Why does Trump continue to believe Reagan lost WI in 1984?

[_DarkHelmet]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... fdaf43dd2b

At least 3 times Trump has bragged about winning Wisconsin while claiming it was the only state Reagan lost in 1984. At the NATO summit he brought it up in a rambling nonsensical response to a question about Brexit. This is just one example of many where Trump doubles down and repeats a claim that is easily disproven. Even though this lie is meaningless, it got me thinking why does he do this? Here are a few reasons I can think of:

He simply confused Minnesota with Wisconsin and nobody corrected him. I can see this happening once, maybe twice, but I find it hard to believe his handlers would let him make the same stupid mistake 3 times.

His handlers did correct his mistake but he insists Wisconsin is the correct answer because it makes him better than Reagan. The truth doesn't fit Trump's alternate reality. This is a possibility.

His handlers corrected him but he keeps forgetting. Senility is starting to kick in. This is a possibility.

Trump knows Reagan won Wisconsin, but he intentionally says he didn't in order to get the media discussing this obvious, but trivial, mistake which distracts from the more important stupid things he says and does. I think this is the most likely explanation.

[_moksha]

Perhaps Trump is just a compulsive liar. Would you rather him be stuck in the restroom washing his hands over and over? I would.

[_Gunnar]

That Trump is a compulsive, pathological liar is, by now, so well established and obvious that it amazes me that he still has any diehard core supporters. It's increasingly difficult to avoid concluding that those who still support him are rather despicable or dishonest themselves or abysmally stupid and ignorant. it reminds me of what Isaac Asimov once wrote about how charlatans who emphatically, dogmatically and repeatedly assert something like "two plus two equals five, and you better believe it, if you know what's good for you!", too often attract a stronger, more loyal and, sometimes, a more numerous following than those who honestly point out that all the best available evidence indicates that two plus two equals four.

[_subgenius]

...(snip)...in order to get the media discussing this obvious, but trivial, mistake which distracts from the more important stupid things he says and does. I think this is the most likely explanation.

Your distraction here notwithstanding?

[_Chap]

That Trump is a compulsive, pathological liar is, by now, so well established and obvious that it amazes me that he still has any diehard core supporters. It's increasingly difficult to avoid concluding that those who still support him are rather despicable or dishonest themselves or abysmally stupid and ignorant. it reminds me of what Isaac Asimov once wrote about how charlatans who emphatically, dogmatically and repeatedly assert something like "two plus two equals five, and you better believe it, if you know what's good for you!", too often attract a stronger, more loyal and, sometimes, a more numerous following than those who honestly point out that all the best available evidence indicates that two plus two equals four.

Yup. Groups to which there is a heavy 'initiation cost' - financial, life-style, or in terms of moral or intellectual integrity - are well known to command greater loyalty than those that don't. As we can see in the example of Mormonism ...

[_Gunnar]

There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."
Isaac Asimov

Trump and his diehard core epitomize this attitude, and that explains to a large extent why he so often chooses to double down on his misstatements and lies, rather than accept correction--no matter how often or by whom he is corrected.

[_Gunnar]

That Trump is a compulsive, pathological liar is, by now, so well established and obvious that it amazes me that he still has any diehard core supporters. It's increasingly difficult to avoid concluding that those who still support him are rather despicable or dishonest themselves or abysmally stupid and ignorant. it reminds me of what Isaac Asimov once wrote about how charlatans who emphatically, dogmatically and repeatedly assert something like "two plus two equals five, and you better believe it, if you know what's good for you!", too often attract a stronger, more loyal and, sometimes, a more numerous following than those who honestly point out that all the best available evidence indicates that two plus two equals four.

Yup. Groups to which there is a heavy 'initiation cost' - financial, life-style, or in terms of moral or intellectual integrity - are well known to command greater loyalty than those that don't. As we can see in the example of Mormonism ...

Exactly! Good example! Though this tends to be true of religions in general, not just Mormonism. Ironically, most religions (especially Mormonism itself) seem to accept that this is generally true of all religions other than their own.

Yet another appropriate Asimov quote:

There is no belief, however foolish, that will not gather its faithful adherents who will defend it to the death.

[_Some Schmo]

If you listen/read what Drumpf supporters have to say, it is obvious that facts and reality are of no concern to them (see pretty much anything Majax has written).

Drumpf doesn't need to be accurate. In fact, if he started telling the truth, his base would likely evaporate. It seems to me they not only want to be conned, they damned love it.

[_Gunnar]

You may be right, Schmo! It often seems that his core base doesn't really care what the truth is. It may well be that Trump's hardest core supporters do so, not in spite of his brazen dishonesty, but because they somehow admire his brazen disregard for reality whenever it doesn't suit his agenda.

[_Some Schmo]

It may well be that Trump's hardest core supporters do so, not in spite of his brazen dishonesty, but because they somehow admire his brazen disregard for reality whenever it doesn't suit his agenda.

I'm convinced this is true of a large percentage of his base. I've met a few of them.

It's not that surprising. What kind of character do you have to have to believe Drumpf is acceptable for public office? What kind of character do you have to have to feel any kind of admiration for him at all?

Compulsive liars are worthless people. What good is someone you have no reason to trust?