Ok then. Maybe this will help convince you of what's going on here.
Your question goes deeper than simply what factors drive Trump support—you're asking
why people choose to maintain beliefs that are demonstrably false or unsupported, and why "amateur" or dubious ideas so often triumph over expert knowledge. This is a major topic in political psychology and cognitive science, and the answer is much more nuanced than simply "low intelligence" or "poor education," though those can play a role.
- Research shows that confirmation bias is powerful: people are motivated to believe information that fits their pre-existing views and identity, even in the face of conflicting facts or expertise. This is not unique to Trump supporters—it's a universal human tendency, but certain psychological and social conditions can make it stronger or more consequential in politics.pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih+1
Like I said above,
The stubbornness to change their minds, in the face of new and compelling evidence, without feeling they've lost face.
- Intuitive thinking styles and poor cognitive reflection (preferring "gut instinct" over deliberative analysis) correlate with greater belief in misinformation and "simple" solutions, and these are more common among some conservative voters.today.ucsd+1
Like I said above,
The inability to critically appraise facts/ideas.
- People often endorse ideas because those ideas signal belonging to a valued group or identity, not because of evidence. Supporting Trump—even when he is wrong—becomes a signifier of in-group loyalty or antagonism toward elites/out-groups, rather than an evaluation of policy substance.colorado+1
- Research has repeatedly found that partisan and identity-motivated reasoning is a more powerful predictor of believing political falsehoods than raw intelligence or education alone.pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih+3
Like I said above,
Susceptibility to 'crowd behaviour', following what others do, even if it's clearly in error, because they can't/fear thinking for themselves.
- Multiple studies show that a disposition toward conspiracy thinking (a cognitive style, not just a lack of education) strongly predicts willingness to believe dubious claims, whether about Trump or other topics. Such individuals are more likely to see mainstream explanations as suspect and find compelling the rhetoric of outsiders or "truth-tellers" against the system.frontiersin+1
Like I said above,
The inability to critically appraise facts/ideas.
- Support for Trump is associated with deep mistrust of traditional institutions and experts. Many are not "duped" in a straightforward way—they choose to disbelieve experts who, in their eyes, have failed them or are seen as biased against their worldview.sites.nd+1
Like I said above,
The inability to critically appraise facts/ideas.https://sites.nd.edu/truth-and-politics/donald-trump-voters-we-like-the-presidents-lies/
- People who feel alienated often prize non-traditional "truth-tellers" regardless of their objective record. As noted by interviewees, evidence presented by "the experts" is discounted as coming from the enemy.sites.nd
I think this one has to be down to stupidity. When my car engine starts making a tapping noise, I think, 'I need to take this to a good mechanic, possibly even the dealership who have experts in my specific type of car.' I
don't think, 'I'll take it to a shaman'!
- Psychological studies reveal that Trump supporters tend to use less cognitively complex language and favor simplistic explanations. This is linked to preferences for black-and-white narratives and distrust of ambiguity or "nuanced," technical explanations associated with experts.psmag+1
Understanding nuanced argument does require the ability to critically appraise, often disparate information, but this can be accomplished by using a sort of algorithm of dichotomous key questions. But his requires effort to acquire and apply. Preferring to drink moonshine, shoot things and shout 'yeeee haaa' at joyful points of the day, suggest a lack of desire to do this.
- While education matters, cognitive ability (as measured by tests of reasoning or reflection) has been found to be an even stronger predictor than years of schooling.sciencedirect+1
Cognitive ability = intellect, intelligence, mentality, mental power, reasoning, comprehension, understanding. 'Years of schooling'
instill these abilities in people.
- Once people in a group have committed to a political figures' narrative, new evidence—especially when delivered by "outsiders"—often leads to attitude polarization rather than change. Admitting error can feel like a personal or group betrayal, and facts are often reframed to fit group identity.colorado+1
Like I said above,
without feeling they've lost face.
- While cognitive ability and education do predict susceptibility to political misinformation, studies also find highly educated people can be motivated reasoners when their identity is at stake.psmag+2
- Overlapping but distinct phenomena of stubbornness, "face-saving", and crowd conformity (as you mention) are well-documented effects—but they are not unique to Trump supporters or those of "low intelligence;" they intensify in highly polarized, mistrustful environments.
The number one ability in the person is the
courage to change one's mind in the face of new and compelling evidence.
For many years a certain cellular structure was thought to be an artifact of processing the cell for view under a microscope; not a real thing but an anomaly. This 'artifact interpretation' was evangelically pushed as being true by a certain, highly eminent cell biologist at Oxford, indeed it being the central theme of his academic career. One day, an
American scientist (of
all nationalities
) went to Oxford to present new data about this 'artifact'. His research showed the artifact was in fact a
vital cellular structure ('Golgi body') involved in secretion and intracellular transport. The room quietened as the eminent, old Oxford cell biologist, slowly stood up to respond to the new data. He said, " All these years I have been wrong and now I have been shown the truth." All those present in the lecture room stood and clapped their hands raw!
- Trump's style is often compared by political psychologists to a "snake oil" phenomenon: the promise of easy solutions, constant repetition, and emotional appeals over rational analysis. This appeals most powerfully to those who are under economic or social stress, alienated from the mainstream, or disposed to distrust complicated but accurate explanations.psypost+1
It's the fourth oldest trick in the book. Putin does it; "We didn't Novichok him in your country. We didn't, we wouldn't, it wasn't us." even when the evidence is irrefutable. Once you know this technique, it's like taking the fabled 'red pill'; you can't unsee the technique. And yet MAGAs do.
So, the scientific consensus is that it's
not just low intelligence or lack of education, but a complex interplay of psychology, social identity, group loyalty, cognitive style, and societal context that drives such patterns of political belief.
frontiersin+4
I think this AI interpretation (it is, isn't it?) is in fact self-contradictory. It
is fundamentally down to low intelligence and a lack of education
allowing that complex interplay to develop.
richardkatz.substack.com
