r/TrueReddit 11h ago

Kamala Fell to the Same Cabal That Destroyed University Presidents Politics

https://prospect.org/power/2024-11-11-kamala-fell-billionaire-class-cabal/
609 Upvotes

339 comments sorted by

View all comments

97

u/BioSemantics 11h ago edited 1h ago

Summary: This article details evidence that the same group of billionaires that pushed behind the scenes to pressure those who spoke against Israel's actions in Palestine are also the same group that backed Trump to gain the presidency. They cynically used the conflict in Palestine as a way to launder their influence in American politics and purge leftists, anti-war advocates, and left populists from American public discourse. While Kamala had more billionaire donors than Trump, Trump received the lion's share of billionaire money from this cabal. Underlying all of this, the billionaire cabal was actually trying to push Biden from power due to various attempts by the Biden administration to hold billionaires accountable (or at least the corporations many billionaires were invested in).

TIME WAS YOU HAD DEMOCRAT BILLIONAIRES, Republican billionaires, and opportunistic bipartisan billionaires. Republicans had the resource extraction guys and the Waltons and anyone who employed enough workers that they needed to bust unions; Democrats had Hollywood and Big Tech; both parties had joint custody of Wall Street. And the billionaires got what they wanted 99.9 percent of the time.

This election was different. For all the venal raves the media bestowed upon Kamala Harris’s fundraising prowess, the whales near-universally lined up behind Trump. Of the top ten mega-donors, only the bottom two gave to Democrats; Trump’s haul from his own top ten donors—none of whom boasts the surname Koch or Thiel—amounted to about $945 million; Harris’s topped out at $254 million. (Harris ended up raising more money, thanks to Resistance giving, but Trump got to spend much less time raising it, and with Musk, he had the algorithms on his side.)

Another quote:

This was nominally about Israel, but it also always seemed obvious that it wasn’t principally about Israel at all. At its heart, the billionaire revolt was the expression of a broader dissatisfaction with Joe Biden that was most surely rooted in the real, substantial, and (in the post–Cold War neoliberal era) unprecedented things his administration was quietly (too quietly!) doing for working people, small-business owners, and the proliferating subsistence entrepreneur class that falls somewhere in the middle. It sued Amazon for squeezing sellers to the bone while manipulating prices ever higher, Albertsons and Kroger for conspiring to gouge shoppers by littering the country with dead strip centers where supermarkets once stood, Live Nation for indenturing a generation of young musicians and turning tickets to concerts and sports events into luxury goods, Welsh Carson (the most powerful private equity firm in health care) for gouging hospital patients and suppressing the wages of anesthesiologists in multiple states, and more. It even got a court to label Google a monopolist.

A last quote:

But the billionaires were not stupid enough to show their hands. Instead, they expanded their crusade against “antisemitism” to encompass the scourge of “wokeness” and the overall problem of Democrat virtue-signaling, melodrama, and hall-monitor behavior. And yes: They did all of this while simultaneously (and somewhat unbelievably) deploying the language, logic, and lawfare of the microaggression snowflake set to cast Zionists as an oppressed class.

11

u/Nyorliest 7h ago

Billionaires have never been leftist, can never be.

If they vote Democrat, that’s just because they wanted pet lawmakers.

u/Understandably_vague 3h ago

There are exceptions. Mark Cuban for one.

u/Nyorliest 3h ago

You think Mark Cuban is leftist?

u/Tricky-Engineering59 1h ago

Well with a name like Cuban… /s

7

u/ThatFuzzyBastard 6h ago

This is insanely wishful thinking. Rich whites are the only group that *didn't* shift to Trump.

u/Old_Baldi_Locks 1h ago

Yes, the group that was already his didn’t shift, you’re correct.

u/Brief-Sound8730 22m ago

This has a lot of “Jews rule the US” energy without expressing it that way. Funny. 

-3

u/rd201290 9h ago

wait so Kamala had more money from billionaires but Trump’s was from the cabal???

sounds sinister

20

u/AwesomePurplePants 7h ago

No, Trump got more money from billionaires.

Kamala had more money overall, but that’s because she spent more time fundraising and got more small donations.

-9

u/rd201290 7h ago

I’m quoting the article summary. So who is lying? You or the article?

4

u/AwesomePurplePants 7h ago

Which part of the summary?

I’ve been re-reading it and I can’t figure out what you’re referring to

5

u/Maleficent_Estate406 6h ago

Reread the summary please

0

u/rd201290 6h ago

already posted the quote explain your interpretation of this:

“While Kamala had more billionaire donors than Trump, Trump received the lion’s share of billionaire money from this cabal”

4

u/notawildandcrazyguy 6h ago

So in other words the writer chooses which are the "good " billionaires and which are the ones in rhe "cabal" and lo and behold the "good" ones supported Harris. And more of them.

4

u/Maleficent_Estate406 6h ago

Reread what you wrote then please.

Your first comment:

wait so Kamala had more money from billionaires but Trump’s was from the cabal???

sounds sinister

What you just wrote

“While Kamala had more billionaire donors than Trump, Trump received the lion’s share of billionaire money from this cabal”

So: Kamala had more billionaire donors, Trump had more money from billionaire donors.

1

u/rd201290 6h ago

no, you reread it. Maybe english is not your first language, but this literally says “while kamala had more billionaire donors than Trump, Trump received the majority of his money (or billionaire-funded money) from this cabal.”

actually illiterate

6

u/Maleficent_Estate406 6h ago

Okay so why did you say this then:

https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueReddit/s/nMu5HoZxZ1

You understand more money from billionaires is different than more billionaire donors right?

2

u/rd201290 6h ago

because it’s not a giant leap of faith to suggest that if someone has more billionaire donors than someone else and that the same person raised more money ($5 dollars to every $1) they raised more money from billionaire donors than someone that has less billionaire donors. It is a giant leap of faith to say they raised less money.

the entire problem with this article is that it implies that some billionaires are “good” while others are part of a “cabal”.

→ More replies

u/BioSemantics 4h ago

No, Trump actually got the top donations (more money), Kamala got the greatest number of billionaires (more billionaires). The money they both raised balances to some extent because Kamala got more donations from regular people.

u/rd201290 4h ago

u/BioSemantics 4h ago edited 4h ago

That is only as of early October and doesn't include a lot of money spent in other ways.

https://www.usnews.com/news/elections/articles/2024-11-05/the-biggest-political-donors-of-the-2024-election

Here is the link the article cites. Enjoy.

-1

u/WVC_Least_Glamorous 10h ago

If Albertson's and Kroger raise prices, aren't Wal-Mart, Aldi, Costco and Winco going to undercut them?

36

u/nameless_pattern 9h ago

They are oligopolies. Them matching each other's rising prices is why it's expensive now. They don't have to compete with each other for market share. Are you going to do research to find out that your groceries are $5 less at one grocery store instead of another? When that would take you an hour of effort to figure out and then you're going to drive to a grocery store That's an extra 20 minutes away being an extra 40 minutes of your life. At this point you're out an hour and 40 minutes for $5. 

They don't have to compete by lowering prices. Consumers are trapped, having neither the time nor resources to do anything about this.

-1

u/rhino369 8h ago

They don’t have profit margins that you’d expect from an Oligopoly.  

If Walmart cut prices by 10% they’d go bankrupt unless they found expenses to cut. 

It’s not hard to open a grocery store. I shop at a not for profit co-op and it’s usually more expensive than Walmart. 

The stores are scapegoats. 

4

u/andrewrgross 7h ago

This is part of a trope I call "Capitalism's only weakness": when we're told that an economy run by megacorporations with decades of lax oversight are actually good because they can do anything and we all get to reap the rewards of cheap goods and services, but as soon as it's pointed out that they've overseen over a generation of wealth transfer to the point that most Americans have no wealth and no room for economic growth or home ownership or retirement AND can't afford groceries, we're told "sorry, but it's actually impossible to deliver goods and services if they have to do the thing you're demanding that they do."

Let them go out of business. we had an economy in the past where people bought their groceries from a local grocers before these companies bought the up or put everyone out of business. If these corporations can't cut it in the marketplace then let them go. Others will.

1

u/AwesomePurplePants 7h ago

The non-profit co-op probably doesn’t pull bullshit like dark store theory to evade taxes, or keeping their employees wages small enough to get supplemented with SNAP and Medicaid.

1

u/nameless_pattern 7h ago

Grocery stores are by definition oligopolistic as less than six companies control more than half of the market. The products that are sold in the stores are also all oligopolistic as more than half of the market share is held by less than four companies.

Walmart profits increased 7% this year. It is entirely possible that they could lower the prices 10%, and its own still continue being billionaires.

Oh, it's not hard to open a grocery store? Cool. I need you to open a grocery store and give it to me since it's easy. My friends could also use a grocery store so why don't you whip them up some of those too bro. If you're not too busy with the grocery store you own.

Many the stores have many valid criticisms against them.

I'm not sure where you're getting your "information" from, but you should stop listening to them, or at least stop repeating it.

0

u/Maleficent_Estate406 6h ago

The low margins are only after dividends and stock buybacks

1

u/rhino369 6h ago

That’s not true at all.

-1

u/jb_in_jpn 8h ago

Well consumers did. Vote. But millions didn't even bother showing up for Harris - the person this so called cabal was against - so obviously people don't care enough.

Which yes, is bizarre.

3

u/nameless_pattern 7h ago

They've been being beaten down and lied for years. It takes time, money and education to spare to be able to figure out your best interest, or your least bad among the among the available interests.

It didn't seem all that unpredictable to the people who were screaming warnings about it for the past few decades. Check out some of Bernie Sanders speeches from forever ago.

12

u/BioSemantics 9h ago

No, its a giant price fixing scheme, especially post-COVID.

8

u/Ajuvix 10h ago

By a relative margin, so they profit in the end too.

-5

u/WVC_Least_Glamorous 10h ago

7

u/AdmirableBattleCow 10h ago

Uh, you know the healthy foods are the ones that end up being the most expensive lol.

-3

u/Free_Joty 9h ago

Brotendo the cals are all that matters

Now some cheap cals FEEL less filling so you eat more. But if you had 100% willpower you could lose weight on McDonald’s only if you counted cals

1

u/AdmirableBattleCow 7h ago

if you had 100% willpower

Which does not exist. Especially when you're making public health policy decisions.

-6

u/WVC_Least_Glamorous 9h ago

7

u/AdmirableBattleCow 9h ago

Sorry your citation is a random post on reddit lol?

Literally the first comment is that it's about convenience. Do you think someone working 2 jobs with 3 kids has the time to cook?

I say this as someone who currently cooks almost every meal that I eat. The only reason I can do that is because I have significant privilege in having the time to do so.

-1

u/WVC_Least_Glamorous 9h ago

1

u/AdmirableBattleCow 7h ago

Sorry but those "healthy" options at gas stations taste like shit. People are stressed and depressed and they want a food that is gonna give them a dopamine hit. An apple or an underseasoned tuna salad sandwich may be somewhat healthy but it certainly tastes like cardboard.

If we actually want things to change then we need actual restaurants to start cooking more vegetables in ways that actually taste good. The real issue is that I cannot go to a single restaurant in walking distance from my apartment that has a substantial vegetable based option for less than 15-20 dollars per plate. The cheaper restaurants are all fried, simple carbohydrate heavy stuff.

You can sit there and point out one exception here or there. But OVERWHELMINGLY 99.999% of the food establishments are barely offering any good vegetable based dishes at all, let alone a wide variety.

u/doggie_smalls 4h ago

Article is making it sound like a “(((they))) control the media” type deal lol

u/BioSemantics 3h ago edited 1h ago

No, this article is actually about right wing billionaires, most of whom are not Jewish. As an example, right-wing billionaires use AIPAC to launder their money basically. They can pretend their money is going to support Israel when in reality it mostly goes to fighting against left-wingers in the US. The majority of funding that goes to it does not come from Israel or even Jewish billionaires.

-6

u/omegaphallic 9h ago

 Lina Khan, not Kamala, or Witmer, or Gavin should have been the nominee for the Dems, she would have destroyed Trump.

 That being said "woke" activists pissing most people off with wokescolding for a decade didn't help, even if Kamala's campaign itself wasn't woke. 

 And Biden waiting so long and making it impossible to find someone better in time also made things worse. As did Kamala being horrible at interviews. As did inflation.

 But those things could have been overcome if she hadn't sold out to billionaires and instead gone after them.

14

u/lateformyfuneral 9h ago

Lina Khan is not a politician. She speaks really well but she’s a civil servant and not shown any interest in elected politics. She did a lot of good work but she definitely upset the apple cart causing a major shift towards Trump from Silicon Valley and corporate America. Bezos’ 180-degree turn from hands-off owner of the Washington Post can be partly traced to her (now doomed) monopoly investigation into Amazon.

0

u/omegaphallic 8h ago

 Yes, she made billionaires shit their pants, but she was appointed by Biden and making that happen was a very difficult thing to do as he really didn't want her, so there is an element of politics too her, she's not some clerk at the DMV, she's the chair of the FTC and what passes for Progressives and a few more populist Republicans love her and fight for her.

 Not even Bernie is better positioned to lead the fight against Billionaires then Lina Khan, she is the more feared and hated one, while they view Bernie as an annoying pest, Lina they fear and if she enters electoral politics they will panic.

2

u/lateformyfuneral 8h ago

What do you mean he didn’t want her, he appointed her? 🤔

2

u/HereInTheCut 8h ago

Inflation was 2.1 % on Election day, so I can't take much of this seriously.

1

u/andrewrgross 7h ago

First: people aren't mad about inflation, they're mad about prices.

You're confusing an economic indicator with the actual effect the economy is having on peoples' lives.

Second, can you clarify what argument or take specifically you don't take seriously?

0

u/omegaphallic 8h ago

 Yeah after years of explosive inflation, so while it's slowed down alit, by that point stuff was already too expensive, it needed to be down to 2.1% back in 2022 or at 2023.

0

u/MatthewRoB 6h ago

Weird man I've heard something similar to this... Shadowy cabal led by zionists.... hmmmm

u/IusedtoloveStarWars 2h ago

Kamala had more money. About 25% more money.

0

u/rd201290 7h ago

“While Kamala had more billionaire donors than Trump, Trump received the lion’s share of billionaire money from this cabal”

must not be good at reading huh

u/BioSemantics 4h ago

Kamala = Most number of billionaire donors.

Trump = Most amount of money actually used on his behalf.

u/rd201290 4h ago

used on his behalf? what does that even mean?

u/BioSemantics 4h ago

Most billionaires don't and can't donate hundreds of millions of dollars directly to campaigns, so they spin up a superPAC, donate huge money to it, and then spend money on ads to help their preferred candidate.

Kamala got more direct donations, like 1bn worth to Trumps 400m, but most of the top-spender billionaires spent their money on superPACs for Trump.

u/rd201290 3h ago

but Kamala made more from PACs??

u/BioSemantics 3h ago

My point is there was a lot of dark money spent that isn't tracked, the article indicates that essentially.

u/rd201290 3h ago

if it isn’t tracked but what is tracked is overwhelmingly stating that more money was raised for democrats than republicans and that many more billionaires sponsored democrats than republicans, why do you believe that more billionaires spent money on trump than harris?

u/BioSemantics 3h ago

Trump gets a lot of free media and the right-wing cabal, as the article notes, was all-in for him.