No one likes to be conned. This, we can all safely assume. If valuables are lost in an exchange, they’re lost willingly; if they’re surrendered, it’s because they were handed over, not pilfered. Otherwise, steps are undergone to recover them. But what do you make of the everyday cycle of repeated conning and forfeiture? Of people who continue to willingly give in the face of evidence that’s easily accessible, rebroadcast in so many different forums by so many trusted neighborhood watch groups by way of so many different grifts that spotlights, highlights and advertises, clearly, that a duping is taking place? And that the same duper is going come knocking on doors again in about a week, looking for more dupe?
You can chalk it up to faith; or poor decisions; or giving because it makes you feel good; of being incapable of following an opaque paper trail that others can; laziness; fatigue; weakness—someone who seeks out being swindled as part of a pattern of behavior they can’t break, but wants to. Some of these may be valid, here or there.
But you would assume, again, that no one likes being duped. So, where’s the line between duped and undupeable, and how do people, assuming they’re aware, get pushed to one side or the other? And how do they resist being pulled back, once they stumble onto that side?
That, my friend, lies the power of the individual. And the power of exploiting that individual when they choose to plant their feet, stand their ground and passionately proclaim, “This is me, AND YOU CAN’T DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT!”
Take politics in America—exploitation at its finest. It turns out, the duper doesn’t dupe. They offer protection. Support. A kind of therapy. Reassurance. They befriend. Charm. They shift blame onto those who deserve it. They represent something that’s central to the duped’s existence.
And nor do the duped get duped. They “watch the news”. They “attend rallies”. They “exercise their constitutional right to vote”. They “scroll through social media” (i.e., make childish, idiotic, aggressively antagonistic comments to strangers who say things they don’t like). All of which are perfectly defensible and plausibly deniable by the duper as not at all being part of the swindlers’ dynamics.
When you appeal to someone’s core belief system, there’s no greater way to get that someone to abandon reason and accept you, despite the numerous red flags you may be fan dancing with, right in front of them.
Cases in point: 1. Romantic relationships, where partners appeal to each other’s lifelong ideals of caring-and-providing-for and feeling wanted, and often miss or refuse to notice toxic red flags; 2. Religion, where the promise of an afterlife assuages fear of death, and rational red flags are often ignored; 3. Sports fanaticism, where people just abandon reason altogether and say the team they love or what they think about a play, trade, call, etc., is right and everyone and everything else—coaches, players, referees, umpires, executives, other teams (i.e., people actually involved in the sport)—be damned; or 4. The military, where chauvinism and cathartic acts of violence and murder are presented to recruits and soldiers as the meat of a questionable, mindlessly obedient sandwich, deliciously wrapped in the bread and condiments of honor, love-of-country or unavoidable, zero-sum outcomes.
The duper, of course, understands this. And they also understand that politics is really unlike any other object of worship in the world. It’s not religion, it’s not professional sports, it’s not marriage, and it’s not military service. It’s kind of a mixture of all four, while being nothing like them at the same time. It’s a protectionist (like the military) appeal to emotion (like a relationship) from a distance (like religion and sports), providing real, physical-world examples (unlike religion, kind of like sports) as evidence, not matter how selective and broad (unlike a relationship), done to make you think you were the one who came up with the idea in the first place (unlike the military, kind of like religion).
Politically duped individuals, therefore, love to flex their individuality, and back those politics like it were all of the above combined, in the name of identity and solidarity. And, in the process, make all the excuses they can in supporting it.
I bring all this up to try and understand MAGA voters in the latter part of 2026. Every halfway sensible American knew what Trump was going to do when/if he got re-elected. Every halfway sensible American knew what he stood for (himself). In the four years leading up to November, 2024, he’d been one of the most visible and transparent politicians ever to run for high office.
So, why? After gestapo-like roundups of immigrants, most of whom have no criminal record and are essential parts of the economy; after starting a far-off war with Iran under false pretenses that very few wanted; after not only not alleviating the economic woes and disadvantages of the average American, but publicly declaring he didn’t care about something so trivial, and that the problem would fix itself; after soliciting millions to spend on what are personal monuments so the world can remember him after he’s dead, basically creating a legacy by creating a legacy, because no one else will; after trying to limit the right of the public to be informed; and after managing the economy so poorly that crucially important bond investors are jumping ship—why? Why, in the face of such ineptitude and obvious use of a public office for personal and private gain, wiping the American public from his shoe like so much bagged and enflamed dogshit, do the obviously duped who support him still crave to be dogshit?
Because, like being single when you yearn to be loved; like having existential fears about your own death when all you want is to know your purpose; like being entertained by the physical prowess of others when they do things you never could, or always dreamed of; and like feeling threatened by the most horrific of the world’s plights and ills when what you want, at the very least, is to feel safe inside your own homeland, MAGA voters want what the illusion of Trump offers them.
And what is that, exactly? What’s the equivalent here, political speaking? What makes that MAGA clock tick?
The desperation to hold onto America as (they believe) it should be. And while I can’t honestly say what that is, or that most MAGA voters even know, I think I can say what it isn’t:
Predominantly liberal. Evenly multicultural. Pantheistic (or just differently monotheistic). Openly tolerant/compassionate/accepting and therefore proactive—the government or its citizens. Forward-thinking. Unconditionally free.
I do know that the possibility of all these things triggers MAGA thugs/bullies/reactionaries/keyboard warriors like nothing else. And Trump, in his inimitable way, promises to crush all of that and bury it in the dust, so to speak. MAGA voters seem to love the notion of that like nothing else they’ve seen in politics.
And I think they rationalize casting their votes and giving their love with the fact that being duped, in the end, is always better than the alternative.
