Do Trumps children get the same benefit of the doubt?
They are well past the age of fifteen.
Agreed but would they? I kinda doubt it
Why should they get the benefit of the doubt?
Fair criticism. I’ll consider both.
They would not. Nor should they.
Trump’s own sister detailed how Trump’s father turned his son into a sociopath, and evidence shows Trump has passed on those traits to his own kids.
“Children” as in “offspring”? That’s absurd. Everyone is, in that sense, a child.
“Children” as in “people under the age of 18”? Hell yes, of course they do, and it’s repugnant when people attack Barron.
Good luck with your hypocrisy hunt tho
Be clear who “they” is. There’s some real equivocating going on, centered around different meanings of “children”.
I agree that attacks on Barron are unwarranted. I don’t think I’ve ever heard the kid make a public statement or a report of anything that would justify an attack on him. But for my own calibration of what attacks on minors are acceptable and which are not, is this repugnant?: Smirky McDouchebag thread.
My point was not to find some hypocrisy by you, but to let you know that it does indeed happen (and to which you already see that it happens) And yes, I meant under 18
Due to the inherent bias in people in general, they usually do not or cannot see it in themselves (or for the most part, even when it is pointed out to them) so kudos to you.
This board is no different in that regard and in some cases much worse due to the echo chamber effect that happens regularly here.
I disagree vehemently, are you then saying that simply because of who you were born to, that is the end all be all of your existence? No change possible, no chance at redemption.
That’s a terrible viewpoint.
I can’t predict what any of the Trump adults will do in the future or whether they will redeem themselves. What we do know is that they have not shown the capacity or willingness to do so to date.
Now, I’m no betting man. But for those who are, where do you suppose the smart money would go?
I don’t disagree with that (or with where the smart money would go), but any child under the age of 18 deserves the benefit of the doubt no matter who their parents are.
I see. So being respectful comes out of fear of consequences, not out of the respectee meriting it. Got it.
On one hand, she is 15, and drama does tend to come with the age. On the other hand, I can totally see how being their child would be an abnormal experience, to say the least.
And she looks… precocious(?) I mean, she looks like she could be in her twenties and is awfully well coiffed and made up. That’s got to be significant somehow, versus the average 15 year old who’s still somewhat awkward and clearly a teenager.
They deserve the benefit of the doubt until they demonstrate otherwise by their actions. Then you have to allow for the shoots of doubt. 18 isn’t some biologically magical age at which an entirely new and unexpected personality emerges. By mid to late teens, their personality is pretty well established. Long term studies of personality changes over the human lifespan suggest that changes do occur but very slowly and are only significantly noticeable when comparing over multiple decades. 63 years in this particular study comparing subjects measured at 14 years of age and then 77.
In this study, we assessed the stability of personality over an interval of 63 years, from adolescence through to older age. We observed that individual differences in personality characteristics in later life were not closely related to the same traits in early life. Controlling rater-group effects did reveal marginally significant and near-significant stability of two of the six assessed personality characteristics at the expense of imposing other assumptions, but results generally indicated very low stability of personality from age 14 to age 77 years. Previous studies have demonstrated that personality is subject to a lifelong series of relatively small changes—particularly in adolescence and early adulthood, but continuing even into older age. As a result of this gradual change, personality can appear relatively stable over short intervals—increasingly so throughout adulthood. However, the longer the interval between two assessments of personality, the weaker the relationship between the two tends to be. Our results suggest that, when the interval is increased to as much as 63 years, there is hardly any relationship at all. If so, personality changes only gradually throughout life, but by older age it may be quite different from personality in childhood. Future studies should focus on developing better understanding of how and why personality changes throughout the life course.
Here is another study that claims:
Personality with stable behavioural traits emerges in the adolescent and young adult years. Models of putatively distinct, but correlated, personality traits have been developed to describe behavioural styles including schizotypal, narcissistic, callous-unemotional, negative emotionality, antisocial and impulsivity traits.
I am making zero claims about any expertise in this area of research. I’m simply stating that it’s not out of the question to start making some informed assumptions about the likely personality of an individual prior to age 18.
Yes, is that an earthshattering worldview? Actions without consequences leads us to here
I guess some feel that you gain respect by wielding a belt, rather than by conducting yourself honestly and honourably.
This explains a lot, really.
Where? What’s wrong with “here”?
15 sounds awfully young to be basing a set determination of who they are, and the lasting effects of just about any decision (and a lot of things even criminal IMO)
I don’t see many children (under18 ish) that deserve to be punished due to who they were born to.
The actions they perform will rightly give others ammo to judge but I think the jury should wait to convict a little while before dropping the hammer.