Trump’s Repeated "Low IQ" Insults: A Pattern of Racial Dog Whistle
Introduction
In the days following the New York Knicks’ loss, former President Donald Trump reiterated a phrase that has become a hallmark of his rhetoric: the claim that certain Black public figures possess "low IQ." Since the end of his first term, this remark has surfaced privately and publicly, targeting a spectrum of individuals from athletes to lawmakers. Experts in linguistics and political communication now trace this usage as a deliberate, recurring dog whistle designed to reinforce racist tropes while maintaining a veneer of deniability.
Body
Dr. Karrin Anderson, a professor of communications studies at Colorado State University, explains that the distinction between a dog whisper and an insult lies in intent and effect. A dog whisper is “designed to sound innocuous” and can be denied as mere slur. Anderson notes that Trump’s use of "low IQ" has “been applied indiscriminately to Black people in different walks of life and professions,” underscoring its racial intent despite lacking overt racial qualifiers. The pattern is not new; the phrase has appeared in Trump posts about former Vice President Kamala Harris, Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, and Representative Jasmine Crockett, among countless others.
In a 2024 retrospective study by Truthout, data revealed that of the 24 public posts Trump made invoking the phrase between January 2025 and April 2026, 80 percent were directed toward Black or brown individuals. Importantly, no white individual was referred to in this way during the same period, a statistic not explicitly highlighted in the reports but strongly implied by the reported data set. The phrase’s historical roots trace back to the colonial era, when white elites employed the notion of intellect superiority to justify privilege. More chillingly, the phrase has long been leveraged in the pseudoscience of IQ studies, which falsely projected biological differences between races. Scholars like Megan Figueroa from the University of Arizona confirm that these inheritances of discredited racial science continue to fuel contemporary rhetoric.
Trump’s comments often peak in the wake of sports events or political milestones. The most recent instance arose after a commentator predicted the Knicks’ loss. Trump then dismissed the commentator’s credibility by stating "you need a high IQ" and doubting the commentator’s intellectual capacity. This came amid a broader media narrative of the former president’s “low IQ” attacks, now understood as not just personal off‑shoots but a strategic pattern that capitalizes on deeply entrenched racial stereotypes. By projecting a deniable claim of intelligence deficiency, Trump signals to an audience sharing the same bias while sidestepping legal or societal consequences that accompany direct racial slurs.
Conclusion
When political actors appropriated language such as "low IQ" to subjugate Black voices, they contributed to a larger systemic story of marginalization in public discourse. The repeated pattern evident in Trump’s rhetoric is more than a set of isolated insults—it is a cultural device that weakens the perception of Black intelligence in the public mind. The analysis of experts underlines how hoisted statements that might appear as simple insults are, in combination with internet amplification and historical precedent, part of a broader strategy of racial exclusion. Recognizing this pattern is vital, as it empowers citizens and journalists alike to confront the subtle forms of racism that persist and to hold public figures accountable for the impact of their words.