How Donald Trump Won
It’s all about psychology. Here’s his playbook.
Hate him or love him, you have to admit that Donald Trump is effective.
These last few months, Trump has transformed himself from circus clown into the Republican nominee.
This has left the media, and most of my friends, perplexed. How could a bombastic, aggressive reality TV star become the leading candidate for the Republican Party? However, to someone trained in the behavioral sciences, his rise makes sense. Trump has masterfully tweaked dozens of different persuasion triggers, and has shaped the media narrative to make him seem as important, and popular, as possible.
In the following article I’m going to go through Trump’s persuasion tactics. I’ll explain which psychological tactics he uses, how each of them works, and provide clear examples (when possible). By the end of this article, you’ll either be incredibly happy or unbelievably distraught, but wiser for the journey.
A quick note: I am indebted to Scott Adams (of Dilbert fame) for bringing Trump’s incredible persuasion abilities to light. It was only after I read a few Scott Adams articles that I realized how truly skilled Trump was. This article is an extended, and more academic, study of Trump’s persuasive power.
Two Types of Persuasion
A person’s persuasion skills can be broken down into two categories:
- Active Persuasion Skills
- Passive Persuasion Skills
Active Persuasion Skills are tricks and gambits that you can use in order to get other people to do what you want. For example, you can get people to sign a petition by first giving them a small gift, like a piece of candy or a flower. The Hare Krishnas are famous for doing this. They will first give you a small gift, usually a flower, and then ask for a donation in return. Many groups that actively fundraise employ the same tactic, either by giving away a gift and asking for a donation, or by reminding you of all the great things they’re already done for you, and asking for a small donation in return.
Passive Persuasion Skills are personal characteristics and framing tactics that you can nurture in order to get other people to respond to you in a predictable manner. For example, a lot of marketers will use social proof to make their products seem popular. “75% of all bodybuilders use our protein powder.” If you see yourself as part of that group (or want to), you’ll be more likely to purchase that protein powder, since it’s just what people in your group do. When we think someone is popular or an authority, we’re more likely to comply with their demands and have positive feelings towards them.
In short, the more authoritative, important, or socially validated you seem, the more effective you’ll be in influencing others.
Donald Trump is a master of both these types of persuasion, but does a particularly great job of building a powerful, larger-than-life image, and this is where we’ll start our analysis.
Passive Persuasion Skills
Passive Persuasion Skills are all about projecting financial, professional, and social power.
Some common ways that people project financial power is by driving expensive cars, buying big houses, wearing designer clothing, or going to the club and purchasing bottle service.
Professional power is projected by speaking at professional events (keynote at a conference), publishing articles in prestigious publications (like Nature, for scientists, or Harvard Business Review, for businessmen), or by appearing as an expert guest on television.
Social power is communicated through social media follower counts, word-of-mouth mentions, and by being seen with other powerful individuals.
In order to build up these three different pillars of power (financial, professional, social), Trump uses three primary tools:
- Association
- Authority
- Social Proof
Trump is a master of social chess. He understands that we are tribal creatures, and that we size people up by looking at who they hang out with, where they stack up in that group, and by figuring out how popular they are.
Let’s look at how he uses each of these passive persuasion tools to build his image and maximize his social proof:
Association
Trump loves talking about people that like him or agree with him. For example, during the third Republican Primary Debate, when Trump was pushed on his tax plan, he associated himself with a financial authority, Larry Kudlow, to fight back against audience & moderator criticism. You can see the exchange below:
“…Larry Kudlow is an example, who I have a lot of respect for, loves my tax plan…”
[ CNBC anchor criticizes tax plan]
“… then you have to get rid of Larry Kudlow, who sits on your panel, who is a great guy, who came out the other day and said I love Trump’s tax plan.”
Trump also does this with another famous financier, Carl Icahn, as you can see below:
By associating himself with these highly regarded people, Trump is able to make himself more credible and authoritative.
Authority
But Trump doesn’t just associate himself with authority figures, he also makes sure to flaunt his own authority. After all, he is a multi-billionaire ($10 billion according to him, $4.5 billion according to Forbes), and has some impressive accomplishments in the real estate and business worlds. To hammer his business authority home, he constantly tells people about how amazing his company is, and how he’s hired “tens of thousands of people”.
He also makes sure to flex his national security and political knowledge. For example, he often tells the audience how he predicted 9/11, and pleaded with the government to not invade Iraq — the implication being that he knows more about terrorism and national defense than anyone else.
Trump is also sure to always be the alpha male in any given situation. He wants people to understand that he is at the top of the pecking order, the status hierarchy. Thus, he will often shout people down or kick people out of his events to show authority and dominance:
This contrasts wildly with Bernie Sanders’ treatment of protestors, as seen here.
Which person displayed more authority and dominance over the situation? Trump in spades. This is not an accident.
Social Proof
We’re tribal creatures. In situations of uncertainty, we tend to follow the herd. ALL of these people couldn’t be wrong, could they?
Trump works hard to make sure that his popularity is known. For example, during his rallies he often heckles the cameramen, saying that they never show the full crowd.
“They don’t turn ‘em. They don’t turn ‘em. Go ahead, turn ‘em. Look. Turn the camera. Go ahead. Turn the camera, ma'am. Turn the camera… Show them how many people come to these rallies.”
He also constantly quotes the polls in which he does best, or just says that “all of the polls have me at number one”. While that may not be the case, he is able to keep repeating the talking point, hammering the image of trump as the unanimous #1 candidate into the head of every viewer.
One can’t but have the mental image of Trump as the most popular man in America. His constant hammering home of how socially approved and popular he is is one of his most powerful tactics.
Active Persuasion
You can change behavior in two different ways:
- Directly
- Indirectly, through changing attitudes & beliefs
Trump is able to effectively manipulate behavior in both ways. Let’s look at his direct persuasion techniques first.
Direct, active persuasion:
- Reinforcement
- Punishment
- Commitment
- Commandment
Reinforcement & Punishment
Reinforcement is just a fancy word for “reward”. When we reward someone for a particular behavior, whether that’s showing up for a rally or speaking at length about their love for Trump, we make it more likely that they’ll do that behavior again in the future. We’ve given them clear expectations and incentives: “If you show up for Trump rallies, you’ll laugh a lot, get lots of approval and attention from other people, and a free hat.”
The opposite of reinforcement is punishment — when we inflict pain on someone for doing a behavior we don’t want to see again in the future. Spanking and “grounding” are two classic forms of punishment that most of us are familiar with from our childhoods. Insults are another popular form of punishment that we, and politicians, use liberally.
Let’s look at a couple of examples of Trump’s use of reinforcement and punishment.
In general, Trump uses the following formula:
Attack & Punish → (person changes behavior) → Reward desired behavior
This can be clearly seen with Chris Christie. Early in the presidential primary process, when Christie was still a rival, Trump laid into him when necessary. Here’s an example of one of Trump’s attack-tweets:
Later, when Christie dropped out of the race, Donald was able to reward him for submissive and pro-Trump behavior by giving him fundraising dollars and a position on Trump’s team.
The same exact pattern can be seen with Ben Carson. During a short stretch in late October and early November of last year, Carson actually closed the gap with Trump and tied him (or led him) in a number of polls. For a moment, it looked like Carson could actually beat The Donald. Right around this time, Donald started unleashing his insult-machine on Carson, calling him “pathological” and comparing him to a child molester.
Right after this intense round of insults and attacks, Carson’s numbers tanked, and Trump’s numbers resumed their upward trend. (Trump is in blue below, Carson is in red)
Here are some of Trump’s Ben Carson insults, as taken from the New York Times:
Mr. Trump on Mr. Carson’s immigration views: “Ben Carson is very, very weak on immigration. He believes in amnesty strongly.”
Mr. Trump on Mr. Carson’s energy levels: “Actually, I think Ben Carson is lower energy than Jeb.”
Mr. Trump on Mr. Carson’s ability to stimulate the economy: “Ben Carson has never created a job in his life (well, maybe a nurse). I have created tens of thousands of jobs, it’s what I do.”
Mr. Trump on Mr. Carson’s fitness to lead: “It’s not his thing. He doesn’t have the temperament for it. I think Ben just doesn’t have the experience.”
Mr. Trump on Mr. Carson’s religion: “I mean, Seventh-day Adventist, I don’t know about, I just don’t know about.”
Mr. Trump on Mr. Carson being violent as a child: “He actually said ‘pathological temper,’ and then he defined it as disease. If you’re pathological, there’s no cure for that, folks. If you’re a child molester, a sick puppy, there’s no cure for that.”
Mr. Trump on Mr. Carson’s bad temper, continued: “Think about what Carson is saying: he hit his mother over the head with a hammer, he hit a friend in the face with a lock, he tried to kill somebody with a knife.”
After Carson dropped out, he endorsed Trump and was rewarded by being given the lead position in Trump’s vice president exploration committee.
It’s the same pattern: Insult/Punish → (change behavior) → Reward
Here’s a great video filled with examples of Trump’s punishing insults:
To learn more about the strategy behind Trump’s insult game, check out this article by Scott Adams.
Now, let’s talk about commitment.
Commitment
It’s been well known in the psychological sciences for some time that people tend to stay consistent with their past actions and commitments. So if I get you to pledge to vote on Sunday, you’ll be much more likely to drive to the polling station when the time comes, compared to someone I’ve merely bombarded with reminders and messages: “Hey! Be sure to vote”.
Commitments can be made even more powerful if we make them public and social. Pledging to vote in front of one person (me), will have some effect. But pledging to vote in front of a dozen of your friends will be even more powerful.
Trump has used this tactic masterfully by, for example, having his supporters pledge to go out to vote on primary day, as seen in the video below:
“I do solemnly swear… that I, no matter how I feel, no matter what the conditions, if there’s hurricanes or whatever — that’s good enough — will vote on or before the 12th… for Donald J. Trump for president.”
This has been a record-breaking year for voter turnout in the republican primary. It’s hard to isolate what kind of an effect this commitment strategy had on turnout, but, according to USA Today: “In Florida, about 46% of eligible voters cast ballots in the primary contest, whichDonald Trump and Hillary Clinton won. Florida Sen. Marco Rubio suspended his campaign after losing his home state primary. The turnout was higher than in the Republican-only primary of 2012 and the joint primary of 2008, when 42% of eligible voters participated, according to the Florida Department of State.”
Not bad.
Commandment
Trump is an alpha male. There’s no denying it. And one of the favorite persuasion techniques of aggressive and domineering people is the command.
Over the last year and a half, Trump has battled his way to the top by using verbal brute force.
He understands that making aggressive demands, and sticking to them, builds his image as the alpha savior-in-chief. He also understands that there’s a good chance that his commands will also end up working — resulting in the outcome he wants. The best example of this is the Fox News Debate showdown. In late January, Trump asked Fox to remove Megyn Kelly as a moderator. The network dug in and refused to budge. Instead of capitulating, Trump attacked back with a strong counter punch: he would throw his own event instead.
Fox News would have lower ratings, he would get a ton of press coverage, and his event would raise money for veterans — further increasing his credibility with his base. Win win win.
You can see Bill O’Reilly begging trump to come to the Fox debate in the video below. Since O’Reilly has the reputation of being a no-BS, tough anchor, this further amplifies Trump’s dominant image.
Let’s move on to the next section: attitude change. We’ll cover the tactics Trump uses to change behavior by first changing how people think and feel.
Indirect, attitudinal persuasion
I’ve isolated eight different ways that Trump changes people’s beliefs and attitudes. They are:
- Reciprocity
- Scott Adams’ Linguistic Kill Shot
- Social comparison
- Identity
- Humor & Likability
- Attention
- Comprehension
Reciprocity
Earlier in this article we talked about Chris Christie and Ben Carson — and the sweet new gigs they’ve gotten from Donald Trump. This is an example of reciprocity. By giving each of these men something (transition team lead & head of VP committee), Trump expects future favors in return. He’s also using these gifts to change the attitudes of each of these scorned ex-candidates, so that they don’t jump on to the anti-trump battalion that is currently forming with the help of the RNC and the Clintons.
By indebting them to him, Trump is playing the long game; setting himself up for success after he’s assumed the presidency. You can bet that when he wants something done in New Jersey during his first term, he’ll have no problem winning Christie over to his point of view.
Scott Adams’ Linguistic Kill Shot
The person who originally recognized Trump’s incredible persuasive ability was Scott Adams. And, in August of 2015, he coined a term, the “linguistic kill shot” to refer to a label that frames a candidate in such a unique and powerfully negative way that they can’t help but lose.
Here’s what Adams has to say about engineering a kill shot:
“Now you know how to engineer a linguistic kill shot.
1. Find a word that is “clean” from historical political baggage (examples: risky, low-energy, credibility).
2. Choose a word that moves people to High Ground concepts where you are relatively strong and your opponent has a weakness, ignoring the smaller issues that are the topics of all disagreements.
Examples:
Low ground: Cut taxes → High ground: Risky
Low ground: Immigration policy → High ground: Low-energy guy
Low Ground: Clinton’s policies → High Ground: credibility
In my corporate days I used the High Ground maneuver to “win” any meeting I needed to win. Unlike most methods of persuasion that have more of a statistical power, perhaps influencing 20% of a crowd, the High Ground maneuver works instantly, every time, and on every person. (In my personal experience.)
As soon as I recognized that tool in Trump’s toolbox, I predicted he would win it all. He was going into a stick fight with a bazooka. Most of you only saw sticks. Trained persuaders saw the bazooka.
I remind you that he literally wrote the book on negotiating.
My best guess for why the High Ground maneuver works so well is that you are taking a person from the weeds of your disagreement to a place where they need to define who they are as a person. Our egos won’t let us define ourselves as small thinkers in front of a big thinker, so we try to keep up, running to the High Ground of our demise as quickly as we can.”
Here are some examples of linguistic kill shots that Trump has come up with this season:
Bernie Sanders
- “Crazy Bernie”
Jeb Bush
- “Low Energy”
Hillary Clinton
- Lacks the strength and stamina (source)
- “Crooked Hillary”
Marco Rubio
- “Little Marco”
- “Lightweight Marco Rubio”
- “Rubio, I’ve never seen a young guy sweat that much.” (source)
Ted Cruz
- “Lyin’ Ted”
Ben Carson
- “Pathological”
By calling attention to strange, unique weaknesses in each of these candidates, Trump is able to destroy the public’s perception of them.
Here’s an incredible visualization of the sheer power of the linguistic kill shot from Matthew Harbison:
As you can see, right after Trump started calling Hillary Clinton “Crooked Hillary”, her polling numbers plummeted as interest in the term rose.
Trump will continue to use this term as long as it works. When it stops being effective, he’ll A/B test some new insults on his Twitter page, choose the best, and then hammer her with the new kill shot.
Social comparison
In social psychology there’s something called Social Comparison Theory. While it sounds complex, it’s actually really simple. It states that we are constantly evaluating our beliefs by checking in with people like us, to see if they see the world the same way as us.
In many ways, Social Comparison Theory tries to understand how social proof works. Why do people tend to become similar to one another? What drives us to bind together with our fellow men and women?
When you see social proof as a way of evaluating your environment, and getting second and third and fourth opinions on your perception, it makes a lot of sense. After all, in math class we’re taught to check our work. Why wouldn’t we also double-check our perception? If the people around you are confident in their perception of someone or something, and you’re unsure about what you think, it would be irrational to assume that they’re wrong and your shaky thoughts are correct.
This means that if you live in a heavily pro-Trump community, your perceptions of Trump will be pulled in a pro-Trump direction. And, once your attitude about him as a candidate change, your behaviors related to him will change as well. You’ll be more likely to vote Trump at the polls in November.
This is why Trump has been throwing so many rallies — well over 100 from what I’ve been able to gather. When Trump creates a safe environment that all of the Trump fans in the community can come to, it further builds their belief in him. After all, here are tens of thousands of people just like you, from your extended community, together at a Trump rally. Obviously the beliefs you have, the way you see the world, is valid; at least all of these people think the same way as you.
The rally just might be the perfect way for people to validate and strengthen their beliefs. The opposing side, consisting of Democrats and liberals, understands this. That’s why they come out to each rally, trying to tear it apart. They don’t want the belief-affirming magic of a collective gathering of like minds to occur.
Identity
All of us have an identity. We see ourselves as having certain values and as being part of certain groups. If you can appeal to someone’s core identity, you have them.
Scott Adams actually has a nice persuasion hierarchy on his blog, quoted here:
Persuasion Stack
Identity (best)
Analogy (okay, not great)
Reason (useless)
Definition (capitulation)
You’ll see a lot of debate on whether Trump is a true conservative or not. That is argument by definition. It is the linguistic equivalent of throwing your gun at a monster because the magazine* is empty.
If we zoom out and look at Trump’s campaign motto, “Make America Great Again”, we see identity clearly highlighted. America. We’re all Americans. It’s the only identity that all of us living in this great country share.
That’s powerful stuff.
As of this article (late May), Clinton’s campaign message is focused on appealing to women: “I’m With Her”. However, women only comprise half of the population, and so this slogan has limited appeal. It’s not universal, Americans, as Trump’s is.
So, on the identity front, Trump’s message appeals to more people. It’s a smart move by a savvy politician.
Humor & Likability
If you’ve studied the field of persuasion at all, you’re probability familiar with Robert Cialdini’s book, Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion. It’s the bible.
In the book, Cialdini lays out six fundamental principles of persuasion. One of them is likability. Simply put, we’re more likely to comply with the wishes of someone that we like — someone that we have a warm emotional connection to.
While Trump has often come across as a less-than-likeable person during the campaign season, he has also worked hard to temper his boorish behavior with humor and kindness — to make sure his favorability ratings don’t fall too far.
Humor is probably the primary tool he uses to increase the positive feelings people have for him. For example, during the first Republican debate, when Megyn Kelly brought up Trump’s history of saying some pretty sexist things about women, Trump responded with a simple, hilarious quip: “Only Rosie O’Donnell”. You can see the clip below. This defused the seriousness of the moment, and made millions of Americans like Trump even more.
By making people laugh, Trump is associating positive feelings with himself. He’s making us feel good. And the better, and more often, he makes us feel good, the more we’ll like him.
Just watch one of Trump’s rallies, like the one linked below, and think: “Have I ever seen a political event like this one? Is there a political candidate that is more fun to watch, and listen to, out there?” I think you’ll find the answer is no to both. Trump has a stage presence, and a way of talking, that is just straight-up fun. He tells stories, he gossips, he throws out amusing insults. It’s great. And you can bet that people leave these Trump rallies with an even greater liking of Trump than they had when they came in.
Humor is one of The Donald’s greatest assets. It’s one of the reasons he’s likely to be our next president.
Attention
To change someone’s mind you have to first hold their attention, and there’s no better way to get attention than to do something outrageous or unexpected. Predictable people are boring. We already know what they’re going to do before they do it. Why keep paying attention? You already have the conclusion.
This is one of the reasons that Trump has been so effective capturing our focus. He’s always changing. You think you understand him, or what he’s going to say or do, and then he does the exact opposite. Every once in awhile, when the news is starting to pull away from him, he drops a bombshell, such as his plan to freeze Muslim immigration, and pulls the spotlight back on himself.
We’re all familiar with the phrase “familiarity breeds contempt”. But, unfortunately, it’s not true. In general, we like things we’re familiar with more than the things we’re unfamiliar with. This is called the “mere exposure effect”. Here’s a nice explanation from Wikipedia:
The mere-exposure effect is a psychological phenomenon by which people tend to develop a preference for things merely because they are familiar with them. In social psychology, this effect is sometimes called the familiarity principle. The effect has been demonstrated with many kinds of things, including words, Chinese characters, paintings, pictures of faces, geometric figures, and sounds.[1] In studies of interpersonal attraction, the more often a person is seen by someone, the more pleasing and likeable that person appears to be.
Since all of us are constantly bombarded with Donald Trump, because of his ubiquitous media presence, it’s only natural we’ll come to like him more over time. A lot of pundits are talking about trump’s “favorability problem”. But favorability is just a measure of how much we like someone. You can bet that his favorability rating will continue to rise over the coming months as Trump continues to dominate the airwaves.
Comprehension
Many people think that big words and fancy sentences are the best way of convincing someone to your point of view. I call it persuasion through obfuscation. This philosophy is very common in colleges across the world, and is why college papers are filled with 15 word sentences using words like “plethora” and “indubitably”. The thinking is as follows: “If I come across as more intelligent, people will be more likely to believe what I say. The best way to come across as intelligent is to use big, intimidating words and complex sentences. OK — let’s do it!”.
Unfortunately, this approach doesn’t work. One of my favorite papers is Daniel Oppenheimer’s cleverly titled “Consequences of Erudite Vernacular Utilized Irrespective of Necessity: Problems with Using Long Words Needlessly”. As the abstract states:
Most texts on writing style encourage authors to avoid overly-complex words. However, a majority of undergraduates admit to deliberately increasing the complexity of their vocabulary so as to give the impression of intelligence. This paper explores the extent to which this strategy is effective. Experiments 1–3 manipulate complexity of texts and find a negative relationship between complexity and judged intelligence. This relationship held regardless of the quality of the original essay, and irrespective of the participants’ prior expectations of essay quality.
In short: If you use overly complex words you come across as an idiot.
I doubt Trump has ever seen this paper, but he makes sure to keep his language as simple and understandable as possible. Jack Shafer of Politico ran Trump’s debate responses through a text analyzer, to determine the grade level. He found that Trump talked at a shockingly low fourth grade level. His sentences are short. His words are simple. While Shafer seems to present this bit of info as an insult, it’s actually the opposite. The ivy-league educated Trump is able to speak with simple and clear language. If we take Oppenheimer’s research into account, it becomes clear that Trump’s simple language is likely increasing the average person’s judgement of his intelligence and savvy.
Interestingly, the researchers think that the reason simple words increase perceived intelligence is due to something called cognitive fluency. Things that have low cognitive fluency are hard to think about, while things that have high cognitive fluency are very easy to think about. We like things that are highly fluent. We are also more likely to believe the explanation that is easy to think about. This is something Trump seems to understand and use. He knows that people don’t care about the hard-to-understand details of foreign and domestic policies. It’ll just go over their head, and that won’t score any points for him. So, instead of going into the weeds and talking about economic and diplomatic gibberish, Trump puts forth simple truisms or makes vague, easy-to-understand statements. People understand, and therefore like, what he has to say. They also perceive him as more intelligent because of this.
Win. Win.
