• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Who Are the Hardcore Trump Supporters?

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
When I evaluated Trump v Hillary, she looked more the authoritarian than did he.
She wanted bigger government & more regulation (both civil & economic).
I remember the health care proposal she advocated during the "unprecedented
co-presidency" (their description), which made any private alternative illegal.
Doesn't Big Government = prosperity and security? Aren't regulations designed to protect people?
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
That is tough. Because I think it is unfair to compare what we THINK Hillary could have been vs Trump now. Does that make sense? In other words, it would much easier to poke fun at Hillary voters when the election was booming than it would be to compare a hypothetical Hillary to reality Trump.
Whatever Hillary would've done in office, she would receive some criticism.
The question is whether criticizing her & her voters in such an abusive
fashion would be acceptable to those who take that tack regarding Trump.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Doesn't Big Government = prosperity and security?
Aren't regulations designed to protect people?
There are unintended consequences to any design.
As I use "big government", it's shorthand for more bureaucracy, higher taxes,
& more regulation. The problem with the last item is that "more" imposes a
costly burden, but so often the benefits are less than the costs. When I'm
dictator, you'll see more regulation in some areas (eg, environmental, infrastructure
hardening), but with an overall reduction....at least until my assassination.
 

Quetzal

A little to the left and slightly out of focus.
Premium Member
Whatever Hillary would've done in office, she would receive some criticism.
The question is whether criticizing her & her voters in such an abusive
fashion would be acceptable to those who take that tack regarding Trump.
Fair point. We need to take my posts with a large grain of salt. I am surrounded by folks who have no issue proclaiming their racism as these current events occur. I am jaded. I am mad. I am #triggered. I want justice, for sure, but I don't want what we have now.

A bit more direct to your post. I do not fault Trump voters, at all. I get it, I do. I do fault current supporters of his more recent policies though if they agree with how they are being carried out.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Whatever Hillary would've done in office, she would receive some criticism.
The question is whether criticizing her & her voters in such an abusive
fashion would be acceptable to those who take that tack regarding Trump.
Do you realize that what the office holders actually do is supposed to have a role in the degree of the criticisms they receive? And in the support they receive or fail to, as well?
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Do you realize that what the office holders actually do is supposed to have a role in the degree of the criticisms they receive? And in the support they receive or fail to, as well?
I realize many things, one of which is that your post doesn't address the point.
Quetzal already did though.
 

tytlyf

Not Religious
That sounds roughly true. I wonder how accurate it is.
It's true. Same crowd, same RW media watchers, same outfits, same misspelled signs.

RW entertainment is responsible for shaping the Tea/Trump supporter. Without RW entertainment outlets, they wouldn't exist. Where else do they learn all the falsehoods, panic mongering, paranoia, conspiracies, etc?

For instance, the Koch created Tea Party was about Taxed Enough Already. The republican elitists were angry that their 1%r taxes were too high, not the middle class.

As if we need more proof, look at the recent republican tax cut. Who benefits? The top, not the middle class. Derped.
 

Kartari

Active Member
Hi Sunstone,

There are a lot of notions about who are Trump's hardcore supporters, and what they see in him. I myself have tended to see his core support as predominantly middle and working class white males who feel the Democrats have abandoned them to head off into the wild, blue yonder of identity politics and intersectionality.

That has seemed a safe bet for me because the people I personally know who voted for Trump have been folks that fit that description, and who voted for him because he was the candidate that most addressed their wallets.

I would say he certainly gave lip service to that notion. I agree in that a very significant number of his supporters perceived that he both could and would help them out financially.

But when I think about it, I'm inclined to that view mainly because I believe the Democrats need to return to their ancient core message of economic prosperity for the middle and working classes. To me, it's the only way they can win, on all levels of government going forward.

There's a lot of truth in your view. Sadly, too many people are primarily motivated by money in life.

However, another idea has occurred to me -- one I should have thought of long ago, because it seems to me it might have some decent odds of being true. That's the notion that Trump's hardest of his hardcore supporters are what psychologists call, "authoritarian followers".

There is, in fact, a growing body of research that evinces the conclusion that Western democracies, particularly the United States, are losing interest in democratic forms of governance while authoritarian forms of leadership are gaining attraction, and at an alarming rate since the aftermath of World War 2 (and particularly over the past few decades). The Journal of Democracy published an article on one alarming survey conducted by the World Values Survey back in 2016 entitled, "The Danger of Deconsolidation: the Democratic Disconnect" (source).

Following World War II, a group of psychologists naturally began studying the psychology of dictators such as Mussolini, Franco, Hitler, Mao, and Stalin. But after a bit of that had been done, a second group of psychologists thought the more interesting subject would be to study the people who followed the dictators.

They rejected the notion of some experiments of the time (which have since been called into serious question) that those people were like everyone else. Instead, they decided to seriously consider the possibility that they formed a distinct psychological group unto themselves.

One of the earliest psychologists to go to work on the subject was Robert Altemeyer. Altemeyer, along with others, found some disturbing characteristics that people who enthusiastically follow dictators seem to have in common. Altemeyer also wrote a short, easy to read, ebook on the subject that's he's made available for free online.

Chapter Three of his book deals with "How Authoritarian Followers Think":
The key to the puzzle [of how authoritarian followers think] springs from Chapter 2's observation that, first and foremost, followers have mainly copied the beliefs of the authorities in their lives. They have not developed and thought through their ideas as much as most people have. Thus almost anything can be found in their heads if their authorities put it there, even stuff that contradicts other stuff. A filing cabinet or a computer can store quite inconsistent notions and never lose a minute of sleep over their contradiction. Similarly [an authoritarian follower] can have all sorts of illogical, self-contradictory, and widely refuted ideas rattling around in various boxes in his brain, and never notice it.​

Indeed, they not only fail to notice themselves, but fail to notice it even when it's rationally or logically pointed out to them.

Altemeyer is not offering his mere opinions here. Everything he says is based on decades of research. He goes on:

So can everybody, of course, and my wife loves to catch inconsistencies in my reasoning when we’re having a friendly discussion about one of my personal failures. But research reveals that authoritarian followers drive through life under the influence of impaired thinking a lot more than most people do, exhibiting sloppy reasoning, highly compartmentalized beliefs, double standards, hypocrisy, self-blindness, a profound ethnocentrism, and--to top it all off--a ferocious dogmatism that makes it unlikely anyone could ever change their minds with evidence or logic. These seven deadly shortfalls of authoritarian thinking eminently qualify them to follow a would-be dictator.​

Altemeyer backs up his statements with footnote after footnote citing and explaining the science in support of his points.

I would urge anyone interested in the mystery of who Trump's hardcore supporters are, where they come from (what shapes them), how they think, and what they want, to read his short ebook. It can be found here:

The Authoritarians.

One note: He wrote the book back when Bush was in office, so the examples are not current, but the science still stands, so far as I know.

If you do read the book, then does it make sense to you that authoritarian followers might be Trump's hardcore supporters? That's a serious question to me because I honestly don't know of any science that supports the notion Trump's hardcore followers are overwhelming authoritarian followers -- but nor do I know of any science that disconfirms the notion.

Comments? Questions? Sly and wicked distortions of what I said? Deeply meaningful tales of love for one's dental braces?

Thanks for the link. I look forward to reading it when I'm in more of a mood to be depressed, lol.

Unfortunately, I think you're right. Authoritarian mindsets do certainly form a significant part of Trump's base of support. Just consider the white supremacist and white nationalist groups which have allied and been emboldened by the president's words and actions, including the KKK and the American Nazi party. I'd go so far as to state that there's a cult of personality around Trump. And Fox News has become the leading part of his personal propaganda network.

Other segments of his base of support include those who choose to remain superficially (mis)informed while not knowingly disavowing democracy as a fundamental institution. In my personal experience (having dealt with two family members in particular who fit into this category), it's nonetheless very difficult to get them to recognize the man they voted for and what he's doing. They are so inundated with misinformation, they probably would require a long term stay at an intensive un-indoctrination camp to unravel the thick layers of falsehoods that they regard as reality.

All in all, the realization that a growing body of Americans would rather have a tough-talking leader with little regard for either an elected legislature or an independent judiciary is not just a disturbing source of depression for me, but makes me fear for the future of this country as a democratic nation. I used to believe in meeting people halfway and having mutual respect for each others' views. How do you change the minds of people whose minds refuse to change with facts and logic, though? How do you even bring yourself to feign any amount of respect for someone who is unphased by, for instance, the ripping of toddlers away from their parents and caging them, without hope of parental reunification, just because they were fleeing a dangerous home country and trying to seek asylum here? Or who has no moral qualms whatsoever with throwing the First Amendment out the window in order to ban people from six countries where zero terrorists have attacked us from, simply because their personal ignorance about their religion links them with terrorism only in their own ignorant minds? These mindsets essentially boil down to bigotry, quite simply. Uninformed, ignorant, with unwarranted confidence in the overly simplistic yet wrong solutions to half-imagined problems that the authoritarian leader pulls from out of his rump and throws at them. Even in the better case of those who are simply misinformed, how do we get them to pay more attention and think critically about the propaganda they have become so thoroughly indoctrinated with?

It's honestly very difficult to maintain any semblance of optimism for the future at this point in time. But hope does remain, if for no other reason than the fact that there were nearly 3 million more people who voted for Clinton than for Trump in 2016, and Clinton was a poor candidate too. I just hope we can find someone better in 2020, if Trump manages to evade impeachment that is.
 
Last edited:

Kangaroo Feathers

Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
37289250_10155272305316315_7405728073162686464_n.jpg
 

ADigitalArtist

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
That is tough. Because I think it is unfair to compare what we THINK Hillary could have been vs Trump now. Does that make sense? In other words, it would much easier to poke fun at Hillary voters when the election was booming than it would be to compare a hypothetical Hillary to reality Trump.
I feel like there's diminishing returns on that challenge, though. Like, "I can't know for certain what would have happened in a Hillary presidency but Trump is the most corrupt president we've had since Richard Nixon, arguably moreso, and it should come as a surprise to nobody based on his history."
 
Top