- cross-posted to:
- politics@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- politics@lemmy.world
“A self-interested, erratic megalomaniac has seized control of the US government.”
You must log in or register to comment.
The head of state sharing power and responsibility with powerful unelected individual(s)? Where have I heard this before?
Pretty sure Trump campaigned with Musk more than Vance.
They voted for an insecure fascist crybaby set to sacrifice whatever and whoever they can to get that fleeting feeling of being in power.
What part was out of the scope of expectations?
The same people who complained that they didn’t vote for Kamala in the primaries are now totally fine with Crypto Hitler
Both DOGE and Project 2025 where public knowledge when people voted. So people voted for Musk and everything that’s happening even if they are too stupid to understand what they did
I don’t want to be pedantic, but okay I will. Musk wasn’t on any ballot. Not a single person voted for an individual named Elon Musk. It wasn’t an option. Enough people voted for Trump and Vance for them to win, but they were the only two on the ballot. It may seem like a distinction without a difference, because Musk functionally has an insane amount of power and influence, but that power was delegated to him by the person that people actually voted for, which is how our government works. People might have voted for Trump hoping he would use Musk in this way, but they still only voted for Trump.
I feel silly writing all that out, but these kinds of distinctions matter imo.
When people vote they are (hopefully) not voting just for the names in the ballot, but in the political program and plans that those names presented. Otherwise no elected politician would have political legitimacy to do anything more effective than waving to the camera on TV.
The Donald Trump that people voted for is the same Donald Trump that openly said he was going to take dictatorial measures and would put Musk in charge of dismantling the government. After this no one has the right to say they didn’t know what they were voting for
Nobody votes for cabinet members. Why is it useful to say so?
I was responding to the comment above (and lots of other chatter like this), which said “people voted for Musk” which is just not true. And like you said, the people don’t vote for the cabinet, they vote for the person who nominates cabinet members. It’s useful to point out because these distinctions have real-world consequences. Musk is a what’s called a “Special Government Employee,” which is an unelected position.
I think the point is that people didn’t directly vote for Musk but they voted for the policies that enable him. So they voted for him indirectly, by voting for Trump and Vance.
I’m still not entirely convinced Musk didn’t steal the election, but the evidence I’ve seen to support it is rather thin beyond circumstantial evidence about voting patterns. We don’t have benevolent hacker groups looking out for us anymore, I don’t think.
A lot of folks don’t understand that a lot of hacks/leaks relied on people from other countries doing the hack. If you’re a citizen of the country you’re trying to hack, you’re in for a real bad time.
The rest of the world is too busy fixing their own problems to be worrying about fixing the USA when we fucked this one up all on our own.
Honestly, we’ve been fucking it up all on our own and showing the rest of the world how little we respect their opinion since at least two weeks after 9/11/2001.
Speaking of stolen elections, I get that this isn’t exactly evidence but this kind of a slip-up, intentional or otherwise is just weird if the election was truly 100% fair.
TLDW with relevant quote: “and he (Musk) knows those computers better than anybody, all those computers, those vote counting computers, and we ended up winning Pennsylvania like in a landslide it was pretty good”
