It is according to the American Journal of Political Science:
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3809096/
Is this actually ‘science’, or just political activism/demagoguery disguised with tables and graphs?
EDIT: I know.
K: my sister who is a clinical psychologist says that in Grad school, they did some
work in this area and she agrees with the results. Her husband who is also
a psychologist has done some private looking into Her Trumpf and he believes
that Herr Trumpf has deep issues like being a textbook case of being a paranoid
narcissist, (didn’t know there was such a thing, but apparently there is) He believes
Herr Trumpf thinks he exists in some imaginary world in which he is the only person.
He final thoughts were that Trumpf is a danger to himself and humanity.
He could easily destroy the world to protect his fantasies about himself.
All this is of course is off the record as they aren’t really allowed to
engage in this type of speculation, its called the “Goldwater rule”.
Kropotkin
That also sounds like something from the loon bin though.
And for good reason. If a person already has a particular political persuasion, aren’t they likely to view people of the opposite persuasion negatively, and start chalking the differences up to some mental problem? In other words, if the results were reversed, and you found out the people doing the study were a bunch of conservatives, wouldn’t you be suspicious?
And a little too convenient that a bunch of scientists would ‘discover’ that some ideology or another is driven by insanity in an election year.
That article is serious BS, but in the long run, all it is is saying is that Trump was born to be a conservative. Of course the authors describe a “conservative” as a serious social deviant so as to promote their political liberal ideology ("Physician heal thyself").
One might want to note that in the world of psychiatry, “Verhulst B, Neale MC.”, stands for “Verhulst B, Neale, Medical Crackpot”.
Frankly, it has about the same credibility as this guy.
.
What about this?
It’s a fake internet propaganda meme. It’s supposed to be something he said on the Oprah show back in the 90’s or something when she asked him if he’d considered running for president, only he never said those things about FOX or Republicans. If it were real, he wouldn’t have gotten the nomination.
Word.
Amazing that that link doesn’t seem to point to the major correction that was issued (if it’s there, it’s not very prominent). The paper as published mixed up conservatives and liberals, so it was actually liberals who were more psychotic.
To my mind, the correction increases the reliability of the study (as corrected). At this point the authors have published a study demonstrating the same unflattering finding about liberals and conservatives. Whatever their political bias, there’s good reason to believe they are able to look past it.
But I found this claim interesting:
The correlation seems to me to be a tactical one, to attempt to make such voters feel ashamed. Why wouldn’t an aggressive loony lefty fall under that category, or any other political party for that matter?
Getting liberal confused with conservative is bad enough, but the more serious problem is that as a science report, it is pathetic.
Before such an actual study can begin, one must define both “personality” and “political attitude” in terms that can be quantifiably measured. Beyond that, the quality control measures must eliminate all possible other casual factors. The notion that you can merely collect thousands of people from all over the country with the attributes you seek and assume that every other attribute has been randomized is hogwash, yet fools non-science people everyday (which includes all psychiatrists). And then to add to that same concern, their correlation numbers were extremely low and insignificant for such a sloppy process.
It is a typical attitude among such pseudo-science people that if they add enough mud into the water, it will all become clear.
I must have super accidentally forgotten to mention that! I was just curious what sorts of responses I would get. But yeah, it’s about the biggest correction/flaw I’ve ever seen in a scientific study, where the published conclusions were completely reversed.
Nice bait! Though personally, i’m always suspicious of such low hanging fruit. Besides, if the study actually were solid, there is no way any self-respecting conservative would willfully put it on the table for the rest of us to see.
As if neo liberalism is any less psychotic. 
It’s not psychosis. Conservatives are simply narcissistic and prone to denial and lying in order to protect a self-image at all costs-- this is because conservatism isn’t actually based in philosophy (as any proper politics should be based in philosophy), but instead is based in psychology, their own psychological and personality needs.
Conservatives care about looking cool, being “strong” and defiant, never admitting they were wrong or don’t know something, and being aligned to the in-group herd mentality, which is why they are obsessed with bedtime storybook quality narratives of “good and evil” (also why they’re prone to religious fanaticism). Conservatism is closer to a religion than to a politics. Hence the obsessions with fantasy-land rather than reality, their reliance on talking points, their obsession with “principles” (defending their deliberately self-ignorant pathological narcissism and never admitting they are wrong).
Conservatives don’t ‘conserve’ anything except their own child-like emotionally constipated ignorance for the purposes of keeping reality at bay so their sensitive egos and convenient ideological beliefs are never challenged. Just like Trump, a conservative could never emotionally handle a sincere look at the things they profess to believe; their world-view is locked in and unchanging, pre-made for them by far right pundits, bigots and uneducated religious nuts. individual conservatives can be nice people, but when it comes to thinking, to politics, to philosophy or to emotional honesty they fall flat. It’s my contention that there must be a correlation between conservative and mildly autistic tendencies, but I’ve no way to demonstrate that since I’m not aware of any research on that point.
Filed under Rachael Maddow political talking points.
Hey check it out UPF, my bait still worked.