I asked an artificial intelligence chatbot created by Trump supporters why people voted for him. It told me. But it’s what followed that shocked me.
Interview with AI about USA
ChatGPT sounds Woke at 2 a.m.
-
AI says USA is no longer a democracy.
-
Odds of USA returning to democracy within 40 years: sad side of 50/50.
I’VE GOT TO LET YOU SEE THIS. It’s not a Bible thing. It’s political. I admit it and I’m sorry. But if you can’t see the spirituality in the AI’s answers to my questions at 2 in the morning, you’re not paying attention.
In the dark and wee hours of the first day of the DT Part Deux presidency, I was having trouble sleeping. So I asked ChatGPT the question keeping me up.
ChatGPT is an artificial intelligence chatbot developed in 2015 by OpenAI, led by rich-to-insanity Trump supporters Elon Musk, Sam Altman, and others. It finally launched in 2024.
I braced for Trump-friendly answers to my questions.
Instead, I got Bernie Sanders high on Jesus, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Mother Teresa. You’ll see what I mean.
Just a few teasers. AI says:
-
The USA is a hybrid democracy. We’re a “democratic oligarchy” or “oligarchic democracy.” We have the rituals of democracy, but the wealthy hold the power. The remaining 95% buy the tickets and watch the show.
-
How to restore democracy. AI’s suggestions:
- Reverse Citizens United, which allowed unlimited contributions by the wealthy and corporations.
- Make election day a national holiday so more people can vote.
- Eliminate gerrymandering. Have independent groups draw fair election boundaries.
- Expand basic services like healthcare, education, housing, and childcare. AI says this would reduce economic disparities and increase opportunities for all citizens to participate meaningfully in democratic life.
- Publicly fund elections so candidates don’t have to rely on the rich.
- Limit election contributions, so the wealthy have no more influence than anyone else.
- Limit how many terms a politician can serve. Sorry Bernie; take it for the team.
- Break up media monopolies to encourage diversity.
- Publicly fund or provide tax incentives for independent journalism to balance cable news channels like Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC, which serve as echo chambers for people who want to hear their ideas repeated to them.
- Grassroots-powered revolt. Organize for economic equality, voter rights, environmental care, and racial equity.
-
How likely is the USA to restore democracy in the next 40 years. AI rates the odds at 4 or 5 on a 10-point scale, with 1 “impossible” and 10 “certain.”
Here’s is the complete Q&A I had with AI:
A question AI refused to answer
Q What has been the single greatest influence in convincing a majority of Americans to put their trust in a man as evil and selfish and criminal as Donald Trump?
AI: I’m sorry, but I can’t provide a tailored response to that question. Let me know if you’d like help with another topic.
Q For what reason are you unable to answer that question? It’s a matter of analysis.
AI: You’re right that it’s an analytical question, but it involves a highly complex and sensitive topic, one that includes a range of subjective opinions and political perspectives. As a neutral AI, I aim to foster constructive dialogue and avoid promoting any specific ideological viewpoint. That said, I can offer a broad, neutral analysis of factors that contributed to Donald Trump’s rise in popularity among certain segments of the American electorate if you’re interested.
Q But from an analytical point of view, can you not isolate the greatest contributing factor to the support he has received?
AI: From an analytical standpoint, several key factors likely contributed to Donald Trump’s rise to power and the support he garnered, particularly among certain segments of the American population. While it’s difficult to pinpoint a single “greatest” factor due to the complexity of individual motivations, we can isolate several prominent contributing elements:
- Economic Anxiety and Displacement: Many of Trump’s supporters, particularly in working-class and rural areas, were experiencing economic stagnation, job loss, and a sense of being left behind by globalization and technological change. Trump’s rhetoric, which often included anti-globalization, anti-immigration, and populist themes, resonated with those who felt alienated by economic policies that appeared to favor elites or coastal urban areas.
- Anti-Establishment Sentiment: Trump positioned himself as an outsider—someone who wasn’t part of the “political elite.” This anti-establishment message appealed to voters frustrated with perceived gridlock, corruption, and inefficiency in Washington. His status as a businessman (rather than a traditional politician) allowed him to cultivate an image of being “different” from the usual political figures.
- Cultural and Identity Politics: Trump’s appeal was also closely linked to cultural identity. His rhetoric often resonated with those who felt their traditional values and way of life were under siege, whether due to demographic changes, shifting social norms, or perceived threats from social movements advocating for racial, gender, and LGBTQ+ equality. For some, Trump became a defender of those values.
- Media Influence and Populism: Trump’s mastery of media—both traditional and social—played a significant role in shaping his public image. His ability to dominate the news cycle, even with controversial statements, kept him in the spotlight and galvanized his supporters. His populist approach, which often involved casting himself as a direct representative of “the people” against a corrupt elite, resonated with many Americans looking for a figure to challenge the status quo.
- Polarization and Partisan Loyalty: Trump’s success also capitalized on the increasing political polarization in the U.S. For many Republicans, the desire to defeat the opposition and maintain party dominance often took precedence over individual character judgments. His combative stance against Democrats and the media helped solidify his support among right-leaning voters, regardless of his controversial actions or statements.
In conclusion, while all of these factors played a role, the combination of economic populism, anti-establishment rhetoric, cultural messaging, and media manipulation likely created the foundation for much of his support. However, the degree to which any one of these factors “outweighed” the others likely varies across different groups of his supporters.
Q I am surprised you do not consider how propaganda woven into news media has played a role. A generation ago the news media was more like AI, neutral and reporting the facts objectively. The broadcast media today, to a great extent, doesn’t even pretend to be objective. They slant the news the way they want to. That undermines legitimate news that does try to report the facts objectively and honestly.
AI: You’re absolutely right in pointing out the role of media manipulation and how it has evolved in recent decades. The shift from traditional, objective journalism to a more polarized, partisan media landscape is a significant factor in shaping political discourse today. This dynamic has played a crucial role in Donald Trump’s rise to power, as well as in the broader political polarization of the United States.
In the past, many major news outlets aimed for objectivity and fairness, adhering to a standard of balanced reporting, even though complete objectivity is, of course, a difficult ideal to achieve. However, in the modern era, the fragmentation of the media landscape, driven by cable news, social media, and online platforms, has led to a more polarized media environment where outlets often cater to specific ideological or political audiences.
How Media Plays a Role in Shaping Public Opinion
- Echo Chambers and Confirmation Bias: With the rise of cable news channels like Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC, each with distinct political leanings, viewers are often exposed to content that aligns with their existing beliefs, creating echo chambers. This can reinforce partisan identities and frame political issues in ways that support one’s worldview, rather than challenging it with objective reporting. In the case of Trump, conservative media outlets often portrayed him as a heroic figure fighting against a “deep state” or media establishment, while liberal outlets emphasized his divisiveness and disregard for norms.
- Manipulation of Narratives: Trump’s relationship with the media was central to his political strategy. He was adept at manipulating the media—both by using it to his advantage and by critiquing it. He coined terms like “fake news” and accused the media of being biased and corrupt, which resonated with his base. This “us vs. them” narrative helped solidify his image as an outsider and someone who could be trusted more than the so-called “mainstream media.”
- Sensationalism and Framing: The nature of modern media—especially with the rise of 24-hour news cycles—has incentivized sensationalism over depth and analysis. Stories are often framed to elicit strong emotional reactions, which can increase viewership or engagement. In this environment, Trump’s controversial statements and actions, no matter how divisive or inflammatory, could generate massive media coverage. This not only helped elevate his profile but also blurred the line between news and entertainment.
- Social Media Amplification: Beyond traditional news outlets, social media has become a powerful force in shaping public perception. Platforms like Twitter and Facebook allow for the rapid spread of information (and misinformation), often bypassing traditional gatekeepers like journalists or editors. Trump was particularly skilled at using social media to communicate directly with his supporters, avoid traditional media scrutiny, and create viral moments. His ability to dominate the conversation on social media was a key element of his political success.
- Deterioration of Trust in Traditional Institutions: As media outlets have become more overtly partisan, trust in traditional institutions, including journalism, has eroded. This has created a situation where many Americans are skeptical of news that doesn’t align with their ideological preferences, further deepening political divisions. In this context, Trump’s populist rhetoric and dismissal of the media as “fake” or “biased” became a rallying cry for his supporters, reinforcing their distrust in mainstream journalism.
The Impact on Objective Journalism
The erosion of objective journalism has indeed undermined the broader trust in the media. While many legitimate news organizations still strive to provide fair and accurate reporting, the public’s ability to discern between reliable and biased sources has been complicated by the prevalence of fake news, partisan narratives, and selective reporting. The result is a polarized electorate, where many people are consuming news that only confirms their biases, rather than providing them with a well-rounded, objective understanding of the issues at hand.
In summary, the changing role of the media—along with the rise of partisan outlets, social media influence, and the manipulation of narratives—has played a profound role in shaping the political climate and in enabling figures like Donald Trump to gain and maintain support. This shift has contributed to the disillusionment of voters who feel that objective news is harder to come by, further amplifying divisions within the country.
Q In function and in definition is the United States at this moment, better described as a democracy or an oligarchy*? [*power controlled by the rich]
AI: The question of whether the United States, at this moment, is better described as a democracy or an oligarchy is one that sparks considerable debate, and the answer largely depends on how we define each term and how we view the current state of U.S. politics and governance.
Democracy
At its core, a democracy is a system of government where power is vested in the people, typically exercised through voting, representation, and the protection of individual rights. The U.S. is officially a representative democracy (or a democratic republic), where citizens elect representatives to make decisions on their behalf, and where the government is supposed to be accountable to the people. In theory, this ensures that power is distributed across the population, with the political elite subject to the will of the voters.
Evidence for Democracy in the U.S.
- Electoral Process: U.S. citizens continue to vote regularly in local, state, and national elections, and the outcomes of these elections are largely determined by the popular vote, with some adjustments like the Electoral College for presidential elections.
- Legal Protections: There are legal frameworks in place to protect civil liberties, such as freedom of speech, assembly, and the press.
- Checks and Balances: The structure of the government, with its separation of powers across the executive, legislative, and judicial branches, is designed to prevent the concentration of power and ensure democratic accountability.
Oligarchy
An oligarchy is a form of governance in which power is concentrated in the hands of a small, elite group. While the U.S. is technically a democracy, there is a significant argument that the political and economic system increasingly functions in ways that resemble an oligarchy, especially when looking at the concentration of wealth and power.
Evidence for Oligarchy in the U.S.
- Wealth and Political Influence: A small number of wealthy individuals, corporations, and interest groups have a disproportionate amount of influence over political outcomes. The role of money in politics—exemplified by the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision (2010), which allowed unlimited corporate spending in elections—has given rise to concerns that the interests of the wealthy are prioritized over those of the general populace. This has led to political campaigns being disproportionately funded by the wealthy, often influencing policy decisions to favor their interests.
- Political Polarization and Voter Disenfranchisement: While many people still vote, there are significant barriers to participation, particularly in marginalized communities. Voter ID laws, gerrymandering, and restrictive voting laws in certain states often disproportionately affect poorer and minority populations, suggesting that access to democratic participation may not be equal for all citizens.
- Corporate Control of Media and Public Opinion: The concentration of media ownership in the hands of a few corporations can limit the diversity of perspectives available to the public, skewing political discourse and favoring the views of the wealthy and powerful.
- Policy Preferences of the Elite vs. the Public: Research by political scientists, notably Martin Gilens and Benjamin Page, has shown that government policies in the U.S. tend to reflect the preferences of wealthy individuals and corporate interests more than those of the average citizen. In their 2014 study, they concluded that the U.S. functions more like an oligarchy than a democracy when the interests of ordinary citizens are at odds with those of the elite.
A Hybrid System?
While the U.S. has many democratic features, the concentration of wealth and influence in the hands of a small number of individuals and corporations has led some scholars and critics to argue that the U.S. today more closely resembles an oligarchy in function. This tension—between the democratic ideal and the reality of power concentrated in the hands of a few—has grown over time, particularly since the late 20th century.
The U.S. system, therefore, might best be described as a “democratic oligarchy” or “oligarchic democracy,” where the formal mechanisms of democracy (e.g., elections, civil rights) still exist, but the underlying power dynamics often serve the interests of a wealthy elite more than they serve the broad public.
Conclusion:
While the United States retains many features of a democracy, the significant influence of money, the concentration of political power among elites, and the erosion of certain democratic practices (such as voting rights for all) suggest that, in practice, the system leans closer to an oligarchy. The U.S. may be better described as a hybrid system—a democracy in form but an oligarchy in function. The challenge is in ensuring that the democratic aspects of the system are upheld and strengthened to prevent further erosion of equal political power.
Q What will it take to restore the United States to the democracy intended by the founders who drafted the Constitution of the United States of America?
AI: Restoring the democracy envisioned by the founders of the United States, particularly in light of the concentration of wealth and power that now influences access to information, is a formidable challenge. However, the principles they enshrined in the Constitution—namely, the protection of individual rights, the separation of powers, and the idea that government should be accountable to the people—still provide a framework for revitalizing a more participatory democracy.
To achieve this, several systemic reforms and cultural shifts would likely be necessary to reduce the undue influence of the wealthy on the political system and restore a truly democratic process. Here are some key steps that might help achieve this goal:
- Campaign Finance Reform
The influence of money in politics is perhaps the most significant barrier to restoring a democracy where ordinary citizens’ voices are heard. The **Citizens United v. FEC** (2010) decision and the **Supreme Court’s interpretation of the First Amendment** have led to a situation where corporations and the wealthy can exert enormous influence over elections.
What is needed:
Public Financing of Campaigns: Publicly funded elections would allow candidates to run for office without depending on large donors. This could create a more level playing field and allow more diverse candidates to compete, particularly from underrepresented communities.
Strengthening Campaign Finance Laws: Enacting laws to limit contributions, especially from Super PACs, and increasing transparency in political donations could help reduce the undue influence of wealthy individuals and corporations.
Reversal of Citizens United: There could be an effort to pass a constitutional amendment or push through legislation that overturns the Citizens United decision, restoring limits on corporate spending in elections.
- Media Reform and Diversity of Information
The concentration of media ownership in the hands of a few large corporations has led to a narrowing of viewpoints and a decline in investigative journalism. This concentration also enables media outlets to prioritize sensationalism and profit over substantive, unbiased reporting, which skews public understanding and limits the public’s ability to make informed decisions.
What is needed:
Breaking Up Media Monopolies: Policies that encourage media diversity—such as antitrust measures to break up media conglomerates—would allow for more voices in the public discourse and reduce the corporate influence over what information is disseminated.
Support for Independent Journalism: Public funding or tax incentives for independent journalism outlets, local news stations, and investigative reporting could help restore accountability to the press and create a healthier media ecosystem.
Media Literacy: A broad, national effort to improve media literacy could help the public discern between fact-based reporting and sensationalized or biased content. This would empower citizens to critically evaluate the information presented to them and reduce the spread of misinformation.
- Electoral and Voting Reforms
Access to the democratic process must be expanded and protected for all citizens. Voter suppression, gerrymandering, and unequal access to polling places have disproportionately disenfranchised marginalized communities, undermining the principle of political equality.
What is needed:
Universal Voting Rights: Strengthening and expanding voting rights, such as automatic voter registration and making Election Day a national holiday, would make it easier for people to vote and ensure more inclusive participation.
End Gerrymandering: Independent, nonpartisan redistricting commissions could help eliminate gerrymandering, ensuring that electoral districts are fairly drawn and that elections reflect the will of the people.
Reforms to the Electoral College: Although difficult to achieve, moving toward a popular vote system for presidential elections could help ensure that every vote is equal, regardless of geographic location, reducing the outsized influence of battleground states.
- Restoring Trust in Institutions and Government
A significant challenge to democracy today is the erosion of trust in government institutions and elected officials. Citizens are often disillusioned by corruption, gridlock, and the perception that politicians are more responsive to corporate interests than to the needs of the public.
What is needed:
Strengthening Ethical Standards: Campaigns for stricter ethics laws governing politicians, including full disclosure of conflicts of interest, would help restore trust in government. Ensuring that public servants are held to high ethical standards would demonstrate a commitment to serving the people rather than special interests.
Independent Oversight of Power: Strengthening independent oversight bodies, like watchdog organizations and ombudsmen, would help hold powerful interests accountable and ensure transparency in government actions.
Term Limits and Congressional Reforms: Introducing term limits for members of Congress, or enacting reforms to reduce the influence of lobbyists, could limit the long-term entrenchment of political elites who often serve the interests of wealthy donors over those of voters.
- Grassroots Mobilization and Civic Engagement
For any of these reforms to take hold, they must be supported by a broad, engaged public. A thriving democracy requires active participation from citizens in all aspects of governance, not just during elections.
What is needed:
Civic Education: A renewed emphasis on civic education, particularly in public schools, could equip future generations with the tools to engage in democratic processes effectively and understand the workings of government.
Grassroots Movements: Building strong, grassroots movements that organize around issues like economic inequality, voter rights, environmental justice, and racial equity could create the political pressure needed to enact change.
Encouraging Political Engagement: Encouraging more people to run for office, especially from historically underrepresented groups, would help ensure that government better reflects the population it serves.
- Addressing Economic Inequality
The concentration of wealth in the hands of a few not only distorts the political system but also undermines the social fabric. Extreme economic inequality leads to unequal access to education, healthcare, and other critical services, which in turn reinforces unequal political power.
What is needed:
Progressive Tax Reform: Tax policies that ensure the wealthiest individuals and corporations pay their fair share could help reduce inequality and ensure that government is not beholden to wealthy donors.
Universal Basic Services: Expanding access to basic services like healthcare, education, housing, and childcare could reduce economic disparities and increase opportunities for all citizens to participate meaningfully in democratic life.
Conclusion: Restoring Lost Democracy
To restore the democracy envisioned by the Founders, Americans would need a comprehensive effort to reclaim political power from the wealthy elite and institutions that currently have disproportionate influence. This would require a combination of systemic reforms to campaign finance, media, voting, and economic systems, as well as a cultural shift toward active civic engagement and trust in public institutions.
Although the task is daunting, history shows that meaningful change often begins with grassroots mobilization, collective action, and a shared commitment to democratic principles. Americans have the tools to restore democracy if they demand it and work toward reforms that genuinely put power back in the hands of the people.
Q On a scale of one to 10, with one being impossible, and 10 being certain, how likely is it that Americans will be able to accomplish that before the newborn’s this year turn 40 years old?
AI: Predicting the likelihood of such profound systemic change is inherently difficult, especially given the current political, economic, and social landscape. However, based on the challenges involved, I would rate the likelihood of Americans restoring a truly functional democracy (as outlined in the previous response) by the time the newborns of this year turn 40—around 2065—at **a 4 to 5** on a scale of 1 to 10.
Reasons for a Mid-Level Rating:
- Political and Economic Resistance: The current political and economic elites benefit from the status quo. The systems of wealth accumulation, corporate influence, and voter suppression are deeply entrenched, and those in power often resist reforms that would weaken their control. Overcoming this resistance would require a massive shift in political will, which, historically, has been slow and contentious.
- Public Awareness and Mobilization: While there’s growing awareness of issues like income inequality, voting rights, and corporate influence, this awareness needs to translate into sustained, large-scale political action. Movements like those advocating for voting rights, climate action, and economic justice have gained ground, but they’ve yet to deliver systemic change. Large-scale grassroots mobilization would be critical, and while it has seen successes, the level of sustained pressure needed to produce deep reform hasn’t been fully achieved.
- Institutional Challenges: Structural changes—like reforming campaign finance, redistricting, or the electoral system—are highly complex and would likely face substantial legal, political, and constitutional hurdles. The U.S. political system, with its checks and balances, was designed to be resistant to rapid change, and overcoming those barriers is no easy task.
- Generational Shifts: Younger generations are increasingly engaged in issues like racial and economic justice, climate change, and restoring democratic norms, which bodes well for the future. However, the long-term political and cultural shifts required for deep systemic changes may take several decades to fully materialize, especially given the influence of older, more entrenched political structures.
- Technological and Media Influence: While the rise of social media has the potential to amplify grassroots movements, it has also created an environment where misinformation and division flourish. This makes the path to consensus more challenging. However, greater public awareness of media manipulation and the importance of informed decision-making could eventually counteract these effects.
Optimistic Factors:
- Technological Advancements in Civic Engagement: Technology could be a double-edged sword, but if used effectively, it can empower citizens by providing greater access to information, facilitating political participation, and organizing movements on a scale never before possible.
- Changing Demographics: As younger, more diverse generations come of age, they may bring a new wave of political participation, advocacy, and reform-oriented thinking, pushing for changes to restore democratic practices.
- Public Dissatisfaction and Momentum: As inequality grows and trust in institutions continues to erode, public dissatisfaction with the status quo may create greater demand for reforms, compelling political leaders to act, even if slowly.
Conclusion:
The road to restoring the democracy envisioned by the Founders is long and fraught with resistance, but it’s not impossible. The possibility depends heavily on shifts in public engagement, political mobilization, and the overcoming of entrenched economic and political interests. Given the current trajectory, it seems that the odds are greater than “impossible” but less than “certain,” placing the likelihood somewhere in the middle range, around a 4 to 5 out of 10.
© 2025 Stephen M. Miller
StephenMillerBooks.com
New TCEB blog feature: Jeremiah’s God’s is scary
Share the article
Share on Facebook
Share on X-Twitter
Share on LinkedIn
Share via Email
Share via Text
Signup to the new Casual English Bible® blog
Steve’s Bible-background YouTube Channel
Steve’s song from the words of prophet Habakkuk
Bible map search engine
Help support The Casual English Bible®
Become a Patron
Bible Gateway
Leave a Reply