Weaponized Polling & Framing Democrats as Traitors: The Road to State Violence

One of the most effective ways to manufacture consent is through the strategic manipulation of public polling. By distorting or selectively presenting data, authoritarians can fabricate the illusion of overwhelming support, discouraging opposition and reinforcing their own power.

Photo by Kayla Velasquez / Unsplash

Polling manipulation is a deliberate tool of authoritarian control. Rhetoric labeling opposition as “traitors” is historically a precursor to state violence and these tactics are actively being used to justify political persecution in real-time.

The Trump administration is engaged in a two-pronged strategy to manufacture justification for extreme state actions against opponents:

Manipulating polling data to create the illusion of overwhelming public support.

Framing Democrats and critics as “traitors” to delegitimize and justify repression.
This isn’t just rhetorical escalation—it’s a deliberate setup for political persecution. If history is any guide, these tactics will be used to justify government crackdowns, arrests, and state violence against dissenters.

To understand how these tactics function, we first need to examine the broader strategy behind them: how public perception is deliberately shaped to justify and sustain authoritarian control.

The term manufactured consent, coined by Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman, refers to the process by which governments and media manipulate public perception to create passive acceptance of authoritarian policies.

Selective use of polling data makes unpopular policies appear widely supported.
Narrative control limits access to alternative viewpoints.
Opposition figures are systematically discredited, making repression seem justified.

Nazi Germany (1930s): The Nazi Party manipulated polling and state-run newspapers to make opposition seem weak and unpatriotic (Evans, 2005).
Hungary (2010s-Present): Viktor Orbán’s regime took control of public polling institutions, manufacturing data to show high support for his policies (Freedom House, 2021).
Russia (Putin’s Model): State-controlled polling firms fabricate approval ratings, ensuring Putin’s dominance appears inevitable (Levada Center, 2022).

This strategy demobilizes resistance by making dissenters feel isolated or powerless—which is exactly what we’re seeing today.

How Polling Data is Manipulated to Create False Narratives

Polling is often seen as an objective measure of public opinion, but under authoritarian rule, it becomes a tool for shaping reality rather than reflecting it.

First, let's look at why more established polls are showing different results than the polls Trump references:

Gallup, Pew Research, and FiveThirtyEight aggregate multiple sources to correct for biases that partisan polls often exaggerate
Use more rigorous methodologies (randomized sampling, live-caller surveys, transparency in data weighting)
Less likely to over-sample partisan demographics
Include more diverse populations (younger voters, voters of color, independents, etc.)
More likely to correct for response biases (e.g., "shy voter" effects, enthusiasm gaps)

Trump’s cherry-picked vs. reality

Trump has repeatedly cited misleading poll results from conservative-leaning polling firms while ignoring more accurate, methodologically rigorous national polls. Sometimes, Trump isn't even citing a real poll. He's just making up statistics on the spot.

Example: Trump cites Rasmussen Polls, ignores aggregate polling

Rasmussen Reports consistently overestimates Republican support and under-samples key demographics (Silver, 2020).
In February 2025, Trump cited a Rasmussen poll showing 62% approval, while the real polling aggregate (FiveThirtyEight) put his approval at 41%.
It has a consistent republican bias and often shows higher approval for Trump than virtually any other poll.

Example: Trafalgar Group’s skewed results and extreme right-wing bias

Trafalgar uses “social desirability bias” weighting, which assumes conservatives hide their true opinions in mainstream polls, inflating Trump’s numbers (Enten, 2022).
The same methodology consistently failed in predicting 2020, 2022, and 2024 election results. It predicted massive republican wins in 2022 midterms, which didn't happen.
Weighs "shy Trump voters" heavily, claiming people lie to other pollsters but tell the truth to Trafalgar.

Example: Harvard CAPS/Harris Poll's questionable credibility

Mark Penn, co-director of the Harvard CAPS/Harris Poll has known affiliations with centrist and conservative political figures, leading some to question the polls impartiality.
Has been criticized for not releasing full question wordings or raw data, making it impossible to verify results.
Harvard's association with the Harris Poll has been criticized in the The Harvard Crimson, arguing the poll lends credibility to a methodologically flawed survey that promotes a right-leaning agenda.

Example: Other right-wing polling firms like Zogby, Patriot Polling, McLaughlin & Associates

Tend to weight responses in ways that inflate Republican support.
Often exclude non-voters or younger demographics from weighting, making their polls overly white, male and older.

Trump citing polls that don't exist and the illusory truth effect

Sometimes, Trump isn't even citing a real poll. He's just making up statistics on the spot.

In 2020, Trump claimed he had a 96% approval rating among Republicans, which no poll ever showed. Since taking office in 2025, he continues to falsely claim "polls show I'm the most popular president ever," and often uses phrases like, "everybody agrees" and "a lot of people say" to create fake consensus.

This is a propaganda technique called illusory truth effect: repeating something often enough that people start believing it's true, even with no evidence.

Why this matters

If you only look at right-leaning polls, you'd think Trump is overwhelmingly popular, even when mainstream polls show the opposite. It creates a false sense of universal support that normalizes authoritarian behavior by manipulating public perception to justify extreme policies.

We need to expose the illusion before it's too late.

The Silent Majority Narrative: How It Works

The silent majority narrative is designed to convince people that Trump’s supporters are the true majority, even when real data contradicts it.

Creates self-fulfilling perceptions—if people believe Trump has overwhelming support, they may self-censor opposition or assume resistance is futile.
Justifies authoritarian action—if Trump represents the “real America,” then suppressing critics is framed as “restoring order.”

Historical parallel: (Turkey, Erdoğan’s Model) Erdoğan’s government inflated polling numbers to create a sense of inevitability, then used the “silent majority” myth to justify crackdowns on journalists and opposition parties (Human Rights Watch, 2018).

While rigged polling helps solidify an illusion of popular support, it is only half the equation. Authoritarian regimes also need to delegitimize their opposition entirely, framing them not just as political adversaries, but as enemies of the state.

Framing Political Opponents as “Traitors” is a Precursor to State Violence

We have now entered a critical escalation point where opposition figures are not just being criticized—they are being labeled as dangerous enemies of the state.

Direct quotes from Trump & Karoline Leavitt framing democrats as traitors

Trump, March 2025: “These radical Democrats hate America. They side with the criminals, the terrorists, the cartels. They are not patriots, they are traitors.” (Presidential Address, March 2025).
Karoline Leavitt, February 2025: “Democrats refusing to stand for this young boy—this hero—exposes them for what they are: anti-American. They do not love this country.” (White House Press Briefing, February 2025).

Why this matters

Once a political group is framed as treasonous, the next logical step is repression.
Calling opponents “traitors” is how authoritarian regimes justify imprisoning, exiling, or executing them.

Historical parallels

Nazi Germany: “November Criminals” Narrative

The Nazi Party blamed the “November Criminals” (political opponents) for Germany’s WWI defeat.
Hitler, 1933: “These traitors of the Fatherland are the greatest threat to Germany’s future.”

Result: Political opponents were arrested, executed, or sent to concentration camps.

Stalin’s USSR: “Enemies of the People”

Stalin branded opposition figures as “enemies of the people” to justify mass purges.
State document, 1937: “These elements are counter-revolutionary traitors, deserving immediate removal.”

Result: Over 700,000 people executed during the Great Purge (Applebaum, 2003).

Chile under Pinochet: “Subversives”

Pinochet labeled leftists as “subversives” to justify disappearances.
Official memo, 1974: “The subversive traitors threaten our national security. They must be neutralized.”

Result: 30,000 people tortured, 3,000+ executed.

This rhetoric is not harmless—it is a well-documented precursor to state persecution.

Understanding these tactics is only the first step. Recognizing them as they unfold in real time and actively pushing back is what prevents them from taking root and escalating into full-scale repression.

Recognizing & Resisting These Narratives in Real-Time

How to spot polling manipulation:

Who conducted the poll? If it’s Rasmussen, Trafalgar, or an unnamed “Trump-commissioned survey,” it’s skewed.
Look at methodology—do they disclose sample sizes? If not, it’s unreliable.
Compare multiple sources—if reputable polling aggregates contradict it, it’s propaganda.

How to spot “traitor” framing:

When critics are called un-American or dangerous, it’s an early warning sign.
When politicians use national security framing (“enemies,” “threats”), repression is coming next.

What we must do now:

Expose false polling narratives immediately.
Directly challenge and dismantle “traitor” rhetoric.
Educate people on historical precedents before it’s too late.

If these patterns continue unchecked, history tells us exactly where they lead. What begins as narrative manipulation and rhetorical attacks soon transforms into tangible state repression.

Final Thoughts: This is How Authoritarianism Escalates

First, they manipulate polling data to convince people resistance is futile.

Then, they frame opponents as “traitors” to justify state action.

Finally, they use repression to eliminate dissent.

We are in phase two. Phase three is coming if we don’t stop it.

Sources

Applebaum, A. (2003). Gulag: A history. Anchor Books.
Bodnik, M. (2024, March 26). Harvard Should Break up With the Harris Poll. The Harvard Crimson: https://www.thecrimson.com/column/forging-harvards-future/article/2024/3/26/bodnick-/
Chomsky, N., & Herman, E. (1988). Manufacturing consent: The political economy of the mass media. Pantheon Books.
Enten, H. (2022, October 10). Why Trafalgar’s polling numbers don’t always match reality. CNN. Retrieved from https://www.cnn.com
Evans, R. J. (2005). The Third Reich in power, 1933–1939. Penguin Books.
Freedom House. (2021). Hungary: Democracy in decline. Retrieved from https://freedomhouse.org
Human Rights Watch. (2018). Turkey’s crackdown on dissent: A decade of authoritarian expansion. Retrieved from https://www.hrw.org
Levada Center. (2022). Public opinion in Putin’s Russia: How state-controlled polling shapes perception. Retrieved from https://www.levada.ru
Presidential Address. (2025, March). Trump’s address labeling Democrats as “traitors.” White House Transcript.
Silver, N. (2020, November 6). Why Rasmussen’s polls lean Republican and what it means for election forecasting. FiveThirtyEight. Retrieved from https://www.fivethirtyeight.com
Stalin, J. (1937). Speech on internal enemies of the revolution. Soviet State Archive.
White House Press Briefing. (2025, February). Karoline Leavitt’s statements on Democrats’ patriotism. Official White House Transcript.

Weaponized Polling & Framing Democrats as Traitors: The Road to State Violence