Summary

President Joe Biden’s economic achievements—lowering inflation, reducing gas prices, creating jobs, and boosting manufacturing—are largely unrecognized by the public, despite his successes.

His tenure saw landmark legislation like the Inflation Reduction Act, CHIPS Act, and major infrastructure investments.

However, Biden’s approval ratings remain low, attributed to inflation backlash, weak communication, and a media landscape prone to misinformation.

Democrats face a “propaganda problem” rather than a policy failure, with many voters likely to credit incoming President Trump for Biden’s accomplishments due to partisan messaging and social media dynamics.

  • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 days ago

    It’s not even a propaganda problem, per se, because most people aren’t obsessively following the news and economic reports.

    It’s how they feel about money.

    That was the biggest single issue.

    People looked at grocery store prices and said, this is nuts, I was paying half this just four years ago.

    It doesn’t matter to them that global inflation skyrocketed along with inflation in the US, or that we’re doing better than the rest of the world right now. They want to see prices go down, even though that would be deflation, which is incredibly bad for an economy.

    • Flocklesscrow@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      10 days ago

      Is it though? Or is it incredibly bad when the system is predicated on infinite growth, measured by quarterly EPS?

      We can probably tolerate a little more disinflation, as a treat. Deflation has to be sustained for it to start moving toward a recession, and since companies (see Tech, see Biosciences, see IT) are already pushing for massive layoffs anyway, where is the incentive for workers? Particularly and explicitly on the heels of record profits and while many large companies are sitting on cash surpluses. They’re basically just laying off workers so executives can get a fat bonus. So whose interests are being served? Certainly not the greater economy.

      Corporate decisions are already breaking the social contract. Reinvestment has been replaced with stock buy-backs, and human capital is crushed to manipulate wages to their lowest point again. As has been happening for nearly 40 years.

      • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 days ago

        We can probably tolerate a little more disinflation, as a treat.

        No, not really, because deflation (not disinflation) tends to be self-sustaining, much like hyperinflation does. If the dollar I have today will buy two dollars worth of goods next week, then I’m going to hold onto my dollar to make any sort of discretionary purchase until next week. When everyone does that, all at the same time, it’s like building a dam; the flow of money just grinds to a halt. Companies don’t have money coming in, so they can’t pay workers, which leads to layoffs, and the people laid off have no income to buy anything now, which feeds right back into that cycle.

        I agree with you that corporations need to be reined in, that executive salaries are out of control, and that things like stock-buybacks are the bane of a functional economy. But that’s literally going to take legislation in this country to fix, in the same way that it did when the economy crashed in the 1920’s, and I guarantee you that there’s going to be zero political interest in that for at least two years.

    • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 days ago

      It’s not even a propaganda problem, per se, because most people aren’t obsessively following the news and economic reports.

      i HIGHLY disagree with you.

      Even if you’re a relatively disconnected right winger, who listens to fox news or the daily wire a couple of times of week, the propaganda is so fucking blatant it will still completely indoctrinate you after a few years.

      like to be clear, any right winger that obsessively follows the news is literally ben shapiro or alex jones. There is no “moderate” here unfortunately.

      • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 days ago

        Even if you’re a relatively disconnected right winger

        I’m not talking about relatively disconnected right wingers; I’m talking about people that are largely centrist, and not paying attention to Fox, NBC, CNN, or any newspapers, and gets all of their ‘news’ from social media. I guess you’d call them the hoi poloi; they’re low-information voters (or no information voters), and mostly apathetic as long as they feel like they’re getting by. Policy won’t matter to them very much; they’re voting on feels.

        any right winger that obsessively follows the news is literally ben shapiro or alex jones.

        That depends. There are a number of people that are extremely fiscally conservative that have zero interest in culture wars issues. Most of them have defected from the Republican party entirely though, because they see that the current iteration of the Republican party is deeply harmful to the kind of conservatism that they stand for. But that kind of conservative hasn’t really been popular since about the time that Newt Gingritch was trying to stir up the country against a president that didn’t keep his dick in his pants.

        • VoterFrog@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 days ago

          Social media is where most of the blatantly false propaganda lives. Getting all of your news from it makes you more susceptible to propaganda, not less. These are people who have nothing to form an opinion with except for what the loudest people around them are complaining about most. And propagandists are the loudest ones, complaining about made up bullshit.

          • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 days ago

            Yes, I understand that. But on social media you aren’t necessarily getting right-wing propaganda, as there’s plenty of left-wing propaganda and misinformation as well. That’s why I’m saying that they’re low- or no-information voters that are working solely on feels.

            • Twista713@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 days ago

              Is there, though? I was trying to come up with some examples yesterday and all I can find from my admittedly lefty algo are fears propagated because of Trump’s words or incoming cabinet appointments. They are at least based on actual recorded words as opposed to cherry-picked data or “feels”. I guess the left could be cherry-picking data to support their arguments also, but the logic seems more sound, at least to me.

              • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                10 days ago

                It is, yeah. When you look at accounts like Occupy Democrats and start fact checking them, there’s a lot of bullshit that they post. Like, pants on fire kind of bullshit. I knew a lot of people that followed them. In order to get engagement, accounts need to stir up emotions and get people to react and comment; it’s easier to do that with things that outrage rather than dense policy positions.

                I want to believe that the political left is more intellectually honest than the right, but that’s because I’m mostly on the political left. (I’m an anarchist at heart, but with a cynical disbelief in the ability of people to work together in a country the size of the US without some degree of authoritarian control.) So I try to fact-check all of the sources that I use for both factual information, as well as ideological biases.