Psychopathy Test Results for the Candidates

a reply to: mOjOm

The PPI test differs from all other tests of psychopathy insofar as it is a self-report, meaning the subject has to take the test himself. Given that neither Trump nor Clinton nor Hitler took the tests, the test was taken by someone else. If the test was taken by someone else, the score does not reflect any real Trump, Hitler, nor Clinton, but the straw-men he has perched in his own head.

The Psychopathic Personality Inventory (PPI-Revised) is a personality test for traits associated with psychopathy in adults. The PPI was developed by Scott Lilienfeld and Brian Andrews to assess these traits in non-criminal (e.g. university students) populations, though it is still used in clinical (e.g. incarcerated) populations as well. In contrast to other psychopathy measures, such as the Hare Psychopathy Checklist (PCL), the PPI is a self-report, rather than interview-based, assessment. It is intended to comprehensively index psychopathic personality traits without assuming particular links to anti-social or criminal behaviors. It also includes measures to detect impression management or careless responding.

It consists of a series of statements to which subjects respond on how accurately the statement describes them using a 4-point Likert scale ("False, "Mostly False", "Mostly True", "True").

Wikipedia

This is false, unethical, pseudoscientific, and blatant propaganda for personal gain or for political reasons. This man's ethics, this article's defamation, and whatever rag they got it from, should be shamed by any self-respecting individual.

a reply to: mOjOm

BTW the only candidate who didn't score within the trouble zone was Sanders at 129.

I didn't see Stein or Johnson scored in that article so saying he was the only one may not be true.

I have to say this is the oddest test I've ever heard of. Absolutely lacking any info at all as to what, how, why for even the existence for the test. Based on what? Why except to prove your own-suspected what? depravity?

Sublimecraft comes the closest with stating, once again, what we all know and fear-George Soros is the most vicious man living-and when the old stench finally dies-most corrupt dead.

Unfortunately he has already groomed his vile spawn to continue his own form of sadistic deeds.

If anything, George Soros should be the collective enemy for all peoples.

And, yes, that's how I really feel..

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

When someone has a vast history of exposure in the public eye with dozens or hundreds of speeches, quotes, platform papers, business dealings, biographers and inner circle people, all willing to describe the person in day to day interactions, I think a reasonable person could take a good shot at how they might answer certain questions or act in a given context.

What's not to know about both Hillary and Trump? We know both of them are liars, both of them are obsessed with acquiring money and power, both of them are willing to try to squelch those who make them look bad or challenge them.

In short, both are psychopaths, sociopaths, and criminal behavior has been demonstrated by BOTH.

I once took an MMPI and it failed to take into account combat service and what we know.
My supervisor at Pinkerton told me I would when he found out my MOS.

a reply to: mOjOm

All this shows is the personal bias of the psychologist himself. They did not take the test, so the "scores" he gives are utterly meaningless. Nothing but a ploy for attention, and a tool for manipulation.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
Trump's leadership traits put him alongside Churchill and George Washington. If this guy is trying to make Trump appear bad for the POTUS position: MAJOR FAIL. His stats look good.

Clearly you didn't read the OP as if you did you'd understand it wasn't promoting any of the candidates, except maybe Sanders.

Instead you just got extremely defensive right off the bat, paranoid someone was insulting your precious Trump.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Athetos


That was my first thought. How'd thy get Hitler to take the test? Or any of them for that matter.

Whats sure is if they could, none of them would answer honestly.

Being a politician is all about image.

Try actually reading the OP.

I think a lot of people score high.

What matters is there intent and how they harness and direct their psychopathic traits.

That's what I tell myself anyway.

originally posted by: SudoNim

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Athetos


That was my first thought. How'd thy get Hitler to take the test? Or any of them for that matter.

Whats sure is if they could, none of them would answer honestly.

Being a politician is all about image.

Try actually reading the OP.

Why don't you. The 'subjects' didn't take the test personally.

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: SudoNim

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Athetos


That was my first thought. How'd thy get Hitler to take the test? Or any of them for that matter.

Whats sure is if they could, none of them would answer honestly.

Being a politician is all about image.

Try actually reading the OP.

Why don't you. The 'subjects' didn't take the test personally.

That was my first thought. How'd thy get Hitler to take the test? Or any of them for that matter.

So why then is that your first thought, when the OP clearly states they didn't take the tests personally?

originally posted by: SudoNim

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: SudoNim

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Athetos


That was my first thought. How'd thy get Hitler to take the test? Or any of them for that matter.

Whats sure is if they could, none of them would answer honestly.

Being a politician is all about image.

Try actually reading the OP.

Why don't you. The 'subjects' didn't take the test personally.

That was my first thought. How'd thy get Hitler to take the test? Or any of them for that matter.

So why then is that your first thought, when the OP clearly states they didn't take the tests personally?

My after thoughts see (like the good doctor) you are also politically motivated...

Instead you just got extremely defensive right off the bat, paranoid someone was insulting your precious Trump.

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: SudoNim

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: SudoNim

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Athetos


That was my first thought. How'd thy get Hitler to take the test? Or any of them for that matter.

Whats sure is if they could, none of them would answer honestly.

Being a politician is all about image.

Try actually reading the OP.

Why don't you. The 'subjects' didn't take the test personally.

That was my first thought. How'd thy get Hitler to take the test? Or any of them for that matter.

So why then is that your first thought, when the OP clearly states they didn't take the tests personally?

My after thoughts see (like the good doctor) you are also politically motivated...

Instead you just got extremely defensive right off the bat, paranoid someone was insulting your precious Trump.

I have no idea what you were just trying to say.

So you read...

Keep in mind that since they didn't actually take the test this is nothing more than a game for psychologists for their own entertainment and these results should not be taken as factual. However, at the same time they may still be correct or close to it.)

And your first(after) thought was;

How'd thy get Hitler to take the test? Or any of them for that matter.

Right. Gotcha. Makes perfect sense. I can imagine your confusion when the article went on to compare Jesus as well.

Donald and Hillary only scored 17 on "Blame Externalization" I find that to be low.

I also find it hard to believe that "Nonplanfulness" is a real word.

a reply to: mOjOm

And he calls himself a professional making an analysis off random remarks? sounds like a paid hack,my background is structural design and engineering,would be like me peering at a building from the seat of my car and saying"yeah,looks safe from here"

This election cycle I'm wishing I were Canadian.......If Clinton wins I'm gonna be" Long Gone For Saskatchewana" a shout out to Corb Lund & The Hurtin Albertins reply to: Athetos

a reply to: SudoNim

I have no idea what you were just trying to say.

I know.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Yeah, I mentioned that right from the start. This is not new information.

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

All this shows is the personal bias of the psychologist himself. They did not take the test, so the "scores" he gives are utterly meaningless. Nothing but a ploy for attention, and a tool for manipulation.

Again. I stated that from the very first post. Anyone who reads it knows this already. Just saying it again isn't providing anything new to the conversation.

originally posted by: Oldtimer2
a reply to: mOjOm

And he calls himself a professional making an analysis off random remarks? sounds like a paid hack,my background is structural design and engineering,would be like me peering at a building from the seat of my car and saying"yeah,looks safe from here"

Does he?

There seems to be a common theme of people who assumed this was anti-Trump and ones who didn't bother reading the OP.

So if you were to ever mutter these words "yeah,looks safe from here" you are no longer considered an structural engineer?

a reply to: SudoNim

What part of leadership traits are you confused by? Did any of the other candidates score as high on "fearless dominance?" No? Ever stop to think that I was making a statement that fearless dominance is an important leadership trait rather than a valid sign of psychopathy? So calm yourself, muchacha, there's no paranoia here, only embracing logical idealized leadership traits.