On Tuesday, a widely cited psychologist took to YouTube to raise the alarm regarding “more highly concerning behavior” from President Donald Trump. According to Dr. John Garrison, Trump’s recent actions suggest “steep neurological decline” and a dangerously “manic-like state.”
Garrison began by playing a clip from a recent Fox News interview, in which Trump declared that the price of oil is “going to go down like a rocket.” According to Garrison, “There were two neurological issues in this very short clip, both of them verbal. One is that he’s having speech planning issues, saying ‘going down like a rocket.’ Obviously, that’s combining phrases. He’s having a hard time organizing his thoughts. And second is an involuntary vocalization.” Here Garrison replays the clip, noting an abrupt sound Trump makes, explaining, “The pathways that deal with language are disrupted. We are seeing serious issues with language with President Trump.” What’s more, Garrison asserts that such vocalizations are “relatively new.”
In the interview, Trump begins talking about the midterm elections, saying, “I’m going to campaign like I did for myself and I’m going to hope that people think that I’m on. And if I’m not on, if they don’t go out and vote, if they go out and vote, we’re going to win easily.” As Garrison notes, “What he’s saying makes absolutely no sense. He cannot organize his thoughts. He gets confused and he believes what he’s saying is coherent. But it truly makes no sense.” According to Garrison, this struggle with verbal planning can be evidence of underlying “neurological issues.”
Here Garrison points to Trump’s pupils, which have remained dilated throughout the interview. “Trump is in a very bright room for this interview,” says Garrison. “You can see the lights actually reflecting off of his eyes, and what should be happening is that his pupils should be constricting rather than dilating because when there’s too much light in a room, your pupils get smaller, not bigger.” According to Garrison, “Dilated pupils like this can be from a wide variety of reasons, but it’s not just something that happens,” and likely culprits include medication for something like incontinence, Parkinson’s disease, or seizures.
…
There’s still room for him to decline?
Remember, whenever you hit rock bottom, you can always find a trap door somewhere.
until he is either dead or in a vegetative state there will be room for decline
Being dead or in a vegetative state both seem to be viable states for holding office in America.
And he wont lose a single vote
To be fair, that’s not true at all. Only 30% of the primary electorate are his base, evangelicals mostly, other religious nutjobs, business dickheads, and so forth.
It’s a lack of a seeming alternative that is the problem. But no, don’t listen to me, I’m sure Jeffries and Schumer will right the ship of state! /s
I mean, I don’t disagree Jeffries and ol’ Chuck are screwing up bigly, but when election day comes - debate has ended y’know? It’s trump or not.
Last election I was really disappointed with some people who couldn’t face the thought of voting against trump. People who presumably were immediately and lastingly oppresse by his brand of incompetent fascism.
While I’ve always shared that sentiment to some degree, I’ve always known it was doomed to fail without a change in party. It’s become all too obvious that the people that rejected voting all along, were right all along, I hate to say it.
And I say it as someone the encourages people to vote and always votes, against the worse candidates.
But let’s not lie to ourselves, unless we get better candidates the non voting people are not entirely wrong. It means nothing in the medium let alone long term, we end in the same place with the controlled opposition in power every other cycle.
I hear you, but the ‘better candidates’ phase was the last year culminating in the recent primaries and there was approximately zero chatter on Lemmy about that. There was 100% more chatter about a certain mayor of a large city where most of us don’t live.
This is either ignorance of the local politics or standard-issue laziness, and it usually manifests as ‘all politicians are terrible; i refuse to vote’, which we should know by now is support for the fascists currently in power. In fact that’s how we got here to start.
So no, I disagree that the non voting people weren’t entirely wrong - they were entirely wrong, and expecting their favored candidate to magically show up on the ballot without any pre-primary support doesn’t change that totals in Congress make a huge difference as so many items fall along party-line votes.
If they choose to abandon democracy entirely- ok. Then they abandon the notion that change can or should happen. Because that’s how change happens at a national, societal level, right?
They are still propping up mcconnell.
I assume whatever is going on with mcconnell is a test run for the big day.
Yes.
He should not be in that chair, and every day that republicans enable and
warshipworship him is both abuse and gross misconduct.If somebody wants to warship him, I’m not getting in the way. Those things are dangerous.
And we see how they played it with Mitch McConnell, so I’m guessing they’ll pull the same shit with Trump. Even the dems did this with Feinstein. So it’s really par for the course in this broken system. Will be interesting to see how cool they can play the game and pretend not to be worried this guy has his fingers on the nukes.
It’s par for the course for as long as the people choose to allow it to continue.
It’s par for the course for as long as the wealthy people choose to allow it to continue
FTFY
Incorrect. Spoken like someone who wasn’t around to see Los Angeles in May of '92.
The French invented a solution to the problem of rich decadent assholes in 1789.
The people decide when this ends.
What did the Los Angeles riots accomplish again?
80%+ of executions by guillotines were commoners. Is this the solution you are talking about?
Looks like someone is romanticizing violence.
There’s plenty of scholarship on the topic. There are a number of judiciary-side changes that arose out of the LA Riots.
And no, violence isn’t romantic. I was in Seattle in '99 for the WTO affair. Violence is simply an unfortunate necessity when power accumulates into the wrong hands.
Billionaires are perpetrating extinction-level ecological crimes against humanity. They won’t voluntarily stop. So, it is incumbent on the rest of us to remember that politics is comprised of three boxes - soap, ballot, and cartridge. When the first two fail to curb tyranny, we must resort to the third box because self-defense is a basic right of all living beings.
So no laws were written and no grievances were actually settled, check.
I was in Seattle at the time of the WTO affair and I was marching with the socialists. Violence was mostly perpetrated on the citizens, not on the wealthy. The same for the LA riots.
Yes, billionaires and their corporations would kill off humanity if it was profitable.
You say you are not romanticizing violence, but then romanticize it. You clearly have no real answers here and instead a warped view of what actually works. I suppose the wealthy will continue to call the shots like they always have.