1/ @jenmercieca takes a deep dive into Trump’s rhetorical strategies.
Looking at these is helpful because we see other Republicans trying to imitate him, but without his skill in deploying these tactics.
The problem didn't end when Trump left the White House.
2/ Also it seems that a bunch of Republicans are trying hard to be another (or the next) Trump by copying these strategies.
@jenmercieca presents Trump as a master con artist. His gaffes weren't gaffes. They were deliberate and masterful uses of aggressive debate tricks.
3/ Here she explains her use of the word "genius" in the title.
Basically, he's a master at manipulating people through standard rhetorical devices.
He ingenuously wields communication as a force in a way that makes it difficult to respond to him.
4/ Observation: Marjorie Taylor Green thinks that the way to imitate Trump is to be as vulgar as possible and try to create the maximum amount of outrage.
But it seems to me that she lacks Trump’s evil genius for manipulating people.
5/ Here we go. Device #1
🔹Appeal to the Crowd
Trump tells his supporters that they're smart enough to see through the manipulation of the “fake” media.
He tells them America’s problems are not their fault; they’re the victims of corrupt and inept politicians.
6/ He conned his supporters into thinking he was a truth-teller by positioning his “lack of political correctness” as genuineness.
The more vulgar he was, the more his supporters liked and trusted him because rejecting “political correctness” made him appear authentic
7/ Thus politically incorrect statements increased his supporters’ appreciation for him.
The impulse of his critics to mock him backfired by solidifying his position as a man of the people mocked by the establishment.
8/ His argument was annoyingly circular: “I’m right because so many people support me, and people support me because I’m right.”
Device #2 🔹 Ad hominem: Trump attacks his opponents' character (“liddle” Marco)
(I won’t go through all the devices.)
9/ Ad hominem prevents critical thinking by diverting attention away from the debated question.
It casts doubt on an opponent, and appeals to hypocrisy by trying to find a contradiction between what a person says and what he does.
10/ What psychologists call “projection” @jenmercieca calls “appeal to hypocrisy.” This is basically saying "my critics have no standing to critique me because they have done it [or worse] themselves."
When Trump projects he’s seeking to undermine others.
11/ Basically Trump unleashed the ugly.
It’s worth noting that most people have the decency not to use or even consider these kinds of rhetorical strategies.
These techniques are aggressive, ugly, mean, and designed to destroy.
Normal people just don’t do it.
12/ Next rhetorical device:
🔹Paralipsis, saying something while claiming not to be saying it. For example:
This gives him deniability “I never said it” and lets him spread innuendo without accountability.
13/ Trump’s followers feel like they’re in on his jokes.
They applaud his deliberate ambiguity, which they understand lets him escape accountability.
Here’s how a fan responded to Trump's disavowal of white supremacy:
14/ Other devices include
🔹Exceptionalism. “America is the greatest but our enemies within have weakened America. I alone can fix it.
🔹Reification (treating people as objects; dehumanizing them)
15/ It's easy to see the overlap between these rhetorical strategies and fascist tactics.
Some of the rhetorical devices @jenmercieca describes are designed to unify his supporters and increase the polarization between his supporters and everyone else.
16/ @jasonintrator describes fascist tactics as creating an “us v. Them” politics.
Fascist dehumanize the “enemies” (reification)
No surprise! Fascist leaders are also masters at these techniques.
They also lack the moral compass that allows them to use these strategies.
18/ Educating the people to recognize these tactics will help, but as @jenmercieca points out, these rhetorical devices are specifically designed to prevent people from using critical judgment.
The prosecution has everyone confused because they are framing the case as "election fraud" and "election interference" so everyone is trying to connect the crimes we know about to "election fraud."
This would be clear: "It is election fraud. Here is how the evidence will support a charge of election fraud." Then show how the behavior supports election fraud.
For years I was perplexed by what I was seeing on left-leaning Twitter, political blogs, and partisan reporting.
I had the feeling that, in its way, what I was seeing was comparable to Fox: Lots of bad information and even unhinged conspiracy theories.
2terikanefield.com/invented-narra…
Of course, if I suggested that, I was blasted for "both-sidesing."
Then I discovered an area of scholarship: Communications and the overlap between communications and political science.
Another contradiction: when people demanded indictments RIGHT NOW (in 2021 and early 2022) the reason was, "Everyone knows he's guilty! Look at all the evidence!"
We saw the J6 committee findings.
Trump isn't saying "I didn't do it." He's saying, "I had the right to do it."
2
We all know what he did. The question is, "Do people want a president who acts like Trump?"
A lot of people do.
People show me polls that a guilty finding would change minds.
I say rubbish. Use common sense. He lost in 2020 and he lost the popular vote in 2016. . .
3/
. . . because it is designed to keep people hooked. People need to stay glued to the screen for hour after hour.
But to hook people, you need to scare them. The Facebook whistleblower testified that content that produces strong emotions like anger gets more engagement.
2/
Fox does the same thing. There is a few minutes of news, but the facts get lost as commentators and TV personalities speculate and scare their audiences.
Before you yell at me for comparing MSNBC to FOX, read all of this:
If I write another blog post addressing the outrage cycle here on Twitter and in the MSNBC ecosystem, it will be to explore why so many people who believe they are liberal or progressive actually want a police state.
1/
Today alone, a handful of people who consider themselves liberal or progressive told me that the "traitors need to be arrested and prosecuted."
In 2019, back when I wore myself out tamping down misinformation, I explained the legal meaning of treason.
2/
Back then, I now realize, people asked politely: "Can Trump be prosecuted for treason (over the Russia election stuff).
I explained that wouldn't happen.
Now it's different. It's more like fascist chants.
3/