Donald Trump’s behavior is so far outside the norm that many people (including mental health professionals) have suggested that he is mentally ill. The most common suggestions I’ve seen are that he suffers from narcissistic personality disorder (NPD), antisocial personality disorder (ASPD, also known as sociopathy), or a combination of the two (known as malignant narcissism). There is also widespread concern about cognitive decline.
I looked up the diagnostic criteria for NPD and ASPD, and it’s shocking how many of the boxes Trump ticks. Here are the criteria for NPD according to the American Psychiatric Association’s diagnostic manual, the DSM-5-TR:
Narcissistic Personality Disorder (301.81 [F60.81])
Diagnostic Criteria
A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:
- Has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements).
- Is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love.
- Believes that he or she is “special” and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions).
- Requires excessive admiration.
- Has a sense of entitlement (i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations).
- Is interpersonally exploitative (i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends).
- Lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others.
- Is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her.
- Shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes.
I would argue that Trump meets all 9 of those criteria. Only 5 are required for an NPD diagnosis.
Here are the criteria for ASPD:
Antisocial Personality Disorder (301.7 [F60.2])
Diagnostic Criteria
A. A pervasive pattern of disregard for and violation of the rights of others, occurring since age 15 years, as indicated by three (or more) of the following:
- Failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors, as indicated by repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for arrest.
- Deceitfulness, as indicated by repeated lying, use of aliases, or conning others for personal profit or pleasure.
- Impulsivity or failure to plan ahead.
- Irritability and aggressiveness, as indicated by repeated physical fights or assaults.
- Reckless disregard for safety of self or others.
- Consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by repeated failure to sustain consistent work behavior or honor financial obligations.
- Lack of remorse, as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another.
B. The individual is at least age 18 years.
C. There is evidence of Conduct Disorder with onset before age 15 years.
D. The occurrence of antisocial behavior is not exclusively during the course of Schizophrenia or a manic episode.
I’d say that Trump meets all of the numbered criteria except #4. Only 3 are needed for an ASPD diagnosis. He’s certainly irritable and aggressive, but I haven’t heard reports of any physical altercations. He meets criteria B and D, but I don’t know enough about his early life to comment on criterion C, which is Conduct Disorder.
Anyway, the point is not whether Trump would qualify for a formal diagnosis. Diagnosis or no, any person who meets that many criteria for both NPD and ASPD is manifestly unfit for office.
Erik,
Hi Eric
I guess you missed the post when I mentioned that he uses hyperbolic language to express his accomplishments and shoots from the hip. He also appears to have some unhealthy narcissism which is not atypical of Presidents.
I am empathetic of people who do not like him. I am not empathetic of people who dishonestly paint people who do not hate him as Trump cult members. This behaviour of painting someone who disagrees with you as a cult member is not healthy for any rational discussion and is detrimental to the Democratic Party as the average polls indicate.
Looking beyond Trump’s term, I suspect there is no political alternative that can achieve a majority. The country has been split pretty much 50-50 for some time, but Republicans seem to have a more cohesive following, and fewer schisms.
Israel seems to break political pundits. I can’t think of anyone who has a coherent and well reasoned argument for or against Israel. Most of my college friends were Jewish and were ambivalent. That was 55 years ago.
Aside from Israel and Ukraine, most Republicans are unified.
colewd, to Erik:
It’s been entertaining to watch Bill trying to find the faintest, most ridiculously understated criticisms of Trump he can come up with:
“Sure, he exaggerates a little and can sometimes be impulsive. Oh, and he’s a bit narcissistic, but you know how presidents are. See? I criticized him. I can’t be a cult member!”
Meanwhile, here’s Bill’s counterpart Fritz criticizing Hitler:
“That mustache doesn’t look good on him and he can be a little overambitious — but you know how world leaders are. Oh, and he’s not always the friendliest when it comes to Jews, but hey — everyone has some people they like and some people they don’t, right? See? I criticized him!”
“I mean, the guy does have some faults, and his style isn’t to everyone’s liking. Some people are more sensitive to that than others. That’s OK. I can see where they’re coming from.”
Let go of the strawman. We’re not painting you as a cult member because you don’t hate Trump. We’re painting you as a cult member because you act like a cult member.
We can’t have a rational discussion with you about Trump. You’re impervious to facts and reason when it comes to him. If we could have a rational discussion with you regarding Trump, we wouldn’t be calling you a cult member.
Here’s how deep in the cult you are. You still haven’t acknowledged even one of Trump’s lies among the many I’ve pointed out in this thread and the tens of thousands — literally tens of thousands — that are documented. He’s a chronic and unrepentant liar, yet you haven’t formed the words “that’s a lie” about anything he’s said. That’s cult behavior.
The closest you’ve come is when you said that his claims about ending six (or seven, or ten) wars are “not well supported”. Dude, they aren’t merely “not well supported”, they’re flat out false, and they’re clearly intentional. That makes them lies. He doesn’t merely exaggerate his accomplishments, he outright lies about them with pathological frequency. No other president comes close.
I offered you a softball, which is the fact that Trump cheats at golf and lies about his tournament wins. You can’t even acknowledge that. It’s cult-level denial.
keiths,
You should pay attention to the accuracy of what you post if you want non Trump haters to take you seriously.
colewd:
I’ve been asking you for three months to demonstrate that my claims about Trump are wrong. Three months! I want you to defend him. Let’s have an actual debate, using facts and reason.
You say my claims are inaccurate. If so, show us exactly what I’ve gotten wrong and what the actual facts are. For a change.
Allan:
What’s worse is that it isn’t just that people are divided in their opinion of him. He actively promotes and reinforces the division. Us vs Them. Constantly labeling and dehumanizing his opponents. He wants us to be divided. It’s straight out of the authoritarian playbook.
Yet this is the guy who said in his inaugural address:
Oh, really? A unifier? “Radical Left Lunatics”, “they hate our country”, “Komrade Kamala”, “Barack Hussein Obama”, “the enemy from within”, “animals”, “why don’t they go back” to their countries (said of Americans serving in Congress), “these people are sick”, “the enemy of the people”.
Some unifier.
This is pretty weak sauce. One man’s hyperbole is another’s lie, while even his narcissism is excused as ‘typical’. Trump’s narcissism is off the scale.
Good grief, Bill, can you not see the issue staring you in the face here? This is what I keep trying to emphasise whenever you say ‘TDS’. ie, You paint someone who disagrees with you as suffering from some kind of condition. When someone does exactly that to you, you complain it stifles
rational discussion…
Motes and beams.
No, I did not miss it. You missed my reply to it.
Except that nobody is dishonestly painting you as a cult member. Instead, you look like a cult member, you walk like a cult member, you quack like a cult member, so to say that you are a cult member is an honest description of you, not a dishonest one.
Besides, like a true cult member (which you are), you operate by means of projection – you think that everybody else is in a “TDS” cult and brainwashed by “leftist bias” media when this cannot be the case at all. You are talking to foreigners from different countries who have no American partisan bone to pick and do not have a “mainstream fake news liberal bias” like USA has, but not even for a single post have you managed to acknowledge that you are not talking to leftist Americans.
Erik,
Indeed, here in the UK, the media bias is anything but ‘leftist’. Barely a day passes without lurid wall-to-wall migrant stories whipping the populace up into a frenzy, and giving disproportionate airtime to our own Trump wannabes who want to deport them.
Allan Miller,
Hi Allan
We are both doing the same thing. One side TDS the other Maga cult member. What you call weak sauce is only a valid claim for those who hate Trump.
What is not being discussed is if his policies are helping the US and the rest of the world. Especially in light of the problems the policies that the prior administration caused.
colewd:
No. We’re actually showing that you’re a cult member, while you’re simply labeling us as TDS sufferers. Showing requires evidence and reason, while labeling is cheap and easy. We’re putting in the work, while you’re being lazy.
If you want the TDS accusation to stick, you need to show that our claims about Trump are false. For a minute, I thought you might actually try. It was when you wrote
Go ahead. Show that my posts are inaccurate.
It’s objectively “weak sauce” when you’ve been shown that Trump is a pathological liar, but all you can manage to say is that he exaggerates. When you’ve been shown that he fits the diagnostic criteria for narcissistic personality disorder — a severe mental illness — but the most you’re willing to acknowledge is that he exhibits signs of narcissism which is “not atypical of presidents”. When you’ve been shown how he viciously goes after people, both verbally and through his actions, but all you’re willing to say is that he has “caustic tendencies”.
It’s clear what’s happening here. You recognize that in order to feign objectivity, you need to show that you’re capable of criticizing the Dear Leader. But as a cult member, you find it excruciating to actually do so. So you cast about for the most watered-down things you can say about Trump that can still be construed as criticisms. The sauce is weak.
Are you actually claiming that we haven’t discussed the impact of his official actions? Tariffs, Putin, foreign aid cuts, sending the military into American cities, the Big Ugly Bill — those don’t count?
Yes, this is what he is claiming. And you can spend three months asking him to prove his claim.
Trump cultists emulate Trump – spew the most obvious lies and blatant idiocies with a semi-straight face and expect to get away with it. And of course they count it as a win when the claim “triggers the libs” and a double win when they get away with it.
keiths,
Your argument based on being a Trump hater requires you attempt to position someone who disagrees with as a cult member. If you fail your whole argument fails.
Quite creative trying to position an independent voter who did not vote for Trump in 2020 as a cult member :-). Creative but a failing strategy.
I doubt you will convince more than a few independent voters of this.
You lack supported claims either because your support has dubious sources or is not relevant to your claim. Your energy for this failing subject is quite extraordinary.
colewd:
Come on, Bill. No claim I’ve made about Trump depends on the fact that you are a cult member. Those are separate questions.
People get sucked into cults, and it happened to you. You were out until you were in. You didn’t vote for Trump in 2020, but now you can’t acknowledge even a single lie among the thousands he’s told. You can’t acknowledge his out-of-control narcissism. You can’t admit that he’s been getting played by Putin, when it’s obvious. You can’t acknowledge that he’s a sexual predator. You are firmly in the cult.
Looks like I don’t have to. Independents are figuring it out on their own. I showed you the approval figures:
colewd:
Show me that my claims are inaccurate.
You do not know the meaning of the words you are using. Namely, here it is *you* issuing a claim. Your claim that our claims are unsupported is unsupported. You do not know what sources are, much less whether the sources are dubious or not. You have never once referred to a single source yourself – all you know is copy-paste and misread Grok.
You are wilfully participating in the mental illness of Trump, the Truth Social tweeter-in-chief. Will you ever support a single claim of yours to demonstrate that you even known what it means to support a claim? Nah, never.
You are fatally brainwashed by propaganda of your own choice and I mean it dead seriously. I grew up in Soviet Union. Did the government-controlled press spew propaganda there and were people by and large brainwashed? Sure. However, the thing is that the government press was the only access to news in Soviet Union. People did not have any other choice.[1] Whereas in USA you can pick your press, your media, and sources of information. You can pick one for a while, another one for another while, you can freely do your news-shopping or surfing on the media landscape. So, whoever in USA is a cultist drowned in propaganda, such as yourself, has no excuse – you did it to yourself. You are willingly and knowingly complicit in your own brainwashing, because you rejected professional journalism.
[1] Except that I was luckily geographically located so that I had access to the news from two foreign, Western and capitalist, countries. I have been living by comparing and contrasting news sources all my life, and I am not going to stop because an internet idiot labels everything he does not like or understand “left-leaning bias”. You clearly do not know what the words “left-leaning” and “bias” mean either.
No, it is weak. “Oh, he’s a bit in-your-face sometimes, sure”. Weak.
I say “cult” because you say TDS. If you think this stifles debate, why do it?
This has all been discussed, extensively. But to those who disagree, who point out the harm he’s doing domestically and globally, it’s just “TDS, TDS, TDS” on endless repeat.
Allan Miller,
I agree in principle.
Someone “pointing out” is an opinion especially in this discussion. I think our view points are going to be different given we are from different countries. Simple disagreement is fine. Over the top unbalanced personal attacks based on spin is just like the TDS and Cult labels. This is actually having the reverse effect on those doing it as it is hurting the democratic party at this point as the average polls indicate.
The democrats need new ideas. Hopefully some candidates with new ideas will emerge such as Clinton did in the early 90s.
There is no discussion worth the name in the first place as long as you do not know the difference between fact and opinion. Your delusional lies do not even count as an opinion or viewpoint, so there is no discussion.
Allan:
colewd:
If I point out your that your house is on fire, am I just expressing an opinion? Is it just my opinion that tariffs are paid by importers, not by foreign countries? That Trump has lied literally tens of thousands of times during his time in office? That he deports people without due process? Directs the Department of Justice to investigate his political enemies? Cheats at golf? Those are matters of fact, not opinion.
I’ll add that to your list of excuses for not addressing our criticisms of Trump. “Oh, you’re a foreigner. These are just cultural differences. Here in ‘Murica, we think corruption is fine, sexual predators are upstanding people, stealing elections is a good thing, antagonizing our allies is smart foreign policy, and having a malignant narcissist as a leader is a blessing.”
Um, no. I’m a fellow American, if you haven’t noticed, and I’m making the same criticisms as the furriners here, so you can’t chalk it up to differences in national culture.
What is the ‘spin’ that you’re referring to? What specifically have we said in this months-long discussion that is inaccurate or false, and how did you make that determination? I keep asking, and you keep avoiding the question.
Allan is not a Democrat. Erik is not a Democrat. I am not a Democrat. Our criticisms are criticisms of Trump, not defenses of the Democratic Party. They aren’t based on party, so you can’t appeal to that as an excuse for dismissing them.
Enough with the rationalizations. How about tackling the criticisms head on? How about responding to our claims with facts and logic rather than fumbling around for excuses not to?
colewd,
Perhaps someone in a different country can take a step back and be more objective, less partisan?
My ‘opinion’ is that trying to equalise the net trade between 2 nations (without really doing so, due to the 10% floor even for nations with whom you are in surplus) is a poorly-thought-out strategy. I don’t think I need to be American to have a view on that. When you then confuse matters by trying to make it also about repatriating manufacturing, punishing specific nations, coercing Canada, fentanyl, stopping wars, etc, it becomes even less rational..He’s economically illiterate. In my opinion. Is that opinion less valid if I also think the man a complete asshole?
Allan Miller,
Unfortunately it does as you have introduced bias into your opinion. The trade issue is complex and will take a while to sort out the cost-benefit analysis.
All that being said the trade issue is a legitimate debate point.
I haven’t introduced any bias. My criticism would be the same if I adored him. The bias is on your side. You are biased against arguments from people who dislike the guy.
Allan Miller,
I am empathetic toward people who don’t like the guy.
I don’t take seriously comments that come from a media narrative devoid of fact.
I don’t take seriously the barrage of personal attacks that have little to do with his job performance. The attacks mostly come from left leaning liberals who propose no viable alternative.
On the other hand I take seriously your concern about tariffs as I am a wait a see on this issue. While I think there is room to balance trade I think Trump maybe over playing his hand.
Do you have anything positive to say about what Trump has done in the first 6 months?
colewd,
Nope. What would you offer for my consideration?
colewd,
People who aren’t in the cult, you mean. If someone criticises him, they are de facto a left-leaning liberal. It’s impossible to criticise him and not be, in your eyes.
Eta – you know left-leaning liberals can still be right about things?
Allan Miller,
Of the Grok list I would say the top accomplishments are:
-Securing the US southern boarder
-Lower Taxes for workers (tips, overtime) and seniors (reduced SSC taxes)
-Stabilising inflation w lower energy prices
-Increased defence support from Nato partners including the UK
https://grok.com/share/bGVnYWN5LWNvcHk%3D_9bf85c18-d6b9-42c8-a6e6-5f80609d3edb
One sided criticism that is based mostly on media spin. Mostly not de facto.
colewd,
Seems you’ll grasp any passing excuse. TDS, left-leaning, biased media spin, furriners don’t understand…
I don’t get my opinion of Trump from the media. I get it from his own mouth, his own posts, his own actions.
Not sure you’ve grasped what de facto means, there!
Allan Miller,
And you are not repeating media spin as some others are.
This is why I have empathy for those who don’t like him especially Brits who have such a respectable culture.
colewd:
I don’t suppose there’s any chance that you’ll give us examples of that media spin, is there? Or that you’ll explain why you regard it as spin and what the actual facts are? I’ve been waiting three months. As one of the “others”, I would love to finally hear it.
You think the British people, with their delicate sensibilities, are especially offended by Trump’s Trumpishness? Have you never heard of Nigel Farage?
Speaking of whom, he appeared before the House today and got ripped. At one point, Jamie Raskin called him a “Putin-loving, free-speech imposter and Trump sycophant”.
keiths,
It eas tremendous. Raskin showed him what real affronts to free speech are taking place under Trump. Of course Raskin’s probly been brainwashed by left-leaning media…
Unfortunately, Farage seems to have a real momentum – a similar cult of personality to Trump, and a vastly better speaker. In this instance, he’s never off the damned media giving his three penn’orth with his three MPs.
Guess what the root of all evil is? Yep, migrants. A familiar refrain.
Not sure if the word was meant to be ‘respectful’ rather than ‘respectable’. Either way I didn’t really get it. It is true that Trump represents the worst kind of cartoon American, to us, and maybe that doesn’t stand out if everyone’s like that!
But he does offer examples: He is the spin. Look at colewd’s latest list of what he thinks Trump’s accomplishments are – all a Trumpite spin. Everything on the list has already been debunked with facts. Moreover, everything on the list looks past of Trump’s crimes and idiocies that are a more urgent and substantive topic.
Edit: Earlier colewd went on on tariffs as a good thing and that Trump ended wars, but now he has that “[Trump] increased defense support from Nato partners” – revealing that he is all in with Trump’s lies on Nato, not knowing what Nato is and how it works. The guy who literally knows nothing blames others of spin – this in itself is a spin (well, it’s actually far worse).
keiths,
CBS editing Kamala’s answer in her interview that cost them 10 million dollars to settle.
The Trump Russian collusion narrative that the media had to admit was made up by the DNC.
The support of the covid vaccine when we know now of the risks that were not articulated.
etc
Do you think our system of government prior to Trump was void of corruption problems?
The name of your fallacy is bait and switch. (There’s more, but let’s begin small.)
Apart from the fact that none of these is an example of any sort of media spin, none of these points has been made by anyone in this discussion, so none of these can count as an example of *us* using media spin. It is, however, for a thousandth time, *your* spin, lies and propaganda.
Erik,
Here is another which you call something other than spin. Let’s call it intent to deceive regarding and interview with Kristi Noem.
Your narrative against Trump is full of media information that has been improperly edited and deceptively broadcast. Hopefully as CBS has admitted they will clean up their act. I hope you and Keiths follow their lead.
colewd,
I’m typing this very slowly so that there would be a chance for you to understand:
You have been accusing us all along of “leftist media spin” and such, without a single example. Now that you finally get to examples, you bring up things that nobody of us has brought up. This makes you a total clown. You have no examples of us using media spin.
As an additional bonus, the examples that you think represent media spin, actually do not. And you are supposedly a grownup man so I do not think you deserve an explanation why they do not represent media spin at all.
But the first point is more important. You are bringing up, as examples of *our* media spin, things that none of us used in our argumentation, i.e. they are not evidence of our media spin. Instead, they are evidence that your monocellular brain is incapable of any facts, logic and reasoning.
How many people here have psychiatric or psychological experience?
I gather none.
Let me tell you something from my limited experience working in psychiatry spanning over 20 plus years frontline both adult and child psychiatry: it takes a lot of education and experience to diagnose psychiatric disorders and we change our minds very often…
Please, AI is not an artificial intelligence. It is an algorithm that can’t think and it never will…
Please drop it because it is very difficult if not impossible to distinguish between personality traits and psychiatric disorders even for professionals…
J_Mac:
Apparently you missed this statement in the OP:
Think about it. It’s alarming that we actually have to ask the question at all. Anyone who even appears to meet almost all of the criteria for NPD and ASPD, as judged by an intelligent layperson, is unfit to be president of the United States.
I challenge anyone to present evidence that Trump doesn’t meet the criteria I’ve identified in the OP.
ETA: I have no idea why you mentioned AI. Natural intelligence is more than sufficient to see that Trump meets the criteria.
colewd, to Allan:
Every personal criticism I’ve made of Trump, even of his cheating at golf, is relevant. The golf cheating itself doesn’t impact the country, obviously, but it does reflect his character, and his poor personal character has been catastrophic for the country. Cheating at golf is minor, but cheating at elections isn’t, and Trump tried to steal one in 2020 and is trying hard to steal the one in 2026. Cheaters cheat. So it is with his other character flaws. They’re hugely important. Character matters in a president.
To claim that Harris wasn’t “viable” is laughable, but in any case it doesn’t matter. Trump is a horrible person and a horrible president all on his own. Even if Trump were better than Harris, it wouldn’t get him off the hook. “Sexual assault is OK when Trump commits it, because I like him better than Harris” is a stupid argument.
We don’t need to wait and see. We already know that he’s economically illiterate. We already know that despite pushing tariffs for 40 years, he still doesn’t know who pays them. We already know that trade deficits are not subsidies and that they don’t mean we’re being cheated. We already know that prices are up and that inflation has surged. We already know that the latest jobs report, like the one before it, is dismal. “Let’s wait and see” is just an excuse you’re using not to acknowledge your Dear Leader’s failures.
And I’m still waiting for you to point to something I’ve said about Trump that is false. Don’t you see how idiotic it is for you to accuse us of bias when you’re the one feeding from the right wing media trough, unable to tell truth from fiction? Remember how you proudly claimed that Trump had ended six wars? Ten minutes of googling would have shown you that he was lying, but you fell for the propaganda and didn’t bother checking. Your critical thinking skills are in serious need of an overhaul.
Weirdly, one of the common MAGA criticisms of Trump is in regard to vaccines. For some weird reason (probably rooted in Covid resentment), MAGAs are overrepresented in antivaxxers. He’s gone and somewhat downgraded that by appointing antivax RFK as HHS. But here’s a statement (on Florida’s stance) I can completely agree with. A topsy turvy world, where Trump gets through several sentences without me thinking ‘moron’, while MAGAs are thinking “hang on a sec…”.
Well I think we have to be very careful. Look, you have some vaccines that are so amazing. The polio vaccine – I happen to think is amazing. A lot of people think that covid [vaccine] is amazing. You know, there are many people that believe strongly in that. But you have some vaccines that are so incredible, and I think that you have to be very careful when you say that some people don’t have to be vaccinated. It’s a very tough position. So I’d give you an answer. I’ll give you a feeling. But just initially I heard about it yesterday and It’s a tough stance. You have vaccines that work. They just pure and simple work. They’re not controversial at all and I think those vaccines should be used. Otherwise some people are going to catch it and they endanger other people…I think people should take it.”
I think if you remove political blustering, it boils down to a question of why pharmaceutical companies donate tens of millions of dollars to legislators, and what do they get in return.
And why are medicines having near placebo effects heavily advertised on TV.
I have a serious question for which I don’t know the answer. Are childhood vaccines mandated in Europe, and if so, which ones?
petrushka,
Pharma is part of the general screwup which is the American healthcare system. Only US and NZ allow advertising. It’s absurd
As to your question:
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/mandatory-childhood-vaccination
Allan Miller,
Use of a lazy label “antivaxxer”. Can you describe RFK’s position on vaccines? It’s a little more nuanced than you are projecting with your lazy label.
keiths,
Relevant to your personal ideology, sure.
That’s the info I was looking for. There’s another layer in the US.
Regardless of government mandates, pediatric practices typically require immunizations as a condition of being a patient.
If Florida has Gombe off the rails, it won’t be the first time.
Fifty years ago it abolished the Health Department, because communicable diseases were all conquered.
You’re a fan of lazy labels aren’cha, Captain TDS? 😉 It’s a perfectly reasonable term to describe someone who campaigns against some or all vaccines. That’s RFK to a T. He’s not nuanced. He uses weasel words – “oh, I just want just want better studies”. As if there are people who want worse ones. Children’s Health Defense is an antivax organisation. Here’s what your mate Grok thinks:
Children’s Health Defense (CHD), founded by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., is widely regarded as an anti-vaccine organization due to its history of promoting misinformation and skepticism about vaccine safety. Multiple sources, including Wikipedia, FactCheck.org, and the Center for Inquiry, describe CHD as a key source of anti-vaccine advocacy, often spreading misleading claims about vaccines causing autism or other health issues. The group has campaigned against public health programs, including childhood vaccine schedules, and has been linked to conspiracy theories, such as those in the viral video Plandemic. CHD’s own materials, while claiming to support “safe and effective” vaccines, focus heavily on alleged risks and lack of transparency in vaccine development, often exaggerating or distorting scientific evidence
colewd:
Yes, and my ‘personal ideology’ includes tenets such as
1) malignant narcissists don’t belong in positions of power;
2) leaders should be honest;
3) corruption is bad;
4) sexual predation, including sexual assault, is bad;
5) the Department of Justice should be about justice, not revenge, and should function independently;
6) elections should be free and fair;
7) separation of powers is a good thing;
8) presidents should respect the Constitution and the law;
9) they should be at least somewhat intelligent and curious;
10) at the very least, they should have a basic understanding of American history and of how the government operates;
11) they should be economically literate;
12) they should be capable of acknowledging their mistakes and failures rather than trying to blame them on others;
13) they should be able to maintain a train of thought and speak and write coherently;
14) they should choose Cabinet members and other appointees on the basis of competence, not loyalty;
15) they should not cozy up to dictators or aspire to be one;
…etc.
Those are noncontroversial, and I’ll bet there was a time when you would have agreed with most if not all of them. That was before you entered the cult and started making excuses for the Dear Leader.
Judged against those tenets, Trump is a failure as a human and as a president.
petrushka,
Not here, as far as I am aware, but we don’t separate out paediatrics from general practice..
I mean, what is it with right-wingers and antivax? Here’s Aseem Malhotra, a British cardiologist (not cancer specialist, not infectious disease specialist, not immunologist) at the Reform Party conference:
It’s highly likely that the Covid vaccines have been a significant factor in the cancers of members of the royal family
This is bullshit.