Psychology, Politics, and National Security
Loading

Featured Posts        



categories        



Links        



archives        



meta        




Aug 28th, 2016




On the psychology of politics, media attention of late has focused on Donald Trump’s narcissism (see “Amateurs analyze Trump’s mind, but should the pros do it?” by Seth Borenstein, Associated Press, Aug. 11, 2016). However, in the context of the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign, Trump’s narcissism is not the main issue; Donald Trump and his Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton, have identical Millon Inventory of Diagnostic Criteria scores on narcissism (MIDC scale 2: Ambitious = 24).

Confident-Narcissistic_spectrum
© 2015 MILLON®

A narcissistic personality can be socially and politically adaptive (functional, nonpathological) if complemented and balanced by appropriately congruent personality patterns, as in the case of Hillary Clinton — at least insofar as erratic, undisciplined political behavior is concerned.

The critical difference between the Republican and Democratic nominees is their score on extraversion (MIDC scale 3: Outgoing; Trump = 24, Clinton = 0), which at higher elevations — as in the case of Trump — may be tantamount to a histrionic personality disorder.

Sociable-Histrionic_spectrum
© 2015 MILLON®

Trump’s high score on the MIDC Outgoing scale accounts for his impulsiveness and lack of discipline and self-restraint (frequently referred to in media commentary as “no filter”).

Trump’s impulsive tendency is exacerbated by his remarkably low score on conscientiousness (MIDC scale 6: Conscientious = 0). Clinton, in contrast, is substantially conscientious (MIDC scale 6: Conscientious = 15), which is associated with emotional restraint, self-discipline, and prudence.

Conscientious-Compulsive_spectrum
© 2015 MILLON®

Following personality theorist Theodore Millon, here’s a quick rundown of personality attributes associated with high elevations on the Outgoing pattern, which approaches histrionic levels in the case of Trump but fails to register on Clinton’s MIDC profile:

Expressive behavior: Dramatic/Impulsive — engaging, provocative, volatile; intolerant of inactivity, resulting in impulsive, highly emotional, and theatrical responsiveness.

Interpersonal conduct: Attention-seeking/Flamboyant — actively solicits attention and approval; vain and exhibitionistic, seeking to be the center of attention.

Cognitive style: Flighty/Scattered — avoids introspective thought, attentive to fleeting external events, and speaks in impressionistic generalities; integrates experiences poorly, resulting in scattered learning and thoughtless judgments.

Self-image: Gregarious/Charming — views self as sociable, stimulating, and charming; enjoys the image of attracting others by physical appearance and pursuing a busy and pleasure-oriented lifestyle.

Mood/temperament: Fickle/Impetuous — rapidly-shifting and shallow emotions; energetic, animated, hotheaded or impulsive, and exhibits a tendency to be easily enthused and as easily angered or bored.

Summary and formulation

To take the full measure of the man, political analysts must consider the interplay between Donald Trump’s ambitious (“narcissistic”) and outgoing (“histrionic”) tendencies, as described in the Millon Inventory of Diagnostic Criteria manual:

Persons who score high on both the Ambitious and Outgoing scales are clever and charming; they are skilled at attracting and seducing others. Though highly ambitious, Ambitious–Outgoing individuals also tend to be undisciplined, traveling an erratic course of successes, failures, and abandoned hopes. Needing excitement, stimulation, and challenge, they are easily bored by routine activities and often act impulsively. They exhibit a restless, driven quality, which may be accompanied by a deficit in social dependability. Because agreements are often hastily assumed, they may have trouble honoring their promises or meeting their obligations. Ultimately, they are more attuned to their own needs than to those of others.

Though fundamentally self-oriented, these individuals are facile in the ways of social seduction, often feign an air of dignity and confidence, and are skilled at deceiving others with their clever glibness. They fabricate stories to enhance their worth and leave behind a trail of broken promises and outrageous acts. Fabrication serves both to nourish their inflated self-image and to seduce others into supporting their excesses; however, their disregard for the truth and talents for exploitation and deception are rarely hostile or malicious in intent. Typically, it is simply a product of their narcissistic attitude of omnipotence and their profound sense of entitlement; fundamentally, they are not malevolent. Criticism, confrontation, and punishment are unlikely to make them change their ways and, in fact, may prompt dismissive rage or anger.

For more information, please consult the Unit for the Study of Personality in Politics Media Tipsheet at http://personality-politics.org/2016-election-media-tipsheet/

 


 

Related reports on this site

The Personality Profile of 2016 Republican Presidential Candidate Donald Trump (Aug. 9, 2015)

Trump poster (2016)
Click on image for larger view

The Personality Profile of 2016 Democratic Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton (July 27, 2016)

Hillary-Clinton_poster_July-2016
Click on image for larger view



The purpose of the Unit for the Study of Personality in Politics Media Tipsheet is threefold. First, it offers political reporters looking for a fresh story angle a sometimes unique, often unconventional perspective on politics. Second, it serves as a repository for research-based political analysis. Analyses and predictions in the Tipsheet are, in effect, research hypotheses to be tested prospectively against actual event outcomes, which in turn serve to refine the guiding theory of personality and leadership that informed the analysis and prediction in the first place. Third, the Tipsheet aims to provide voters and reporters with politically unbiased, nonpartisan insights into aspects of candidates’ personal character likely to impinge on their public lives, campaign style, policy preferences, and leadership prospects.

July 30, 2016

At the start of the general election campaign immediately following the Republican and Democratic national conventions, the “smart money” 100 days before the 2016 presidential election is on Hillary Clinton to win in a landslide.

As Rachel Maddow reported July 29 on MSNBC, the Rothenburg Political Report, the Cook Political Report, Sabato’s Crystal Ball, and the Princeton Election Consortium all projected more than 300 Electoral College votes for Clinton (270 needed to win).

Electoral-College-forecast_7-29-2016

Moreover, New York Times ‘Upshot,’ Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEight, and PredictWise forecast, on average, a better than 60 percent chance of Clinton winning the election. [Aug. 3 update: The Upshot: 74%; FiveThirtyEight: 70%; PredictWise: 78%; Sam Wang: 80%]

Election-forecasts_7-29-2016

Maddow’s discussion of the election-outcome predictions starts at 10:40 on the video segment below (“The Rachel Maddow Show,” July 29, 2016).

In contrast to the conventional wisdom, my own presidential election forecast model, the Personal Electability Index (PEI), projected as early as August 2015 that Donald Trump would defeat Hillary Clinton.

The PEI, developed at the Unit for the Study of Personality in Politics (USPP), has accurately predicted, before Super Tuesday, the outcome of every presidential election since 1996.

The PEI heuristic model employs candidate personality traits, as publicly perceived, to predict which contender will resonate most favorably with independent and unaffiliated voters who base their voting choice primarily on the candidate’s personal qualities as publicly displayed rather than on party-political affiliation or allegiance.

More information about the Personal Electability Index


August 11, 2016 — Donald Trump’s Narcissism Is Not the Main Issue

On the psychology of politics, media attention has been focused on Donald Trump’s narcissism (see “Amateurs analyze Trump’s mind, but should the pros do it?” by Seth Borenstein, Associated Press, Aug. 11, 2016). However, in the context of the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign, Trump’s narcissism is not the main issue; Donald Trump and his Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton, have identical Millon Inventory of Diagnostic Criteria scores on narcissism (MIDC scale 2: Ambitious = 24).

A narcissistic personality can be socially and politically adaptive (functional, nonpathological) if complemented and balanced by appropriately congruent personality patterns, as in the case of Hillary Clinton — at least insofar as erratic, undisciplined political behavior is concerned.

The critical difference between the Republican and Democratic nominees is their score on extraversion (MIDC scale 3: Outgoing; Trump = 24, Clinton = 0), which at higher elevations — as in the case of Trump — may be tantamount to a histrionic personality disorder.

Trump’s high score on the MIDC Outgoing scale accounts for his impulsiveness and lack of discipline and self-restraint (frequently referred to in media commentary as “no filter”).

Trump’s impulsive tendency is exacerbated by his remarkably low score on conscientiousness (MIDC scale 6: Conscientious = 0). Clinton, in contrast, is substantialy conscientious (MIDC scale 6: Conscientious = 15), which is associated with emotional restraint, self-discipline, and prudence.

Following personality theorist Theodore Millon, here’s a quick rundown of personality attributes associated with high elevations on the Outgoing pattern, which approaches histrionic levels in the case of Trump but fails to register on Clinton’s MIDC profile:

Expressive behavior: Dramatic/Impulsive — engaging, provocative, volatile; intolerant of inactivity, resulting in impulsive, highly emotional, and theatrical responsiveness.

Interpersonal conduct: Attention-seeking/Flamboyant — actively solicits attention and approval; vain and exhibitionistic, seeking to be the center of attention).

Cognitive style: Flighty/Scattered — avoids introspective thought, attentive to fleeting external events, and speaks in impressionistic generalities; integrates experiences poorly, resulting in scattered learning and thoughtless judgments.

Self-image: Gregarious/Charming — views self as sociable, stimulating, and charming; enjoys the image of attracting others by physical appearance and pursuing a busy and pleasure-oriented life.

Mood/temperament: Fickle/Impetuous — rapidly-shifting and shallow emotions; energetic, animated, hotheaded or impulsive, and exhibits a tendency to be easily enthused and as easily angered or bored.

Summary and formulation

To take the full measure of the man, political analysts must consider the interplay between Donald Trump’s ambitious (“narcissistic”) and outgoing (“histrionic”) tendencies, as described in the Millon Inventory of Diagnostic Criteria manual:

Persons who score high on both the Ambitious and Outgoing scales are clever and charming; they are skilled at attracting and seducing others. Though highly ambitious, Ambitious–Outgoing individuals also tend to be undisciplined, traveling an erratic course of successes, failures, and abandoned hopes. Needing excitement, stimulation, and challenge, they are easily bored by routine activities and they often act impulsively. They exhibit a restless, driven quality, which may be accompanied by a deficit in social dependability. Because agreements are often hastily assumed, they may have trouble honoring their promises or meeting their obligations. Ultimately, they are more attuned to their own needs than to those of others.

Though fundamentally self-oriented, these individuals are facile in the ways of social seduction, often feign an air of dignity and confidence, and are skilled in deceiving others with their clever glibness. They fabricate stories to enhance their worth and leave behind a trail of broken promises and outrageous acts. Fabrication serves both to nourish their inflated self-image and to seduce others into supporting their excesses; however, their disregard for the truth and talents for exploitation and deception are rarely hostile or malicious in intent. Typically, it is simply a product of their narcissistic attitude of omnipotence and their profound sense of entitlement; fundamentally, they are not malevolent. Criticism, confrontation, and punishment are unlikely to make them change their ways and, in fact, may prompt dismissive rage or anger.

For more information, please consult the Unit for the Study of Personality in Politics Media Tipsheet at http://personality-politics.org/2016-election-media-tipsheet/


Related reports on this site

The Personality Profile of 2016 Republican Presidential Candidate Donald Trump (Aug. 9, 2015)

Trump poster (2016)
Click on image for larger view

The Personality Profile of 2016 Democratic Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton (July 27, 2016)

Hillary-Clinton_poster_July-2016
Click on image for larger view



A psychological analysis of Hillary Clinton — Democratic nominee in the 2016 presidential election — by Rylee Pool and Aubrey Immelman, Ph.D., at the Unit for the Study of Personality in Politics, revealed that Clinton’s predominant personality patterns are Ambitious/self-serving (a measure of narcissism) and Dominant/controlling, infused with secondary features of the Conscientious/dutiful and Retiring/reserved patterns. In summary, Clinton’s personality composite can be characterized as an adaptive elitist narcissist.

Hillary-Clinton_poster_July-2016
Click on image for larger view

———————————————————————————————————

Note: Personal Electability Index (favorability) score

Hillary Clinton scores high on the Millon Inventory of Diagnostic Criteria-based Personal Electability Index, which has accurately predicted the outcome of every presidential election since 1996.

Following are the PEI calculations for Hillary Clinton:

Hillary Clinton: PEI = 27 (Study 3; 2016)

Scale:    1A    1B    2    3    4    5A    5B    6    7    8
Score:   21      2   24   0    0      0      3    15    1    7

Scale: 1A = 21; 2 = 24; 3 = 0; 6 = 15; 8 = 7

[Extraversion (scale 3) = 0] + [Narcissism (scale 2) = 24] + [Dominance (scale 1A) = 21] – [Introversion (scale 8) = 7] – [Conscientiousness (scale 6) = (15 – 4) = 11] = 45 – 18 = 27
Dysfunctionality adjusted
[Extraversion (scale 3) = 0] + [Narcissism (scale 2) = 15] + [Dominance (scale 1A) = 15] – [Introversion (scale 8) = 7] – [Conscientiousness (scale 6) = (15 – 4) = 11] = 30 – 18 = 12

Hillary Clinton: PEI = 39 (Study 2; updated)

Scale:   1A    1B    2    3    4    5A    5B    6    7    8
Score:  19      2    21   1    0      0      0     6    0    0

[Extraversion (scale 3) = 1] + [Narcissism (scale 2) = 21] + [Dominance (scale 1A) = 19] – [Introversion (scale 8) = 0] – [Conscientiousness (scale 6) = (6 - 4) = 2] = 41 – 2 = 39
Dysfunctionality adjusted
[Extraversion (scale 3) = 1] + [Narcissism (scale 2) = 15] + [Dominance (scale 1A) = 15] – [Introversion (scale 8) = 0] – [Conscientiousness (scale 6) = (6 - 4)  = 2] = 31 – 2 = 29

Hillary Clinton: PEI = 23 (Study 1; 2008)

Scale:   1A    1B    2    3    4    5A    5B    6    7    8
Score:  15      4   15    2    1      0      9    11   0     2

Clinton: [Extraversion (scale 3) = 2] + [Narcissism (scale 2) = 15] + [Dominance (scale 1A) = 15] – [Introversion (scale 8) = 2] – [Conscientiousness (scale 6) = (11 - 4) = 7] = 32 – 9 = 23

——————————————————

Related reports on this site

Behind the Clinton E-mails: The Psychological Profile of Hillary Rodham Clinton (March 11, 2015)

Clinton poster
Click on image for larger view

The Personality Profile of 2016 Republican Presidential Candidate Donald Trump (Aug. 9, 2015)

Trump poster (2016)
Click on image for larger view

Projecting the Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election: The Personal Electability Index (Feb. 29, 2016)

Donald-Trump_Hillary-Clinton_Getty-Images
Getty Images

Donald Trump’s Narcissism Is Not the Main Issue (Aug. 11, 2016)

Confident-Narcissistic_spectrum Sociable-Histrionic_spectrum
© 2015 MILLON® (Click on images for larger view)

———————————————————————————————

Media reports of political-psychological interest

Hillary Clinton, the Candidate We Know So Well — And Don’t


In this Sunday, April 24, 2016 file photo, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton speaks during a campaign stop at the University of Bridgeport in Bridgeport, Conn. (Photo: Matt Rourke / AP)

By Jocelyn Noveck

July 13, 2016

Excerpts

For the last 14 years, and 20 overall, Americans polled by Gallup have named Clinton their most admired woman in the world. But consider some other titles attached to her over the years: Lady Macbeth. Washington insider. Robotic. Wildly ambitious. Congenital liar. (Or Donald Trump’s current favorite, “Crooked Hillary.”) …

“It’s an amazing life,” says biographer Carl Bernstein, who wrote a 600-page book on her and says he still struggles to define her. “You could not make any of this stuff up.” …

[T]he ambition tag has dogged Clinton, 68, throughout her career, as if it were a bad quality rather than a necessity in high-stakes politics. The satirical website The Onion captured the irony in a 2006 headline: “Hillary Clinton Is Too Ambitious To Be The First Female President.”

That gets a knowing laugh from Melanne Verveer, Clinton’s chief of staff from her first lady years.

“If a guy is described as ambitious, it’s a noble attribute — he wants to put himself ahead,” says Verveer. “But if a woman is ambitious, it’s not an attribute, it’s a negative, a pejorative. It’s not proper somehow.”

Former Rep. Patricia Schroeder thinks the ambition factor is — unfairly — key to Clinton’s challenges connecting with the electorate.

“We still don’t like a woman who is showing ambition, especially for that level of a job,” says Schroeder, who famously explored her own presidential candidacy decades ago. “It’s: ‘I’d like her if she weren’t so damned ambitious. How come she wants all that power?’” …

Part of the narrative on Clinton has been her trouble connecting to the public. “I am not a natural politician, in case you haven’t noticed,” she said recently, “like my husband or President Obama.” …

Others note that Clinton has naturally become very guarded, given that she’s been judged, relentlessly and often unfairly, “on a huge stage, for all of her life,” in Bernstein’s words. …

Read the full report at the Associated Press

———————————————————————————

Clinton on Ballot Tests Voter Views on Gender

Pool-Rylee_headshot
Rylee Pool (Submitted photo)

By Rylee Pool
St. Cloud Times
August 28, 2016

At 5:39 p.m. [CT] July 26, [2016] history was made in America. Hillary Clinton became the first woman to secure major-party nomination for president of the United States. Although some Americans may not view her nomination as a historic moment for the country, others argue this is a momentous occasion that will go down in history as the next big feminist win.

The women’s rights movement in America gained momentum in the mid-1800s when the first women’s rights convention was held in Seneca Falls, New  York, and one of the main points on the agenda at the convention was women’s suffrage.

From struggling to pass the 19th Amendment to now having a woman’s name on arguably the most important ballot in the world, we’ve come a long way in the last century and a half. Or have we?

Nature or nurture?

Political discourse in the wake of Clinton’s nomination illustrates our country still struggles with gender issues. But is this because we are by nature sexist, or are our brains simply hardwired to be critical of women leaders?

Psychologists specializing in sex differences from a biological perspective would argue the latter — at least to a significant extent. Although gender stereotypes are products of our culture, gender differences are fundamentally rooted in biology, which implies the tendency to view dominant women as overbearing (think “Iron Lady” Margaret Thatcher) but dominant men as strong leaders (think “British Bulldog” Winston Churchill) is hardwired into our brains.

A 2012 study at Texas A&M University illustrates this point. The researchers measured the amount of male sex hormones present in 3-month-olds and then tracked eye movement and duration looking at “male” versus “female” toys. The results? Babies with higher levels of male sex hormones spent more time looking at stereotypically male gendered toys. And all of this research was done on 3-month-olds — before societal pressures could plausibly influence their personal preferences.

But how exactly do sex differences influence how a person is perceived by society? College of St. Benedict and St. John’s University psychology professor Pamela Bacon argues if a woman is cold and uncaring, she tends to be judged more harshly than a man with identical traits because the woman violates the gender stereotype, whereas the man does not.

Psychology and politics

So, what does all of this “psychobabble” have to do with presidential politics? As a Talking Points Memo reader noted recently on the political website, “the kinds of things that leaders do are gendered as male, so we like Joe Biden or Barack Obama for doing them. But when Hillary does them, it’s seen as a violation of gender norms, and so we instinctively don’t like it.”

Politics is a dog-eat-dog world. Wars are waged, foreign policy is formulated, and economic policies are effected. Being president is not just kissing babies and playing golf; it’s serious business. Americans expect their president to be a strong, confident leader.

Psychologically speaking, strength is an expression of dominance and confidence reflects adaptive narcissism. And who ranks high on dominance and narcissism? Clinton. But so do many participants in the high-stakes game of presidential politics, including Donald Trump.

Personality, leadership

Looking at a candidate’s personality offers a glimpse into their leadership style. Research conducted at CSB/SJU’s Unit for the Study of Personality in Politics reveals Clinton has a personality profile similar to many other high-level leaders. Among the personality traits on which she ranks highest is dominance, similar to politicians such as Rudy Giuliani, Chris Christie and Bob Dole.

Regrettably, as indicated by the gender research cited earlier, male candidates high in dominance are viewed as tough and competent, whereas women who share that quality, like Clinton, are frequently denigrated. Thus, Clinton has been derided with unflattering pejoratives (see, for example “The era of ‘The Bitch’ is coming,” The Atlantic, Aug. 17, 2016). According to prevalent gender stereotypes, women are supposed to be docile and submissive, and those who do not conform are harshly criticized.

Hope or fear ahead?

Although Trump and Clinton are very different in many respects, from their sexes to their resumes to their political ideologies, they have some key qualities in common: their unprecedented unfavorability as major-party nominees and widespread doubt about their character. But if Clinton wins, will her gender inhibit her leadership?

If we look at some of history’s great women leaders, such as Thatcher, Indira Gandhi and Golda Meir, we cannot say their gender rendered them incompetent. But what we can say is that we, as human beings, are naturally hesitant and critical of dominant, ambitious women. Undoubtedly, that will leave Clinton with a steep hill to climb right out of the gate.

This is the opinion of Rylee Pool, Hastings, a senior biology major at the College of St. Benedict and St. John’s University, where she is a summer research fellow in the Unit for the Study of Personality in Politics, directed by Aubrey Immelman.

About this series

This the 10th in an occasional series of personality profiles of candidates in the 2016 presidential election. Rylee Pool is a research assistant in the Unit for the Study of Personality in Politics led by associate professor Aubrey Immelman at St. John’s University/College of St. Benedict. Immelman will elaborate after Labor Day in a commentary about the psychology of Hillary Clinton and her likely leadership style if elected president.


Alternate link to “The Personality Profile of 2016 Democratic Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton” at Unit for the Study of Personality in Politics website » http://Personality-Politics.org/Hillary-Clinton



We are pleased to announce the launch of a new website on the psychology of politics, focusing on the role of leader personality in the realm of politics – including campaigns, elections, and executive leadership style.

USPP-Website_header

Established in 1999, the Unit for the Study of Personality in Politics (USPP) is a collaborative faculty–student research program in the psychology of politics at St. John’s University and the College of St. Benedict in Minnesota, directed by Aubrey Immelman, Ph.D., associate professor of psychology, who specializes in the psychological assessment of presidential candidates and world leaders.

USPP_SJU USPP_CSB

Purpose

The Unit for the Study of Personality in Politics is operated solely for research and educational purposes. The Unit does not advocate support for or defeat of any candidate for any political office. Political analysis published by the director or research associates of the Unit is the personal opinion of those individuals, based on empirical analysis of personality in politics and the influence of personality traits on high-level leadership.

Mission

The mission of the Unit is to conduct psychological assessments of candidates for public office and to disseminate the findings to professionals, the media, and the voting public.

Related links

sju pic

Former (1999-2008) USPP website » http://uspp.csbsju.edu/

New (2016- ) USPP website » http://personality-politics.org/

USPP on Twitter » @PolPsyProfiling

USPP director Aubrey Immelman with 2016 summer research fellows Marcus Langley, Rylee Pool, and Anna Faerber.

 

Announcement: August 22, 2016

Thesis-2016_Victoria-BeachVictoria Beach, B.A. Psychology (magna cum laude), has been appointed Director of Undergraduate Research at the Unit for the Study of Personality in Politics for the 2016-17 academic year.

Victoria is a 2016 graduate of the College of St. Benedict. Her duties during the fall semester include training students in an undergraduate Personality Psychology course in data collection procedures and coordinating group research projects on the personalities of Democratic and Republican vice-presidential candidates Tim Kaine and Mike Pence.

Victoria works part-time as a Mental Health Associate at St. Cloud Hospital prior to starting graduate school in fall 2017.

 


2016 Nominating Conventions


CNN looks back at eight days of nominating conventions in 150 seconds.

2016 Democratic National Convention (Philadelphia, July 25-29)

2016_Democratic-National-Convention
Photo: Democratic National Convention

Watch live or watch Democratic National Convention videos at youtube.com/demconvention

Twitter » @DemConvention

Facebook » https://www.facebook.com/demconvention

————————————————————————————————————

2016 Republican National Convention (Cleveland, July 18-21)


The Quicken Loans Arena in Cleveland, Ohio, site of the 2016 Republican National Convention, July 18-21. (Photos: Aubrey Immelman)


Cuyahoga riverfront adjacent to the Quicken Loans Arena in Cleveland, Ohio, site of the 2016 Republican National Convention, July 18-21. (Photos: Aubrey Immelman)

Watch live or watch Republican National Convention videos at youtube.com/c/gopconvention

Twitter » @GOPconvention

Facebook » https://www.facebook.com/GOPconvention


Jun 12th, 2016

Islamic State linked to worst mass shooting in U.S. history


Omar Mir Seddique Mateen (MySpace)

Orlando-victims_HRC
On June 17, the Human Rights Campaign installed images of all 49 victims of the Orlando terrorist attack in its front windows, creating an 8-story composite image that carries the message “We Are Orlando.”

Terrorist-attacks_incidence
Click on image for larger view

—————————————————

Related reports on this site

Al-Qaida’s Low-Intensity / High-Frequency Strategy (Oct. 30, 2010)

Heartbreak at Ft. Hood (Nov. 5, 2009)

Columbine: The Real Story (March 14, 2009)



ST. JOHN’S UNIVERSITY MEN’S BASKETBALL TEAM

2016_ SJU-European-tour_Team-USA

2016 EUROPEAN TOUR ITINERARY

DAY 1 (May 13) — MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL / ZURICH, SWITZERLAND

Depart Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport for Zurich, Switzerland via Reykjavik, Iceland

2016-05-13_Departure-MSP
Click on image for larger view

DAY 2 (May 14) — ARRIVE ZURICH

2016-05-14_Arrival-Zurich
Click on image for larger view

Upon arrival, transfer by motor coach to Zurich
Orientation tour of Zurich and surrounding area
Check-in at Ramada Hotel Zurich City

2016-05-14_Zurich_Peterson-Immelman
Jordan Peterson and Tim Immelman in Zurich

DAY 3 (May 15) — LUCERNE / LUGANO / COMO AREA

Morning excursion to Lucerne

2016-05-15_SJU-team_Lucerne
Click on image for larger view

2016-05-15_Lucerne_Immelman-Weiss 2016-05-15_Lucerne_Immelman-Sexe
Tim Immelman (left) with Tyler Weiss and Conrad Sexe in Lucerne

Afternoon excursion to Lugano and Lake Como on Switzerland-Italy border

2016-05-15_Lugano_Sexe-Peterson-Immelman
Conrad Sexe, Tim Immelman, and Tyler Weiss in Lugano

Check-in at Hotel Leonardo da Vinci

DAY 4 (May 16) — COMO, ITALY / LUGANO, SWITZERLAND

Guided walking tour of Lake Como

Transfer to Cadempino near Lugano

LOGO_CMYK_ok

Game 1: St. John’s University vs SAM Basket Massagno

2016_Team_SAM-Basket-Massagno-U23
Click on image for larger view

SAM Basket Massagno Facebook

2016-05-16_SAMBasketMassagno-SJU
Click on image for larger view
SAM Basket Massagno 70, St. John’s, 62

2016-05-17_Erba-Bigs
Postgame in Erba: Big men Tim Immelman, Conrad Sexe, Jordan Peterson, Mitch Wollin, Ben Hartmann, and Tyler Weiss with point guard Alex Schmitt (front center)

DAY 5 (May 17) — MILAN, ITALY

Guided tour of Milan

2016-05-17_Milan_Conrad-Tim
Conrad Sexe and Tim Immelman at the Duomo di Milano, a Gothic-Renaissance marble cathedral. (Click on image for larger view)

2016_APL-SJU
Click on image for larger view

Game 2: St. John’s University vs Associazione Pallacanestro Lissone

2016_Team_Associazione-Pallacanestro-Lissone-C-Gold
Click on image for larger view

APL Facebook

2016-05-17_APLCAPLissone-SJU
Click on image for larger view
Galvi Lissone–C Gold 60, St. John’s, 54

DAY 6 (May 18) — FUSSEN / GARMISCH / MUNICH, GERMANY

Transfer by motor coach to Munich
Check-in at Hotel Angelo

DAY 7 (May 19) — MUNICH

2016-05-19_Munich_Olympic-Park
Click on image for larger view

Guided tour of Munich, including Olympic Park, site of the 1972 Olympic Games

2016_Team-logo_MTSV-Schwabing

Game 3: St. John’s University vs MTSV Schwabing

MTSV Schwabing Facebook

St. John’s 68, MTSV Schwabing 63

DAY 8 (May 20) — DACHAU / MUNICH

Excursion to Dachau

2016-05-20_Dachau
Click on image for larger view

DAY 9 (May 21) — MUNICH / USA

Depart Munich International Airport for return flight to the United States

2016-05-21_Departure-Munich 2016-05-21_Arrival-Minneapolis
Departure from Munich and arrival at Minneapolis over Lake Calhoun and Lake of the Isles

—————————

Related report

Johnnie Basketball embarked on 17th foreign trip May 13-21

————

Update

SJU Basketball Team, Six Johnnies Earn NABC Academic Honors

2015-16_SJU-Basketball-Team

Saint John’s University
July 27, 2016

COLLEGEVILLE, Minn. – Saint John’s University earned its fourth consecutive National Association of Basketball Coaches (NABC) Team Academic Excellence Award and six student-athletes were named to the 2015-16 NABC Honors Court on Wednesday, July 27.

To be eligible for the honor, a college or university must submit the grade points earned and hours attempted for each player on its official squad list for the academic year and carry a team GPA of 3.00 or higher. To be eligible for the Honors Court, student-athletes must be a junior or senior academically, a varsity player during the 2015-16 season, boast a 3.2 GPA or higher at the conclusion of the academic year, and have spent at least one full year at the current institution.

The 21 Johnnies on the official roster combined for a 3.31 GPA.

The Johnnies recognized were:

  • Junior Will Bauman (Monticello, Minn.) biology major
  • Junior Tim Immelman (Sartell, Minn./Sartell-St. Stephen) psychology major
  • Senior Mitchell Kuck (Lino Lakes, Minn./Centennial) accounting major
  • Senior Jordan Peterson (Eden Prairie, Minn.) economics major
  • Senior Joe Risinger (Shorewood, Minn./Minnetonka) global business leadership major
  • Junior Conrad Sexe (Woodbury, Minn./East Ridge) philosophy and psychology double-major

SJU finished third in the MIAC with a 13-7 record (19-8 overall) and earned its 23rd trip to the conference playoffs under the direction of first-year head coach Pat McKenzie ’04 in 2015-16.

———————————————————————

Other basketball reports on this site

Tim Immelman — 2012-13 Basketball Photo Gallery (Oct. 8, 2013)

Tim Immelman — 2011-12 Basketball Photo Gallery (April 22, 2012)

http://www.immelman.us/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/2012-02-24_Monticello-4-Dana-Fischer.jpg

Matt Immelman — 2014-15 Basketball Photo Gallery (Feb. 28, 2015)



Cruz-Trump-Indiana_Redstate
According to a poll by the Mike Downs Center for Indiana Politics on Friday, April 29, 2016, Ted Cruz leads Donald Trump 45 percent to 29 percent among registered voters. (Redstate.com)

Tuesday’s Republican primary in Indiana is a must-win for Ted Cruz if he is to have any prospect of preventing Donald Trump from reaching the 1,237 delegates required to secure the Republican nomination for president on the first ballot at the Republican National Convention.

The Personal Electability Index (PEI), developed by Aubrey Immelman, Ph.D., at the Unit for the Study of Personality in Politics (USPP), projects that Trump will edge Cruz in the Indiana Republican primary.

The PEI has accurately predicted, before Super Tuesday, the outcome of every presidential election since 1996. The heuristic model employs candidate personality traits, as publicly perceived, to predict which contender will resonate most favorably with independent and unaffiliated voters that base their voting choice primarily on candidates’ personal qualities as publicly displayed rather than on party-political affiliation or allegiance.

The PEI model’s predictive utility in presidential general elections derives from the practically even division of the nation into reliably Republican and Democratic voting blocks, essentially yielding the balance of power to politically independent and unaffiliated voters comprising roughly one-third of the electorate.

Although the PEI is not designed to predict primary election outcomes it appears to have some practical utility in predicting the results of open primaries, where political affiliation is not a requirement for voting in a partisan ballot.

Indiana effectively (i.e., with some unenforceable restrictions) has an open primary, which favors Trump over Cruz (whose appeal is more ideological and more restricted to conservative Republican base voters).

Research on the psychology of politics conducted at the USPP reveals that voters respond favorably to candidates that are outgoing (extraverted), self-confident (productively narcissistic), and dominant; and negatively to candidates that are introverted and overly conscientious.

Based on those criteria, the Republican contenders on Indiana’s primary ballot rank as follows:

  1. Donald Trump (PEI = 62; 45 corrected score)
  2. Ted Cruz (PEI = 25)
  3. John Kasich (PEI = 14)

————————————————————————————

Detailed Personal Electability Index scores

Donald Trump: PEI = 45 (dysfunctionality adjusted)

Trump poster (NCUR)
Click on image for larger view

Scale:   1A    1B    2    3    4    5A    5B    6    7    8
Score:  15     11  15  15    1      0      6     2    1     0

Scale: 1A = 15; 2 = 15; 3 =15; 6 = 2; 8 = 0

[Extraversion (scale 3) = 15] + [Narcissism (scale 2) = 15] + [Dominance (scale 1) = 15] – [Introversion (scale 8) = 0] – [Conscientiousness (scale 6) = (2 – 2) = 0] = 45 – 0 = 45

Ted Cruz: PEI = 25

Ted Cruz poster 2015-09
Click on image for larger view

Scale:   1A    1B    2    3    4    5A    5B    6    7    8
Score:  13      6     8    4    0      0      4     2    0    0

Scale: 1A = 13; 2 = 8; 3 = 4; 6 = 2; 8 = 0

[Extraversion (scale 3) = 4] + [Narcissism (scale 2) = 8] + [Dominance (scale 1) = 13] – [Introversion (scale 8) = 0] – [Conscientiousness (scale 6) = (2 - 2) = 0] = 25 – 0 = 25

John Kasich: PEI = 14

Poster - John Kasich 2016
Click on image for larger view

Scale:   1A    1B    2    3    4    5A    5B    6    7    8
Score:    7      3     4    3    5       1      3     2    0    0

Scale: 1A = 7; 2 = 4; 3 = 3; 6 = 2; 8 = 0

[Extraversion (scale 3) = 3] + [Narcissism (scale 2) = 4] + [Dominance (scale 1) = 7] – [Introversion (scale 8) = 0] – [Conscientiousness (scale 6) = (2 - 2) = 0] = 14 – 0 = 14

—————————————

May 3, 2016 Update

Cruz: Trump ‘is a pathological liar’


Video: Republican presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz had harsh words for rival Donald Trump ahead of the Indiana primary. (Duration: 4:28)

By David Wright and Julia Manchester
http://zignallabs.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/cnn-politics-logo.png
May 3, 2016

Ted Cruz on Tuesday unloaded on Donald Trump, accusing him during a news conference of being a “pathological liar,” “utterly amoral,” “a narcissist at a level I don’t think this country’s ever seen” and “a serial philanderer.”

“He is proud of being a serial philanderer … he describes his own battles with venereal diseases as his own personal Vietnam,” Cruz said, citing a decades-old Trump appearance on “The Howard Stern Show.”

The Texas senator’s dramatic and deeply personal attack on Trump comes as polls indicate Trump is poised to claim victory in Cruz’s must-win state of Indiana and follow accusations the front-runner made about Cruz’s father.

The epic takedown of his opponent on an all-important voting day was extraordinary even by the standards of the 2016 campaign.

“This man is a pathological liar, he doesn’t know the difference between truth and lies … in a pattern that is straight out of a psychology textbook, he accuses everyone of lying,” Cruz said as Indiana voters headed to cast their ballots.

“Whatever lie he’s telling, at that minute he believes it … the man is utterly immoral,” Cruz told reporters. “Donald is a bully … bullies don’t come from strength they come from weakness.”

Earlier Tuesday, Trump had criticized Rafael Cruz, calling him “disgraceful” after he urged evangelical voters in Indiana to reject his son’s rival.

Trump also referenced a report from the tabloid National Enquirer — without naming the publication — which alleged that it had identified Rafael Cruz in a photo with Lee Harvey Oswald months prior to the JFK assassination. CNN has not independently confirmed that report. …

Full report

—————————————

May 4, 2016 Update

Indiana-GOP-primary-results

Graphic: The New York Times

Ted Cruz Suspends 2016 Presidential Campaign After Indiana Loss

John Kasich Suspends 2016 Presidential Campaign

—————————————————————————————————————————

Related reports on this site

Trump-Cruz-Kasich_Greg-Nash_via-The-Hill

The Personality Profile of 2016 Republican Presidential Candidate Donald Trump

The Personality Profile of 2016 Republican Presidential Candidate Ted Cruz

The Personality Profile of 2016 Republican Presidential Candidate John Kasich

Projecting the Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election: The Personal Electability Index



A psychological analysis of Vermont senator Bernie Sanders — a contender for the Democratic nomination in the 2016 presidential election — by Catherine Lundstrom, Hanae Nakamoto, Jacob Wankel, Christian Grande, Joe Trenzeluk, Atarah Pinder, and Aubrey Immelman, Ph.D., at the Unit for the Study of Personality in Politics, revealed that Sanders’s primary personality patterns are Dominant/controlling and Contentious/resolute, with secondary Ambitious/confident features. In summary, Sanders’s personality composite can be characterized as a deliberative nonconformist. (Note: This is a pilot study with a lower confidence level than comparable studies of Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump, and Ted Cruz.)

Poster - Bernie Sanders 2016
Click on image for larger view

Analysis

Preliminary analysis of Bernie Sanders’s psychological profile — based on the finding of substantial social dominance (MIDC scale 1A = 13), augmented by considerable contentiousness (MIDC scale 5B = 8) and bolstered by a healthy dose of self-confidence, or adaptive narcissism (MIDC scale 2 = 6) — suggests that Sanders will be tenacious in his quest for the Democratic nomination for president.

The big takeaway from the profile is the inference that Sanders will resist calls to drop out of the race and rally his supporters behind front-runner Hillary Clinton, even after it becomes clear that he has no path to winning the required number of delegates for the nomination. In short, it seems likely that Sanders, with his resolute, oppositional tendency, will hound Clinton all the way to the Democratic National Convention with dogged determination.

May 2016 Update

Sanders: ‘The convention will be a contested contest’ (Rebecca Savransky, The Hill, May 1, 2016) — Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders on Sunday said there will be a “contested contest.” In a news conference from Washington, D.C., on Sunday, the Vermont senator urged superdelegates from states where he has won the majority of the vote to reconsider their support. … “We intend to fight for every vote in front of us and for every delegate remaining,” he said. … Full report

July 2016 Update

Bernie Sanders endorses Hillary Clinton (MJ Lee, Dan Merica, and Jeff Zeleny, CNN, July 12, 2016) — Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders formally declared an end to their political rivalry Tuesday, joining forces to take on a shared enemy: Donald Trump. … The long-anticipated unity event, coming less than two weeks ahead of the Democratic National Convention, effectively puts to rest Democratic fears of a political nightmare scenario: that Sanders might sit on his hands in the general election, or worse, run as a third-party candidate on the left. … Sanders’ endorsement had been elusive for Clinton long after she clinched the nomination. For weeks, Sanders refused to concede, continuing to hold rallies and advocate for his agenda, rattling Democrats eager to begin the general election. … Full report

———————————————————————————————————

Note: Personal Electability Index (favorability) score

Bernie Sanders scores relatively low on the Millon Inventory of Diagnostic Criteria-based Personal Electability Index, which has accurately predicted the outcome of every presidential election since 1996.

Following are the PEI calculations for Bernie Sanders:

Bernie Sanders: PEI = 18

Scale:  1A   1B   2   3   4   5A   5B   6   7   8
Score: 13     5    6   3   5     0      8    3   0   4

Scale: 1A = 13; 2 = 6; 3 = 3; 6 = 3; 8 = 4

[Extraversion (scale 3) = 3] + [Narcissism (scale 2) = 6] + [Dominance (scale 1) = 13] – [Introversion (scale 8) = 4] – [Conscientiousness (scale 6) = (4 - 4) = 0] = 22 – 4 = 18

Following are the PEI calculations for Sanders’s rivals:

John Kasich: PEI = 14

Scale:  1A   1B   2   3   4   5A   5B   6   7   8
Score:  7      3    4   3   5     1      3    2   0   0

Scale: 1A = 7; 2 = 4; 3 = 3; 6 = 2; 8 = 0

[Extraversion (scale 3) = 3] + [Narcissism (scale 2) = 4] + [Dominance (scale 1) = 7] – [Introversion (scale 8) = 0] – [Conscientiousness (scale 6) = (2 - 2) = 0] = 14 – 0 = 14

Ted Cruz: PEI = 25

Scale:  1A   1B   2   3   4   5A   5B   6   7   8
Score: 13     6    8   4   0    0      4    2   0   0

Scale: 1A = 13; 2 = 8; 3 = 4; 6 = 2; 8 = 0

[Extraversion (scale 3) = 4] + [Narcissism (scale 2) = 8] + [Dominance (scale 1) = 13] – [Introversion (scale 8) = 0] – [Conscientiousness (scale 6) = (2 - 2) = 0] = 25 – 0 = 25

Hillary Clinton: PEI = 29 (dysfunctionality adjusted)

Scale:  1A   1B   2   3   4   5A   5B   6   7   8
Score: 15     2  15   1   0     0      0    6   0  0

[Extraversion (scale 3) = 1] + [Narcissism (scale 2) = 15] + [Dominance (scale 1) = 15] – [Introversion (scale 8) = 0] – [Conscientiousness (scale 6) = (6 - 4)  = 2] = 31 – 2 = 29

Donald Trump: PEI = 45 (dysfunctionality adjusted)

Scale:  1A   1B   2   3   4   5A   5B   6   7   8
Score: 19   11  24 19  1     0      6    2   1   0

Scale: 1A = 19; 2 = 24; 3 =19; 6 = 2; 8 = 0

[Extraversion (scale 3) = 15] + [Narcissism (scale 2) = 15] + [Dominance (scale 1) = 15] – [Introversion (scale 8) = 0] – [Conscientiousness (scale 6) = (2 – 2) = 0] = 45 – 0 = 45

————————————

4/22/2016 Update

Catherine Lundstrom (left) and Christian Grande (right) presented “The Political Personality of 2016 Presidential Contender Bernie Sanders” (by Catherine Lundstrom, Hanae Nakamoto, Jacob Wankel, Christian Grande, Joe Trenzeluk, and Atarah Pinder) at Scholarship and Creativity Day, College of St. Benedict and St. John’s University, April 21, 2016.

The long-anticipated unity event, coming less than two weeks ahead of the Democratic National Convention, effectively puts to rest Democratic fears of a political nightmare scenario: that Sanders might sit on his hands in the general election, or worse, run as a third-party candidate on the left.

——————————————————

Related reports on this site

Projecting the Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election: The Personal Electability Index (Feb. 29, 2016)

Donald-Trump_Hillary-Clinton_Getty-Images
Getty Images

The Personality Profile of 2016 Democratic Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton (March 11, 2015)

Clinton poster
Click on image for larger view



A psychological analysis of Ohio governor John Kasich — a contender for the Republican nomination in the 2016 presidential election — by Timothy Immelman, Katherine Jennissen, Brianna Kupser, Jeremy Reller, Samantha Womeldorf, Joe Trenzeluk, and Aubrey Immelman, Ph.D., at the Unit for the Study of Personality in Politics, revealed that Kasich’s primary personality patterns are Dominant/asserting and Accommodating/cooperative, with secondary Ambitious/confident and Outgoing/congenial features. In summary, Kasich’s personality composite can be characterized as a forceful mediator. (Note: This is a pilot study with a lower confidence level than comparable studies of Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, and Hillary Clinton.)

Poster - John Kasich 2016
Click on image for larger view

———————————————————————————————————

Note: Personal Electability Index (favorability) score

John Kasich scores relatively low on the Millon Inventory of Diagnostic Criteria-based Personal Electability Index, which has accurately predicted the outcome of every presidential election since 1996.

Following are the PEI calculations for John Kasich:

John Kasich: PEI = 14

Scale:  1A   1B   2   3   4   5A   5B   6   7   8
Score:  7      3    4   3   5     1      3    2   0   0

Scale: 1A = 7; 2 = 4; 3 = 3; 6 = 2; 8 = 0

[Extraversion (scale 3) = 3] + [Narcissism (scale 2) = 4] + [Dominance (scale 1) = 7] – [Introversion (scale 8) = 0] – [Conscientiousness (scale 6) = (2 - 2) = 0] = 14 – 0 = 14

Following are the PEI calculations for Kasich’s rivals:

Bernie Sanders: PEI = 18

Scale:  1A   1B   2   3   4   5A   5B   6   7   8
Score: 13     5    6   3   5     0      8    3   0   4

Scale: 1A = 13; 2 = 6; 3 = 3; 6 = 3; 8 = 4

[Extraversion (scale 3) = 3] + [Narcissism (scale 2) = 6] + [Dominance (scale 1) = 13] – [Introversion (scale 8) = 4] – [Conscientiousness (scale 6) = (4 - 4) = 0] = 22 – 4 = 18

Ted Cruz: PEI = 25

Scale:  1A   1B   2   3   4   5A   5B   6   7   8
Score: 13     6    8   4   0    0      4    2   0   0

Scale: 1A = 13; 2 = 8; 3 = 4; 6 = 2; 8 = 0

[Extraversion (scale 3) = 4] + [Narcissism (scale 2) = 8] + [Dominance (scale 1) = 13] – [Introversion (scale 8) = 0] – [Conscientiousness (scale 6) = (2 - 2) = 0] = 25 – 0 = 25

Hillary Clinton: PEI = 29 (dysfunctionality adjusted)

Scale:  1A   1B   2   3   4   5A   5B   6   7   8
Score: 15     2  15   1   0     0      0    6   0  0

[Extraversion (scale 3) = 1] + [Narcissism (scale 2) = 15] + [Dominance (scale 1) = 15] – [Introversion (scale 8) = 0] – [Conscientiousness (scale 6) = (6 - 4)  = 2] = 31 – 2 = 29

Donald Trump: PEI = 45 (dysfunctionality adjusted)

Scale:  1A   1B   2   3   4   5A   5B   6   7   8
Score: 19   11  24 19  1     0      6    2   1   0

Scale: 1A = 19; 2 = 24; 3 =19; 6 = 2; 8 = 0

[Extraversion (scale 3) = 15] + [Narcissism (scale 2) = 15] + [Dominance (scale 1) = 15] – [Introversion (scale 8) = 0] – [Conscientiousness (scale 6) = (2 – 2) = 0] = 45 – 0 = 45

————————————

4/22/2016 Update

2016-S&CD_Immelman&Immelman
Research director Aubrey Immelman (left) with Tim Immelman (right), who presented “The Political Personality of 2016 Presidential Contender John Kasich” (by Timothy Immelman, Katherine Jennissen, Brianna Kupser, Jeremy Reller, Samantha Womeldorf, and Joe Trenzeluk) at Scholarship and Creativity Day, College of St. Benedict and St. John’s University, April 21, 2016. (Click photo for full-size image)

——————————————————

Related reports on this site

Projecting the Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election: The Personal Electability Index (Feb. 29, 2016)

Donald-Trump_Hillary-Clinton_Getty-Images
Getty Images

The Personality Profile of 2016 Republican Presidential Candidate Ted Cruz (Sept. 6, 2015)

Ted Cruz poster 2015-09
Click on image for larger view

The Personality Profile of 2016 Republican Presidential Candidate Donald Trump (Aug. 9, 2015)

Trump poster (July 2015)
Click on image for larger view

Comparative Psychological Profiles of the GOP Field (Aug. 6, 2015)

Fox News candidates on stage

Republican Presidential Candidate Profiles, Polling, and Debates
(May 31, 2015)



Republican presidential contenders (from left to right and top to bottom) Ben Carson, Ted Cruz, Carly Fiorina, Mike Huckabee, George Pataki, Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, and Rick Santorum (Photo credits: Gage Skidmore, officeholder official portraits / Wikipedia)