National politics is all about winning the votes of the people with the Warrior personality type, because they are the vast “middle” in the political spectrum.
If you want a definition of the Warrior personality type, they are the ones that have the letter combination of S and P in their Myers-Briggs personality profile.
The “S” stands for sensation, which is how they take in information. They prefer to use their five senses to gather information, and mostly ignore the sixth sense called intuition. Intuition is that gut-feeling, or an inference of additional information beyond what is physically available.
For example, if you held up a glass of green Kool-aide, they would just see the color green. If they preferred to use intuition, they would say that it is a combination of blue and yellow water mixed together. But for them, it is simply: green.
The “P” in the designation stands for perceiving. I don’t know why Myers or Briggs choose that word, because it doesn’t really describe the trait of how much information to take in before making a decision. People with the perceiving trait don’t like to make a decision until they have gathered all the information (which to them is never enough). And even then, they might change their mind. The polar opposite to this trait is called: Judging. People with the judging trait make a decision fairly early in the information gathering process, and then stick with it. They don’t change their mind once they have come to a conclusion.
People with the SP letter combination, I call Warriors. People with the SJ letter combination I call Logisticals. I chose these particular names because they describe how they behave in life.
Warriors are fighters, and are great at adapting in battle because their perceiving trait allows them to continuously scan their surroundings for any advantage. In other words, they seem to be waiting for their adversary to commit to a plan, and then they can adapt in a way that gives them the upper hand. It often pays to wait until the last second to commit to an action (make a decision), because it gives you maximum flexibility.
As a voter, Warriors don’t usually make up their mind until the very last second. Again, the reason is that they are continuously scanning to see where they get the best tactical advantage for themselves.
I say this, to put you into the mindset of the person with the Warrior personality type. If you know how they think, and how they feel, you have a good chance of coming up with a strategy to persuade them. This is essential in politics, as you have to persuade them to vote for your candidate.
Free Thinking Time…
That is where I want you to go right now. I want you to try to get into the mind of the Warrior. So imagine you were in a battle situation, let’s say in the middle ages, where fighting was done on foot and was mainly the hand-to-hand variety. If you think of the movie Braveheart, you’re on the right track.
You’re a fighter. But you don’t really want to die. So you aren’t really looking forward to the battle, are you?
With that in mind, answer these questions:
- Who is your enemy?
- Who do you dis-trust?
- Who do you trust?
- Who would you choose to lead you into battle?
- Who annoys you?
- Who do you want to have by your side?
- Where are you most vulnerable?
- Who puts you in a position of vulnerability?
- What do you need to be successful?
- What would you rather be doing besides being on the battlefield?
- How do you view the future?
The answer to these questions are going to give you the strategies on how to persuade them to vote for your candidates.
In the second article of this series, we actually answered the very first question: “Who is your enemy?” The answer is: the person that takes away your freedom.
On the battlefield, the obvious enemy is the person you’re fighting with right now. They want to kill you – which is the ultimate loss of freedom. Right? If you’re dead, you don’t have any choice about what you’re going to do tomorrow, do you?
In the last article, I answered the questions about where you are most vulnerable. It is your backside. You can’t be charging forward and defending your back at the same time. So you are very vulnerable to back-stabbers. In fact, it is your worst fear as a Warrior. So you despise back-stabbers, and deal with them severely.
Today, I want to talk about another emotional trigger of the Warriors. That is: “who puts you in a position of vulnerability?”
The answer to this question really goes back to the first question – Who is your enemy? Remember, the answer to that one was the person that tries to take away your “individual freedom.” And it this respect, it isn’t just the fighter on the other side. It could be someone on your side too.
In a lot of cases, the foot-soldier warrior has an uneasy relationship with his commander. This is the guy that orders him into battle. Being ordered to fight, where you could die, is a restriction of freedom, isn’t it? You bet! Particularly when he could give the ultimate order and send you on suicide mission. Your own commander makes you personally vulnerable by what orders and directions he may give you.
Therefore, Warriors have a natural dislike for a commander; someone that gives you orders. They make you vulnerable by forcing you into a position that might not give you a tactical advantage. They restrict your freedom to make individual choices.
With that in mind, who is that commander type person in the human army? If you are thinking of the person with the Strategist personality type, you are absolutely right.
There is a natural distrust between people with the Warrior personality type and those people with the Strategist personality type.
This doesn’t bode well for Mitt Romney, does it? He has the Strategist personality type.
The Liberals are quick to exploit this trait-warfare. For example, at the White House Correspondents Dinner on April 28, 2012, President Obama made this joke:
“We both have degrees from Harvard. I have one, he has two. What a snob.”
Calling him a snob for having more qualifications is meant to remind the people with the Warrior personality how they feel about Strategists. It was highly effective.
But at the same time, when Republican’s call Obama the “professor,” they are doing exactly the same thing. And it is just as effective.
Fear of Being Used
The underlying fear in this case, is the fear of being used.
Warriors don’t like being pawns in a chess game. Pawns are sacrificed for the overall strategy of the game. In other words, the pawns are the least valuable pieces on the board, and in society. It is this that is a natural worry and fear of the person with the Warrior personality type.
Being looked down upon, and being seen as “not valuable” is a constant worry for the person with the Warrior personality type. They hate to be disrespected.
This is important, because a “fear” is an emotional trigger to get a person to act. As I talk about in the book Emotional Copywriting Revealed, there are two ways to motivate people: carrot or stick. Fear is a stick-approach, that is used to drive people to take an action. It is much more powerful than the carrot approach, which is why it is used by the democrats to get the Warriors worked up.
For example, Obama’s favorite theme in politics is “fairness.” This topic resonates the strongest with the people with the Morale Officer personality type (Obama is a Morale Officer type), but because Warriors worry about being a pawn and used by others, they are also receptive to this message too. He is tapping into their fear of being pawns and being used by others.
Obama will pound on fairness until he is blue in the face, because it is his way of manipulating the voters with the Warrior personality type to voting for him.
I use the word “manipulation” instead of persuade in this case, because he “is” using the Warriors as pawns for the purpose of advancing his agenda, not theirs. The Warriors won’t like socialism once they are under its oppressive thumb. That I can guarantee.
This fear of “being insignificant” is actually massive to the Warriors. And in our next article, I’d like to talk about it more, and how the Democrats use it to optimum effectiveness.