Oh My!

[iolo]

Seems that Trump's plan for the first 100 days pursuing 10 - no, - make that 11 different lawsuits against women he has assaulted, and trying to get Hillary locked up. Good to know he has America's interests front and center.

Has he been convicted of 11 assaults?
The Democrats not unlike the earlier Republican administrations have failed in their foreign policies, causing trillions of dollars in debts, while Obama even more so than his previous administrations have borrowed their way out of problems. At the moment the US$ debt does not seem to be a recognizable problem but if it goes on like that, in a few years there could be a crisis.

It seems none of the major parties (none of whom have over 50% support) are simply engaged in attacking each other rather than focusing on presenting an intellectual case.

The only conceivable way capitalist governments can deal with capitalist slumps is either to go in for wars or go in for state investment. Either produces debt, obviously.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Has he been convicted of 11 assaults?
The Democrats not unlike the earlier Republican administrations have failed in their foreign policies, causing trillions of dollars in debts, while Obama even more so than his previous administrations have borrowed their way out of problems. At the moment the US$ debt does not seem to be a recognizable problem but if it goes on like that, in a few years there could be a crisis.

It seems none of the major parties (none of whom have over 50% support) are simply engaged in attacking each other rather than focusing on presenting an intellectual case.

The only conceivable way capitalist governments can deal with capitalist slumps is either to go in for wars or go in for state investment. Either produces debt, obviously.

Wars are an ideal distraction from economic problems while at the same time whipping up public support. Government wasted projects can also be crafted in as investment

 

[Elixir]

Seems that Trump's plan for the first 100 days pursuing 10 - no, - make that 11 different lawsuits against women he has assaulted, and trying to get Hillary locked up. Good to know he has America's interests front and center.

Has he been convicted of 11 assaults?

He'd have zero basis for any suits if he was already conviced, DUH.
I would bet dollars to donuts (not that radical, now that donuts are about $.50) he was lying again when he promised to sue all those women. I'd love it if he did though - it would be wonderful to see all those Apprentice tapes brought forth in the counter-suits.

It seems none of the major parties (none of whom have over 50% support) are simply engaged in attacking each other rather than focusing on presenting an intellectual case.

Two things - it would be incredible if more than one party had over 50% support. And, are you really so naive as to think that any "intellectual case" ever formed the basis of a winning election bid?

 

[whichphilosophy]

Has he been convicted of 11 assaults?

He'd have zero basis for any suits if he was already conviced, DUH.
I would bet dollars to donuts (not that radical, now that donuts are about $.50) he was lying again when he promised to sue all those women. I'd love it if he did though - it would be wonderful to see all those Apprentice tapes brought forth in the counter-suits.

It seems none of the major parties (none of whom have over 50% support) are simply engaged in attacking each other rather than focusing on presenting an intellectual case.

Two things - it would be incredible if more than one party had over 50% support. And, are you really so naive as to think that any "intellectual case" ever formed the basis of a winning election bid?

It's best to let the courts adjudicate not the bottom feeders of the press.
I agree that it is a mathematical impossibility to have more than one party gaining 50% of the vote. There again we have heard of dead men voting where exit polls indicate the majority support the Democrats.

 

[Elixir]

It's best to let the courts adjudicate not the bottom feeders of the press.

Oh, I agree a thousand percent. And ten thousand percent regarding the inevitable counter-suits, should Trump ever follow through on his hollow promise. (Can't WAIT to see those Apprentice tapes! )

we have heard of dead men voting where exit polls indicate the majority support the Democrats.

I think "we" have been consuming a bit too much alt-right propaganda, haven't "we"?
There is no instance where the outcome of any vote has been altered by "dead men voting". The closest thing was when the Republicans finagled the 2000 election, and that had zero to do with dead people voting. But I guess you right wingers are easily made to freak out by hollow assertions from your scaremongers in chief.

 

[whichphilosophy]

These traits as you correctly say would apply to (ultra) right wing fanatics, but can equally apply to the ultra left. .

Nope. Once again, the right wing authoritarian traits do NOT apply equally to the left as to the right, "ultra" or not. That is a complete falsehood.

Their philosophies may differ, but their zealotry and fanatisizm of seeing everything is black and white and not shades of grey are the same. They go for extreme measures and extreme viewpoints against those they oppose. The extreme right is the flipside of the extreme left coin and vica versa. There may be differences in opinions but by nature they are just as predictable and identical in how they process data.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Oh, I agree a thousand percent. And ten thousand percent regarding the inevitable counter-suits, should Trump ever follow through on his hollow promise. (Can't WAIT to see those Apprentice tapes! )

we have heard of dead men voting where exit polls indicate the majority support the Democrats.

I think "we" have been consuming a bit too much alt-right propaganda, haven't "we"?
There is no instance where the outcome of any vote has been altered by "dead men voting". The closest thing was when the Republicans finagled the 2000 election, and that had zero to do with dead people voting. But I guess you right wingers are easily made to freak out by hollow assertions from your scaremongers in chief.

Trump may claim the Royalties on these tapes and it may push the rating up. There have been instances of dead people appearing on the list of people who voted but there is nothing to suggest this is hundreds or thousands. The Scaremonger in chief died six years ago but he still makes these claims today. There again how do we know who votes for who in a secret ballot.

 

[Angry Floof]

Nope. Once again, the right wing authoritarian traits do NOT apply equally to the left as to the right, "ultra" or not. That is a complete falsehood.

Their philosophies may differ, but their zealotry and fanatisizm of seeing everything is black and white and not shades of grey are the same.

Not true.

They go for extreme measures and extreme viewpoints against those they oppose.

Complete bullshit.

The extreme right is the flipside of the extreme left coin and vica versa. There may be differences in opinions but by nature they are just as predictable and identical in how they process data.

Absolutely not true. You clearly haven't a clue "how they process data" or even what that means in relation to this topic. You're just blatantly and shamelessly pulling whatever out of your ass.

Those "opinions" themselves reveal the cognitive tendencies of the holders of those opinions. The differences in philosophy are not just random thoughts having nothing to do with cognitive function. There's a reason the vast majority of liberals score low on the RWA scale. I'd love to have a conversation about this if you're curious and if you're allowed to study some wog science. Check the link in my signature or google "right wing authoritarian follower" and school yourself a little bit.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Their philosophies may differ, but their zealotry and fanatisizm of seeing everything is black and white and not shades of grey are the same.

Not true.

They go for extreme measures and extreme viewpoints against those they oppose.

Complete bullshit.

The extreme right is the flipside of the extreme left coin and vica versa. There may be differences in opinions but by nature they are just as predictable and identical in how they process data.

Absolutely not true. You clearly haven't a clue "how they process data" or even what that means in relation to this topic. You're just blatantly and shamelessly pulling whatever out of your ass.

Those "opinions" themselves reveal the cognitive tendencies of the holders of those opinions. The differences in philosophy are not just random thoughts having nothing to do with cognitive function. There's a reason the vast majority of liberals score low on the RWA scale. I'd love to have a conversation about this if you're curious and if you're allowed to study some wog science. Check the link in my signature or google "right wing authoritarian follower" and school yourself a little bit.

The way in which data is processed does not follow an exact pattern even amongst extremists though I am sure there str a lot of similarities at times. No one has developed a 100 percent reliable test for this as reflected by critics.

Liberals will score low on the RWA scale or indeed against comparisons with extreme socialists because their conclusions are different.

This is also because Cognitive functions include reasoning, memory of data, memories of incidents good and bad , attention, and language and lead directly to the attainment of information and therefore knowledge and or conclusions.

Additionally this should not discount environmental biological and experiential factors.

How people become right wing extremists may also be influenced by environmental factors. In pre War Nazi Germany, political scapegoats such as Jews, gypsies and other ‘races’ were considered the problem pollution the ‘white’ status quo. Most Liberals, communists and socialists didn’t view the problems in this manner.

It doesn’t need complex research to show that the ultra right has often veered towards racial superiority in terms of intelligence and IQ. A lot of reasons given do reflect the mentality of an extreme right wing person. Again in Germany many socialists and even liberals turned towards National Socialism as a solution to the problems the society was facing.

Russia some years later followed its own road to authoritarianism.

The views you have are based on a majority consensus I am not sure if there is a possible standard model to determine who such personalities develop but I believe that more emphasis should be focused on the environment, biological and experiential circumstances in combination with each other.

The Fascist (F) scale is frequently amended to include changes in society is the most used as I understand.

Wiki quotes the following for information.
Altemeyer's research on authoritarianism has been challenged by psychologist John J. Ray, who questions the sampling methods used and the ability of the RWA Scale to predict authoritarian behavior and provides evidence that the RWA scale measures conservatism rather than "directiveness", a construct that John J. Ray invented and that he relates to authoritarianism.[40][41] Ray's approach is, however, a minority position among researchers [42] and other psychologists have found that both the RWA Scale and the original F-Scale are good predictors of both attitudes and behavior.[43]
In 2012, the American Journal of Political Science [44] published an article discussing the correlation between conservatism and psychotism, which they associated with authoritarianism, among other traits. In 2015, they released an erratum [45] showing that psychoticism is actually more associated with liberalism, whereas neuroticism is more associated with conservatism.
There is also this article here for interest.


http://retractionwatch.com/2016/06/07/conservative-political-beliefs-not-linked-to-psychotic-traits/
Retraction Watch
Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process
Conservative political beliefs not linked to psychotic traits, as study claimed

Researchers have fixed a number of papers after mistakenly reporting that people who hold conservative political beliefs are more likely to exhibit traits associated with psychoticism, such as authoritarianism and tough-mindedness.

As one of the notices specifies, now it appears that liberal political beliefs are linked with psychoticism. That paper also swapped ideologies when reporting on people higher in neuroticism and social desirability (falsely claiming that you have socially desirable qualities); the original paper said those traits are linked with liberal beliefs, but they are more common among people with conservative values.

We’re not clear how much the corrections should inform our thinking about politics and personality traits, however, because it’s not clear from the paper how strongly those two are linked. The authors claim that the strength of the links are not important, as they do not affect the main conclusions of the papers — although some personality traits appear to correlate with political beliefs, one doesn’t cause the other, nor vice versa.
In total, three papers have been corrected by authors, and a correction has been submitted on one more. END OF QUOTE

Take this where I have commented below from the Daily Kos where I have inserted my own views.

Take this referencing research conclusions:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/3/1/190887/-

• Authoritarian submission: A high degree of submission to the authorities who are perceived to be established and legitimate in the society in which one lives.
• Authoritarian aggression: A general aggressiveness, directed against various persons that is perceived to be sanctioned by established authorities.
• Conventionalism: A high degree of adherence to the social conventions that are perceived to be endorsed by society and its established authorities.

My own reply is as follows
Equally observed in extreme socialist, communist, rightwing religious and dictatorships and in Asian non political circles and in tribal societies.
This may relate to personality traits of obsessions and inhibitions with certain topics.