Trumpenomics
-
wrote on 12 Mar 2025, 14:26 last edited by
He’s against tariffs.
I was talking about the longer arc of the last few years for him. Used to like his podcast during Trump term 1. Sometimes he’d agree and many times he’d disagree with the administration.
He slowly moved to almost lockstep predictable positions… since that’s where his audience had presumably moved to.
-
He’s against tariffs.
I was talking about the longer arc of the last few years for him. Used to like his podcast during Trump term 1. Sometimes he’d agree and many times he’d disagree with the administration.
He slowly moved to almost lockstep predictable positions… since that’s where his audience had presumably moved to.
wrote on 12 Mar 2025, 14:33 last edited by@xenon said in Trumpenomics:
He’s against tariffs.
I was talking about the longer arc of the last few years for him. Used to like his podcast during Trump term 1. Sometimes he’d agree and many times he’d disagree with the administration.
He slowly moved to almost lockstep predictable positions… since that’s where his audience had presumably moved to.
How does your audience capture theory fit with this push back on the tariffs? Being for these chaos tariffs as Trump is implementing them would be an absurdist symptom of audience capture, but he's not there, so what are some absurdist symptoms of audience capture he was showing before now? Talking points that tribes hit on over and over tend not to be absurd, or even untrue, so much as non-disprovable empty rhetoric that makes the audience feel good.
-
wrote on 12 Mar 2025, 15:22 last edited by xenon 3 Dec 2025, 15:24
He called Jan 6 the worst day in American history since 9/11. He said he would never vote Trump because of his character, since his own morals are deeply rooted in his religion.
Those are just a couple of top of mind examples. He realized that he can’t be anti-Trump and also a popular right wing commentator.
He used to disagree with the vast majority of things Trump. Now he agrees with the vast majority (or at least goes out of it way to give the most charitable explanation).
-
wrote on 12 Mar 2025, 15:29 last edited by
It surprises me Shapiro was ever as strident about Jan 6 or Trump as the two examples you point out.
I don't listen to much DW content because it's not substantive enough, just relentless culture war dunks that might be funny, but aren't so meaningful.
-
It surprises me Shapiro was ever as strident about Jan 6 or Trump as the two examples you point out.
I don't listen to much DW content because it's not substantive enough, just relentless culture war dunks that might be funny, but aren't so meaningful.
wrote on 12 Mar 2025, 15:54 last edited by@Horace said in Trumpenomics:
It surprises me Shapiro was ever as strident about Jan 6 or Trump as the two examples you point out.
I don't listen to much DW content because it's not substantive enough, just relentless culture war dunks that might be funny, but aren't so meaningful.
I think you’re too influenced by Walsh and Candace Owen’s. 85% of Shapiro’s stuff for the masses is the typical red meat, but about 15% is far more intellectual and you see a reasoning/philosophical point to some of the governance points Ben is making. Klavan is hilarious in his openings, but occasionally delves kind of deep into his background as an author and an artist. Knowles will dig pretty deep into classical western theology and philosophy to make his points.
Yes, 80% is Rush redux, but the 20% makes it worthwhile.
-
wrote on 12 Mar 2025, 15:55 last edited by
This is all fair enough from Shapiro:
Link to video -
@Horace said in Trumpenomics:
It surprises me Shapiro was ever as strident about Jan 6 or Trump as the two examples you point out.
I don't listen to much DW content because it's not substantive enough, just relentless culture war dunks that might be funny, but aren't so meaningful.
I think you’re too influenced by Walsh and Candace Owen’s. 85% of Shapiro’s stuff for the masses is the typical red meat, but about 15% is far more intellectual and you see a reasoning/philosophical point to some of the governance points Ben is making. Klavan is hilarious in his openings, but occasionally delves kind of deep into his background as an author and an artist. Knowles will dig pretty deep into classical western theology and philosophy to make his points.
Yes, 80% is Rush redux, but the 20% makes it worthwhile.
wrote on 12 Mar 2025, 15:57 last edited by@LuFins-Dad said in Trumpenomics:
I think you’re too influenced by Walsh
Probably. The algo decided I like Walsh at some point and I get fed his stuff every day. Well, I do like him, but I don't need the 1000th serving of culture war dunks.
-
wrote on 13 Mar 2025, 00:15 last edited by
-
wrote on 13 Mar 2025, 01:54 last edited by
I predict some stocks will go up and down.
Just 1 man's opinion.
-
wrote on 13 Mar 2025, 02:02 last edited by
@Copper You are a smart man!!!!
-
wrote on 13 Mar 2025, 02:08 last edited by
Stock market? More like drop market.
-
wrote on 13 Mar 2025, 02:33 last edited by xenon
Speaking of audience capture - here’s VDH’s take on the tariff situation with Canada.
He sounds reasonable too, which is impressive in its own right. But pretty much frames it that Canada is in the wrong and Trump is completely right.
And he had a video on tariffs early feb too, where his point was that Trump doesn’t actually put on tariffs, just uses them as a diplomatic cudgel (eg prisoner deportation). But he didn’t address that here.
Link to video -
Speaking of audience capture - here’s VDH’s take on the tariff situation with Canada.
He sounds reasonable too, which is impressive in its own right. But pretty much frames it that Canada is in the wrong and Trump is completely right.
And he had a video on tariffs early feb too, where his point was that Trump doesn’t actually put on tariffs, just uses them as a diplomatic cudgel (eg prisoner deportation). But he didn’t address that here.
Link to videowrote on 13 Mar 2025, 02:47 last edited by RenaudaI watched it yesterday. He has some misconceptions about Canada. Particularly with regard to how he equates the supply management system here as a government subsidy as in the US and fails to acknowledge that US has been given a quota under CUSMA which it can export dairy products to Canada tariff free. The US. Is therefore treated like any dairy producer in Canada - it is given a percentage quota. I believe jon-nyc posted something about how that worked either in this thread or the Canada Tariff thread yesterday as well. I referenced the dairy supply management system as well in answer to a question TG had the other day.
There was also a statement he made about oil and gas exports that was inaccurate
Overall I rate it a C. He should do his homework.
-
wrote on 13 Mar 2025, 02:50 last edited by
He’s a smart guy. I think he knows better, but doesn’t want to lose his audience over it.
-
wrote on 13 Mar 2025, 03:18 last edited by
Still no excuse for sloppy thinking on his part.
-
wrote on 13 Mar 2025, 14:49 last edited by jon-nyc
Seeing a lot of this type of thing from business and finance types that voted Trump for the first time in 2024. They voted for him over wokeness, immigration, and Israel thinking the tariff stuff was mostly bluster.
Asness used to run the quantitative finance desk at Goldman before going in to start AQR Capital Management. He has advanced degrees in both CS and quantitative finance. Smart guy.
-
wrote on 13 Mar 2025, 15:10 last edited by
It's never been clear to me how anti-competitive manufacturing jobs are supposed to make america great again.
-
wrote on 13 Mar 2025, 15:24 last edited by xenon
Maybe, just maybe…. Trump’s an idiot. It’s worth considering.
-
wrote on 13 Mar 2025, 15:34 last edited by
I’m not saying it’s not a different flavor of incompetence.