Trump Derangement Syndrome or the Foolish Fear of Tyranny
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Recently, a diagnosis has spread through American political commentary. Critics of the administration find themselves accused of suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS): an inability to identify or critically think about the actions of Donald Trump or his administration objectively. To talk of the administration as undermining democracy, the rule of law, or the public realm is a mere symptom of TDS, not a diagnosis of the current state of US politics. Some individuals have even begun to self-diagnose with TDS.
TDS is not the first term invented to pathologise the fear of tyranny. Tyrannophobia, the foolish fear of tyranny, has a longer history. Like all phobias, it is an exaggerated sense of fear that is debilitating, making the holder unable to act rationally towards the object. But it is an invention. And like TDS, it is both a form of ridicule but also similarly internalised. The aim is to silence those who raise concerns about emerging authoritarianism by making them figures of fun.
This blog post looks at the emergence of tyrannophobia and the role it plays in constitutionalism and authoritarianism. It then moves to TDS, how it has evolved, and how it is now moving into a new phase of self-diagnosis, in which those who raise legitimate concerns about the direction of the current US administration are couching their language in the possibility of their own ridiculousness.
As I outlined in my book On Tyranny and the Global Legal Order , naming tyranny is one of the first steps in either preventing or dismantling it. When that act of naming is made to seem ridiculous, bad actors are inoculated against both constitutional and political bulwarks that stand in the way of their consolidation of power.
Tyrannophobia
Thomas Hobbes first coined tyrannophobia in his Leviathan.
“So when a Monarchy is once bitten to the quick, by those Democraticall writers, that continually snarle at that estate; it wanteth nothing more than a strong Monarch which neverthelesse out of a certain Tyrannophobia, or feare of being strongly governed, when they have him, they abhorre.”
Hobbes says a lot in this quote. First, the use of phobia suggests an exaggerated fear. Those who suffer from it are silly and not to be taken seriously. Second, their concerns are misdirected because they confuse strong government with tyranny. They are either insufficiently wise or suffer from a debilitating fear that makes their judgement unsound when there is a strong government in place.
According to Hobbes, tyrannophobia leads to divisions, civil war, and a return to a brutish state of nature. Hobbes’ state of nature is, as Montesquieu described, a form of “blind fatality”. For Hobbes, strong government requires tough choices. And it is a binary choice: strong government or chaos. But where is the line between a “foolish” fear and a “real” fear? Hobbes writes that
“because the name of Tyranny, signifieth nothing more, nor lesse, than the name of Soveraignty, be it in one, or many men, saving that they that use the former word, are understood to be angry with them they call Tyrants; I think the toleration of a professed hatred of Tyranny, is a Toleration of hatred to Common-wealth in generall, and another evill seed, not differing much from the former.”
This suggests that any complaint against the sovereign – the state – in how it governs is an act of hatred, it is irrational, it is foolish. For Hobbes there is no space for a fear of tyranny that would not be foolish. Rather, it is disloyal or insincere.
John Locke argued that we can never be secure from tyranny and that vigilance is an absolute necessity. Arendt argues that totalitarianism is always a possibility. Justified fear of tyranny is part of the rationale for constitutional structures such as checks on power, term limits, separation of power, the rule of law, and processes such as impeachment. Impeachment constitutionalised tyrannicide by providing ways to remove individuals from office in extraordinary circumstances. That fear, combined with democracy, forms the foundation of much of liberal constitutionalism. Though constitutionalism alone is insufficient. An active public realm is also necessary. But both require active engagement with the possibility of the emergence of totalitarianism.
Trump Derangement Syndrome
Fear of tyranny is not misplaced; it is not foolish. But the accusation serves a different function. It is a form of ridicule. It may seem trite to quote a Greek play and say nothing much changes. But Aristophanes’ play Wasps has a speech that could easily come out of the current White House Press room.
“Oh, everything is a “tyranny” or a “conspiracy” for you, no matter whether the accusation is of a big or of a small deed! For the last fifty years I haven’t even heard the word “tyranny”, and now it’s way cheaper than salt fish, and its name is tossed from mouth to mouth in the market!”
Coined by Charles Krauthammer, derangement syndrome dates from the Bush Administration and was also used under the Obama administration to describe those who opposed them or who suggested conspiracy theories about them. However, under the Trump administration, this has gone to a new level. In 2025, five Minnesota legislators sought to have TDS categorised as a mental illness that “seriously limits a person’s capacity to function in primary aspects of daily living such as personal relations, living arrangements, work, and recreation.”
“Trump Derangement Syndrome” means the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal persons that is in reaction to the policies and presidencies of President Donald J. Trump. Symptoms may include Trump-induced general hysteria, which produces an inability to distinguish between legitimate policy differences and signs of psychic pathology in President Donald J. Trump’s behavior. This may be expressed by:
(1) verbal expressions of intense hostility toward President Donald J. Trump; and
(2) overt acts of aggression and violence against anyone supporting President Donald J. Trump or anything that symbolizes President Donald J. Trump”
In Arizona , a legislator sought to introduce a Bill requiring their health authorities to study TDS. Lawmakers have also proposed a similar bill at the federal level in the US Congress . Neither has been successful. But the mere fact that we have moved into this territory is deeply troubling.
There is a long history of mental health being used as a weapon by authoritarian figures. The pathologisation of tyrannophobia and, thus, of dissent is worrying. The moves to make TDS a legal category of incapacitation fit within that historical practice. TDS embodies the state as a single person so that any criticism of the state is a criticism of the person, here Donald Trump. Being accused of having TDS could then lead to a process that removes those individuals from the public sphere as dangerous to the state. TDS’s embrace by the Trump administration, the self-diagnosis by some, such as California Governor Gavin Newsom, and others , sits alongside a narrative in the media that warns critics of the Trump administration away from any critique that could come within the definition of TDS . This is deeply worrying.
This is for several reasons. First, it distorts the public realm, placing the emphasis on the critics of the administration to censor their own commentary and check it for paranoia, hysteria and the ability to distinguish between so called legitimate policies and what must, in turn, be illegitimate ones. But in this scenario, the definition of legitimacy always lies with the administration. Second, it curtails, delays, and even potentially forestalls acts within the constitutional structure to prevent policies and laws that foreshadow or introduce authoritarian practices. Before any acts can take place, they must prove the person does not have TDS. Third, by self-diagnosing, individuals are acting as if it is reasonable (and not also prejudicial towards those who have a mental illness but have the capacity to engage in political debate) to use an entirely made-up illness within the public realm as if it has bearing on political action. And finally, and most disturbingly, it enables authoritarianism to make its long, slow creep into established practice. Tyranny does not emerge suddenly; it most commonly emerges over a long, slow process.
TDS and Tyrannophobia
Accusations of tyrannophobia/TDS are a way to belittle opponents. If only the feebleminded fear strong government, exercising vigilance becomes foolish. Any actions taken are ridiculous, will make things worse, and may even bring about chaos. TDS can seem like a small issue, part of the public realm of AI memes, social media posts, and a never-ending news cycle where insults and mockery are the norm. However, TDS/tyrannophobia is more than an insult. It is a tool of silencing that paralyses action, including the tools of constitutionalism which were purposefully intended to prevent the advent of tyranny. It is essential that we do not embrace self-diagnosis but also that raising concerns about the dissolution of the public realm and constitutionalism as an essential act of vigilance overtakes the TDS narrative. Naming tyranny is an essential act to prevent its emergence or in starting the process of its removal. TDS is a way to stop that act of naming tyranny from occurring and should be resisted.
Honesty and NO personal attacks. Read and comment with a VERY open mind. Stay on topic or deletions will occur.
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Who is online
86 visitors
TDS/tyrannophobia is more than an insult. It is a tool of silencing that paralyses action, including the tools of constitutionalism which were purposefully intended to prevent the advent of tyranny
Trump Derangement Syndrome” means the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal persons that is in reaction to the policies and presidencies of President Donald J. Trump. Symptoms may include Trump-induced general hysteria, which produces an inability to distinguish between legitimate policy differences and signs of psychic pathology in President Donald J. Trump’s behavior. This may be expressed by:
(1) verbal expressions of intense hostility toward President Donald J. Trump; and
(2) overt acts of aggression and violence against anyone supporting President Donald J. Trump or anything that symbolizes President Donald J. Trump”
I detest liars, and pathological liars, neither of which do I 'appease' since they are quite disturbing to my mental state. That is, I avoid them with a passion. They can not be my friend. Why? Because I will not know when they are telling me the truth or lying to me. Who has the time to figure out what a liar is up to on a daily basis?! Better to let that liar or group of liars alone. I can't do that with MAGA King Trump as he forces himself into the news cycle on a daily basis on purpose-even when it is just to troll. . . Wait, what president in his or right mind would think it practical and safe even to troll the citizens under his or her control?!
So yes, if you must call somebody a 'sufferer of MAGA King Trump' and label it TDS or whatever else,. . . then 'color' me GUILTY OF A CRIME! Because all my life I have passionately hated LIARS and MAGA King Trump is lying to people like me (what about people like you?) on a daily basis! For example: The U.S. - Iran war is just a conflict. . . or is it really? It will be over in a week, two weeks, three weeks, a month, —ninety days. . . and so forth.
Now then, is the president LYING about the war being a mere conflict or is he legit in moving the "Deal" daily out beyond its deadline. . . .? MAGA supporters should be asking their 'King':
Hey! Where's the Deal ("beef")?
If MAGA supporters can not get or do not want a straight answer from MAGA King Trump, then why the heck do you all accuse everybody else of lying when you you won't charge your own to "be better"?
Keep MAGA out of the discussion.
the most tragically afflicted have been known to betray oaths of service, the rule of law, basic common sense, and even blood heritage in blind devotion to a convicted felon, insurrection instigator, and likely child molester.
But, did they do that as a result of their personal behaviours or because of being supporters of Trump?
BTW - a convicted felon, insurrection instigator, and likely child molester are part of the TDS/fear of anarchy pattern. A convicted felon, Yeah, by the city/state of NY - not the feds. The other two claims are suppositions with no fact - purely conjecture.
Okay. So tell me, do you all have a 'beef' with liars in daily life. . . ? I ask because if liars bother y'all - then, King Trump is a problem-not its solution. I have demonstrated why once already.
Here is a new example: King Trump is using y'all as cover for his self-aggrandizement projects, because he obviously is capable of 'bedazzling' his 'court.' I have observed that when the 'spell' is waning or gone. . .loyalists and fans finding cause to disagree with the King drift away to distant and remote lands. . .or are forcefully exiled and ejected from his 'kingdom.' Perhaps y'all have noticed this occurring too? (Rhetorical question.)
It is not a good or nice look!
Character matters, especially for the PotUS. Being critical of a PotUS with abysmal character is not a derangement; it is rational, responsible, and patriotic.
On your points ...
Donald Trump summoned tens of thousands of his followers to Washington DC for Jan 6th , with the promise that "it will be wild".
There were interviews with the rioters inside the capitol who told reporters they were there on behalf of Donald Trump.
In his speech on Jan 6th Trump told his mob that Pence should still follow the Eastman plan, which Eastman himself had told Trump was most likely not legal.
Trump did not act to end the riot. Why not? Because he wanted it to succeed.
Right John -
"I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard
And I say this despite all that's happened. The best is yet to come.
So we're going to, we're going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue. I love Pennsylvania Avenue. And we're going to the Capitol, and we're going to try and give.
So let's walk down Pennsylvania Avenue."
Did Trump call tens of thousands of people to Washington so they could peacefully stand outside the Capitol Building holding hands and singing protest songs?
It is laughable.
The typical 'defense' — cherry-pick the few times Trump expressed normal rhetoric while ignoring the many times (for months prior to the event) where he incited his supporters:
Compiled by ChatGPT:
Indeed, it is laughable.
Fight ... fight ... fight ... go in peace ... fight ... fight
A clear directive for a peaceful protest.
And that is the 'Tell'! A president and vice-president within proximity of each other know their position and status. President Trump 'knew' his VP was in distress at the capitol building in D.C. and at no point indicated he was distressed enough to act on behalf of one of his own highest-ranking officials! Pence was a fool to not play up his abandonment by Trump in the 2024 election cycle!
I wonder if the former officials and congressional men and women primaried in GOP election races, and under constant threat to perform for their chosen "MAGA king" Trump would like to see more critical thinking regarding MAGA King Trump and his public conduct. Being 'tossed' out of a job/career and compelled to 'go hungry' in the wilderness of politics tends to make enemies out of otherwise good people.
noun
One more thing: I s there anyone in MAGA movement that thinks that MAGA King Trump is the epitome of a "Public Servant" committed to political neutrality ?
No more MAGA comments.
Is Trump a public servant committed to public neutrality, or do you have any suspicion and concern that the citizenry is serving Trump?
Try discussing the TDS/tyranny thread posted above.
Okay, since you are deciding for us what we are about. . . then, tell us one thing (pick your best 'shot') we should objectively accept about this president that is presently controversial. Let's see what you 'got.' I will objectively respond to it. . .if you participate.
The thread is about the differences between TDS and advancing tyranny.
Which?
What "advancing" tyranny do you see on the horizon or even nearer? Please explain. As for as TDS goes. . .giving voice to power and speaking up, as well as offering constructive criticism are positives. The aforementioned 'points' only becomes an issue when politicians and their supporters try to upend the good that comes from such activities by persistent mocking and denigration of it.
Here is the Trump strategy: openly lie, cheat, and grift, relentlessly, so that there is just about nothing about him that is honest or genuine. Then use the reaction to this brazen criminality to fuel this narrative of TDS, as if Trump is just your average politician undeserving of the reaction that he purposely generates.
There are MANY in Congress that fit your description.
What's your discussion?
There is nothing in the history of US politics as loathsome and despicable as Trump. He is an avalanche of in-your-face corruption, and his supporters are fine with that.
Is there a remedy for correction?
Yes. Stop electing spineless, servile republicans.
That really is the issue since the response to what should be done about an out-of-control executive is to lobby congress to use their checks and balances. What we're seeing are Trump supporters saying, "Trump isn't doing anything illegal as long as congress doesn't say it's illegal!" while simultaneously electing the most spineless servile legislators who they know will do nothing to stop him. All the pain and suffering, inflation, high gas prices and another ongoing unnecessary war in the middle east are Trump supporter's fault. They own this mess and the sooner we hold these feckless idiots to account the better.
You forgot to add "Democrats" - same group of spineless, servile people - most of the 535 of them.
republicans make up the majority of that number in congress, and none of the ass-licking wimps in the executive branch ...
I have viewed those who accuse others of TDS (especially those who do it in almost every comment) as trolls.
It is one thing to dispute a critique of Trump with facts and reason. An actual honest, rational argument.
But the mere bantering about of "TDS" is of no value ... just another tactic to try to annoy others. Nowadays, IMO, it just makes the accuser look like a fool.
Because the term is intentionally designed to provoke a reaction or shut down legitimate debate rather than engage with the facts, it fits neatly into the modern definition of political trolling.
Then you should have no issue speaking to the facts in 1.1.4 and 2.1.1 without delaying or misdirection.
[✘]
What negative opinion of Trump do people have that you think is unjustified ?, therefore creating "TDS". If Trump deserves the criticism he gets there is no TDS.
Did you see Trump on Meet The Press this morning? No discerning person who sees something like that can believe this person should be president of the United States.
You can set the rules for your seed, but that doesnt make them good rules.
You are aware arent you that Trump said " I am MAGA"
In an interview with NBC News in January 2026, Trump said “MAGA is me. MAGA loves everything I do.”
In March 2026, defending commentator Mark Levin, Trump said “I am MAGA” while arguing that critics inside the movement “are not MAGA.”
Another report summarizing the same episode quotes Trump saying “I am MAGA” in his Truth Social post.
And it also doesn’t automatically make your determination of the veracity of those rules, to be correct.
... seems like a 2 way street to me, despite the authors attempts to confine the discussion to non-maga americans. trump refers to his followers as maga, his sycophants in congress refer to themselves as maga, and his supporters and potential grift victims call themselves maga. TDS has a different meaning to a majority of americans now, just like the teabag dipshit movement did after it hemorrhaged and bled out during the obama term. virtually the same group of one-off republicans hated the term teabag too, even though they had originally referred to themselves with that term as well.
maga doesn't have the ability to identify that trump has violated the law so many times, SCOTUS had to give him immunity. he violates precedent and tradition regularly, has been and is still involved with, multiple lawsuits that have and will continue to be constitutional violations, in defiance of his oath of office. his violations of the constitution's emoluments clause and his family's corruption make all the stink he and his chorus of morons made concerning hunter and joe biden, even if they were true, are pocket change compared to the amount of graft and corruption by him, his family, and his regime. apparently critical thinking to maga is to remove any logic or reason from the now overwhelming evidence of trump's illegal activities.
I know what TDS stands for to me, and trump supporters fully embody that with every pro-trump comment they make.
[✘]
[✘]
4.1.3 is not about the ability to flag. I'd like you to respond to what I said.
Read the thread John - it tells you all you need to know.
bummer, go figure ...
You haven't said anything - your "AI" made it up for you.
Yeah - can't tell the wrong folks that . . . . .
So help me understand: This is just a "dump" on liberals article--is that it? Trump is what your article is about and yet you are strongly implying he should not be discussed?!!! That is invalid.
I started to post something similar about this, and decided Saturday. . . it would not matter as the other side appears numb to facts that are not preselected.
No it is not a "dump" - read the thread. The thread discusses and explains how and what TDS is and it doesn't belong/come from just liberals.
And you are regularly wrong about that but I’m absolutely positive you will disagree. Wiring is wiring.
TDS is a living breathing thing in today’s world. Started by a pissed off chosen one, when Trump beat her in 2016. Perpetuated and exacerbated by those who followed her and screamed at the sky or worse when the candidate who they said had no path to the presidency, beat Hillary. Their embarrassment was palpable. Still is today. Especially since Trump beat their second chosen one.
The definition of a “troll” here for many is a convenient way to censor dissenting discussion when one doesn’t agree with what is being said. So call this a troll. It matters not. Any truly thinking person can read the game that is afoot here and can recognize the folks behind that curtain.
What is trolling?
Trolling is when someone posts or comments online to ‘bait’ people, which means deliberately provoking an argument or emotional reaction. In some cases they say things they don’t even believe, just to cause drama. In other cases, they may not agree with the views of another person or group online, so they try to discredit, humiliate or punish them. This may include online hate – personal attacks that target someone because of their race, culture, religion, gender, sexual orientation or disability. The troll may also encourage mob mentality, urging others to join in the attack so it becomes a pile on.
Trolls often post under a fake name or anonymously, so they can say things without being held responsible. This can make them feel more powerful and less cautious than they would be if they were talking to someone ‘IRL’ or in person. This makes it difficult to identify who actually left the post or comment.
Trolls also often try to downplay the impact of their behaviour, claiming anyone who’s upset by their posts or comments is overreacting. They may say it was just a joke, or the person who they targeted needs to toughen up. This can make the person who was trolled feel even worse.
You show up to continue with the TDS nonsense.
[deleted][✘]
[✘]
Trolling is habitually posting non-content.
There is massive trolling here.
[✘]
Like I've said, it's the bad actors desperately trying to make TDS "seem ridiculous" that are the folk to be wary of, not those admitting that they have a healthy caution towards tyranny.
Someone whose main contribution to the forum is constant complaints about "TDS" is a troll.
They could try and defend Trump on the basis of known facts , and make an affirmative case for Trump , or try to, but the constant complaining that they are being unfairly treated by "TDS" people is basically meaningless.
In 2011 Donald Trump knowingly lied about Barak Obama's birth origin. He then knowingly lied about having investigators in Hawaii who were finding incredible things about Obamas birth. He wanted to create a political base based on birtherism. How did this person become a presidential nominee?
I have dozens of such questions about Trump that you have never even attempted to answer. You are too busy yelling "TDS".
You know this seed is about TDS right? John, it well known that you are in denial about the existence of TDS. And it well known I think that is bullshit.
How many more times you wanna hear it?
Trump Derangement Syndrome would accurately describe the current support for Trump no matter what damage he does.
Every time you respond you prove my point. Thank you.
TDS doesnt exist because Trump has said and done hundreds of things over the past 15 years that should have disqualified him from elected office. This is not even capable of being honestly disputed.
Good:
Can you tell me why Trump, 5 1/2 years later, has never produced a single piece of evidence that the 2020 election was stolen from him?
Its a simple question.
Because you disagree with it it's "nonsense"?
John - you don't understand that much of what you're seeing here is exactly what you're describing.
Please John - quick trying to reach out so far that you want to use your previous comments discussing my topic on TDS.
Reread the seed - that is where the accuracy is and there is INDEED separation.
The point is this: We're certainly too old (in my opinion) to be just bullsh-tters pinging back and forth online. If we have something factual, honest, and appropriate to ask or answer then we should do that! Now, that's just me!
Calling every criticism of Trump ‘TDS’ is nonsense. It offers no facts and is just a cheap trolling tactic.
If someone has a problem with a criticism then they should make a reasoned, fact-based rebuttal.
You have essentially stated the same position.
You constantly criticize my comments with a theme of ‘because I say so it is true’. But I never say that. In fact, I routinely acknowledge that I am opining. Many times based on fact and almost always based on a supporting argument. I can always back up my positions if challenged. So what drives you to pretend that I claim ‘because I say so …’.? It is dishonest and obnoxious.
No. If you want a response then make a specific rebuttal.
Because they are two SEPARATE issues - one is the fear of TDS and the other is the fear of tyranny.
It seems MOCKERS need to have a name for 'everything' that does not go there way. . . now that is some "Obsession" in its own right. Liberals do not care about name-calling nearly as much . . . . Yes, I trifle around with it nowadays, because I am working through breakthrough the 'block-cade' of rhetoric surrounding Trump (Derangement Syndrome). Additionally, I am personally 'creeped-out' by ten years of daily verbal and policy "barrages" from a persistent Creep empowered by some to be downright dirty, trifling, grifting, insulting, and on occasion vulgar to people like me (and Others).
I will be blunt. You and others here proclaim TDS is real without offering a single example of a concrete situation where Trump has been unfairly criticized, even though you and the others here who cry "TDS" have been given many many opportunities to be specific.
Trump is indefensible and people who know that and discuss it are not "deranged".
Indeed, defending an incompetent, vindictive, irresponsible, dishonest psychopath to be PotUS seems deranged to me; especially given all the damage he has done.
My task as seeder is NOT to justify what the author is stating. My task, as I understand it, is to be able to offer a topic for discussion by the members of NT, allowing them to voice THEIR opinions on the topic.
You get your "back'n'forth" rebuttal's/responses from the other commenters - not from the seeder UNTIL/IF the discussion on the topic gets way outta hand. At that point, I will call for the assistance of the Mods if that is allowable.
If you do not want to defend the seed then do not pretend that I did not properly read the seed. If you have a problem with my comments then make your position clear. I will then respond accordingly.
Nobody required you to post your demand @4.2.18
Yet, here you are trying to 'pigeon-hole' discussion to your 'taste' in political rhetoric. We resist 'pigeonholing' as by your OWN ADMISSION you should "allow us to voice OUR opinions on the topic" of TDS, what it really is or not and how it is derived.
If you would discuss TDS that would be fine - but you wander and try to throw everything in the sun on the board
And you have just described a TDS comment - thanks.
Your reply could have several different meanings.
I did not describe a TDS comment; I commented on what seems deranged to me.
A] So you might be trying to claim that my comment was an example of TDS. In which case, you illustrate how TDS is just a lame tactic to dismiss criticism of Trump without actually making a rebuttal that shows why it is incorrect.
B] Alternatively, your reply might be saying that it is TDS to try to defend Trump based on the fact that he is an incompetent, vindictive, irresponsible, dishonest psychopath. If so, I agree.
Based on your comment history, I think you meant the former ([A]).
So make an argument rather than a mere quip. Explain how you can think Trump is competent, tolerant (non-vindictive), responsible, honest and NOT a psychopath. Or even how you could think it is deranged to assess Trump in this manner given the overwhelming evidence.
Offer something beyond a mere quip.
And there ya go.
the TDS label from maga is a one size fits all response from those that fall very short on critical thinking skills ...
Another quip.
You do not have a rebuttal, so you post a vacuous quip.
Explain how you can think Trump is competent, tolerant (non-vindictive), responsible, honest and NOT a psychopath. Or even how you could think it is deranged to assess Trump in this manner given the overwhelming evidence.
I can, at any time, (and have done so repeatedly on this site) illustrate Trump's incompetence, vindictiveness, irresponsibility, dishonesty, and the characteristics that define psychopathy.
I dare you to make a real argument to the contrary.
I have not and will not REBUTE with you all that you disagree with
From the author - Recently, a diagnosis has spread through American political commentary. Critics of the administration find themselves accused of suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS): an inability to identify or critically think about the actions of Donald Trump or his administration objectively. To talk of the administration as undermining democracy, the rule of law, or the public realm is a mere symptom of TDS.
[✘]
I dare you to make a real argument to the contrary.
Outta line.
... he can't.
You seem to think there is Trump derangement syndrome on newstalkers. Elaborate with examples.
[✘]
Let's be clear: You have at least twice 'checked' me for "allowing my opinion to be voiced on the topic" - something you at 4.2.26 attest to being your role here to permit. Even going so far as to deny use of specific words and wordings. If it is not clear ("foggy") what you hope to get out of this. . . then, how can we not fail at giving it? It is a set-up for FAILURE by all that comment with conviction and opinion.
[✘]
Not sure what that is supposed to mean. I asked ChatGPT to give it a shot on likely meaning:
So, assuming you meant something like: “I have not argued against, and will not argue against, everything with which you disagree.”
Then you basically accused me of penning a TDS comment (I guess, hard to say) and now refuse to back up your allegation.
The first word in the title is Trump. Buy a vowel.
TDS is not a medical, mental, physical, spiritual, emotional diagnosis. It is none of those. It is not even a political diagnosis. It is only a pejorative.
A mocking statement looking for a 'foothold' in the minds of people whom disagree with how this president is changing the political landscape and bending our rule of law (and its understood and accepted meaning) to the point of near breakage at the foundational level based on sheer blunt force political power alone.
Thus, "from the author" - I ask, who the heck is s/he to be defining and rendering a "diagnosis" - especially when it is evidently conservative-complicitous.
Out of line to challenge you to back up your allegation with an argument??
Show where I said THIS seed did not mention Trump
"Buy a vowel."
Get a clue
Sounds alot like many dems using racist every time they don't like what you say. Or is that Nazi now?
He said every seed, not just this one
And he was 100% correct
Get a clue
So you recognize that this seed is about Trump?
Then stop whining about Trump being discussed here.
Is this seed not part of "every seed"?
I understand that it is uncomfortable for Trump supporters to have to deal with the valid criticism of Trump.
Too bad. That unease is a useful signal that you should reconsider your support for Trump.
I must live under a rock because I always thought TDS was applied to the Trump faithful who support every stupid thing this POTUS has done over both of his Administrations, the years in-between, and the biggest blind spot in the world for his choices of former friends, and the dictators he admires most.
That being said, TDS is just an insult to whoever levels it.
The cons here who wield it against liberals have forgotten the eight years of ODS and before that BDS.
Nothing ever gets old for goldfish. /S
TDS makes more sense (to me) as a description of blindly supporting Trump no matter what he has done or what he is.
[✘]
Looks that way, That definition is just some liberals trying to change the meaning from the original. Seems they can't come up with things of their own
There is nothing deranged about criticizing Trump for cause.
It is arguably deranged to try to defend Trump's wrongdoing in spite of cause.
TDS would be an apt description for people who still try to defend Trump.
For example, you claim that Trump is fit to be PotUS. The only PotUS who tried to steal a US presidential election with fraud, coercion, lying, and incitement. But you consider him fit to be PotUS.
And that is even in consideration of all that crap he has done in his second term. The corruption, lying, incompetence, vindication, surrounding himself with incompetent sycophants, etc.
You inexplicably consider him fit yet hold that those who criticize these acts are the ones who are deranged.
Pathetic.
For cause is the key.
The rest is just trolling.
[✘]
exactly. that term is a 2 way street. now TDS simply means playing mental dodge ball with facts, reality, public accountability, and the constitution.
Yes, I do.
That's why I SPECIFICALLY said "seeds that have nothing to do with Trump"
I believe the purchase of a vowel belongs to you.
So you post a comment on a seed that has everything to do with Trump and whine about bringing up Trump on seeds that have nothing to do with Trump.
You are lost. Here is what you do. Find a seed that has nothing to do with Trump. Find a comment that brings in Trump. Then issue your complaint.
TDS was originally coined to describe those on the left who cannot get Trump off their minds and have to comment about him at every turn.
Those same leftists have tried to change the definition of TDS to make it look like it is Trump supporters with it.
I remember a story about a psychologist that stated more than half of his patients that identified as liberal demonstrated classical symptoms of what is widely known as TDS, stating that they were unable to continue with their day without thinking of Trump constantly.
Correct. That is a good symptom of folks with TDS .
Deflection away from their affliction, nothing more.
I know a few like that, my brother in law included. Luckily my sister no longer lets him talk about Trump in my presence.
[✘]
[✘]
[✘]
Trump is discussed because he is top of news every day and he continues to damage this nation.
Do you consider Trump to be fit to be PotUS given all the damage he has done?
They come on seeds like this and just prove the truth of what everybody says about them.
Why would Trump not be part of the discussion when the point of the seed is to proclaim "Trump Derangement Syndrome" ?
Some things right wingers say on this forum are inexplicable.
Exactly
Trump is demonstrably unfit to be PotUS yet people who support everything he does call those who criticize Trump 'deranged'.
How can someone think Trump is fit to be PotUS and not have the ability to persuasively explain —with all the damage he has done, the level of corruption, the violation of law and the CotUS, the endless lying, the incompetence, the irresponsibility, ... — how he is fit to be PotUS.
If one could justifiably label valid Trump critics with TDS, then one surely could explain how Trump is fit to be PotUS compared to our history of presidents.
What is so patently ridiculous is Trump goes after his 'members' who vote with him 98 plus percent of the time. . . and takes them out politically one at a time. . .and the fence-sitters still SIT/SAT/CLUTCH waiting for there chance at being politically shutdown and 'tossed.' ("Pick me!" "Pick me!!") These so-called, "fierce" republicans and conservatives get 'folded' like a proverbial cheat suit by their 'king' whom they gave 98 percent plus (and not "All of Me" ) to time after time. It's a sorry state of affairs.
Funny how some of them say the same thing about left wingers.
People, regardless of ideology, will sometimes make inexplicable claims.
But today, right now, we have arguably the most corrupt administration in US history. Quite likely one of the most incompetent and irresponsible as well. The PotUS is a con-man who uses the power of the presidency for self-aggrandizement rather than for the good of the people per a sense of duty.
Given these circumstances, those who cry "TDS" when Trump and/or his administration is criticized, yet fail to put forth even a feeble rebuttal to the criticism, have no standing to label anyone else "deranged".
Yes, and many of them ha e TDS
Of course you are welcome to that opinion. Some people that share it and yell from the mountaintop about it a dozen times a day have TDS. I question if they have a life outside of Trump and worry about them when Trump is gone and they have no life.
It is not that Trump is criticized, there is plenty to criticize him for. It is the incessant, often over the top nonsense that many have issue with. There is a difference between a rebuttal and a rebuttal some folks accept. Same for some criticism of Trump and some criticism people don't accept.
I am not sure about "deranged", I have heard more of that claim from the left.
A person who believes Trump is fit to be PotUS has no standing to label anyone else as deranged.
I don't. Seems like a pointless question to ponder.
It is incessant because Trump is incessant. The notion that much of it is "over the top" needs to be substantiated. What do you consider to be over the top? Do you think criticizing Trump's slush fund is over the top? His immunity 'deal' with the IRS? His vindictive lawfare? His attempts to get state voter information? His launching an illegal and irrational war? His endless lying? His hiring and firing of people based on loyalty to him?
( so many more examples )
Trump is so over the top in so many dimensions, it is a failure of reason to think commensurate criticism is over the top.
Of course they do.
And much of it unfounded. I guess that's what I have a problem with. For example, we hear constantly "he's unfit", "he's a pedophile", "draft dodger" but NONE of those making that claim have backed it up.
And you issue your standard claim that nobody has backed up claims. I know I have many times. You just categorically dismiss all arguments (while failing to put forth a rebuttal).
Consider what Trump has done in terms of competency, ethics, legality, morality, integrity, honesty, diplomacy, economics, dignity, decency, duty, etc.:
Trump does not view the presidency as a solemn duty but rather as a license to do whatever pleases him personally.
How does this level of abuse of the powers and influence of his office for personal gain NOT cross well past the line of fitness to serve as PotUS? Where have you seen any other PotUS come close to this level of unfitness?
Hell this alone makes Trump unfit to be PotUS:
Exactly. Same here. Some offer their opinions as proof of the claim. Sometimes I agree, and sometimes I just see it for the misinterpretation / exaggeration it is. Of course then I run the risk of being labeled a Trump supporter like it means something.
Trump supporter = an individual who still holds that Trump is fit to be PotUS.
For that to happen all you have to do is not agree 100% with them, voice an opinion or fact that goes against their narrative, and / or be able to think for yourself.
Um, no, but thank you for proving my point.
According to gemini:
Another ridiculous exaggeration.
It boils down to some very basic lines. It starts with the fact that Trump tried to steal the 2020 election with fraud, coercion, lying, and incitement. One who denies this obvious fact has clearly earned the label 'Trump supporter'.
One can applaud Trump's border policies, his claim to deport illegals who are criminals, to lower energy prices, lower taxes, balance the budget, pay down the national debt, not enter the USA into another war, end the Ukraine war, stop 'rigged' elections, stop lawfare, etc. ... all to make our nation better and still be quite rational.
But to think that he actually did all those things would be irrational ... to the point of delusion.
Worse is to believe his lies.
Worse still is ignoring/denying his many failures (as shown, in part, at @4.2.79).
You, et. al., ignore the outrageous words and deeds of Trump and pretend they are all normal and acceptable for a PotUS. That seems to me is what should be labeled TDS.
Guilty
voice an opinion or fact that goes against their narrative
Guilty
Guilty.
That seems to explain the mischaracterization. What seems funny is the importance some put on the label like like the accused should care what they think.
You have an odd perception of what 'proving my point' means.
You believe Trump is fit to be PotUS, despite all he has done.
Do you like the direction he is taking our nation?
Do you deny the damage by Trump indicated by my list @4.2.79 ?
Do you believe the USA would be worse off if Harris had won?
Your comment history shows a preponderance of excuse-making and deflection in favor of Trump. You also claim (still) that he is fit to be PotUS. So how can you justify your implied claim that you are NOT a Trump supporter?
Anyone who still (somehow) believes Trump is fit to be PotUS qualifies as a Trump supporter to me.
Don't forget nazi, white supremacist, when the left has an ACTUAL nazi running for Senate and most of them back him 100 percent.
The old adage "Whatever the left is accusing you of doing, they have either already done it or are currently doing the same".
This has never been truer over the past decade.
You again go after the most extreme, fringe examples.
The primary criticism of Trump is that he is unfit. This is demonstrable and obvious.
All one need do, given a rational mind, is compare Trump to any of our prior presidents. Our past presidents collectively define what it means to be fit to serve as PotUS.
A summary of candidates (other than Trump) who might be considered unfit for the job from ChatGPT:
So Johnson for morality, Buchanan for incompetence, Nixon for abuse of power, Wilson for physical incapacity, Pierce for incompetence and judgment, and Harding for corruption.
And Trump has all these failures, except for Wilson's chronic physical disability, and more. He is clearly the absolute winner in unpresidential behavior. And is the only PotUS who tried to steal a presidential election with fraud, lying, coercion, and incitement. Trump is the G.O.A.T. in presidential unfitness.
Next, compare Trump to the norm (which includes all the other presidents ... all of whom were presidential and the vast majority who viewed the office as a solemn duty rather than a license to do whatever pleased them personally).
So how can any rational mind support Trump? And then label those who justifiably criticize Trump as 'deranged'?
You can’t make stuff like that up ….. well, you could …. If you were writing a movie script.
You and I both. But you have to admit, it is a little fun to watch the freak out.
Anyone can pick the extremes and claim they are the norm. It is dishonest and lazy, but easy to do. And very tempting if one cannot make an actual argument to justify their position.
What is revealing is the dismal failure of Trump supporters like you to put forth an actual rebuttal. The responses are almost always deflection, lies, etc.
While it is understandable why a Trump supporter cannot truthfully defend Trump, slimy tactics are surely not the solution.
Oh, and don't forget about the al Queda sympathizer. But hey, it's all "but Trruuummmmpppppp!
Using ChatGPT to prove your point is so today. How about the last President weaponizing the justice department against his opponents and the American people? No ChatGPT recognition of that? That stuff makes Nixon look like a rookie. I could go on but I’ve got better things to do.
That said, if the Dems win the midterms congress will go on another Trump “eliminator” tour. More wasted tax dollars by the party of the people …… bank on it
Fun and a little perplexing.
It's just laughable that they actually expect to be taken seriously.
Another tour? You mean they stopped?
Do people who object to Trumps behavior in the Meet The Press interview shown yesterday have TDS ?
Do you truly not recognize that this is exactly what Trump has been doing???
More to the point, how on Earth could you possibly NOT recognize that this is what Trump has been doing???
Then why weren’t you raising holy hell when Biden was doing it?
Do you not realize that in the real world there are consequences to actions? The main way Trump has disappointed me is by not releasing the Epstein files. Not because I think he might be in them (he might) but because of all the other pieces of shit he is protecting that are in them.
After that, you abused your power working for Biden or whoever. You are now reaping the whirlwind of the wind you have sown.
To which I say about time.
How was Biden doing it?
Unless you have some real evidence Biden had anything personally to do with anything The DoJ did you're pissin in the wind. There were four years of Congressional investigations into Biden and they found nothing but right-wing talking points.
Of course, you cannot answer my question, so you deflect to Biden.
Biden was NOT engaging in lawfare. The Biden DoJ raised entirely legitimate indictments against Trump for his Jan 6 (and before) actions and his refusal to return / obstruction regarding classified documents.
This sentence is incoherent.
Trump is engaging in an outrageous level of lawfare, and instead of criticizing this abuse of power, you attempt to deflect to Biden with no specifics.
This is something that might qualify as TDS — failure to even recognize an outrageous abuse of power.
Well documented unless you are deeply in denial.
Then you should easily be able to post it here.
Donald Trump has been found guilty or liable in every case that went to trial. Sounds like there was evidence of his wrong doing. There was also evidence of his wrong doing in the cases that didnt go to trial (because he stalled and stalled and then got elected). In ZERO of the charges brought against him was he found not guilty or not liable.
This "lawfare" nonsense which they claim Trump was persecuted by is of a kind with his election lies.
Really?
Since you like AI:
[ deleted ][ ✘ ]
What critics and Republicans argue have not been proven to be factual evidence Biden was involved and all but a few of the DoJ allegations against Trump were true.
You are actively trying to change the meanings of words to mean something they are not.
Yawn ….. same goes for critics and Democrats
Nope
Right back at ya
The AI reported on allegations.
Do you not recognize that the AI is reporting mere claims made by Rs? It is not listing actual lawfare.
Good grief man, your 'rebuttal' is pathetic.
They know this but can only feign ignorance in order to keep playing the game. When their opponents prove in court that their hero committed a crime, they call it unfair lawfare against him. But when their opponent is merely accused of a crime, they're already climbing a tree with a rope in hand.
Mirror propaganda is often linked to Goebels Nazi speeches and writings from 1930 to 1940
but the concept is in Sun Tzu, The Art of War, Macheiveli, the Prince and perhaps more famously
Vladimir Lenin's writings who basically said "accuse your enemies of your own misdeeds until they have no credibility when they rightfully accuse you." ( paraphrased.)
Now both sides do it but it is Trump who has the least credibility and his supporters are simply going on faith and hope that Trump isn't as bad as he looks.
Many do. Some dont. Unfortunately it's the many that have constantly made the unfounded claims like "he's unfit", "he's a pedophile", "draft dodger" that are the loudest and have never actually backed up their claims.
The argument for Trump’s unfitness has been repeatedly made in detail with supporting links.
Your faux obtuse claim to the contrary is not fooling anyone.
It is quite easy. I like / agree and dislike / disagree with some things every president is and has done since I was old enough to pay attention. Just like Trump that does not make me a supporter of any of them. Supporter is too broad a term unless you vote/donate money or time to get someone elected.
You are welcome to that opinion. Since I reject that opinion don't expect me to give it any credence.
[✘]
opinions backed up by more opinions.
Because most AI sources use left wing biases for their responses.
You will bever find a story with a left wing source admitting to that weoponization.
[✘]
Or lines like "repeatedly made in detail with supporting links." as they fail to provide ANY of the links they are referring to. More and more I'm starting to think those links are as made up as "Russia Collusion".
[✘]
Given that the preponderance of your comments are in support of Trump (either directly or by deflection), your denial is pointless.
Worse, given the level of corruption, incompetence, lawlessness, recklessness, and unpresidential behavior of Trump and his administration, what kind of thought process would conclude that this is anywhere within the norm for a PotUS?
Weird... Many of the AI company owners and operatores donate money to the GOP.
Well, that whole "think for yourself" - thing-is questionable. Trump accosts "free-thinkers" that do not "free-think" he is "G.O.A.T." and removes them from his presence, from office, from boards, from television networks (when he can pressure it into being), and it is rumored he dares to think he can do something about social media critics. Y'all are sure the heck not free-thinkers under Trump leading the GOP/conservative movement.
I guess you didn't like my comment so you ignored it.
That makes your "rebuttal " pointless.
Well, you forgot to do it again. . . you left your question asked of Gemini AI off the comment. . . it is a good source of clarification, especially for those that 'question' the validity of an AI answer.
Old habits are hard to break, I get it.
Ooops, I did it again.
You deflected from my questions:
In response, you state that you like some of his decisions and not others ... same as with other PotUS. That vague bullshit is non-responsive.
He's bent over backwards to respond to the trolling, far more than he needs to. And every time he does respond, any objective observer would think to themselves, "Well, that settles it. Not sure how anyone could twist their way out of that bit of logic" and yet, here we are, all continually surprised at the truly logic defying mental contortions never thought possible of a human mind, watching as it folds back in on itself. An ouroboros intestine-like brain, constantly circulating the brain rot, pooping out another response of "I know you are, but what am I?".
Of course. Trump has been caught 'napping' at the oval office desk during meetings. . . and, the same noisy folks that shouted examples of "senility" about Biden's 'halted' walking and fall mishaps. . . won't mention the naps of Trump. We know why: ONE-WAY!
Right Down the Center, I truly wish you to explain to me how a party wholly charged to support Trump 100% or otherwise face his wrath, revenge, or retribution is a party of individuals dedicated to FREE-THINKING. Will you directly answer this question. Let's see if we can get something on the record on this one!
I do not support Maine's senate candidate. . . and lucky for me. . .I don't have to, as I am on the west coast! That said, you are extrapolating too much. . . . . . then again. . .I guess you do have a point. . . afterall, Trump is still called a "pussy-grabber" based on his past indiscretions on a bus ride were audio was recorded. So, okay! Let's see what happens in Maine on Tuesday's election!
That comment caves in on itself. Trump still holds the posture that nothing should be done to assist in getting to the bottom or even to justify the women involved in Epstein file scandal. And, yet all you have is so-called, "disappointment." - REALLY? Disappointed? /sarcasm.
How "Susan Collins"! Can we get a itty-bitty "holy hell-raiser" - a tinny, tiny, bit of it?
Here is a suggestion.
If he thinks what is written is trolling, then simply ignore it......or the writer.
By responding, the responder is validating the post as a legitimate post.
No, I ignored them altogether. Rather than play a 20 questions game I answered the question (So how can you justify your implied claim that you are NOT a Trump supporter?) directly.
I like / agree and dislike / disagree with some things every president is and has done since I was old enough to pay attention. Just like Trump that does not make me a supporter of any of them. Supporter is too broad a term unless you vote/donate money or time to get someone elected.
It is anything but vague or non responsive. The need to call it bullshit just shows you have nothing else of value to add.
You can accept my answer, reject my answer or try to change definitions to better suit your point but if you think I am going to play 20 questions or feel a need to prove to anyone I am not a Trump supporter (by their definition) you are sadly mistaken.
Uh huh
I think you are speaking too broadly.
As far as politicians are concerned they may look at his record when he decides to endorse their opponent. Job security is a powerful motivator.
As far as the republican party some buy into him, some look at the alternative and cringe, some don't care, some are waiting for him to go away in hopes of normalcy, etc etc etc.
The only folks that are not free thinkers are the ones that vote by party only. There are plenty of them and have been since voting began.
Sounds like a Don't feed the troll strategy. I like it and use it sometimes.
Good point. I always find it funny when one person accuses another of trolling yet just keeps feeding the troll. They just can't seem to help themselves.
[✘]
[✘]
[✘]
[✘]
[✘]
[✘]
[✘]
That would be too much like cooperation and carrying on a proper discussion-they are not here for sharing.
Literally a post asserting, well. . . nothing? " Allegations are not proof!
They like the 'trinket' policies Trump gives them. . . and so he can't be wrong, because he treats them so 'right'!
Better get a "conservative" AI then? Truth does not care about conservatives or liberals. These things are human constructs. Humans use such to TORTURE themselves!
Why do you think Trump is 'canceling' GOP conservatives that vote for him less than 99 percent thereabouts of the time? Please proceed and clear.
Where did you get that figure?
My guess would be ego but unlike some others I won't claim to know what is going on in his head
Cornyn: I voted with Trump more than 99% of the time
ByAinvest
Tuesday, May 19, 2026 1:22 pm ET
U .S. Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) recently stated that he voted in alignment with former President Donald Trump on more than 99% of legislative issues during Trump’s presidency. The remark, made in a recent public statement, underscores Cornyn’s consistent support for Trump’s policy agenda and legislative priorities over the past several years.
Apparently, 99 percent of the time is not good enough for the 100 percent 'king'! : )
The above is from the web. Where "I" got it from was the media (in real-time)!
[✘]
Well, that is one. I will reiterate not only do I not know what goes on in the mind of Trump but I would be concerned if I did.
That being said I go back to ego. Or maybe Trump watched a John Wick movie and decided Cornyn did not show the proper fealty to the high table.
If you ask Gemini (why doesn't trump support john cornyn) See, I did it!
Not supporting the filibuster could have been it, I do recall Trump really wanting it.
Pretending like MAGA and the criminal they worship don't demand 100% fealty is adorable, but you tell yourself whatever you need to so that you can continue to support a convicted felon.
Do you see any problem in judgment with Trump endorsing the corrupt Paxton over Cornyn when Cornyn was almost 100% in support of Trump policies?
Do you see any problem with a PotUS surrounding himself with people who will do whatever he says regardless of their competency and character?
I'm not pretending a goddamn thing. As evidenced for not going with your pathetic unfounded accusations.
[✘]
[✘]
[✘]
[✘]
[✘]
See 6.1.7.
Well, there it is: Making a way (escape) for Trump out of 'no way' at all!
We have the 'receipts' 99 percent is never going to be good enough apparently for Trump! The GOP is not a party of free-thinkers. . . It is a vital part of Trump's 'court.'
Au contraire. What escape are you referring to? You asked a question and I answered it. I also made it clear I don't know what is going on in Trumps mind. I gave Trump no escape, whatever that is. Seems like yoou may be more interested in a gotcha than having a give and take
If you wish to prove your theory that 99% is not enough you will need to show anyone with less than 99% is left by the wayside. I don't think you can do that.
I think it more likely that Cornyn went against Trump on a couple key votes that will stop him from doing many things. The filibuster comes to mind.
If you want to continue to have an adult conversation please try and refrain from misinterpreting comments, using a single example to show an overall result you want or looking for confirmation bias.
see 4.2.155
You're kidding right? Do you watch news? Maybe I am more of a news "junkie" that you. Trump is firing people for cause 'everywhere' and lack of loyalty and somehow that is missing you? C'mon, and you want me to "grow-up'? No grow "suggestions" for Trump? You are kidding me. I will not stoop to insulting you about it, nevertheless.
Not available.
So, what should be the voting percentage aligning with the President for every Republican legislator in the congress and Senate? How often do you believe they should be allowed to vote for their interests and their constituents if that differs with what the President wants? At what percentage do you believe the legislator should get primaried by a Trump loyalist?
It's beyond obvious that Trump supporters demand 100% fealty from Republicans along with non-partisan coverage, un-biased reporting, no openly Democrat messages from any media source and any legislator, even from Democrat legislators, claiming any partisanship displayed from their opponents' grounds to throw out any and all arguments or valid complaints made. And they do that while simultaneously presenting the MOST biased, MOST partisan and just openly obsequious Trump brown nosing messaging, kissing his feet and bowing before their dear Leader as if that's somehow synonymous with being "American!".
So yes, rightwing conservative Trump supporters are nothing but pretenders. Pretend Americans pretending to be righteous, bloviating about their pretend intelligence and pretend wisdom while worshiping a pretend genius who is very much a real convicted felon and a real admitted sexual predator and a real accused pedophile who got us into a very real war that is costing actual real patriotic Americans very real lives and treasure.
Going to bed - see you tomorrow
That seems pretty absurd and worthy of ridicule to me. How does pointing out how ridiculous those idiots are that are trying to categorize an invented conservative insult as a mental illness or spend tax dollars to have it studied "inoculate" the clearly "bad actors"?
I think there is the self-diagnosed healthy fear of tyranny which is what Newsom and other Democrats have admitted to, and then there is actual "Derangement Syndrome", the ridiculous and absurd actions of Trump defenders, which need to be pointed out as absurd. Otherwise, they become the norm and then it's too late to even point out the obvious grift where a President has his attorneys go behind closed doors and settle the suit the President himself brought against his own government and has his people, those he appointed to their jobs, sign off on handing the President almost $2 billion dollars that he then decides should be funneled to his insurrection co-conspirators and violent felons who attacked capital police. That actually happens, and apparently some are still rubbing their chins saying "Well, maybe we should have a discussion about whether peoples fear of tyranny is justified or not."
Nice admission and kinda headed toward deflection.
I wasn't deflecting. I explained what I see as a healthy caution towards tyranny contrasted by the unhealthy protection of tyranny by some calling those who are on their guard against tyranny, "Tyrannaphobes", and claiming it's somehow their fault for creating tyrants because they ridicule them which, according to them, "inoculates" the tyrant from constitutional or political consequence.
What is the alternative to pointing out or naming the absurd and ridiculous? And isn't the author here cautioning against making the act of naming something a derangement syndrome "seem ridiculous" which isn't the same as proving it ridiculous. In fact, it's the bad actors desperately trying to make TDS "seem ridiculous" that are the folk to be wary of, not those admitting that they have a healthy caution towards tyranny. Those whining about what they see as an unwarranted fear of tyranny are clearly the only ones that are inoculating the potential tyrant from constitutional and political consequence.
TDS deals mostly, per the article, with the "personal" actions/attitudes of Trump, i.e. liar, cheat, ta-ta-da-da, and NOT with his political actions.
Two very separate areas of life.
Not from what I have observed. Those who cry 'TDS' do so in response to any criticism of Trump.
It is a tactic to defend (attempt to) Trump when a real defense cannot be formulated (which is most of the time).
Trump's attitude about the presidency. . .such as enriching himself and using the authority vested in him to 'increase' his private profile across the country. . . trailing over into history is OBNOXIOUS. That is disruption and inconsiderate behavior that is unacceptable. You can understand what obnoxiousness is, because you feel it towards liberals such that you post this OBNOXIOUS article written by some partisan conservative and then you try to constrain discussion to having liberals accept the bashing by acquiescence. That is insult, if liberals allow it to occur that would be injury.
[✘]
So then, those who point out Trump's flawed math (“You know, we’ve cut drug prices by 1,200, 1,300, 1,400, 1,500%. I don’t mean 50%, I mean 14 — 1,500%.”) his illegal tariffs (SCOTUS 6-3 decision that the tariffs exceed the powers given the president by Congress) his aggressive violent ICE actions, his starting an unprovoked war in Iran causing inflation and gas prices to spike, his not keeping many promises he made like ending the war in Ukraine and lowering the cost of living and the list goes on and on as has been listed here many times before, they don't have TDS, correct? Because that seems to be what you're saying. So why do those pointing these things out often get accused of having TDS? Why do Trump supporters believe all resistance to their dear Leader is "deranged" even when the vast majority of the complaints are actual policy or actions he's taken as President complaints. Sure, his debased rock bottom personal character gives rise to many non-policy complaints, but they are still character complaints about a man who is supposed to represent all Americans. The fact is tens of millions of patriotic Americans see him as lower than pond scum just as a human being due to all the scummy gross perverted things he's done and said throughout his life while also being born with a platinum spoon in his mouth. But even though he's such scum as a person, that doesn't mean he might not make good business decisions, so I get what you're saying, and you'd have a point if there were ALL of the other actual policy shit that is just horrendous and is trending towards tyranny the way he's going about implementing his agenda.
These people trolled Biden's age and Obama's (farther back) birth certificate. . . looking for 'positive results' for conservatives that did not come. So now, they are at it again. . . that is, sticking to a narrative that they hope (wrong) will throw writers and commenters "off their game" - simply because they repeat their ridiculous thought-terminating cliche : TDS is a thought-terminating cliche .
Perhaps an appeal to the religious nature of rightwing conservatives will help them get the point.
Not that I expect the fake righteousness of many MAGAites to be moved by scripture, but perhaps a few still haven't sold their souls and reason for a bowl of orange lentil stew.
So, while most who despise the joke that got elected President do have real policy concerns as I pointed out above, his character flaws like being a liar and a cheat that can't be trusted are tremendously relevant when it comes to choosing a leader or manager that you're hiring which is what every patriotic American should be thinking about when they vote for President.
There are two problems here that I see:
1. The "right" on NT outright refuses to discuss religion (and I know why). And no members of the right, you do not need to feign protest. I 'got' you already on the subject.
2. The use of constrained writing, or in our case, constrained commenting where the seeder STRICTLY dictates the limits of what can be discussed such that only the opposite side can be subject matter. (That does not work on NT because no topic can be that 'narrow.')
most of them don't read that fucking book, they just use it like a cudgel as if they had ...
Sorry there is an issue when someone doesn't jump on the "bait" that is thrown out.
And you have done just what the thread needed - you discussed both portions of the thread in both your positive and negative responses.
Thanks.
like this article?
You could have just left it there.
You're welcome. When responding to queries, it is quite common to use both positive and negative responses. When someone suggests that TDS is somehow an unreasonable fear of tyranny, I point out the flaws in their clearly deficient argument. Admittedly, a negative response.
When others point out the fact that using the word 'deranged' in this case far better describes those with an unreasonable attachment to the convicted felon and accused pedophile than it does to describe those with real concerns over the direction the accused pedophile is pushing our nation, I use positive responses in support.
I think it's quite clear that TDS best describes those defending Trump, not those pointing out his clear desire to be an authoritarian tyrant. And the only reason MAGA is trying to deflect and claim it's the other side that is deranged is because they want an authoritarian tyrant as long as he's 'their' authoritarian tyrant enacting things they desire like injecting more rightwing conservative Christian ideology and agenda into our government, courthouses and schools.
So, what it comes down to are those Americans that conservatives are accusing of having TDS are, for the most part, rational patriotic Americans with real concerns over Trump and MAGA consolidating power and forcing a wildly unconstitutional rightwing conservative Christian ideology down every Americans throat. And in doing so, prove themselves truly deranged for supporting a vile admitted sexual predator (grab them by the pussy) convicted felon and known liar all because they are desperate to force their rightwing conservative Christian ideology down every Americans throat contrary to the constitution and Trump was the perfect criminal they could use to do it.
I don't really see how you can describe both the hard-working patriotic Americans who supports the constitution and what our nation stands for while also describing those who worship a populist and work to destroy our constitutional Republic and replace it with a rightwing conservative Christo-fascist authoritarian State ruled by a dictator without using both positive and negative comments.
it fails to work, nevertheless.
TDS does seem to be real, but it afflicts Trump's supporters, not his detractors. People have to be deranged to support a criminally corrupt, treasonous, mentally ill tyrant; at least in this country, which used to pride itself on being the world's greatest republic.
All one need do, given a rational mind, is compare Trump to any of our prior presidents. Our past presidents collectively define what it means to be fit to serve as PotUS.
A summary of candidates (other than Trump) who might be considered unfit for the job from ChatGPT:
So Johnson for morality, Buchanan for incompetence, Nixon for abuse of power, Wilson for physical incapacity, Pierce for incompetence and judgment, and Harding for corruption.
And Trump has all these failures, except for Wilson's chronic physical disability, and more. He is clearly the absolute winner in unpresidential behavior. And is the only PotUS who tried to steal a presidential election with fraud, lying, coercion, and incitement. Trump is the G.O.A.T. in presidential unfitness.
Next, compare Trump to the norm (which includes all the other presidents ... all of whom were presidential and the vast majority who viewed the office as a solemn duty rather than a license to do whatever pleased them personally).
So how can any rational mind support Trump? And then label those who justifiably criticize Trump as 'deranged'?
Undoubtedly. It's hard to believe how far we've fallen, and how much good standing we've lost in the world.
Exactly. Supporting Trump is what's deranged.
Honestly, things have gotten so bad that I keep having to take little mini-vacations from the news, and even from this site. The insanity has gone beyond what I can handle on a daily basis. It's rage-inducing, and I'm not good with rage.
This is what happens when the public decides to chew its own political ass off in an attempt to end political bowel movements! The public is now found 'wanting' for something to return to them in a form it can recognize. Parents are the biggest losers in this, because frankly they have brought the children in this country to a crossroads at 'midnight' and the sun is not due for another two years. . . and those children have to make a choice now or else!
I feel you, as I have been faced with a 'test' to my religion. That is, I have developed a 'regular' cursing habit that I lost some decades ago! I can honestly attribute it to a pathological liar that crowds my political 'junkie' brain with confusion. I am not the type to run and hide, and yet this guy defiles me - inside. . . and yet. . . I must fight through and come out the other side. . . because I will not leave him to just steamroll 'us.' I did not ask for this political fight. I do not want this political fight. I must fight this political fight for myself and others, nevertheless!
[deleted][✘]
What I see is you claiming that rational criticism of Trump is TDS.
A fine example of my point @6.1.3.
Which proved my point - thanks.
So your point is that rational, fact-based criticism of Trump is TDS?
Your vague responses do not accomplish anything other than demonstrate that you have no argument.
Make an actual case that shows that Trump is not, when compared to the norm of past PotUS', the worst (or at least among the worst) in terms of:
... taken as a whole.
[deleted][✘]
[✘]
Thanks for participating.
Actually there was "some" good discussion and I appreciate your input.
Have a great day.
Closed/Locked
That technique is not how one locks an article. Sorry! Hope this helps! (If you need help- just ask!)