Tuesday, January 19, 2016 9:39:45 AM
The One Weird Trait That Predicts Whether You’re a Trump Supporter
And it’s not gender, age, income, race or religion.
By Matthew MacWilliams
1/17/2016
If I asked you what most defines Donald Trump supporters, what would you say? They’re white? They’re poor? They’re uneducated?
You’d be wrong.
In fact, I’ve found a single statistically significant variable predicts whether a voter supports Trump—and it’s not race, income or education levels: It’s authoritarianism.
That’s right, Trump’s electoral strength—and his staying power—have been buoyed, above all, by Americans with authoritarian inclinations. And because of the prevalence of authoritarians in the American electorate, among Democrats as well as Republicans, it’s very possible that Trump’s fan base will continue to grow.
My finding is the result of a national poll I conducted in the last five days of December under the auspices of the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, sampling 1,800 registered voters across the country and the political spectrum. Running a standard statistical analysis, I found that education, income, gender, age, ideology and religiosity had no significant bearing on a Republican voter’s preferred candidate. Only two of the variables I looked at were statistically significant: authoritarianism, followed by fear of terrorism, though the former was far more significant than the latter.
Authoritarianism is not a new, untested concept in the American electorate. Since the rise of Nazi Germany, it has been one of the most widely studied ideas in social science. While its causes are still debated, the political behavior of authoritarians is not. Authoritarians obey. They rally to and follow strong leaders. And they respond aggressively to outsiders, especially when they feel threatened. From pledging to “make America great again” by building a wall on the border to promising to close mosques and ban Muslims from visiting the United States, Trump is playing directly to authoritarian inclinations.
Not all authoritarians are Republicans by any means; in national surveys since 1992, many authoritarians have also self-identified as independents and Democrats. And in the 2008 Democratic primary, the political scientist Marc Hetherington found that authoritarianism mattered more than income, ideology, gender, age and education in predicting whether voters preferred Hillary Clinton over Barack Obama. But Hetherington has also found, based on 14 years of polling, that authoritarians have steadily moved from the Democratic to the Republican Party over time. He hypothesizes that the trend began decades ago, as Democrats embraced civil rights, gay rights, employment protections and other political positions valuing freedom and equality. In my poll results, authoritarianism was not a statistically significant factor in the Democratic primary race, at least not so far, but it does appear to be playing an important role on the Republican side. Indeed, 49 percent of likely Republican primary voters I surveyed score in the top quarter of the authoritarian scale—more than twice as many as Democratic voters.
Political pollsters have missed this key component of Trump’s support because they simply don’t include questions about authoritarianism in their polls. In addition to the typical battery of demographic, horse race, thermometer-scale and policy questions, my poll asked a set of four simple survey questions that political scientists have employed since 1992 to measure inclination toward authoritarianism. These questions pertain to child-rearing: whether it is more important for the voter to have a child who is respectful or independent; obedient or self-reliant; well-behaved or considerate; and well-mannered or curious. Respondents who pick the first option in each of these questions are strongly authoritarian.
Based on these questions, Trump was the only candidate—Republican or Democrat—whose support among authoritarians was statistically significant.
So what does this mean for the election? It doesn’t just help us understand what motivates Trump’s backers—it suggests that his support isn’t capped. In a statistical analysis of the polling results, I found that Trump has already captured 43 percent of Republican primary voters who are strong authoritarians, and 37 percent of Republican authoritarians overall. A majority of Republican authoritarians in my poll also strongly supported Trump’s proposals to deport 11 million illegal immigrants, prohibit Muslims from entering the United States, shutter mosques and establish a nationwide database that track Muslims.
And in a general election, Trump’s strongman rhetoric will surely appeal to some of the 39 percent of independents in my poll who identify as authoritarians and the 17 percent of self-identified Democrats who are strong authoritarians.
What’s more, the number of Americans worried about the threat of terrorism is growing. In 2011, Hetherington published research finding that non-authoritarians respond to the perception of threat by behaving more like authoritarians. More fear and more threats—of the kind we’ve seen recently in the San Bernardino and Paris terrorist attacks—mean more voters are susceptible to Trump’s message about protecting Americans. In my survey, 52 percent of those voters expressing the most fear that another terrorist attack will occur in the United States in the next 12 months were non-authoritarians—ripe targets for Trump’s message.
Take activated authoritarians from across the partisan spectrum and the growing cadre of threatened non-authoritarians, then add them to the base of Republican general election voters, and the potential electoral path to a Trump presidency becomes clearer.
So, those who say a Trump presidency “can’t happen here” should check their conventional wisdom at the door. The candidate has confounded conventional expectations this primary season because those expectations are based on an oversimplified caricature of the electorate in general and his supporters in particular. Conditions are ripe for an authoritarian leader to emerge. Trump is seizing the opportunity. And the institutions—from the Republican Party to the press—that are supposed to guard against what James Madison called “the infection of violent passions” among the people have either been cowed by Trump’s bluster or are asleep on the job.
It is time for those who would appeal to our better angels to take his insurgency seriously and stop dismissing his supporters as a small band of the dispossessed. Trump support is firmly rooted in American authoritarianism and, once awakened, it is a force to be reckoned with. That means it’s also time for political pollsters to take authoritarianism seriously and begin measuring it in their polls.
Matthew MacWilliams is founder of MacWilliams Sanders, a political communications firms, and a Ph.D. candidate in political science at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, where he is writing his dissertation about authoritarianism.
© 2016 POLITICO LLC
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/donald-trump-2016-authoritarian-213533 [with comments]
--
Donald Trump Demands To Know 'What Is Going On?'
01/18/2016
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-demands-what-is-going-on_us_569d15e8e4b0b4eb759f2c5a [with comments], http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VG94GJT8okE [embedded; with comments]
*
The GOP: The New Know Nothing Party?
Blend Images - John Lund/Stephanie Roeser via Getty Images
By John W. Traphagan
Posted: 01/18/2016 1:09 pm EST Updated: 01/18/2016 3:59 pm EST
In the middle part of the 19th Century a political party, formally called The American Party, but known widely as the Know Nothing Party operated on a national scale in the U.S. promoting nativist, anti-immigration sentiments. Members of the Know Nothings were elected to Congress and they even nominated former President Millard Fillmore for the 1856 election, despite the fact that he was neither a party member nor a nativist.
The party's platform emphasized purifying American politics using anti-Catholic, nativist rhetoric that pandered to popular fears about the German and Irish Catholic immigrants. The Know Nothings claimed that Catholicism was contrary to the values of a republic, because Catholics owed ultimate allegiance to the Pope. They could not be loyal American citizens.
The party, whose membership was limited to Protestant men, feared the growing flow of immigrants from Europe and elsewhere and claimed these immigrants undermined American lifestyles and values and stole jobs from "native born" Americans.
Sound familiar?
Although the Know Nothings didn't last long as a political party, their brand of racist anti-immigration policy continued in the U.S. It is evident in laws like the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and the Immigration Act of 1924, both of which drastically limited (or prohibited) people from China and other Asian countries from moving to the U.S. And we also see it in the forced relocation of American citizens of Japanese descent to concentration camps during World War II.
Today, we hear echoes of the Know Nothings in the words of the GOP candidates and other leaders when they promote prohibiting Muslim immigrants or building border walls.
Indeed, Republicans like Donald Trump sound a great deal like the Know Nothings of the 19th-Century when they discuss immigration. Trump, in particular, in his call for banning Muslims is a prime example of the xenophobic and hateful rhetoric that characterized the actions and statements of the Know Nothings over 160 years ago. It's nothing new in this country of immigrants to find reasons to ban particular groups from entering the country. And religions like Islam, Judaism, and Catholicism often have been targets for xenophobic and discriminatory rhetoric and legislation.
The parallels are truly striking. Like the Know Nothings, the GOP largely consists of white Protestants (now both male and female) who deeply fear their "way of life" is being challenged by dangerous outsiders. Why are they dangerous? Because they bring to our shores different religious ideas and come from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds.
In other words, the campaign rhetoric and platform statements of the current GOP candidates have much in common with those espoused by the Know Nothings in the 19th Century.
It's interesting that the "know nothing" moniker arose because members were instructed to respond with "I know nothing," when asked by reporters and others about the group's secretive meetings and actions. When it comes to today's version of the GOP, secrecy may not apply, but the phrase "know nothing" seems to be an apt description of the ideas and policies they promote, not just in relation to immigration, but in general.
During the current campaign, when it comes to issues such as climate change, immigration policy, international relations, gun violence, income and wealth inequality, medical care, and so on, many Republican candidates seem to relish in ignorance and misinformation. They try to incite emotional rather than rational responses in followers by using inflammatory, and sometimes bigoted rhetoric designed to stimulate fear among the populace.
One would think that in the last century and a half we would have come farther than this. All that has been accomplished in the area of voter rights, anti-discrimination legislation, environmental policy and clean up, and at least a start in improving health care access, and here we are. Having to listen to a new Know Nothing Party spew its rhetoric of ignorance and xenophobia. The reason for the name may be different, but the phrase "know nothing" is an equally apt description of the party.
When we look at the GOP of 2016, it seems very much as though we are witnessing a new version of the Know Nothings of the 1850s. One can only hope that this time it is equally short-lived.
Copyright ©2016 TheHuffingtonPost.com, Inc.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-w-traphagan/the-gop-the-new-know-noth_b_9010454.html [with comments]
--
Trump says very curious things about God, church and the Bible
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump at Liberty University in Lynchburg, Va.
January 19, 2016
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/01/19/trump-says-very-curious-things-about-god-church-and-the-bible/ [with embedded video, and comments]
*
Donald Trump Quotes Scripture, Sort of, at Liberty University Speech
JAN. 18, 2016
http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2016/01/18/donald-trump-quotes-scripture-sort-of-at-liberty-university-speech/ [with embedded video]
*
Citing ‘Two Corinthians,’ Trump Struggles To Make The Sale To Evangelicals
January 18, 2016
http://nepr.net/news/2016/01/18/citing-two-corinthians-trump-struggles-to-make-the-sale-to-evangelicals/
*
Trump bungles Bible reference at Liberty University
Ted Cruz's team reacted quickly to Donald Trump's mistake.
01/18/16
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/trump-liberty-university-bible-217938 [with comments]
*
Evangelical Leader Russell Moore Just Blistered Donald Trump in Response to His Speech Today
January 18, 2016
[...]
But on the subject of Trump’s speech, which included a scriptural gaffe, Moore concluded that “now is the time for a clear articulation of the gospel, not to leave a lost soul confused about his relationship with God. The gospel is more important than politics, more important than the United States of America.”
https://www.ijreview.com/2016/01/517794-russell-moore-on-donald-trump-and-ted-cruz/ [with comment]
--
in addition to (linked in) the post to which this is a reply and preceding and (other) following, see also (linked in):
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=119453224 and preceding and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=119568542 and preceding and (future) following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=119717193 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=119804484 and preceding and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=119911939 and preceding and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=119913179 and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=119916080 and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=119919411 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=119923006 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=119925082 and following
And it’s not gender, age, income, race or religion.
By Matthew MacWilliams
1/17/2016
If I asked you what most defines Donald Trump supporters, what would you say? They’re white? They’re poor? They’re uneducated?
You’d be wrong.
In fact, I’ve found a single statistically significant variable predicts whether a voter supports Trump—and it’s not race, income or education levels: It’s authoritarianism.
That’s right, Trump’s electoral strength—and his staying power—have been buoyed, above all, by Americans with authoritarian inclinations. And because of the prevalence of authoritarians in the American electorate, among Democrats as well as Republicans, it’s very possible that Trump’s fan base will continue to grow.
My finding is the result of a national poll I conducted in the last five days of December under the auspices of the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, sampling 1,800 registered voters across the country and the political spectrum. Running a standard statistical analysis, I found that education, income, gender, age, ideology and religiosity had no significant bearing on a Republican voter’s preferred candidate. Only two of the variables I looked at were statistically significant: authoritarianism, followed by fear of terrorism, though the former was far more significant than the latter.
Authoritarianism is not a new, untested concept in the American electorate. Since the rise of Nazi Germany, it has been one of the most widely studied ideas in social science. While its causes are still debated, the political behavior of authoritarians is not. Authoritarians obey. They rally to and follow strong leaders. And they respond aggressively to outsiders, especially when they feel threatened. From pledging to “make America great again” by building a wall on the border to promising to close mosques and ban Muslims from visiting the United States, Trump is playing directly to authoritarian inclinations.
Not all authoritarians are Republicans by any means; in national surveys since 1992, many authoritarians have also self-identified as independents and Democrats. And in the 2008 Democratic primary, the political scientist Marc Hetherington found that authoritarianism mattered more than income, ideology, gender, age and education in predicting whether voters preferred Hillary Clinton over Barack Obama. But Hetherington has also found, based on 14 years of polling, that authoritarians have steadily moved from the Democratic to the Republican Party over time. He hypothesizes that the trend began decades ago, as Democrats embraced civil rights, gay rights, employment protections and other political positions valuing freedom and equality. In my poll results, authoritarianism was not a statistically significant factor in the Democratic primary race, at least not so far, but it does appear to be playing an important role on the Republican side. Indeed, 49 percent of likely Republican primary voters I surveyed score in the top quarter of the authoritarian scale—more than twice as many as Democratic voters.
Political pollsters have missed this key component of Trump’s support because they simply don’t include questions about authoritarianism in their polls. In addition to the typical battery of demographic, horse race, thermometer-scale and policy questions, my poll asked a set of four simple survey questions that political scientists have employed since 1992 to measure inclination toward authoritarianism. These questions pertain to child-rearing: whether it is more important for the voter to have a child who is respectful or independent; obedient or self-reliant; well-behaved or considerate; and well-mannered or curious. Respondents who pick the first option in each of these questions are strongly authoritarian.
Based on these questions, Trump was the only candidate—Republican or Democrat—whose support among authoritarians was statistically significant.
So what does this mean for the election? It doesn’t just help us understand what motivates Trump’s backers—it suggests that his support isn’t capped. In a statistical analysis of the polling results, I found that Trump has already captured 43 percent of Republican primary voters who are strong authoritarians, and 37 percent of Republican authoritarians overall. A majority of Republican authoritarians in my poll also strongly supported Trump’s proposals to deport 11 million illegal immigrants, prohibit Muslims from entering the United States, shutter mosques and establish a nationwide database that track Muslims.
And in a general election, Trump’s strongman rhetoric will surely appeal to some of the 39 percent of independents in my poll who identify as authoritarians and the 17 percent of self-identified Democrats who are strong authoritarians.
What’s more, the number of Americans worried about the threat of terrorism is growing. In 2011, Hetherington published research finding that non-authoritarians respond to the perception of threat by behaving more like authoritarians. More fear and more threats—of the kind we’ve seen recently in the San Bernardino and Paris terrorist attacks—mean more voters are susceptible to Trump’s message about protecting Americans. In my survey, 52 percent of those voters expressing the most fear that another terrorist attack will occur in the United States in the next 12 months were non-authoritarians—ripe targets for Trump’s message.
Take activated authoritarians from across the partisan spectrum and the growing cadre of threatened non-authoritarians, then add them to the base of Republican general election voters, and the potential electoral path to a Trump presidency becomes clearer.
So, those who say a Trump presidency “can’t happen here” should check their conventional wisdom at the door. The candidate has confounded conventional expectations this primary season because those expectations are based on an oversimplified caricature of the electorate in general and his supporters in particular. Conditions are ripe for an authoritarian leader to emerge. Trump is seizing the opportunity. And the institutions—from the Republican Party to the press—that are supposed to guard against what James Madison called “the infection of violent passions” among the people have either been cowed by Trump’s bluster or are asleep on the job.
It is time for those who would appeal to our better angels to take his insurgency seriously and stop dismissing his supporters as a small band of the dispossessed. Trump support is firmly rooted in American authoritarianism and, once awakened, it is a force to be reckoned with. That means it’s also time for political pollsters to take authoritarianism seriously and begin measuring it in their polls.
Matthew MacWilliams is founder of MacWilliams Sanders, a political communications firms, and a Ph.D. candidate in political science at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, where he is writing his dissertation about authoritarianism.
© 2016 POLITICO LLC
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/donald-trump-2016-authoritarian-213533 [with comments]
--
Donald Trump Demands To Know 'What Is Going On?'
Can someone please tell Donald Trump what's happening? He seems very confused.
01/18/2016
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-demands-what-is-going-on_us_569d15e8e4b0b4eb759f2c5a [with comments], http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VG94GJT8okE [embedded; with comments]
*
The GOP: The New Know Nothing Party?
Blend Images - John Lund/Stephanie Roeser via Getty Images
By John W. Traphagan
Posted: 01/18/2016 1:09 pm EST Updated: 01/18/2016 3:59 pm EST
In the middle part of the 19th Century a political party, formally called The American Party, but known widely as the Know Nothing Party operated on a national scale in the U.S. promoting nativist, anti-immigration sentiments. Members of the Know Nothings were elected to Congress and they even nominated former President Millard Fillmore for the 1856 election, despite the fact that he was neither a party member nor a nativist.
The party's platform emphasized purifying American politics using anti-Catholic, nativist rhetoric that pandered to popular fears about the German and Irish Catholic immigrants. The Know Nothings claimed that Catholicism was contrary to the values of a republic, because Catholics owed ultimate allegiance to the Pope. They could not be loyal American citizens.
The party, whose membership was limited to Protestant men, feared the growing flow of immigrants from Europe and elsewhere and claimed these immigrants undermined American lifestyles and values and stole jobs from "native born" Americans.
Sound familiar?
Although the Know Nothings didn't last long as a political party, their brand of racist anti-immigration policy continued in the U.S. It is evident in laws like the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and the Immigration Act of 1924, both of which drastically limited (or prohibited) people from China and other Asian countries from moving to the U.S. And we also see it in the forced relocation of American citizens of Japanese descent to concentration camps during World War II.
Today, we hear echoes of the Know Nothings in the words of the GOP candidates and other leaders when they promote prohibiting Muslim immigrants or building border walls.
Indeed, Republicans like Donald Trump sound a great deal like the Know Nothings of the 19th-Century when they discuss immigration. Trump, in particular, in his call for banning Muslims is a prime example of the xenophobic and hateful rhetoric that characterized the actions and statements of the Know Nothings over 160 years ago. It's nothing new in this country of immigrants to find reasons to ban particular groups from entering the country. And religions like Islam, Judaism, and Catholicism often have been targets for xenophobic and discriminatory rhetoric and legislation.
The parallels are truly striking. Like the Know Nothings, the GOP largely consists of white Protestants (now both male and female) who deeply fear their "way of life" is being challenged by dangerous outsiders. Why are they dangerous? Because they bring to our shores different religious ideas and come from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds.
In other words, the campaign rhetoric and platform statements of the current GOP candidates have much in common with those espoused by the Know Nothings in the 19th Century.
It's interesting that the "know nothing" moniker arose because members were instructed to respond with "I know nothing," when asked by reporters and others about the group's secretive meetings and actions. When it comes to today's version of the GOP, secrecy may not apply, but the phrase "know nothing" seems to be an apt description of the ideas and policies they promote, not just in relation to immigration, but in general.
During the current campaign, when it comes to issues such as climate change, immigration policy, international relations, gun violence, income and wealth inequality, medical care, and so on, many Republican candidates seem to relish in ignorance and misinformation. They try to incite emotional rather than rational responses in followers by using inflammatory, and sometimes bigoted rhetoric designed to stimulate fear among the populace.
One would think that in the last century and a half we would have come farther than this. All that has been accomplished in the area of voter rights, anti-discrimination legislation, environmental policy and clean up, and at least a start in improving health care access, and here we are. Having to listen to a new Know Nothing Party spew its rhetoric of ignorance and xenophobia. The reason for the name may be different, but the phrase "know nothing" is an equally apt description of the party.
When we look at the GOP of 2016, it seems very much as though we are witnessing a new version of the Know Nothings of the 1850s. One can only hope that this time it is equally short-lived.
Copyright ©2016 TheHuffingtonPost.com, Inc.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-w-traphagan/the-gop-the-new-know-noth_b_9010454.html [with comments]
--
Trump says very curious things about God, church and the Bible
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump at Liberty University in Lynchburg, Va.
January 19, 2016
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/01/19/trump-says-very-curious-things-about-god-church-and-the-bible/ [with embedded video, and comments]
*
Donald Trump Quotes Scripture, Sort of, at Liberty University Speech
JAN. 18, 2016
http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2016/01/18/donald-trump-quotes-scripture-sort-of-at-liberty-university-speech/ [with embedded video]
*
Citing ‘Two Corinthians,’ Trump Struggles To Make The Sale To Evangelicals
January 18, 2016
http://nepr.net/news/2016/01/18/citing-two-corinthians-trump-struggles-to-make-the-sale-to-evangelicals/
*
Trump bungles Bible reference at Liberty University
Ted Cruz's team reacted quickly to Donald Trump's mistake.
01/18/16
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/trump-liberty-university-bible-217938 [with comments]
*
Evangelical Leader Russell Moore Just Blistered Donald Trump in Response to His Speech Today
January 18, 2016
[...]
But on the subject of Trump’s speech, which included a scriptural gaffe, Moore concluded that “now is the time for a clear articulation of the gospel, not to leave a lost soul confused about his relationship with God. The gospel is more important than politics, more important than the United States of America.”
https://www.ijreview.com/2016/01/517794-russell-moore-on-donald-trump-and-ted-cruz/ [with comment]
--
in addition to (linked in) the post to which this is a reply and preceding and (other) following, see also (linked in):
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=119453224 and preceding and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=119568542 and preceding and (future) following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=119717193 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=119804484 and preceding and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=119911939 and preceding and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=119913179 and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=119916080 and following
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=119919411 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=119923006 and preceding (and any future following)
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=119925082 and following
Greensburg, KS - 5/4/07
"Eternal vigilance is the price of Liberty."
from John Philpot Curran, Speech
upon the Right of Election, 1790
F6
Join the InvestorsHub Community
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
