But their pseudo-psychological analysis was superficial at best. Pundits and commentators don t hire psychologists for help in their understanding of psychological events or realities in society. Color them like every one else, for practically no one in power hires psychologists as consultants. Respect for psychologists or for psychological insight runs about as high in contemporary society as does respect for Clinton among conservatives. Yet that does not stop pundits and commentators who haven t a shred of psychological expertise or background from putting out pseudopsychological babble of their own when trying to explain the actions of the electorate or the moods of the country.
People have feelings coming from unconscious factors.
And those feelings color their decisions, hence their affinities, proclivities, and votes. And when they vote, they vote for people who they identify with. Small wonder when we call these politicians our representatives in the government. People don t just want politicians who represent or advance their issues . So angry people will identify with angry candidates, and the fates of those candidates will become their own.