I never get who is the audience for claims like “nobody knows more about [complex topic many people are full-time experts on] than me!” Even his most rabid supporters can’t think it’s literally (or even approximately) true. And most people find obviously false boasts offputting.
Like, a more modest claim (“I know a great deal about... I have thoroughly studied”) would be equally false, but at least *might conceivably* be true given the will to believe, and wouldn’t so strongly reinforce the impression that he lies constantly about everything.
So if the lie isn’t supposed to convince anyone of its literal truth, what work is it doing? And why doesn’t it seem to hurt him in the way obviously-false boasts normally would? Some possibilities...
Maybe some people just find the brashness & unshakable confidence appealing. Maybe it’s even appealling because it’s clearly not true: He’s refusing to be cowed by egghead expertise.
Maybe bluster like this helps insulate him from criticism of lies that are less obvious (to the general public) lies. “Hey, he’s a salesman, more fool you for expecting literal truth in advertising” (even if many people ARE deceived by those other claims).
Or maybe it’s an anchoring effect? Like, ok, clearly it’s not true that literally “nobody knows more”, but if that’s the blustery version, people figure he must at least know something? Or maybe he’s just a pathological liar and his fans are inured to it & don’t care.
