Shooting in Portland

Donald trump is demented. Full stop. You can’t make sense of it, because it’s insanity.

The Rs are rolling the dice big time that Trump will be able to finish the campaign to re-elect him, never mind complete his term in office. His noticeable deterioration may pose complications for the transition period if he loses, and make for some unnerving moments between the election and his 2nd inauguration if he wins.
 
The Rs are rolling the dice big time that Trump will be able to finish the campaign to re-elect him, never mind complete his term in office. His noticeable deterioration may pose complications for the transition period if he loses, and make for some unnerving moments between the election and his 2nd inauguration if he wins.
I maintain my opinion, that if this was dementia, he would have decompensated earlier. I'd say he has mental health issues that adversely affect his cognition, but the difference between the two is reversibility.
 
I maintain my opinion, that if this was dementia, he would have decompensated earlier. I'd say he has mental health issues that adversely affect his cognition, but the difference between the two is reversibility.

All I know is that the guy popping off some answer to a question and then going off on a bunch of tangents (at best!) is not the same guy who back in the summer of 2015 was still giving succinct and on-point although self-serving answers to press questions during casual encounters.

At that time he was proving entirely capable of just moving on from the encounter. By that I mean he wasn't popping up later with a tweeted tirade based on hours of subsequent internal obsession about having been asked some question or having his response questioned on a follow-up.

Sure, that reads more like narcissism taking him south than dementia, although sometimes rage is part of the picture when someone's aware of losing cognition, but whatever it is, it has got worse. So we can stick a label of some sort on that or not --and I'm not a physician-- but it doesn't really matter to most of us out here because

1) whatever Trump's problems are have been progressing since 2015, and​
2) it's not reassuring to have a US President consistently demonstrate inability to stay on even his own political message. All those "theme weeks" the WH staff prepared for him to roll out? He was advised not to take questions but when he did, he invariably ended up stirring some pot with a reporter that stepped on the theme by time the scheduled presentation was over.​
How's he going to do on the campaign trail? He's more unfocused now than he was during his highly inappropriate departures from prepared remarks at that Boy Scout Jamboree a few years ago. Imagine how GOP state chairs feel about this guy coming to their state on the campaign trail this fall, virtually or in person. He's a dice roll for them now every time out the box.

In theory this should please me, since I lean left. It doesn't. He's the US President and might even get re-elected. Yet he's a guy whose performance would not be tolerated if he were an officer of any publicly traded corporation. The fate of the nation rests in his hands today, and if he's not actually at the helm then we're not clued in on who's really minding our store.

At the moment Trump is grossly underperforming because the violent incidents in Kenosha and Portland are not being addressed appropriately by the White House. He's trying to make a partisan campaign issue out of isolated breakdowns in an otherwise mostly peaceful nationwide expression of weariness with systemic racism in police behavior. Past that he's trying to grandstand some EO-supplied fixes to covid-19 economic fallout, instead of managing to get Democrats and Republicans to pass legislation for an adequate followup stimulus program.

But mostly Trump's proving unwilling to focus on healing rather than dividing us over the fact that all of our lives matter, no matter if we personally camp out these days with "black lives matter" or "blue lives matter" or just wonder how we got to a place where a US President can turn up so useless during times of crisis. Our bottom line problem with Trump is that none of our lives really matters to him.

Sad to say that, and part of his inability to respond appropriately to racial injustice, covid-19, economic uncertainty, etc., is probably due to his illness. That's sad but certainly not a reason for him to be returned to office for another four years. I don't think Kenosha or Portland or even the tiny town of Bainbridge not too far from me (where a peaceful demo against racial injustice raised some nasty divisions later on ) can take the lack of national leadership on that issue that Trump has shown us.
 
All I know is that the guy popping off some answer to a question and then going off on a bunch of tangents (at best!) is not the same guy who back in the summer of 2015 was still giving succinct and on-point although self-serving answers to press questions during casual encounters.

At that time he was proving entirely capable of just moving on from the encounter. By that I mean he wasn't popping up later with a tweeted tirade based on hours of subsequent internal obsession about having been asked some question or having his response questioned on a follow-up.

Sure, that reads more like narcissism taking him south than dementia, although sometimes rage is part of the picture when someone's aware of losing cognition, but whatever it is, it has got worse. So we can stick a label of some sort on that or not --and I'm not a physician-- but it doesn't really matter to most of us out here because

1) whatever Trump's problems are have been progressing since 2015, and​
2) it's not reassuring to have a US President consistently demonstrate inability to stay on even his own political message. All those "theme weeks" the WH staff prepared for him to roll out? He was advised not to take questions but when he did, he invariably ended up stirring some pot with a reporter that stepped on the theme by time the scheduled presentation was over.​
How's he going to do on the campaign trail? He's more unfocused now than he was during his highly inappropriate departures from prepared remarks at that Boy Scout Jamboree a few years ago. Imagine how GOP state chairs feel about this guy coming to their state on the campaign trail this fall, virtually or in person. He's a dice roll for them now every time out the box.

In theory this should please me, since I lean left. It doesn't. He's the US President and might even get re-elected. Yet he's a guy whose performance would not be tolerated if he were an officer of any publicly traded corporation. The fate of the nation rests in his hands today, and if he's not actually at the helm then we're not clued in on who's really minding our store.

At the moment Trump is grossly underperforming because the violent incidents in Kenosha and Portland are not being addressed appropriately by the White House. He's trying to make a partisan campaign issue out of isolated breakdowns in an otherwise mostly peaceful nationwide expression of weariness with systemic racism in police behavior. Past that he's trying to grandstand some EO-supplied fixes to covid-19 economic fallout, instead of managing to get Democrats and Republicans to pass legislation for an adequate followup stimulus program.

But mostly Trump's proving unwilling to focus on healing rather than dividing us over the fact that all of our lives matter, no matter if we personally camp out these days with "black lives matter" or "blue lives matter" or just wonder how we got to a place where a US President can turn up so useless during times of crisis. Our bottom line problem with Trump is that none of our lives really matters to him.

Sad to say that, and part of his inability to respond appropriately to racial injustice, covid-19, economic uncertainty, etc., is probably due to his illness. That's sad but certainly not a reason for him to be returned to office for another four years. I don't think Kenosha or Portland or even the tiny town of Bainbridge not too far from me (where a peaceful demo against racial injustice raised some nasty divisions later on ) can take the lack of national leadership on that issue that Trump has shown us.
I agree about the poor performance, and obvious cognitive issues. My point is (though I didn't express it well), that if it's due to poor impulse control, short attention span and impaired judgement when facing information that is incompatible with his view of self, the situation will plateau and not progress. If it's neurodegenerative, it will progress until he's dead. From a practical stand point, it doesn't matter; he has never been competent/qualified even when he ran for president. From a prognostic stand point, he'd not be able to complete 4 more years if it's neurodegenerative.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree about the poor performance, and obvious cognitive issues. My point is (though I didn't express it well), that if it's due to poor impulse control, short attention span and impaired judgement when facing information that is incompatible with his view of self, the situation will plateau and not progress. If it's neurodegenerative, it will progress until he's dead. From a practical stand point, it doesn't matter; he has never been competent/qualified even when he ran for president. From a prognostic stand point, he'd not be able to complete 4 more years if it's neurodegenerative.
Considering trumps personality, performance and trajectory, it’s a steep decline from here on out.
 
From a prognostic stand point, he'd not be able to complete 4 more years if it's neurodegenerative.

Yeah, I've seen this [personally] more than once, if you take his current state, his rate of decline over the past 3-4 years, he's at a point where if it is neurodegenerative, he's headed off a cliff, he won't last (if he was to win another term) another 12-18 months, i.e., welcome president pence ...
 
I just heard a report on the radio about support for the protests. 75% of Democrats support them but only 7% of Republicans. When asked the reason, the pollster opined that they saw the support for the protests go down among Republicans in a direct correlation of Trump‘s criticisms of them.

So, Republicans generally supported the protests until their cult leader said the protests are bad. They can no longer think for themselves. If Trump were to disappear tomorrow, they would not know how to tie their shoes.
 
I just heard a report on the radio about support for the protests. 75% of Democrats support them but only 7% of Republicans. When asked the reason, the pollster opined that they saw the support for the protests go down among Republicans in a direct correlation of Trump‘s criticisms of them.

So, Republicans generally supported the protests until their cult leader said the protests are bad. They can no longer think for themselves. If Trump were to disappear tomorrow, they would not know how to tie their shoes.

I don't know. I'll bet they suddenly remember how to tie their shoes. Plus, they'll us how many ways our shoe laces are destroying the very fabric of nation. The minute trump is gone they'll complain that we're all living in the past for bringing trump up or their alleged support of him and his policies.
 
I don't know. I'll bet they suddenly remember how to tie their shoes. Plus, they'll us how many ways our shoe laces are destroying the very fabric of nation. The minute trump is gone they'll complain that we're all living in the past for bringing trump up or their alleged support of him and his policies.

All those regulatory agency rule rollbacks that this administration has managed to install are what will have people bringing up Trump's name in the future (with a string of curses appended). A lot of their effects haven't even kicked in yet.
 
All those regulatory agency rule rollbacks that this administration has managed to install are what will have people bringing up Trump's name in the future (with a string of curses appended). A lot of their effects haven't even kicked in yet.

Luckily, I’m dead in the next 20-30 years.

Who has two thumbs and zero children or grandchildren? THIS GUY!
 
Here we go again with “assault rifle”(s). An assault rifle is highly regulated and extremely expensive. I would say that maybe in the last 3 years they have been used a total of maybe 3 to 5 times during an actual crime. It is so rare I can’t even find statistics on it.

What is your need to vote or your need to speak freely in public where do you get off asking me why I need my constitutional rights.

A few days ago, my wife was speaking over Zoom with our son's teacher. And, during it she noted that she didn't entirely understand the Windows machine the school supplied because we used Apples.

And, of course, I went "argghh...." in the other room, but rather than waltz in a correct her, I kept my mouth shut. (I'm getting less dumb every year.)

See, we use Apple products, including Mac computers.

Is "Apples" wrong? Totally. Did my son's teacher understand what she meant? Yeah.

Assault rifle is similar. There is a such thing as an assault rifle—the M4A1 being a great example. And, the AR-15 is a civilian copy, largely similar to the M16A1, but without fully automatic fire. And, really that's both a major detail and a few small differences in the weapon from the outside.

So, when someone asks "why" do you need an assault rifle, they may or may not mean the AR-15. I get the pedantic reflex, but rather than derail the conversation over a punctilious detail, instead, let's discuss why the AR-15-patterned rifles are popular, and why Americans increasingly have shifted from old bolt-action Remingtons that were used for target shooting or hunting, to a weapon that often looks exactly like the assault rifles used in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The cultural change is much more important than technical details. And, the increasing use of AR-15-style weapons against civilians and police is important.

We need to talk about this real problem, without getting too tied up in technical details. Maybe we can say, "I understand," rather than attack the argument based on picayune details. And, I say this even as I know I'll get hung up on picayune details when it suits me.
 
All those regulatory agency rule rollbacks that this administration has managed to install are what will have people bringing up Trump's name in the future (with a string of curses appended). A lot of their effects haven't even kicked in yet.
Fortunately, most of it was done through executive order, you know that thing he used to dog Obama for all the time?

58f50994c75d4a62008b4cf3


Biden will have his work cutout for him with all the damage Trump has already done but he can undo most of the EOs on day one.

Funny, for being such a "deal maker" Trump couldn't get anything passed in congress, not even when he held both houses.
 
A few days ago, my wife was speaking over Zoom with our son's teacher. And, during it she noted that she didn't entirely understand the Windows machine the school supplied because we used Apples.

And, of course, I went "argghh...." in the other room, but rather than waltz in a correct her, I kept my mouth shut. (I'm getting less dumb every year.)

See, we use Apple products, including Mac computers.

Is "Apples" wrong? Totally. Did my son's teacher understand what she meant? Yeah.

Assault rifle is similar. There is a such thing as an assault rifle—the M4A1 being a great example. And, the AR-15 is a civilian copy, largely similar to the M16A1, but without fully automatic fire. And, really that's both a major detail and a few small differences in the weapon from the outside.

So, when someone asks "why" do you need an assault rifle, they may or may not mean the AR-15. I get the pedantic reflex, but rather than derail the conversation over a punctilious detail, instead, let's discuss why the AR-15-patterned rifles are popular, and why Americans increasingly have shifted from old bolt-action Remingtons that were used for target shooting or hunting, to a weapon that often looks exactly like the assault rifles used in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The cultural change is much more important than technical details. And, the increasing use of AR-15-style weapons against civilians and police is important.

We need to talk about this real problem, without getting too tied up in technical details. Maybe we can say, "I understand," rather than attack the argument based on picayune details. And, I say this even as I know I'll get hung up on picayune details when it suits me.
I like your analogy, but it is much more morbid here. It's more like two teachers standing next to a student who lays on the ground with a gaping hole in his chest. One of the teachers says there's no justification for assault weapons (unless the goal is this exactly) and the other one rolls his eyes and says "iT waSN't AN assAuLt rIflE!!!!!!!&*#&^#&#" then walks away.
 
A few days ago, my wife was speaking over Zoom with our son's teacher. And, during it she noted that she didn't entirely understand the Windows machine the school supplied because we used Apples.

And, of course, I went "argghh...." in the other room, but rather than waltz in a correct her, I kept my mouth shut. (I'm getting less dumb every year.)

See, we use Apple products, including Mac computers.

Is "Apples" wrong? Totally. Did my son's teacher understand what she meant? Yeah.

Assault rifle is similar. There is a such thing as an assault rifle—the M4A1 being a great example. And, the AR-15 is a civilian copy, largely similar to the M16A1, but without fully automatic fire. And, really that's both a major detail and a few small differences in the weapon from the outside.

So, when someone asks "why" do you need an assault rifle, they may or may not mean the AR-15. I get the pedantic reflex, but rather than derail the conversation over a punctilious detail, instead, let's discuss why the AR-15-patterned rifles are popular, and why Americans increasingly have shifted from old bolt-action Remingtons that were used for target shooting or hunting, to a weapon that often looks exactly like the assault rifles used in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The cultural change is much more important than technical details. And, the increasing use of AR-15-style weapons against civilians and police is important.

We need to talk about this real problem, without getting too tied up in technical details. Maybe we can say, "I understand," rather than attack the argument based on picayune details. And, I say this even as I know I'll get hung up on picayune details when it suits me.

I don’t know exactly how long it’s been since I was exiled From PRSI, but it feels like years. And I distinctly remember having these conversations with @Lostngone, trying to convince him that getting lost in minutiae is merely a way to avoid addressing the very large problem of firearms and public safety.

Feels a little like Groundhog Day to wake up to that same conversation this morning.

Rise and shine.
 
Last edited:
The measurable realities are that:
1. In the UK (cops aren't usually armed), armed cops were perceived less trustworthy
2. In the UK, armed cops were more likely to get involved in violence
3. The visual of guns changes human behavior for the worst (fuck open carry)
4. The number of guns correlates with gun violence (shocker!!!)
5. The USA has the highest gun murder rate compared to the West, but even compared to the majority of Eastern Europe (except for regions with a recent civil war - shocker!!!)
 
A few days ago, my wife was speaking over Zoom with our son's teacher. And, during it she noted that she didn't entirely understand the Windows machine the school supplied because we used Apples.

And, of course, I went "argghh...." in the other room, but rather than waltz in a correct her, I kept my mouth shut. (I'm getting less dumb every year.)

See, we use Apple products, including Mac computers.

Is "Apples" wrong? Totally. Did my son's teacher understand what she meant? Yeah.

Assault rifle is similar. There is a such thing as an assault rifle—the M4A1 being a great example. And, the AR-15 is a civilian copy, largely similar to the M16A1, but without fully automatic fire. And, really that's both a major detail and a few small differences in the weapon from the outside.

So, when someone asks "why" do you need an assault rifle, they may or may not mean the AR-15. I get the pedantic reflex, but rather than derail the conversation over a punctilious detail, instead, let's discuss why the AR-15-patterned rifles are popular, and why Americans increasingly have shifted from old bolt-action Remingtons that were used for target shooting or hunting, to a weapon that often looks exactly like the assault rifles used in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The cultural change is much more important than technical details. And, the increasing use of AR-15-style weapons against civilians and police is important.

We need to talk about this real problem, without getting too tied up in technical details. Maybe we can say, "I understand," rather than attack the argument based on picayune details. And, I say this even as I know I'll get hung up on picayune details when it suits me.

The argument/debate is over in my opinion when people choose to ignore the differences in a debate even after the facts have been presented.

Don’t say “assault rifles” should be banned. Say “semi-automatic rifles” should be banned. I know from the outside/non-firearm enthusiast that might seem a little pedantic but when it comes to the law and what is actually made illegal the difference is significant.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top