• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Mary Trump's Book

Mary Trump has a simple reason for writing this book.
"Donald, following the lead of my grandfather and with the complicity, silence and inaction of his siblings, destroyed my father. I can’t let him destroy my country.”

I like her already, waiting all this time to deliver her revenge. Truly it's the slow knife that penetrates the shield. I care nothing about her objectivity. She can be as subjective as she wants if she does real damage to that vile family.
 
I like her already, waiting all this time to deliver her revenge. Truly it's the slow knife that penetrates the shield. I care nothing about her objectivity. She can be as subjective as she wants if she does real damage to that vile family.

Yeah, I'm really liking the arrogance she brings. The idea that Donald Trump is going to destroy the country and her book will stop it is impressive.
 
The Spice must flow!

It's a compelling metaphor, but I feel like if you're waiting until three and a half years into his presidency to make your move, you're probably doing it wrong. This should probably have been one of those "let's destroy this Death Star before it's completed" kind of scenario. Where was she in 2016? The sad truth is that no matter how much psychology Mary Trump's book contains, Hillary Clinton will still never be president.
 
It's a compelling metaphor, but I feel like if you're waiting until three and a half years into his presidency to make your move, you're probably doing it wrong. This should probably have been one of those "let's destroy this Death Star before it's completed" kind of scenario. Where was she in 2016? The sad truth is that no matter how much psychology Mary Trump's book contains, Hillary Clinton will still never be president.

I think this comment says more about how much time _you_ spend thinking about Clinton than the rest of us, mate. :)
 
Yeah, I'm really liking the arrogance she brings. The idea that Donald Trump is going to destroy the country and her book will stop it is impressive.

It takes lots of cuts (metaphorical) to get rid of Caesar, we need all the Senators to do their part. Besides, if it hurts Trump and the four nits who grew into lice who cares if she's arrogant?
 
It's a compelling metaphor, but I feel like if you're waiting until three and a half years into his presidency to make your move, you're probably doing it wrong. This should probably have been one of those "let's destroy this Death Star before it's completed" kind of scenario. Where was she in 2016? The sad truth is that no matter how much psychology Mary Trump's book contains, Hillary Clinton will still never be president.

She mentions that early on. She thought he was too stupid to win more or less. It makes more sense to wait until the next election to do the most damage. She should have spoken out earlier but she's not the only one who didn't think 80,000 morons would betray their country and put that thing in the White House.
 
This statement from the book, should tell us all we need to know about Mary Trump's objectivity:

Now, I am NOT saying that she is wrong in her feelings. I think they are well justified from her POV. What I am saying is that those feelings cloud clinical judgement and therefore, you won't find any confirmation of DJT's mental illness in the pages of her book.


Facts are facts, wherever they come from. There are objective criteria for diagnosing mental illness, and if she can make her case by those standards, the fact that she has observed him up close all her life is a plus.

Here's a non-shrink applying his own direct observations:
As I once did up close, we can observe every day which psychopathic traits Trump manifests in his behavior. The highly regarded Hare Psychopathy Checklist enumerates 20 of them. By my count Trump clearly demonstrates 16 of the traits and his overall score is far higher than the average prison inmate.
https://gen.medium.com/the-psychopath-in-chief-aa10ab2165d9
https://www.businessinsider.com/hare-psychopath-checklist-test-sociopath-2016-11
 
She mentions that early on. She thought he was too stupid to win more or less. It makes more sense to wait until the next election to do the most damage. She should have spoken out earlier but she's not the only one who didn't think 80,000 morons would betray their country and put that thing in the White House.

In one excerpt she criticizes the media for never asking Trump's family members -- who included a veteran federal judge and a clinical psychologist -- whether they supported his campaign. Their answers might have been a bright red flag.
 
It's a compelling metaphor, but I feel like if you're waiting until three and a half years into his presidency to make your move, you're probably doing it wrong. This should probably have been one of those "let's destroy this Death Star before it's completed" kind of scenario. Where was she in 2016? The sad truth is that no matter how much psychology Mary Trump's book contains, Hillary Clinton will still never be president.

No one thought Trump was going to win in 2016...not even Trump. Why on earth should Mary Trump have come forward then? Speaking up after his election but long before the Nov. 2020 election would also have been a waste of time because people have very short memories. MT's book has absolutely nothing to do with Hillary Clinton being/not being president and why you would even suggest it does is more a comment on your thinking than Mary Trump's.
 
I like her already, waiting all this time to deliver her revenge. Truly it's the slow knife that penetrates the shield. I care nothing about her objectivity. She can be as subjective as she wants if she does real damage to that vile family.

Yeah, I like the timing. In 2016 no-one really believed it was possible, I remember thinking that what the hell is wrong with the people for him getting maybe even as much as 45% of the vote... Anway, this is the time for it to do maximum damage. Maybe it won't amount to much in the end but every little helps :)
 
I think this comment says more about how much time _you_ spend thinking about Clinton than the rest of us, mate. : )

Enh. It's kind of a cometary orbit, for me. Spends most of its time out of sight and out of mind, but occasionally swings into view for a moment.

Anyway, Mary is saying that she's here with her book to stop Trump from destroying the country. Leaving aside the fact that nobody who matters to that goal is actually going to read the thing, don't you think the time for her to stop Trump would have been about four years ago?

And don't you think it's weird that you're calling out references to Hillary Clinton, in the context of the 2016 US presidential elections? I'm not saying you have to think about her defeat by Donald Trump *all* the time. But shouldn't it at least cross your mind when it's the actual thing being talked about?
 
And don't you think it's weird that you're calling out references to Hillary Clinton, in the context of the 2016 US presidential elections? I'm not saying you have to think about her defeat by Donald Trump *all* the time. But shouldn't it at least cross your mind when it's the actual thing being talked about?

You're not talking about the 2016 elections. Your "she's still not president" is a jab, not an argument or a cogent comment.
 
Last edited:
Hillary Clinton will still never be president.
And that sad phrase just sums it up.

Can anyone here explain to me what on earth is with the Bill/Hill obsession?

Not only is Hillary not even a candidate, she clearly stated that she was not remotely interested in being one.
 
It takes lots of cuts (metaphorical) to get rid of Caesar, we need all the Senators to do their part. Besides, if it hurts Trump and the four nits who grew into lice who cares if she's arrogant?

Maybe "unearned confidence" or "hubris" is a better term.

Anyway, I'm not following the "Senators" metaphor. Who are they supposed to represent, in the current situation?

And if it doesn't stop Trump from destroying the country, who cares if it hurts him? Millions dead, but at least Trump is a little bit unhappier than he otherwise might have been? That's a weird ethical calculus, even in the context of the weird ethical calculus you're already pushing.

She mentions that early on. She thought he was too stupid to win more or less.
So much for her credentials as a psychologist giving her a unique and valuable insight into the man.

It makes more sense to wait until the next election to do the most damage. She should have spoken out earlier but she's not the only one who didn't think 80,000 morons would betray their country and put that thing in the White House.

I wonder what you think the Venn diagram looks like, of people whose change of mind will matter in this election, and people who will read this book and have their mind changed prior to this election.

I think it's probably a pretty small overlap. I think the vast majority of people who are going to read this book have already made up their minds who they're going to vote for. And the way electoral demographics work, most of those votes are a given anyway.

And I think most of the swing voters who are going to read this book have also already made up their minds as well. I doubt there are very many voters at all whose lives are so finely balanced on the points of economics, social justice, and public health, that their vote can be tipped by this book. Maybe you *should* care if she's arrogant, if it leads to misplaced confidence. There's a whole pandemic out there, touching the lives of millions of Americans, and you think this book is going to make a difference?

At least Caesar had a countable number of stab wounds, degrees of injury that could be observed and measured. The damage to his life could be calculated from the blows received. You've got this imaginary world where all these little blows are doing all these little hurts to Donald Trump. You tell yourself that even though you can't see them, they must be happening. And maybe you think you have to settle for those imagined cuts. But Mary Trump doesn't think she has to settle for that. Mary Trump has set her sights much higher. Mary Trump is going to save the country.

And she's going to do it with this book.
 
Facts are facts, wherever they come from. There are objective criteria for diagnosing mental illness, and if she can make her case by those standards, the fact that she has observed him up close all her life is a plus.

Here's a non-shrink applying his own direct observations:

https://gen.medium.com/the-psychopath-in-chief-aa10ab2165d9
https://www.businessinsider.com/hare-psychopath-checklist-test-sociopath-2016-11

If the author's just going to tell us the same stuff that we laypersons can figure out on our own, what's the relevance of their Ph.D.?
 
You're not talking about the 2016 elections. Your "she's still not president" is a jab, not an argument or a cogent comment.

I was literally talking about the 2016 elections. The elections she could have influenced, had she published earlier. The elections Hillary lost. Thus the reference to Hillary losing them. If that reference feels like a jab... Perhaps it's better not to personalize this too much.
 
I was literally talking about the 2016 elections. The elections she could have influenced, had she published earlier. The elections Hillary lost. Thus the reference to Hillary losing them. If that reference feels like a jab... Perhaps it's better not to personalize this too much.

Oh, please. The discussion has NOTHING to do with whether Hillary will ever be president. Stop it.
 
And that sad phrase just sums it up.

Can anyone here explain to me what on earth is with the Bill/Hill obsession?

Not only is Hillary not even a candidate, she clearly stated that she was not remotely interested in being one.

Come on now, be honest. You've never taken a moment to imagine what might have been, if Mary Trump had thought to publish four years earlier? You don't have to be obsessed with Hillary Clinton, to wish that she'd won in 2016, and regret that she didn't.

I would say this book is bound to re-open old wounds, for people who lament the way the 2016 elections turned out. But actually I think those wounds are still fresh for a lot of people.
 

Back
Top Bottom