From the East Room of the White House in Washington, D.C., at 2:30 a.m. on November 4, President Trump delivered an extraordinary speech that included these words:
“We were preparing to win this election. Frankly, we won this election… We want all voting to stop. We don’t want them to find any ballots at 4 a.m. and add them to the list, okay? It’s an unfortunate moment. To me, it’s an unfortunate moment. And we’re going to win this election. As far as I’m concerned, we’ve already won it.”
Which aspect of the speech above reveals the most about the speaker’s mental state?
Try answering this psychological test question before reading the rest of the post.
Psychologists who have analyzed the speech patterns of U.S. presidents in detail, and what their word choices reveal about their personality, recently published a study, the results of which suggest that such speech can reveal a hidden mental agenda behind the words. The psychology behind the vote-rigging allegations is currently on the minds of many, who have focused on whether there is any truth to this startling claim.
The study, titled “The Best Words: Linguistic Indicators of Grandiose Narcissism in Politics,” was inspired by another previous speech by the 45th president. At a 2015 campaign event, Donald Trump claimed, “I have the best words.” The boast seemed to inspire the authors of the study, James Underberg, Anton Gollwitzer, Gabriele Oettingen, and Peter Gollwitzer, because it seemed like the boasting that only so-called “bookish” narcissism might be associated with.
The study used previous research that assessed the grandiose narcissism of every president from George Washington to George W. Bush, based on the judgments of 177 historians. According to this analysis, Theodore Roosevelt and Lyndon Johnson scored extremely high on self-admiration, while Grover Cleveland and James Monroe scored extremely low.
The authors investigated a particular form of vanity, “grandiose narcissism,” which typically describes a type of person who is convinced of their general beauty, but who goes to extremes of aggression and dominance through attention-seeking actions.
Because narcissists are dedicated to gaining leadership, fame, and fortune, losing power and status can leave them feeling empty, whereas those who are less self-absorbed can adapt to a relatively more obscure life after the presidency, and more graciously accept that it is someone else’s turn to take the top job.
Because narcissists display heightened self-importance and entitlement to special treatment, it makes sense that losing means the competition is rigged against them, just because they don’t win. This may explain why they may not feel the need to provide any further evidence of cheating against them. The mere fact of being tracked becomes a confirmation of a hostile plot.
These egoists are much more relentless in their pursuit of status and prestige than non-narcissists and are therefore more likely to overestimate their abilities or lie to get ahead. Narcissists are also more likely to interrupt.
Given all the warning signs, anyone facing an electoral contest with a narcissist might have been able to anticipate any subsequent fraud allegations. Anyone running against those who love themselves should not only have a contingency plan in place beforehand but also be more forceful in refuting post-contest allegations.
Another way that narcissism can affect electoral outcomes is that egos are known to suffer from “narcissistic rage.” This is an explosive mixture of anger and hostility, arising from threats to the ego’s sense of superiority. Narcissists cannot accept losing in any contest, because it threatens their convictions of superiority. As a result, it is natural, even inevitable, for narcissists to claim not that they did not win—but that the other side must have stolen the victory through cheating.
Two speeches from each president were analyzed in the research, published in the Journal of Linguistics and Social Psychology, meaning that the average number of words entered into the analysis for each president was 10,308, including the first inaugural and first State of the Union addresses.
The study, conducted by psychologists based at New York University and Yale University, finds that more “stately” American presidents use words differently than their more modest counterparts — including, notably, more “we-talk.”
Stateliness was most strongly predicted by “we-talk,” also known as the first-person plural pronoun. Donald Trump frequently used the word “we”; this personal pronoun appears several times in the excerpt from the “election fraud” speech above.
Donald Trump’s speech seemed improvised and may not have been the product of a team of scriptwriters. One obvious criticism of the current study is that presidents’ speeches are written to varying degrees by speechwriters. However, the authors defended their analysis by pointing out that candidates are known to select speechwriters and edit their work to ensure that it is in their voice. It has also been noted that stable word-use patterns in politicians’ speeches—even those written by different speechwriters—occur over time. Political speeches have thus been accepted as valid for character analysis.
Trump’s speech may have served several purposes: it may have kept the media spotlight on him when it should have been moving away, toward Joe Biden, the candidate who has shown himself to be moving forward.
How to Deal with a Narcissist
How do you tell them they didn’t win when their wounded self-esteem could turn them into a dangerous opponent? A wounded animal is sometimes more deadly than one who is fit enough to run away. There are two classic techniques, both of which are deeply manipulative, and they can be referred to as “the illusion of victory” and “love bombing.”
The “illusion of victory” is achieved by making the second prize bigger and brighter than the winner’s trophy. So, give those who love themselves a show that makes them feel like winners so that they are never abandoned to face the reality of losing.
Other tactics, such as “love bombing,” involve showering someone with messages, gestures, and charm. You can make the loser feel like a winner by praising the way he or she fought, and celebrating accomplishments that will never be forgotten. For example, “behind-the-scenes” offers to take on a visiting ambassadorship, or a similar role where a former president can travel the world with a personal camera crew, in an official Air Force One-and-a-half, might have been able to turn a potential crash into a takeoff.
