3 ms·

I always ask myself, "what is being done by the left hand, while we are distracted by the right hand?" Could this dust-up have anything to do with some other b

I always ask myself, "what is being done by the left hand, while we are distracted by the right hand?" Could this dust-up have anything to do with some other bill being passed or a policy implemented? I can think of the big reconciliation (BBB) bill, and Palantir getting access to more information on American citizens, as 2 things that the public could be distracted from by the Musk-Trump issue.

fullshark 1y ago
The public doesn't need elaborate schemes to be distracted, no one actually cares about that stuff. Republicans don't even really care about massive deficit spending in the budget which is out in the open.
- rayiner 1y ago
  Correct. Republicans voted to close the border and deport illegal aliens, not cut the budget deficit. The fiscally responsible republican party hasn’t existed since the 1920s. Trump has been consistent on this since 2016: he considers Medicare and Social Security untouchable. (The other republicans weren’t going to cut those either, but they were going to talk about reforming them.)
  - mindslight 1y ago
    One has to love this chameleon of a Republican "platform" where values and ideals are championed to browbeat support for a particular action, but then written off as irrelevant when they're awkward for analyzing other actions - while other values and ideals are dragged out in support. A week ago, "the debt" was really important. Now that Dear Leader has declared otherwise, apparently it's not. Right into the memory hole it goes. The reality is there is no platform beyond anger (the base), and naked autocratic power (the politicians). Everything else is post-hoc rationalization. (and just to clarify so I'm not written off as some progressive partisan: I'm a libertarian who was unaligned, understood and saw merit in both camps' ideals - until the Republican party turned its back on conservatism in favor of cult of personality reactionaryism)
    - rayiner 1y ago
      There is a platform: https://www.donaldjtrump.com/platform https://www.donaldjtrump.com/platform. No taxes on tips was on the platform (#6) as was no cuts to medicare or social security (#14). Balancing the budget was not on the platform. There are republicans who care about the debt, but the party as a whole doesn’t. The economic libertarians have been thoroughly marginalized in the modern GOP, because economic libertarianism is unpopular. To be clear, I admire the traditional small government conservatives, though I am not one. The GOP hasn’t been that party since the 1920s. The mass immigration of the 20th century made that approach unviable. We’re a country of machine politics now and it’s only going to become more pronounced. The guy who ran on “No Taxes on Tips” to buy the Latino vote in Nevada was never going to balance the budget.
      - mindslight 1y ago
        That platform statement does not contain values or ideals! It contains goals, which could possibly be achieved in very different ways. Values and ideals are then trotted out in support of the specific policies that purport to achieve those goals, and my point is that those ideals are highly inconsistent and seemingly sum up to mere blind anger. Your individual assertion that you don't care about a balanced budget isn't particularly relevant to the larger context where an overwhelming amount of Trump supporters did just make arguments professing support of the need to get the budget under control to justify last week's policies.
        rayiner 1y ago
        Just because people don’t have a grand unifying theory tying their preferences together doesn’t mean their preferences are motivated by “mere blind anger.” Trying to fit your preferences into some internally consistent framework is a high-IQ fixation. That’s especially true because society is hard to analyze. For example, I think it will be bad for society to encourage greater race and ethnic consciousness in a diverse society. I can point to all the sectarian conflict that exists in countries around the world as an example of what I seek to avoid, but that’s hardly definitive. Is the upshot that we have to proceed with a vast social experiment, because we can’t provide a closed form analysis of the proposal a priori?
  - tzs 1y ago
    > Trump has been consistent on this since 2016: he considers Medicare and Social Security untouchable. (The other republicans weren’t going to cut those either, but they were going to talk about reforming them.) Technically they weren't going to cut them, but they also weren't doing anything to effectively address the upcoming shortfalls in the SS and Medicare trust funds and in fact the tax changes they are trying to enact would shorten the time to those shortfalls.
hypeatei 1y ago
> Palantir getting access to more information on American citizens This is overblown IMO. The government already has this data on citizens and they're merely using it how they like (i.e. consolidating it through a contractor) The time to stop this would've been before it was collected in the first place.
enraged_camel 1y ago
I think you're falling into the "they are playing 5D chess" trap, whereas the truth is almost certainly much simpler: two powerful men with giant and brittle egos, who were on a collision course from day one, have now collided. That's it.
- rayiner 1y ago
  They’re to powerful men with huge egos who fundamentally disagree on political priorities. Trump had a platform: https://www.donaldjtrump.com/platform https://www.donaldjtrump.com/platform. Balancing the budget wasn’t on it, but the following was: “FIGHT FOR AND PROTECT SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE WITH NO CUTS, INCLUDING NO CHANGES TO THE RETIREMENT AGE” (all-caps original).
yb6677 1y ago
[dead]
krick 1y ago
That's what I usually think too. Even if just to be cautious: people alluding to "Hanlon's razor" (as if it's a real thing) are basically declaring themselves the smartest in the room, so by another well-known eponymous effect they are usually the dumbest in the room. Usually the worst suspicions are confirmed later. This time, though, I'm running with the crowd. I think this is just too much. I mean, come on, screaming on Twitter that Trump didn't release Epstein files, because he is in them? Sure, it doesn't hurt him, it's no news nor a real accusation, but I'm pretty sure Trump didn't want that to be posted. The whole thing doesn't look nice for anybody, it doesn't help anybody. No, I really think Musk has become totally insane this time, or/and is drugged out. The left hand still may be doing something, but that's taking the opportunity, not making this all up for the sake of distraction.

fullshark 1y ago

The public doesn't need elaborate schemes to be distracted, no one actually cares about that stuff. Republicans don't even really care about massive deficit spending in the budget which is out in the open.

rayiner 1y ago
Correct. Republicans voted to close the border and deport illegal aliens, not cut the budget deficit. The fiscally responsible republican party hasn’t existed since the 1920s. Trump has been consistent on this since 2016: he considers Medicare and Social Security untouchable. (The other republicans weren’t going to cut those either, but they were going to talk about reforming them.)
- mindslight 1y ago
  One has to love this chameleon of a Republican "platform" where values and ideals are championed to browbeat support for a particular action, but then written off as irrelevant when they're awkward for analyzing other actions - while other values and ideals are dragged out in support. A week ago, "the debt" was really important. Now that Dear Leader has declared otherwise, apparently it's not. Right into the memory hole it goes. The reality is there is no platform beyond anger (the base), and naked autocratic power (the politicians). Everything else is post-hoc rationalization. (and just to clarify so I'm not written off as some progressive partisan: I'm a libertarian who was unaligned, understood and saw merit in both camps' ideals - until the Republican party turned its back on conservatism in favor of cult of personality reactionaryism)
  - rayiner 1y ago
    There is a platform: https://www.donaldjtrump.com/platform https://www.donaldjtrump.com/platform. No taxes on tips was on the platform (#6) as was no cuts to medicare or social security (#14). Balancing the budget was not on the platform. There are republicans who care about the debt, but the party as a whole doesn’t. The economic libertarians have been thoroughly marginalized in the modern GOP, because economic libertarianism is unpopular. To be clear, I admire the traditional small government conservatives, though I am not one. The GOP hasn’t been that party since the 1920s. The mass immigration of the 20th century made that approach unviable. We’re a country of machine politics now and it’s only going to become more pronounced. The guy who ran on “No Taxes on Tips” to buy the Latino vote in Nevada was never going to balance the budget.
    - mindslight 1y ago
      That platform statement does not contain values or ideals! It contains goals, which could possibly be achieved in very different ways. Values and ideals are then trotted out in support of the specific policies that purport to achieve those goals, and my point is that those ideals are highly inconsistent and seemingly sum up to mere blind anger. Your individual assertion that you don't care about a balanced budget isn't particularly relevant to the larger context where an overwhelming amount of Trump supporters did just make arguments professing support of the need to get the budget under control to justify last week's policies.
      - rayiner 1y ago
        Just because people don’t have a grand unifying theory tying their preferences together doesn’t mean their preferences are motivated by “mere blind anger.” Trying to fit your preferences into some internally consistent framework is a high-IQ fixation. That’s especially true because society is hard to analyze. For example, I think it will be bad for society to encourage greater race and ethnic consciousness in a diverse society. I can point to all the sectarian conflict that exists in countries around the world as an example of what I seek to avoid, but that’s hardly definitive. Is the upshot that we have to proceed with a vast social experiment, because we can’t provide a closed form analysis of the proposal a priori?
- tzs 1y ago
  > Trump has been consistent on this since 2016: he considers Medicare and Social Security untouchable. (The other republicans weren’t going to cut those either, but they were going to talk about reforming them.) Technically they weren't going to cut them, but they also weren't doing anything to effectively address the upcoming shortfalls in the SS and Medicare trust funds and in fact the tax changes they are trying to enact would shorten the time to those shortfalls.

hypeatei 1y ago

> Palantir getting access to more information on American citizens This is overblown IMO. The government already has this data on citizens and they're merely using it how they like (i.e. consolidating it through a contractor) The time to stop this would've been before it was collected in the first place.

enraged_camel 1y ago

I think you're falling into the "they are playing 5D chess" trap, whereas the truth is almost certainly much simpler: two powerful men with giant and brittle egos, who were on a collision course from day one, have now collided. That's it.

rayiner 1y ago
They’re to powerful men with huge egos who fundamentally disagree on political priorities. Trump had a platform: https://www.donaldjtrump.com/platform https://www.donaldjtrump.com/platform. Balancing the budget wasn’t on it, but the following was: “FIGHT FOR AND PROTECT SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE WITH NO CUTS, INCLUDING NO CHANGES TO THE RETIREMENT AGE” (all-caps original).

yb6677 1y ago

[dead]

krick 1y ago

That's what I usually think too. Even if just to be cautious: people alluding to "Hanlon's razor" (as if it's a real thing) are basically declaring themselves the smartest in the room, so by another well-known eponymous effect they are usually the dumbest in the room. Usually the worst suspicions are confirmed later. This time, though, I'm running with the crowd. I think this is just too much. I mean, come on, screaming on Twitter that Trump didn't release Epstein files, because he is in them? Sure, it doesn't hurt him, it's no news nor a real accusation, but I'm pretty sure Trump didn't want that to be posted. The whole thing doesn't look nice for anybody, it doesn't help anybody. No, I really think Musk has become totally insane this time, or/and is drugged out. The left hand still may be doing something, but that's taking the opportunity, not making this all up for the sake of distraction.