Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

The Forum

A Journal of Applied Research in Contemporary Politics

Ed. by Disalvo, Daniel / Stonecash, Jeffrey

IMPACT FACTOR 2017: 0.536

CiteScore 2017: 0.48

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2017: 0.265
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2017: 0.723

See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 15, Issue 2


The Rhetorical Psychology of Trumpism: Threat, Absolutism, and the Absolutist Threat

Morgan Marietta / Tyler Farley / Tyler Cote / Paul Murphy
Published Online: 2017-07-29 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/for-2017-0019


Conventional wisdom suggests that Donald Trump’s rhetoric – aggressive, insulting, often offensive – would be counterproductive to electoral success. We argue that Trump’s surprising victories in both the primary and general campaigns were partly due to the positive effects of his appeals grounded in the intersection of threat and absolutism. The content of Trump’s rhetoric focused on threats to personal safety (terrorism), personal status (economic decline), and group status (immigration). The style of Trump’s rhetoric was absolutist, emphasizing non-negotiable boundaries and moral outrage at their violation. Previous research has shown perceived threat to motivate political participation and absolutist rhetoric to bolster impressions of positive character traits. Trump employed these two rhetorical psychologies simultaneously, melding threat and absolutism into the absolutist threat as an effective rhetorical strategy. Analysis of Trump’s debate language and Twitter rhetoric, as well as original data from political elites at the Republican National Convention and ordinary voters at rallies in New Hampshire confirm the unconventional efficacy of Trump’s rhetorical approach.


  • Albertson, Bethany, and Shana Kushner Gadarian. 2015. Anxious Politics: Democratic Citizenship in a Threatening World. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Baron, Jonathan, and Mark Spranca. 1997. “Protected Values.” Organizational Behavior and Decision Processes 70 (1): 1–16.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Baron, Jonathan, and Sarah Lesher. 2000. “How Serious are Expressions of Protected Values?” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 6: 183–194.Google Scholar

  • Bobo, Lawrence. 1983. “Whites’ Opposition to Busing: Symbolic Racism or Realistic Group Conflict?” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 45 (6): 1196–1210.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Boyer, Pascal, and Nora Parren. 2015. “Threat-Related Information Suggests Competence: A Possible Factor in the Spread of Rumors.” PLoS One 10 (6): e0128421.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Dick, Jason. 2016. “The Politics of Fear: Will Fear of Terror and Economic Uncertainty Drive this Year’s Election?” Roll Call posted 27 June.Google Scholar

  • Feldman, Stanley, and Karen Stenner. 1997. “Perceived Threat and Authoritarianism.” Political Psychology 18 (4): 741–770.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Fiske, Alan, and Philip Tetlock. 1997. “Taboo Trade-offs: Reactions to Transactions That Transgress Spheres of Justice.” Political Psychology 18 (2): 255–297.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Gadarian, Shana Kushner. 2010. “The Politics of Threat: How Terrorism News Shapes Foreign Policy Attitudes.” Journal of Politics 72 (2): 469–483.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Gross, Justin, and Kaylee Johnson. 2016. “Twitter Taunts and Tirades: Negative Campaigning in the Age of Trump.” PS: Political Science & Politics 49 (4): 748–754.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Landau, Mark, Sheldon Solomon, Jeff Greenberg, Florette Cohen, Tom Pyszczynski, Jamie Arndt, Claude H. Miller, Daniel M. Ogilvie, and Alison Cook. 2004. “Deliver Us From Evil: The Effects of Mortality Salience and Reminders of 9/11 on Support for President George W. Bush.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 30 (9): 1135–1150.Google Scholar

  • Marietta, Morgan. 2008. “From My Cold, Dead Hands: Democratic Consequences of Sacred Rhetoric.” Journal of Politics 70 (3): 767–779.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Marietta, Morgan. 2009. “The Absolutist Advantage: Sacred Rhetoric in Contemporary Presidential Debate.” Political Communication 26 (4): 388–411.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Marietta, Morgan. 2012. The Politics of Sacred Rhetoric: Absolutist Appeals and Political Persuasion. Waco: Baylor University Press.Google Scholar

  • Merolla, Jennifer, and Elizabeth Zechmeister. 2013. “Evaluating Political Leaders in Times of Terror and Economic Threat: The Conditioning Influence of Political Partisanship.” Journal of Politics 75 (3): 599–612.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Onreat, Emma, Alain van Hiel, and Ilse Cornelius. 2013. “Threat and Right-Wing Attitude: A Cross-National Approach.” Political Psychology 34 (5): 791.Google Scholar

  • Petriglieri, Jennifer. 2011. “Under Threat: Responses to and the Consequences of Threats to Individuals’ Identities.” Academy of Management Review 36 (4): 641–662.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Pyszczynski, Thomas, Sheldon Solomon, and Jeff Greenberg. 2003. In the Wake of 9/11: The Psychology of Terror. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar

  • Schmid, Katharina, and Orla Muldoon. 2015. “Perceived Threat, Social Identification, and Psychological Well-Being: The Effect of Political Conflict Exposure.” Political Psychology 36 (1): 75–92.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Silver, Nate. 2017. “There Really Was a Liberal Media Bubble: Groupthink Produced a Failure of the ‘Wisdom of Crowds’ and an Underestimate of Trump’s Chances” 538 Blog 10 March 2017.Google Scholar

  • Tetlock, Philip. 1986. “A Value Pluralism Model of Ideological Reasoning.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 50: 819–827.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Tetlock, Philip. 2003. “Thinking the Unthinkable: Sacred Values and Taboo Cognitions.” Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7 (7): 320–324.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Tetlock, Philip, Randall Peterson, and Jennifer Lerner. 1996. “Revising the Value Pluralism Model: Incorporating Social Content and Context Postulates.” In The Psychology of Values: The Ontario Symposium, Volume 8, edited by Clive Seligman, James Olson, and Mark Zanna. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

About the article

Morgan Marietta

Morgan Marietta is Associate Professor of Political Science and author of The Politics of Sacred Rhetoric: Absolutist Appeals and Political Persuasion and A Citizen’s Guide to American Ideology: Conservatism and Liberalism in Contemporary Politics.

Tyler Farley

Tyler Farley is a senior in the Honors College, whose research on social facts at the Supreme Court has been published in the Journal of Law & Courts.

Tyler Cote

Tyler Cote are seniors in the Honors College.

Paul Murphy

Paul Murphy are seniors in the Honors College.

Published Online: 2017-07-29

Published in Print: 2017-07-26

Citation Information: The Forum, Volume 15, Issue 2, Pages 313–332, ISSN (Online) 1540-8884, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/for-2017-0019.

Export Citation

©2017 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

Eugenia Ha Rim Rho, Gloria Mark, and Melissa Mazmanian
Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 2018, Volume 2, Number CSCW, Page 1

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in