Jump to content

The Tramp again reminds us how psychologically “off” he is


Recommended Posts

A few days without an outburst. A plausible choice or two for his Cabinet. A succinct and searing comment on the vitriolic United Nations resolution attacking Israel. (“As to the U.N., things will be different after Jan. 20th.”) If you squint, you might see a weak light at the end of the 2016 tunnel, some faint flicker of hope that President-elect Donald Trump is stable, sane and responsible. But then, wham! In 140 characters or fewer, he reminds us how psychologically “off” he is, how a thin veneer of normalcy can easily be pierced. On Monday, he took credit for Christmas sales: “The world was gloomy before I won — there was no hope. Now the market is up nearly 10% and Christmas spending is over a trillion dollars!” On Tuesday, he praised himself in the third person. (“The U.S. Consumer Confidence Index for December surged nearly four points to 113.7, THE HIGHEST LEVEL IN MORE THAN 15 YEARS! Thanks Donald!”)


There you have it, once again: A man whose ego is so frail that he, like the rooster taking credit for the rising sun, sees all good news as a reflection of his own fabulousness. James Pethokoukis of the American Enterprise Institute is quoted in Politico as saying, “The president-elect judges his own personal wealth based on his own feelings. So on any given day, he could just decide based on his feelings that America is great.” (The first sentence is a reference to Trump’s own testimony in a 2007 deposition in which he asserted, “My net worth fluctuates, and it goes up and down with markets and with attitudes and with feelings, even my own feelings.”)


The narcissistic personality is ever-present. Every person is judged to be a “good guy” or a “loser” based on what he or she says about Trump. Every bad bit of news is the result of the no-good, sleazy, rotten, most-dishonest-people-he-ever-met media. Terrorist massacres are not tragedies, but vindication that he was “right” (right about exactly what is not clear). Trump’s seeming inability to take himself out of the equation and assess events, people and policies on their own merits remains the most frightening aspect of his impending presidency. He’d rather ignore a direct attack on American democracy than admit that Russia put its thumb on the scale in his election victory. His psychological need for affirmation, for love even, takes precedence over reality and the needs of the country.


Most Republicans for now are ignoring the prospect of a president whose psyche and intellect make him manifestly unfit to govern. They convince themselves that he is stable, is making excellent choices and in the maelstrom of a crisis will act logically and carefully. And if all that is wrong, if the real Trump is the one congratulating himself on a figure that merely reflects our hyper-partisanship (with Trump elected, Republicans now think things will be swell), what do they do then? Who on the White House staff or in Congress or in the Cabinet is capable of confronting him when his ego won’t accept reality or recognize dangers to the United States? Maybe that person is his 35-year-old son-in-law (who has never held office, worked in the public sector or served in any national security post) or Vice President Mike Pence. What keeps many up at night, however, is the worry that there is no one who can convince Trump that he is wrong. We wonder whether anyone is capable of telling him: “Mr. President, Russia really did attempt to meddle in our election, just as it has done to our European allies time and time again. Denying this makes you sound like a Russian stooge.”


Sure, all presidents have big egos. The problem arises when their psyche impairs their ability to function rationally. Let’s hope that there are courageous and effective people to save Trump from himself — and save the country, too.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

A few days without an outburst. A plausible choice or two for his Cabinet. A succinct and searing comment on the vitriolic United Nations resolution attacking Israel. (“As to the U.N., things will be different after Jan. 20th.”) If you squint, you might see a weak light at the end of the 2016 tunnel, some faint flicker of hope that President-elect Donald Trump is stable, sane and responsible. But then, wham! In 140 characters or fewer, he reminds us how psychologically “off” he is, how a thin veneer of normalcy can easily be pierced. On Monday, he took credit for Christmas sales: “The world was gloomy before I won — there was no hope. Now the market is up nearly 10% and Christmas spending is over a trillion dollars!” On Tuesday, he praised himself in the third person. (“The U.S. Consumer Confidence Index for December surged nearly four points to 113.7, THE HIGHEST LEVEL IN MORE THAN 15 YEARS! Thanks Donald!”)

There you have it, once again: A man whose ego is so frail that he, like the rooster taking credit for the rising sun, sees all good news as a reflection of his own fabulousness. James Pethokoukis of the American Enterprise Institute is quoted in Politico as saying, “The president-elect judges his own personal wealth based on his own feelings. So on any given day, he could just decide based on his feelings that America is great.” (The first sentence is a reference to Trump’s own testimony in a 2007 deposition in which he asserted, “My net worth fluctuates, and it goes up and down with markets and with attitudes and with feelings, even my own feelings.”)

The narcissistic personality is ever-present. Every person is judged to be a “good guy” or a “loser” based on what he or she says about Trump. Every bad bit of news is the result of the no-good, sleazy, rotten, most-dishonest-people-he-ever-met media. Terrorist massacres are not tragedies, but vindication that he was “right” (right about exactly what is not clear). Trump’s seeming inability to take himself out of the equation and assess events, people and policies on their own merits remains the most frightening aspect of his impending presidency. He’d rather ignore a direct attack on American democracy than admit that Russia put its thumb on the scale in his election victory. His psychological need for affirmation, for love even, takes precedence over reality and the needs of the country.

Most Republicans for now are ignoring the prospect of a president whose psyche and intellect make him manifestly unfit to govern. They convince themselves that he is stable, is making excellent choices and in the maelstrom of a crisis will act logically and carefully. And if all that is wrong, if the real Trump is the one congratulating himself on a figure that merely reflects our hyper-partisanship (with Trump elected, Republicans now think things will be swell), what do they do then? Who on the White House staff or in Congress or in the Cabinet is capable of confronting him when his ego won’t accept reality or recognize dangers to the United States? Maybe that person is his 35-year-old son-in-law (who has never held office, worked in the public sector or served in any national security post) or Vice President Mike Pence. What keeps many up at night, however, is the worry that there is no one who can convince Trump that he is wrong. We wonder whether anyone is capable of telling him: “Mr. President, Russia really did attempt to meddle in our election, just as it has done to our European allies time and time again. Denying this makes you sound like a Russian stooge.”

Sure, all presidents have big egos. The problem arises when their psyche impairs their ability to function rationally. Let’s hope that there are courageous and effective people to save Trump from himself — and save the country, too.

 

Then what are the markets responding to? Despite the effort to make it analogous to a "rising sun", the sun doesn't rise any faster or slower based on how anxious or not anxious one is to see it's rise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

can you imagine the Crying YOU Z09 would have done if Obama would have said something?????

 

 

or all the other asshole republiKans????

 

 

and how bout your Fake 'news'?

 

So can you tell us EXACTLY what the Russians did or how they affected the election??

 

THEN we can talk about YOUR psychosis and how it affects YOU!!

 

That should be an interesting topic all by itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

can you imagine the Crying YOU Z09 would have done if Obama would have said something?????

 

 

or all the other asshole republiKans????

 

 

and how bout your Fake 'news'?

 

So let's get this right...

 

The president of the United States knows how elections are getting hacked and does nothing...

 

But when the candidate he endorses actually loses he then cries foul?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So let's get this right...

 

The president of the United States knows how elections are getting hacked and does nothing...

 

But when the candidate he endorses actually loses he then cries foul?

benny boy will run now. You just exposed one of the many failures of the kenyan clown

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then what are the markets responding to? Despite the effort to make it analogous to a "rising sun", the sun doesn't rise any faster or slower based on how anxious or not anxious one is to see it's rise.

The stock market has always responded to fear and greed, and there is no exception here.

Trump has the role of a Chinese dragon image: investors think that he will scare away a bear market, and buy.

Investors believe that he will satify7 the greedy, and buy.

 

Trump's emotional state is rather manic, so investors have reason to expect a wild ride, with higher and lower swings than in the past.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Then what are the markets responding to?"

 

 

3rd qtr earnings under Obama,,,,and the anticipation of the Corp's receiving Failed gop TRICKLE DOWN under the Economy Wrecking gop

 

Really/??

 

Kyle Smith ,

Contributor

I write about economics, politics, media, business and film.

Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own.

Supporters of President Barack Obama, such as one of his campaign donors Robert Deitrick, an Ohio financial advisor often quoted in Forbes and elsewhere, insist that the Obama economy has been much more robust than Ronald Reagan's. Are they right?

Let's look at some numbers. President Reagan entered office in a period of high inflation which was stamped out by high interest rates that in turn led to the 1982 recession. His job-creation record after that may fairly be termed outstanding: nearly 20 million more Americans were employed when he left office than when the recession ended. Overall, including the recession on his watch, Reagan's net job growth over eight years was 16.1 million.

Barack Obama entered office in different circumstances: He inherited a recession that was already well underway, which ended much earlier in his presidency than did the Reagan recession. If you think of the economic cycle like a bouncing ball, Obama entered office just as the ball was about to strike the pavement. The bounce, though, has proceeded in agonizingly slow motion. Some eight million jobs have been created under Obama since the mid-2009 end of the recession, with a net gain of about five million. Charting Obama and Reagan's job-creation against overall U.S. population increases makes the picture look even worse for Obama, and the Reagan-era U.S. had a much smaller population. At any rate, more people have been added to the food-stamp rolls than the job rolls under Obama.

It's misleading to compare employment rates during the two presidencies. Imagine 90 out of 100 people are employed, and because the economy looks like it's picking up more steam 10 more people enter the workforce. If nine out of ten of them find jobs, the unemployment rate doesn't go down at all, yet ten percent more people are employed.

Reagan's economy was so strong that, for the last three-quarters of his administration, Americans were flooding into the workforce. Under Obama, the opposite has happened, and those who have given up on working aren't counted as unemployed. Even today, more than five years into the tepid recovery, labor-force participation remains at its lowest level since 1978. Don't blame waves of retirement for that fact: the Census Bureau reported that, from 2005 to 2010, older Americans actually became more likely to be employed. The percentage of 65-69 year-olds remaining in the workforce jumped from 26 percent to 32 percent over a ten-year-period ending in 2012. Among those 70-74 the jump was even more startling: from 14 percent to 19.5 percent. Meanwhile workers in the prime of their lives have simply left the playing field.

Recommended by Forbes

How about overall growth? GDP under Reagan was turbocharged compared to the Obama years. The Reagan years brought annual real GDP growth of 3.5 percent -- 4.9 percent after the recession. In inflation-adjusted 2009 dollars, GDP jumped from 6.5 trillion at the end of 1980 to 8.61 trillion at the end of 1988. That's a 32 percent bump. As Peter Ferrara pointed out on Forbes, it was the equivalent of adding the West German economy to the U.S. one.

Under Obama, GDP up to June 30, 2014 has grown an anemic 9.6 percent, total . Reagan-era growth was far more than double the Obama rate.

Ah, but did all of that Reagan bounty trickle down to ordinary Americans, though? Yes. Real (inflation-adjusted) median household income shot up some ten percent in the Reagan years. It has flatlined under Obama.

How about Reagan's spending record? Contrary to myth, and despite the opposition of a Democratic House of Representatives for his entire administration, Reagan achieved a reduction in federal spending as a percentage of GDP. That's including his famed military buildup often credited with ending the Cold War and hence delivering the "peace dividend" that helped dampen federal spending in the 1990s, in which Reagan economic policy largely stayed in place. Spending fell from 22.9 percent of GDP to 22.1 percent in 1989, whereas under Obama it has hit as high as 25 percent and has steadily hovered above 24 percent. Total accumulated debt was at 53 percent of GDP when Reagan left office. Today it is at 102.7 percent of GDP, a level unprecedented since WW II. The debt has exploded by 66 percent in the Obama years.

Does a president control the economy like a puppeteer? No, nor does a president have the power to spend; that's a Congressional duty. Nevertheless, to argue that the economy is doing better under Obama than it did under Reagan is at best obtuse and at worst partisan hackery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unemployment soared after Reagan’s 1981 tax cuts.
Unemployment
after Reagan enacted his much-touted tax cut, and it took years for the rate to get back down to its previous level. Meanwhile,
income inequality exploded
. Despite the myth that Reagan presided over an era of unmatched economic boom for all Americans, Reagan
the poor and middle class, but the economic growth of the 1980’s did little help them. “Since 1980, median household income has risen only 30 percent, adjusted for inflation, while average incomes at the top have tripled or quadrupled,” the New York Times’
.

Reagan grew the size of the federal government tremendously. Reagan promised “to move boldly, decisively, and quickly to control the runaway growth of federal spending,” but federal spending “ballooned” under Reagan. He bailed out Social Security in 1983 after attempting to privatize it, and set up a progressive taxation system to keep it funded into the future. He promised to cut government agencies like the Department of Energy and Education but ended up adding one of the largest — the Department of Veterans’ Affairs, which today has a budget of nearly $90 billion and close to 300,000 employees. He also hiked defense spending by over $100 billion a year to a level not seen since the height of the Vietnam war.

Reagan gave amnesty to 3 million undocumented immigrants. Reagan signed into law a bill that made any immigrant who had entered the country before 1982 eligible for amnesty. The bill was sold as a crackdown, but its tough sanctions on employers who hired undocumented immigrants were removed before final passage. The bill helped 3 million people and millions more family members gain American residency. It has since become a source of major embarrassment for conservatives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few days without an outburst. A plausible choice or two for his Cabinet. A succinct and searing comment on the vitriolic United Nations resolution attacking Israel. (“As to the U.N., things will be different after Jan. 20th.”) If you squint, you might see a weak light at the end of the 2016 tunnel, some faint flicker of hope that President-elect Donald Trump is stable, sane and responsible. But then, wham!

 

......Hi$ kid$ wind-up at the Unemployment Office.....'cause Daddy made a few errors, forecasting business-operations for them.

http://www.liberalforum.org/index.php?/topic/203485-commander-trumpys-war-watch/

96830d5813cacefe85737c8bdda34cf8.jpg

"Have you tried workin' Times Square????"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The stock market has always responded to fear and greed, and there is no exception here.

Trump has the role of a Chinese dragon image: investors think that he will scare away a bear market, and buy.

Investors believe that he will satify7 the greedy, and buy.

 

Trump's emotional state is rather manic, so investors have reason to expect a wild ride, with higher and lower swings than in the past.

With a republican in the White House, I think many investors feel more of the returns on their investments will go to the investor, instead of being used by the narcissistic ideology of liberalism in the name of social justice to buy votes with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I think many investors feel more of the returns on their investments will go to the investor"

 

 

wall street is getting another gop HandOut....NOT Main Street...Market will come tumbling down under Failed gop Trickle Down soon, as it ALWAYS DOES

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With a republican in the White House, I think many investors feel more of the returns on their investments will go to the investor, instead of being used by the narcissistic ideology of liberalism in the name of social justice to buy votes with.

 

confusion-smiley-emoticon.gif

Gee.....that almost made sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I think many investors feel more of the returns on their investments will go to the investor"

 

 

wall street is getting another gop HandOut....NOT Main Street...Market will come tumbling down under Failed gop Trickle Down soon, as it ALWAYS DOES

 

The markets are OVER INFLATED NOW dumbass. Have been since obama and his Fed started pumping money into it.

 

NOW when that shit gets back to being right, you will see a drop, as it SHOULD do since it DOES NOT reflect true value in earnings or any other factors used to determine share prices.

 

Add to it, as soon as Yelen raises interest rates, as she is going to do soon, then you get a more balanced interest rate instead of this ARTIFICIAL ONE that has been around since obama took office.

 

Try as hard as you may DUMBASS, but the obama FED had kept the markets up, NOT real economic growth.

 

It's WHY that bubble WILL burst and soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I think many investors feel more of the returns on their investments will go to the investor"

 

 

wall street is getting another gop HandOut....NOT Main Street...Market will come tumbling down under Failed gop Trickle Down soon, as it ALWAYS DOES

hey benny low info loser 13, explain this; https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-05-11/congrats-on-winning-the-white-house-here-s-your-recession

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The stock market has always responded to fear and greed, and there is no exception here.

Trump has the role of a Chinese dragon image: investors think that he will scare away a bear market, and buy.

Investors believe that he will satify7 the greedy, and buy.

 

Trump's emotional state is rather manic, so investors have reason to expect a wild ride, with higher and lower swings than in the past.

Fear and greed explains the stock market improvement under obama? I've not heard obama say as much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With a republican in the White House, I think many investors feel more of the returns on their investments will go to the investor, instead of being used by the narcissistic ideology of liberalism in the name of social justice to buy votes with.

 

Well, historically, they are simply wrong. When Democrats hold the White House, the Market has risen more.

 

Fear and greed explains the stock market improvement under Obama? I've not heard Obama say as much.

 

That is because it would have been counterproductive for President Obama or any president to publicly state that investors are driven by fear and greed. But it is undeniably the case, and any market analyst will tell you that this is true. He certainly has never said that this is NOT true.

 

It is the proper role of any president to speak optimistically about the market and the economy: to do otherwise activates the people who spread fear as a motivator, which can cause a bull market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...