2024 US Presidential Election (Taylor's Version)

[microbet]

@hokie

the Tea Party movement, which was funded by the wealthy

People supposedly forget this so often I think they just prefer the story that it was not the rich people who made this happen. The Tea Party was started by the Koch Brothers with an assist from tobacco companies.

[simplicitus]

Imo, the rich, being necessarily a minority, hitch a ride on the backs of the morons and religious nuts (though many are both rich and morons/nuts). Sure they help fund the enterprise, but only because they have money. But, what 48% of American wanted was someone to argue that Barack Obama wasn’t really an American, the issue that boosted trump into a political player. That legitimated trump among the base, but what got him elected was mirroring the dipshit ideas of the public back to the public. Trump is just a whiteboard reflecting their dumb ideas, and he speaks their language because he’s also a dipshit.

Fox News doesn’t make money by telling people what to think–it makes money telling them what they already think.

[hokie]

@Trolly

We have to remember that Fox News was originally anti-Trump! It’s true that the media manipulates people, but it’s also not as simple as “the system gave us Trump.” The political and media machinery tried to stop Trump and then gave up in the face of a wave of populist sentiment.

But I’m saying that that wave of populist sentiment was largely their own creation. The system giving us Trump is not a literal statement about the primaries in 2016 or something, it’s about the conditions and incentives that made it easy and inevitable for someone like Trump to rise to power. As an example, even if we grant that Fox News was briefly anti Trump during the primaries, they’re the ones who were platforming him in 2012 to rant about Obama’s birth certificate.

[simplicitus]

@WichitaDM

Markets bend to the will of the consumer seems like a very naive take.

Try making a product that “elites” want people to buy. It may work for a while, but it’s not an equilibrium.

[hokie]

@simplicitus

Try making a product that “elites” want people to buy. It may work for a while, but it’s not an equilibrium.

gestures at the American Healthcare system

[WichitaDM]

The Democratic Party? Seems like an obvious example of the market having almost no impact on the product vs. the will of the elites.

[hokie]

For a fringe example, internal combustion engine cars

[Trolly]

@simplicitus

Try making a product that “elites” want people to

Easy: luxury watches and cars.

But politics isn’t that easy. Money plays an enormous role, but the rubes still outnumber the wealthy and they vote. From Reagan to Romney, the GOP’s plan was to give out tax cuts and deregulation to the rich and toss the poors bullshit social issues like guns and bathroom bills. Trump’s great insight was that he could focus on all the populism and spectacle and cut out all the trickle-down bullshit that nobody except the 0.1% really liked.

[dlk9s]

Just tried that PAC site. Used fake info for Georgia. Sure enough, all I got was this when I was done:

There’s no second step. There’s a disclaimer at the bottom of the page that says you’re not officially registered until your application is approved by the “appropriate board of registrars,” but of course it never will be because this isn’t a voter registration application.

[Riverman]

In any remotely functioning country the site would be down and people going to jail.

[suzzer99]

JFC

[suzzer99]

SCOTUS will get around to telling us no, it’s not legal, around next May.

[LKJ]

https://x.com/RMG_Research/status/1819361783263449320

The “smarter than me about polls” people have long noted that Scott Rasmussen is a legitimate pollster, and that so was the Rasmussen polling firm when he was involved, but they kept his name upon him leaving and have run the integrity of the name into the ground. All of which is to say that I’m under the impression this shouldn’t be disregarded in the same way.

Anyway, RMG Research’s GE poll a week earlier was Trump +2. And they had Trump +5 over Biden in the last pre-dropout poll.

[Melkerson]

@microbet

Trump rolled back 125 environmental regulations and cut corporate taxes 30%. The owners of the USA love him.

I think this one is a tough one for rich people. They love tax cuts, but most of them don’t want the coming climate change.

I suppose it depends on which rich people we are talking about. The ones I know are generally pretty educated. Probably 95% claim they won’t vote for Trump, but only 70% actually won’t.

I see much more DGAF about climate change from upper middle class MAGA types. They’re not poor, but they are also definitely not rich.

[Soulman]

Bummer that they didnt have HU numbers.

[LKJ]

Right; that’s the Trump +2 that I noted from a week earlier.

[Soulman]

Too late with my Ninja edit.

[Melkerson]

@suzzer99

SCOTUS will get around to telling us no, it’s not legal, around next May.

I’m not even sure about that.

[beetlejuice]

Lenin, 1916 (dumb): democracy can not produce the best results for a society

Me, 2016 (smart): so, so wrong sir. In a world where information is free and accessible, people of all social classes will educate themselves and we can form a rational society together by democratic consensus

Lenin, 2024 (dead):

Me, 2024 (smarter): democracy can not produce the best results for a society

[Melkerson]

@LKJ

x.com

The “smarter than me about polls” people have long noted that Scott Rasmussen is a legitimate pollster, and that so was the Rasmussen polling firm when he was involved, but they kept his name upon him leaving and have run the integrity of the name into the ground. All of which is to say that I’m under the impression this shouldn’t be disregarded in the same way.

Anyway, RMG Research’s GE poll a week earlier was Trump +2. And they had Trump +5 over Biden in the last pre-dropout poll.

Wasn’t Rasmussen closest of the major ones to the final result in 2016? Maybe I’m remembering that wrong.