3 ms·
The evidence broadly shows that the people who vote for this will not change their mind. Not when their farming business is likely going to fail due to tariffs
by toomuchtodo 11mo ago
The evidence broadly shows that the people who vote for this will not change their mind. Not when their farming business is likely going to fail due to tariffs (~78% of farmers voted for this), not when their North Carolina saw mill that has been in the family for forty years is forced to close (Mackey’s Ferry Sawmill), not when their ACA subsidies and SNAP benefits are pulled. One's presence and voice is immaterial. One can both vote and donate to campaigns from abroad; there is literally nothing one can do on US soil you cannot do from abroad while not exposing yourself and potentially family to a slowly failing and degrading governance system, that by all observations and evidence, hates its citizens with policy.
As I often ask when problem scoping, "What is your time horizon?" Will things change in 3, 5, 7, 10 years? ~2M voters 55+ die every year in the US, ~5k per day (mental models are rigid, progress occurs one funeral at a time as Planck said). Young voters were very excited for this admin, and now that vibes have met reality, they are not so excited, with a roughly 50 point swing in favorability in polling. I expect a swing back, considering recent elections over the last few weeks, but it will take quite some time.
So, from a first principles perspective, if you can live somewhere safer, better, or other idea of more favorable while losing nothing, why not? You can always move back if the US gets its shit together, and if it doesn't, you have made a home and life for yourself somewhere more favorable. Leaving is not giving up, it is merely having a better life experience while sacrificing nothing except US in person work opportunities and proximity to friends and loved ones (if applicable) for the time horizon in question. Some may feel entitled to functional governance systems, and they should (imho) vote with their feet and wallets. It is a rational evaluation in a volatile environment.
And if another country is offering you a residency visa or path to citizenship, they clearly want you. You might not be aware, but the developed world is going through a working age population crunch due to structural demographics; skilled workers are in demand, as well as those with either investment, pension, or social security income.
(think in systems)
- dauertewigkeit 11mo agoThe farmers and the sawmill operators are easily explained. I also listen to Bloomberg, lol. Those people are rich and most of their wealth is now diversified away from their businesses, and while they would rather keep those businesses alive because it's part of their family identity, they care more about reducing their taxes on their overall net worth.
- toomuchtodo 11mo agoPlease explain the ACA subsidies and SNAP benefit cuts to rural republican voters who will still vote for this then. Are these people going to change their vote? Again, likely not. Their mental model and their identity is rigid (along with a bit of in group and tribalism) and they will very likely vote this way to the very end. You can live a better life by leaving while waiting for these voters to age out, because you cannot change their mind or their vote. If you stay, you will be exposed to governance outcomes from their votes. You can think of it as the grey rock method in a political and expat context. You don't engage, doing so would be of no value; you just ignore and leave. Life is short, optimize accordingly. https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/columnist/2025/10/30/shutdown-snap-republican-voters-rural-america/86946759007/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/columnist/2025/10/30/... https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/5325977-trump-budget-impact-rural-medicaid/ https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/5325977-trump-budget-... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grey_rock_method https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grey_rock_method
- ryandrake 11mo agoThey are obviously not voting for a better life for themselves. They are voting for a worse life for their perceived enemies. A huge number of voters would rather suffer if it means people they don't like will suffer even more.
- toomuchtodo 11mo agoThere it is. And that cannot be solved for on timelines relevant to people who can leave.
- AnimalMuppet 11mo ago> if you can live somewhere safer, better, or other idea of more favorable while losing nothing, why not? If. Are you really losing nothing?