The Michigan index of consumer expectations (not current consumer sentiment) is doing its usual thing in the wake of the election:
As usual, Republicans are considerably more partisan about the economy than Democrats. After Joe Biden's election their expectations dropped about 75 points while Democratic expectations rose 30 points. This time around Republican expectations are already up 27 points compared to a Democratic drop of about 16.
This is a partisan dynamic we see frequently, and I don't know why. Are Republicans just more partisan? More scared of Democrats than Democrats are of Republicans? Is it media driven? Some enterprising grad student should look into this.
Anecdotally, my friend is a lifelong Republican who is retired and doing well on his pension and savings. He is deathly afraid that Democrats are going to take away his retirement money one way or another.
Is he deathly afraid that Republicans are going to impose tariffs and raise prices? If not, why not? They've promised to do that.
Your friend is an idiot.
One of the fundamental differences that I have observed between Democrats and Republicans is that Democrats are organized by a few broad ideas about what government should do: Healthcare, safety net, civil rights, inequality and so on. There is a broad range of identities and a broad range of ideas about *how* to address these, but broad agreement on the fundamental principles. Even with Bernie Sanders, the disagreements are more about details.
Whereas the Republican Party organizes itself by its opposition to Democrats. A Republican might well agree with Democrats on some ideas, but if they are oppsed to something the D's want to do, they belong in the R party. This is what Reagan accomplished, and somehow Trump is holding together. "Government is the problem" has morphed into "Democrats are the enemy within", but both of those statements are extremely vague umbrellas that invite anyone with a bone to pick.
I'm not completely clear on how this plays out in this specific case, but it really seems like it has an impact.
I agree the first paragraph is completely correct, which is why Dem turnout is always at issue --- all potential D voters agree on the need for Healthcare, but if particular candidate does not agree with the voter's particular position, that vote is at risk. That's just the way it is. There is no reason, no analytical reason, to sit out voting for Clinton in 2016 because you liked Sanders better, but it happened.
R's are a party of extremists, gun nuts (Group 1), anti abortionistes (Group 2), "hey, I'm not a racist just because of ......." (Group 3) and taxation is, fundamentally, theft (Group 4). One could go on, but its not merely that Groups 1-4 in the examples above are "opposed to Dems" its that they are not only opposed but are not interested in discussion a political compromise on their issue.
Republicans are both more delusional and more addicted to lying. And the democrat reaction is not necessarily partisan and certainly irrefutably not completely partisan since the economy historical has done much better under democrat presidents.
It will interesting to see this graph overlay with the real economical benchmarks, maybe offset by few years. Presumably Democrat lines will match better.
Here's where I'd go first for an answer: Who are the most and least informed voters, by political affiliation?
I'll put five bucks on Republicans as a whole. If so, there's your explanation. Fox tells them things are going to hell in a handbasket? They believe it. Fox tells them that the future is so bright they've gotta wear shades? They put their sunglasses on.
Not that many Republicans watch Fox News. At least if you count "Republicans" as "People who voted for Trump".
I know that because not that many people watch Fox News period. I just looked at figures that say they have 2 million viewers in prime time, total. In media, that is not a big number. I know YouTube channels with bigger numbers, and they are kind of obscure ones.
They aren't a heavy media hitter. We need to refocus on what people are listening to and watching, which is social media, which is a hotbed of disinformation and lies. It works so much better for several reasons, not the least of which is very, very poor visibility, which means very poor accountability. Social media has turned the whispering campaign and the conspiracy theory into a primary political tool, precisely because it is microtargeted and invisible to those who aren't its targets.
Seriously, Fox News is about as relevant as the NYTimes.
every poll I've check shows Fox #1
It's not that simple. First, you can't assume that it's the same 2 million people watching every night (although my dad would be in that group). Second, you shouldn't assume that Fox's reach is limited to just people directly viewing it. I suspect their influence is far greater than just prime time viewership.
There is nothing mysterious about this - it's what happens when instinctive tribal loyalties are aroused. Perceptions and judgements are driven by that, not reason. Everything the other side does becomes wrong. Low-income white Republican voters are not necessarily exceptionally stupid to believe Trump's lies about the economy, they just don't make decisions logically or even from material self-interest, they do it on the basis of tribal loyalty.
The tribe in question is the white, Christian, straight, male-dominated one. (WCSM's? This is descriptive, MAGA is not). Republicans have been relying on this tribal agglomeration as a means of dividing the lower-income vote for a long time. Trump put himself at the head of the tribe by being more explicit and telling people that they are right to be bigoted.
Democrats have also become more partisan, partly in reaction, but this is mostly a result of the influence of more-extreme factions, not Democratic politicians. It is the Republican party which has had the deliberate strategy of splitting the "working class" and they have the support of the right-wing media and the compliance of the MSM.
I'm surprised this is a question, given Kevin's previous willingness to assign blame to Fox News. Republicans consume more propaganda than Democrats. "Democrats have the most trust in PBS, ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN, while Republicans particularly trust Fox News, Fox Business Channel, and Newsmax." (https://today.yougov.com/politics/articles/49552-trust-in-media-2024-which-news-outlets-americans-trust) Fox told them the Biden ecoomy sucked, and now I assume it's telling them the Trump economy is going to be great.
The right-wing media are important, but remember than Trump came to prominence before 2016 despite initial opposition in the campaign from Fox. He also had little financial support. He did get a lot of free publicity from the MSM, which tended to regard his candidacy as a joke (I did too at first).
Neither Trump nor Rupert Murdoch are bending half the country to their will. Their success is based on giving people what they want, which for many is bigotry. Bigotry is itself a result of tribalism, not really any specific kind of morality.
This is explained easily: The Apprentice. People believed that Trump was the character he played on that show. I've heard soooo many people say some variation of, "sure he seems like a crazy person and a crook, and he's not a real Christian, and he's kinda sexist and racist, but he's a great business man who will whip the government into shape." Every time I hear it, I want to literally scream.
I personally hate "reality" TV and thought it would probably be bad for the country from the very beginning, but an incredible amount of people seem to like it. I honestly thought that the apprentice was on TV for a season or two. I just can't imagine why anyone would have watched something so incredibly stupid. But, I also thought that everyone knew what a fucking dipshit Trump was long before he first started running for president in 2015. I am obviously way out of touch with the mainstream - and thankfully so.
"This is explained easily: The Apprentice. "
Only partially.
Trump spent several years before 2015 going around meeting various groups looking for ways of bamboozling people to support him. He found that some specific strains of bigotry can get him substanial support, so he campaigned on these strains of bigotry.
Most of people didn't think that bigotry can work that well on the national stage, which is why they were so surprized by his success.
Yes, also true. I definitely over simplified, but I firmly believe that without the Apprentice, none of this would have happened. Trump would probably be a small time scammer who once owned some real estate.
Ah, yes. I love it when Kevin poses questions that everyone (including Kevin) knows the answers to.
From the party of corporate profits via no taxes, no labor leverage, no environmental or legal responsibility . . .
why am I not surprised
In my adult lifetime, the economy always crashes during Republican administrations and never during Democratic ones. Bush Sr, Bush Jr, Trump all ended with a terrible economy and then we elected Clinton, Obama and Biden to clean things up. So even if Republicans and Democrats both exhibit a tendency to rate the economy better when their man* is in the White House, the actual economy’s performance seems to suggest that Democrats are actually more correct in their vibes than Republicans are.
*As we’ve painfully seen twice now, it’s always a man and never a woman in the WH.
Yeah, should Democrats be cast as rank partisans for rationally predicting that the economy will tank (or observing that it has tanked) under a Republican president? Just because it appears partisan doesn't mean that's the root cause.
I would like to know if people actually make changes to their behavior that align with their stated views of the economy.
Or is it always just talk, the way that people who claim Social Security won't exist for them don't actually save more for retirement.