Obviously the Moderator’s expression at the beginning has to be dealt with first.
This facial expression hit me between the eyes. To understand others you need to understand first how you are different. I would urge everyone to try and put this expression on their face, and try to picture holding it, particularly the parts around the cheeks and below the outsides edges of the eyes. Actually get in front of a mirror, and pull muscles and make faces until your’s looks like this. Feel what it is like to try and maintain this expression, even just for 60 seconds. It is unnatural. Now try to envision yourself opening a nationally publicized debate like this. That is how different Liberals are. They think that is normal, so they make that face, no matter how difficult it is.
The expression holds other significance to me. I once got to observe a female Narcissist while she was trying to manipulate her family, to exploit a very trying time for them. For about two hours, she maintained this same facial expression, even as they mulled about in a very sad situation. It was painfully obvious she was trying to hold a permanent smile, so as to appear happy, and distract from her ulterior motives. I guess seeing that weird facial expression was burned into my amygdala.
Most people change themselves slightly to try and fit in. Silly people may try to look serious, angry people may try to seem funny or harmless, scared people may try to look angry and tough. But when you flex facial muscles this much to put on an expression this strained, something is up, and it should be an amygdala-stimulating red flag to anyone.
Interestingly, phoney, ingratiating smiles are associated with self-perceived, lower social status. If you think of yourself as a kick-ass leader of men, you don’t smile to ingratiate yourself with people, but if you see yourself as low man on the totem pole, you smile in social situations all the time as a conflict avoidance mechanism.
On the debate, Romney didn’t go with inflicting Narcissistic injuries for some reason, preferring to simply play alpha, and dominate the setting, even ignoring the moderator at points. It was a good play, and helped offset the moderator’s inevitable bias.
When I saw this pic of both men waiting for a question, I thought of Heartiste saying that if you want to be Alpha, “you need to assume a posture that infuses you with ballsiness. Uncross your arms, lower your drink, open your legs, thrust out your chest, lift your chin a bit and make your crotch the locus of your chi.” Dollars to donuts, somebody at National Review turned Romney’s advisors on to Heartiste, if they weren’t reading it already. I wouldn’t even be surprised if Romney is a fan himself.
Obama, as I would have expected, came out angry. Narcissists have natural rage problems, and Obama is no different, especially now that he is seeing the Presidency stripped from him by conditions far beyond his control. Combined with his entitlement, and his history of simply voting present and being hailed as a genius, it is all just so unfair now.
Romney should have been more subtly demeaning with the Narcissistic injuries, and tried to illicit laughter at some of Obama’s more ridiculous statements (“Well, there you have it son, re-elect Barack Obama and he will have a job waiting for you after college – tightening the bolts on stuff as it comes off the assembly line!”). This would have built upon the anger, but oh, well. Perhaps tonight wasn’t the night, and it will be better to hit him in the final debate all at once.
Regardless, Obama gained strength twice, and these cases were useful to observe. This is what I meant when I said my own Narcissist would gain strength in interactions, in my case, when I showed any emotion.
The first example was when Romney asked Obama if he checked his retirement plan (never give the Narcissist any control, such as by letting them speak), and Obama said, “It’s not as big as your’s.” Typical out-grouping by a lib, but the real problem was people laughed at it, and that gave Obama energy. Above, he looks like a little kid, trying to make sure Romney sees he is laughing at him. Within every Narcissist is the little kid who wants to pick on other kids from within the safety of the crowd, but who is terrified of having to actually fight, face to face. If it was Romney who had the disaster of the last four years attached to him, and Obama was going to easily take the Presidency from him, and in a debate Romney melted down and threw an emotional tantrum, that is the same face Obama would make. Of course having it all turned around is just agony, and that is why Obama’s standard expression now is one of rage and frustration. Notice in the photo above, Obama makes eye contact. His amygdala is, for one short moment, quieted.
Narcissists and Libs don’t care about right or wrong, or good or bad. They only care about whether the group knows what they are, and is about to expel or kill them, (the evolutionary consequences which molded the nature of these urges, even though they are less of a risk in today’s society), or whether the group is on their side. If they lean towards thinking expulsion/killing is coming, they are programmed to collapse and sulk angrily into the shadows, to avoid the consequences of the mob. If they think they have everyone fooled, they are actually programmed to build up their energy and become exuberant, and they will then try to climb the social ladder as fast as they can.
Obviously, Obama also got energy from the Benghazi thing, but what can you do when the moderator is a biased tool. At least it was minor, quickly corrected, didn’t change the status of the race, and Obama is still going to lose.
Now the most interesting thing about the whole night – what should be the focus of this whole debate, was that Obama cannot tolerate eye contact. Below is a graphically intensive representation of a roughly two minute segment in the debate, where Romney locked eyes on Obama, and followed him around while holding eye contact. All the while, Obama did whatever he could to avoid the eye contact. As we have pointed out in numerous places, direct eye contact is a no-no for those with damaged amygdalae, and Liberals have less developed, less functional amygdalae. It seems clear Romney is holding eye contact purposefully, and Obama can’t handle it.
I found it interesting, and hope Romney knew what was going on. I suspect this means Obama will have it more difficult in the next debate, since if he is sitting across a table from Mitt, he won’t be able to walk away from Mitt, and talk to the crowd to break the eye contact. I even caught Romney at one point, later on, walking around Obama to get in his peripheral vision, so I definitely think Mitt knows what he is doing.
Also, note that the eye contact ploy stimulates a Liberal’s amygdala, but only screws up their brain if they are helpless to destroy you. If Obama was in the position of Stalin, he would have quieted his amygdala by having Mitt taken into the basement to be tortured and shot. Obama can’t do that here. Moreover, he feels particularly helpless as he watches his undoubted failure of a Presidency, being ripped from him by a highly successful multimillionaire businessman, with a history of success, a dream life, a lovely, loving wife, and a bunch of kids who appear to love him as well. Between the helplessness and the inferiority stimulating the amygdala, with no solution in sight, the eye contact is just too much to take.
But don’t think you will force your boss into submission. It is more likely he will find being around you so discomfiting, he will fire you to quiet his amygdala. With the eye contact thing, context is key.
The next debate will be interesting, if Romney hires a shrink, and has a bunch of Narcissistic dog whistles ready to go. Combined with the eye contact, and an inability to turn away and avoid it, Obama is going to have it rough.
