One of the most germane areas of theory and research on this matter is something called terror management theory. The theory’s original inspiration was anthropologist Ernest Becker’s Pulitzer Prize-winning 1973 book, The Denial of Death, which argues that humans are uniquely cursed by our innate dual capacities to a) really, really want to survive and b) know that we will one day die. This existential reality is, quite simply, terrifying, so humans tend to go to great lengths to deny, deflect and dispose of this fact in order to manage it. Becker went on to claim that much of what humans do throughout our lives—our work, our family life, our religious beliefs, how we vote—is organized around our profound need to manage this most basic terror.

In the 1980s, three prominent social psychologists took this idea into the lab to study it. Since that time, they and their colleagues have conducted hundreds of experiments and field studies to investigate the premises of Becker’s work—in particular, the effects of what they call “mortality salience,” a state of awareness of the cold fact that we are going to die. One of the main findings of this research has been that when humans are reminded of their own mortality—such as during a pandemic—they are much more inclined to cling tightly to their cultural worldviews, to derogate and even harm those who are seen as threatening these views, and to support brash, charismatic leaders who claim to protect them. This means that as Americans begin to fixate more on their own mortality, they are likely to become more nationalistic, socially conforming, prejudiced against outgroups and aggressive. They also are more likely to favor dominant leaders who model these inclinations.

Mortality salience has played a role in American politics before. In a fascinating set of experimental studies, researchers found that higher levels of mortality salience brought on by reminders of the 9/11 attacks significantly increased support for George W. Bush in 2004—including support for his reelection—and decreased support for his presidential rival, John Kerry. The researchers saw support for Bush stemming from his incumbency, as well as his “image as a protective shield against death, armed with high-tech weaponry, patriotic rhetoric, and the resolute invocation of doing God’s will to ‘rid the world of evil’”—the ultimate salve for a debilitating terror of death.

The research on terror management clearly suggests that the more anxious Americans become through the next election cycle, the more likely that Trump’s current disaster bump in the polls will hold, and the greater his chances for reelection. Although Bush and Trump displayed two very different leadership styles (Bush’s plainspoken resolution in the face of a foreign threat or Trump’s act as a “get-it-done” business executive), they both epitomize the tough, no-nonsense, take-no-prisoners unilateralism that the highly anxious seek. Trump’s christening of himself as a “wartime president,” with the inclusion of military officers in fatigues and dress blues standing shoulder-to-shoulder with him (less than 6 feet apart) during news conferences, should fit nicely with America’s need for an invulnerable, symbolic protector.

So, what should the Democratic Party do if it is serious about defeating Trump in 2020? The inclination of many Democrats today is to double down on a message of fear by stressing the deleterious consequences of the actions and policies of the Trump administration, including its many missteps in preventing and mitigating the deadly spread of the virus. However, research on hope and fear in anxious, conflict-riddled societies suggests that while fear usually dominates in these settings because of the more basic evolutionary purposes it serves, it also becomes a major obstacle to the more functional, peaceful orientation necessary for normalcy to return. More recent research on terror management suggests that a sense of hope can prevail in a population when conditions are present that trigger an alternative motivational system called growth-enrichment—an optimistic mode of functioning that encourages a less defensive, more accurate view of the world and allows for adaptation and change.

How can we switch modes? By offering a compelling vision of hope.

In the 1980s, 15 years into Augusto Pinochet’s dictatorial grip on Chile, he succumbed to international pressure and agreed to hold a national referendum on whether he should be allowed to remain in power for another eight years. An opposition group prepared a national campaign to oust Pinochet’s military junta, which stressed its horrific abuses of power, including the disappearance, torture and execution of tens of thousands of Chileans. However, when invited to work on the campaign, René Saavedra, a successful advertising man, recognized the error in this approach—that reminding citizens of the horrors of the regime would scare them into supporting the reigning strongman. Saavedra proposed and implemented an alternative path for the “No” campaign—one that emphasized the hope, joy and promise of a nation free from Pinochet’s tyranny. And it worked! A study on the effects of the advertising campaign found that, despite the extraordinary level of fear Chileans were living under, exposure to a positive message significantly swayed the vote. Two years later, Pinochet lost in a democratic election and was forced to hand power over to the newly elected president.

Further studies suggest that offering American voters an image of a more inclusive, tolerant, secure, caring and globally connected future can go a long way toward overriding death anxiety. Today, in the context of a terrifying crisis like the coronavirus pandemic, topped with the dysfunctional divisiveness of our politics, Americans are desperate for a promising sense of a way out and a way forward. No, this does not mean they are looking for Pollyanna happy-talk. Rather, they need a clear-eyed presentation of the challenges and consequences the country faces and a strong sense of the hope and possibility that awaits us on the other side of this crisis. That’s what should prevail in November.