"Excellent student" versus "poor student": why Trump won?

Table of contents:

"Excellent student" versus "poor student": why Trump won?
"Excellent student" versus "poor student": why Trump won?

The celebration in the Kremlin will still take place. At least, according to Hillary Clinton, who spoke under the slogan: "Let's leave the Kremlin without a holiday!" Despite the image of an uneducated "belmondo", Donald Trump won in 2016. Because you can't be “good” like that in the world.


Humiliated and humiliated

People love the offended. And not only Russians - everyone. Not without exception, but in the mass. And Trump was offended: they mocked, made jokes about "Tanzania" (in one of his campaign speeches, Trump made a mistake, putting the stress on the name of this state on the wrong letter), his numerous statements about women. In general, the narrow-minded "bad guy" seemed to perfectly set off the prudence of the "iron lady" - the victory, obviously, was in her pocket. And, in principle, it was so - most of the voters voted for her. Not to mention ex-President Barack Obama, who traveled around the country and campaigned for Clinton, 90% of the media, which were exclusively for a Democratic woman, and ending with US allies. In general, it would seem that everyone was on Hillary's side. Trump, in fact, had only a small number of votes. But in the end, the gap with Trump turned out to be quite insignificant (47, 79% - for Clinton, 47, 30% - for Trump). The scales tipped in Trump's favor with more electors than Clinton.

“The first reason for his victory is socio-psychological,” said in an interview with the director of the Foundation for the Study of the United States. Franklin Roosevelt Yuri Rogulev. - When everyone piles on one of the candidates and begins to stomp and kick him, it can have the opposite effect. The voter, the common people, loves such offended, and the fact that Trump began to offend is a fact."


At the end of the election race, the stars of American show business attacked the "uncouth macho". When these same stars advertise laundry detergent, the average person buys it in a "secret" hope of at least a little familiarity with a famous person. But in politics, this simple marketing ploy does not work - in this case, the stars and other cream of society appear as an alien, far from the needs of a simple voter, an element. The attack on Trump has had the opposite effect.

Add to this Clinton's unchanging confidence in her victory - from the very beginning of the pre-election race, she delivered her speeches in the tone of the already elected president: let's, they say, we will work a little more, we will push, there we will try - and I will "officially" become the head of state. Most people are attracted by confidence, but self-confidence is repulsive. Clinton was being too provocative.


American Zhirinovsky

So the media has already dubbed the newly-made US president. The types of both politicians are indeed from the Find 10 Differences series. So one can just as well ask why Trump is popular, why Zhirinovsky is popular. The answer is simple: it depends on who. The type (and, undoubtedly, the real character) of Vladimir Volfovich, and with him Donald Trump, of course, resonates in the souls of a certain category of voters. And in the case of Zhirinovsky, and in the case of Trump, these are ordinary people. The media paint a portrait of a typical Trump supporter - a white male with a secondary education (or none at all), from the working class (or unemployed).

In America, as in Russia, there are many of them, and probably even the majority. Clinton relied on the establishment and the "advanced" Americans.Trump initially appealed to a very simple audience, which does not need rational arguments, Hillary's correctness, and what is there - even an election program, which, as you know, Trump, in general, did not have. These people need clear and specific slogans. It could even be contradictory. With this, Trump is just fine. He turned to the American dream of a little man, carefully drawn by Hollywood blockbusters and television programs, which he himself embodied: wealth, fame and, as a result, freedom of action and speech. Trump is a reality show, as vivid as it is meaningless, but so close to many people.


Endangered White Male

And, of course, chauvinism. Without him, probably nowhere, even in democratic America. The woman at the helm was perceived with a bang - and this was one of Clinton's trump cards - among the developed public, among the average man in the street, to whom Trump appealed, hardly. One of the bloggers on Glavpost.com, predicting the victory of the then-still running Trump, called Nixon a gender traitor, who introduced a rule that provides schoolgirls with equal rights in sports. This was the first blow to the patriarchal consciousness of the Americans. The second blow was the permission to fly on commercial aircraft. And then off we go: Beyoncé attacked the Super Bowl field with an army of black women, fists raised, who announced the end of male domination. What the hell is going on! Something like this, according to the author, should think of the “Dying White Man”, who has the impression that power is slipping out of his hands, that “this feminist monster” has conquered him. And what - after 8 years of rule by a black man telling Americans what to do, they will have to endure another 8 years of a woman. This will not happen!

Baba Yaga against

Irritant effect is irritating. And that's why it is remembered. All the speeches of the new president were annoying. Clinton appealed to reason, not to feelings, so she lost. A small man, a simple American who, despite his attitude to the golden billion, lives in the grip of his obligations. Refined reflection does not warm him - he lives and thinks in simple things and momentary impulses. He is not given the floor because he has nothing to say. The moment the president is elected in the polling booth is one of the few when he gets the right to vote. And he - meaningless - feels significant. And he says his protest "no" to rationality and creation.


Excellent student syndrome

As is often the case, Clinton was let down by her own correctness: decency, effectiveness of the proposed program, intelligence. Nobody likes excellent students. Even if they give to write off, and if they do not give, even more so. We know this from school. Miss Perfection tried too hard, she was too perfect and therefore lost. People don't like the right ones. Someone - because the "wrong" look more sincere, someone - out of envy. After all, the majority cannot boast of either excellent erudition, or intelligence, or rational thinking, or deliberate actions.

"Most likely, he (Trump. - Ed.) Would have lost to a candidate with the image of a" C "or" good ", but the excellent student Clinton became the very background that strengthened the sympathy of the broad masses for him, - writes the political psychologist in his blog, consultant on information and psychological security, chief editor of the Internet magazine "Security and Law" Sergei Nesterenko. - Clinton reacted recklessly to each of his attacks with attempts to prove that she was even better - and thus, paradoxically, even more contributed to the strengthening of Trump's position. (…) Hillary, as befits an excellent student, tried and did much more than she should. (…) Trump showed himself “as is”. And as a result, his crude sincerity turned out to be closer to voters than Clinton's "ideality".Too good is often bad. Hillary and her team didn't take that into account.



Dmitry Olshansky, a famous Petersburg psychoanalyst:

- I watched all the debates between Clinton and Trump and finally became convinced that Donald is a superficial, stupid person and does not understand at all how politics works, but for some reason I liked him and began to like him. And then I wondered what psychological techniques his team uses to create such an image. It is clear that he violated all the laws of the election campaign, failed all debates, created an extremely negative image, and that is why he was chosen. It is also obvious that Clinton is a head professional, smarter, more restrained and more suitable for the presidency, but sympathy is still on the side of Trap.

Regardless of the level of development of society and democratic traditions in the country, the psyche of people always gravitates towards conservatism, which was convincingly proved by Sigmund Freud. For example, we will always buy the same toothpaste that we used every day, and no amount of advertising can force us to change it, unless we get clear harm from the old one. It is the same in politics: the idea of ​​conservatism and a return to the great past is more likely to be supported by people than the idea of ​​radical reforms and innovations. Therefore, Trump, with his conservative rhetoric "Let's make America great again", came in handy. “Let's revive the great past” is a win-win slogan in any country.


Such a psychological effect is known that a negative selection is remembered better than a positive one. For example, you probably remember a failed exam better than the most successful one. Or an unsuccessful declaration of love is imprinted in memory more firmly than a successful one. It's the same in politics: the bully Trump is always better remembered, attracts more attention and gets the lead faster than good-girl Clinton. So her whole soft and caring image worked only into the hands of the troublemaker and the boor Trump and raised his rating.

Vote with your heart - we remember this psychological technique from our 1996 elections. Clinton appealed to consciousness and logic, Trump appealed to the basic stage of Maslow's pyramid: protection, food, sex. He openly declared that he freely satisfied all his desires and wanted to spit on the rules and the law: he did not pay taxes, he pawed women without their consent, he would drive all Mexicans out of the country and fence off them with a wall. Such a position can cause both indignation and disgust, but identification with a person who achieves everything that he wants arises unconsciously, because we all want the fulfillment of our desires here and now.

Plus, Trump was in the right place at the right time. In the United States, the nouveau riche is not very much favored, so not a single oligarch has ever been the president of America, although many had the desire. Therefore, his election is rather an exception to the rule. And, rather, this is a protest vote: people wanted not so much Trump as they wanted to get rid of the bronzed establishment.

All that we know about Trump today is just an image made by political strategists. He poured out promises abundantly, but did not offer any specific program of action. Therefore, what the Trump-President will ultimately be like, only time will tell, it makes no sense to guess.


Popular by topic