There is definitely a quiet support among the faang owners for Trump.
Not one hundred percent of them. And many tech execs are liberal. I'm talking about the larger demographic trends.
https://www.ft.com/__origami/service/image/v2/images/raw/ftc...
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-says-apple-ceo-cook-c...
Now, if Americans are stupid enough to make Trump president again - well, that's a different scenario because Trump would be president. Then Tim Cook has incentive to try to convince Trump to not thoroughly wreck and destroy the US economy. Tim Cook can wait until after the election to see if he has to cross that bridge.
> So no, there's no reason to believe this happened.
Why hasn't he (or any of the other Big tech CEOs who Trump has claimed conversations with) denied it? They just have to put out a statement saying "the conversation never happened". Their silence is deafening.
Not if you want something from the narcissist. Instead you chuff the narcissist up. It's gross, but we've seen them all do it reactively after he was elected in 2016, so why not be proactive this time? None of them (Big tech) are going to lose customers over it, so there's no risk.
> Only an idiot believes Trump's incessant lies and neither I, nor presumably Tim Cook, gives a rat's ass what idiots think of us.
Whatever his cognitive abilities, if elected president, he will have nearly absolute power over foreign trade policy. He could try to use it to exert leverage over the EU to weaken their antitrust enforcement.
If you think Big Tech can't be replaced, then you haven't been paying attention. Google is facing irrelevancy in the age of AI. Netflix subscriptions have been tanking as the world's largest content creators have moved into the streaming space. Facebook's growth is anemic and people are actively trying to use their service less.
Apple's customers trend liberal and Apple already has the challenge of convincing them they need a better camera than the one they bought two years ago, when the one they bought two years ago works just fine and does everything they need. That's why iPhone sales are down - significantly. Same with Mac sales. Good enough is good enough. Facing those challenges, do you really want to go and piss off your customers over something like politics?
Amazon is about the only one that's looking like it has a bright future. That's why Bezos wisely chose not to endorse Harris last week - why would he want to piss off half his customers over politics? Especially heading into the holiday season where he's expecting major sales? Look what politics did to Bud Light.
So no, Big Tech is not safe. They're big because they're smart, and by being smart they know there's no need to kiss Trump's ass before he's president and there's a business need requiring them to do so.
I never said that. They are not safe. Specifically they are not safe from anti-trust enforcement and the threat that the corporate tax rate will rise to what it was before the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, and those are strong motivators for them to get ahead of the political ball.
Big tech is probably also talking to the Harris campaign before the election, to try to negotiate the de-fanging of the FTC and preserving their tax cuts to the extent they can if she wins. Some of Harris wealthy tech donors specifically want Lina Khan removed.
They are smart (and cynical) by covering all their bases. Trump talks about it because he feels (not incorrectly) that name-dropping those conversations helps him.
There is little long-term risk of these corporations losing business over this stuff. Consumers have demonstrated for a long time that they don't care much about the unethical behavior of corporations, especially if changing their consuming behavior affects their lifestyle in any way.
Between now and the election or holiday season, what are Apple, Google and Amazon's customers going to do to boycott? Delay an iPhone purchase? Stop advertising on Google (conceding attention space to competitors)? Shop instead at ... Walmart?
As far as what customers may be willing to do, do you think Bud Light drinkers stopped drinking beer? I'm not confident we can rely on past customer behavior to predict future customer behavior in today's political climate. That's the very essence of chaos.
I agree that most of his statements are lies, but his claim that big corporation CEOs called him is far more plausible than his lie about Haitians eating cats and dogs.
Again, why haven't the CEOs debunked his claims? If anyone else with a similar megaphone to Trump made such false claims, they would immediately release a statement to the contrary. Their lack of rebuttal of his supposedly false claim is incredible telling of how much they hope to gain from him if elected.
> As far as what customers may be willing to do, do you think Bud Light drinkers stopped drinking beer?
Please explain what is the serious non Bigtech option for your next smartphone, or the serious retail alternative to Amazon or Walmart (without trading off convenience - which most consumers will not do).
In contrast, there are a ton of cheap beer alternatives to Bud Light, like Coors, Pabst, etc.
What we seen to disagree about and are arguing about are the subtleties of the posturing and timing rather than the intent.
Don't listen to what they say, Look at what they do.
Breaking Points back in July, while discussing the Trump-Biden debate <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cV8ULfwTneE> (which I highly recommend watching; it's the single best sum-up), pointed out two things for those who claim (to believe) the above:
* If TrumpNaziKKK being reelected means "no more elections ever", shouldn't Democrats have originally chosen someone other than a living corpse as his opponent?
* While discussing how the many plans among Democrats like Newsom, Whitmer, etc. (and their successors) for 2028 were disrupted/forced up by the potential to replace Biden (before Kamala's abrupt coronation), they again pointed out the paradox of on the one hand claiming that Trump will abolish elections, and on the other hand having plans for running to replacing Trump in 2028.
Read this June New York Times interview of Whitmer. <https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/22/magazine/gretchen-whitmer...> Strange, how she doesn't say (despite being very specific about things like the plot against her) that "if Trump wins, there won't be elections in 2028 and all non-MAGAtards will be executed by Trumptroopers". You'd think that would be something of sufficient urgency to repeat at every public opportunity. Almost as if actual Democratic leaders don't really believe the rhetoric they have so successfully foisted upon their supporters, including 75% of Redditors.
Another example: Post-Trump/Biden debate, Rep. Jared Golden (D-ME) explicitly denying that Trump's reelection will threaten American democracy <https://www.bangordailynews.com/2024/07/02/opinion/opinion-c...>.
Yet another example: After discussing Golden's op-ed, Ezra Klein citing other Democrats who privately admit to him <https://x.com/Timodc/status/1811136469911711877> that a) they don't believe Trump is an "existential threat to democracy", and don't know why others say that, and b) that's why they aren't speaking out about Biden stepping down, because they believe the damage to their own careers from doing so is a greater threat than Trump winning
Yet another example, perhaps the most prominent of all: Biden telling George Stephanopoulos that if he loses to Trump then, well, "I'll feel, as long as I gave it my all and I did as goodest as I know I can do, that's what this is about". If he was the only person who can save the country from Orange Hitler, would that really be the extent of Biden's reaction? Really?!?
They clearly are a party divided by old timers, radicals and the rest. Biden has a retinue of close advisers who loose power when he looses office (either by mental ability or loosing) They have the influence to damage anyone taking a swipe at the "king". Obvious disloyalty is toxic in politics. (even more so in trump circles. even though hes not very loyal to you)
Trying to pry a leader out of their seat, when there are no clear charismatic upstarts is fucking hard, even more so when your party is in paralysis because they are loosing in the polls.
THe democrats bungled it. and you have Harris.
Youre citing sources saying that the democrats will plan x,y & z, and they are keeping it a secret.
They can't keep a secret. Look how much warning we had about Biden being yeeted. _months_ of low lying noises and grumbles.
Where as you look at trump and he says: "I'm going to deport milions"
and
> “We have some very bad people. We have some sick people, radical left lunatics. And I think they’re the big — and it should be very easily handled by, if necessary, by National Guard, or if really necessary, by the military, because they can’t let that happen.”
There isn't really an equivalent from the democrats, because they are disorganised and frankly useless.
Trump has a chance to do this because he's surrounded by pricks who'll let that happen.
I used to fear for what this would mean for Europe (me), but I think it will be incompetence top to bottom. He had a decent crew last time around, but by the end it was Giuliani, MyPillow and the big dick toilets guy.
This is about billionaires wanting to avoid taxes.