describing is a simple-minded person who can't critically analyze historical information.

I do not recall you ever having claimed to understand, sympathize, or empathize with someone's motivation in voting for Trump. The "simple-minded person" or "buffoon happy with platitudes" has been the predominant characterization from anyone left of or including The National Review.

marina wrote:

I'm talking about Lichter's analysis of why Republicans were rated as less truthful than Democrats and conclusions about PolitiFact's cherry-picking.

MagentaYenta wrote:

Ok I'm gonna assume that Messing is someone from Hollywood or a pop culture celeb of some sort, Fox seems to focus on those people. But frankly 'm not in tune to that whole culture so could give a rip about what she says.

"Oh, that silly Fox. I can't imagine why she concerns herself with these ridiculous celebrities. I'm personally far, far above that!"

And people accuse me of being condescending?

Apparently you're so above-it-all that you missed the entire point. Debra Messing's post is instructive not because she has brought her vast experience portraying Grace Adler on Will & Grace to shine light on our dubious political situation.

Rather, it's because she is emblematic of a great many Trump opponents: she tweeted her disgust simply because she hates Trump. She didn't even read or understand the proposal that allegedly disgusted her. This seems to be a common problem. You start asking specific questions, and all you get back is, "But he's a narcissist!"

PinkFridge wrote:

I've heard that Kid Rock makes Trump look well, not like a choir boy but not terrible by comparison. I think that the failure of repeal and replace is going to be a problem. But 2018 elections are over a year away.

Let me be clear that I'm not enthused about the prospect of Kid Rock in the Senate. But Obama won Michigan in 2008 by 16 percent and in 2012 by 9 percent. And all of a sudden voters who supported Obama are abandoning an incumbent Democratic Senator in favor of a pro-Trump entertainer with no platform? I think most political observers would counsel a little soul-searching on the part of the Democratic Party and the left in general. Clearly, it seems that attempting to shame Trump voters isn't doing the trick.

marina

Mon, Jul 31 2017, 1:10 am

Quote:

marina wrote:
Under Obama, the Dow reached new heights, businesses were happy and consumer confidence rose. There is no shortage of articles and data on this. So the reasonable Trump voter, being as reasonable as he or she is, must surely have been waiting for something absolutely more fabulous than just the regular old Obama-era growth.

Quote:

Fortunately, the Dow average and the consumer / business confidence index are statistical data points that do not depend on left or right interpretations.

Here's the Dow:

Consumer Confidence:

Business Confidence

Here are the websites that I used:
http://www.macrotrends.net/135.....years
https://tradingeconomics.com/u.....dence
https://tradingeconomics.com/u.....index

Feel free to find some charts with different data points. Also plse note that the positive trends are continuing under Trump, but there's nothing outstanding, other than the uptick in business confidence, I'd say.

And so, again- these charts are available to the reasonable Trump voter. What is he or she so excited about compared to the last 8 years?

MagentaYenta

Mon, Jul 31 2017, 1:19 am

In all honesty you are good at twisting words.

Quote:

"Oh, that silly Fox. I can't imagine why she concerns herself with these ridiculous celebrities. I'm personally far, far above that!"

But the fact is I never said that. I'm the first to admit I have little or no interest in pop culture. You are free to spend your time as you wish. It's not my cuppa. And that is why there are more flavors than vanilla.

marina

Mon, Jul 31 2017, 1:47 am

Quote:

I do not recall you ever having claimed to understand, sympathize, or empathize with someone's motivation in voting for Trump.

^^^ fake news. I've said a few times that people could have voted for Trump for legitimate reasons. Here's an example:

http://www.imamother.com/forum.....rt=80

Quote:

Finally, and I've said this before and I stand by it, if you are voting for Trump you are most likely okay with electing- to the highest office in the country- a person who makes bigoted and misogynistic statements in public. Someone who makes fun of disabled people, who talks about his daughter's breasts, his p3nis size, women's periods, etc. Perhaps you think he has other redeeming qualities, but you are okay with that kind of leader.

Let me be very clear: I do not think Trump supporters are idiots. Not at all. Some may have done all the research and come to an informed conclusion. But many others - despite their intelligence - just trust this guy and get sucked into fear mongering, perhaps because of anxiety or social factors, etc. People can be very very intelligent and still be swept along with the crowd or just make wrong calls.

That's an example of what I wrote and later in that thread you quoted and responded to the above.

Fox

Mon, Jul 31 2017, 2:14 am

marina wrote:

And so, again- these charts are available to the reasonable Trump voter. What is he or she so excited about compared to the last 8 years?

I wouldn't characterize Trump voters are necessarily "excited." However, I would say they are encouraged, pleased, or satisfied that none of the dire predictions about economic doom came true and that, in fact, things continue to improve.

MagentaYenta wrote:

But the fact is never said that. I'm the first to admit have little or no interest in pop culture. You are free to spend your time as you wish. It's not my cuppa. And that is why there are more flavors than vanilla.

Yes, we all now fully understand that you have little or no interest in pop culture. Mazel tov! How that relates in any way, shape, or form to the point I made is still a mystery.

Basically, I gave a specific example to illustrate a point. You seem to think that not being familiar with the particular person in the example is relevant in some way. That suggests to me that you are unable to adequately argue the point and have therefore shifted the focus.

But here is my question that has gone unanswered: how is it that Michigan, a state that voted for Obama with significant margins in each election and has long voted Democrat, has suddenly become disenchanted with the Democratic Party? Moreover, Michigan voted for Trump with a razor-thin margin. Yet nine months later, they are apparently more supportive of Trump's populist approach rather than less. It appears that Kid Rock's success in the polls is as much of a shock to him as it is to anyone else.

How does the Michigan race as it stands now fit into the narrative that Trump voters are simple-minded? These are the same people who elected Obama. Were they simple-minded then or is this a recent development? If it is, it seems to be getting worse. And if it's getting worse, any theories on why?

Or is it back to the old canard that Obama accidentally let slip in 2008 -- before all those bigots voted for him:

Quote:

And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

Fox

Mon, Jul 31 2017, 2:33 am

marina wrote:

Quote:

That's an example of what I wrote and later in that thread you quoted and responded to the above.

This is your example of respecting someone's reasons for voting for Trump? You consider it a compliment to say someone isn't an idiot? Your "understanding" is limited to believing that intelligent people can get "sucked into fear mongering" because they experience anxiety?

Sorry, but I can't imagine a world in which this would be considered even borderline respectful.

I along with a number of other Trump voters on Imamother acknowledged repeatedly that we felt he wasn't a perfect candidate. We mentioned his obvious failings -- in fact, I repeatedly spoke about his lack of political capital and his inexperience in dealing with what has come to be known as the "Deep State" -- which I was correct in predicting as significant weaknesses. I also wrote at length (do I write any other way?) about the fact that I sometimes found myself uncomfortably defending Trump simply because I thought he was a significantly better choice than the alternative -- and I still do!

In the larger conservative world, there are plenty of people critiquing Trump -- most in specific and thoughtful ways. At this point, I don't hear serious critique from anyone on the left. I'm sure it must exist, but it's been drowned out by crazies. And when the most respectful thing that non-crazies can come up with is, "Not all Trump voters are idiots," well, for better or worse, get ready to welcome the new Senator from Michigan.

PinkFridge

Mon, Jul 31 2017, 7:37 am

Fox wrote:

Insightful analysis.
I think the yad Hashem is so obvious in this day and age. So little is making sense, or working the way we would have thought. (How DID Trump get so far? What did he have on Cruz? Or did he make a deal with the devil. Not that that option is in our theology but it almost makes as much sense.)

PinkFridge

Mon, Jul 31 2017, 7:40 am

Fox wrote:

This is your example of respecting someone's reasons for voting for Trump? You consider it a compliment to say someone isn't an idiot? Your "understanding" is

What about her first sentence, that some made informed decisions?

marina

Mon, Jul 31 2017, 9:24 am

Fox wrote:

Can you point to a post where you stated that some Hillary voters are informed because they've done the necessary research? Or anything similar? Not where you criticize Trump. Thanks.

marina

Mon, Jul 31 2017, 9:29 am

Quote:

This is where you say "hey thanks so much for showing me the charts that I thought didn't exist, I guess because I, the quintessential reasonable Trump voter - didn't bother to do the statistical research before claiming that only the left thought the Dow and aforementioned indexes were doing well."

marina

Mon, Jul 31 2017, 9:45 am

Quote:

Rather, it's because she is emblematic of a great many Trump opponents: she tweeted her disgust simply because she hates Trump. She didn't even read or understand the proposal that allegedly disgusted her. This seems to be a common problem. You start asking specific questions, and all you get back is, "But he's a narcissist!"

Honestly, I'm kind of all done. Fox, you repeatedly claim that Trump opponents are ignorant and opposed him blindly, without even understanding what he actually did. And then you claim that Trump supporters, on the other hand, are thoughtful people who make their decisions based on how well they think the economy is doing. I guess no one is blindly supporting Trump for the wrong reasons.

And you do this over and over again, even though I've called you out on it many times- in politics and in feminism. You take some extremist and try to convince us that he or she represents the whole group.

I've never, as far as I can remember, done that - because it's the low hanging fruit. It's super easy to pretend that everyone in the "other" camp is represented by a moron. Not interested in that level of debate or saying the same stuff over and over.