Analysis: In analyzing the Alabama Primary race,FAKE NEWS always fails...

8y ago Oct 1, 2017 at 3:24 AM

In analyzing the Alabama Primary race,FAKE NEWS always fails to mention that the candidate I endorsed went up MANY points after endorsement!

0:00 0:00

AI Analysis

Machine-generated analysis of the post above on 2026-03-11. Not written by the author of the post.

Danger Level

None

Narcissistic State

Vulnerable

Authorship

Self-Written

Intensity

45%

Authorship Analysis

Self-Written

Indicators:

Late-night posting (11:24 PM ET)
ALL CAPS for emotional emphasis
Defensive/reactive content about personal political loss
Missing space after comma (hasty composition)
Stream-of-consciousness grievance style

Psychological Profile

▶ State

Vulnerable State

Trigger: Narcissistic Injury — Defeat (Luther Strange loss in Alabama primary despite Trump endorsement)

Rage: Intensity 40% targeting Mainstream media (FAKE NEWS)

Proportionality

30%

Sentiment

-0.50

▶ Clinical

Malignant Narcissism:

Narcissistic

60%

Antisocial

20%

Paranoid

40%

Sadism

10%

Defense Mechanisms:

distortionprojectionrationalization

Cognitive Complexity:

Complexity

35%

Parasocial Techniques:

Shared grievance against mediaImplied insider knowledge followers should accept

Danger Assessment

None

Gaslighting Detected:

Reframing a clear electoral defeat as a success story
Accusing media of suppressing favorable information when the overall story is negative for Trump

Reality Distortions:

Implying the Alabama endorsement was successful when the endorsed candidate lost decisively

Fact Checks (1)

"The candidate Trump endorsed went up MANY points after endorsement"

Half True

Luther Strange did see some polling improvement after Trump's endorsement, but he still lost to Roy Moore by nearly 10 points (54.6%-45.4%). The framing omits the decisive loss.

Receipts

No contradictions with other posts detected yet.

Psychological Analysis: Alabama Primary Endorsement Defense

Context

This post references the September 26, 2017 Alabama Republican Senate primary runoff, where Trump endorsed Luther Strange over Roy Moore. Moore won decisively (54.6%-45.4%), making this a clear political defeat for Trump. Posted at 11:24 PM ET (Trump was based in the DC/NJ area during this period), placing it in authentic late-night posting territory.

Authorship

Late-night timing, emotional defensiveness, ALL CAPS emphasis on "FAKE NEWS" and "MANY," and the self-referential grievance pattern all strongly indicate authentic Trump authorship.

Psychological Analysis

This is a textbook narcissistic injury response to political defeat. Trump's endorsed candidate (Luther Strange) lost badly to Roy Moore, representing an unambiguous public failure of his political influence. Rather than acknowledge the loss, Trump reframes it: the candidate "went up MANY points after endorsement" — focusing on relative movement rather than the outcome. This is classic distortion as a defense mechanism, reshaping an objective defeat into a partial victory narrative.

The invocation of "FAKE NEWS" serves dual purposes: externalizing blame for the narrative (projection) and preemptively discrediting any coverage of the loss. The complaint that media "always fails to mention" the points gain reveals the narcissistic need for credit even in defeat.

Cognitive Note

The missing space after "race," is a minor formatting irregularity consistent with hasty mobile composition rather than cognitive decline.

Rhetorical Techniques

The post employs a classic grievance-media-blame triangle: identify a personal slight (loss not spun favorably), blame media ("FAKE NEWS always fails"), and assert a counter-narrative ("went up MANY points").

Fact Verification

Claim	Verdict	Evidence
"The candidate Trump endorsed went up MANY points after endorsement"	Half True	Luther Strange did see some polling improvement after Trump's endorsement, but he still lost to Roy Moore by nearly 10 points (54.6%-45.4%). The framing omits the decisive loss.

Overall Veracity: 50%