Donald Trump has a distinct method for communicating with both supporters and critics: he tends to call out the misdeeds of others, despite having engaged in similar behavior himself.
On October 3, 2024, Trump accused the Biden administration of using Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) funds—designated for disaster relief—to benefit immigrants. In reality, this claim is unfounded, as Biden has not done this. However, during his presidency, Trump did allocate FEMA resources for purposes such as expanding detention facilities.
This isn’t the first instance where he has projected his actions onto others. In 2016, Trump criticized then-opponent Hillary Clinton for using a personal email server while serving as secretary of state, labeling it as “extreme carelessness with classified information.” Yet once in office, he continued using his unsecured personal cellphone. Trump has since faced criminal charges for unlawfully retaining classified documents after leaving the White House, stashing them in his bathroom, bedroom, and various locations at Mar-a-Lago.
Justice Department via AP
More recently, a man armed with a rifle was arrested by the Secret Service for allegedly plotting to shoot Trump during a golf outing. Following this incident, Trump blamed Democrats for using “inflammatory language” that incites political violence. Yet, Trump himself has a track record of making inflammatory remarks that can potentially provoke violence.
As someone who studies both politics and psychology, I’m acquainted with the psychological tactics that candidates employ to persuade the public and vilify their adversaries. Trump’s repeated use of a strategy known as “projection” exemplifies this; it involves minimizing one’s own faults by highlighting those same faults in others.
Projection in Politics
Numerous examples illustrate this phenomenon. During his debate with Vice President Kamala Harris on September 10, 2024, Trump claimed that Democrats were to blame for the assassination attempt against him on July 13, saying, “I probably took a bullet to the head because of the things that they say about me.”
Earlier in that same debate, he falsely accused immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, of consuming pets, a claim that led to bomb threats and prompted the city’s mayor to declare a state of emergency.
Similarly, both congressional investigators and federal prosecutors have pointed out that Trump’s rhetoric incited thousands of individuals to gather in Washington, D.C., on January 6, 2021, encouraging them to violently storm the Capitol to disrupt the electoral vote count.
Trump is not the only politician to employ projection. His running mate, JD Vance, claimed that “the rejection of the American family is perhaps the most vile and damaging thing the left has done in this country.” Critics quickly noted that Vance’s family has a history of dysfunction and addiction.
Projection is evident across the political spectrum. In response to Trump’s proposed 10% tariff on all imported goods, the Harris campaign took to social media to criticize the so-called “Trump tequila tax.” While Harris portrays this as a sales tax that would harm middle-class families, she conveniently overlooks the fact that inflation has already increased the cost of living for middle-class Americans since she and President Biden took office.
The Mechanics of Projection
Projection represents one instance of unconscious psychological processes known as defense mechanisms. Many individuals find it difficult to process criticism or acknowledge information they wish were untrue. As a result, they seek alternative explanations for discrepancies between their beliefs and reality.
This behavior is often referred to as “motivated reasoning,” a broad term that encompasses various mental gymnastics people engage in to align their perceptions with the facts.
Examples include searching for information that aligns with one’s beliefs, disregarding factual claims, or concocting alternative explanations. For instance, a smoker may trivialize or ignore data connecting smoking to lung cancer or convince themselves that they smoke less than they truly do.
Motivated reasoning is not limited to politics. It can be a difficult concept to confront since individuals often perceive themselves as fully in command of their decision-making and believe they can objectively analyze political matters. Yet, evidence shows that unconscious cognitive processes play a significant role, too.
Impact on the Audience
Audiences are also vulnerable to similar unconscious psychological dynamics. Research indicates that over time, people subconsciously connect emotions with specific concepts, names, or phrases. Consequently, someone might react emotionally when hearing the terms “gun control,” “Ron DeSantis,” or “tax relief.”
Moreover, people’s minds develop unconscious defenses for these automatic emotions. When their feelings and defenses are challenged, a phenomenon called the “backfire effect” may occur, wherein efforts to correct mistaken beliefs end up solidifying rather than altering those beliefs.
For instance, some individuals might struggle to accept that their preferred candidate lost an election, believing instead that there must be another reason for it, such as a rigged process or widespread fraud. When presented with evidence that contradicts their beliefs, they may staunchly resist changing their views.
AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein
Finding Solutions
Fortunately, research suggests effective strategies to lessen people’s dependency on these automatic psychological processes. This includes clearly repeating and elaborating on factual information and, importantly, addressing falsehoods through trusted sources within the same political context.
For example, challenges to Democrats’ views regarding the Trump-related conservative agenda, dubbed Project 2025 as “dangerous,” would be more impactful if articulated by a Democrat rather than a Republican.
Likewise, a rebuttal to Trump’s assertion that the world is on the brink of World War III under the current Democratic administration would carry more weight if voiced by a fellow Republican. Statements from former Republican Vice President Dick Cheney asserting that Trump “can never be trusted with power again” would have a far greater impact when made by him rather than any Democrat.
While critiques from within a candidate’s own party are not unrealistic, they remain unlikely given the highly charged environment of the 2024 election season.