POST-MORTEMS & THE ELECTION Figuring Out ‘What Went Wrong?’

What went wrong? How did Kamala Harris lose so badly? And how did Donald Trump win so decisively? Since the election there has been over a week of post-mortems and a lot of it degenerated into various “blame games.” And just about every democrat was targeted for the blame—Biden for getting out so late, for not supporting Harris more, for hiding his cognitive decline, for blowing the debate.

Harris for not having a specific agenda, for not answering questions, for her word-salads, for not accepting tough interviews. The democrat party for not having a primary, for a Woke agenda. The media for covering up Biden’s decline, for not asking follow-up questions of Harris, not focusing on the everyday issues of the voters (economy, inflation, border, etc.). Obama for scolding black men. The voters for being ignorant, being brainwashed, for their racism, sexism, etc.

As “the blame game” by which various commentators, and others who were invited to chime in—people tended to think in very simplistic either/or ways. A few, however, knew how to distinguish blame from responsibility. I was impressed by Stephen Smith, a very thoughtful democrat pundit, who identified a whole range of factors that came together to create the situation. He also used the post-mortem as it is designed—as a way to learn from mistakes and to correct them. He focused on responses and responsibility rather than judging people. His focus was on learning and understanding.

When I think about it—Trump’s overwhelming victory was in spite of so many things. He won in spite of having a lower “favorability” rating, in spite of being labeled a felon (due to the lawfare bring by Biden’s DOJ), and in spite of being called the worst of names, Nazi, Hitler, Fascist, etc. He won in spite of talking like a gruff blue-color worker, in spite of the media’s bias against him (90% of all media reports were negative about him). And in spite of all of that—Americans voted overwhelmingly for him. So, how did that happen? The lawfare did not work; the media bias didn’t work; the assassination attempts did not work; and the name-calling didn’t work. So how do we explain that?

A Psychological Perspective As a psychologist here’s my view of the victory as a psychological victory, rather than a political one. It seems to me that there were several psychological factors which worked to his advantage.

First, everyday reality won. The reality of grocery prices, gas prices, mortgages, rent, etc. won. And media’s spin that the economy was getting better did not deceive people. Everyday people could tell the difference between media spin about the economy and the reality of the economy as they experience it. (Neurons #49)

Second, authenticity won. I wrote about this earlier (Neurons #46). You may not like how Donald Trump sometimes speaks, but he speaks his mind and he is authentic. The same cannot be said for Harris at all. She was far too cautious, too hesitant to say what she actually thought, to explain why she changed her mind about many things, to answer questions. She played the role of a “politician” far too well. There were also too many contradictions in her. On the one hand, “nothing comes to mind” regarding anything she would do different from the four years of the Biden administration, but on the other hand, she is going to “turn the page.” On the one hand she was a prosecutor, but on the other hand she could not say she would vote for proposition 36 in California making shoplifting a crime.

Third, memory won. People remembered what life was like when Trump was President (2017- 2020) in contrast to what life has been like under Harris/Biden (2021-224). Repeatedly people exited the poles saying, “I had more money in my pocket.” “There were no new wars under Trump.” “There was no invasion at the border.” They remembered and that memory made the difference. The current reality was too painful and Harris and other democrats running for office did not communicate that they under their pain.

Fourth, common sense won. You can’t “defund the police” and then claim that you will make people safer. You can’t open up the border and then ignore migrant crimes. You can’t promote boys in girl’s sports and claim it is fair or democratic. You can’t prevent parents from knowing what’s going on with their kids in school regarding their gender and say you are for democracy. None of that makes sense. It is certainly not common sense.

Fifth, human needs won. Finally, I think that people voted according to their human needs rather than ideologies. They voted in terms of their needs for safety and security, financial survival (lower taxes, lower inflation), and physical survival (wanting lower crime). They did not vote for Woke ideology and the Political Correctness.

Sixth, humor won the day. Having written a book on human (Thinking Humorously), I looked for and noted the amount, kind, and nature of the humor used by both Trump and Harris. In Harris’ campaign speeches, there was almost no humor. By contrast, Trump uses a lot of humor. Most often is his exaggerations, his play on words, and some of it is his storytelling. He told about wearing the garbage man’s vest and how someone said “it makes you look thinner.” So he wore it on stage! He often used self-depreciation humor which was aimed at himself.