Fact - something that is known to have happened or to exist, especially something for which proof exists, or about which there is information.
As a scientist, the word “fact” sometimes annoys me because our understanding of the natural world is always evolving. Even well-established theories or scientific laws can be challenged by new ideas and evidence. Still, there are facts in our world: an orange is an orange, my dogs are the cutest in existence, and former President Trump lost the 2020 election.
That last fact was brought up in Tuesday’s debate when former President Trump continued to spread disinformation that the 2020 election was stolen from him. Yet, 63 courts ruled on the matter, and they all came to the same conclusion - Trump lost the 2020 election. It is a fact.
Vice President Kamala Harris used Trump’s refusal to concede that he lost the 2020 election to question his grip on reality. “It leads one to believe, that perhaps we do not have in the candidate to my right the temperament, or the ability to not be confused about fact. That is deeply troubling, and the American people deserve better,” Harris replied to Trump’s 2020 election denial.
Trump has no interest in science or fact
Trump has no interest in the pursuit of truth, regardless of the process by which it arrives. This much was made clear by his prior campaigns and his four years as president, which included over 200 attacks on science. This was also made clear by Tuesday’s debate in which fact-checkers noted that Trump made more than 30 false claims compared to 1 by Harris, including a crazy claim that Haitian immigrants are eating people's pets in Springfield, Ohio.
And while we’re all laughing at the memes and TikTok videos of dogs looking worried as the Trump sound byte plays, Trump and his supporter’s post-truth world is scary and dangerous. We have already seen the ramifications of having Trump and an anti-science, anti-fact, anti-truth administration in office - thousands paid with their lives. Yet, Trump’s odds of holding office are currently 50-50.
Trust in science is increasingly polarized
A recent opinion essay written by Thomas B. Edsall in the New York Times shows that “a substantial number of Republican voters are losing faith in science.” Edsall reports on data from a long-standing survey on the issue conducted by the Pew Research Group. The data support that there is a widening gap between Democrats and Republicans when it comes to public trust in scientists - a gap that didn’t exist until about four years ago. As Mr. Trump has been the de facto leader of his party since the 2016 election this decline in trust can be clearly associated with that leadership.
It will be interesting to see continuing data to see if the trend holds, particularly in light of the 2024 election. But it is hard not to think that the Trump administration’s politicization of science has contributed to the increased polarization of American’s trust in science. As I have shown in survey studies prior - leaders can be highly influential when it comes to evidence-based decision-making.
This distrust in expertise has consequences for the health, safety, security, and quality of life of every person in this country and around the world. People died during and after the pandemic because of the concerted effort to deny scientific evidence. More sicken or die by political mantras that go against the best evidence on a huge range of issues from vaccines to pollution and even national security. This “political” narrative is killing us.
Disinformation and polarization are the strategy
If Trump can sow distrust of experts, like scientists, then he can more easily promulgate disinformation that will help him win this election. Or call into question whether this election is credible - a strategy that is already unfolding through the Trump campaign’s rhetoric regarding non-citizen voting. Republicans in Congress are already threatening a government shutdown unless a bill is passed making it more difficult for folks to register to vote - a bill that Trump is pressuring legislators to pass.
Of course, if Trump wins the election, then we can expect to see our country even more divided when it comes to science - when it comes to truth. Debates unfortunately don’t predict who wins elections. However, they certainly give us glimpses of what the candidates will be like when holding office. And for Trump - well, as Kamala Harris put it - he still seems to be confused by fact.
That’s it for today - Thank you so much for reading SciLight!
If you enjoyed today’s post, please like it or share it with others. You can also support the work we do to shine a light on the politicization of science by becoming a paid subscriber!
If you want to share today’s post as a web page with your network, click this button:
If you have suggestions, questions, comments, or want to drop us a line - send it all to scilightsubstack@gmail.com