Summary

Low-income voters who supported Donald Trump are expressing concerns over potential cuts to government benefits as his administration pushes for aggressive spending reductions.

Trump’s newly announced “Department of Government Efficiency” (DOGE), led by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, is tasked with cutting programs, raising fears about impacts on social safety nets.

Trump also plans to shut down the Education Department, impose tariffs on imports from China, Mexico, and Canada, and has nominated Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as Health Secretary, signaling a focus on controversial health policies.

Voter anxieties about these shifts are growing.

Non-paywall link

  • GBU_28@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    All well and good to admire the leopard feast, but I’m worried about the fact that once these people are down and out, society is going to have to collectively carry them one way or another.

    It’s concerning that many people near the edge will fall off it, regardless of their voting position.

    It’s obviously concerning that since republican policy will be enacted, more will solely be covered via emergency services rather than collective safety nets, which is an overall cost increase to society.

    • IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      At this point, I’m convinced it’s just a matter of regulating food

      Every major revolution in history was more or less sparked and accelerated because people were starving. And when you have the choice of starving to death or doing something, anything, then most people will opt for action rather than dying.

      So as long as you keep people fed … you can abuse them, manipulate them, treat them with no respect and take away everything from them and the majority of them won’t do a thing … take away their food however, and they’ll lash out like a wild animal.

      This also doesn’t mean that you keep people well fed … it just means keeping enough food in their grasp to keep them from revolting.

      • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 days ago

        If they fail to provide food, I think there’s a chance a significant enough chunk of people would learn that the right will not help them no matter what. Perhaps that would be enough to crack the fucking propaganda.

        • MutilationWave@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          Nah they’ll keep them fed enough. If they’re really smart they’ll increase SNAP/WIC spending. It would be a paltry amount compared to what we’ll lose from the rich tax breaks and the deportation fiasco.

          Although on the other hand that could lose them votes among the working poor who don’t have to worry about starving but do, in their heart of hearts, want the bad people to starve.

          I think the only way for people to see differently is if the threatened tariffs are put in place and we see the worst inflation in the country’s history over the next two years. Then maybe we can get some actual progressives in Congress (unfortunately under the Democrat umbrella) to stem the tide of insanity.

          • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            I think the only way for people to see differently is if the threatened tariffs are put in place and we see the worst inflation in the country’s history over the next two years. Then maybe we can get some actual progressives in Congress (unfortunately under the Democrat umbrella) to stem the tide of insanity.

            I can see that happening. I don’t know if it’ll result in a proper progressive wave though. Or instead just more of the same. If people got so fucked by conservatives to turn away from them, they would be incentivised to vote for anything but conservatives. That lets the Democrats win with establishment candidates. I think a shift in the Democratic party is more likely in the in-between period, when things haven’t gotten too dire for people yet.

      • GBU_28@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 days ago

        To the downvotes:

        I completely acknowledge that right wing policy is the problem here, and these people brought it about. If anyone deserves consequences, it should be those that actively brought them about.

        I am not sympathetic for leopard chew toys, I’m sympathetic for society which has no option but to accommodate them.