85.2%

[canpakes]

Why are so many voters more inclined to un skeptically believe the easily debunked torrent of lies coming from Trump than the solidly evidence-based, positive economic indicators that are easy to look up and confirm?

Because it’s still even easier for some to not look up and confirm anything, in favor of choosing to believe what makes them feel better believing.

[ceeboo]

Only heavily online culture warriors like Ceebs would know about it

Ha!

Merry Christmas, Gad.

[Gunnar]

Why are so many voters more inclined to un skeptically believe the easily debunked torrent of lies coming from Trump than the solidly evidence-based, positive economic indicators that are easy to look up and confirm?

Because it’s still even easier for some to not look up and confirm anything, in favor of choosing to believe what makes them feel better believing.

Of course! I actually really knew that before I asked the question. It was at least partly rhetorical. A good example of that is HOH's apparent refusal to take a look at the 2024 Democratic Platform we have urged him to look at and comment on. It is still a shame that so many would rather choose to uncritically accept what makes them feel good rather than try to objectively search the evidence. Yet, I can't assuredly claim that I am entirely immune from that tendency myself. I do try to reexamine my convictions when warranted by new and more complete evidence and have at least occasionally managed to correct and/ or abandon faulty or mistaken convictions when warranted.

[Dr Exiled]

I think democrats need to realize that voters actually can think for themselves and most chose Trump in 2024 and then look to see why that happened. Maybe it's what the democrats were selling or the lack thereof that lost the election. Perhaps the elitist idea that the idiot voters are somehow controlled by russia (the 2016 nonsense reason democrats claimed Trump won) or bamboozled by Trump this go around needs to go. This article by politico seems to point to that, but, this thesis could be wrong of course. Vote for us or you're an idiot has been the playbook for a while and so why not continue it. Case solved.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/12/2 ... p-00195806

The fact remains that voting for Donald Trump and his MAGA conservatives was a horrible mistake, by almost ever objective measure, and this will become increasingly apparent during the next 4 years. People don't like to be characterized as idiots--especially if they really are. They would rather risk remaining idiots, than admit to being or having been idiots. The more foolish they have been, the more they will resist admitting to having been so foolish. Perhaps too much emphasis was placed on pointing out how foolish it was to ever support Trump in the first place, and people, especially the foolish, would rather risk remaining foolish than admit to being or having been foolish.

Too many voters were insufficiently aware of the objective fact that by nearly every objective economic factor such as record job growth, record low unemployment rates, highest GDP growth of the so called "G7 nations, declining inflation rates (reaching the lowest of most, if not if not all other nation, Biden's Administration has left us significantly better off than most, if not all other nations, and better off than we were at the start of his administration. Biden has, believe it or not, left Trump's incoming administration with a strong and still improving economy, which Trump will undoubtedly try to take full credit for as long as it continues, but blame Biden if it takes a turn for the worse due to Trump Administration policies and actions. It is tragic that so many Americans seem to give more credence to Trump and MAGA's unrelenting torrent of baseless and easily debunked lies than to the well documented strength of the leading economic indicators: U.S. economy grows at 3.1% pace in third quarter, an upgrade from previous estimate

GDP growth has topped 2% in eight of the last nine quarters.

Consumer spending expanded at a 3.7% pace, fastest since the first quarter of 2023.

Real GDP increased at an annual rate of 3.1 percent in the third quarter of 2024.

In the second quarter, real GDP increased 3.0 percent.

Why are so many voters more inclined to un skeptically believe the easily debunked torrent of lies coming from Trump than the solidly evidence-based, positive economic indicators that are easy to look up and confirm?

I don't think you are looking at the historical trends that I believe have led to frustration among the populace and led to the Trump 2016 and Sanders 2016 populist movements. However, in the short term, maybe these charts can explain the phenomenon:

https://www.statista.com/chart/32428/in ... ed-states/

Over the last four years, while inflation is down, according to the chart, prices are still up and wages have lagged behind, meaning that it is harder to make ends meet for enough to make the close election what it was. Consumer prices increased by 20.6% and wages increased by 19.2% according to the chart. So, perhaps the people aren't as dumb as once thought?

Overall, however, there is still the macro trend of the top 1% getting all the gains while the remaining get left in the dust, and both parties are to blame for this:

https://www.epi.org/blog/wage-inequalit ... 44-growth/

I think the macro-trend is a main driver in this discontent, leading the population to chose someone like Trump. There still is a trend toward monopoly in all the economy and that doesn't seem to be stopping any time soon. People are fed up and this is why I believe that Trump is just a symptom of an overall problem. The source of the angst and anger is in the rising income inequality that has been going on for the last 45 years.

Here is an article from a guy I've followed for some time that explains things pretty well as far as the economy goes:

https://www.oftwominds.com/economy-not- ... l8-23.html

He talks about being gaslighted by the elites and their economists:

In essence, nothing that is consequential is properly quantified, so the pundit class keeps insisting everything is wunnerful and is mystified why people are so foolishly dissatisfied with our wunnerful economy. The reason why people are not buying the fantasyland story is they have to live and work in the crapified real economy, as serfs serving the economist-punditry-elite aristocracy.

[canpakes]

I don't think you are looking at the historical trends that I believe have led to frustration among the populace and led to the Trump 2016 and Sanders 2016 populist movements. However, in the short term, maybe these charts can explain the phenomenon:

https://www.statista.com/chart/32428/in ... ed-states/

Over the last four years, while inflation is down, according to the chart, prices are still up and wages have lagged behind, meaning that it is harder to make ends meet for enough to make the close election what it was. Consumer prices increased by 20.6% and wages increased by 19.2% according to the chart. So, perhaps the people aren't as dumb as once thought?

Are you trying to say that ‘the people’ are smart to believe the following:

- Prices always come down when the inflation rate is low,
- Any particular US President can be responsible for worldwide post-pandemic inflation,
- Trump has a viable plan to ‘reduce prices’ on everything to 2019 levels.

If that’s your claim, then I don’t think that your last sentence pans out.

Overall, however, there is still the macro trend of the top 1% getting all the gains while the remaining get left in the dust, and both parties are to blame for this:

https://www.epi.org/blog/wage-inequalit ... 44-growth/

I think the macro-trend is a main driver in this discontent, leading the population to chose someone like Trump.

There are differing opinions on how smart that choice is:

[canpakes]

Forgot to comment on this one:

Here is an article from a guy I've followed for some time that explains things pretty well as far as the economy goes:

https://www.oftwominds.com/economy-not- ... l8-23.html

He talks about being gaslighted by the elites and their economists:

In essence, nothing that is consequential is properly quantified, so the pundit class keeps insisting everything is wunnerful and is mystified why people are so foolishly dissatisfied with our wunnerful economy. The reason why people are not buying the fantasyland story is they have to live and work in the crapified real economy, as serfs serving the economist-punditry-elite aristocracy.

The author missed the irony of claiming that economists and pundits are the baddies.

It’s unfortunate that Smith spends 99% of the article complaining about these terrible economists and pundits, and maybe 1% talking about the root problem of … the 1%.

[Gadianton]

If that’s your claim, then I don’t think that your last sentence pans out.

Right, I take issue with the very last sentence.

Aside from that I agree with Dr. Exiled that a strong economy means nothing to any particular individual's standard of living. A strong economy can mean terrible things for poor or fixed-income people living in successful, gentrifying cities. The strong economy isn't particularly leaving me with confidence either; I feel more trapped than ever.

The voters not buying this message doesn't mean they are smart, they are still dumber than crap. The good economy still means something, even if it isn't ideal. If Dr. E. is reasoning that the economy isn't a success at all because people are feeling the hurt at the grocery store, then he's wrong. We can lower grocery store prices, it's called a recession. We could also pull out the old communist playbook, if all people want are cheap groceries, that's doable. If anyone has known folks who have lived in eastern Europe or Russia, you know that bread and milk were often very cheap due to fixed prices, so much so that littering becomes a problem -- people would just buy some milk, chug half of it, throw the rest in the street because wasn't worth taking home.

What we're really saying here is that Biden was out of touch, not that people were smart. He wasn't savvy enough to figure out how to spin the situation and lie to stupid people. And I do thing Lichtman screwed up in calling the economy good and counting it for Harris. There could still be something to his model, but he's not having it, he's doubling down that his interpretation is correct. It was pretty easy to see that people didn't think the economy was good.

Trump may be on to something. He has come out recently and said that lowering prices might be hard. He knows he can't realistically do anything about it. So, I think he's got a good strategy going with misdirection and fear mongering.

1) Let's conquer the Panama Canal and Greenland, Canada and Mexico. Suddenly MAGA is field with the fighting spirit again. Distraction. Who care about grocery prices, we're going to conquer the world!

2) Mass deportations, tariffs, cuts to social security and medicare, cuts to -- well just about everything, forced return to office for all government employees; historic cronyism under billionaire grifters, and I'm sure I'm scratching the surface. If Trump is all talk and does none of this, then people will breathe a sigh of relief and accept high grocery prices given how bad it could have been.

Just because things weren't perfect under Biden, when the chances of Trump f'ing things up are substantially higher and it was obvious all along, people are therefore stupid for voting for him.

[canpakes]

The good economy still means something, even if it isn't ideal. If Dr. E. is reasoning that the economy isn't a success at all because people are feeling the hurt at the grocery store, then he's wrong. We can lower grocery store prices, it's called a recession.

This is true. The economy can be fantastic for any number of folks, and yet we’ll still have millions experiencing food insecurity, or a lack of healthcare affordability, or will not be able to put a cent towards their retirement. Yet, MAGA will still host their boat flotillas and $80K truck parades (while complaining about Biden making the cost of eggs rise), and Tesla will still sell over a million EVs this year. Thus the measure of a ‘good economy’ is both objective and subjective.

Not that it matters. Some people and pundits will write that it’s the fault of other pundits and economists for pushing a false narrative, while those same pundits simultaneously ignore or forgive Trump for lying to them about the cause, after which they’ll force themselves to believe that Trump never actually made outlandish and ridiculous promises during the election to ‘fix’ it all.

[Dr Exiled]

I don't think you are looking at the historical trends that I believe have led to frustration among the populace and led to the Trump 2016 and Sanders 2016 populist movements. However, in the short term, maybe these charts can explain the phenomenon:

https://www.statista.com/chart/32428/in ... ed-states/

Over the last four years, while inflation is down, according to the chart, prices are still up and wages have lagged behind, meaning that it is harder to make ends meet for enough to make the close election what it was. Consumer prices increased by 20.6% and wages increased by 19.2% according to the chart. So, perhaps the people aren't as dumb as once thought?

Are you trying to say that ‘the people’ are smart to believe the following:

- Prices always come down when the inflation rate is low,
- Any particular US President can be responsible for worldwide post-pandemic inflation,
- Trump has a viable plan to ‘reduce prices’ on everything to 2019 levels.

If that’s your claim, then I don’t think that your last sentence pans out.

Overall, however, there is still the macro trend of the top 1% getting all the gains while the remaining get left in the dust, and both parties are to blame for this:

https://www.epi.org/blog/wage-inequalit ... 44-growth/

I think the macro-trend is a main driver in this discontent, leading the population to chose someone like Trump.

There are differing opinions on how smart that choice is:

I don't know about the statements you cite above and whether anyone believes them. Given how bent you are to blame one side when it is both that have engineered our economy to always benefit the donor class, my guess is that these are invented out of whole cloth to support a position.

[Dr Exiled]

Forgot to comment on this one:

Here is an article from a guy I've followed for some time that explains things pretty well as far as the economy goes:

https://www.oftwominds.com/economy-not- ... l8-23.html

He talks about being gaslighted by the elites and their economists:

The author missed the irony of claiming that economists and pundits are the baddies.

It’s unfortunate that Smith spends 99% of the article complaining about these terrible economists and pundits, and maybe 1% talking about the root problem of ... the 1%.

His point is that they paint a rosy picture over seemingly temporary gains when there is an underlying trend against the overwhelming majority. However, I'll stop raining on your blame the voter parade. I just think there is more to it and perhaps your leaders aren't what they claim to be.