Anyone who watched the “Philly Stake” debate on Tuesday night probably thinks picking the winner was, like one of the candidates on the stage, a “no brainer.”  So, how could I,  a self-described champion of counter-intuitive thinking, make a case that was not the case.  No, I’m not going to raise Donald Trump’s arm in victory.  But what if the real winner was not who outperformed his or her opponent, but how they did it.

The winner and new champion is “the field of psychology.”  Below is the evidence.

PSY-OPS

Much post-debate commentary pointed to Kamala Harris’ suggestion people attend Trump’s rally to see how exhausting and boring the MAGA nominee has become.  What they missed is the fact the “mind games” began 12 hours earlier.  On Tuesday morning the Harris campaign released a new TV ad that included Barack Obama’s now famous innuendo about Trump’s obsession with “crowd size.”  To make sure the former president saw it, it ran twice on “Fox and Friends.”  Instead of focusing on putting on his game face,  Trump more than likely spent Tuesday stewing about his nemesis Obama mocking him.

WAHOO-WAH

Every morning I get an update about what’s new at my alma mater, “Mr. Jefferson’s University” AKA the University of Virginia.  Among recent articles was a background piece on alumna Linsey Davis, who ABC News chose to be a co-moderator of the Trump/Harris standoff.  What I did not previously know and learned from the article was the anchor of the Weekend Nightly News was not a communications major.  She holds a B.S. in psychology.

Her academic training was in full display Tuesday night, the prime example being her fact-checking Trump’s accusation Democrats, including Governor Tim Walz, support “abortion after birth.”  She did not say, “President Trump, that is not true.”  She knew the audience could figure that out on their own if presented with one clear and simple fact, “There  is no state in this country where it is legal to kill a baby after it’s born.”

THE PREGNANT PAUSE

In his book Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion, Robert B. Cialdini suggests a target audience is more likely to buy into an argument when they are allowed to reach their own conclusions.  This principle was apparent when Trump attempted to score points by blaming Joe Biden and Harris for the chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan.  After presenting the history of Trump’s agreement with the Taliban that precipitated the hurried departure of U.S. troops, she wanted to put an exclamation point on her argument by reminding  viewers her opponent had invited the Taliban to visit Camp David, a site reserved for more serious occasions. 

She looked directly at Trump and began, “This…” before taking a moment to let the audience fill in the blank.   Post debate, on-line viewers turned the pause into a game of political “Mad Libs.”  What did Harris want to say before she caught herself and referred to Trump in the more politically correct term “former president?”   Her audience was more than ready to fill in the blanks.

COGNITIVE DISSONANCE

Cognitive dissonance occurs when a person’s behavior and beliefs do not complement each other or when they hold two contradictory beliefs.

~Medical News Today

Donald Trump believes he is a “stable genius.” On Tuesday night, he was anything but.  If he were still alive, Leon Festinger (1919-1989), the Stanford psychology professor who coined the phrase “cognitive dissonance,” would certainly add excerpts from Trump’s appearance in the post-debate “spin room” to illustrate the behavior which carries the label Festinger attached to it.  Trump can believe he won the debate.  His behavior showed just the opposite.

In conclusion, Tuesday was a pretty good day for Kamala Harris.  Not so good for Trump.  But the clear winners were Freud, Jung and generations of their disciples.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP