I as representative of the European giraffe leage vote Hillary. I don't think the American psyche can handle a sanders yet.
Jeb Bush
Ben Carson
Chris Christie
Ted Cruz
Carly Fiorina
Jim Gilmore
Lindsey Graham
Mike Huckabee
Bobby Jindal
John Kasich
George Pataki
Rand Paul
Marco Rubio
Rick Santorum
Donald Trump
Hillary Clinton
Martin OMalley
Bernie Sanders
Other - Independent
Other - Green
Other - Libertarian
Other - Other
Suck it
I made an extra option
I as representative of the European giraffe leage vote Hillary. I don't think the American psyche can handle a sanders yet.
Think a lot of people are just sick of hearing about the Clintons in general.
I'm not saying that any of it is right. I'm only saying from the dichotomy pov these are what he's saying (information).Originally Posted by Subteigh
Trump as a republican appeals to the general feelings for how secure and safe Americans want the US to be.
-
Dual type(as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
He's ILE lol
Are you still referencing Trump here? Because, if so, these are contradictory.
Oops, LIE. Lol.
A positivist would say that everyone is the descendant of immigrants, if not immigrants themselves, and would perhaps say that borders between countries should be torn down, not maintained. They would also say that immigrants on the whole provide a positive contribution to society, and would not slander all immigrants and foreigners as rapists and so on. Indeed, a realist would point to research that shows that immigration (whether illegal or not) overall has no net negative effect on a country's wealth, and that governments should thus be far more inclusive towards immigrants, and devoting far more time to actively ensuring integration, rather than having indifferent, muddled policies, or even outright negative ones.
Focusing more on humanitarian policies rather than warfare would be a far more productive and cheaper way of making the US "secure and safe".
What if what positive message he's giving is that "I will protect American" that's positive
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Ah, but you didn't mention that. You focused on the negative. I would still stay that such a statement is inherently negative, as it implies a threat. It is also a meaningless thing for you to pick up on and psychoanalyse, as it is exactly the same bullshit that every other major candidate over the last 200 years has said. You seem to be missing the fundamental image of Trump that has been readily apparent to a significant number of people: he is someone who is defined by his hatred for disadvantaged and minority groups, and whose rhetoric is full of vitriol and self-publicity. The only constant is his negativity, except when it is referring to himself. I'm surprised if you had missed all that.
It's a controlled melting pot, not a taco soup free-for-all.
There's also the issue of invasive species in the economic context.
I was saying that it doesn't matter if the message is negative as in good or bad or positive. In that dichotomy it's about adding and subtracting. What he wants to do may be perceived as bad from certain pov but ultimately it's action and they are seen as good from the standpoint of republicans (not all) but he's making appeals to
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Sure, no problem. Short answer is because he wants to break up big banks, reform wallstreet, get money out of politics, redistribute wealth, invest in knowledge workers and the working class. He is a clear secularist and does not deny evolution or climate change(Yes it makes a huge difference). If I can't have Bill Nye, Bernie will do. Hillary will also do, certainly over any of the Republicans, but she will not help the next generation enter the high tech work force as well as Bernie(free education will create more long term access to education for high tech jobs). Many these things are not readily achievable during 4-8 years in office, but key steps can be made for future politicians to build off from, like how Obamacare is the first step toward universal healthcare. He can lay the tracks for future trains to pass.
Whether some Republicans find it "good" has no bearing on whether his statements are positivist or not. He is known for his bombastic, attention-seeking, negative comments, whether personal insults or scaremongering. He creates problems, and describes himself as the answer: this is a negativist mindset. I do not consider the Reinin dichotomies as especially valid however - or at least, I do not consider them of primary importance, and find their usage liable to be a distraction from identifying a person's type through Model A theory.
With an open mind I watched additional Trump interviews, @Maritsa, and I see Trump as a clear SLE. His style of attack, his showmanship, his bravado...all point to SLE (and even if you disagree w an SLE typing, they certainly point away from SLI).
I also think @Subteigh and others make good points above.
"In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is." - Yogi Berra
Trump is gamma people. I am almost certain of SEE. Keep in mind that according to Jung,Valuers can be cold etc. Not only that but if you actually know the mechanics of Model A, you'll know that 8th "augments" the Creative. This is how Fi creatives create their ideal of behaviour etc through manipulation of interpersonal relationships. And this is what Trump has been doing like forever. Where you see Ti or Ti augmented with Te.../shrug.
Not that it matters to this discussion.
I hope that Killary gets indicted. Either Biden or Bernie would be SO much better! Hell, Bernie has like 99% chance of winning vs the Brick...wooops, the Donald, right. Why the SDs ignore him...no idea. Where's the logic in this...? Ok, I understand backroom deals, blackmails, sellouts etc...but come on! Each and every SD would profit much, much more from a slam dunk victory of their representative, not from this 50 / 50 crap.
Trump = Beta extrovert. EIE.
Fe base, Se hidden agenda fit wonderfully.
---
And off topic. People claiming Hillary as a Beta? Wtf? She fits any gamma description ever written. My inclination is ESI. People let their own political biases get in the way of logical and accurate typing, that's the only explanation for some of these laughable guesses.
---
edit: oops, wrong thread. But I'll leave it here anyway.
I previously typed Hillary as ESE but some more reading and I'm saying final to SEI
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Trump is Gonna win this election one way or the other. As I said in other posts, once you understand that America has never been "One" nation but rather a loose and very eclectic coalition of 11 nations the outcome becomes clear. The current dominant nation "The Left Coast" along with its new ally "El Norte" has drastically overplayed its hand. They've doubled down on pissing off the most radically individualist nation, "Greater Appalachia" to disastrous results. They hated gays yet, if allowing them could net the support of "New Netherlands" (i.e. New York/Trump) they'd do it just to stop that in an act of political desperation.
Basically, the country is so polarized that the "enemy of my enemy is my friend" effect is kicking in and at the end of the day it's 2v9. The Left Coast and Yankeedom managed to piss off the other nine nations in such a way as to give us the current previously unbelievable reality. He's gonna win given that reality unless they kill him dead. I really pray they don't. If they do it'll be Civil War 2.0 and this time only the south has the guns. The result of that conflict is both bloody and certain. Much as I am not liberal I don't wanna see em' dead, I'm against war and killing people, but ye need only look at how WWI got started to see how killing the guy who was supportive of the underdog plays out.
Franz Ferdinand liked the Serbs, and Serbs killed him and his wife. Goodby any hope for the peace and love faction!
I'd actually hold to the ESE type. I'm really feeling the conflictor vibe with her. She has exactly zero foresight in her foreign policy. I could have told her during my junior year how it would have all played out and how we really, REALLY, shouldn't have fucked with the Middle East. Bad Idea, begging for a migrant crisis, just not something a smart person would do. She does it anyway with a sickening enthusiasm. "We came, we saw, he died!" as she cackled like a madman. I nearly puked in my soul. What a vile void of ethics. She needs to be sealed below a cell encased in several tons of holy concrete so we at least get some warning before the demon that ate her soul tunnels its way out of her sarcophagus.
I gotta know what this 11 nations thing is about. your own idea, or is there a link?
Seconded
"In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is." - Yogi Berra
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...o-you-live-in/
The book I mention is titled "American Nations: A History of The Eleven Rival Regional Cultures Of North America" By Colin Woodard. A very fascinating Tome if I do say so myself. I majored in Political Science yet always felt I was missing a piece of the puzzle as I delved into American History. That book filled in the missing piece. Once I read it everything else made perfect sense from the Revolution to WWII and beyond to the present day. I highly recommend everyone read it, it really is an eye opening piece.
Nah, not arrogant... Bush the second already gave you a reputation of doubtful taste, trump as candidate makes you just look stupid
(not you personally ofc)
also; almost every country in Europe has a trump-lite / trump-alike which has more support than should be. We're all a bit stupid it seems...Trump's logic is so warped and his lies so obvious (they are caught on video) that I'm just....The Logan Act (1799) was enacted specifically to prevent private citizens from interfering with U.S. government business by negotiating directly with hostile governments. Trump was certainly reaching out to a government hostile to America calling on “Russia,” and not simply hackers that might be Russians. He specifically called out, “Hey Russia” and not “hey hackers.” He is just too full of his own hubris to comprehend that Americans may be stupid, but they
aren’t so stupid as to not see a deliberate outreach to a hostile foreign government.
http://www.politicususa.com/2016/07/31/investigate-indict-donald-trump-felony-violation-logan-act.htmlHe lies about stupid stuff like meeting Putin and then exposed for lying about that. Now he claims he never met Putin. He lies about the NFL contacting him about the timing of the debates but they put out a statement that no one from their organization has contacted Mr Trump. He is a name dropper sometimes, when it comes to the rich or famous. Other times he just goes with a generic "people have told me" or "I have people".
Who are these "people" he constantly refers to? I can only guess that some are his imaginary friends. I am pretty sure that he is a habitual self promoting liar and he can't stop himself. He is a true con artist able to play on people's fear and emotions to get what he wants. It is his own fear and emotions that he is projecting. He is afraid that he will lose more money if the dems win again but other than that he lacks foresight and constantly makes blunders that are hard to take back.
He is using diversion tactics when it comes to debates because he will not be able to win without sinking to lowest levels and insulting Hillary. He is like a child throwing a tantrum. I suppose that is appealing to those hooked on reality TV. He is trying to weasel out of a debate just as he is trying to weasel out of showing his tax returns. He thinks he will lose the election based on his tax returns.
It could be argued that Hillary has also lied. Who hasn't? Her lies are more strategic. I am willing to bet that some of her lies were most likely sanctioned and top secret, done to protect classified operations overseas and here. There is a lot more to the email story. She was not charged for good reason. A likely scenario is that the server she sent emails on was set up for purposes the public will not know about for years to come. Not a stretch to imagine that false "classified" information was purposely exchanged on those servers.Trump comes unstuck over Putin relationship denial when he is reminded in TV interview that he said THREE TIMES in the past that he DID have relationship with Russian leader
- Donald Trump is now saying that he's never met or talked on the phone with Russian President Vladimir Putin
- In the past Trump said he spoke 'indirectly and directly' with the Russian leader during a Miss Universe pageant in Moscow
- He also talked about being Putin's 'stablemate' on 60 Minutes - even though their interviews were filmed in different cities
- Now, amid reports that Russians may have hacked the DNC, Trump says 'I don't know what it means by "having a relationship"'
Stephanopoulos interjected with: 'You would know it if you did, wouldn't you?'
'I think so. Yeah, I think so. So I've –I don't think I've ever met him. I mean, if he's in the same room or something, but I don't think so,' Trump said.
That thought occurred to me while I watched the FBI director make statements about his investigation. It was obvious he was not happy about having to make those statements. I am sure he had to be let in on things he could not tell the public during his investigation and he took a lot of criticism for his recommendation. Something doesn't add up and we are missing information. For now I am going with my theory that the email scandal was an intentional set up to pass fake information to hackers.
Trump was not being sarcastic when he called for Russian hackers, specifically, to hack Hillary. He was upset and he meant it. Nothing subtle about it. It reminded me of how he makes racist comments to appeal to white supremacists and then tries to cover it with sugar, "I love Mexicans" and "they love me". He does that specifically to win more votes. His responses to direct questions can be very vague and it makes him look incompetent. His team is constantly doing damage control because Trump cannot self monitor and regulate what he says. He feels it first, then the words pour out of his mouth. That is not something Americans should value in a president so I have no problem considering those who don't see how bad he will be for this country as ignorant.
If he wins it will certainly be an interesting 4 years, if he isn't impeached during the first two. He admits on video to buying politicians over the years, which is bribery. I don't imagine he will change his tactics if he is president. Republicans who endorse him are afraid of losing control and they think they will be able to control him once he is pres. Newsflash they won't be able to control what he says. They will block him on certain issues which is some consolation to those who are against him. They can't tape his mouth shut.
He is is full of fear for his own future and that is his main motivation for running. He looks out for himself first. Running for president is not an altruistic gesture. He only cares for those close to him, not the masses. You can tell because he always talks about his own personal gains through business deals and dismisses that others lose, a lot, when he wins. He insults people primarily on ethical issues (mostly lies) because he can't figure out the logistics himself. In fact he avoids topics that require him to make logical judgments because he sucks at it. He can't even keep track of his own lies. Apparently he still hasn't caught on to the idea that if he said it in video it will come back and haunt him later. Maybe he is just slow.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
I have been very optimistic that he won't be president, but yesterday morning I had a moment of utter terror that this man could get his finger on nuclear weapons and felt panicky all day. Seriously, this is DANGEROUS. How do people not see that he lies, evades, manipulates and has NO empathy?? Trump is about Trump. #NeverTrump
“Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage.”
― Anais Nin
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
I find this USA elections as strange. Those who like popcorn should prepare a stock of it.
Aylen with her infinite Ni-wisdom could to make a cup of coffee to guess with it, to check what happens in her crystal ball or to sacrifice someone of noisy neighbours to know the truth about tomorrow. There is something wrong.
He's not going to get his finger anywhere near that, there are powers above him that are going to keep a very close eye all the time, if he ever were to get elected.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
Sadly, he would have almost unlimited power to launch nuclear weapons:https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...going-nuclear/
“Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage.”
― Anais Nin
I would never vote for those Clinton creeps to be back in the White House. Bill is bad, Hillary is worse. Pure evil. No way. Trump is probably evil as well as being a clown, but somehow I sense the possibility he is slightly less evil, since how could it be worse than Hillary? So I'm going with that. The fact that the media is so gaga in love with her and is scare-mongering about Trump makes me think Trump is maybe less evil. Also Trump appears not be be an insider like Hillary, and being a political insider is a huge problem IMO, but, if elected he will probably become an evil insider like the rest of them if he already isn't already. We really have no choice, as usual. May the least-worst candidate win.
"A man with a definite belief always appears bizarre, because he does not change with the world; he has climbed into a fixed star, and the earth whizzes below him like a zoetrope."
........ G. ........... K. ............... C ........ H ........ E ...... S ........ T ...... E ........ R ........ T ........ O ........ N ........
"Having a clear faith, based on the creed of the Church, is often labeled today as fundamentalism... Whereas relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along
by every wind of teaching, looks like the only
attitude acceptable to today's standards." - Pope Benedict the XVI, "The Dictatorship of Relativism"
.
.
.
How is she evil?I would never vote for those Clinton creeps to be back in the White House. Bill is bad, Hillary is worse. Pure evil. No way. Trump is probably evil as well as being a clown, but somehow I sense the possibility he is slightly less evil, since how could it be worse than Hillary? So I'm going with that. The fact that the media is so gaga in love with her and is scare-mongering about Trump makes me think Trump is maybe less evil. Also Trump appears not be be an insider like Hillary, and being a political insider is a huge problem IMO, but, if elected he will probably become an evil insider like the rest of them if he already isn't already. We really have no choice, as usual. May the least-worst candidate win.
“Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage.”
― Anais Nin
I still don´t believe it´s how things really work at that level. It´s not like the Washington Post has everything right. The military would likely rebel and don´t execute his orders, yeah that would be a coup, in the US...
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
Let's hope it doesn't come to that. I am not all that crazy about a coup triggered by a thin-skinned man-baby throwing a hissy fit over a foreign leader disagreeing with him...
“Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage.”
― Anais Nin
Evil is a very subjective judgment when it comes to Hillary. Calling her "evil" is a bit melodramatic. She has done a lot of good as well. If evil is an imbalance then we probably all qualify at various times. I don't even think Trump is "evil" but I think he is probably mentally ill which should exclude him from running for president. Don't they have mental evaluations of the candidates? Other jobs test for psychological competency so it is strange if there isn't something in place to ensure that our president does not have a mental illness and nukes the world during a manic phase.
Anyway, there are far more worthy recipients of such a label, so I take it with less than a grain of salt.
Perhaps a brief refresher on the concept of evil might be helpful for some here. I don't use wikipedia as a primary source of information but I think it gives a good summary of the concept of "evil" as it is defined by various philosophies and religions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_and_evil
Evil, in a general context, is the absence or opposite of that which is described as being good. Often, evil is used to denote profound immorality.[2] In certain religious contexts, evil has been described as a supernatural force.[2]Definitions of evil vary, as does the analysis of its motives.[3] However, elements that are commonly associated with evil involve unbalanced behavior involving expediency, selfishness, ignorance, or neglect.[4]
How to achieve good is also discussed in the social sciences and in biology.
The philosophical question of whether morality is absolute, relative, or illusory leads to questions about the nature of evil, with views falling into one of four opposed camps: moral absolutism, amoralism, moral relativism, and moral universalism.When I read that post, all I got from it is she doesn't like Hillary and therefore labels her evil. I would like to see her "evil" acts laid out and the rationalization behind the conclusion that she is "evil. I could call Eliza, for example, evil just because I do not like some of her choices. Does that make Eliza evil? No but it would say I don't like her values and consider her choices evi. Anyway I do not see Hillary, Trump or Eliza as evil. Whatever happened to applying this Christian concept?profound immorality, wickedness, and depravity, especially when regarded as a supernatural force.
It is weird to me that I am not even Christian (or any other religion) yet I can see the value in that teaching.
Hillary being portrayed as a "evil" person, is laughable to me. She is probably no more evil than anyone here. Let's compare her and ourselves to someone like ****** to get some perspective.Carl Jung[edit]
Carl Jung, in his book Answer to Job and elsewhere, depicted evil as the dark side of the Devil. People tend to believe evil is something external to them, because they project their shadow onto others. Jung interpreted the story of Jesus as an account of God facing his own shadow.[18]
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
Trump= chaotic evil, Hillary= lawful evil
I am still trying to shake my "chaotic good" results. I managed to get "true neutral" on one quiz. I never like seeing "good" in my results. I wanna be evil, at least in fantasyland. I can't even achieve it there. hmmph!
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
are you sure? in his rnc speech trump said it would be a society of law and order, and went on to talk about how lawless dangerous people are everywhere and crime is out of control and the immigrants and streaming in to kill us all... i feel like he might put his foot down more than clinton would. he's a chaotic person but maybe the only one allowed to be chaotic is him.
I was just light heartedly parroting something I saw elsewhere because it amused me, not that serious. I think the idea is that trump is more unpredictable or more of a political upset.
@inumbra, Trump doesn't respect law and order. He constantly tries to get special treatment for himself, regardless of any laws, like any narcissist. He calls for law and order because that noise activates his authoritarian supporters, not because he believes in it. He has been both a Democrat and a Republican, but always an opportunist who serves himself first. Furthermore, he isn't even that good a businessman, according to Warren Buffett. The guy is a menace to democracy, and shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the office of the Presidency.
Here is a link to some information which will help you to understand politicians like Trump: http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/
If you have time, read pages 1-35 in the following pdf document, and then look up Social Dominators and Authoritarian Leaders.
http://members.shaw.ca/jeanaltemeyer...oritarians.pdf
"The Authoritarians" was written about GW Bush, but his crew of nation-wreckers is back and their history of pandering to peoples fears to appear as their only saviors (Donald Trump: "Only I can save you") have spawned Donald Trump's nomination, and even many of these Republicans are horrified at what their practices have produced.
An article by a psychologist on Trump: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/...-trump/480771/
As for putting his foot down, he didn't even know his buddy Putin had invaded the Ukraine. Trump is entirely self-serving.
Let me be clear. I don't like Hillary Clinton (although I was surprised to see this: http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-dru...st-politicians) because I think she serves Finance, but Trump is a true threat to democracy. I think it is better to hold my nose and vote for a Clinton, and wait out the next four years until we can get a true Progressive into the White House.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
