Politics is entertainment

July 15,  2024

Politics is as entertaining as it is enlightening. Politics illustrates one of our recurrent opinions at Creatix, which is that everything humans do or don't do is based on perceived convenience (PC). Politics is interesting because most people truly believe that the issues really matter without realizing that they are pretexts and rationalizations for the two emotions that control humans, which are fear and greed. 

-----------------

A quick word about Creatix.

Creatix -> sales matrix

A matrix is a place or platform where things are created. To create is to transform. Creatix transforms data and information into opinions for sale. The mission is to create sales. The vision is everyone enjoying sales. Why sales? Because humans need goods (products and services) to survive and thrive. Commercial sales are the best way to promote the creation and distribution of goods. Producers and vendors choose what to sell. Consumers choose what to buy. Voila!

Creatix sells opinions. 

Unable to sell everything, we focus on selling opinions. Data and information are practically infinite (PI) in this PI universe. We transform data and information into opinions. Check them out. Who knows. Maybe one of our opinions can help you prosper in business life and in the business of life. Paid consulting is available via email or text at a "spa" rate of $125 per hour. In our opinion, an excellent deal. Enjoy.

-----------------

In this post, let's keep enjoying the election season and how politics illustrates how fear and greed rule human behavior. The headlines are still dominated by Trump's assassination attempt. Wall Street took Trump's botched ass attempt very well with another day of market gains. Most institutional investors are greedy by nature and risk takers. They believe that a second Trump administration will promote a business-friendly environment with less regulations, lower (or at least not higher) taxes, and massive government spending. Trump is a pro-business big spender. This wakes up greed on Wall Street. 

Wall Street is celebrating that Trump survived the first assassination attempt against him, and that surviving the assassination attempt may make Trump even more popular for re-election. The market is ready for a second Trump administration and so are we. We are neither against nor in favor, but simply ready for it just as we are ready for Democrats holding onto the White House. Those two possibilities complete most of the range of possibilities and we are ready for either scenario. We are all lucky that either scenario is highly predictable. We all know how Trump's first term went and how Biden's first is going. Neither one is "good" or "bad" because those are simply labels based on opinions. Each political camp creates its own opinions based on perceived convenience (PC). The facts and issues are irrelevant. They are only used for rationalization of emotional preferences based on PC.

A second Trump administration or a second Biden administration would be mostly a repetition and a predictable sequel. Of course, the future has not been created yet and we can all count on unknown unknowns that may materialize in the future. That's what keep things interesting. 

The Assassination Attempt bump on Trump's popularity will be short-lived.

We are predicting that the dominance of Trump's assassination attempt on the media will fade soon. The identity and circumstances of the gunman do not seem to be "juicy" enough for a prolonged squeeze. Neither side has much to gain focusing on the ass attempt. As we all know, the narrative on gun violence is mostly dominated by race. If the gunman is "brown", it is an illegal immigrant, a terrorist, or similar alien "non-American", with the narrative gravitating to the immigration and border security debate. If the gunman is black, it is a "thug" issue, with the conversation gravitating to urban crime and the welfare state. If the gunman is white, the narrative shifts to mental health and the gun control debate (Second Amendment, background checks, NRA lobby, etc.).

Gun violence is a reality of American life. No one should reasonably expect any changes any time soon. Each party will use Trump's assassination attempt as evidence validating their point of views. Democrats will say that Trump is a dictator wannabe that breeds violence. Conservatives will blame liberals for portraying Trump as a threat to our democracy to the point of radicalizing pasty white kids to kill him. The issue will prove to be inconsequential for these elections. 

Trump supporters will continue supporting Trump no matter what so long as they perceive it as convenient and beneficial to them. Those in the anti-Trump movement (ATM) will continue opposing Trump perceiving him as detrimental to their interests. For the majority of voters, political affiliation is a matter of self identity, community, and sense of belonging. Regardless of the issues or the candidates, they stick to their self identity and community. Undecided and independent voters do not tie their identity to a party and gravitate to whatever they perceive as more convenient and beneficial to them. They decide which community they want to join, if any, and which candidate to support, if any, based on the expected reward / risk ratio (greed and fear). It is unlikely that the fact that a white kid from Pennsylvania tried to kill Trump will persuade many independent voters to either vote in particular way. Even in Pennsylvania, a key battleground state this year, the shooting incident will be most likely inconsequential. Unless there are more mass shooting events or assassination attempts, it is unlikely that gun control may become a decisive issue on these elections. Americans are used to the risk of gun violence and not afraid of guns. We are more afraid of not having guns and not being able to defend against criminals and dictators. Inflation and immigration will most likely keep reigning as the main issues.

Inflation is interesting because it shows how voters say one thing, but do another based on perceived convenience (PC). Everyone is pro economic growth except when a strong economy leads to higher prices. People don't really care for a strong economy overall, but for relative socioeconomic privileges for themselves. That is, if people feel that they themselves have less than others or can buy less than before they become upset even if the overall economy is doing great.  

Supposedly everyone wants a strong economy. However, when prices go up and development speeds up, many want the economy to slow down if they are not keeping up with the pace and falling behind. Rapid economic expansion leads to inflation. When everyone is doing well there are lots of dollars competing to buy the same goods, which makes prices increase. Then people want the government to intervene to lower prices, slow down growth, or do whatever needs to done so that Joe Voter can feel rich and privileged again. 

Immigration is also interesting because many on both sides of the political spectrum benefit from immigration. Arguably immigration fuels economic growth by increasing demand, increasing productivity, and decreasing production costs (lower wages). Those would be the conservative points in favor of immigration if the immigrants were white anglo saxon protestants. 

Morality is not a central issue in these elections, but it is interesting also. Most voters would say that moral and ethical values are important when choosing a leader for our Nation except when it is perceived as inconvenient to do so. Many are willing to sell out on supposed moral convictions based on personal convenience. The same applies to law and order. People say that they are favor of law and order until it is enforced against them or the candidates they support.  All of sudden, law enforcement becomes unfair, incompetent, political, etc.

Trump and Biden are great examples about the principle of convenience. The vast majority of voters, even Trump supporters, would admit that if the candidate of the other party had the business and criminal record that Trump already has on the books, they would be against the candidacy for President of the United States.  However, when it is their candidate, it is okay. Biden supporters would also admit that if the candidate of the other party appeared to be too old and potentially senile to run, they would not support him. When it is their candidate, they find ways to rationalize it. Better an old president than a dictator. Any pro democracy candidate is better than a dictator wannabe.

People's political preferences are based on emotional calculations of convenience. Political preferences are not about the issues much less about the facts whatever they may be. Facts and issues are used as excuses and rationalizations for the underlying emotions. Come November, voters will choose the next President of the United States based on an emotional assessment of perceived convenience (PC). They key to victory for each side depends on how much fear and greed they can instill on voters. They have to instill enough fear and greed to mobilize their respective base supporters to vote, and to convince independents and undecided voters to join their cause.

We'll see what happens. Bring out the popcorn. A sequel is coming soon.

www.creatix.one