Vivek Ramaswamy isn't going to win the Republican nomination in 2024, but it's worth understanding the faux-anti-corporate pitch he's making to conservative voters
"He offers rapper Eminem’s “Lose Yourself” as his life’s theme song. “I think that children should be forced to listen to it,” Ramaswamy says, “the edited version, of course.”"
Loved this analysis! This faux-anti-corporate rhetoric reminds me a lot of the way Republicans approached voters struggling in coal country in the late 2010s. It worked incredibly well at getting former Democrats across Appalachia to flip to the Republican party. But after almost a decade later: nothing's materially changed for the average voter in these places. Mines and plants continue to close, local unemployment continues to rise and healthcare remains out of reach (both economically and geographically) for most. The GOP's populism only exists in its campaigns, not in its governance. We just need to find a more accessible way to get this message to the average voter.
That's why all this animates me so much. I'm not a believer in blaming folks for "voting against their interests"- when one poltical party makes a pitch to you saying that they'll fight for you and the other doesn't, it makes sense to go with the one that at least makes the pitch. The tragedy, of course, is that's always been a bum deal (and has often come packaged with radicalized resentment-- "we'll fight for you instead of somebody else"). The folks in power will take their votes, but never get around to the "fighting for you" (or the even better- "fighting for a whole lot of people, some of whom live nearby, others of whom don't") part of the equation.
"He offers rapper Eminem’s “Lose Yourself” as his life’s theme song. “I think that children should be forced to listen to it,” Ramaswamy says, “the edited version, of course.”"
now THAT's a policy proposal
Thank you for recognizing that the main thing I want to talk about is Da Vek's extremely PG approach to rapping!
Loved this analysis! This faux-anti-corporate rhetoric reminds me a lot of the way Republicans approached voters struggling in coal country in the late 2010s. It worked incredibly well at getting former Democrats across Appalachia to flip to the Republican party. But after almost a decade later: nothing's materially changed for the average voter in these places. Mines and plants continue to close, local unemployment continues to rise and healthcare remains out of reach (both economically and geographically) for most. The GOP's populism only exists in its campaigns, not in its governance. We just need to find a more accessible way to get this message to the average voter.
That's why all this animates me so much. I'm not a believer in blaming folks for "voting against their interests"- when one poltical party makes a pitch to you saying that they'll fight for you and the other doesn't, it makes sense to go with the one that at least makes the pitch. The tragedy, of course, is that's always been a bum deal (and has often come packaged with radicalized resentment-- "we'll fight for you instead of somebody else"). The folks in power will take their votes, but never get around to the "fighting for you" (or the even better- "fighting for a whole lot of people, some of whom live nearby, others of whom don't") part of the equation.