Trumpenomics
-
@89th said in Trumpenomics:
"Tariffs are a tax hike on foreign countries. Tariffs are a tax cut for the American people." Either I totally am wrong (possible) or I think the white house truly has NO idea what a tariff is and who pays it. WTFFFFFFFF
Of course she snips at the AP at the end of it.
a good summary.
For those who do not follow economics, here's basically what happened:
Leavitt: 2+2=Purple.
AP Reporter: I have a calculator and 2+2=4.
Leavitt: How DARE you insult my math skills!
Conservative Media: White House DESTROYS disrespectful and un-American AP reporter.wrote 3 days ago last edited by@jon-nyc LOL
But true.
-
wrote 3 days ago last edited by
Shapiro has been going off on Trump’s tariff policy and the general populist MAGA underpinnings.
-
wrote 3 days ago last edited by
I’ve been listening to him too lately. He’s such a case study in audience capture. He knows better than all this.
He was a big Trump booster during the election this time - his position was that Trump wouldn’t do a lot of the things he’s now doing.
-
wrote 3 days ago last edited by jon-nyc 3 Dec 2025, 14:00
Re audience capture, I remember a number of years ago hearing him with Sam Harris and thinking he was an intelligent guy who I didn’t always agree with but he made sense. Then I listened to him on his own podcast. For about five minutes. Oy.
-
wrote 3 days ago last edited by
I read LD's post as Shapiro being unhappy with the tariffs. What is Shapiro saying?
-
wrote 3 days ago last edited by
I think basically that the Trump's tariff chaos and the "withdrawal from global commerce" (not really, but the general feeling) is not going to result in a good outcome for America or the world. It's a lose-lose strategy. I only listened to it a little, so @LuFins-Dad correct me please.
-
wrote 3 days ago last edited by
Not sure where Xenon's post is coming from, then.
-
wrote 3 days ago 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 3 days ago 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 3 days ago 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 3 days ago 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 3 days ago 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 3 days ago 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 3 days ago 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 2 days ago last edited by
-
wrote 2 days ago last edited by
I predict some stocks will go up and down.
Just 1 man's opinion.
-
wrote 2 days ago last edited by
@Copper You are a smart man!!!!
-
wrote 2 days ago last edited by
Stock market? More like drop market.
-
wrote 2 days ago 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 2 days ago 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.
