Why Trump Voters Might Have Confidence in Joe Biden

By Naomi Ellemers, Kai Sassenberg, Daan Scheepers, and Annika Scholl

While awaiting the final result of the presidential election before the weekend, Joe Biden pledged his intention to serve the interests of Trump voters as well as those who had voted for him. The words that he chose to express this emphasized the responsibilities of the presidential office, and the duties towards the American people it implies.

He said: "My responsibility as president will be to represent the whole nation. And I want you to know that I will work as hard for those who voted against me as for those who voted for me. That’s the job. It’s called a duty of care, for all Americans." He further specified that his “first responsibility as President will be to control COVID-19." On other occasions, too, Biden has highlighted that he thinks of a president as someone who takes responsibility in extending care for others and leading by example.

This turn of phrase communicates an approach to the office that is very different from the language often used by President Trump. On multiple occasions, he actively deflected responsibility for events that unfolded under his leadership. For instance, when he was asked about the spread of the coronavirus in the USA (“it’s China’s fault”), whether he should feel responsible for understanding the anger and pain of Black Americans (“I don’t feel that at all”), or for Americans asking whether they should ingest disinfectants to combat the coronavirus (“I can’t imagine why”). When asked to respond to the spread of COVID-19 and lack of testing capacity in March of this year, President Trump said: “I don't take responsibility at all," as he pointed to a “set of circumstances” and “rules, regulations, and specifications from a different time” to explain the situation that had developed.

Instead, President Trump preferred to highlight opportunities created by his presidency, rallying voters to allow him to "Make America great again." For instance, an important spearhead of Trump’s policy of cutting tax payments hopes to create “opportunity zones” that foster investments and creation of jobs in neglected neighborhoods.

Of course, many speeches are prepared by professional speech writers and do not necessarily reflect the language favored or the private thoughts of those who give them. Further, campaign promises are not always kept. Yet, this systematic difference in these leaders’ choice of words to refer to their position of power — and to indicate their ambitions of using this power — might not be without consequence.

This observation is based on many years of research examining how different terms leaders can use to characterize their position relate to the leadership behavior they display. The results of this work offer some nuance to the common view that “power corrupts." Granted, there is consistent evidence that being placed in a position of power — or only considering this possibility — can change individual perceptions, emotions, and behavioral choices. Yet, we find that the likelihood that this happens also depends on whether someone focuses on the opportunities offered by their position of power to realize their goals and ambitions, or on the responsibilities of having this position for getting things done.

What does this evidence show? First, once people have achieved a position of power, they may interpret this situation differently—focusing primarily on its responsibilities or on its opportunities. The willingness to recognize their responsibility for others depends on powerholders’ experience of a joint identity. Powerholders who identify with others in exercising their power are more likely to take responsibility for the needs and circumstances of these others. In comparison, powerholders who fail to identify with their subordinates are more inclined to focus on their own interests, and how their position might offer them opportunities to further their personal goals.

Second, highlighting the responsibilities rather than the opportunities of power makes powerholders more inclined to take into account advice from others when making their decisions. Evidence revealing this was obtained in studies investigating different samples of powerholders (e.g. managers in organizations) and using different types of research procedures. Powerholders who were prompted to mind their responsibilities were more open to suggestions made by experts, subordinates, and teammates in making their own decisions. By comparison, powerholders who focused on the opportunities offered by their position were more inclined to disregard such advice, even when it was proposed by experts.

The additional demands of taking into account the interests and views of others imply that considering a power position in terms of its responsibilities is not for the faint-hearted. Accordingly, a third strand of research evidence attests to the personal costs of taking on such broader social responsibilities as implied in a role of power. Highlighting the responsibilities associated with their position makes the burden of power seem heavier. This was established in studies examining adaptive versus maladaptive cardiovascular responses. Maladaptive threat responses occur when people's hearts become less efficient in transporting oxygenated blood due to situational stresses. Such responses typically emerge when the demands of a situation seem to outweigh the available resources to cope with the situation. Reminding study participants of the responsibilities of power made the situation seem more demanding and resulted in more cardiovascular threat.

President Donald Trump Essential Reads

Golf, Integrity, and Presidents Past

Does Trump Believe His Own Lies?

Accordingly, when a position of power is characterized in terms of its responsibilities, it seems less attractive than when the opportunities of power are highlighted, another set of studies found. Especially those who have an interest in gains and achievements are discouraged to step up to a position of power when they consider the responsibilities (rather than the opportunities) of this position.

What might we expect from the presidency of Joe Biden, based on these results? His emphasis on the responsibilities of this highest office tells us a number of things. First, that he is willing to identify with all Americans, including those who did not support his candidacy, and will try to consider their situation and perspective. Second, that he may be open to input and advice from multiple experts and constituents affected by his policies, before making decisions. Third, that he does not shy away from a task that will be highly demanding and challenging.

Even if the words Biden used to describe these ambitions were not his own, study results suggest that it is worthwhile to remind him of these promises and to hold him accountable for acting accordingly. The pledge to take responsibility and to care for all Americans may, therefore, reassure even those who voted for Trump that their needs and interests will also be addressed.