Search This Blog

November 27, 2016

Nov. 27, 2016

Previous November posts here

Read Read the nearly 200 of my Daily Kos articles or don’t.  Some of my photos  

Sunday, Nov. 27, 2016
I saw this Tweet on Daily Kos (where you can read comments), and thought it had to be satire from The Onion. As I sometimes do when something is too unbelievable to believe I looked it up and found that the media, from CNN to Fox News, was reporting it.

He really Tweeted this… either he has a hitherto unseen sense of humor or has entirely lost his mind. The serious notion that he had a dual Jekyll and Hyde personality has to be revised if he meant this Tweet seriously. If so, there must be a third personality that is of a raving paranoid delusional lunatic.

I am consulting with my psychoanalyst friends to decide whether it is time to call for an involuntary commitment.

Excerpts: Donald Trump, and the Republican majorities in the Senate, are poised to wipe out the signature victories of his predecessor in areas ranging from health care to the environment. He will enter office as the first explicitly anti-free trade president since Herbert Hoover, committed to unraveling a series of agreements that underpin the root assumptions of global commerce. His list of potential Supreme Court nominees include judges who reject not simply the jurisprudence that led to the gay marriage and abortion decisions, but the arguments that led the Court to uphold New Deal legislation some 80 years ago and to bind states to the protections of the Bill of Rights.
… the idea of a Republican House and Senate acting as a brake on Trump seems almost fanciful. Yes, Rand Paul’s civil libertarian and anti-globalist impulses may lead him to oppose a nomination of an Attorney General Jeff Sessions or a Secretary of State John Bolton. But his would be a lonely voice—especially given the fact that the Republican base is in the hands, at least for now, of an incoming President who won by running head-on against the congressional wing of the party.
Is it odd that a Ronald Reagan, who won historic landslides, could change so little while a president who “lost” by a million or more votes might change so much? Chalk it up to the quirks of the Electoral College, or a late intervention by an FBI director, or a tone-deaf Democratic candidate, or to a simmering fury at the political-media elite by just enough disaffected voters to turn three states red, or to whatever contingent forces you choose. But the reality is those forces have brought us to the very real prospect of the most profound, unsettling changes in public policy in close to a century.

Joy Reid, on MSNBC, is doing a story about how Scots feel about Trump… she showed this newspaper:

Saturday, Nov. 26, 2016

We keep reading about the possibility that Trump will make major changes to policy that the majority of Americans don’t support. Some fly in the face of logic, climate change for example, and others in attitudes about issues like abortion and most forms of birth control.
We read today on Daily Kos that a radical anti-abortion group is ready to help Attorney General designate Jeff Sessions prosecute Planned Parenthood. Most Americans support Planned Parenthood.
We have a president that supposedly has no objection to same sex marriage but a vice president that doesn’t, and who actually believes in conversion therapy. Most Americans support same sex marriage and know that sexual orientation is not changeable by therapy.
I don’t have time to find citations for the following, but I hope the polling statistics back up my conclusions. Even if “most” isn’t exactly correct, I would say that it can be said that a significant number, i.e., close to 50%, feel this way about these issues. 
Can you think of any more besides the following? 
  • Most Americans don’t want us using torture.
  • Most don’t believe in a registry for Muslims.
  • Most don’t think undocumented children should be deported.
  • Most don’t think Hillary did anything that should end her up in prison.
  • Most don’t think we should undo the newly established relationship with Cuba.
  • Most don’t want the most important parts of Obamacare rescinded.
  • Most won’t want the wall to be built if it increases the deficit.
  • Most don’t want the very rich to have a tax cut.
  • Most don’t want us out of NATO.
  • By far most want medical marijuana both legalized and researched.
  • Most want recreational marijuana to be legal.
  • At least most seniors or soon to be seniors do not want Medicare privatized.
The more unpopular changes Trump makes, the less he will have the nation’s support. 
He ran like he didn’t care what half the nation thought, what the most educated segment of the population thought about him, and what the press thought. But now he is about to be president of all of us. 
I doubt he really will feel good just because he’s admired by thepeople who buy the National Enquirer, which as of this week is blaring “Trump Must Build That Wall” on its front cover (I was at the supermarket this morning). Plus, when he doesn’t build the wall, even those people will be angry at him.
The power of the president through executive order and through the various departments is vast.  He has the power to royally fuck up the country and the world. In doing so may find the adoration he enjoyed from his supporters has eroded to the point where this narcissistic who thrives on admiration may not be able to maintain his psychological equilibrium. 
My fellow psychotherapists know that the ego of a narcissist is fragile, and that even a successful boisterous blowhard like Trump has a breaking point. We can expect protests around the country, marches on Washington, ever more irreverent SNL sketches, and more snarky New York Daily News front pages. There are likely to be continued investigations and revelations about his conflicts of interest. He will be called out on every unpresidential utterance and Tweet.
Even his poor grammar will be mocked: "I join the many Cuban Americans who supported me so greatly in the presidential campaign….” “So greatly!”
I expect that we’ll see failures of signature programs so obvious that even Fox News has to report on them.
My online support group of psychotherapists debate whether deep down inside, or as we say, in the unconscious, Trump just wants to get the love he never received from his parents. He certainly seems to need to be admired and thought to be the smartest and best looking person in the room, irritable to attractive women and worthy of fealty from powerful men.

When Trump looses all this he could become a dangerous president.
Back from the emporium of stuff, Fred Meyer’s (right), I still don’t have an original thought worth sharing, so will offer a good quote:

This election, American voters elected a con man, a swindler, a bluster bag who articulated a twisted set of mores and a horrific vision for our country. In fact, that Pew graph effectively shows voters knew exactly what they were doing and did it anyway. 
The inescapable message was that a candidate being overtly racist, sexist, and downright ignorant and unqualified was forgivable and even laudable as long as he wasn't a she.Any Trump voter who is now surprised by what they get from his administration—whether it be in the form of horrors they didn't take seriously or broken promises they had counted on—will be getting exactly what they asked for and deserve.  By Kerry Eleveld, "The rampant sexism of 2016 and the law of unintended consequences."
My caption
Excerpt from Politico article:
Romney, for his part, who remains interested in the role, “is taking all of this stuff in stride, and would like to serve the country,” according to a person in his orbit who has spoken to him since he met with Trump last week. The person denied published reports that Romney was drafting a formal apology for his comment during the GOP primaries that the developer-turned-reality-TV-star was a “phony, a fraud,” who was “playing members of the American public for suckers.” 
The idea of forcing Romney to sign some kind of mea culpa is being mulled by transition officials hostile to his nomination, several senior Republicans said.
Even less clear is where Trump’s increasingly influential son-in-law Jared Kushner, a fierce supporter of Israel, stands on the candidates. Transition sources told POLITICO Kushner has said broadly positive things about both men, 
As that battle plays out, there are indications advocates for both candidates may be losing – and that the Trump team is looking to Petraeus, the four-star general who served as President Obama’s director of the Central Intelligence Agency until 2012 when he was removed for sharing classified documents with a biographer who was also his mistress.
My hunch is that Gen. Petraeus will be the eventual selection.

I haven’t thought of anything to write about yet. I’m sitting here waiting for inspiration: 

No comments: