by Matthew Allen | Feb 17, 2025
Okay nerds, welcome to the Science Behind RUBI Theory episode! If you haven’t heard episode one yet (Who the hell are the RUBIs?), go listen to that first. This is where we get into the weeds. And I mean ALL the weeds. Like, full-on gardening expedition here.
Some of you probably finished that last episode thinking, “Cool theory bro, but where’s the evidence?” First of all, I love that skeptical energy. Second, you’re absolutely right to ask. So let’s dig into this thing and see what holds up.
Fair warning: this is going to be a wild ride through cognitive psychology, voting patterns, and my personal favorite topic: how stress makes people do weird things. We’re going to look at what science actually tells us about decision-making under pressure, why celebrity politicians are a thing, and whether I’m completely off my rocker with this whole RUBI framework.
And yeah, sometimes the answer is going to be “we don’t know for sure.” Because surprise! Politics and human behavior are messy and complicated. But I promise you this: by the end of this episode, you’ll understand exactly what evidence supports the RUBI theory, where I’m making educated guesses, and why I think this framework is useful even with its limitations.
Ready to get unnecessarily detailed about voter psychology? Let’s do this thing.
Let’s start with what we actually know about stress and decision-making. And boy, do we know some things.
Remember how I said RUBIs are too stressed and overwhelmed to think clearly about politics? Turns out there’s some fascinating research backing this up.
The heavy hitter here is this mind-blowing study from Science (yeah, that Science, the fancy journal, not your high school textbook). These researchers found that just being stressed about money drops your cognitive performance by 13 IQ points. That’s like pulling an all-nighter, or drinking until you’re legally unable to drive. And this isn’t some weird lab experiment. They studied real people dealing with real financial stress.
Think about that for a second. When you’re worried about making rent or choosing between groceries and gas, your brain literally cannot function at full capacity. Not because you’re dumb, but because stress is eating up all your mental bandwidth.
And here’s the kicker: According to the American Psychological Association, 83% of Americans are stressed about money and the economy right now. That’s not just a statistic. That’s a massive chunk of the voting population operating with their mental CPU constantly maxed out.
But wait, it gets better (or worse, depending on how you look at it). Some brilliant folks at Princeton coined this term “scarcity mindset.” When you’re constantly worried about not having enough, whether it’s money, time, or mental energy, your brain goes into survival mode. You start taking shortcuts. You focus on immediate problems and ignore long-term consequences.
Sound familiar? Because this is exactly what we’re seeing with RUBI voters.
Now, here’s where I need to be straight with you: While we have solid research about stress and decision-making, the direct link to voting behavior is more... let’s say speculative. Nobody’s done a study specifically measuring cortisol levels at voting booths (though honestly, how fascinating would that be?).
So what does all this stress research tell us about how people vote? Let’s connect some dots.
First, we know stressed people take mental shortcuts. They don’t carefully weigh every option because their brains are already overloaded. It’s like when you’re super hungry at the grocery store. You don’t carefully compare nutrition labels, you grab whatever looks good right now.
In politics, these shortcuts look like:
Sound like anyone we know?
But here’s where it gets really interesting. Remember those states where people voted for both Trump AND abortion rights? Traditional political science struggles to explain this. It’s like ordering a Big Mac with a Diet Coke and a side salad. It doesn’t fit neat partisan categories.
But through our stress and scarcity lens? It makes perfect sense. When your brain is operating in survival mode, you don’t build coherent political philosophies. You make quick, instinctual choices based on what feels right in the moment.
Now, I need to be crystal clear here: This is my interpretation of how stress research might explain voting patterns. No one’s done the definitive study connecting these dots. (Though seriously, someone should. Get on that, political scientists!)
Okay, speaking of familiar choices, let’s talk about another way RUBIs use mental shortcuts: celebrity politicians. Not just because Arnold Schwarzenegger managed to muscle his way from action hero to governor, but because there’s a fascinating pattern here that explains a lot about how RUBIs make decisions.
The “celebrity advantage” in politics is real, and it’s exactly what you’d expect when voters are stressed and overwhelmed. Think about it: if you’re exhausted and barely keeping up with life, which takes more mental energy?
This isn’t just speculation. When researchers look at low-information elections (like state and local races), name recognition alone accounts for up to 27% of vote choice. That’s more than party affiliation in some cases. And celebrities? They come pre-packaged with name recognition.
But it goes deeper than just name recognition. There’s this fascinating thing called “parasocial relationships.” Basically, when you watch someone on TV regularly, your brain starts to think of them as someone you actually know. It’s why people feel personally betrayed when their favorite actor gets caught in a scandal. Or why they think they know what Taylor Swift is really like.
Trump seems to understand this perfectly. By the time he ran for president, Americans had spent a decade watching him play a successful businessman on The Apprentice. Never mind that he was actually a terrible businessman in real life. He was a “successful businessman” in people’s living rooms every week. That feeling of familiarity matters more than reality.
Look at this pattern:
It’s not just that these people were famous. They had already played roles in public that matched what voters want in a leader. Reagan played a tough cowboy. Arnold was the unstoppable action hero. And Trump played the ruthless but successful businessman.
This is why just being famous isn’t enough. When Dr. Oz ran for Senate, he lost. Why? Because his celebrity image (trusted doctor giving health advice lol) didn’t match what people want in a senator. The role has to fit the office.
And here’s where it gets really interesting for RUBIs: Celebrity candidates are like mental shortcuts for trust. Instead of having to evaluate someone new, voters can rely on years of perceived familiarity. It’s like when you move to a new city and see a Starbucks. You might not love Starbucks, but at least you know what you’re getting.
Is this good for democracy? Hell no. But it’s how stressed human brains work. And if we want to win in 2028, we need to understand that.
This doesn’t mean Democrats should just nominate any celebrity who’s willing to run. But it does mean we need to think seriously about candidates who:
And before you say “but that’s not how we should pick leaders,” I agree! But remember: we’re not trying to design a perfect democracy here. We’re trying to save the democracy we have. And that means understanding how stressed, overwhelmed voters actually make decisions.
Want to know more about how Democrats can use the celebrity advantage? Check out our next episode (The Celebrity Advantage) where we break down exactly what makes celebrity candidates work and reveal our top 10 list of potential Democratic celebrities who could actually win in 2028.
These patterns we’re seeing, whether it’s stress-based decisions or celebrity appeal, they aren’t just theoretical. Let’s look at what actually happened in the 2024 election, because the numbers tell a fascinating story.
You’ve probably heard pundits talk about “split-ticket voting,” making it sound like some mysterious phenomenon that needs a PhD to understand. But the reality is way more interesting.
Look at what happened in multiple swing states: Trump won the presidential race, but Republican Senate candidates lost. Every single GOP Senate candidate got fewer votes than Trump. Think about that. Millions of people went to the polls, voted for Trump, and then just... stopped. They didn’t even bother with the rest of the ballot.
Traditional political science says this shouldn’t happen. Voters are supposed to be ideologically consistent. They’re supposed to vote party line. But RUBIs? They don’t play by those rules.
Want an even spicier example? Look at Arizona. Trump won, but Kari Lake (basically Trump with better hair) lost. How does that make any sense? If you’re ideologically MAGA, you vote for both. If you’re anti-MAGA, you vote for neither.
But RUBIs don’t care about ideology. They care about what feels right in the moment.
And then there’s the crown jewel of weird voting patterns: those seven states where Trump won AND abortion rights passed. This isn’t just unusual, it’s political quantum mechanics. It shouldn’t be possible according to everything we know about partisan voting. But it happened.
Now, the usual political talking heads will give you a dozen different explanations for these patterns. And maybe they’re right! But I think there’s something simpler going on here.
What if we’re overthinking this? What if the answer isn’t buried in some complex demographic analysis or mysterious swing voter psychology? What if it’s as simple as stressed people make quick, emotional decisions based on what they recognize and what feels right in the moment.
Think about it.
This isn’t the behavior of highly engaged voters carefully weighing policies and platforms. This is the behavior of overwhelmed people using mental shortcuts to get through yet another demanding task in their already stressful lives.
And before you say, “But people should try harder! Democracy requires effort!” Yeah, okay. That’s a nice thought. But remember that stress research we talked about? When you’re worried about making rent or putting food on the table, your brain literally cannot handle complex political analysis. It’s not laziness. It’s not stupidity. It’s biology.
The genius (and I use that word with gritted teeth) of Trump is that he perfectly exploits this dynamic. He’s the political equivalent of a bright, shiny “Click Here!” button. No reading required. No thinking required. Just emotional, instinctual response.
But here’s the thing that makes me hopeful: if we understand this pattern, we can work with it. Not exploit it, but work with it.
Look, I know some of you are squirming right now. This feels icky, right? Like we’re talking about manipulating voters. But here’s the crucial difference between what I’m suggesting and what Trump does.
Trump exploits stressed people to enrich himself, stay out of prison, and feed his endless narcissism. The harm his policies cause? That’s just collateral damage he doesn’t care about.
We can reach these same stressed voters to give them breathing room: better wages, affordable healthcare, financial security. Things that actually let people lift their heads up and think about more than just survival.
So, same tools, totally different goals.
Now, I know what some critics will say. Actually, let me channel my inner political scientist for a minute. Here we go.
“This framework oversimplifies complex voting behavior. People make political decisions based on multiple factors including cultural identity, economic self-interest, regional differences, and historical voting patterns.”
Well, yes. Obviously. Real humans are complicated. No single theory explains everything.
“The link between stress and voting behavior isn’t proven. Correlation doesn’t equal causation.”
Also true. We’ve got solid research on stress and decision-making, but the direct connection to voting is mostly my interpretation. It’s a theory based on patterns I’m seeing, not a mathematical proof.
“This is just another version of the ‘low information voter’ stereotype!”
Actually, no. The RUBI framework isn’t about intelligence or education. It’s about bandwidth and cognitive load. Some of the smartest people I know are totally RUBI about certain things because they’re too busy being brilliant at their specific jobs to track political minutiae.
But here’s the thing: even if this framework isn’t perfect, it’s useful. It explains patterns we’re seeing. It suggests strategies we can try. And most importantly, it gives us hope.
Because if RUBIs are just exhausted humans making stress-based decisions, we can work with that. We can reach them. We just need to do four things:
Let’s be real: the RUBI theory isn’t perfect. It’s a lens for understanding what we’re seeing in American politics right now. Some parts are backed by solid research. Other parts are my best attempt to connect the dots.
But even with its limitations, I believe this framework gives us something crucial: a path forward.
Because here’s what we know for sure. Millions of Americans are drowning in bills, working multiple jobs, and still barely keeping their heads above water. Stress affects how people make decisions. Trump knows how to exploit this. Democrats... well, we’re still giving PowerPoint presentations.
We can do better. We have to do better. And understanding RUBIs is the first step.
Will every stressed and overwhelmed voter respond to our message? No.
Will some people vote for Trump no matter what? Obviously.
But there’s a huge group of Americans in the middle who aren’t ideologically committed to either side. They’re just trying to get through their days, and they’ll vote for whoever makes them feel heard and hopeful.
That could be us. That should be us.
So yeah, maybe I’m oversimplifying some things. Maybe this framework needs refinement. But if it helps us understand why we lost in 2024 and how we might win in 2028, I’ll take that criticism all day long.
Because at the end of the day, this isn’t about perfect political science. It’s about winning elections so we can help people. And if understanding RUBIs helps us do that, I’m all in.
So, thanks for geeking out with me on this deep dive. If you haven’t checked out our main RUBI Theory episode yet, give it a listen. And stay tuned for more episodes about specific strategies for reaching RUBI voters, including our upcoming deep dive into The Celebrity Candidate Playbook: Lessons From Trump.
Next episode
Get episode updates via email
We'll never share your email, period. We only hit your inbox to announce a new episode, and if you ever want out, unsubscribing is one click. Easy peasy.
Join us on Reddit