搜索结果：Trump

On July 13, 2024, at the Trump rally in Pennsylvania, someone attempted to assassinate Republican Presidential Candidate Donald Trump. This attempt sparked a large-scale discussion on social media. We collected posts from X (formerly known as Twitter) one week before and after the assassination attempt and aimed to model the short-term effects of such a ``shock'' on public opinions and discussion topics. Specifically, our study addresses three key questions: first, we investigate how public sentiment toward Donald Trump shifts over time and across regions (RQ1) and examine whether the assassination attempt itself significantly affects public attitudes, independent of the existing political alignments (RQ2). Finally, we explore the major themes in online conversations before and after the crisis, illustrating how discussion topics evolved in response to this politically charged event (RQ3). By integrating large language model-based sentiment analysis, difference-in-differences modeling, and topic modeling techniques, we find that following the attempt the public response was broadly sympathetic to Trump rather than polarizing, despite baseline ideological and regional disparities.

Political debates are a peculiar type of political discourse, in which candidates directly confront one another, addressing not only the the moderator's questions, but also their opponent's statements, as well as the concerns of voters from both parties and undecided voters. Therefore, language is adjusted to meet specific expectations and achieve persuasion. We analyse how the language of Trump and Harris during the debate (September 10th 2024) differs in relation to the following semantic and pragmatic features, for which we formulated targeted hypotheses: framing values and ideology, appealing to emotion, using words with different degrees of concreteness and specificity, addressing others through singular or plural pronouns. Our findings include: differences in the use of figurative frames (Harris often framing issues around recovery and empowerment, Trump often focused on crisis and decline); similar use of emotional language, with Trump showing a slight higher tendency toward negativity and toward less subjective language compared to Harris; no significant difference in the specificity of candidates' responses; similar use of abstract language, with Trump showing more variabi

This study investigates the emotional rhythms and behavioral mechanisms of dominant political leaders in strategic decision-making. Using the Trump administration's 125 percent tariff hike on China as a case, it adopts a Multimodal Cognitive Behavioral Modeling framework. This includes micro-expression tracking, acoustic intonation analysis, semantic flow modeling, cognitive load simulation, and strategic behavior mapping to construct a full-cycle simulation of emotion, motivation, and output. Results reveal that Trump's decisions are not driven by rational deduction, but emerge from dominance-coherence rhythms. A six-axis National Strategic Tempo Intervention Framework is proposed to support anticipatory policy modeling.

This paper analyzes the intersection of presidential authority and cryptocurrency markets during Donald J. Trump's second term (2025-2029). We examine developments from 2024 through October 2025, focusing on how executive influence, family business ventures, and digital assets became intertwined in ways that blurred boundaries between public office and private profit. Using a mixed-methods approach that combines quantitative market data with qualitative institutional assessment, we identify politically linked digital assets as a distinct class characterized by reflexive valuations, asymmetric risk distribution, and systemic vulnerabilities. The Trump family's integrated cryptocurrency ecosystem reached peak valuations exceeding eleven billion dollars before collapsing by more than one trillion in market capitalization following a tariff announcement in October 2025. Results highlight conflicts of interest, failures in market microstructure, and the emergence of political finance as a monetizable phenomenon in the digital age. The study contributes to understanding how presidential signaling reshapes capital flows, how politically branded tokens function as quasi-currencies, and how

Cryptoassets launched by political figures, e.g., political finance (PoliFi) tokens, have recently attracted attention. Chief among them are the eponymous tokens backed by the 47th president and first lady of the United States, TRUMPandMELANIA. We empirically analyze both, and study their impact on the broad decentralized finance (DeFi) ecosystem. Via a comparative longitudinal study, we uncover a "Trump Effect": the behavior of these tokens correlates positively with presidential approval ratings, whereas the same tight coupling does not extend to other cryptoassets and administrations. We additionally quantify the ecosystemic impact, finding that the fervor surrounding the two assets was accompanied by capital flows towards associated platforms like the Solana blockchain, which also enjoyed record volumes and fee expenditure.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities across a wide range of instruction-following tasks, yet their grasp of nuanced social science concepts remains underexplored. This paper examines whether LLMs can identify and classify fine-grained forms of populism, a complex and contested concept in both academic and media debates. To this end, we curate and release novel datasets specifically designed to capture populist discourse. We evaluate a range of pre-trained (large) language models, both open-weight and proprietary, across multiple prompting paradigms. Our analysis reveals notable variation in performance, highlighting the limitations of LLMs in detecting populist discourse. We find that a fine-tuned RoBERTa classifier vastly outperforms all new-era instruction-tuned LLMs, unless fine-tuned. Additionally, we apply our best-performing model to analyze campaign speeches by Donald Trump, extracting valuable insights into his strategic use of populist rhetoric. Finally, we assess the generalizability of these models by benchmarking them on campaign speeches by European politicians, offering a lens into cross-context transferability in political discourse

Political "circuses" may undermine democratic accountability if leaders facing scandal can reliably pull media coverage toward fresh topics and away from substantive investigations or evaluations. We investigate whether politicians strategically alter their messaging during damaging media coverage ("strategic diversion") or maintain consistent provocative communication regardless of scandal coverage ("always-on circus"). Using computational text analysis of Donald Trump's Truth Social posts during the 2025 Epstein revelations, we find that a one-standard-deviation increase in scandal coverage is associated with communication patterns that deviate from baseline by 0.28 standard deviations over a 4-day window. Although these findings do not provide formal causal identification, they are robust to timing placebos and falsification tests, are consistent with the interpretation that leaders may deploy diversionary communication specifically within their own friendly media ecosystem, which has implications for accountability in polarized democracies.

Donald Trump has tweeted thousands of times during his presidency. These public statements are an increasingly important way through which Trump communicates his political and personal views. A better understanding of the way the American public consumes and responds to these tweets is therefore critical. In the present work, we address both consumption of and response to Trump's tweets by studying replies to them on Twitter. With respect to response, we find that a small number of older, white, left-leaning, and female Americans are responsible for the vast majority of replies to Trump's tweets. These individuals also attend to a broader range of Trump's tweets than the rest of the individuals we study. With respect to consumption, we note that Trump's tweets are often viewed not in isolation, but rather in the context of a set of algorithmically-curated replies. These replies may therefore color the way Americans consume Trump's tweets. To this end, we find some evidence that Twitter accounts see replies in line with their political leanings. However, we show that this can be largely, although not entirely, attributed to the fact that Twitter is more likely to show replies by acc

Automated social media accounts, known as bots, have been shown to spread disinformation and manipulate online discussions. We study the behavior of retweet bots on Twitter during the first impeachment of U.S. President Donald Trump. We collect over 67.7 million impeachment related tweets from 3.6 million users, along with their 53.6 million edge follower network. We find although bots represent 1% of all users, they generate over 31% of all impeachment related tweets. We also find bots share more disinformation, but use less toxic language than other users. Among supporters of the Qanon conspiracy theory, a popular disinformation campaign, bots have a prevalence near 10%. The follower network of Qanon supporters exhibits a hierarchical structure, with bots acting as central hubs surrounded by isolated humans. We quantify bot impact using the generalized harmonic influence centrality measure. We find there are a greater number of pro-Trump bots, but on a per bot basis, anti-Trump and pro-Trump bots have similar impact, while Qanon bots have less impact. This lower impact is due to the homophily of the Qanon follower network, suggesting this disinformation is spread mostly within on

We study the emergence of support for Donald Trump in Reddit's political discussion. With almost 800k subscribers, "r/The_Donald" is one of the largest communities on Reddit, and one of the main hubs for Trump supporters. It was created in 2015, shortly after Donald Trump began his presidential campaign. By using only data from 2012, we predict the likelihood of being a supporter of Donald Trump in 2016, the year of the last US presidential elections. To characterize the behavior of Trump supporters, we draw from three different sociological hypotheses: homophily, social influence, and social feedback. We operationalize each hypothesis as a set of features for each user, and train classifiers to predict their participation in r/The_Donald. We find that homophily-based and social feedback-based features are the most predictive signals. Conversely, we do not observe a strong impact of social influence mechanisms. We also perform an introspection of the best-performing model to build a "persona" of the typical supporter of Donald Trump on Reddit. We find evidence that the most prominent traits include a predominance of masculine interests, a conservative and libertarian political lean

Measuring the specific kind, temporal ordering, diversity, and turnover rate of stories surrounding any given subject is essential to developing a complete reckoning of that subject's historical impact. Here, we use Twitter as a distributed news and opinion aggregation source to identify and track the dynamics of the dominant day-scale stories around Donald Trump, the 45th President of the United States. Working with a data set comprising around 20 billion 1-grams, we first compare each day's 1-gram and 2-gram usage frequencies to those of a year before, to create day- and week-scale timelines for Trump stories for 2016 through 2020. We measure Trump's narrative control, the extent to which stories have been about Trump or put forward by Trump. We then quantify story turbulence and collective chronopathy -- the rate at which a population's stories for a subject seem to change over time. We show that 2017 was the most turbulent overall year for Trump. In 2020, story generation slowed dramatically during the first two major waves of the COVID-19 pandemic, with rapid turnover returning first with the Black Lives Matter protests following George Floyd's murder and then later by events

In this paper, we study the likelihood of Bernie Sanders supporters voting for Donald Trump instead of Hillary Clinton. Building from a unique time-series dataset of the three candidates' Twitter followers, which we make public here, we first study the proportion of Sanders followers who simultaneously follow Trump (but not Clinton) and how this evolves over time. Then we train a convolutional neural network to classify the gender of Sanders followers, and study whether men are more likely to jump ship for Trump than women. Our study shows that between March and May an increasing proportion of Sanders followers are following Trump (but not Clinton). The proportion of Sanders followers who follow Clinton but not Trump has actually decreased. Equally important, our study suggests that the jumping ship behavior will be affected by gender and that men are more likely to switch to Trump than women.

This paper predicting Trump victory has been submitted before the election and revised after, allowing to add a Foreword and Note Added in Revision to discuss in details the causes of the failure of the prediction. In 2016, Trump was unanimously seen as the loser in the November 8 election. In contrast, using a model of opinion dynamics I have been developing for a few decades within the framework of sociophysics, I predicted his victory against all odds. According to the model, the winning paradoxical martingale of 2016, has been Trump capability to activate frozen prejudices in many voters by provoking their real indignation. However, four year later, Trump shocking outings do not shock anymore, they became devitalized, losing their ability to generate major emotional reactions. Does this mean that this time around he will lose the 2020 election against Biden, as nearly all analysts, pundits and commentators still predict? No, because with frozen prejudices remaining frozen, the spontaneous prejudices will be activated but this time they will benefit to both Biden and Trump. The main ones are the fear of the other candidate policy and the personal stand facing a danger. In additi

The Trump phenomenon is argued to depart from current populist rise in Europe. According to a model of opinion dynamics from sociophysics the machinery of Trump's amazing success obeys well-defined counter-intuitive rules. Therefore, his success was in principle predictable from the start. The model uses local majority rule arguments and obeys a threshold dynamics. The associated tipping points are found to depend on the leading collective beliefs, cognitive biases and prejudices of the social group which undertakes the public debate. And here comes the sesame of the Trump campaign, which develops along two successive steps. During a first moment, Trump's statement produces a majority of voters against him. But at the same time, according to the model the shocking character of the statement modifies the prejudice balance. In case the prejudice is present even being frozen among voters, the tipping point is lowered at Trump's benefit. Nevertheless, although the tipping point has been lowered by the activation of frozen prejudices it is instrumental to preserve enough support from openly prejudiced people to be above the threshold. Then, as infuriated voters launch intense debate, oc

People who share similar opinions towards controversial topics could form an echo chamber and may share similar political views toward other topics as well. The existence of such connections, which we call connected behavior, gives researchers a unique opportunity to predict how one would behave for a future event given their past behaviors. In this work, we propose a framework to conduct connected behavior analysis. Neural stance detection models are trained on Twitter data collected on three seemingly independent topics, i.e., wearing a mask, racial equality, and Trump, to detect people's stance, which we consider as their online behavior in each topic-related event. Our results reveal a strong connection between the stances toward the three topical events and demonstrate the power of past behaviors in predicting one's future behavior.

The past decade has witnessed a marked increase in the use of social media by politicians, most notably exemplified by the 45th President of the United States (POTUS), Donald Trump. On Twitter, POTUS messages consistently attract high levels of engagement as measured by likes, retweets, and replies. Here, we quantify the balance of these activities, also known as "ratios", and study their dynamics as a proxy for collective political engagement in response to presidential communications. We find that raw activity counts increase during the period leading up to the 2016 election, accompanied by a regime change in the ratio of retweets-to-replies connected to the transition between campaigning and governing. For the Trump account, we find words related to fake news and the Mueller inquiry are more common in tweets with a high number of replies relative to retweets. Finally, we find that Barack Obama consistently received a higher retweet-to-reply ratio than Donald Trump. These results suggest Trump's Twitter posts are more often controversial and subject to enduring engagement as a given news cycle unfolds.

Algorithms provide powerful tools for detecting and dissecting human bias and error. Here, we develop machine learning methods to to analyze how humans err in a particular high-stakes task: image interpretation. We leverage a unique dataset of 16,135,392 human predictions of whether a neighborhood voted for Donald Trump or Joe Biden in the 2020 US election, based on a Google Street View image. We show that by training a machine learning estimator of the Bayes optimal decision for each image, we can provide an actionable decomposition of human error into bias, variance, and noise terms, and further identify specific features (like pickup trucks) which lead humans astray. Our methods can be applied to ensure that human-in-the-loop decision-making is accurate and fair and are also applicable to black-box algorithmic systems.

In this paper, we propose a framework to infer the topic preferences of Donald Trump's followers on Twitter. We first use latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) to derive the weighted mixture of topics for each Trump tweet. Then we use negative binomial regression to model the "likes," with the weights of each topic serving as explanatory variables. Our study shows that attacking Democrats such as President Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton earns Trump the most "likes." Our framework of inference is generalizable to the study of other politicians.

There certainly is little or no doubt that politicians, sometimes consciously and sometimes not, exert a significant impact on stock markets. The evolving volatility over the Republican Donald Trump's surprise victory in the US presidential election is a perfect example when politicians, through announced policies, send signals to financial markets. The present paper seeks to address whether BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) stock markets equally vulnerable to Trump's plans. For this purpose, two methods were adopted. The first presents an event-study methodology based on regression estimation of abnormal returns. The second is based on vote intentions by integrating data from social media (Twitter), search queries (Google Trends) and public opinion polls. Our results robustly reveal that although some markets emerged losers, others took the opposite route. China took the biggest hit with Brazil, while the damage was much more limited for India and South Africa. These adverse responses can be explained by the Trump's neo-mercantilist attitude revolving around tearing up trade deals, instituting tariffs, and labeling China a "currency manipulator". However, Russi