# Post x_972853747750711296

- Post ID: `x_972853747750711296`
- Platform: X (Twitter)
- Posted: 2018-03-11T15:16:22.000Z (UTC)
- Deleted: no
- Repost: no
- Canonical URL: https://trump.fm/post/x_972853747750711296
- Analysis page: https://trump.fm/post/x_972853747750711296/analysis
- Audio narration: https://static.trump.fm/audio/x_972853747750711296.mp3 (a synthesized voice reading the post text, not a recording)

## Post text

> Rasmussen and others have my approval ratings at around 50%, which is higher than Obama, and yet the political pundits love saying my approval ratings are “somewhat low.” They know they are lying when they say it. Turn off the show - FAKE NEWS!

## Engagement

- Likes: 106,270
- Reposts: 24,696
- Replies: 0
- Views: unknown
- Metrics collected: 2026-01-31T23:43:13.404Z (UTC)

# Analysis

_Machine-generated by trump.fm on 2026-03-14T02:23:04.506Z (UTC): a model's reading of this post, not his words. Its psychological terms describe the language, not a clinical assessment of him._

## Summary

This post is a textbook specimen of Trump's persecuted-champion narcissistic dynamic. Triggered by media commentary characterizing his approval ratings as low, he responds by citing the outlier Rasmussen poll while suppressing the broader polling consensus, comparing favorably to Obama using the same cherry-picked source, and attributing deliberate dishonesty — rather than methodological disagreement — to all who present contrary data. The post culminates in an explicit epistemic closure command ("Turn off the show — FAKE NEWS!"), directing his audience to disengage from any information channel presenting unflattering data. Defense mechanisms include denial of the broader polling reality, projection of bad faith onto critics, and rationalization via selective data citation. The Obama comparison reveals the primary narcissistic dynamic at work: status calibration against the predecessor. No cognitive decline markers are present relative to 2018 baseline. The post is almost certainly authentically authored — Sunday morning TV-reactive output consistent with documented behavioral patterns. No danger indicators are present. The post is clinically consistent with Trump's established baseline and does not represent a marked deviation.

# Analysis: Trump Twitter Post — March 11, 2018 (Approval Ratings / Fake News)

## Authorship Attribution

**Verdict: High confidence authentic Trump.**

The UTC timestamp of 15:16:22 converts to **11:16 AM EDT** on March 11, 2018 (DST began that morning at 2:00 AM in the Eastern timezone; Trump was almost certainly in or en route to the DC/Pennsylvania corridor given the 7:00 PM MAGA rally in Moon Township, PA that same day). While 11:16 AM is not the canonical late-night/early-morning window, Sunday mornings are well-documented as Trump's TV-watching time, and the style is overwhelmingly authentic:

- Stream-of-consciousness reactive construction ("They know they are lying when they say it")
- CAPS escalation for the money shot ("FAKE NEWS!")
- Unprompted comparative diminishment of a predecessor (Obama)
- The abrupt imperative clause ("Turn off the show") with no transitional logic
- Characteristic absence of hedging or subordinate clauses

The preceding cluster of tweets on the same date (NYT/Russia, MAGA rally announcement, Fake News Media) is consistent with a Sunday morning phone-scrolling/TV-watching session.

---

## Situational Context

This post occurs during a period of accumulating political stressors: the Stormy Daniels lawsuit was filed days earlier, Gary Cohn had just resigned, and Mueller investigation coverage was intensifying. Trump appears to have been watching Sunday morning political programs and reacting to pundit commentary on his approval numbers — a documented and well-established behavioral pattern.

---

## Level 1: Dispositional Traits (Big Five)

**Neuroticism (dominant):** The post is reactive, emotionally heated, and disproportionate in response to media commentary about polling. The pivot from a data claim to "they know they are lying" to an imperative dismissal in four sentences reflects trait-level angry hostility and impulsiveness.

**Extraversion:** The assertive, dominant register ("Turn off the show") is consistent with high assertiveness facet of extraversion. No vulnerability is expressed without immediate grandiose countermove.

**Agreeableness (very low):** Zero modesty, zero openness to critics' perspective. The claim that pundits are *knowingly lying* (vs. mistaken, biased, or interpreting differently) demonstrates the low-trust, attributionally hostile facet of low agreeableness.

**Openness (low):** Rigid schema — the single approved data source (Rasmussen) is correct; all other framings are deliberate lies. No epistemic flexibility is available.

---

## Level 2: Characteristic Adaptations

**Dominant motive: Status/Power.** The core concern is *rank* — specifically, whether his approval score places him above or below his predecessor. The comparison to Obama is not incidental; it is the psychological core of the post. Obama functions as the permanent comparison object against which Trump's status is calibrated.

**Agency schema:** The world is divided into those who correctly measure his greatness (Rasmussen) and those engaged in a deliberate conspiracy to understate it (political pundits, media). There is no middle category.

**Supply structure:** The post is simultaneously *supply-seeking* (look at my numbers) and *narcissistic injury response* (reacting to being called "somewhat low"). These dynamics are co-present and in tension.

---

## Level 3: Narrative Identity

**Protagonist role:** Misunderstood winner. He has strong objective data; enemies misrepresent it on purpose.

**Narrative sequence:** Contamination — his genuine success (50% approval) is corrupted/denied by media dishonesty. There is no redemption arc offered within the post; the solution is audience-level action (turn off the show).

**Identity claims:**
- "I am at 50%, which is high"
- "I am higher than Obama"
- "They lie about me"
- "I can see through the deception"

**Contrasting other:** Obama (primary status comparison object); "political pundits" (persecution agent).

---

## Level 4: Clinical Indicators

### Malignant Narcissism Components

**A. Narcissistic Features (high salience):**
- Grandiosity: Cherry-picks the outlier poll (Rasmussen consistently ran 4-8 points higher than polling averages for Trump) as the "real" number.
- Entitlement: Believes accurate coverage of his approval is owed to him.
- Envy/comparison: The Obama comparison reveals a preoccupation with relative status rather than absolute performance.
- Arrogance: Characterizes professional polling analysts and media commentators as *knowing liars* rather than holding a defensible methodological disagreement.

**B. Antisocial Features (mild):**
- Deceitfulness is attributed outward (they lie), while the post itself engages in selective data citation. The claim "higher than Obama" is materially misleading when using multi-pollster averages (see Fact Checks).

**C. Paranoid Features (moderate):**
- "They know they are lying when they say it" — attributes deliberate bad faith to an entire professional class without evidence of intentionality. This is persecutory ideation directed at media.

**D. Ego-syntonic sadism (absent in this post).**

### Narcissistic Dynamics

**Trigger:** Narcissistic injury via unfavorable comparative framing ("somewhat low" ratings). The injury is calibrated — "somewhat low" is a moderate slight, and the response is moderate in intensity relative to Trump's baseline.

**Narcissistic state:** Mixed — grandiose in the data claim, vulnerable in the "they know they are lying" formulation, which positions him as a persecuted truth-teller.

**Rage:** Present at low-to-moderate intensity. Proportionality is poor (pundits are not simply interpreting polls; they are characterized as *knowing liars*). Target: media/pundit class.

---

## Defense Mechanisms

**Denial (pathological):** The broader reality that most major polls consistently placed Trump's approval in the 38–43% range — historically low for a first-year president — is entirely absent. Only Rasmussen exists.

**Projection (immature):** "They know they are lying" — the deceptive element is the selective citation of Rasmussen while ignoring the polling aggregate. The epistemological bad faith is located in the critics.

**Rationalization (neurotic):** Rasmussen is cited as legitimate authority to construct a plausible-sounding data argument that papers over the cherry-picking.

**Splitting (immature):** Rasmussen = truth; all other polls and the pundits who cite them = deliberate liars. No intermediate category available.

---

## Rhetorical & Propaganda Techniques

**Cherry-picking:** Rasmussen was a significant outlier; the Real Clear Politics polling average had Trump in the low 40s. "Rasmussen and others" is technically accurate but rhetorically structured to imply mainstream consensus.

**False equivalence / baseline manipulation:** Comparing to Obama using a single pollster (Rasmussen) where that pollster happened to show the most favorable comparative numbers.

**Ad hominem + motive attribution:** Does not dispute the pundits' methodology — asserts they are *lying knowingly*, which forecloses any need to engage with their data.

**Epistemic closure command:** "Turn off the show" is an explicit instruction to audience members to remove themselves from any information source presenting contrary evidence. This is not rhetorical flourish; it is a direct request for information isolation.

**FAKE NEWS label:** Functions as an epistemic termination mechanism — once applied, no further engagement with the content is required by the in-group audience.

**Appeal to comparison object:** The Obama comparison activates grievance/rivalry dynamics in the base, who hold Obama as the paradigmatic illegitimate predecessor.

---

## Gaslighting & Reality Distortion

**Present.** The post constructs a reality in which:
1. ~50% approval (Rasmussen) is the true number
2. All contrary framings are deliberate lies
3. The correct audience response is to disengage from sources presenting contrary data

This is a functional gaslighting structure directed at the broader public information ecosystem, not at a specific individual. The phrase "they know they are lying" is particularly significant — it doesn't allow for honest disagreement; it pathologizes the alternative view as willful deception.

**DARVO elements (partial):** He is the victim of lying pundits; the attacker (selective data citation) is reversed into defense (I have the numbers).

---

## Epistemic Closure

**Present.** "Turn off the show" is a textbook epistemic closure instruction. Combined with the FAKE NEWS label, the post actively recruits audience members into a closed information loop where only Trump-approved sources are legitimate.

---

## Cognitive Status Markers

Within normal range for Trump's 2018 baseline. Sentences are short but grammatically complete. The logical sequence (data claim → comparative claim → attribution of motive → dismissal command) follows a coherent, if fallacious, structure. No word-finding difficulty, neologisms, or temporal confusion evident. Perseveration on FAKE NEWS label is consistent with his baseline, not a deviation.

**Complexity score: 0.35** (below general population average, consistent with Trump's established baseline of short, punchy, emotionally loaded syntax).

---

## Archetypal Analysis

**Warrior/Victim composite:** The post oscillates between warrior mode (I have the numbers, I see through them) and victim mode (they lie about me, they misrepresent my success). This is Trump's characteristic archetype — the *persecuted champion*.

**Shadow projection:** The deceptive element (selective data citation) is projected outward onto "political pundits." What is disowned (manipulation of information) is attributed to enemies.

**Order/Chaos dynamics:** He positions himself as *order restorer* — the holder of true data against a chaotic, dishonest media landscape. But the media represents a legitimate epistemic institution he is attacking, placing him simultaneously as *order attacker* against the established informational hierarchy.

---

## Fact Verification

| Claim | Verdict | Evidence |
|-------|---------|----------|
| "Rasmussen and others have my approval ratings at around 50%" | **Mostly True** | Rasmussen's three-day rolling average in March 2018 was in the 47-50% range, making 'around 50%' approximately accurate for that specific pollster. However, 'and others' is misleading — Rasmussen was a significant outlier. The RCP polling average had Trump at approximately 40-43% at this time. |
| "Which is higher than Obama" | **Mostly False** | Using multi-pollster averages at comparable points in their presidencies, Obama's approval in early March 2010 was approximately 47-49%, compared to Trump's 40-43% average. The comparison only holds when using Rasmussen exclusively — which did show Obama at similar elevated levels — making the cherry-pick structurally consistent but misleading in aggregate implication. |
| "Political pundits saying approval ratings are 'somewhat low'" | **True** | Trump's multi-pollster approval average in March 2018 was historically low for a first-year president at this stage, and this was accurately and widely reported by political commentators. |
| "They know they are lying when they say it" | **False** | Pundits citing multi-pollster averages had methodologically defensible and statistically supported grounds for characterizing Trump's approval as low. Attributing knowing deception rather than methodological disagreement is unsupported by evidence. |

Overall Veracity: 50%

## Danger Assessment

**Level: None.** No eliminationist language, dehumanization, or stochastic terrorism indicators. This is a standard media-criticism/approval-rating post within Trump's established repertoire.

---

## Summary

This post is a textbook specimen of Trump's *persecuted-champion* narcissistic dynamic. Triggered by media commentary characterizing his approval ratings as low, he responds by citing the outlier Rasmussen poll while suppressing the broader polling consensus, comparing favorably to Obama using the same cherry-picked source, and attributing deliberate dishonesty (rather than methodological disagreement) to all who present contrary data. The post culminates in an explicit epistemic closure command ("Turn off the show — FAKE NEWS!"), directing his audience to disengage from any information channel presenting unflattering data. Defense mechanisms include denial of the broader polling reality, projection of bad faith onto critics, and rationalization via selective data citation. The Obama comparison reveals the primary narcissistic dynamic at work: status calibration against the predecessor. No cognitive decline markers are present relative to 2018 baseline. The post is almost certainly authentically authored — Sunday morning TV-reactive output consistent with documented behavioral patterns. No danger indicators are present. The post is clinically consistent with Trump's established baseline and does not represent a marked deviation.

## Authorship Analysis

**Self-Written** (score: 87%)

### Indicators

- Sunday morning 11:16 AM EDT — consistent with documented TV-watching reactive posting pattern
- Stream-of-consciousness construction: data claim → motive accusation → imperative dismissal in rapid sequence
- ALL CAPS escalation (FAKE NEWS!) as climax marker
- Unprompted Obama comparison — characteristic status-calibration behavior
- Abrupt imperative clause ('Turn off the show') with no logical transition

## Psychological Profile

### State

**Mixed State**

**Trigger:** Narcissistic Injury — Criticism (Political pundits characterizing approval ratings as 'somewhat low')

**Rage:** Intensity 45% targeting Political pundits / media class
- Proportionality: 25%

Sentiment: -0.45

### Clinical

**Malignant Narcissism:**
- Narcissistic: 72%
- Antisocial: 28%
- Paranoid: 52%
- Sadism: 5%

**Defense Mechanisms:**
- denial (pathological)
- projection (immature)
- splitting (immature)
- rationalization (neurotic)

**Cognitive Complexity:**
- Complexity: 35%

**Parasocial Techniques:**
- Direct address to audience as shared persecution community ('they know they are lying')
- Epistemic closure command ('Turn off the show') recruits audience into closed information loop
- FAKE NEWS label as tribal identity marker requiring audience allegiance

## Danger Assessment

**NONE**

### Gaslighting

- Constructs reality in which ~50% approval (Rasmussen outlier) is the 'true' number while all other framings are deliberate lies
- 'They know they are lying' forecloses honest disagreement — pathologizes contrary interpretation as willful deception
- Explicit epistemic closure command ('Turn off the show') instructs audience to disengage from sources presenting contrary evidence
- FAKE NEWS label as reality-denial mechanism applied to statistically defensible pundit commentary

## Fact Checks (4)

_The model's verdicts from 2026-03-14._

> Rasmussen and others have my approval ratings at around 50%

**MOSTLY TRUE**

Rasmussen's three-day rolling average in March 2018 was in the 47-50% range, making 'around 50%' approximately accurate for that specific pollster. However, 'and others' is misleading — Rasmussen was a significant outlier. The RCP polling average had Trump at approximately 40-43% at this time.

Sources: Rasmussen Reports daily tracking poll March 2018; RealClearPolitics polling average March 2018

> Which is higher than Obama

**MOSTLY FALSE**

Using multi-pollster averages at comparable points in their presidencies, Obama's approval in early March 2010 was approximately 47-49%, compared to Trump's 40-43% average. The comparison only holds when using Rasmussen exclusively — which did show Obama at similar elevated levels — making the cherry-pick structurally consistent but misleading in aggregate implication.

Sources: Gallup historical presidential approval; RealClearPolitics historical data

> Political pundits saying approval ratings are 'somewhat low'

**TRUE**

Trump's multi-pollster approval average in March 2018 was historically low for a first-year president at this stage, and this was accurately and widely reported by political commentators.

Sources: Gallup historical presidential approval comparisons; Pew Research historical data

> They know they are lying when they say it

**FALSE**

Pundits citing multi-pollster averages had methodologically defensible and statistically supported grounds for characterizing Trump's approval as low. Attributing knowing deception rather than methodological disagreement is unsupported by evidence.

Sources: Standard polling methodology consensus; Academic polling literature

Overall Veracity: 50%

## Tags

- approval-ratings (90%)
- fake-news (85%)
- obama-comparison (80%)
- epistemic-closure (85%)
- cherry-picking (80%)
- narcissistic-injury (75%)
- media-attack (80%)
- rasmussen (70%)
- sunday-morning-reactive (70%)

## That day

_From trump.fm's machine-generated digest of the day, not his words._

**Post-Rally High Gives Way to Sunday Morning Media Siege Mentality**

Trump rode a post-rally high from a Moon Township, Pennsylvania event Saturday evening, celebrating crowd size and issuing trade ultimatums to the EU. By Sunday morning, the mood had curdled into defensive grievance, triggered by a New York Times report questioning his satisfaction with his Russia investigation legal team — a report he flatly denied but which proved prescient when lead attorney John Dowd resigned eleven days later. The morning devolved into a rapid-fire volley of media complaints: attacking reporter Maggie Haberman by name, protesting insufficient credit for Republican election wins, and cherry-picking a favorable poll to accuse pundits of deliberate dishonesty about his approval ratings.

Full digest for 2018-03-11: https://trump.fm/date/2018-03-11/analysis

## Citation

- APA: Trump, D. J. (2018, March 11). Rasmussen and others have my approval ratings at... [Social media post]. X (Twitter). trump.fm. https://trump.fm/post/x_972853747750711296
- MLA: Trump, Donald J. "Rasmussen and others have my approval ratings at around..." X (Twitter), 11 Mar. 2018. trump.fm, https://trump.fm/post/x_972853747750711296. Accessed 9 Oct. 2026.
- Chicago: Donald J. Trump, "Rasmussen and others have my approval ratings at around...," X (Twitter), March 11, 2018, archived at trump.fm, https://trump.fm/post/x_972853747750711296.

## For agents

- Site overview: https://trump.fm/llms.txt
- API specification: https://trump.fm/openapi.json
- MCP server: https://trump.fm/mcp (search and fetch tools, no auth)
- This post as JSON: https://trump.fm/api/posts/x_972853747750711296
- Analysis as JSON: https://trump.fm/api/analysis/x_972853747750711296
- All citation formats: https://trump.fm/api/cite/x_972853747750711296
- Same day: https://trump.fm/date/2018-03-11
- The record alone, without the analysis: https://trump.fm/post/x_972853747750711296.md?analysis=false

_Markdown view of a trump.fm page. Post, analysis, date, feed, contradictions, search and about pages answer in markdown at their URL with `.md` appended (`/index.md` for the home page), or when sent `Accept: text/markdown`._