Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by DrZarkov99 7 years, 11 months ago
    Trump definitely does not have problems with low self esteem. However, he doesn't seem to suffer the highly negative aspects of the narcissists I've had the unpleasant experience of dealing with. He is eager to listen to opposing points of view, and is not opposed to modifying his plans when he hears something that sounds like it might work better. That's incredibly rare, since the egotistical people I've known have been stubborn, dismissive of other viewpoints, and downright self-destructive (like Hillary). If he remains approachable, he could be quite a successful President.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 7 years, 11 months ago
      You used many of the key words in their vernacular sense, granted that the question was posed that way: "big ego" not strong ego.

      The difference is subtle, but important. An "egotist" is not an "egoist."

      You identified Trump's "not having problems with low self esteem" as being "egotistical." I agree that both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are egotistical. Neither one is an egoist.

      Also, being open to new facts is not the same thing as being open to "different opinions." Uncritically accepting many points of view is not necessarily a virtue.

      Finally, changing one's opinion in the face of new facts is not necessarily an example of rational thinking. It could be the reduction of cognitive dissonance, a form of irrational thinking.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by NealS 7 years, 11 months ago
      His real smarts come from surrounding himself with people that agree with his agenda and are allowed to do it pretty much their own way, as long as they achieve the desired results. It's quite obvious he could not do much of anything by himself. His ego and arrogance could get in the way, and I think he understands that. I also feel he's really not that quick on his feet. He simply frowns and raises his eyebrows when he's stumped. Kellyanne will be running a lot of the show behind the scenes, if only they could plug her into his ear so more proper things might come out of his mouth. But then again, when he speaks in direct response it definitely keeps the media busy and out of his way.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Stormi 7 years, 11 months ago
    Trump was brought up to be a businessman in a generation which learned from their elders, more than business school. That is what he projects. It is the old fashioned promote yourself, to get what you need done style. We are so used to politicians, and smooth business school grads, we forget how men used to do business. He likes to talk about his win, but at the same time, I think he is also amazed at how it all came down. That is why snowflakes can't related, no tie to what came before their generation.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 7 years, 11 months ago
      That is an easy generalization, but in fact, John D. Rockefeller went to a business school after a year of high school. Moreover, Trump himself did attend business school, specifically because Wharton had a major in real estate. He completed a bachelor of science degree in economics.

      When sketching an analogy about "how men used to do business," I find Donald Trump to be like a successful Willy Loman.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ Stormi 7 years, 11 months ago
        The Rockefellers are a bunch of manipulators, keeping the money completely within the family.The finances are so convoluted one accountant has no idea what the others are doing - by design. Have you read "The Rockefeller Files"?
        Trump is old school, not polished, not a good speaker, but a master of the deal. He works one on one.
        Today we have a bunch of smooth talkers, who fell for TQM like it was the answer. Some eventually found that thinking on their feed at reacting was actually more important than endless meetings.We reached an era when if a guy could deliver a smooth talk, they were promoted, even though they did not understand their product. Gee, did I just describe Obama?
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by Kittyhawk 7 years, 10 months ago
          The Rockefeller and Rothschild families helped Trump since at least the 1980s, and there's a plausible argument that they began grooming him for the presidency even then. See http://philosophyofmetrics.com/how-ro... "In 1987 Donald Trump purchased his first casino interests when he acquired 93% of the shares in Resorts International... On October 30, 1978, The Spotlight newspaper reported that the principle investors of Resorts International were Meyer Lansky, Tibor Rosenbaum, William Mellon Hitchcock, David Rockefeller, and one Baron Edmond de Rothschild."
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ Stormi 7 years, 10 months ago
            There's business, then there is politics. Rockefellers have been one worlders in politics. In the recent election, the Rothschilds were not behind Trump, at least not openly. Rockefeller and Kissinger worked toward one world government back in 1976. Obama's children are supposedly on loan from Illuminati parents. These people all make money thogether, but not always politically. Look at Sinatra and and the Mafia. Who do you think groomed and invented Barrack Obama, out of Barry? It almost had to involve the inner workings of a White House then Republican.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by LibertyBelle 7 years, 11 months ago
    I don't think the kind of arrogance he shows indi-
    cates much true self-esteem (especially in the
    Objectivist sense). He does have a big mouth,
    and a tendency to put his foot in it. He seems to have a tendency to shoot off his mouth without thinking much beforehand.Somebody
    with more true self-esteem would want to avoid
    getting caught being in the wrong because of
    what he had said, by being careful beforehand.
    Still, I voted for him, considering the alternative.
    But we have to watch him, to keep him under a
    certain control. He is supposed to be account-
    able to us, the people.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by wmiranda 7 years, 11 months ago
    I sure hope so. Otherwise, he'll become another go with the flow typical politician and not accomplish anything. If he accomplishes just half of what he promised, we'll be well on the way to make America great again, as he said.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 7 years, 11 months ago
      Have you read any books on Objectivist psychology? Most people here are using these words in the their vernacular sense, not their technical meanings. Selfishness, ego, egoism, and compromise have very specific meanings to anyone who understands the ideas behind Ayn Rand's *Atlas Shrugged."
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by wmiranda 7 years, 11 months ago
        Excuse my simple sentences from before. I do believe Trump has a yuuge ego. I believe his selfishness in an objectivist sense, is what has made him successful. I don't think he has a single altruistic bone in his body. The events you've heard about in which he has engaged in acts of kindness towards someone, where not by altruistic motivation, rather, simply and because he could. I believe Trump would be someone Ayn Rand would talk about and enjoy talking to, not necessarily agree with always, but maybe even be friends, if she were alive. However, since they're not contemporaries, we'll never know. I don't think he's John Galt. But I hope he's Hank Rearden, at least. Just saying. Afterall, I'm not an Objectivism scholar
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 7 years, 11 months ago
          If you have read The Fountainhead you know the differences between Peter Keating and Howard Roark. I believe that Donald Trump is successful in the way that Peter Keating was. Altruism does not mean being nice or giving a lot to other people. Just the opposite. Altruists are people haters. Benevolence toward others comes from selfishness within. Donald Trump is not benevolent.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 7 years, 11 months ago
          I agree that, finally, we cannot know for certain. However, based on her life as it was recorded by herself and others, it seems unlikely that Donald Trump would be in her social circle. For someone that she did enjoy talking to even though she did not agree with him, I point to her Random House editior Bennett Cerf. For a successful business creator in her social circle, many here know Ed Snider of Comcast Spectacor, the Philadelphia Flyers, and other enterprises.

          Neither Cerf nor Snider bears any resemblance to Donald Trump.

          wmiranda wrote: "I believe Trump would be someone Ayn Rand would talk about and enjoy talking to, not necessarily agree with always, but maybe even be friends, if she were alive. However, since they're not contemporaries, we'll never know."
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by DoctorObvious 7 years, 11 months ago
    He absolutely has a huge ego. Nobody puts TRUMP on properties all over the world if they don't. However, that is the very reason why he is driven to succeed; he has a brand reputation to uphold. That makes him potentially the best president ever. He won't want the USA failing on his watch and hurting his brand reputation!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by term2 7 years, 11 months ago
      I am even inspired to do better now that Trump is president. I was very depressed at the idea of Hildebeast. Its just the way it was for me. Why work when Hillary will take credit for it and take away a chunk of what I worked for?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 7 years, 11 months ago
        Taxes might become lighter. Regulations might become less stringent. Those have nothing to do with Donald Trump's ego, or lack of ego. The words egoist and selfish have specific meanings to those who understand and appreciate the ideas behind Atlas Shrugged.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 7 years, 11 months ago
      In the common vernacular, Donald Trump may have "a huge ego." However, for someone who appreciates the ideas behind Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead Donald Trump does not have a strong ego. He is not objectively selfish. He is in many behaviors selfless. He needs other people in order to be "himself." Donald Trump is more like Peter Keating, the successful man about town.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by 7 years, 11 months ago
        I wouldn't go so far as this... just yet. However, if I am correct that he is a bullshitter, then he will -- of course -- be subjected and vulnerable to flattery.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 7 years, 11 months ago
    Yes. Look at all of the branded products he has tried out with his name on them. Look at how he treated people on "Apprentice". Look at the way he boasts about his sexual exploits.

    What is a bigger issue is whether or not he can make objective decisions in spite of his ego. So far, I haven't seen much evidence of that - from the billboard to Rubio's "hands" comment to any number of other personal attacks. I hope that it doesn't become his Achilles' Heel.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by term2 7 years, 11 months ago
      Interesting that his apprentice show was an unqualified success. Martha Stewart's was a dismal failure. I think its because he just said it like it is, and didnt mince words. martha Stewart was too "nice". Thats not the way the world is, and people didnt relate to it.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ blarman 7 years, 11 months ago
        There is a difference, however, between entertainment and government; success is measured very differently in those two cases. I'm not trying to take away from Trump's accomplishments as an entertainer, I'm just pointing out that the same characteristics that make one a successful entertainer are not the ones that make one a policy wonk.

        Reagan successfully made the transition from actor to governor and then to President. He had his terms as Governor to learn the ropes and the job. Trump is trying to make the leap straight to President, and people will be very unforgiving of the inevitable mistakes he will make along the way. But that is precisely where one's ego comes into play. Ego is the sense that I know what I'm doing and I don't need anyone else to help. It is arrogance and pride. When one is used to getting their own way, their ego gets in the way of learning from what didn't work and why - which is sometimes one's ego in the first place! Trump's comments that he "had never done anything wrong and didn't need to change anything" concern me greatly because that is an attitude of ego - not of learning.

        Trump and Reagan differ significantly in almost every other major personal character attribute. It will be interesting to see which of those attributes plays out in the first 100 days, as they will be a huge clue as to the rest of his term.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by term2 7 years, 11 months ago
          i think Trump is a lot more into getting all the right information before he acts. He would have had to do that to be financially successful as he has been. I can see that very trait playing out in his cabinet selection. He is seeking the input even from people who I think are snakes in the grass, just so he can get them to talk and tell their "side" of the story. THEN, he makes a decision, like he did in trashing Romney as potential SOS. I say he knew all the time Romney wasnt the right person for that job, but he wanted to let him talk and perhaps shed some light of the office.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ blarman 7 years, 11 months ago
            "i think Trump is a lot more into getting all the right information before he acts."

            And if he does that, he stands a much better chance at being successful - assuming of course that the people he is getting his information from are honest (and I don't see anything that leads me to believe otherwise ATM). Obama's Cabinet consisted of yes-men and patsies that told him what he wanted to hear - which is often the case when dealing with large egos.

            Regarding Romney, I think Romney would have done a credible job as SoS. I would point out that during the 2012 debates with Obama, Romney was correct in pointing out that Russia was the most dangerous threat to world peace - even though he was laughed at on stage. No one is laughing now. I think it would have shown a lot of humility and objectivity to select Romney because it would have shown that Trump was willing to let bygones be bygones. Instead, he held a meaningless grudge. That isn't a trait I see in a great leader - it's the trait I see from a great ego.

            Please don't get me wrong. I want Trump to succeed in "making America great again". I remain skeptical, however, that Trump has the necessary tools of character to carry out the necessary changes. I could be wrong. Time will tell. What I don't want anyone getting into is a Trump-mania similar to the Obama-mania that took over the left and led to Obama's Nobel Peace Prize. I won't have any problems lauding Trump after he does something right. I just find the celebration quite premature. Let's wait until after his first 100 days and re-evaluate then, shall we?
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by term2 7 years, 11 months ago
              I would disagree somewhat with your assessment of Romney. He had a real distaste for Russia, and I think that would have made relations with them more difficult. Reagan and Gorbachev liked each other and that was a distinct advantage. Russia has a more aggressive foreign policy, but has met with little resistance from Obama. Trump will stick up for the USA and Putin will stick up for Russia. There is some middle ground that will let both countries prosper, and we definitely need that to happen. Arguments between Russia and the USA dont really do much for either country, and I think Putin realizes that (along with Trump). Romney or Hillary for that matter would have just been combative and gotten us nowhere.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 7 years, 11 months ago
      Allow me to recommend that you find the books of Nathaniel Branden. The very examples you offered of hos Trump appeared to treat people on The Apprentice and his bragging about his sexual exploits are exactly the hallmarks of someone with weak self-esteem. He appears to me to be covering up his weak ego with grandiose behaviors.

      Putting own name on everything could an example of a strong ego. You might think easily of Ayn Rand's Hank Rearden or other heroes. The villains had corporations with vague names like Associated Steel and Amalgamated Switch. But in our time, with Donald Trump's generation, the "Me Generation" it could also be just the opposite.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by 7 years, 11 months ago
        I think Donald is the kind of person who bullshits in an effective manner because he is so committed to it. I don't think that is Objectivist. To be successful he will need not to rationalize, but to use reason in order to attain his objectives. Because a bullshitter has one major weakness: bullshit.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 7 years, 11 months ago
    The easy answer is "probably not." The Objectivist theory of self-esteem suggests that his public behavior speaks of a man who lives through others. He is not self-defined. Alone on an island, he might have a hard time being himself well enough to survive.

    On the other hand, for someone who is intelligent and gifted - as he appears to be - impression management might be just a tool, like accounting or law, whether he "believes" in them or not.

    I work in a military office and one day, on our way to meeting across base, I discussed Donald Trump with my Sergeant First Class. "What do you make of his success at military school?" I asked. We puzzled it out back and forth, all speculation, but pretty much decided that Donald Trump proved to himself, his father, and the world, that he could excel at whatever he chose to. That speaks well, of him, of course, but does not address the deeper issue of where he finds his inner visibility.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by term2 7 years, 11 months ago
      I think he would do fine on a desert island. At least for as long as any other person. Eventually he would want some human companionship, as we all do. He would be the one TO survive, no matter what
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 7 years, 11 months ago
        You can live three minutes without air, three days without water, three weeks without food, and three months without love. Donald Trump does not strike me as the kind of person who could go that long without personal reflection from other people. To the best of my knowledge, having read The Art of the Deal about 20 years ago, and being unable to avoid him now, my judgement is that he needs other people around him in order to be "himself."
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by ProfChuck 7 years, 11 months ago
    Yes. But because he is almost as smart as he thinks he is (which is really smart) he can get away with it.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ jdg 7 years, 11 months ago
      I would like to believe that. But it's one of him vs. several million senior career bureaucrats who have experience outlasting presidents of all stripes.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 7 years, 11 months ago
      What is there to "get away with"? If you are saying that Donald Trump is above average in intelligence, that is clearly true by observation. Whether he is an real egoist versus a mere egotist is a different discussion entirely. He could be the most selfless man ever to serve from the White House.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Blanco 7 years, 11 months ago
    I think he has a healthy ego/self-image. However, unlike Hussein Obama, I don't think he is narcissistic or egomaniacal.

    Blanco
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 7 years, 11 months ago
      If Donald Trump has a "healthy ego" or a "healthy self-image" as you claim, why does he behave the way he does" Why did he bully kids on The Apprentice? Why does he brag about his sexual exploits? Have you read any of the books on Objectivist psychology, especially *The Psychology of Self Esteem" by Nathaniel Branden?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by 7 years, 11 months ago
        He was coached to aggrandize himself and his bullish behavior on The Apprentice to become the stereotypically harsh boss that people fear. And we, the audience, are invited to scorn and mock the failure of others to make ourselves feel better about our own shortcomings... or so it was for the second-handers...
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 7 years, 11 months ago
    Does anyone know of any people of note, who have accomplish and created things that have low self esteem or tiny, self effacing egos? Trump or Howard Roark - which one has the bigger ego? George Washington or Rockefeller? Henry Ford or Edison? Of course he has a big ego, and he actually enjoys putting it on display.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ jdg 7 years, 11 months ago
      The only way I would even mention Trump and Howard Roark in the same sentence is to contrast them as proof that having a large ego does not necessarily imply having principles.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 7 years, 11 months ago
      True, this question is not meant to suggest that a big ego is a bad thing. The bigger the ego, the more rational control required, but for sure it can be done.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 7 years, 11 months ago
      Nicola Tesla comes to mind as a self-effacing genius of great achievements. John D. Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie, even Steve Jobs... You have to remember that The Virtue of Selfishness overturned 2500 years of ethical teachings. People who achieved great accomplishments in the past were not raised to think well of themselves, nor were they rewarded for it in later life.

      "I do not know what I may appear to the world; but to myself I seem to have been only like a boy playing on the seashore, and diverting myself in now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me." -- Sir Isaac Newton.

      Newton's colleagues called him fearful, cautious, suspicious, insidious, ambitious, execessively covetous of praise, and impatient of contradiction. Even his relatives and his true friends were modest in their praise of Newton. However great his accomplishments and however strong his personality, Newton was clearly did not enjoy good self esteem or a strong ego.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Herb7734 7 years, 11 months ago
        I'd be surprised if their apparent lack of ego was what they put forth so as to not me condemned for being just the opposite.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 7 years, 11 months ago
          If they had strong egos they would not have cared if they were "condemned" in the opinions of other people.

          I agree that the creators and achievers of the past whether in 19th century America or 2nd century China deserve respect and praise from us today. However, it is an error to read into them and their lives what we understand here and now.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by Herb7734 7 years, 11 months ago
            No one knows what goes on insude a person's head. If you had a strong opinion of your self worth and was given the opportunity to create - doing what you love to do, but a demonstration of your ego would cause you to lose everything, would you go to work in a quarry?
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 7 years, 11 months ago
              I agree that to an outside observer a person's motives may not be as clear as their actions. But other people are not mysterious beings of unknowable attributes. On point here, I suggest The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism by Max Weber. Pride was punished, but worthiness changed from unobtainable to demonstrable.

              I just point out that here in Galt's Gulch Online, we tend to look to Objectivism for an over-arching explanation of the world and worldly events. Donald Trump does not display the actions of a man of strong self-esteem. More to the point, he is not in a position of weakness and never has been. He is free to be himself, whatever that might be... I think that he shows his true self quite clearly, and while he might have "a big ego" in the common vernacular - which daily talk condemns "selfishness" - he does not appear to have a strong ego in the Objectivist sense of the phrase.

              I suggest that you look into the available works on Objectivist psychology.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by Herb7734 7 years, 11 months ago
                Thanks for the suggestion. Actually, I fail to see any significant difference between us. You clarified your position nicely and it only goes to show that humans are not pasteboard cut-outs who can be easily categorized. If black equals evil and white equals good, where in the shades in between does one become purely one or the other? Easy to see in archetypes such as Hitler and Washington but the majority are tilting one way or another and can often surprise by crossing over. I'm sure that you have met or know of a George Soros type who for whatever reason does a very good thing or an Objectivist that you wouldn't invite to dinner.

                By the way, while I'll put your suggestions on my reading list, I was pretty close to some original Objectivist shrinks. I was friends with Lee Shulman who was a psychologist who was pals with Nathaniel Branden. His break-up with Rand can only be described as a stupid event on both sides
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo