It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Devotion to Trump is based on emotional patterns most people grow out of by age five

page: 10
30
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 6 2018 @ 01:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: C0bzz

Yale psychiatrist explains how devotion to Trump is based on emotional patterns most people grow out of by age five

Raw Story: In your opinion, what are the emotions driving Donald Trump’s base?

Bandy X. Lee: The sense of grandiose omnipotence that he displays seems especially appealing to his emotionally-needy followers. No matter what the world says, he fights back against criticism, continues to lie in the face of truth, and above all is still president. What matters is that he is winning, not whether he is honest or law-abiding. This may seem puzzling to the rest of us, but when you are overcome with feelings of powerlessness, this type of cartoonish, exaggerated force is often more important than true ability. This is the more primitive morality, as we call it, of “might makes right,” which in normal development you grow out of by age five.

But, in this case, Trump appeals to that childlike degree of emotional development? Why?

Strongman-type personalities are very appealing in times of socioeconomic or political crisis, as the population is less able to think rationally but is rather overcome with fear, or desire to draw strength from fantastical ideas. This happens to normal people in times of stress, or to people whose development has been stunted because of emotional injury. The problem is, the person who promises the impossible and states, “I alone can fix it,” and gives himself an A+ on his performance, is not a strong person who can deliver but the opposite. So Mr. Trump’s “base“ looks for someone to rescue them and their intense yearning does not allow them to see through his deception, while Mr. Trump senses better than anyone their needs (they are his) and makes use of them for his own benefit—even as he disdains his supporters for being so gullible. In this manner, they fulfill each other’s emotional needs in a mutually unhealthy way.

www.rawstory.com...



This is absolutely true. From browsing ATS, the majority of pro-Trump posts here are simply rants at so called "liberals" without any regard for the truth. Rather than looking towards the future, it's "make america great again". Rather than have an actual vision, they simply bark like dogs at "liberals". Rather than face the truth, they lie and make it sound like they are "winning".

In reality they are emotionally needy. Weak. Fragile. And terrified of losing their power.

The question is to the reader. Are you a 5 year old or are you an adult?

How many of the replies here are going to be dog barks at "liberals", "leftists", "globalists" and crazy insane rants, rather than a rational vision for the future?


I find it hilarious that people are getting paid to do studies on why people support trump.

I'd say that is more of a 5 year old response than supporting someone you believe in.


Know many 5 year-olds paying for social/psychological studies eh?




posted on Dec, 6 2018 @ 01:43 PM
link   
a reply to: C0bzz

Well gosh... I don't want people thinking I'm only as smart as a 5 year old. I better vote against Trump next time in order to avoid intellectuals with degrees making fun of me. Cause those people are like, really smart and they know what they're talking about. I usually do not know what they're talking about but that's okay because that one super smart lady explained that we commoners cant always understand them because they are literally so smart that we just can't comprehend their intelligence... but they definitely know better than we do, so I think it's probably just best if we just do as they say without arguing or asking too many questions.

I mean they said it so it must be true. So come on people, you are making us look like 5 year olds if you vote for Trump! It just gives me a Lot of anxiety worrying about what these really smart people think of us, and I just wish you guys would help me out and just, Not vote for Trump ever again!

I just want some kind of approval from someone smarter and more successful than I am, is that too much to ask for?? Can't we just do this, so we can get our pat on the head from the masters? Cant you all just imagine with me how amazing that will be to have these amazing wonderful people look at us and say "You made the right choice."

Let me tell you about these people and see if I can change your mind for a moment. These are the people who are tackling the most serious problems facing humanity, ok? I'm talking about Manspreading, Mansplaining, Christmas songs that maybe arent the most empowering...cause every song I ever hear has to be totally empowering on all levels.

I mean, what more do you need to hear? Who cares about the economy or immigration... we need to make sure offensive jokes are not being told near grown adults on college campuses.

VOTE "anyone but Trump" 2020 so we can take care of the problems that REALLY MATTER!



posted on Dec, 6 2018 @ 02:05 PM
link   
a reply to: C0bzz

Interpretation:


I'm as triggered as fluck by TRUMP. I shall project my hatred thusly, libtarded University professors are my saving grace.

Anyone responding in this thread supporting Trump is a 5 year old. I'm awesome, you are pathetic.



posted on Dec, 6 2018 @ 02:30 PM
link   
a reply to: C0bzz


Standing up for what's right.


Right now, left and right have different functional definitions of what this is. When we stand up for what's right, we are often standing up for different things. This is partially because we also have different ideas of what justice is. The left tends to favor the idea of social justice -- equal outcomes through the law -- where the right prefers justice -- equal treatment under the law. They are actually very different things with very different results.


Waging wars on poverty.


Again, there are very different ideas of what this means. Left favors a bureaucratized, collectivized approach where they outsource their personal responsibility to the state and force everyone to give to the apparatus with all its attendant inefficiencies and corruptions and inability to actually get people out of poverty. We have more people in poverty now than we did when Lyndon Johnson declared war on it. You can apply many of the same War on Drugs counter-arguments to the War on Poverty. The leftist approach negates personal responsibility and choice in the matter of how much and where and how to give and help the poor.

On the other hand, the right feels we ought to raise ourselves with the feeling of obligation to help those in need, but it happens through personal choice. It used to be a sense of community strengthened these bonds. We had strong family ties, strong neighborhoods, strong faith communities. You felt a personal tie to those communities and helped those in them. The networks helped each other and were wide-reaching and overlapping.


Sacrificing for and caring for your neighbors.


When you are compelled into collective networks and forced to give without regard for your personal circumstance or needs, it removes your sense that you have more obligation. If you feel you are already strapped and strapped against your will to provide for complete strangers at that, how much harder is it to want to go another mile to help those around you? Obviously some will, but it gets harder. See my point above about "I gave at the office" because that's the effect of ever higher social safety net giving as opposed to strong communities which certain policies are busy destroying.


Never beating its chest


Simple. Stop railing on about how we're the "Leader of the Free World." Pay much attention to the press? They beat this point tirelessly. We must or must not do this or that because ... We're the Leader of the Free World. And the left-wing press does it as much as any other.


Acted like men


Eweeee ... TOXIC MASCULINITY! Most people wouldn't know an actual man if he came up and bit them these days.


Foster technological achievements and explore the stars


The easiest way to do this is to promote true talent, not by infesting the STEM and other fields in academia with insectional BS like we're doing now. Just because you don't see an even proportional representation of certain genders, races, orientations, etc., in this or that profession and field doesn't necessarily mean there is discrimination or at least not the kind of discrimination you are thinking of of. Sometimes, those groups self-select away from the fields and professions you aren't seeing them in, but that's a whole other discussion.

Instead, we see people bending over backward to lower standards in order to try to achieve that chimera of equality they think should exist instead of looking for the best and brightest wherever they may be found. This will not foster achievement in anything and certainly won't let us reach for our own shoelaces, much less the stars.


Foster greatest artists and the worlds greatest economy


You do not create these. They happen on their own. Anytime someone talks about government "fostering" anything, they're talking about picking out some above others. What makes an artist great? I would argue in this era of modern art, no one really knows anymore. To me it seems that modern art is more about the catharsis an artists feels when creating than it is in any greatness in their work itself. Certainly as I do my work I see lots of examples of modern art. Most of them bear no visual relation to the things they are supposed to represent, so I can only assume the artist was pondering those things while creating and experiencing catharsis in the creative act.

This is a reverse of the traditional role of art which is to evoke in the viewer.



Do you see this, for example? To me, it looks like a throw rug you might find in a little girl's room, but it's part of an exhibit at the Chrysler Museum of Art in Norfolk, VA.

chrysler.org...


Chaos and Awe: Painting for the 21st Century is a sweeping survey of contemporary art from around the world that weaves together images of the physical world, memories, emotions, and the virtual world. Works from thirty-six international artists dramatically suggest the powerful, exciting, and destabilizing effects of 21st-century forces such as globalism, mass migration, radical ideologies, and the rapid expansion of technology.


I don't really see any of those concepts in that paiting/fiber art. So is this fostering great artists? Does this communicate the message to you?

As far as the economy goes, it does its thing. It does not need to be fostered. Economies happened before anyone had any idea what they were. They may even have pre-dated the idea of government.



posted on Dec, 6 2018 @ 02:44 PM
link   
Decided to look into the credibility of Brandy X Lee. This is the same shrink that diagnosed Trump publicly and then had to take a thumping from the American Psychiatric Association. Here is a just a sampling of her opinion.


In April 2017 Lee hosted a meeting at Yale University medical school to discuss the mental health of President Donald Trump.[4][5] In an interview with Salon in May 2017 she argued that the subject of the President's mental health amounted to a "state of emergency" as "our survival as a species may be at stake."

en.wikipedia.org...

Now she's diagnosing half of the American population, and dare I say some of the worlds population. We are being diagnosed by a person that believes that Trump is a threat to our species. Oh My. Can the bar get any lower for some folks?



posted on Dec, 6 2018 @ 02:51 PM
link   
These ivory tower dwellers have been attacking Trumps base for 2 years straight now. Told they are uneducated, backwards, ignorant, bigoted, etc, etc, etc...

Do that to any other minority group and you're liable to have a civil suit on your hands. But modern liberals are so indoctrinated by this "orange man bad" narrative they are incapable to see they are dehumanizing their own countrymen and women.

Much like 1930's Germany.
How they can't see this is beyond me.
This Yale psychiatrist is an absolute piece of ****.



posted on Dec, 6 2018 @ 03:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Witness2008

Hey, a girl's gotta make a living right? How better to do that than off the backs of the TDS sufferers?




posted on Dec, 6 2018 @ 03:20 PM
link   
a reply to: underpass61

Rather than being concerned about Trump, who I might add is actually doing some smart things for all Americans, folks should be concerned about the quality, or in this case the very low quality of the instructors that we pay to teach our kids. Brandy X Lee is bottom of the barrel quality.



posted on Dec, 6 2018 @ 03:22 PM
link   
So, devotion to the sitting president of the United States of America is childish? Well, yeah, if you are a Brit or French or German it is. I support the office of the president and our government even though there is corruption in it because it is a better government than the majority of countries in this world have.



posted on Dec, 6 2018 @ 03:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: LSU2018
a reply to: angeldoll


They weren't crumbs to me. The rich people aren't my business, nor are they yours or anyone else's. I wouldn't care if they save $10,000,000.00. I don't make enough to save $10,000,000.00 like they do. What I got helped me, as did my raise.


Why do you infer that I believe what the wealthy do is my concern? What is, however, my concern is when a person who has temporary power kowtows to them, by giving them massive amounts of tax-cuts at the expense of needed social programs. I was fine before the cut, with it and without it. It was no big deal to me, but I'm glad it helped you out.




Did you cry about the stimulus check obama handed out in 2009?


If you recall, the country was in big trouble with a market crash, with millions of people, including myself, losing a LOT of money. People had years of savings and their 401-K's wrecked. The stimulus package was to save the country's economy, and not simply bow and scrape to the wealthy, while understanding that his base would pee in their pants over a $1.00.

btw, I'm not crying about anything
edit on 12/6/2018 by angeldoll because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2018 @ 03:37 PM
link   







The usual suspects are out tonight...



posted on Dec, 6 2018 @ 03:37 PM
link   
a reply to: watchitburn

Yes because all Obama supporters spoke ebonics. Just like all trump supporters speak like racist Nazi rednecks. *Sarcasm*



posted on Dec, 6 2018 @ 03:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Cassi3l

That cuts both ways. Aiming that anywhere in particular?



posted on Dec, 6 2018 @ 03:40 PM
link   
a reply to: C0bzz

Are these so-called Trump devotees exhibiting any of the behavioral patterns seen below?




edit on 12 6 2018 by underpass61 because: added



posted on Dec, 6 2018 @ 05:47 PM
link   
So psychiatrist states that Trump supporters have the mindset of a 5 year old and their argument against this, is to act like 5 year olds, with name calling, childish meme posting and the "I know you are but what am I" argument.

Interesting tactic.



posted on Dec, 6 2018 @ 05:53 PM
link   
Yeah? And narcissists with low self esteem are less likely to support Democracy.

Which would explain a lot about AntiFa and those with TDS.




posted on Dec, 6 2018 @ 06:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
I know better than to lean on the words of hypocrite, political hacktivist psychologists.


You are Exhibit A in proving the OP's point.



posted on Dec, 6 2018 @ 06:11 PM
link   
a reply to: imrighturwrong

Says "i'm right you're wrong"

We've been watching a literally nonstop tantrum from the left since Hillary lost and we're the ones acting like children.
#memesrule



posted on Dec, 6 2018 @ 06:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: F4guy

originally posted by: JinMI
I know better than to lean on the words of hypocrite, political hacktivist psychologists.


You are Exhibit A in proving the OP's point.


That's completely fine by me.

If looking into the source of information and seeing an obviously hypocritical assessment and using that to come to a conclusion makes me part of the OP's point, so be it.

Easily better than bleating off talking points from an obvious hypocrite and political hack.

However I'm willing to bet dollars to doughnuts you never bothered looking past the OP and into the source only because it suits your bias.



posted on Dec, 6 2018 @ 11:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: watchitburn
So leftist professor dislikes Trump supporters?
You don't say!? I'm shocked!

What was his assessment of the Obama cult?
With the chills running up their legs and "they's gonna get thems that obama cash" ? And his "scandal free" presidency?


And.......... you prove said professor correct.

Pretty much every post you respond to, you use the exact same defense.

1. Attempt to delegitimize the message by name calling “leftist professor”
2. Use the Whataboutism logical fallacy to shift the discussion away from the subject matter you don’t like.

Someone’s political leanings does not change their expertise. This professor understands the subject matter better than you or I do. So, when you attempt to discredit him by labeling him a “leftist” you only discredit your own position.

Acting this way definitely makes you appear like a small child throwing a temper tantrum because someone has told you something you don’t agree with. What makes it even worse is that you actually think your smart. It’s just sad.




top topics



 
30
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join