Before answering the question, “what is a believist?,” it is important to frame the modern problem that we humans are struggling to solve. Since the beginning of time humans have frequently transcended their ways of living from the breakthroughs of a select few, namely scientists. The discoveries that these brilliant men and women have made have allowed the rest of us to enjoy what we often take for granted today. Nearly none of the general population understands the complexities of our various systems that are constantly being studied, reviewed and remodeled by engineers, scientists, mathematicians, among other experts.

Specifically, there is a very small percentage of Americans who understand how a computer works (and not even separating that into a hardware versus software question), or how the plumbing of their house works, or how to calculate the expected value from a binomial distribution. Suffice to say there is a lot that we don't know and, if we can spare some humility, even more that we don't know we don't know? Now the problem is becoming clearer, that is to say, there is a widening gap, a chasm of ignorance that many Americans habitat. Unfortunately the issue doesn't stop here but is further compounded by the fact that many of these Americans choose to remain in a world separate from factual evidence and support.

Instead of grabbing a dictionary or typing it into a search engine to see what pops out, I'll tell you what—or rather—inform you who are believists. It is better to start with where the term comes from because that will help many understand the definition. I made it up. This was a totally new word as far as I know and I made it up because, for one thing, there is a lot of that going around recently, and two, there needs to be a way to label this phenomenon. More important than the origin of the word is the benefit that the rest of us, non-believists (still work-shopping that one) will gain from no longer needing an explanation of who these people are, but rather a term for this group of people that can be referred to in an array of future contexts.

More and more recently, feelings and facts have been disgustingly interchanged and distorted, swapped and amputated, only for there to be a remaining Frankenstein-like creation, moaning and groaning, on the operating table that baffles anyone trying to make sense of it. If asked where this detestable science-experiment-gone-wrong takes place, the answer can often be found here in the United States. It has become undoubtedly and chillingly common for there to be such a bizarre disregard for facts and in it's lackluster substitute—feelings, opinions, gut—to take their place. The mark of this uptick occurred not so surprisingly with the uptick of Trump's recognition and reverence.

Drumpf is a man of small words, a smaller conscience, and even smaller fingers. He has the makings of an excellent sociopath as he lies, deflects, berates, mimics, panders, and yells without hesitation, without pause, without remorse. Drumpf spends more time rewriting history and what he said in an interview last week than he does preparing for an upcoming speech because it is easier to be someone who pretends to have foresight when they really only have hindsight, and even at that he struggles with. To an objective listener, Drumpf sounds like a man who utters unrealistic plans for the future that are deeply rooted in bigotry and misogyny.

During a CNN interview, Newt Gingrich not only presents the believist mentality that allows for feelings to outweigh facts but further goes on to succinctly explain the phenomenon taking place over the course of the Trump campaign.

It isn't a crime to be ignorant but when presented with facts that contradict your feeling-based and grounded argument, it should be. Maybe it is a little harsh to make a plea for punishment of the common man who chooses to turn a blind eye to facts when he feels that he is right. It should at least be criminal for politicians. Maybe it too is a little unrealistic to hold those honorable people to those incredibly high standards like rationality and logic. Well, is there anyone else to be held accountable? Is there anyone who can be arbiter to this scandal, this charade, this bizarro-land?