at the
2017 inauguration, a theme earlier established by Reagan to elicit a sense of restoration of hope Sociologist
Arlie Hochschild writes that Trump's "speeches—evoking dominance, bravado, clarity, national pride, and personal uplift—inspire an emotional transformation" in followers, deeply resonating with their "emotional self-interest". Hochschild states that Trump is an "emotions candidate", appealing to the emotional self-interests of voters. To Hochschild, this explains the paradox raised by
Thomas Frank's book ''
What's the Matter with Kansas?'', an anomaly which motivated her five-year immersive research into the emotional dynamics of the
Tea Party movement which she believes has mutated into Trumpism. Her book
Strangers in Their Own Land was named one of the "6 books to understand Trump's Win" by
The New York Times. Hochschild claims that voters were not persuaded by rhetoric to vote against their self-interest through appeals to the "bad angels" of their nature: "their greed, selfishness, racial intolerance,
homophobia, and desire to get out of paying taxes that go to the unfortunate." She grants that the appeal to bad angels is made by Trump, but states that it "obscures another—to the right wing's good angels—their patience in waiting in line in scary economic times, their capacity for loyalty, sacrifice, and endurance", qualities she describes as a part of a motivating narrative she calls their "deep story", a
social contract narrative that appears to be widely shared in other countries as well. She thinks Trump's approach towards his audience creates group cohesiveness by exploiting a crowd phenomenon
Emile Durkheim called "
collective effervescence", "a state of emotional excitation felt by those who join with others they take to be fellow members of a moral or biological tribe ... to affirm their unity and, united, they feel secure and respected." Trumpian rhetoric employs absolutist
framings and threat
narratives rejecting the political establishment. The absolutist rhetoric emphasizes non-negotiable boundaries and moral outrage at their supposed violation.
Money-Kyrle pattern A particular pattern is common for authoritarian movements. First, elicit a sense of depression, humiliation and victimhood. Second, separate the world into two opposing groups: a
demonized set of
others versus those who have the power and will to overcome them. This involves identifying the enemy supposedly causing the current state of affairs and then promoting
conspiracy theories and
fearmongering to inflame fear and anger. After cycling these first two patterns through the populace, the final message aims to produce a
cathartic release of pent-up
ochlocracy and mob energy, with a promise that salvation is at hand because the leader will deliver the nation back to its former glory. This three-part pattern was identified in 1932 by
Roger Money-Kyrle who wrote
Psychology of Propaganda. Reporting on Trumpist rallies has documented expressions of the Money-Kyrle pattern and associated
stagecraft.
Trump rallies rally in Arizona, 2018 Critical theory scholar
Douglas Kellner compares the elaborate staging of
Leni Riefenstahl's
Triumph of the Will with that used in Trump rallies using the example of the preparation of
photo op sequences and aggressive hyping of huge attendance expected for Trump's 2015 primary event in Mobile, Alabama, when the media coverage repeatedly cuts between the Trump jet circling the stadium, the rising excitement of rapturous admirers below, the motorcade and the final triumphal entrance of the individual Kellner claims is being presented as the "political savior to help them out with their problems and address their grievances". Connolly thinks the performance draws energy from the crowd's anger as it channels it, drawing it into a collage of anxieties, frustrations and resentments about malaise themes, such as
deindustrialization,
offshoring, racial tensions, political correctness, a more humble position for the United States in global security, economics and so on. Connolly observes that animated gestures, pantomiming, facial expressions, strutting and finger pointing are incorporated as part of the theater, transforming the anxiety into anger directed at particular targets, concluding that "each element in a Trump performance flows and folds into the others until an aggressive resonance machine is formed that is more intense than its parts." Some compare the symbiotic dynamics of crowd pleasing to that of the
professional wrestling style of events which Trump was involved with since the 1980s. Some academics point out that the narrative common in the popular press describing the psychology of such crowds is a repetition of a 19th-century theory by
Gustave Le Bon when organized crowds were seen by political elites as potential threats to the social order. In his book
The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind (1895), Le Bon described a sort of collective contagion uniting a crowd into a near religious frenzy, reducing members to barbaric, if not subhuman levels of consciousness with mindless goals. Since such a description depersonalizes supporters, this type of Le Bon analysis is criticized because the would-be defenders of liberal democracy simultaneously are dodging responsibility for investigating grievances while also unwittingly accepting the same
us vs. them framing of illiberalism. Connolly acknowledges the risks but considers it more risky to ignore that Trumpian persuasion is successful due to deliberate use of techniques evoking more mild forms of
affective contagion. .
Rhetoric A constant barrage of rhetoric rivets media attention while obscuring actions such as
neoliberal deregulation. One study concluded that significant environmental deregulation occurred during the first year of the Trump administration but, due to its concurrent use of racist rhetoric, escaped much media attention. According to the authors, the rhetoric served political objectives of dehumanizing its targets, eroding democratic norms, and consolidating power by emotionally connecting with and inflaming resentments among the base of followers and distracted media attention from
deregulatory policymaking by igniting media coverage of the distractions. conspiracy theory used to delegitimize his political rival by employing a political tactic known as the
big lie. According to civil rights lawyer
Burt Neuborne and political theorist
William E. Connolly, Trumpist rhetoric employs
tropes similar to those used by
fascists in Germany to persuade citizens (at first a minority) to give up democracy, by using a barrage of falsehoods, half-truths, personal invective, threats,
xenophobia,
national-security scares, religious bigotry,
white racism, exploitation of economic insecurity, and a never-ending search for
scapegoats. Neuborne found twenty parallel practices, such as creating what amounts to an "alternate reality" in adherents' minds, through direct communications, by nurturing a fawning mass media and by deriding scientists to erode the notion of
objective truth; organizing carefully orchestrated mass rallies; attacking judges when legal cases are lost; using lies, half-truths, insults, vituperation and innuendo to marginalize, demonize and destroy opponents; making
jingoistic appeals to
ultranationalist fervor; and promising to stop the flow of "undesirable" ethnic groups who are made scapegoats for the nation's ills. Connolly presents a similar list in his book
Aspirational Fascism (2017), adding comparisons of the integration of theatrics and crowd participation with rhetoric, involving grandiose bodily gestures, grimaces, hysterical charges, dramatic repetitions of alternate reality falsehoods, and totalistic assertions incorporated into signature phrases that audiences are encouraged to join in chanting. Despite the similarities, Connolly stresses that Trump is no
Nazi but is "an aspirational fascist who pursues crowd adulation, hyperaggressive nationalism, white triumphalism, and militarism, pursues a
law-and-order regime giving unaccountable power to the police, and is a practitioner of a rhetorical style that regularly creates fake news and smears opponents to mobilize support for the
Big Lies he advances." In his 2024 book
Trump and Hitler: A Comparative Study in Lying, cultural theorist
Henk de Berg points to a number of further parallels between Trump's and Hitler's rhetoric; namely, the use of jokes and personal insults; the deliberate creation of controversy; interpretative openness, allowing different groups to recognize themselves in the argument; and oratorical meandering in cases where a coherent narrative would draw attention to the argument's inconsistencies. De Berg also points out that extremist language used by Trump's followers is often perceived as authentic, because in real life we also tend to overstate things (e.g., "My new boss is worse than Stalin").
Branding Trump used
personal branding to market himself as an extraordinary leader by using his celebrity status and name recognition. As one of the communications directors for the MAGA
super PAC put it in 2016, "Like
Hercules, Donald Trump is a work of fiction." Journalism professor
Mark Danner explains that "week after week for a dozen years millions of Americans saw Donald J. Trump portraying the business magus [in
The Apprentice], the grand vizier of capitalism, the wise man of the boardroom, a living confection whose every step and word bespoke gravitas and experience and power and authority and ... money. Endless amounts of money." Political science scholar Andrea Schneiker regards the branding strategy of the Trump public persona as that of a superhero who "uses his superpowers to save others, that is, his country. ... a superhero is needed to solve the problems of ordinary Americans ... Hence, the superhero per definition is an anti-politician. Due to his celebrity status and his identity as entertainer, Donald Trump can thereby be considered to be allowed to take extraordinary measures and even to break rules."
Appeal to emotions Historian
Peter E. Gordon observes that "Trump, far from being a violation of the norm, actually signifies an emergent norm of the social order" where the categories of the psychological and political have dissolved. In accounting for Trump's election and ability to sustain high approval ratings among voters, Erika Tucker writes in the book
Trump and Political Philosophy that though all presidential campaigns have strong emotions associated with them, Trump was able to recognize, and then to gain the trust and loyalty of those who felt strong emotions about perceived changes in the United States. She notes, "Political psychologist
Drew Westen has argued that
Democrats are less successful at gauging and responding to affective politics—issues that arouse strong emotional states." Examining the populist appeal of Trump, Hidalgo-Tenorio and Benítez-Castro draw on the theories of
Ernesto Laclau, writing, "The emotional appeal of populist discourse is key to its polarising effects, this being so much so that populism 'would be unintelligible without the affective component.' (Laclau 2005, 11)" Trump uses rhetoric that political scientists have deemed to be both dehumanizing and connected to physical violence by Trump's followers.
Emotion, trust, and media Scholar Michael Carpini states that "Trumpism is a culmination of trends that have been occurring for...decades...we are witnessing...a fundamental shift in the relationships between journalism, politics, and democracy." Carpini identifies "the collapsing of the prior [media] regime's presumed and enforced distinctions between news and entertainment." Examining Trump's use of media in
Language in the Trump Era, professor Marco Jacquemet writes that this approach "assumes (correctly, it appears) that his audiences care more about shock and entertainment value in their media consumption than almost anything else." Plasser and Ulram describe a media logic which emphasizes "personalization ... a political star system ... [and] sports based dramatization." Olivier Jutel notes that "Trump's celebrity status and reality-TV rhetoric of 'winning' and 'losing' corresponds perfectly to these values", asserting that "
Fox News and conservative personalities from
Rush Limbaugh,
Glenn Beck and
Alex Jones do not simply represent a new political and media voice but embody the convergence of politics and media in which affect and enjoyment are the central values of media production." Studying paranoia in media, Jessica Johnson writes, "Rather than finding accurate news meaningful,
Facebook users find the affective pleasure of connectivity addictive, whether or not the information they share is factual, and that is how communicative
capitalism captivates subjects as it holds them captive." Looking back prior to social media, researcher
Brian L. Ott writes: "I'm nostalgic for the world of television that
Neil Postman (1985)
argued, produced the 'least well-informed people in the Western world' by packaging news as entertainment.
Twitter is producing the most self-involved people in history by treating everything one does or thinks as newsworthy. Television may have assaulted journalism, but Twitter killed it." Commenting on Trump's support among Fox News viewers, Mark Lukasiewicz has a similar perspective, writing, "
Tristan Harris famously said that social networks are about '
affirmation, not information'—and the same can be said about
cable news, especially in prime time."
Arlie Russell Hochschild holds that Trump supporters trust their preferred sources of information due to the
affective bond they have with them. As Daniel Kreiss summarizes Hochschild, "Trump, along with Fox News, gave these strangers in their own land the hope that they would be restored to their rightful place at the center of the nation, and provided a very real emotional release from the fetters of
political correctness that dictated they respect people of color,
lesbians and
gays, and those of other faiths ... that the network's personalities share the same 'deep story' of political and social life, and therefore they learn from them 'what to feel afraid, angry, and anxious about.'" From Kreiss' account of conservative personalities and media, information became less important than providing a sense of familial bonding, where "family provides a sense of identity, place, and belonging; emotional, social, and cultural support and security; and gives rise to political and social affiliations and beliefs." Hochschild gives the example of a woman who states, "
Bill O'Reilly is like a steady, reliable dad.
Sean Hannity is like a difficult uncle who rises to anger too quickly.
Megyn Kelly is like a smart sister. Then there's
Greta Van Susteren. And
Juan Williams, who came over from
NPR, which was too left for him, the adoptee. They're all different, just like in a family." Olivier Jutel notes that, "
Affect is central to the strategy of Fox which imagined its journalism not in terms of servicing the rational citizen in the public sphere but in 'craft[ing] intensive relationships with their viewers' in order to sustain audience share across platforms." In this segmented market, Trump "offers himself as an ego-ideal to an individuated public of enjoyment that coalesce around his media brand as part of their own performance of identity." Jutel states that news media companies benefit from offering spectacle and drama. "Trump is a definitive product of
mediatized politics providing the spectacle that drives ratings and affective media consumption, either as part of his populist movement or as the liberal resistance." Researchers give differing emphasis to which emotions are important to followers. Michael Richardson argues that "affirmation, amplification and circulation of disgust is one of the primary affective drivers of Trump's political success." Richardson agrees with Ott about the "entanglement of Trumpian affect and social media crowds" who seek "affective affirmation, confirmation and amplification. Social media postings of crowd experiences accumulate as 'archives of feelings' that are both dynamic in nature and affirmative of social values."
Social trust expert Karen Jones follows philosopher
Annette Baier in explaining that the masters of the art of creating trust and distrust are populist politicians and criminals, who "show a masterful appreciation of the ways in which certain emotional states drive out trust and replace it with distrust." Jones sees Trump as an exemplar of this who recognize that fear and contempt are tools that can reorient networks of trust and distrust in social networks to alter how a potential supporter "interprets the words, deeds, and motives of the
other." She holds that "A core strategy of Donald Trump...has been to manufacture fear and contempt towards some undocumented migrants (among other groups)", a strategy which "has gone global ... in Australia, Austria, Hungary, Poland, Italy and the United Kingdom."
Falsehoods and misleading statements involves repeated deceptive claims that "
windmills" "kill the birds". However,
wind turbines in the U.S. are responsible for less than one one-hundredth of one percent of human-related bird deaths. There are many falsehoods which Trump presents as facts. Drawing on
Harry G. Frankfurt's book
On Bullshit, political science professor Matthew McManus argues that Trump is a bullshitter whose sole interest is to persuade, and not a liar (e.g.
Richard Nixon) who takes the power of truth seriously and so deceitfully attempts to conceal it. Trump by contrast is indifferent to the truth or unaware of it. Unlike conventional lies of politicians exaggerating their accomplishments, Trump's lies are egregious, making lies about easily verifiable facts. At one rally Trump stated his father "came from Germany", even though
Fred Trump was born in New York City. Leaders at the 2018
United Nations General Assembly burst into laughter at his boast that he had accomplished more in his first two years than any other United States president. Visibly startled, Trump responded to the audience: "I didn't expect that reaction." Trump lies about the trivial, such as claiming that there was no rain on the day of
his inauguration when in fact it did rain, as well as making grandiose "Big Lies", such as claiming that Obama founded
ISIS, or promoting the
birther movement, a conspiracy theory which claims that Obama was born in Kenya, not Hawaii. Connolly points to the similarities of such reality-bending
gaslighting with fascist and post Soviet techniques of propaganda including
Kompromat (scandalous material), stating that "Trumpian persuasion draws significantly upon the repetition of Big Lies."
Robert Jay Lifton, a scholar of
psychohistory and authority on the nature of
cults, emphasizes the importance of understanding Trumpism "as an assault on reality". A leader has more power if he is in any part successful at making truth irrelevant to his followers. Trump biographer
Timothy L. O'Brien agrees, stating: "It is a core operating principle of Trumpism. If you constantly attack objective reality, you are left as the only trustworthy source of information, which is one of his goals for his relationship with his supporters—that they should believe no one else but him." Lifton believes Trump is a purveyor of a
solipsistic reality which is hostile to facts and is made collective by amplifying frustrations and fears held by his community of zealous believers. Research published in the
American Sociological Review found that Trump's lying helped boost his "authentic appeal". It argued that in systems viewed as flawed or with low political legitimacy, a "flagrant violator of established norms" is seen "as an authentic champion" by being perceived as "bravely speaking a deep and otherwise suppressed truth" against a political establishment that does not appear to be working on behalf of the people. While a perceived establishment candidate "may be more likable or perceived to be more competent", voters question the candidates opposition to "the injustice that is said to have permeated the established political system". Andrew Gumbel, writing for
The Guardian after the 2024 presidential election, wrote that many Trump voters in
Youngstown, Ohio, saw both parties as filled with crooks and liars, but that Trump "comes across as someone who doesn't pretend to be anything other than what he is, and that perceived authenticity counts for more with many Youngstown voters than his character flaws or even his policy positions". Gumbel argued that voters preferred "gut instincts" to "carefully scripted messaging of a Democrat like
Kamala Harris or even a mainstream Republican". == Social psychology ==