Trump Derangement Syndrome

[commonsense]

I also note that you're making mountains out of molehills...like "he looks to long at the sun," or "his wife might not have taken his hand on a given occasion," and then making something even smaller than molehills out of Biden's digital rape, Biden's racist comments, or Biden's ginning up of public hatred -- all of which you have actual video evidence for. And we have the Biden laptop, as well, for proof that Biden's corrupt and enabling a coke fiend son, and doing some monkey business in Ukraine. We have his total failure at the wall, his embarassing debacle in Afghanistan, his inability to speak coherenty or even stay upright on a bike...Yet you save every negative epithet for Trump?

So why don’t you start another thread about Biden and see what happens?

Because I'm talking to you. I'm offering you an opportunity to assess your own motives honestly, reflecting on what is really motivating you. It's a gift, even if you don't know it is.

But you can take it, or pass on it. That's the nature of gifts.

So you know my motives better than I do. That’s beyond mind reading.

[Immanuel Can]

Your point here which switches attention to criticism of Democratic leaders, is part of your argument that criticism of Trump is deranged. That conclusion is a defence of Trump.

You've bought into the ridiculous theory that the Dems are above criticism

No, I've bought into the theory that you, Manny, are defending Trump.

There's no evidence for that theory. I have said nothing at all to redeem his reputation, though I have said much about the venialities of his rivals.

I've also not tried to make any "et tu quoque," or "whataboutery" argument. You won't find I ever have said that the wickedness of others excuses any man's wickedness.

So that's just not so, and you can see it's not, by reviewing my earlier responses, if you care to.

... the degree of venom directed against him ...

You and Walker keep making this kind of assertion, but you haven't yet provided any substance, Manny.

Actually, you've provided it. I haven't had to.

Your repeated and heated vituperation against Trump is manifestly vastly more excessive than your one calm accusation against the other side, made only after I pointed them out...even when the other side has been far more venial by any reasonable standard. As for Trump's "followers," against whom you also rail, you do not know who they are, or why they actually prefer Trump, or what their motives might actually be -- yet you condemn them. And all that speaks volumes...and is, in fact, the point, and all the proof one needs for TDS.

Why be so excessive? Nothing you've pointed to warrants it, or excuses Biden and Clinton from far worse condemnation. Or why do you not even mention their followers, who are surely far more culpable, if Trump supporters are?

[Immanuel Can]

So why don’t you start another thread about Biden and see what happens?

Because I'm talking to you. I'm offering you an opportunity to assess your own motives honestly, reflecting on what is really motivating you. It's a gift, even if you don't know it is.

But you can take it, or pass on it. That's the nature of gifts.

So you know my motives better than I do. That’s beyond mind reading.

I'm not reading your mind...I'm offering you a chance to do so.

I'm pointing out the evidence everybody can see, by first pointing out how disproportionate and irrational your antipathies have become. Why should a mere media creature and ex-Democrat provoke the outrage that vastly exceeds even your antipathy to rapists and criminals of a much worse sort, or why should your disgust for an ex-president fall short of that you feel for the much less competent and at least equally contemptible incumbent?

All of that deserves thought. You can spend time on it, or remain a mystery to us...and plausibly to yourself, as well. For nothing any of us knows about justifies such an imbalance.

[commonsense]

Because I'm talking to you. I'm offering you an opportunity to assess your own motives honestly, reflecting on what is really motivating you. It's a gift, even if you don't know it is.

But you can take it, or pass on it. That's the nature of gifts.

So you know my motives better than I do. That’s beyond mind reading.

I'm not reading your mind...I'm offering you a chance to do so.

I'm pointing out the evidence everybody can see, by first pointing out how disproportionate and irrational your antipathies have become. Why should a mere media creature and ex-Democrat provoke the outrage that vastly exceeds even your antipathy to rapists and criminals of a much worse sort, or why should your disgust for an ex-president fall short of that you feel for the much less competent and at least equally contemptible incumbent?

All of that deserves thought. You can spend time on it, or remain a mystery to us...and plausibly to yourself, as well. For nothing any of us knows about justifies such an imbalance.

But there’s no imbalance of venom or vitriol or

[commonsense]

Does it feel good to you, IC—ignoring and distorting?

[Impenitent]

burning cities is mostly peaceful

-Imp

[Immanuel Can]

So you know my motives better than I do. That’s beyond mind reading.

I'm not reading your mind...I'm offering you a chance to do so.

I'm pointing out the evidence everybody can see, by first pointing out how disproportionate and irrational your antipathies have become. Why should a mere media creature and ex-Democrat provoke the outrage that vastly exceeds even your antipathy to rapists and criminals of a much worse sort, or why should your disgust for an ex-president fall short of that you feel for the much less competent and at least equally contemptible incumbent?

All of that deserves thought. You can spend time on it, or remain a mystery to us...and plausibly to yourself, as well. For nothing any of us knows about justifies such an imbalance.

But there’s no imbalance of venom or vitriol or

What? When you pillory one man for making frat-boy talk, and say nothing about his competitor who's an actual rapist? I think practically everbody would say that's an imbalance of values, at the very least.

And it still needs explaining.

[commonsense]

This thread is about a syndrome of criticizing Trump only. There’s the imbalance.

You are the one overtaken by an emotional need to point your finger away from Trump.

[commonsense]

I see it now. Since you are not getting the answers you want, you say your questions are unanswered.

I think you are enjoying the exasperation this causes me.

Let me try to answer you this way:

Trump, unethical in multiple instances.
Biden, unethical in some instances.

I expect that, out of intentional ignorance, you will ask for specifics to explain why. Get your “facts” and opinions somewhere other than right leaning outlets.

[Walker]

The Guy Who Believed Biden’s Speech
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6yXf4zXO1g


The gullibility that is satirically presented is an element of TDS, and that's being generous.

(The last 2 minutes is a capitalist/hippie sales pitch.)

[Sculptor]

The Guy Who Believed Biden’s Speech
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6yXf4zXO1g


The gullibility that is satirically presented is an element of TDS, and that's being generous.

(The last 2 minutes is a capitalist/hippie sales pitch.)

This is about your derangement syndrome. If you want to talk about Biden - start a new thread.

[Sculptor]

I'm not reading your mind...I'm offering you a chance to do so.

I'm pointing out the evidence everybody can see, by first pointing out how disproportionate and irrational your antipathies have become. Why should a mere media creature and ex-Democrat provoke the outrage that vastly exceeds even your antipathy to rapists and criminals of a much worse sort, or why should your disgust for an ex-president fall short of that you feel for the much less competent and at least equally contemptible incumbent?

All of that deserves thought. You can spend time on it, or remain a mystery to us...and plausibly to yourself, as well. For nothing any of us knows about justifies such an imbalance.

But there’s no imbalance of venom or vitriol or

What? When you pillory one man for making frat-boy talk, and say nothing about his competitor who's an actual rapist? I think practically everbody would say that's an imbalance of values, at the very least.

And it still needs explaining.

Start another thread if you want to talk about another person.
Otherwise you are just going to be laughed at for Whataboutery.
Maybe you think that SIr Donald is okay to disrespect women because other people do?

[Immanuel Can]

But there’s no imbalance of venom or vitriol or

What? When you pillory one man for making frat-boy talk, and say nothing about his competitor who's an actual rapist? I think practically everbody would say that's an imbalance of values, at the very least.

And it still needs explaining.

Start another thread if you want to talk about another person.

We're talking about TDS, and have not left the subject. And we are not talking about "another person," but about the same person's comparative reactions to different incidents.

When a speaker...any speaker...has a strong reaction to one thing, and no comparable outrage at other things that are manifestly, and by all general consensus, much more morally egregious,(like "bad talk" versus "serial rape") we need a reasonable accounting for the disparity. If there is no reasonable explanation, then plausibly, we have something like TDS in hand. The person has manifestly become irrational and unbalanced in some way. And that is what we are looking to evaluate.

[Walker]

The Guy Who Believed Biden’s Speech
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6yXf4zXO1g


The gullibility that is satirically presented is an element of TDS, and that's being generous.

(The last 2 minutes is a capitalist/hippie sales pitch.)

This is about your derangement syndrome. If you want to talk about Biden - start a new thread.

The gullibility that is satirically presented in the link is an element of TDS, thus relevant, as painful as that must be for you to face.

[tillingborn]

When you pillory one man for making frat-boy talk, and say nothing about his competitor who's an actual rapist? I think practically everbody would say that's an imbalance of values, at the very least.

Both Trump and Biden have been accused of sexual assault. Neither have been convicted. On what grounds do you find one guilty and the other innocent?