Thought the realization that Trump's lies were leading people they know to die unnecessarily might persuade people to go beyond performative belief or willfully ignorant denial / politically motivated flimsy rationalizations... but new evidence suggests otherwise:
'Even With 190,000 Dead, There's a Lot That Voters Don't Know
[...] political science research has found that people don't always vote in a way that reflects their policy preferences.
A principal obstacle is lack of knowledge. In surveys, voters often can't distinguish presidential candidates' stances even on critical issues of the day.
[...] Voters appear not to know Mr. Trump's and Biden's stances. Only 40 percent place Mr. Biden as more supportive than Mr. Trump on masks, and only 41 percent do the same on closing businesses. Only 47 percent place Mr. Biden as more supportive of the WHO. These results are consistent with decades of research showing that a considerable share of the public doesn't know the positions of the parties and presidential candidates, even on the most salient issues. By contrast, among respondents who are highly knowledgeable about the presidential candidates on other issues, more than 90 percent correctly place them on all three coronavirus questions.
[...] When people don't have a sense for party or candidate platforms, they tend to assume that their preferred party or candidate agrees with them on the issues. This phenomenon, which political scientists call projection, appears to be operating here. People's perceptions appear strongly influenced by which candidate they like.
Strikingly, a majority (59 percent) of Trump voters support requiring masks (only 18 percent are opposed), and 81 percent of Trump voters who support mandatory masking think Mr. Trump does as well.
[...] Perhaps surprisingly, knowledge of Mr. Trump's positions on the virus declines among those with a close friend or family member who died of the coronavirus. Sixty-eight percent of Trump voters who know someone who died (compared with 56 percent among those who do not) believe that Mr. Trump supports mask requirements in public.
You might think that the critical importance of an issue would improve people's ability to vote on the basis of that issue. Even in times like these, however, the public's attention to politics remains limited — politics is still "a sideshow in the great circus of life." Lacking knowledge, the importance may simply be making them project their position even more onto their party's candidate.'
https://www.nytimes....projection.html
The researcher doesn't mention whether Trump's incoherence, ambiguous 'jokes', '"truthful" hyperbole', and tendency to contradict himself might contribute to projection, but it seems very likely....
'Faith and politics mix to drive evangelical Christians' climate change denial
[...] Politically powerful Christian interest groups publicly dispute the climate science consensus. A coalition of major evangelical groups, including Focus on the Family and the Family Research Council, launched a movement opposing what they describe as "the false worldview" of environmentalism, which supposedly is "striving to put America, and the world, under its destructive control."
Studies show that belief in miracles and an afterlife is associated with lower estimates of the risks posed by climate change. [...]
According to Kahan's data, identification as a political conservative, and as white, is much more predictive of rejecting the climate consensus than overall religiosity. He argues that anti-science bias has to do with threats to values that define one's cultural identity. There are all kinds of topic areas wherein people judge expert qualifications based on whether the "expert" confirms or contradicts the subject's cherished view.
[...]
As I explain in my book, "The Truth About Denial," there's ample evidence for a universal human tendency toward motivated reasoning when faced with facts that threaten one's ideological worldview. The motivated reasoner begins with a conclusion to which he or she is committed, and assesses evidence or expertise according to whether it supports that conclusion.
White American evangelicals trend very strongly toward political conservatism. They also exhibit the strongest correlation, among any faith group, between religiosity and either climate science denial or a general anti-science bias.
Meanwhile, African-American Protestants, who are theologically aligned with evangelical Protestants but politically aligned with progressives, show some of the highest levels of climate concern.
North America is the only high-income region where people who follow a religion are substantially more likely to say they favor their religious teachings over science when disagreements arise. This finding is driven mainly by politically conservative U.S. religious denominations—including conservative Catholics.
[...]
But the available evidence cuts both ways. A landmark study from the 1980s suggested that fundamentalist religious traditions are associated with a commitment to human dominion over nature, and that this attitude may explain anti-environmentalist positions.
Even after controlling for political ideology, those committed to an "end-times theology"—like U.S. evangelicals—still show a greater tendency to oppose the scientific consensus on environmental issues.
Perhaps some specific theologies bias the believer against the idea that human beings could be responsible for the end of humanity. This bias could show up as an automatic rejection of environmental science.
We are left with something of a "chicken and egg" problem: Do certain religious communities adopt politically conservative positions on climate change because of their religious tradition? Or do people adopt a religious tradition that stresses human dominion over nature because they were raised in a politically conservative community?'
https://theconversat...e-denial-143145
Clearly Go* is very mad at Nancy Pelosi (and Portland... and Bill Gates---but He spared Texas!... well, this time):
'Why Does the West Coast's Sky Look Like Literal Hell Right Now? [...] people are arguing about whether it looks like Mars or Venus where they live. [...] thick wildfire smoke has enveloped regions of California and Oregon. As a result, residents of Salem and San Francisco are experiencing eerie orange-red skies.'
https://slate.com/te...e-sky-glow.html
The orange haze is clearly proof that Go* supports Trump. The fires are previews of hell. What a wonderful miracle!
'Once the decision to wear a mask became informed by political beliefs, it did not matter that scientists better understood the severity of the virus and the evidence in favor of mask wearing became clearer. Why? Research on identity theory shows that individuals are motivated to maintain consistency between the values associated with their identity and the information they encounter. The groups we identify with provide us with a sense of belonging and self-worth. Thus, if we identify with a political group, our psychological motivation is to process information in a way that supports the group we belong to.
This identity protection process was exactly what I found in my dissertation as well. Both Democrats and Republicans interpreted fictitious news headlines very differently depending on whether the headline was favorable or unfavorable toward their political group. This is consistent with a meta-analysis showing robust political bias for both Democrats and Republicans.
Political polarization is extremely strong in the United States, which further perpetuates political bias. The political divide regarding COVID-19 has actually grown over time, despite our increased knowledge of the virus and the efficacy of mask wearing.
How does this divide continue despite the greater knowledge we have about the virus? Well, Democrats and Republicans trust and consume different news media. These media bubbles can lead to many Americans receiving news regarding COVID-19 that is biased toward supporting their political in-group. Democrats and Republicans each prefer to associate with people who share their political beliefs. Research has also found that political attitudes become more extreme after a group discussion with like-minded people. Additionally, a study of mine found that greater political homogeneity in one's personal network was associated with stronger political beliefs. This finding was replicated in my dissertation research where I found political polarization was positively associated with having a greater proportion of close associates who hold similar political beliefs.
In summary, once misinformation becomes political, it is very hard to correct because of our motivation to protect our identity and the reinforcement from our political echo chambers.
[...] As my research shows, depolarization can occur when there is exposure to opposing viewpoints in one's personal network. Furthermore, I found in my dissertation that Republicans were more likely to agree that climate change is influenced by human activity when they had more positive feelings toward Democrats. This is consistent with other work that shows how connecting with people we disagree with on an emotional level is key for depolarization and persuasion. Relating this to the pandemic, we can say that when members of our community engage in mask wearing, it becomes more solidified as a social norm among our group, which ultimately leads to more people adopting the behavior.'
https://theconversat...iticized-144268
But Trump flouts 'consistency' and many traditional Republican 'values'... his cult of personality, and appeal to identity politics, trump consistent 'principles'?... Perhaps they assume that his inconsistency is still going to be good for their identity group? Or are they already conditioned to accept or ignore the ways business and religious leaders exploit them?... 'It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it'---and 'it's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled'....
'We believe lies when we feel too vulnerable to allow the truth and its consequences to manifest in our lives. When truth does emerge, we often feel terribly betrayed and we can lose faith in our own ability to make good judgments. To protect against this pain, we sometimes continue lying to ourselves long after reality seems unavoidable.'
https://www.nbcnews....iars-ncna993816
This post has been edited by Azath Vitr (D'ivers: 10 September 2020 - 04:47 PM
Help
," Pierce wrote in an email. "But I do love my God, my Country and Notre Dame, and I will fight to the death for Kyle Rittenhouse."'
