A Complete Psychological Analysis of Trump's Support

[Tommy Tainant]

Why dont we go through the article point by point ?

Point 1 - For some wealthy people, it’s simply a financial matter. Trump offers tax cuts for the rich and wants to do away with government regulation that gets in the way of businessmen making money, even when that regulation exists for the purpose of protecting the environment. Others, like blue-collared workers, like the fact that the president is trying to bring jobs back to America from places like China. Some people who genuinely are not racist (those who are will be discussed later) simply want stronger immigration laws because they know that a country with open borders is not sustainable. These people have put their practical concerns above their moral ones. To them, it does not make a difference if he’s a vagina-grabber, or if his campaign team colluded with Russia to help him defeat his political opponent. It is unknown whether these people are eternally bound to Trump in the way others are, but we may soon find out if the Mueller investigation is allowed to come to completion.

To me this seems to be the main reason people voted for Trump. I dont see it as controversial.

Unless you talk to the people that voted for Trump on the board. Many of them were fed up. The Republican party is really two factions. There were multiple people that said on USMB that they did not see Trump as this awesome individual but rather someone that was capable of destroying the people that had been in power too long and promoted their own agendas.

It's the my billionaires are better than your billionaires game.

A protest vote ?

 

[GreenAndBlue]

Why dont we go through the article point by point ?

Point 1 - For some wealthy people, it’s simply a financial matter. Trump offers tax cuts for the rich and wants to do away with government regulation that gets in the way of businessmen making money, even when that regulation exists for the purpose of protecting the environment. Others, like blue-collared workers, like the fact that the president is trying to bring jobs back to America from places like China. Some people who genuinely are not racist (those who are will be discussed later) simply want stronger immigration laws because they know that a country with open borders is not sustainable. These people have put their practical concerns above their moral ones. To them, it does not make a difference if he’s a vagina-grabber, or if his campaign team colluded with Russia to help him defeat his political opponent. It is unknown whether these people are eternally bound to Trump in the way others are, but we may soon find out if the Mueller investigation is allowed to come to completion.

To me this seems to be the main reason people voted for Trump. I dont see it as controversial.

Trump was showing his disgust with women going for stars and not their husbands and soldiers

He had witnessed that first hand And was disgusted

He said if one is a star then you can do anything to women including grabbing their private parts

Kamala Harris proves this. Who slept with old man Willis brown. Slept her way to the top

Same as what Madonna has done and now all of Hollywood women doing this

 

[Disir]

Why dont we go through the article point by point ?

Point 1 - For some wealthy people, it’s simply a financial matter. Trump offers tax cuts for the rich and wants to do away with government regulation that gets in the way of businessmen making money, even when that regulation exists for the purpose of protecting the environment. Others, like blue-collared workers, like the fact that the president is trying to bring jobs back to America from places like China. Some people who genuinely are not racist (those who are will be discussed later) simply want stronger immigration laws because they know that a country with open borders is not sustainable. These people have put their practical concerns above their moral ones. To them, it does not make a difference if he’s a vagina-grabber, or if his campaign team colluded with Russia to help him defeat his political opponent. It is unknown whether these people are eternally bound to Trump in the way others are, but we may soon find out if the Mueller investigation is allowed to come to completion.

To me this seems to be the main reason people voted for Trump. I dont see it as controversial.

Unless you talk to the people that voted for Trump on the board. Many of them were fed up. The Republican party is really two factions. There were multiple people that said on USMB that they did not see Trump as this awesome individual but rather someone that was capable of destroying the people that had been in power too long and promoted their own agendas.

It's the my billionaires are better than your billionaires game.

A protest vote ?

Yes, Tommy. And you were around to hear them say it.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Why dont we go through the article point by point ?

Point 1 - For some wealthy people, it’s simply a financial matter. Trump offers tax cuts for the rich and wants to do away with government regulation that gets in the way of businessmen making money, even when that regulation exists for the purpose of protecting the environment. Others, like blue-collared workers, like the fact that the president is trying to bring jobs back to America from places like China. Some people who genuinely are not racist (those who are will be discussed later) simply want stronger immigration laws because they know that a country with open borders is not sustainable. These people have put their practical concerns above their moral ones. To them, it does not make a difference if he’s a vagina-grabber, or if his campaign team colluded with Russia to help him defeat his political opponent. It is unknown whether these people are eternally bound to Trump in the way others are, but we may soon find out if the Mueller investigation is allowed to come to completion.

To me this seems to be the main reason people voted for Trump. I dont [sic] see it as controversial.

That's the only point in the article that is mostly true,and mostly rational. Even so, it shows some intent by the author to put his own ridiculous left wrong-wing spin on it. And it's not just wealthy people who saw the practical necessities involves. Many of us working-class people spent eight years watching an extreme, incompetent, radical LIbEral President promote policies that were destructive and devastating to our economy, and to the economic interests of most Americans. In 2016, we had a clear choice before us, between a candidate who threatened to continues those destructive policies, and one who wanted to take a different direction.

The subheading for this point reads “Practicality Trumps Morality”. It falsely suggests that we had a choice between a morally-sound candidate, with otherwise bad policies, and a morally-unsound candidate, with much better policies. No, we didn't. We had a choice between two very morally-unsound candidates, and of the two of them, on that front, Mrs. Clinton was much, much worse.

 

[GreenAndBlue]

Outrageous how the crooked media has brainwashed women to go for stars

Trump understands that well

A total disgrace

 

[Disir]

Why dont we go through the article point by point ?

Point 1 - For some wealthy people, it’s simply a financial matter. Trump offers tax cuts for the rich and wants to do away with government regulation that gets in the way of businessmen making money, even when that regulation exists for the purpose of protecting the environment. Others, like blue-collared workers, like the fact that the president is trying to bring jobs back to America from places like China. Some people who genuinely are not racist (those who are will be discussed later) simply want stronger immigration laws because they know that a country with open borders is not sustainable. These people have put their practical concerns above their moral ones. To them, it does not make a difference if he’s a vagina-grabber, or if his campaign team colluded with Russia to help him defeat his political opponent. It is unknown whether these people are eternally bound to Trump in the way others are, but we may soon find out if the Mueller investigation is allowed to come to completion.

To me this seems to be the main reason people voted for Trump. I dont [sic] see it as controversial.

That's the only point in the article that is mostly true,and mostly rational. Even so, it shows some intent by the author to put his own ridiculous left wrong-wing spin on it. And it's not just wealthy people who saw the practical necessities involves. Many of us working-class people spent eight years watching an extreme, incompetent, radical LIbEral President promote policies that were destructive and devastating to our economy, and to the economic interests of most Americans. In 2016, we had a clear choice before us, between a candidate who threatened to continues those destructive policies, and one who wanted to take a different direction.

The subheading for this point reads “Practicality Trumps Morality”. It falsely suggests that we had a choice between a morally-sound candidate, with otherwise bad policies, and a morally-unsound candidate, with much better policies. No, we didn't. We had a choice between two very morally-unsound candidates, and of the two of them, on that front, Mrs. Clinton was much, much worse.

And the DNC literally made him a martyr.

 

[Olde Europe]

A protest vote ?

4. “Some Men Just Want to Watch the World Burn.”

Some people are supporting Trump simply to be rebellious or to introduce chaos into the political system. They may have such distaste for the establishment and democrats like Hillary Clinton that their support for Trump is a symbolic middle finger directed at Washington. These people may have other issues, like an innate desire to troll others or an obsession with schadenfreude.​

It wouldn't be completely unfair to call them "arsonists". They are around on here in significant numbers, and in unquestioning support for the arsonist-in-chief.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Why dont we go through the article point by point ?

Point 1 - For some wealthy people, it’s simply a financial matter. Trump offers tax cuts for the rich and wants to do away with government regulation that gets in the way of businessmen making money, even when that regulation exists for the purpose of protecting the environment. Others, like blue-collared workers, like the fact that the president is trying to bring jobs back to America from places like China. Some people who genuinely are not racist (those who are will be discussed later) simply want stronger immigration laws because they know that a country with open borders is not sustainable. These people have put their practical concerns above their moral ones. To them, it does not make a difference if he’s a vagina-grabber, or if his campaign team colluded with Russia to help him defeat his political opponent. It is unknown whether these people are eternally bound to Trump in the way others are, but we may soon find out if the Mueller investigation is allowed to come to completion.

To me this seems to be the main reason people voted for Trump. I dont [sic] see it as controversial.

That's the only point in the article that is mostly true,and mostly rational. Even so, it shows some intent by the author to put his own ridiculous left wrong-wing spin on it. And it's not just wealthy people who saw the practical necessities involves. Many of us working-class people spent eight years watching an extreme, incompetent, radical LIbEral President promote policies that were destructive and devastating to our economy, and to the economic interests of most Americans. In 2016, we had a clear choice before us, between a candidate who threatened to continues those destructive policies, and one who wanted to take a different direction.

The subheading for this point reads “Practicality Trumps Morality”. It falsely suggests that we had a choice between a morally-sound candidate, with otherwise bad policies, and a morally-unsound candidate, with much better policies. No, we didn't. We had a choice between two very morally-unsound candidates, and of the two of them, on that front, Mrs. Clinton was much, much worse.

And the DNC literally made him a martyr.

In what way ? I dont see him as a victim.

 

[GreenAndBlue]

The most true wise. Are the ones that has high net worth and who goes for balance instead of insane greed like Amazon owner.

These most wise are trump supporters and these are the ones that die fighting for principle and won world war 11

Trump has the Real power behind him and he may call out the military to arrest the leaders of New York and Virginia On murder charges of us citizens

 

[Tommy Tainant]

A protest vote ?

4. “Some Men Just Want to Watch the World Burn.”

Some people are supporting Trump simply to be rebellious or to introduce chaos into the political system. They may have such distaste for the establishment and democrats like Hillary Clinton that their support for Trump is a symbolic middle finger directed at Washington. These people may have other issues, like an innate desire to troll others or an obsession with schadenfreude.​

It wouldn't be completely unfair to call them "arsonists". They are around on here in significant numbers, and in unquestioning support for the arsonist-in-chief.

But in terms of an election I would think they would not be significant. They were around during brexit as well but only a minority.

 

[MarathonMike]

This applies to both ends of the political spectrum, of course. The question is whether the infected individual naturally lacks the capacity to see outside of their ideology, or whether this blindness is the product of conditioning over time. My guess is the latter.

Ho-hum, the tiresome "Both sides are just as bad" argument.

"I know that Trump threw some kids into cages, and some of them died, but someone yelled at Sarah Sanders when she was having dinner."

"I know Trump called the Nazis good people at Charlotteville when one of them ran over a girl with a car, but they wouldn't let Ann Coulter speak at Berkeley."

Nonsense comparisons revealing your complete bias.

 

[Olde Europe]

But in terms of an election I would think they would not be significant. They were around during brexit as well but only a minority.

If they are just 1% out of 130 million votes, that would be 1.3 million. The election was decided in Trump's favor by less than 90,000 votes in three States. Yep, very significant.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

This really doesn't belong in the CDZ.

The article cited in the OP is nothing more than a hyperpartisan pseudoscientific flame against conservatives in general, and Trump supporters in particular. It's chock full of psychological projection of its author's own deficiencies, bad assumptions, gratuitous ad-hominems, and flat-out lies, thinly-disguised as “science”. There's really no way to have much of a discussion about this article or its author without stooping to the same low level that it sets, in violation of the letter and the spirit of the CDZ.

When a website rewards such tactics, the trolling will only continue.

Posts like this intending to malign constitute the actual trolling. It is only the reactions to the trolling that are suppressed, however, which only rewards the troll for engaging in such behavior.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

The Dunning-Kruger effect explains that the problem isn’t just that they are misinformed; it’s that they are completely unaware that they are misinformed, which creates a double burden.

This applies to both ends of the political spectrum, of course. The question is whether the infected individual naturally lacks the capacity to see outside of their ideology, or whether this blindness is the product of conditioning over time. My guess is the latter.

The same intellectual myopia manifests when the ideology-infected individual is unaware that they are indeed infected. Those stricken with a hardcore partisan ideology simply, literally don't see how similar their behaviors are compared to those they so loathe.

The Pathology of Partisanship
Partisanship is a toxin and a potent mind-altering drug
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN COGNITIVE COMPLEXITY AND POLITICAL PARTISANSHIP
Tribal Psychology and Political Behavior - Econlib
The Sadness of Partisan Polarizing
The primeval tribalism of American politics
How Politics Breaks Our Brains, and How We Can Put Them Back Together - The Atlantic
.

The OP discusses "A Complete Psychological Analysis of Trump's Support" in general, and the role the Dunning-Kruger Effect plays in this in particular. The quoted article asserts that Trump is unique on the political landscape, and the explanation for his support has to account for that uniqueness. It sets out to demonstrate that there is a variety of confluent factors, ranging from the benign to the out-and-out vile, explaining the continuing support for Trump.

Mac quotes "Dunning-Kruger Effect", completely forgets about it, and then chooses to ride his shtick - finds "hardcore partisan ideology" on all sides, vigorously dragging the thread off topic.

That's post #6, and it's getting worse, and personal, thereafter.


The place is in need of a clean-up.

Yes, Mac is intelligent and fair minded. This certainly does get under the skin of extremely dogmatic individuals who are neither.

The Manichaean nature of this posting reveals the Dunning-Kruger effect every bit as much that it purports to address, as it is predicated upon the unquestioning allegiance to group think with a corresponding feeling of superiority for doing so.

 

[Ringel05]

This applies to both ends of the political spectrum, of course. The question is whether the infected individual naturally lacks the capacity to see outside of their ideology, or whether this blindness is the product of conditioning over time. My guess is the latter.

Ho-hum, the tiresome "Both sides are just as bad" argument.

"I know that Trump threw some kids into cages, and some of them died, but someone yelled at Sarah Sanders when she was having dinner."

"I know Trump called the Nazis good people at Charlotteville when one of them ran over a girl with a car, but they wouldn't let Ann Coulter speak at Berkeley."

Thanks for proving his point.

Maybe if you had taken psych (or at least paid attention in class) you'd know how true Mac's post is. Of course if you had the slightest concept of self evaluation...........

 

[Correll]

A Complete Psychological Analysis of Trump's Support
Its a long article but worth reading. It paints quite a bleak picture of the modern world and the way that people can be manipulated. I recognise many of these traits in the people I know who support brexit which shows that it is not a specifically American issue.

This one chimes with me a lot because I worked with several of these people on a project a few years back. People who have had success in some things believe that they are experts in all fields. You cant reach them because they are bomb proof.

7. The Dunning-Kruger Effect: Humans Often Overestimate Their Political Expertise

Some who support Donald Trump are under-informed or misinformed about the issues at hand. When Trump tells them that crime is skyrocketing in the United States, or that the economy is the worst it’s ever been, they simply take his word for it.

The Dunning-Kruger effect explains that the problem isn’t just that they are misinformed; it’s that they are completely unaware that they are misinformed, which creates a double burden.

Studies have shown that people who lack expertise in some area of knowledge often have a cognitive bias that prevents them from realizing that they lack expertise. As psychologist David Dunning puts it in an op-ed for Politico, “The knowledge and intelligence that are required to be good at a task are often the same qualities needed to recognize that one is not good at that task — and if one lacks such knowledge and intelligence, one remains ignorant that one is not good at the task. This includes political judgment.” These people cannot be reached because they mistakenly believe they are the ones who should be reaching others.

That is something that happens with all humans.


Your pretense that it only happens with Trump supporters is simply incorrect.

 

[Correll]

The Dunning-Kruger effect explains that the problem isn’t just that they are misinformed; it’s that they are completely unaware that they are misinformed, which creates a double burden.

This applies to both ends of the political spectrum, of course. The question is whether the infected individual naturally lacks the capacity to see outside of their ideology, or whether this blindness is the product of conditioning over time. My guess is the latter.

The same intellectual myopia manifests when the ideology-infected individual is unaware that they are indeed infected. Those stricken with a hardcore partisan ideology simply, literally don't see how similar their behaviors are compared to those they so loathe.
....
.

Is the Dunning-Kruger effect supposedly limited, or in any way more associated with ideologues?

 

[Olde Europe]

"I know that Trump threw some kids into cages, and some of them died, but someone yelled at Sarah Sanders when she was having dinner."

No one yelled at Sanders. She was politely asked to leave.

But the bigger problem is, why are so many Americans willing to embrace someone like Trump. The points in the article are good ones, but I think it can be a lot simpler.

White folks look at their declining fortunes, as the needs of the labor market change... They look at the good jobs their parents had at a factory with union representation.

And while they have no stomach to form a union and fight for more rights, learn the skills to keep their job set relevant, they do understand the profound cultural loss.

Trump (and for that matter, every Republican before him going back to Nixon) gives them someone to blame, the people who are not like them.

Here is the point you are making, just better explained:

8. Relative Deprivation — A Misguided Sense of Entitlement

Relative deprivation refers to the experience of being deprived of something to which one believes they are entitled. It is the discontent felt when one compares their position in life to others who they feel are equal or inferior but have unfairly had more success than them.

Common explanations for Trump’s popularity among non-bigoted voters involve economics. There is no doubt that some Trump supporters are simply angry that American jobs are being lost to Mexico and China, which is certainly understandable, although these loyalists often ignore the fact that some of these careers are actually being lost due to the accelerating pace of automation.

These Trump supporters are experiencing relative deprivation, and are common among the swing states like Ohio, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. This kind of deprivation is specifically referred to as “relative,” as opposed to “absolute,” because the feeling is often based on a skewed perception of what one is entitled to.​

And yes, racism - and misogyny - play a very real role in this.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Is the Dunning-Kruger effect supposedly limited, or in any way more associated with ideologues?

I would say yes to your question since it is all about self-awareness. It's pretty much a flushed out version of the old maxim "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing" where the less competent a person is, the more they overestimate their ability and the more competent a person is, the more they underestimate. Ideologues do not question their own ideology and are not aware individuals. The more extremely unaware derive comfort from reducing the complexity of the world right down to the binary level, which is reinforced by all the others doing the same. Any hint of original thought they ascribe to the other while clinging to their unquestioned belief system as gospel.

 

[Penelope]

A Complete Psychological Analysis of Trump's Support
Its a long article but worth reading. It paints quite a bleak picture of the modern world and the way that people can be manipulated. I recognise many of these traits in the people I know who support brexit which shows that it is not a specifically American issue.

This one chimes with me a lot because I worked with several of these people on a project a few years back. People who have had success in some things believe that they are experts in all fields. You cant reach them because they are bomb proof.

7. The Dunning-Kruger Effect: Humans Often Overestimate Their Political Expertise

Some who support Donald Trump are under-informed or misinformed about the issues at hand. When Trump tells them that crime is skyrocketing in the United States, or that the economy is the worst it’s ever been, they simply take his word for it.

The Dunning-Kruger effect explains that the problem isn’t just that they are misinformed; it’s that they are completely unaware that they are misinformed, which creates a double burden.

Studies have shown that people who lack expertise in some area of knowledge often have a cognitive bias that prevents them from realizing that they lack expertise. As psychologist David Dunning puts it in an op-ed for Politico, “The knowledge and intelligence that are required to be good at a task are often the same qualities needed to recognize that one is not good at that task — and if one lacks such knowledge and intelligence, one remains ignorant that one is not good at the task. This includes political judgment.” These people cannot be reached because they mistakenly believe they are the ones who should be reaching others.

Excellent article:
I found this interesting although I knew it already, they see Trump as their big powerful Daddy figure and the strong military goes along with it:

A 2008 study in the journal Science found that conservatives have a stronger physiological reaction to startling noises and graphic images compared to liberals. A brain-imaging study published in Current Biology revealed that those who lean right politically tend to have a larger amygdala — a structure that is electrically active during states of fear and anxiety. And a 2014 fMRI study found that it is possible to predict whether someone is a liberal or conservative simply by looking at their brain activity while they view threatening or disgusting images, such as mutilated bodies. Specifically, the brains of self-identified conservatives generated more activity overall in response to the disturbing images.