Why do some support Trump even if they likely will be hurt by his policies?

Almost against my will, I find myself fascinated by why so many support Trump’s policies (and Project 2025), even if it will very likely hurt them¹.

WE ARE NOT ALWAYS RATIONAL

Why do some support Trump and his policies even if it will likely hurt them?

The short answer is likely that these things are not completely, or even mostly, rational. Or it’s rational in a way I am not aware of or wouldn’t call rational.

I tend to investigate, learn, and think through these things, and support and vote for the one(s) who seem to have the best policies for society as a whole, for ecology, and for future generations. So I – unconsciously and viscerally – assume it must be like that for others too, even if I know it’s not always that way. It’s not always that way for me, in other areas of life.

Why did many in Germany in the 1920s and 1930s support Hitler even if they (somewhere in them) must have known that his ideology – based on misinformation, hatred, and division – would lead them into dictatorship and disaster? It was certainly not just for rational reasons, or for reasons that fit my kind of rationality.

A GUESS: IGNORED BY THE POLITICIANS AND THE “ELITE”

Why do some support Trump even if his policies will likely hurt them?

The main reason may be that many feel let down by politicians and the “elite”. They feel overlooked, ignored, and left to fend for themselves. They don’t have good social safety nets. Their income may be below the poverty line even if they work two jobs. They see a few others earning huge amounts of money. They may see their bosses earning tens or hundreds or more times as much as they do, and apparently do less for it. They are aware of the enormous and increasing gap in income and wealth between the few wealthy and the many poor.

They know that mainstream politicians have done little to help them. Neither Democrats nor Republicans have taken this seriously, prioritized it, and done much about it. They know that policies often follow the interests of Big Money and that politicians are in the pockets of corporations and the super-wealthy. (Of course, there are politicians who take this seriously, but it’s limited what they can do because of the system they function within.)

This is nothing new, of course. This inequality and ideologies to justify it came with the agricultural revolution. It’s inherent in our system. The most recent form is the neo-liberalism made popular in the 1980s (Reagan, Thatcher) and continued until now. I have seen statistics saying that the wealth inequality in the US these days is similar to France before the French Revolution, and although there are several ways to calculate these things, I wouldn’t be surprised. They had their revolution, and the US has Trump.

I completely agree and sympathize with the frustration that inevitably comes with this dramatic inequality. At the same time, I don’t understand how Trump can be the solution (if anything, he is this problem on steroids), but I understand the desperation, frustration, anger, and despair that can lead someone to support a candidate who seems different and outside of the mainstream.

This also points to a solution to the Trump and emerging fascism problem in the US: Create good social safety nets. Tax the super-wealthy and use the money for the benefit of everyone. Make higher education tax-sponsored and free to the students. Implement good universal healthcare. (Far less expensive than the current system.) Encourage strong unions. Take the concerns of the working class seriously. Of course, this is easier said than done. Strong forces oppose this, and many ordinary citizens have been brainwashed to reject these solutions.

MORE GUESSES

What are some more specific reasons? Why do some support Trump even if his policies may hurt them?

Some may be guided by misinformation. They assume his economic policies will be good for them, and don’t realize that tariffs are ultimately paid by ordinary people and that the tax cuts go to the already extremely wealthy, not to them (their taxes are likely to go up).

Some may be seduced by his cheap scapegoating of minority groups. Instead of going into a real analysis of the problem, Trump blames immigrants and foreigners for the problems in the US. (A classic leaf out of the fascist playbook.)

Some know that he has a dislike or hatred for their group – women, people of color, immigrants, LGBT+ – but other things take priority for them. They may be loyal to the Republican party. They may be misled to think his economic policies will be good for them. Maybe they think his policies targeting these groups won’t affect them.

Some may assume that much of his rhetoric is political theater. He says a lot of weird things, and he won’t actually do it. They ignore Project 2025 and that he has a system, people, and plan in place to do exactly what he says he will do.

He says he will use the military against US citizens, he will persecute his political enemies, he will be a dictator from day one, he will consolidate power in the presidency, he will undo the normal checks and balances of democracy, he will limit the freedom of the press, he will replace civil servants with loyalists, and so on, and he won’t actually do it, in their mind. (Or maybe they naively assume it won’t matter that much.)

Some may see him as a strong leader or successful businessman and the right person to lead the country and don’t care much about his specific policies. Of course, he is not a strong leader. He is far too volatile, irrational, and egocentric to be a good leader. He is also far too enamored with authoritarian leaders abroad to be able to stand up to them.

He is also clearly not a successful businessman. Would a successful businessman have time or interest in signing on to a TV show? (The Apprentice.) Would a successful businessman have six bankruptcies?

Would a capable businessman have such a huge string of past and current lawsuits against him? Would a good leader have so many people from his previous administration go against him in public, calling him dangerous, unhinged, and fascist?

A few extremely wealthy may benefit from his economic policies, at least in the short term. It comes with a huge cost to the rest of society, and especially several minority groups, and they don’t seem to care enough about that to not support him.

They also don’t seem to care that his policies will very likely be damaging to the US – and US economy – in the long run. He alienates former allies, he loves tarrifs, he doesn’t support research or higher education, he wants to undo the fabric of society that makes the US work as well as it does.

Some may be contrarians. Most media, experts, and well-educated liberal people see Trump as deranged, unhinged, and fascist, so they want to support him just to poke the liberal elite in the eye. They prioritize this over supporting someone who, by all normal criteria, actually is a fascist.

Some may see someone who mirrors their own pain and hatred. He hates women, people of color, LGBT+, immigrants, and so on, and they do too. They are happy that he seems to validate their own hatred and don’t care much about anything else. Some within these groups may have internalized this hatred, even if they are the target. Some may also see themselves as the exception: Yes, I am a woman, person of color, immigrant, LGBT+, but I am not like others in that group.

Said another way, some may resonate with his trauma behavior. Trump is a living ball of trauma behavior. They too have trauma and choose to deal with it through going into anger, bigotry, us vs them thinking, blame, scapegoating, and so on, so they resonate with it in him. He is one of them. They don’t care so much about the rest.

Some may not know enough about history to realize that this is exactly how democracy dies. Trump’s approach fits all the hallmarks of fascism, and the shift into a dictatorship has often looked just like the Trump movement looks now.

Some, about half of us, have a genetic predisposition for conservatism. Some of these may lean towards supporting any conservative candidate independent of specifics.

Some say they want change just of the sake of change. They don’t care so much what kind of change. To me, this seems profoundly misguided.

Some may think that anything is better than what they have now. To me, that’s a clear trauma response. They don’t realize what they have and how much worse it can get. They likely don’t know enough history to understand, or they assume it won’t be that bad or that they won’t be affected.

Some see him as the Great Disruptor that will usher in something new. Yes, he will. At least, he will try, although the changes may not be what you wish to see or experience. His dystopian world may not be as amazing as you think or lead to the changes you wish to see.

Some see their privilege fading, as white Christians in an increasingly more diverse society. They are so attached to being on top of the hierarchy that they cannot bear being just one group of many. This is so important to them that they don’t care if they lose democracy, if large groups of innocent people are made to suffer, if their economy worsens, and so on.

Some may have a zero-sum mindset. They assume, perhaps based on personal painful experience, that if you win, I lose, and for me to win, you must lose. Trump embodies that zero-sum mindset. They overlook that the world is full of examples of win-win solutions where we all benefit. (The social safety net in the Nordic countries is one of many examples.)

WHAT’S RATIONAL TO ME MAY NOT BE RATIONAL TO YOU

I have my own ideas of what’s rational, and these reflect my own background and biases.

To me, it’s rational to find solutions – and support policies – that seem good for society as a whole, for the living systems we are part of, and for future generations. I support democracy since, although it’s a flawed system, it’s the best we have. I seek win-win-win solutions since they are better for all of us. I support inclusivity since a more inclusive society is better for all of us.

What’s rational for someone else may be different. As mentioned above, they may operate on misinformation. They may prioritize one or a few things, and ignore or be OK with the rest that comes with it. For them, that’s rational.

THE WORLD IS MY MIRROR

The world is my mirror, also here.

I can take any one of the stories I have about Trump or his supporters, turn it to myself, and find genuine and specific examples of how it’s true. Most likely, I can even find it in the moment I have these thoughts about them. I do what I see in them, at this moment.

That’s humbling, and it’s also amazing, liberating, and enlivening. It helps me find more of my own richness. It helps me relate to these sides of me with a little more awareness. It helps me see myself in them and erode my imagination of me versus them.

This is an ongoing process. My fascination, which I started with in this article, is a clear sign that there is more for me to explore and discover here. The fascination is a sign that I see something in them I am not so aware of in myself yet.

Also, all of this is happening within and as what I am. The consciousness I am forms itself into all of it.

THE UPSIDE OF TRUMP

What are some upsides of Trump?

He highlights the frustration among many about the growing inequality coming from decades of neo-liberal policies. He highlights how the working class feels left behind.

He highlights the weirdness of the US political system where one candidate wins the popular vote, and the other becomes president. (Because of the arcane, outdated, and essentially meaningless electoral college.)

He mirrors what’s in all of us. He shows us our shadow. (Whether we consciously notice, embrace, and make use of it is another matter.)

A Trump presidency will fuel a lot of effort to create a more life-centered and kind society. Many of us will channel our frustration into this kind of work. (I know it’s that for me.) It will create even more of a sense of urgency.

Who knows what social dynamics will be set in motion from a Trump presidency? In a slightly larger historical picture, it’s a blip, and we may see it as a transition leading into something more life-centered. (The question is if we have time for this now, considering we are in the middle of a global ecological crisis.)

We will still live our daily lives. Life moves on. Whatever he represents and creates will not last. There have been many like him throughout history, and they are soon left in the dust of history after some years or decades.

THE BIGGER PICTURE

There is a bigger picture here too.

The Universe forms itself into this living planet and us, including our politics and social dynamics.

It’s all part of existence expressing, exploring, and experiencing itself in always new ways.

It seems that the exploration is the point, not any particular outcome.

From another angle, we can say that this is Spirit taking all of these forms. It’s Spirit expressing, exploring, and experiencing itself in all of these ways.

It’s the play of existence. And just like a theater play, it’s the experience that’s the point.

NOTES

How may those voting for him be hurt by his policies? What are some examples of how they are voting against their interests?
(a) Latinos may be deported or have friends or family deported, even if they are legally in the US. Trump will seek to find ways to remove the protection even of many who are in the US legally, so they can be deported. This, of course, goes for all immigrants.
(b) Trump will find ways to erode the already weak social safety nets in the US. If you benefit from the Affordable Care Act (Obama-care), Medicaid, or similar, you may find you suddenly lost it.
(c) In general, Trump’s aim is to funnel money to the already super wealthy and away from everyone else. If you are not super wealthy, you will likely find you are in a worse financial situation.
(d) He is unhinged, and unhinged policies are generally not good for the society or economy.
(e) Although he seemed war-averse during his first term, that may change. Trump 2.0 will likely be quite different from Trump 1.0.
(f) If you live in the US, you’ll find that society becomes increasingly more polarized. That’s not good for anyone. (If you are bigoted, you may think so, but it’s not true.)
(g) If you are a worker, expect your worker rights to be eroded.
(h) If you have a child in school, or work in the public school system, expect the school system to be further weakened.
(i) If you like democracy, or the ability to speak up without fear of the consequences, or free press, expect all of that to get worse.
(j) Expect the US economy and position in the world to worsen over the coming years and decades through the gutting of science and education.
(k) Expect the US position in the world in general to worsen, through Trump’s bullying and mafia tactics in terms of international relations.
(l) Don’t expect much of a boost in terms of foreign students and visitors to the US. Most people around the world don’t like facism or countries that elect facist leaders.

These are just a few examples, and none of it is very difficult to predict. It comes naturally from his words, actions, and generally inclinations. It’s also a part of his playbook, Project 2025.

NOTE ON ELECTION DAY

It’s the morning of the election day in the US (November 5, 2024). The ones I follow predict (a) a clear win of the popular vote for Harris which doesn’t matter, and otherwise (b) a very close election that (c) can lead to a landslide in either direction because of the winner-takes-all system in the US, (d) and likely a very messy situation if Harris wins. How that messiness unfolds is anyone’s guess, although it will likely involve many legal cases, a politicized legal system, intimidation, possible violence, and so on.

Trump has, of course, set the stage by repeating that the previous election was stolen and that the only way he can lose this time is if they steal it again. This is another example of his habitual projections. He says that others are doing, or will do, what he is planning to do or are already doing.

I am also reminded that the US has a long history of undermining and overthrowing democracies and installing right-wing governments. Now, they may be doing it to themselves. I guess that’s a kind of karma. They are finally applying their habit to themselves.

UPDATE JULY 2025

It’s now July 5, 2025, and the “big bill” has been approved by congress. This bill is explicitly designed to fullen money to the already extremely wealthy (tax cuts for the rich) and cut programs that benefit everyone else, including the most poor.

There is nothing new here. This is what we knew Trump wanted to do, and what he had everything in place to do, long before the election. This is what Project 2025 is about.

Still, more than half of the voters in the US voted for him and these policies, and these changes that directly hurt most of them.

I haven’t written follow-ups to my 2024 posts about Trump because there isn’t much to say. What’s unfolding is what we knew would unfold, unless a miracle happened.

The ones who voted for him are hurt by his policies. It’s what we knew would happen.

Of course, we see that in many other areas of life. Daily, the vast majority of people vote for “business as usual” – with their lives, priorities, money, and in elections. They want us to go further into global ecological overshoot. They want the collapse of our civilization. That’s what they vote for through how they live.

They can’t say they didn’t know, because this information is widely available. They can’t say they thought someone else would take care of it, because that obviously isn’t happening. They can’t say they thought we had more time, because we are already in the middle of it.

MORE INFO

I asked ChatGPT 4o for input on some of these topics, and used parts of the text above as prompts. See below.

Why Many Support Trump: An Apparent Voice for the Overlooked, Frustrated, and Forgotten

The allure of Trump for many stems from a deep-seated frustration with the political and economic systems in the U.S., systems that seem rigged in favor of the wealthy and influential. For millions of Americans, the American Dream feels increasingly out of reach. Stagnant wages, dwindling job security, rising healthcare costs, and the astronomical cost of education all paint a bleak picture. People in these situations see Trump, not as a conventional politician, but as an outsider—a brash, disruptive force who stands apart from the “elite” that has seemingly abandoned them.

Feeling Overlooked by the Political and Economic Elite

For decades, both mainstream Democrats and Republicans have struggled to connect meaningfully with working-class and lower-middle-class Americans. These citizens feel like afterthoughts in a game of political chess that prioritizes wealthy donors and corporations. Even with promises of economic reform, the reality on the ground has not matched the rhetoric, and millions of families still struggle. They see a handful of people becoming wealthier by the day while their own communities are left to languish. These growing divides in income and opportunity make the “elite” seem distant, almost like a different class entirely.

Trump capitalizes on this divide by positioning himself against “the establishment” and portraying himself as someone who understands these frustrations. To his supporters, Trump represents a direct rebuke of the entire political class, including Republicans who failed to curb income inequality, inflation, and the erosion of American manufacturing jobs. By embodying the role of an outsider, he taps into the profound sense of betrayal and anger that these communities feel.

Economic Desperation and Rising Inequality

The economic reality for many Americans is stark: they work long hours, often at multiple jobs, only to scrape by. When they look at the top echelons of society, they see an almost unfathomable wealth gap that seems to grow year after year. Executives earn hundreds of times more than their employees, often doing work that appears remote or disconnected from the real, tangible labor that working-class Americans put in each day.

Trump’s rhetoric resonates with people who feel that this inequality is not just economic but fundamentally unjust. They see his criticism of big corporations and billionaires, his calls to “bring jobs back,” and his tariffs on foreign imports as a direct appeal to the pain they’re feeling. The fact that he is also extremely wealthy doesn’t necessarily matter, because his wealth doesn’t come from being part of the political establishment. Instead, his supporters see him as a self-made figure who “tells it like it is” and who, at least on the surface, claims to care about American jobs and industries.

The Failure of Social Safety Nets

For millions of Americans, the safety net has proven threadbare. Access to affordable healthcare, stable housing, and quality education often feels more like a privilege than a right. When politicians make sweeping promises about health reform, college tuition, or job security, but fail to deliver, it deepens feelings of abandonment and resentment.

Trump’s populist messaging speaks directly to this insecurity, framing him as a champion for people who feel left out of the political and economic systems. His critiques of Obamacare, his promises to bring down prescription drug prices, and his pledges to “take care of our own” resonate with those who have watched both parties overpromise and underdeliver for decades. His supporters may know that he is not a typical politician; they view this as an advantage, hoping that his outsider status means he is more willing to challenge an ineffectual system.

A Rejection of the “Elite” Culture and Values

Many Trump supporters feel alienated not just by economic policy but also by what they see as a cultural shift away from traditional American values. To them, the “elite” isn’t just wealthy; it represents a certain set of liberal, progressive values that they feel are being imposed upon them. They see Trump as someone who rejects political correctness, embraces “straight talk,” and represents a return to a more traditional vision of America. This stance may not align directly with Trump’s personal behavior or past, but his rhetoric and policies align with their concerns.

For these voters, supporting Trump is a cultural statement as much as it is a political choice. He gives voice to grievances they feel are ignored or dismissed by the liberal elite. His harsh criticisms of academia, the media, and progressive social movements resonate with those who believe that these institutions look down on their beliefs, concerns, and ways of life.

“Someone Who Speaks for Us”

For many, Trump embodies a style of leadership that feels refreshing, even if controversial. His refusal to conform to the conventions of political discourse, and his unabashed attacks on “the swamp,” make people feel like they finally have a leader who is “on their side.” Even if he doesn’t have policy solutions that address all of their needs, his anger at the establishment mirrors their own.

People who feel ignored or misunderstood by the current political system often look for a leader who will speak directly to their emotions. They interpret his aggression, brashness, and willingness to break norms as signs of strength and authenticity, qualities they feel are missing from polished politicians. His speeches often center on loyalty and pride in America, evoking a sense of patriotism and solidarity that many supporters feel is deeply lacking in modern politics.

“Better Than the Alternative”

Another reason for Trump’s support is the feeling that he is simply a better option than the alternatives, particularly when people believe that mainstream politicians don’t address their issues. Some of his supporters may not wholeheartedly endorse every aspect of his policies or character but prefer him over the Democratic candidates, whom they associate with the political elite. For these voters, Trump’s flaws are tolerable in light of the fact that he represents, in their eyes, the “lesser of two evils.”

A Desperation for Change

For many Americans, supporting Trump is a product of desperation. They know he may not fully understand or embody their struggles, but they feel he offers a new direction, however imperfect. When faced with political systems that seem unresponsive and apathetic to their pain, they are willing to take risks on a candidate who breaks all the rules. Trump’s very unpredictability becomes an asset, a sign that he is willing to disrupt the status quo and potentially bring about change.

This is not necessarily about logical, carefully thought-out policy choices. It’s about a sense of deep frustration, a feeling that conventional politicians have failed and something different is needed, even if that “different” comes with risks and drawbacks. For many, Trump’s unpredictability and bombast offer a sense of hope that perhaps, finally, someone will shake things up enough to create meaningful change.

Trump’s support, therefore, is complex and multi-faceted. It is fueled by economic hardship, a distrust of political elites, resentment of cultural shifts, and a yearning for someone who appears to challenge the status quo. Trump’s policies may not be perfectly aligned with his supporters’ best interests, but his rhetoric and persona tap into deep-seated feelings of anger, betrayal, and disillusionment with the traditional political system. For those who feel overlooked, ignored, or left behind, supporting Trump is not merely a political choice; it’s a way to reclaim their voice in a system they believe has long stopped listening.

The Complexities of Trump Support Across Social Groups

Support for Donald Trump across various demographics, even among those who may face negative consequences from his policies or rhetoric, reveals the complexities of voter behavior. Various groups, including women, people of color, working-class citizens, and those of lower-income brackets, support him for reasons that often transcend the immediate, surface-level impacts of his policies. This phenomenon can be attributed to a combination of political psychology, social identity, misinformation, and the overarching polarization in American politics.

Women and Trump: Navigating Misogyny and Identity

Trump’s treatment of women has been controversial, but a substantial number of women still support him. Some of these women may downplay or even disregard his misogynistic rhetoric and actions for several reasons:

Party Loyalty: For many conservative women, loyalty to the Republican Party often supersedes individual candidate qualities. Many women see support for Trump as essential to upholding Republican values on issues like abortion, gun rights, and traditional family roles. These issues resonate strongly with religious or conservative beliefs, creating a shared identity that overshadows concerns over Trump’s treatment of women.
Embracing the “Tough Guy” Persona: Some women perceive Trump’s brash demeanor as “strong” or “alpha,” qualities they believe are necessary in a leader. This preference for a “tough” image may lead them to overlook personal faults, viewing them as minor in the face of perceived strength and assertiveness, particularly in foreign policy and immigration.
Fear of the Alternative: Trump’s anti-left rhetoric often frames Democrats as a threat to traditional values. Some conservative women fear progressive changes, such as LGBTQ rights, gender equality in workplaces, and reproductive rights, perceiving these as undermining traditional roles they value. Trump’s promises to protect these roles appeal to women who hold these perspectives.
Religious Beliefs: Many evangelical and conservative Christian women see Trump as an imperfect vessel for a divine mission. He is viewed as a protector of religious freedom, traditional family values, and a bulwark against secular progressivism, which makes his personal behavior less relevant.

People of Color: Perceived Gains and Anti-Establishment Sentiments

Trump’s support among Black, Latino, and Indigenous groups may seem counterintuitive given his rhetoric and policies that many argue negatively affect these communities. However, there are specific reasons why some individuals in these groups align with him.

Economic Aspiration: Trump’s image as a wealthy businessman appeals to aspirational minorities who prioritize economic success and stability. He’s viewed as a self-made figure whose success represents the American Dream, and many believe his policies, including tax cuts and deregulation, will ultimately benefit entrepreneurial efforts and economic mobility for all.
Social Conservatism: Among Black and Latino communities, social conservatism is often strong, especially around issues such as family values, abortion, and religious freedom. Many from these groups feel alienated by the Democratic Party’s progressive stance on social issues and view Trump as a guardian of these traditional values.
Distrust of Government and the “System”: Some individuals in minority communities feel that both major political parties have failed them historically. Trump’s “outsider” status and his anti-establishment rhetoric resonate with those who feel ignored or exploited by political elites. His promise to “drain the swamp” can appeal to communities who believe the system is fundamentally broken and that Trump will disrupt the status quo.
Law and Order: Trump’s “law and order” message resonates with some individuals, particularly in Latino and Black communities concerned about crime. While it is a divisive stance, some see his approach as necessary for safer communities, particularly in areas affected by gang violence and drug trafficking.

Working-Class and Rural Voters: Economic Realities and Cultural Identity

Trump’s appeal to working-class and rural voters remains strong despite policies that might hurt them economically. This support can be broken down into a few major factors:

Cultural Identity and Anti-Globalization: Trump’s “America First” stance and anti-globalization rhetoric resonate with voters in rural areas who feel they have been left behind by globalization. They may see free trade policies and immigration as threats to local jobs and cultural values. For these voters, Trump’s opposition to international agreements and his nationalist rhetoric align with their desire to maintain a distinct American identity.
Mistrust of “Coastal Elites” and Intellectuals: Many working-class and rural voters feel disrespected or condescended to by “coastal elites.” Trump’s rejection of the intellectual and political establishment, as well as his frequent targeting of the media, appeals to people who feel misrepresented and alienated by these groups. They see Trump as an “outsider” who speaks their language and respects their way of life.
“Economic Populism”: Trump’s promises to revive American manufacturing and coal industries, regardless of economic feasibility, appeal to those who once held these jobs and communities that depended on them. This desire for economic revitalization, even if largely symbolic, garners support from people who feel economically displaced.
Tax Cuts as an Illusion of Benefit: Trump’s tax cuts largely favored the wealthy and corporations, but they were framed as benefiting the middle class. Many working-class voters who saw a temporary increase in their take-home pay believe they’re benefiting, even though their long-term tax burden may increase due to cuts in services and rising deficits. Trump’s rhetoric gives the impression that he’s looking out for the “little guy,” which resonates with economically vulnerable voters.

The Appeal of Conspiracy Theories and Distrust in Science

Supporters from various demographics are often drawn to Trump’s endorsement of conspiracy theories, which reinforces their sense of distrust in government, science, and the media.

COVID-19 Misinformation: Trump’s approach to COVID-19, including downplaying the virus and pushing unproven treatments, appealed to people skeptical of mainstream science or the government’s role in public health. Those who distrust pharmaceutical companies or the health system may feel validated by Trump’s stance, despite its harm to public health.
Election Integrity: Trump’s claims of election fraud appeal to supporters who already feel the system is stacked against them. This narrative gives voters a sense of fighting against a corrupt system, reinforcing a shared identity with Trump as the embattled outsider.
Appeal of Anti-Expert Rhetoric: Many Trump supporters believe that “experts” and intellectuals, particularly those in coastal cities or academia, are out of touch with everyday Americans. Trump’s disdain for expert opinion resonates with those who view intellectual authority as biased or elitist, especially in rural areas.

Wealthy Supporters: Prioritizing Deregulation and Long-Term Economic Policies

Some wealthy Americans support Trump, even if his policies increase national debt or carry potential long-term economic risks for the U.S. economy. Their reasons for support often revolve around financial motivations.

Tax Cuts for the Wealthy: Trump’s tax policies provided significant benefits to the wealthiest Americans. Those in high-income brackets support his policies for the immediate financial gain, even if it means potential economic instability in the future.
Corporate Deregulation: Many wealthy business owners and investors prioritize deregulation over other factors, as it allows for more freedom in business operations and often increases short-term profitability. Trump’s policies, which rolled back environmental protections, labor rights, and other regulations, are seen as a win for those in corporate and financial sectors.
Protection of Wealth and Assets: Wealthy supporters view Trump as a protector of their financial interests, particularly when it comes to issues like estate taxes and corporate taxes. This self-interest in preserving their wealth overrides concerns about policy implications for lower-income Americans.

Evangelical Christians: Moral Compromise for Religious Freedom

Evangelical Christians are among Trump’s most loyal supporters, despite his controversial personal conduct, because they prioritize issues related to religious liberty and conservative social values.

Abortion and Religious Liberty: Evangelicals prioritize abortion restrictions, and Trump’s appointment of conservative judges, particularly to the Supreme Court, is seen as a major victory. They are willing to overlook his personal life, language, and conduct in exchange for support on these pivotal issues.
Religious Identity: Trump’s overt support for Christian values and his willingness to foreground evangelical concerns make him an appealing candidate. Evangelicals see Trump as a defender of “Christian America,” protecting their ability to practice their faith without interference.
End Times Theology: Some evangelical Christians support Trump due to beliefs related to end-times prophecy, seeing him as playing a role in fulfilling a divine plan. This often leads them to view his actions as beyond traditional moral scrutiny, as they interpret them through a religious lens.

Conclusion: Identity, Distrust, and Longing for Change

Support for Trump across various demographics that his policies or rhetoric may seemingly harm is a complex issue shaped by identity, distrust of institutions, and a desire for drastic change. Many supporters prioritize identity alignment, perceived economic or religious gains, and cultural values over policy specifics or the potential negative impact on their communities.

The Trump phenomenon underscores how voter behavior often transcends policy analysis, as political identity, cultural values, and mistrust of traditional institutions come to the forefront. This multifaceted support illustrates a broader societal division and reflects deep-seated issues within the American political landscape, where symbolism, perception, and personal beliefs can outweigh tangible policy implications.

How Different Groups Will Be Impacted by Trump’s Policies and Project 2025

If Trump’s policies or those proposed under Project 2025 are implemented, various minority and special groups are likely to be adversely impacted. These include racial and ethnic minorities, LGBTQ+ communities, women, low-income households, immigrants, environmental advocates, and Indigenous communities, among others. Below is an outline of groups potentially at risk and the reasons why they may be hurt by these policies.

1. Racial and Ethnic Minorities

Many policies under the Trump administration and Project 2025 proposals appear likely to disproportionately affect racial and ethnic minorities, including Black, Latino, Asian, and Indigenous communities. Specific concerns include:

Reduced Voting Access: Voter ID laws, purging voter rolls, and reducing polling places can disproportionately impact minority communities. These actions can limit voting access and suppress minority voices.
Policing and Criminal Justice: Increased support for aggressive policing and criminal justice policies could exacerbate racial profiling and mass incarceration, issues that already disproportionately affect Black and Latino communities.
Access to Health and Social Services: Cuts to Medicaid, the Affordable Care Act, and other social safety nets would disproportionately hurt low-income minorities who rely on these services for healthcare and basic needs.

2. LGBTQ+ Communities

Trump’s policies and Project 2025 include provisions that could significantly impact LGBTQ+ individuals by undermining protections and increasing discrimination. Potential effects include:

Loss of Anti-Discrimination Protections: Rolling back anti-discrimination laws could leave LGBTQ+ individuals vulnerable to discrimination in housing, employment, healthcare, and education.
Threats to Transgender Rights: Policies that restrict the rights of transgender individuals to access healthcare, change their gender markers, or participate in activities that align with their identity can limit their quality of life and safety.
Erasure of LGBTQ+ Data: By potentially eliminating questions on federal surveys about sexual orientation and gender identity, LGBTQ+ needs could be overlooked in policy planning, reducing visibility and access to resources.

3. Women, Particularly Those Needing Reproductive Healthcare

Women, particularly those seeking reproductive healthcare, could face significant setbacks due to policies that restrict access to reproductive rights and healthcare. Key impacts include:

Loss of Abortion Rights: Project 2025’s pro-life stance could lead to restrictions on abortion, impacting women’s reproductive freedoms and access to safe medical procedures.
Reduced Access to Contraceptives and Family Planning: Defunding Planned Parenthood and other reproductive healthcare providers would reduce access to contraceptives and family planning, particularly for low-income women.
Gender Pay Equity and Workplace Protections: Reduced emphasis on gender equity initiatives could impact efforts to address wage gaps, harassment, and discrimination in the workplace.

4. Low-Income Households

Economic policies that focus on deregulation and tax cuts for the wealthy, coupled with reduced support for social programs, would likely hurt low-income individuals and families. Expected impacts include:

Cuts to Social Safety Nets: Reduction in programs such as Medicaid, SNAP, and unemployment benefits would leave low-income families struggling to access healthcare, food, and other basic needs.
Regressive Tax Policies: Tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations could lead to higher taxes on lower-income families or cuts to essential services due to decreased federal revenue.
Rising Costs of Education: Cuts to education funding and financial aid programs could make higher education less affordable, further limiting social mobility for low-income individuals.

5. Immigrants and Refugees

Trump’s immigration policies and Project 2025’s hardline stance on immigration would have severe consequences for immigrants and refugees, especially those from marginalized backgrounds. These impacts include:

Increased Deportations and Family Separation: Tighter immigration enforcement could lead to an increase in deportations, with devastating consequences for families and communities.
Reduced Pathways to Citizenship: Policies aimed at curbing legal immigration could limit pathways to citizenship, making it more difficult for immigrants to contribute fully to society.
Workplace Exploitation and Reduced Protections: Immigrants in low-wage industries may face increased workplace exploitation due to weakened labor protections and reduced avenues for legal recourse.

6. Indigenous Communities

Indigenous communities could face a range of challenges under these policies, particularly in relation to land rights, cultural preservation, and environmental protection. Key issues include:

Threats to Tribal Lands: Increased emphasis on oil drilling, mining, and other resource extraction could threaten tribal lands and undermine treaties meant to protect Indigenous territories.
Reduced Funding for Tribal Services: Cuts to healthcare, education, and infrastructure services for tribal communities could deepen existing disparities in these areas.
Loss of Environmental Protections: Many Indigenous communities rely on clean water, air, and land for sustenance and cultural practices. Deregulation could increase pollution and habitat destruction in and around tribal lands.

7. Environmental Advocates and Rural Communities Affected by Climate Change

Environmental deregulation would likely harm both environmental advocates and rural communities that rely on natural resources. These policies may exacerbate climate change impacts, which tend to affect marginalized communities more severely. Key risks include:

Reduced Environmental Protections: Rolling back regulations on emissions, pollution, and land use would degrade air and water quality, disproportionately affecting rural and economically disadvantaged areas.
Accelerated Climate Change: Policies that promote fossil fuels over renewable energy would contribute to climate change, disproportionately impacting coastal and rural communities vulnerable to extreme weather and changing agricultural conditions.
Loss of Funding for Renewable Energy: The prioritization of fossil fuels could undermine renewable energy projects that bring economic and environmental benefits to rural and low-income communities.

8. People with Disabilities

Policies that reduce funding for healthcare, disability support services, and anti-discrimination protections would likely have serious consequences for people with disabilities. Possible impacts include:

Cuts to Medicaid and Healthcare Services: Reductions in Medicaid could limit access to essential healthcare services, leaving many people with disabilities without affordable care.
Weakening of ADA Enforcement: Rolling back Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) protections could make it harder for people with disabilities to seek redress for discrimination and ensure accessibility in public and private spaces.
Reduced Access to Educational Support: Budget cuts to special education programs could limit opportunities for disabled students to receive a quality education, reducing future employment and quality-of-life outcomes.

9. Scientific and Academic Communities

Project 2025 and Trump’s policies often deprioritize scientific research, particularly on issues like climate change, health, and social sciences. Potential harms include:

Cuts to Research Funding: Reduced funding for research into climate change, health, and environmental science could stymie progress and innovation in areas crucial to public health and ecological sustainability.
Suppression of Climate Science: Limiting climate change research and censoring information would hinder efforts to address environmental issues, further endangering communities at risk from climate impacts.
Attacks on Academic Freedom: Increased political scrutiny and restrictions on academic institutions could inhibit free inquiry and the development of critical knowledge, particularly in areas deemed “controversial” by political actors.

10. Future Generations

Future generations are at risk from policies that undermine environmental protections, educational funding, and economic stability. Long-term effects could include:

Environmental Degradation: Deregulation and lack of climate action may leave future generations with a planet suffering from severe climate disruptions, pollution, and biodiversity loss.
Economic Instability: Economic policies that prioritize short-term gains for the wealthy over equitable growth could lead to economic instability, high national debt, and reduced opportunities for future generations.
Undermining of Democratic Institutions: Erosion of democratic norms and protections could leave future generations with weakened institutions and fewer protections against authoritarianism.

11. Journalists and Free Press Advocates

Finally, Project 2025’s proposals indicate a tough stance on press freedoms, which would directly impact journalists and media organizations. Likely consequences include:

Increased Pressure on Journalists: Restrictions on media and criticism of “mainstream media” could create a hostile environment for journalists, discouraging critical reporting.
Suppression of Information: Threats to press freedoms could lead to increased government control over information, limiting public access to transparent and diverse news sources.
Intimidation of Independent Media: Independent and smaller media outlets may be disproportionately affected, limiting the range of voices and perspectives available to the public.

In summary, Trump’s policies and Project 2025 represent a comprehensive approach that may negatively affect a range of marginalized groups. Racial and ethnic minorities, LGBTQ+ individuals, women, low-income families, immigrants, Indigenous communities, environmental advocates, people with disabilities, scientists, future generations, and journalists are all potentially at risk if these policies are fully implemented. The impacts vary widely but generally lean toward undermining protections, reducing resources, and limiting opportunities for these vulnerable groups.

How Trump’s Policies May Harm Specific Groups

Trump’s policies and ambitions—including Project 2025—are widely considered to pose serious risks to various groups within the United States. From reproductive rights to systemic racism, centralized power, and economic policy, the repercussions of these initiatives affect many marginalized groups disproportionately.

Women and Reproductive Rights

One of the most significant impacts would be felt by women, especially if Trump and his allies succeed in implementing a nationwide abortion ban. Such a policy would severely restrict bodily autonomy and force individuals to carry pregnancies to term, even in cases of health risks, rape, or incest. Beyond the immediate impact on individual lives, this would increase healthcare burdens on marginalized communities, further entrenching economic inequality. States with bans already in place see higher rates of maternal mortality, indicating that a national ban would likely exacerbate these risks on a larger scale.

Communities of Color and Immigrants

Trump’s history of discriminatory remarks and policies reflect a consistent targeting of communities of color and immigrants. Policies aimed at limiting immigration, combined with rhetoric that incites suspicion toward immigrant communities, create an environment where racial profiling, violence, and discrimination are normalized. This targeting would also be amplified under Project 2025, which seeks to replace established civil servants with loyalists, potentially allowing openly racist or xenophobic policies to go unchallenged. Furthermore, Trump’s rollback of protections for marginalized communities has fueled systemic racism in housing, employment, and healthcare access.

LGBTQ+ Rights

The Trump administration’s policies have consistently undermined LGBTQ+ protections, from attempting to roll back anti-discrimination measures to proposing rules allowing discrimination based on “religious beliefs.” Under Project 2025, the erosion of LGBTQ+ rights could accelerate, particularly as conservative leaders press for restrictive definitions of gender in federal policy. This leaves LGBTQ+ individuals at risk of losing healthcare protections, safe access to public spaces, and equal employment opportunities, making life increasingly precarious for an already vulnerable community.

Economic Policies Favoring the Wealthy

While Trump’s tax cuts and economic policies are framed as benefiting all Americans, the reality is starkly different. His tax reform provided major benefits to the wealthiest citizens and corporations, leaving ordinary Americans with increased economic disparity and little meaningful relief. Working-class and middle-income households bear the brunt of these policies through stagnant wages, rising healthcare costs, and limited access to education. Project 2025 also includes measures to deregulate industries under the guise of economic growth, which could worsen environmental degradation and affect the health of low-income communities disproportionately.

Centralization of Power and the Erosion of Democratic Norms

Trump’s ambitions to consolidate power in the presidency represent a profound threat to democracy. Under Project 2025, checks and balances would be minimized, allowing the executive branch to operate with fewer limitations. This could lead to a form of government where dissent is suppressed, and democratic institutions such as free press, independent judiciary, and civil service are undermined. Trump’s threats to prosecute political opponents would further erode democratic norms and could embolden similar actions at local and state levels, creating an atmosphere of fear and division.

Political Opponents and Dissenters

Trump’s repeated threats to prosecute and silence his critics reflect a broader pattern of authoritarianism. Under a presidency that seeks to remove opposition voices, dissenters—including activists, journalists, and even political rivals—are likely to face increased harassment, legal action, or imprisonment. Such persecution could extend to organizations that challenge Trump’s policies, creating an environment hostile to free expression and political discourse. When the federal government targets opposition, it not only threatens individuals but discourages broader civic engagement and the healthy debate essential to democracy.

Future Generations and Environmental Degradation

Project 2025 prioritizes fossil fuel development, deregulation, and reducing environmental protections, actions that would lead to heightened pollution and accelerated climate change. Low-income communities often live closer to polluting industries and are therefore disproportionately affected by these policies. The removal of environmental regulations also undermines efforts to mitigate climate change, putting future generations at risk of severe weather events, resource shortages, and widespread displacement. The lasting environmental damage that would result from Trump’s policies threatens the well-being of the most vulnerable populations and diminishes opportunities for future generations.

The Broader Impact on Society and Democracy

Trump’s policies, especially those outlined in Project 2025, are a comprehensive threat to the pluralistic and democratic ideals of the United States. By consolidating power and dismantling democratic norms, his administration could erode the rights of all groups that do not align with his agenda, creating a society where only a narrow set of voices are represented, and where fear and division take precedence over unity and common purpose.

These examples show how Trump’s policies and ambitions would likely harm numerous groups in specific, tangible ways, from reproductive rights and racial equality to economic security and environmental sustainability. The effects would ripple through society, impacting not only those directly targeted but also the fundamental structures that protect the freedoms and well-being of all citizens.

Trump & Projections: His and Ours

Looking at Trump through the lens of projection provides insight into both his behavior and how his opponents respond to him. Trump often projects his own behaviors and qualities onto others, deflecting criticism and creating a narrative where he’s the victim of the very things he’s accused of. On the other hand, those who oppose him may project their own unexamined qualities onto him, which can fuel polarization and intensify negative emotions. Here’s how that dynamic plays out, with more detailed examples, including “stealing the election.”

1. Trump’s Projection onto Others

Trump’s defense mechanisms frequently involve accusing others of the same behaviors he’s involved in. This allows him to shift attention away from his own actions and create a narrative where he’s combating the very things he himself does. Here are several specific examples:

“Stealing the Election”: Trump claimed that the 2020 election was “stolen” from him, alleging massive fraud without substantial evidence. Ironically, he tried to overturn the results by pressuring officials to find votes in his favor, launching dozens of lawsuits, and encouraging efforts to decertify votes. His claims that others are “stealing” the election actually mirror his own attempts to disrupt a legitimate election outcome, deflecting scrutiny by projecting his actions onto opponents.
Labeling others as “Fake News”: Trump frequently accuses media outlets of being “fake news,” claiming they’re biased or spreading lies. Yet, he’s been known to spread false information and conspiracy theories, from the size of his inauguration crowd to misinformation about COVID-19 and the election. Calling the media “fake news” serves as a way to delegitimize critical sources while deflecting from his own inaccuracies.
Calling others “weak”: Trump often labels his opponents as “weak” or “low-energy,” questioning their toughness or strength. At the same time, he frequently avoids situations where he might face direct criticism or challenge, such as skipping debates, firing officials who disagree with him, or surrounding himself with loyal supporters. By accusing others of being weak, he deflects from his own aversion to confrontation and criticism.
Claiming others “don’t care about America”: Trump frequently frames his opponents as unpatriotic, claiming they “hate America” or want to “destroy” it. Yet, his own policies and actions, from efforts to undermine democratic norms to weakening environmental protections, have sometimes been criticized as damaging to the country. By projecting a lack of patriotism onto others, he presents himself as the “true patriot” while deflecting from the ways his own actions might be questioned.
Accusing others of a “witch hunt”: Trump has labeled the investigations into his actions, from impeachment to financial probes, as “witch hunts.” This projection allows him to claim he’s unfairly persecuted while reframing legitimate investigations as baseless attacks. Ironically, Trump himself has often supported targeting opponents, from encouraging investigations into Hillary Clinton to pursuing loyalty tests among staff.
Saying others are “out of touch with reality”: Trump often casts others as disconnected from the “real America” or unable to see the truth. This is interesting given his own tendency to promote conspiracy theories and disregard inconvenient facts. By projecting this trait onto others, he frames himself as the voice of reason, even when his views are at odds with established facts.
“It’s a hoax”: From climate change to election security, Trump has dismissed various issues as “hoaxes” designed to harm him politically. This projection reframes pressing issues as personal attacks, allowing him to dismiss valid concerns while accusing others of fabricating threats. For example, calling the climate crisis a “hoax” shifts attention away from the real environmental concerns, projecting his own dismissiveness onto others.

By projecting these qualities onto others, Trump can create a public image where he’s constantly under attack by dishonest, corrupt, or disloyal opponents—qualities that, when mirrored, reflect his own behaviors.

2. Our Projection of Trump as a Shadow Figure

For those who oppose Trump, it can be illuminating to explore how he might act as a “shadow figure,” embodying qualities we may disown in ourselves. In psychology, projection often involves attributing qualities we find distasteful or unacceptable to others, rather than acknowledging them in ourselves. Here are some ways we might be projecting onto Trump:

Authoritarianism and control: Trump’s apparent disregard for democratic norms and authoritarian tendencies can feel deeply unsettling. Yet, in opposing him, we may adopt an authoritarian stance of our own—seeking to control conversations, “canceling” those with differing views, or insisting on rigid ways of thinking. By fiercely condemning his authoritarianism, we might overlook our own desire to impose control and create a moral hierarchy where only our views are “acceptable.”
Anger and hostility: Trump’s aggressive rhetoric often evokes strong anger in his opponents. But in this response, we might fall into our own pattern of hostility, seeing his supporters as “the enemy” and sometimes labeling them in similarly dehumanizing terms. In labeling Trump as uniquely “bad” or “evil,” we might avoid seeing our own capacity for anger and resentment, reinforcing the very divisiveness we oppose.
Self-centeredness: Trump is often perceived as self-centered, placing his interests above others. Yet, we may unconsciously mirror this trait when opposing him by becoming so focused on being “right” or morally justified that we don’t listen to opposing views. In making our opposition about asserting our identity, we may reinforce our own self-centered tendencies, seeking validation rather than understanding.
Lack of humility: Trump’s refusal to admit mistakes or show vulnerability is often infuriating. Yet, we may also struggle with humility, clinging to certainty and avoiding the discomfort of self-reflection. By fixating on his lack of humility, we may avoid looking at our own reluctance to be open or question our assumptions.
Denial of reality: Trump’s dismissal of facts that don’t suit him, from election results to scientific data, can be frustrating. However, in our reactions, we might deny our own tendencies to ignore uncomfortable truths. For instance, we might overlook our own inconsistencies or biases, or refuse to engage with facts that don’t support our views. By projecting denial onto Trump, we avoid examining our own blind spots.
Fear of losing power: Many people view Trump’s actions as a desperate attempt to cling to power. But our own fear of losing power, whether political or social, can emerge when we perceive his influence as a threat. By focusing on his power-grabbing, we might overlook how we, too, seek to maintain control or security in times of uncertainty.
Defensiveness: Trump’s defensive reactions and attacks on critics might resonate because they mirror our own defensiveness. When we respond to him or his supporters with hostility or dismissiveness, it can reflect our own insecurity and fear of being challenged. This dynamic can turn debates into shouting matches, reinforcing divisions instead of fostering understanding.

Integrating the Shadow and Reducing Polarization

Seeing Trump as a “shadow figure” offers a chance to examine and integrate aspects of ourselves that may otherwise remain hidden. Instead of only demonizing him, we can ask ourselves where similar traits or tendencies might reside within us. This process of reflection doesn’t mean condoning harmful behavior but instead encourages a more compassionate, balanced perspective. Here are some ways this might look:

Recognizing our own desire for power: Reflecting on how we, too, might seek control or influence can help us approach change with more humility and less need for dominance. Instead of focusing solely on “defeating” Trump or his supporters, we might look for ways to foster positive change without reinforcing hierarchies.
Addressing our own hostility: Acknowledging our own capacity for anger or frustration can make us more empathetic, helping to depolarize conversations and foster a more open, respectful dialogue.
Balancing self-assertion with humility: By recognizing our own tendencies toward self-centeredness or moral superiority, we can seek a balance between standing up for our beliefs and listening to others, promoting a less rigid and more inclusive discourse.
Embracing complexity: Trump’s approach often seems to oversimplify, but we, too, can fall into black-and-white thinking when we view him and his supporters as inherently “bad” or “wrong.” Embracing complexity in ourselves allows us to see Trump’s supporters as multifaceted, helping to bridge divides and reduce polarization.

Trump, then, becomes a mirror—a figure whose behavior invites us to look inward. By seeing him in this way, we can use our reactions as an opportunity for self-reflection, softening our responses, and finding constructive ways to address our concerns. This doesn’t diminish the need for accountability but encourages us to approach opposition with greater empathy and a clearer, more integrated sense of self.

America’s Democratic Paradox: How Decades of Foreign Intervention Have Come Full Circle with Trumpism

The United States has a long and complex history of intervening in other countries’ democracies, especially in the 20th century. Often, these interventions were driven by ideological battles during the Cold War, as the U.S. sought to prevent the spread of communism and protect its geopolitical interests. In numerous instances, this led to supporting or directly orchestrating the overthrow of democratically elected governments in favor of authoritarian leaders or military regimes more aligned with U.S. interests. The irony now lies in how these same anti-democratic tactics appear to be emerging within the U.S., particularly through the rise of Trumpism and the challenges it presents to American democratic institutions.

Historical Background of U.S. Interventions

Throughout the Cold War, the U.S. pursued a policy of containment against the Soviet Union, sometimes to the detriment of democracies worldwide. Some notable examples include:

Iran (1953): The CIA helped orchestrate a coup to overthrow Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh, who had nationalized Iran’s oil, challenging British and American economic interests. This led to the installation of the Shah, who ruled with an authoritarian hand until the 1979 Islamic Revolution.
Guatemala (1954): The democratically elected President Jacobo Árbenz was overthrown after he threatened the land holdings of the United Fruit Company, a U.S. corporation. The CIA’s operation ushered in decades of brutal military regimes.
Chile (1973): The Nixon administration supported efforts to destabilize and overthrow President Salvador Allende, who had nationalized key industries and implemented socialist reforms. This led to General Pinochet’s authoritarian rule, marked by severe repression and human rights abuses.
Nicaragua, Congo, Indonesia, Vietnam: Similar interventions occurred globally, where democratically elected leaders were undermined or ousted in the name of protecting U.S. interests, whether for economic reasons or to prevent supposed communist influence.

In many cases, the U.S. justified these actions by arguing they were necessary to prevent the spread of communism and maintain stability. However, these interventions often disregarded the will of local populations, violated democratic principles, and left long-lasting scars on the nations involved. The resulting authoritarian governments were often brutal, leading to repression, human rights abuses, and cycles of violence that continue to impact these regions.

Parallels with Trumpism

Today, it seems that some of these very tactics—once reserved for international strategy—are surfacing in U.S. domestic politics. Under Trump and his influence, the erosion of democratic norms has accelerated. This includes repeated attacks on election integrity, attempts to undermine the judiciary, disinformation campaigns, and overt efforts to intimidate political opponents. Many Americans and observers worldwide now worry that the U.S. may be heading down a path it helped pave abroad. Key parallels include:

Discrediting Elections: Trump’s unfounded claims of a “stolen election” in 2020 have sown widespread distrust in electoral processes. This is reminiscent of tactics used to delegitimize leaders in foreign countries, creating a foundation for justifying intervention. Trump’s rhetoric about election fraud has influenced a substantial portion of the U.S. public to question the legitimacy of democratic outcomes.
Attempts to Consolidate Power: Trump’s allies have tried to challenge state officials who upheld election results, seeking to replace them with loyalists who might support Trump’s preferred outcomes in future elections. Such moves echo the U.S. practice of supporting puppet regimes that align with its interests, stripping local populations of autonomy.
Attacks on the Rule of Law: In his time as president, Trump repeatedly tried to undermine the judiciary, including placing judges who might be sympathetic to his policies and personal legal battles. This tactic aligns with the efforts to destabilize other countries’ legal systems to enable autocratic control and prevent accountability.
Media Manipulation and Disinformation: Trump’s narrative about the “fake news” media mirrors propaganda campaigns the U.S. has sometimes supported or initiated to sway public opinion against leaders it wanted removed. Disinformation creates divisions, erodes trust, and paves the way for authoritarian leadership by convincing people they cannot trust existing institutions.
Polarization and Division: Trump’s rhetoric has intensified polarization in the U.S., leading to violent confrontations, even between neighbors. Historically, the U.S. exploited societal divisions in other nations to weaken governments it opposed, often escalating violence and destabilizing these countries. Trump’s actions are fostering similar chaos within the United States itself.

The Risk of a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy

America’s history of undermining foreign democracies reveals a deeply rooted paradox: by opposing democracies abroad, the U.S. has inadvertently created a playbook for dismantling democratic processes. Trump’s movement, often nationalist and populist in tone, is reanimating these old tactics against America itself. While the resilience of U.S. institutions has been demonstrated through their checks on executive power, they remain vulnerable to the same erosion they enabled elsewhere.

The irony of this situation is profound. The very tactics the U.S. once used to control other nations now pose a threat to its democracy. In this internal struggle, the U.S. may need to reckon with the consequences of its past actions abroad and recognize the threat posed by anti-democratic forces at home. The question remains whether it can learn from history and take a stand for democracy within its own borders, as it so often claimed to do elsewhere.