Archive for the ‘Donald Trump’ Category

Iowa Woman Pleads Guilty To Voting Twice For Donald Trump – HuffPost

An Iowa woman pleaded guilty to election misconduct this week after being accused of illegally voting twice for Donald Trumplast year, according to The Associated Press.

The woman, 56-year-old Terri Lynn Rote,reportedly cast a ballot during early voting in Polk County and attempted to cast a second one at a satellite voting location, where she was arrested. Rote told police she voted twice because she believed Trumps claims that the 2016 election would be rigged and thought her first ballot would be changed to a vote for Democrat Hillary Clinton, according to CBS News.

Rotes plea comes as Trump has focused national attention on voter fraud. He has claimed 3 million to 5 million people voted illegally last year in the 2016 election, but has offered no evidence to support that claim. Multiple investigations, including one by the Justice Department under President George W. Bush, have found that while a handful of people such as Rote do vote illegally, it is not a widespread phenomenon.

Rotes attorney told the court in January that she believed her client had cognitive limitations and a mental health disorder. Sentencing is set for Aug. 15, and Rotes attorneys are recommending two years probation with community service.Election fraud can be punished in the state by up to five years in prison, according to the AP. Prosecutors agreed to drop a perjury charge against Rote because she pleaded guilty to a felony charge, the AP reported.

Punishments for illegal voting vary from state to state. In February, for example, a Texas mom and noncitizen was sentenced to eight years in prison for voting in U.S. elections and faces likely deportation. She said she didnt know she was ineligible.

In April, Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach (R), secured his first plea from a noncitizen who admitted to voting. The man was put on unsupervised probation for up to three years and ordered to pay a $5,000 fine.

In North Carolina, by contrast, a prosecutor declined to even bring chargesagainst a woman who admitted she voted for Trump on behalf of her deceased mother in 2016.

Iowa enacted a voter ID law earlier this year, despite concerns it would make it more difficult to vote. Iowa Secretary of State Paul Pate (R) pushed the bill, even though he said the states elections were already fair and clean.

More:
Iowa Woman Pleads Guilty To Voting Twice For Donald Trump - HuffPost

Donald Trump and the decline of the West: Ten thousand years of civilization and we end up with this guy? – Salon

In trying to reckon with Donald Trumps bizarre speech in Poland on Thursday, which was among the most troubling events of his troubling presidency, I couldnt help thinking about Mahatma Gandhis supposed quip when asked by a British reporter what he thought of Western civilization: He thought it sounded like a good idea. As with so many famous quotations, the story is almost certainly apocryphal: It did not appear anywhere until almost 20 years after Gandhis death. But it endures for a reason, because it reflects the profound ambivalence and self-regard that lie at the very heart of the Western intellectual tradition.

President Trump professes no such ambivalence. He apparently thinks Western civilization is a good idea too, although its by no means clear what he thinks he means by that term and he is constitutionally incapable of irony or double meaning. Various commentators, including Salons Amanda Marcotte, have already pointed out that the propagandistic mishmash Trump delivered in Warsaw was aimed as usual at his most virulent supporters, and channeled a current of racism and white nationalism so overt it can hardly be called subtext.

In this context, Western civilization presumably means the culture of white people in Europe and North America, as if that could be described as one coherent and continuous phenomenon, and as if any of those terms could be clearly defined. On one hand, Trump is deploying a false and dangerous form of mythology for narrow-minded, present-tense political purposes. (Breaking news, I know!)

Of course he doesnt understand anything about the long and complicated legacy of what is conventionally called Western civilization, and if he did he would be against it. Trumps self-appointed status as defender of the West is primarily about excluding or vilifying Muslims and other immigrant groups, and secondarily about marginalizing those Westerners who believe that pluralism and cultural diversity are in fact central values of our civilization (at least in its better moments).

On the other hand, there is a deeper level of historical irony at work here, one that Trump cannot possibly perceive. Its possible that Steve Bannon, the supposed Svengali in his supposed doghouse, has some awareness of this irony, filtered through his discount-store, conspiracy-theory understanding of history. One could indeed perceive Donald Trump as the symbolic end point of Western civilization, or at least as the fulfillment of its most diminished and malicious tendencies. After Plato, Shakespeare and Descartes after all the Dead White Males who did terrible things or magnificent things but were undeniably Important we wind up here, with an orange reality-TV troll as the democratically elected leader of the most powerful nation in history.

Its tempting to say that Donald Trump rose to his current position by way of a massive historical accident, despite the fact that he knows nothing and understands nothing. But I think thats almost entirely upside down, and is another way of insisting that the current situation in the United States isnt as bad as it looks, and can be remedied with a few replacement parts. Trump was elected president precisely because he is an arrogant ignoramus who spews out politically incorrect bigotry unsupported by any evidence. Furthermore, he has an unparalleled understanding of our cultures most central elements: the marketing and branding of fame, the power of mass media, and the extent to which image and rhetoric can reshape or even replace reality.

I am reminded again of historian Joachim Fests famous discussion of whether it was acceptable to describe Adolf Hitler as a great figure in world history, despite all the obvious reasons one might not want to. Fest argued, in effect, that those in postwar Germany who sought to minimize Hitlers importance were also trying to deny the extent to which Hitler had outwitted, manipulated and dominated them.

Hitlers peculiar greatness is essentially linked to the quality of excess. It was a tremendous eruption of energy that shattered all existing standards. Granted, gigantic scale is not necessarily equivalent to historic greatness; there is power in triviality also. But he was not only gigantic and not only trivial. The eruption he unleashed was stamped throughout almost every one of its stages, down to its final collapse, by his guiding will.

He also had an amazing instinct for what forces could be mobilized at all and did not allow prevailing trends to deceive him. The period of his entry into politics was wholly dominated by the liberal bourgeois system. But he grasped the latent oppositions to it and by bold and wayward combinations seized upon these factors and incorporated them into his program. His conduct seemed foolish to political minds, and for years the arrogant Zeitgeist did not take him seriously. The mockery he earned was justified by his appearance, his rhetorical flights, and the theatrical atmosphere he deliberately created. Yet in a manner difficult to describe he always stood above his banal and dull-witted aspects.

As I have previously observed, if you update the terminology here and there, Fests description appears to describe our current president with uncanny accuracy. (Although the final collapse of the Trump phenomenon remains in the unknown future, and further away than many wish-casting Democrats hope.)

Trump has never sounded more like Hitler than he did the other day in Warsaw, where the historical irony fell from the sky like a fluke summer snowstorm. Poland was of course the first nation invaded by Hitlers troops in the opening chapter of World War II, and the home of the worst of Hitlers death camps devoted to exterminating the Jewish people. Trump was supposedly there to celebrate the Poles resistance to Hitler, and the only fair thing to say about that is that some did and some definitely didnt. Every moment of that peculiar spectacle had at least a double meaning, none of them salutary.

To be clear, drawing the rhetorical and ideological parallels is not to say that Trump is Hitler, or that he is like Hitler in the most important ways. At worst, Trump is a third-generation photocopy with the background washed out, or a bad actor playing a character he has glimpsed on TV but does not understand.

Hitler presented himself as the defender of Western civilization too, although the alien invaders who were said to be destroying it from within were of course not Muslims but members of another religious and cultural minority. As Frankfurt School cultural critics like Theodor W. Adorno and Max Horkheimer argued, Hitler could be understood to embody certain insidious tendencies that ran just below the surface of European civilization and were especially strong in Germany, which viewed itself (with some justification) as home to the finest poets, philosophers and musicians of the modern age.

In their landmark work Dialectic of Enlightenment, Horkheimer and Adorno suggested that the mythology of the Dark Ages had never been conquered by the supposed Enlightenment, only repressed, and that it had reappearedin spectacular fashion, circa 1932, in the personage of the little Austrian corporal with the ridiculous mustache. Our situation in America circa 2017 is not quite like that: We have no dialectic and no enlightenment, only myth.

Hitler and the Nazis claimed to be huge fans and defenders of Western high art and high culture, in a middlebrow, anti-modernist vein, as exemplified by their embrace of composer Richard Wagner. (Who was a vicious anti-Semite and a generally terrible person, but also died six years before Hitler was born and cannot be held responsible for the latters crimes.) No such branding maneuver is necessary today.

It is inconceivable that Donald Trump has ever willingly sat through a Wagner opera or any other taxing work of old-school high culture. For that matter, if he ingests anything from the cultural sphere at all except endless amounts of cable news and hilarious right-wing internet memes, we dont hear about it. Even Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush felt obliged to express enthusiasm for various bland and deracinated forms of art, literature and music. (You know: The Gershwin songbook at the Kennedy Center; concerts by some old guys in Hawaiian shirts with a halfway plausible claim to be the Beach Boys.) Trump, perhaps to his credit, doesnt even fake it.

So what exactly the president means when he praises the strength and resilience of Western civilization is deliberately left unclear. Since he self-evidently doesnt give a crap about any of that traditions cultural, philosophical and artistic accomplishments and would no doubt deem most of them to be fake news and/or pretentious bullshit we are left with other possibilities. Its all about consumer capitalism and white rage, pretty much. The president of the United States sending angry tweets from his gold-plated toilet seat, with an empty tub of Hagen-Dazs beside him. Theres Western civilization for you.

Trump offers nothing remotely close to the elaborate pseudo-scientific racism of the Nazis, under which the so-called Aryans would rule the world but various lesser grades of white folks with northern European backgrounds would also get a sweet deal. Maybe some of his alt-right nerd followers still obsess about that stuff but who needs it? Trumpian racism is simply rooted in a dumbass, anti-historical vision of the past, a vaguely articulated fiction that until some relatively recent point (probably the 1960s) our countries were a certain way i.e., overwhelmingly white, overwhelmingly Christian, culturally homogeneous and dominated by men and had been that way forever.

It probably does no good to observe that while the fantasy of a lost golden age recurs throughout history, this dad-shorts, #MAGA iteration is beyond any serious doubt the dumbest version ever constructed. It is quintessentially American, in the sense that it is too naive and weak-minded to acknowledge its innate cruelty. The Nazis, who if they had nothing else had a theory of history, would have found it hilarious and childish.

To start with, there is no country in Europe or the Americas or anywhere else in the world that has not been shaped and reshaped by waves of migration and immigration, or by conflict, conquest, turmoil and change. The island nation where my grandparents were born provides a valuable case in point. Although Ireland is often presented, in the most simplistic variety of nationalism, as the home of an ancient, homogeneous and ethnically unitary civilization, that is more myth than history. (If the myth often seems like harmless tribal romance, it has also had darker consequences.) In reality, the people of modern Ireland largely resulted from centuries of violent collision between Celtic, Scandinavian, Anglo-Saxon and Norman cultures, and the full story is considerably more complicated than that.

Traces of Iberian and North African DNA can be found to this day among people on the southwestern coast of Ireland. (Folk wisdom has long held that such influences accounted for the black Irish combination of dark hair and olive skin.) As for Celtic culture, the source of so many bad American tattoos, it isnt as ancient as all that and did not originate in Ireland. The Celts first appear in the archaeological record around 3,000 years ago in central Europe, roughly in present-day Austria or Slovakia. Of course they had come from someplace else before that, and when they were driven west into France, Spain and the British Isles they conquered or displaced the people who lived in those places, about whom not much is known. Recent genetic research suggests there may in fact have been multiple waves of pre-Celtic people, some with roots in the southern Mediterranean and the Middle East, others who came from the steppes of Russia or Ukraine.

So if I describe myself as a white person of largely Irish ancestry, its a statement of fact with an extremely limited horizon of information. It does not connect me to some essential, pure and unchanging culture but to a little green island that has seen lots of turbulent history. Go back more than a few generations, and like everyone alive today I could have ancestors almost anywhere: Sardinia? Lebanon? Some village of mud huts on the Danube? If linguistics is any guide, everyone of European ancestry ultimately has roots on the Indian subcontinent and, of course, you and I and everyone else on this planet evidently share an African foremother.

As Gandhi apparently did not say (but probably believed), Western civilization is something of a mixed bag. But if the term can be said to describe anything, it describes a process of constant change, of conflict, ferment, fusion, cross-pollination and evolution. It has never prospered by erecting barriers between itself and the rest of the world. Indeed, the fundamental nature of Western civilization it is curious, acquisitive, voracious, questioning means it can never really do that.

Donald Trump may pay lip service to Western civilization as a pallid, steady-state realm of Great Men writing Great Books he has not read and making Important Speeches he does not understand. But thats no more than a thin veneer pasted on top of the version his followers really want, a racial fantasyland of full employment for white men and zero immigration. Neither of those things has ever existed in the past or will ever exist in the future. They have nothing to do with civilization, except insofar as they misinterpret it as a fortress rather than a process. They have nothing to do with history, except as an attempt to stop it from happening. That wont work, of course. But this moment is likely to shape our history and our civilization, and not in a good way.

Here is the original post:
Donald Trump and the decline of the West: Ten thousand years of civilization and we end up with this guy? - Salon

The First Lady of Poland Smoothly Avoided Shaking Donald Trump’s Hand [Updated] – Vanity Fair

Donald Trump has only been in office for six months, but he already has a streak of awkward handshakesor in this case, snubswith world leaders. As the president and First Lady were greeting the Polish President Andrzej Duda and his wife, Agata Kornhauser-Duda, in Poland on Thursday, Kornhauser-Duda appeared to pass over the president and instead shook Melania Trumps hand.

The video, which quickly went viral, shows the president turning toward Kornhauser-Duda for a handshake as she swiftly walks by him. Trump looks bewildered at this apparent rejection. (She did, later, shake the presidents hand after all.)

But this interaction is only the latest fumble in Trumps social interactions. In February, Trumps meeting with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe resulted in what looked like an [uncomfortable power struggle] as Trump held on to the Abes hands for nearly 19 seconds. The president has a reputation for this kind of handshake, which CNN deemed the grab and yank in a compilation video featuring political leaders from Vice President Mike Pence to New Jersey Governor Chris Christie.

There was also that time in January when Trump held on to British Prime Minister Theresa Mays hand as they walked the White House colonnade. It is hard to forget, too, the presidents refusing to shake German Chancellor Angela Merkels hand in March, despite her actually asking him to do so for a photo op. It looks like they finally got that handshake in at the G20 Summit on Thursday, though Merkel appears to be slightly startled.

And do we even need to get into the Melania hand graze seen round the world? O.K. fine, we have. . This article has been updated to reflect that President Trump and Kornhauser-Duda did eventually shake hands.

Losing to wind next to his helicopter in Scotland.

Losing to wind at Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland.

Losing to wind as he heads to Indiana.

Losing to wind while hes in Scotland to discuss bankrolling an anti-wind-farm campaign in order to fight an off-shore development near his luxury golf resort.

Losing to wind in the presence of Tom Brady.

Losing to wind while waving.

Putting up a good fight but ultimately losing to wind in Scotland.

PreviousNext

Losing to wind next to his helicopter in Scotland.

By Michael McGurk/Alamy.

Losing to wind at Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland.

By Nicholas Kamm/AFP/Getty Images.

Losing to wind as he heads to Indiana.

By Timothy A. Clary/AFP/Getty Images.

Losing to wind while hes in Scotland to discuss bankrolling an anti-wind-farm campaign in order to fight an off-shore development near his luxury golf resort.

By Danny Lawson/PA/A.P.

Losing to wind while he talks to Patriots owner Robert Kraft before a game.

From Splash News.

Losing to wind at the house on the Isle of Lewis, Scotland, where his mother was born before she immigrated to the United States in 1929.

From PA/Alamy.

Losing to wind while boarding the Marine One helicopter at Joint Base Andrews, Maryland.

By Jonathan Ernst/Reuters.

Losing to wind while leaving One World Trade in New York.

By Timothy A. Clary/AFP/Getty Images.

Losing to wind in the presence of Tom Brady.

From Boston Herald/Splash News.

Losing to wind while waving.

By Rob Carr/Getty Images.

Putting up a good fight but ultimately losing to wind in Scotland.

By Michael McGurk/Rex/Shutterstock.

Link:
The First Lady of Poland Smoothly Avoided Shaking Donald Trump's Hand [Updated] - Vanity Fair

Donald Trump vs. CNN: How the President Is Trolling the Media Into Oblivion – Newsweek

The president of the United States of America is a shitposter.

Its not an elegant turn of phrase. But it is, I think, the correct terminology to capture a political moment so monstrously stupid that even Jerry Springer finds it embarrassing. To shitpost, according to the scholarly journal Urban Dictionary, is to make utterly worthless and inane posts on an internet message board, particularly those involving memes or low-quality visuals.

And the presidents latest act of shitpostingtweeting out a video edited to show Trump wrestling, and beating up, the CNN logohas flung the 24-hour news network into a week-long controversy involving death threats, claims of blackmail and a Reddit user who calls himself HanAssholeSolo. Its very hard to imagine having to explain that sentence to a person from 2007. But frankly, its also pretty hard to explain that sentence to a normal person from 2017 who doesnt spend every waking moment following incremental developments in Trumps blustery war with the media. (Which, probably, is healthy.)

Daily Emails and Alerts - Get the best of Newsweek delivered to your inbox

Related: Trump blocked me on Twitter for telling him hes not as cool as witches

Now, a week after Trumps tweet, CNN is accused of blackmailing the Reddit user behind the wrestling clip, and the networks journalists (and even some of their families) are being subjected to threats and harassing phone calls from pro-Trump trolls and Redditors. Curiously, the line from the CNN story that was interpreted as blackmail (a stretch) wasnt written even by the reporter. According to Gizmodo, it was added by a CNN executive as a legal safeguard, but the threatening tone proved disastrous. But as the #CNNBlackMail hashtag spread through the alt-right this week, things got ugly. These far-right trolls are really threatening people and coming after people, an anonymous CNN employee told The Daily Beast. Somebodys gonna do something stupid at some point.

For observers of Gamergate, these tactics are familiaronly now the digital mob is taking inspiration from the highest reaches of government. Trump frequently approaches social media like a message board troll, so its darkly fitting that far-right trolls are adopting the basest instincts of internet forumculture to wage war against the presidents perceived enemy: CNN.

Trump cant win a war against CNN in the courts. But he can continue to troll the network (and other media outlets) into chaos and disarray. Consider Trumps 2006 battle with the journalist Tim OBrien, who had published a book alleging that Trumps net worth was far lower than claimed. Trump sued the author for libel, and after a lengthy legal process, the case was eventually dismissed. But Trump was pleased: I spent a couple of bucks on legal fees, he later told The Washington Post, and they spent a whole lot more. I did it to make his life miserable, which Im happy about.

Its not farfetched to think that Trump feels similarly pleased with himself for bringing chaos to CNN. (Jeffrey A. Zucker, the president of the network, has described Trumps behavior as bullying.) By casting journalists as villains in his administration, the president makes questions of objectivity even trickier to navigate. As the writer/comedian Sarah Cooper tweeted, Journalists aren't supposed to be the story, so by making them the story, Trump automatically makes them look biased in defending themselves.

If youre still confused about the state of the presidents war with CNN, heres an explainer.

U.S. President Donald Trump delivers remarks during a joint news conference with Romanian President Klaus Iohannis in the Rose Garden at the White House in Washington, D.C., on June 9. The writer is not allowed to see Trump's tweets anymore. Jonathan Ernst/Reuters

Q: Why is the president so mad at CNN? Trump has been regularly fuming about CNN, which reports critically on him (and which he calls Fake News), since the campaign days. But this particular wave of hostility seems to have been prompted by a retracted CNN story regarding a Russian investment fund with ties to Trump officials. Three journalists resigned after CNN pulled the story. The president spent days gloating about this, though its worth noting that when he lies, nobody resigns or issues a retraction.

Q: What about that video? Did Trump really wrestle a guy from CNN? No. The video is an old clip of Trumps appearance at WrestleMania. The CNN logo was superimposed over anotherguys head.

Q: Where did the doctored video come from? Reddit, of course. CNNs Andrew Kaczynski did some digging and determined that the video originated with a Reddit user named HanAssholeSolo, whos left behind a sizable trail of racist and anti-Semitic posts (including a graphic showing CNN employees with Jewish stars next to their names). Mr. Asshole Solo apologized and deleted his other posts.

Q: "HanAssholeSolo? What kind of name is Its a Reddit username. If you havent spent much time on Reddit, feel free to keep it that way.

Q: I heard that CNN is blackmailing the pro-Trump Reddit guy. Is that true? Not exactlythough the outlet definitely botched how the story was handled. CNN tracked down the source of the video, but declined to publish his real name. Its reasonable for news outlets to take an interest in this Reddit user, since hes been involved in a big, newsworthy event; there was a clear public interest in how the violent video traveled from pro-Trump forums to the presidents Twitter feed. But the issue of anonymity is somewhat thorny, since the guy is a private citizen and, by most accounts, didnt give permission for Trump to use his video. He is not a public figure, and if doxed, he could be subject to threats or harassment.

Whats weird is that CNN granted HanAssholeSolo a sort of conditional anonymity. This passage from the story was widely interpreted as a threat to dox the Reddit user if he resumes his ugly behavior:

CNN is not publishing "HanA**holeSolo's" name because he is a private citizen who has issued an extensive statement of apology, showed his remorse by saying he has taken down all his offending posts, and because he said he is not going to repeat this ugly behavior on social media again. In addition, he said his statement could serve as an example to others not to do the same. CNN reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change.

This is odd language to include in a news story. It makes it seem as though the promise of anonymity is transactional, in exchange for a promise not to misbehave. But it wasnt intended as blackmail. It was just sloppy wording. As Kaczynski noted on Twitter, the line was meant to express that CNN hadnt made any agreement with the man regarding anonymity. (If that paragraph was poorly phrased, it might be because it wasnt constructedby a writer; it was written by a network executive as a defensive measure to explain their sourcing decision, Gizmodo later found.)

I dont think CNN intended this as blackmail, Poynters ethicist concluded, but its easy to see how the unfortunate wording in the story could be easily misinterpreted. Its also easy to see that aggressive pro-Trump trolls might act in bad faith and attack CNNs reporters regardless of the anonymity issue. When Trump characterizes the media as the enemy of the American people, his most vociferous followers might regard it as a patriotic deed to harass journalists.

Q: Wait, I thought the wrestling video was made by a 15-year-old kid? No. This false detail spread quickly in early social media posts, stirring up anti-CNN fervor among Trump supporters inclined to believe that the network was threatening a minor. (Donald Trump Jr., for instance, tweeted: So I guess they weren't effective threatening the admin so they go after & bully a 15 y/o?) But it isnt true. Andrew Kaczynski, the CNN reporter who spoke to the Reddit user, has confirmed that he is an adult.

Trump did once retweet a 16-year-old boy bashing CNN, but that was a separate incident.

Whats going on at CNN now? Lots of unease, reportedly. Kaczynskis family is receiving dozens of harassing phone calls. So are reporters and executives at the network.

Why doesnt Trump just tell his followers not to target journalists with death threats or anti-Semitic memes? Well . That would require Trump to acknowledge that some of his followers make death threats and post anti-Semitic memes. Plus, Trumps tweet was interpreted as encouraging attacks on journalists. The larger issue isnt that the president dislikes CNN (which has mishandled plenty in recent weeks). Its that the president dislikes the fundamental notion of journalism holding power to account.

Are we going to be OK? At press time, we really dont know.

See the article here:
Donald Trump vs. CNN: How the President Is Trolling the Media Into Oblivion - Newsweek

Is Donald Trump a TV Addict? – POLITICO Magazine

For a man who famously doesnt drink, television has been Donald Trumps drug of choice his entire adult life. During his playboy years in New York, after he made sure he was photographed with a beautiful woman on his arm, his most urgent desire was to make a beeline for his apartment and the TV, the Washington Posts Marc Fisher, co-author of Trump Revealed, told me. He liked to settle in and watch through the night with a big bag of candy. In the beginning, he was a sports junkie; then, as he started to become more politically aware, he shifted to news.

Now, Trumps obsession with television is so consuming that the former reality-TV show star experiences the reality of his presidency through flat-screens in the West Wing. A thorough Washington Post report about Trumps viewing habits describes a man never more than a few feet from a TV, whether tuned in to CNN, Fox, Fox Business or MSNBC. Trump has even been known to shush staff and visitors so he can focus on whats airing, or to yell at screens showing negative coverage of him. The Post estimated that Trump logs more than five hours of TV viewing a day, starting his morning with Fox & Friends and ending with marathon sessions in the private residence, often reviewing the days events on TiVo (one of the greatest inventions of all time, he told Time). All this tube time grinds away at him. Witness his recent, much-denounced Twitter attacks on the co-hosts of Morning Joe, Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski, and on CNN for its coverage of him.

Story Continued Below

The man clearly has a habit, but what if its something more than that? Could the 45th president be a television addict? And if so, what does that mean for his presidency? Psychologists and other experts agree that people whose TV watching gets out of control can take steps to master their compulsion. But to do so requires the recognition that their behavior needs to change. So, ponder the likelihood of Trump acknowledging that.

The question of whether one can truly be addicted to TV, in the clinical sense, is a matter of some debate. Historically, addiction was understood to mean being in the grip of strong, overpowering urges, but the modern definition narrowed to describe a substance dependencedrugs, alcohol, nicotinethat results in physiological withdrawal, as Steve Sussman, a professor of psychology at the University of Southern California and author of the textbook Substance and Behavioral Addictions, has described. Now, the pendulum again swings to encompass behavioral compulsions. For example, the last revision of the American Psychiatric Associations Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders included gambling disorderthough shopaholics, sex addicts and compulsive television watchers do not yet have their own designations. All the experts I spoke with said that whether you consider excessive television watching an addiction or an addiction, there is no doubt that heavy users feel compelled to watch, and bereft and agitated when they cant.

Sussman told me that television dependency is probably the first addiction many of us experience. Think of children, glassy-eyed in front of the screen, and the tantrums they throw if its turned off. Since its invention, television has been noted for its enslaving power. In a 2013 paper titled Hidden Addiction: Television, Sussman and co-author Meghan Moran, of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, wrote that only a few years after television became widely available in this country in the late 1940s, researchers began expressing concern about its grip. They cite a 1954 studythe first known on television addictionsuggesting that the condition could lead to generalized apathy, neglect of responsibilities, negativism, and fantasy.

A 2003 article in Scientific American Mind, by professors Robert Kubey and Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi and titled, Television Addiction is No Mere Metaphor, helped to explain televisions strangely seductive power. It turns out that before both television and Trump, Russian scientist Ivan Pavlov in 1927 described what he called the orienting response. This is the instinctive focus we give to novel visual or auditory stimuli. Such action makes evolutionary sense: As a species, we had to be excellent at detecting predators (or food) lurking nearby. Kubey and Csikszentmihalyi note that a study from the 1980s found that the nature of television, with its incessant, ever-changing sights and sounds, is perfectly designed to trigger our orienting response. Regardless of subject matter, we find it hard to turn away.

We know that television watching can set off powerful physiological reactions. Press the remote and the sense of relaxation is instantaneous, Kubey and Csikszentmihalyi write, with the orienting response slowing the heart and quieting the body, so the brain can gather information. That sounds great, but when the screen goes black, people can quickly return to what the authors call dysphoric ruminationa state of unpleasant, roiling, repetitive thoughts. Heavy watchers forced to go cold turkey described being angry, jangled and volatile. Kubey and Csikszentmihalyi note the existential dilemma of obsessive media consumers whose electronic life seems more important, more immediate and more intense than the life they lead face-to-face. It would be interesting to find out, after the upcoming G-20 summit, if Trumps first face-to-face meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin provides him the same intensity as watching an episode of Morning Joe.

According to Kubey and Csikszentmihalyi, research shows that those who tend to be anxious in unstructured situations, and easily bored and distracted, are more vulnerable to television addiction. Sussman and Moran write that the condition is more likely to occur when an individual feels insecure in identity, feels alienated socially, feels unable to act or learn to act appropriately in social contexts, and is preoccupied with TV viewing as a means of solitary and social play. They note that in severe cases, ones ability to continue to function in roles at work or at home could become jeopardized as the result of ones television addiction. As an example, they describe people who may try to work at home as often as possible to be able to watch TV. Of course, if you live at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, working at homeand watching as much television as you wantis a perk of the office.

So, does Trumps television watching rise to the level of addiction? The hours he spends are not out of sync with the rest of America. Nielsen says adults on average watch more than four hours a day of television, and people over age 65 watch more than seven. (Estimates from the Bureau of Labor Statistics are considerably lower.)

Of course, if you consider Trumps cohort to be not the rest of us but previous presidents, his viewing habits are unprecedented, according to the Atlantic, and so is the role television plays in how he discharges his duties. He is a man so consumed with media consumption that he monitors the appearancesand appearanceof members of Congress, complimenting or criticizing what they said and how they looked. As the Post has reported, everyone seeking to influence Trump, from members of Congress to foreign visitors, tries to get booked on cable as a way of delivering a message directly to him. Representative Elijah Cummings (D-Maryland) once actually addressed the president directly on Morning Joe, asking him to call to talk about prescription drugs. Trump did.

If the role of television in the life of Trump was once a means of distraction and relaxation, it no longer serves that function. Today, television provides no escape. Its as though the president is in an endless episode of The Twilight Zone (a series he likely would have watched when young) or Black Mirror (a recent series he likely hasnt). Anywhere he clicks on cable news, hes all anyone is talking about. For someone with Trumps limitless ego needs, how gratifying; for someone with Trumps exquisite sense of offense, how enraging. Because, unless he is docked at that island of constant praise that is Fox, hes bound to encounter someone saying something disparaging of him. Trump keeps vowing he has stopped watching any show that criticizes him, but the Washington Post notes he often hate watches his perceived enemies. Perhaps its an evolutionary need: If there are predators closing in, better to be on the alert and vanquish them with a weapon our hominid ancestors could not even conceive: the tweet.

At the same time, despite all his bluster about fake news, Trump is very trusting of what he learns on TV, Marc Fisher says. Many television viewers have a sense that they know the people they regularly watch on screen, but now that Trump is president, he actually does know them. When he knows people, he trusts their information, Fisher says. Fox & Friends are part of his family. That was true for Morning Joe, and thats why he feels so spurned and betrayed.

During the campaign, NBCs Chuck Todd asked Trump whom he talked to for military advice, and Trump famously replied, Well, I watch the shows. Of course, if youre president of the United States, trust in television pundits isnt exactly reassuring. A veteran Republican consultant told the Post that White House aides despair of Trumps viewing habits because they know a comment he hears on Fox could cause an abrupt change of position. In the conservative National Review, Kevin Williamson recently wrote, Id wager that Trump could list at least three times as many cable-news commentators as world leaders. He is much better versed in CNNs lineup than in NATOs.

Seth Norrholm, an associate professor in psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Emory University School of Medicine, concludes, based on Trumps public behavior, that the president has an extreme case of narcissism, and believes Trumps time as star of The Apprentice has affected his expectations as president. In the show, Norrholm says, Trump was the undisputed emperor of an artificial kingdom, all-powerful and beyond criticismand that is what he would like his White House experience to be. Norrholm believes Trumps current television obsession confirms for Trump his sense of his own importance, while constantly and maddeningly going off Trumps preferred script. Narcissists often try to avoid reality, Norrholm says, which is generally full of ego injury, and when they cant protect themselvesas perhaps when they are hate-watching cable newsthey get depression and paranoia.

David M. Reiss, a psychiatrist in private practice in Southern California, also believes Trump is severely narcissistic based on the presidents public behavior. A basic struggle of the narcissist is to distract from inner emptiness and loneliness, Reiss explains, and cable television in particular is highly effective at this because it is intended to grab you emotionally. Reiss says he thinks Trump has never been that interested in analyzing the news, but instead uses television viewing for emotional arousal.

For Trump today, watching television is no longer so distracting or relaxing as it once might have been, Reiss says, but it now likely serves a unique need, by validating the narcissists continuous sense of grievance. Reiss says, Television does away with the cognitive dissonance of Why am I angry? Trump can conclude he is angry because hes watching television, and considering what people are saying about him, it makes sense to feel apoplectic. When someone criticizes him, it gives him consistency between his inner and outer experience, Reiss says. Then it also gives him a target he can vent at. Reiss expects Trumps hate-watching to continue and his rage to build because the grandiosity now has a reality to it. That Trump really is the most powerful person in the world will make all the pathology worse, Reiss says.

What does Trumps TV watching mean for the rest of us? If his dependency is affecting his mood, how he spends his time, even his thinking on policyclearly, the effects could be serious. But there is yet another potential consequence: In the 1970s, two social scientists, Sandra Ball-Rokeach and Melvin Defleur developed what they called the Media System Dependency theory, which holds that during strange and unsettled times, when a society is experiencing unusual conflict and change, people become more dependent than ever on the media. As the ratings for cable news soars, perhaps Trump is making television addicts of us all.

Emily Yoffe is a contributing editor at the Atlantic.

View post:
Is Donald Trump a TV Addict? - POLITICO Magazine