Why Saying “No” Is the Biggest Barrier to Political Persuasion
And three simple things you can do to be influential instead.
Just like you, Trump voters don’t like being controlled.
No one likes to be told what to think or what to do. We don’t like to be told we are wrong or that our perceptions are skewed.
That’s not because we are dumb or ignorant or arrogant or obnoxious. And it’s not because we are incapable of seeing the error of our ways. It’s because we’re human.
Psychologists call the acute negative emotional reaction we all have in response to feeling controlled “reactance”:
“[Reactance is] a motivational state characterized by distress, anxiety, resistance, and the desire to restore…freedom…[W]hen people feel coerced into a certain behavior, they will react against the coercion, often by demonstrating an increased preference for the behavior that is restrained, and may perform the behavior opposite to that desired.” — American Psychological Association
In a political conversation, reactance is triggered by the perception that someone is trying to change our political attitudes, beliefs, and/or behavior.
When you try to influence someone, and they sense that’s what you are trying to do, reactance naturally inspires them to fight back even if what you’re saying is true, you’re being polite, and your motivations are pure.
Reactance is a bit like having your fingers stuck in a finger trap toy. The harder you pull, the tighter the toy grasps your fingers. However, if you stop fighting and give up ground by pushing your fingers toward each other, you can extricate yourself easily.
When political conversations go awry, it’s usually because we’re locked in a stuggle like fingers in a finger trap. The more we pull, the more the other person fights back. But when we stop trying to force them to agree with us and move toward them instead, they become much more open to our point of view.
Three simple steps for minimizing reactance
1. Acknowledge the elephant in the room
In most political conversations, people are on guard for any attempt to change their minds. This means even if you aren’t actively trying to control them, they are already defensive and resistant to your point of view.
This problem can be easily resolved by being upfront and honest about your motivations and intentions.
I find it helpful to say some or all of the following:
- “You and I disagree about this issue and that’s okay.”
- “I’m open to the possibility that I’m wrong.”
- “I would like it if you agreed with me, but I can’t change your mind. Only you can do that.”
- “Chances are neither of us knows the whole story. Even though we disagree, I’m sure you have something to teach me about this topic.”
- “I believe the best way to figure out the truth is for people who disagree to talk with each other about it and try to figure it out together.”
2. Agree whenever possible
Reactance is triggered whenever we tell someone they are wrong about something. For that reason, I try to spend more time telling people why they are right than why they are wrong.
As a general rule, it’s easier to agree with people about goals, values, and emotions than about political figures, parties, and policies.
Here are some examples of things I say to Trump supporters:
- “I agree that Trump has helped some voters feel heard.”
- “I am angry about the state of American politics today too.”
- “The Bill of Rights is very important to me also.”
- “I also would like to see fewer abortions performed in the U.S.”
3. Say “yes, and”
When trying to influence someone, there will always come a point where you have to part ways and offer a slightly different view of the world. The key to doing this without triggering reactance is to offer your perspective in a manner that *expands* rather than negates their perspective.
The best tool I’ve seen for doing this is the “Yes, and” statement. “Yes, and” is an alternative to “No” and “Yes, but”, two statements that tend to generate immediate reactance. I think of “yes and” statements as a way to reduce friction in challenging conversations.
For example:
Statement: “Abortion is wrong.”
Response: “Yes, and a great way to reduce the number of abortions is to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies.”
Statement: “Gun rights are important.”
Response: “Yes, and it’s important to balance gun rights with public safety.”
Statement: “Wearing a mask should be my choice.”
Response: “Yes, and we need to find ways to protect the public health.”
If reading these examples generates reactance in you, I have two suggestions. One, practice. Saying “yes, and” can be hard at first because we are so accustomed to immediately telling everyone why they’re wrong. The more you do it, though, the easier it will get.
Second, if the yes feels deceptive at times, like you’re agreeing with something you simply can’t agree with under any conditions, then try something softer:
- “I can see where you’re coming from”
- “There’s some truth in that position”
- “A lot of people agree with you about that”
A little perspective
People often tell me they like my work and my ideas, but reject strategies like these out of hand because they’re just too hard.
That’s okay. Let’s face it, I can’t change their mind or yours. All I can do is ask you to consider whether I might be right.
The truth is, I agree with many of these critiques. Talking politics with Trump supporters can push us to our limit emotionally and cognitively. Breaking the habit of saying “no” is extremely difficult. Sharing our message in a way that is more likely to be heard is challenging. And, often no matter what we do, it doesn’t make a difference.
And, at the same time, we can all agree we have to do everything in our power to defeat Donald Trump. Because, no matter how hard the work of persuasion is, another four years of President Trump would be harder.
About the Author
Dr. Karin Tamerius is the founder of Smart Politics, a former psychiatrist, and an expert in political psychology who specializes in teaching progressives how to communicate more productively and persuasively with people across the political spectrum.