5 ms·

This. Something like 5 people are almost entirely funding Trump's slump (hard to call this mess a campaign) towards the White House and for sure they are going

This. Something like 5 people are almost entirely funding Trump's slump (hard to call this mess a campaign) towards the White House and for sure they are going to want pay back. This is what oligarchy looks like.

fakedang 2y ago
5 people? Last time I was on X, nearly every Silicon Valley/tech billionaire was crooning from the rooftops for Trump. You could argue it's the native X bias, but these were all the famous billionaires and multimillionaires who are top names in the SV space. All rooting for a Trump win, perhaps anticipating a quick Vance presidency.
- FirmwareBurner 2y ago
  Which is ironic since in 2016 everyone on SV was holding back tears of sadness over Trump getting elected. Oh how the turntables.
  - outside1234 2y ago
    I do believe that something like 70% of SV can't stand Trump. You can see that in the insane amount of money Kamala has raised from SV (which probably even dwarfs Trump's XX person oligarch haul). It is largely the sociopaths at the very very top that are Trump donors.
    - FirmwareBurner 2y ago
      SV only cares about whoever will help them make more money. Everything else is virtue signaling by champagne socialists pretending to care about current day social issues and the struggles of the lower classes.
      - fakedang 2y ago
        Somebody (an SV VC actually) once gave me some advice: Silicon Valley VCs will be all nice to you in front of you but talk shit behind your back. East Coast VCs will outright tell you your product is shit and that you are shit, just like your n-th order ancestors. It was very good advice.
- outside1234 2y ago
  Entirely possible - I spend as little time as possible thinking about this and am just looking forward to our national nightmare of Trump being a plausible president candidate being over the week after next.
  - fullshark 2y ago
    He's a plausible candidate and he's at worst a coin flip to win. Almost a 3-2 favorite based on betting markets. https://www.predictit.org/markets/detail/7456/Who-will-win-the-2024-US-presidential-election https://www.predictit.org/markets/detail/7456/Who-will-win-t...
    - outside1234 2y ago
      You mean the betting markets the oligarchs have gamed? :) Though I will agree with you that he has a coin flip chance of being president, which is totally terrifying. Is that what it felt like to be in Germany with Hitler?
- zamadatix 2y ago
  A lot talk but only a ~half dozen actually bother to put together 100s of millions where their mouths are about it. I haven't looked this year but usually Bloomberg tops the chart on the blue side.
- labster 2y ago
  Of course all of the billionaires are rooting for Trump, because they want to be in business next year. Harris will understand voting for other parties, but Trump punishes disloyalty.
- NekkoDroid 2y ago
  > 5 people? Last time I was on X, nearly every Silicon Valley/tech billionaire was crooning from the rooftops for Trump. From what I heard Bezos interfered with Washington Post for (one of?) the first time to make them not post on endorsing a candidate for president (first time in 36 years). What the actual reason behind it is is unsure, but they say they wanna "return to their roots". I honestly doubt it and expect its more political interest like to not be on Trumps "land in prison because radical marxist leftist" since he didn't do anything like this in the previous years.
Terr_ 2y ago
> Trump's slump [...] towards the White House Somehow my mind supplies "slouch" instead, probably because of a poem [0]: > And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, > Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born? [0] https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/43290/the-second-coming https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/43290/the-second-comi...
- specproc 2y ago
  > The best lack all conviction and the worst are full of passionate intensity. Every time I read this poem it nails something. Incredible sense of tension and dread.
- IAmGraydon 2y ago
  It’s fitting that you would quote Yeats, yet another guy who predicted an apocalypse that never came.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - Terr_ 2y ago
    It's a poem by a poet published right "the Great War", so I'm not sure what kind of predictive-standard you're trying to apply here. More generally, predicting a disaster is sometimes an important step in ensuring it never occurs. Self-negating prophecies can have high utility.
primitivesuave 2y ago
While I am sure we would agree on the dangers posed by certain wealthy donors on both sides, the ruling of Citizen's United allows for something far more insidious - effectively a nullification of regulations set forth in a bipartisan campaign finance reform act eight years earlier (BCRA). Essentially what we have today is a free-for-all. Any corporation can spend unlimited amounts of money (commonly referred to as "dark money") to influence politics, with virtually no oversight (i.e. FEC reporting requirements). As an individual, my ability to fund political campaigns is limited to thresholds set at the local and federal level, but a billion dollar company like FTX can give millions of dollars to politicians who put forward favorable regulations. Billion dollar AI companies will control potential future regulation in a similar manner. I'm oversimplifying here, and added some helpful links for anyone interested: - Two Challenges for Campaign Finance Disclosure After Citizens United and Doe v. Reed - https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj/vol19/iss4/8/ https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj/vol19/iss4/8/ - The Death of Non-Resident Contribution Limit Bans and the Birth of the New Small, Swing State - https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj/vol28/iss4/4/ https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj/vol28/iss4/4/ - Why Contribution Limits on a Hybrid PAC’s Independent-Expenditure Arm are Impermissible - https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj/vol25/iss1/10/ https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj/vol25/iss1/10/

fakedang 2y ago

5 people? Last time I was on X, nearly every Silicon Valley/tech billionaire was crooning from the rooftops for Trump. You could argue it's the native X bias, but these were all the famous billionaires and multimillionaires who are top names in the SV space. All rooting for a Trump win, perhaps anticipating a quick Vance presidency.

FirmwareBurner 2y ago
Which is ironic since in 2016 everyone on SV was holding back tears of sadness over Trump getting elected. Oh how the turntables.
- outside1234 2y ago
  I do believe that something like 70% of SV can't stand Trump. You can see that in the insane amount of money Kamala has raised from SV (which probably even dwarfs Trump's XX person oligarch haul). It is largely the sociopaths at the very very top that are Trump donors.
  - FirmwareBurner 2y ago
    SV only cares about whoever will help them make more money. Everything else is virtue signaling by champagne socialists pretending to care about current day social issues and the struggles of the lower classes.
    - fakedang 2y ago
      Somebody (an SV VC actually) once gave me some advice: Silicon Valley VCs will be all nice to you in front of you but talk shit behind your back. East Coast VCs will outright tell you your product is shit and that you are shit, just like your n-th order ancestors. It was very good advice.
outside1234 2y ago
Entirely possible - I spend as little time as possible thinking about this and am just looking forward to our national nightmare of Trump being a plausible president candidate being over the week after next.
- fullshark 2y ago
  He's a plausible candidate and he's at worst a coin flip to win. Almost a 3-2 favorite based on betting markets. https://www.predictit.org/markets/detail/7456/Who-will-win-the-2024-US-presidential-election https://www.predictit.org/markets/detail/7456/Who-will-win-t...
  - outside1234 2y ago
    You mean the betting markets the oligarchs have gamed? :) Though I will agree with you that he has a coin flip chance of being president, which is totally terrifying. Is that what it felt like to be in Germany with Hitler?
zamadatix 2y ago
A lot talk but only a ~half dozen actually bother to put together 100s of millions where their mouths are about it. I haven't looked this year but usually Bloomberg tops the chart on the blue side.
labster 2y ago
Of course all of the billionaires are rooting for Trump, because they want to be in business next year. Harris will understand voting for other parties, but Trump punishes disloyalty.
NekkoDroid 2y ago
> 5 people? Last time I was on X, nearly every Silicon Valley/tech billionaire was crooning from the rooftops for Trump. From what I heard Bezos interfered with Washington Post for (one of?) the first time to make them not post on endorsing a candidate for president (first time in 36 years). What the actual reason behind it is is unsure, but they say they wanna "return to their roots". I honestly doubt it and expect its more political interest like to not be on Trumps "land in prison because radical marxist leftist" since he didn't do anything like this in the previous years.

Terr_ 2y ago

> Trump's slump [...] towards the White House Somehow my mind supplies "slouch" instead, probably because of a poem [0]: > And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, > Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born? [0] https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/43290/the-second-coming https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/43290/the-second-comi...

specproc 2y ago
> The best lack all conviction and the worst are full of passionate intensity. Every time I read this poem it nails something. Incredible sense of tension and dread.
IAmGraydon 2y ago
It’s fitting that you would quote Yeats, yet another guy who predicted an apocalypse that never came.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- Terr_ 2y ago
  It's a poem by a poet published right "the Great War", so I'm not sure what kind of predictive-standard you're trying to apply here. More generally, predicting a disaster is sometimes an important step in ensuring it never occurs. Self-negating prophecies can have high utility.

primitivesuave 2y ago

While I am sure we would agree on the dangers posed by certain wealthy donors on both sides, the ruling of Citizen's United allows for something far more insidious - effectively a nullification of regulations set forth in a bipartisan campaign finance reform act eight years earlier (BCRA). Essentially what we have today is a free-for-all. Any corporation can spend unlimited amounts of money (commonly referred to as "dark money") to influence politics, with virtually no oversight (i.e. FEC reporting requirements). As an individual, my ability to fund political campaigns is limited to thresholds set at the local and federal level, but a billion dollar company like FTX can give millions of dollars to politicians who put forward favorable regulations. Billion dollar AI companies will control potential future regulation in a similar manner. I'm oversimplifying here, and added some helpful links for anyone interested: - Two Challenges for Campaign Finance Disclosure After Citizens United and Doe v. Reed - https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj/vol19/iss4/8/ https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj/vol19/iss4/8/ - The Death of Non-Resident Contribution Limit Bans and the Birth of the New Small, Swing State - https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj/vol28/iss4/4/ https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj/vol28/iss4/4/ - Why Contribution Limits on a Hybrid PAC’s Independent-Expenditure Arm are Impermissible - https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj/vol25/iss1/10/ https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj/vol25/iss1/10/