As you point out, the media is interested in conflict because that is what sells. There is a chicken-and-egg problem. Does the media through its choices create a conflict-demanding public or does the public demand conflict for engagement and the media has no choice but to respond? I suspect that the latter is the true order. Since the founding of the U.S., media has been feeding the public's desire for conflict and salaciousness. The more vicious and raw, the better.
I try to avoid such stories, though I too fall victim to them more often than I care to admit. That is why I so value your Substack. It is refreshing to read data-driven, thoughtful analysis.
“Does the media through its choices create a conflict-demanding public or does the public demand conflict for engagement and the media has no choice but to respond?” Such an important question. I’ve given a presentation a few times where I talk about the “supply and demand of media polarization” - is it because we’re giving to you, or because you want it from us? It’s probably a chicken and the egg problem like you say where the answer is a little bit of both, but I think it’s exactly the right question to be asking and I wish more people making and consuming media were asking it.
Gabe and Derek, I highlighted this from Gabe's post, "more than being biased to the left or right, the media is biased towards conflict". We are a bunch of generations that fell into the lure of TV. The old cathode ray with its 60 cycle flashing dots puts one into the alpha state ( typically reserved for hypnosis or meditation, where positive imagery is the norm). However we were fed a steady stream of ANGER, ACTION, VIOLENCE & CONFLICT...even in sitcoms. Directly into our alpha-stated brains. There is little R&D on the effects of TV, as it was the main vehicle for selling mass quantities of stuff that floated the raft of GROWTH BASED ECONOMY. Most R&D was (and is) funded by the very corporations that benefitted from the alpha state. Welcome to the s#¡t show!
If murdering Persian schoolgirls isn't enough to budge the MAGA hardcore, maybe rising prices for everything will.
If Americans knew their history, they would know that America has been stronger when it collaborates with its allies in the world. Alas, American education is in the toilet, with Trump's hand on the 'flush' lever.
Gabe, you bring up such a great point about how to qualify a MAGA or even an Independent. Is an Independent someone with no viewpoint or someone who listens to both sides? That’s a great question that few talk about.
A brilliant and very telling analysis. Worth bearing in mind, however, that it should not be possible for GOP to win national elections (e.g., 2026) even if MAGA cuts 100% for Trump. The question becomes what, if anything, appeals to the non-MAGA voters who constitute more than two-thirds of the electorate -- and how does Trump plan to strip the electorate such that half of it, rather than a third of it, is MAGA?
This is one of, if not THE sharpest take I've read on this. Curious if you've come across this "Beyond MAGA" study on 10,000+ Trump voters that broke the coalition into four segments? http://beyondmaga.us
I was certainly surprised to see only 29% of his voters fall into the "MAGA Hardliners” category — which, as other comments mentioned, is still very much up for debate on how to define…I actually know the lead author well, if you'd ever want to talk to him. Think you guys would have a really interesting conversation about this.
“Indeed, opposition to the war skews younger, while membership in the MAGA movement skews older (about half of the movement is over 65, according to one study). When you think of MAGA, it’s probably more accurate to think of a Fox News viewer 65 or older who is strongly committed to the Republican Party; the younger, more heterodox Tucker Carlson viewers clearly make up a small segment of the movement.”
Fascinating. Can’t wait for Gabe’s take on 2026 and 2028 in light of this analysis
I think the GOP is in for a rough 10-15 years after Trump dies, whether that be before or after the end of his term. Expect massive infighting as everyone tries to be the Brigham Young to Trump's Joseph Smith
The fact that 2/3 of self-identified GOP is MAGA, and that the definition of MAGA's policy preferences amounts to "whatever (and that means ANYthing) Trump decides to do tomorrow," does not at all bode well for the future of the GOP. That is the first point you seem to be making. And your second point that the media is primarily in the entertainment business and therefore always stresses conflict when it comes to politics goes a long way in explaining how MAGA came into existence in the first place. Fortunately, we will be rid of at least the first of those two negative influences in the near future.
Gabe, I think you're mischaracterizing the purpose of activism. It's not to "convince" people or the media that you speak on behalf of an entire identity group that you belong to. It's raising awareness about real issues affecting your community (backed by data!), which can cross identities, and promoting policy solutions to alleviate those issues. That often involves persuasion - even within your own identity group - and telling your story in public is one mechanism for persuasion. Youth activists hosting a march aren't saying, "All young people agree with us on climate change." They're saying, "Those of us marching care about this issue. Here's why we think you should too, and here's what we can all do about it." I also don't know what groups you're referencing when you're saying that there were Hispanic groups saying most Hispanic voters want looser borders, or when you say Black activists were "giving the impression" that Black voters wanted to defund the police. What groups? Most activists are not framing their arguments in this way.
If MAGA = Trust Trump then yes of course, by definition, there is no split in MAGA over the Iran war. Trump started the war and if you trust him then you support the war as well. What we should look at then is possible MAGA defection over the Iran war. Are there fewer people now with MAGA allegiance than before? For example, congressman Kevin Kiley, a man praised by Trump as a “MAGA champion”, recently left the Republican party altogether and is now an Independent. Marjorie Taylor Greene, Tucker Carlson and Steve Bannon, are now in disagreement with Trump and therefore no longer true MAGA. Have others, just plain folk, also abandoned MAGA? Or have become semi MAGA? Or have left the Republican party entirely and drifted over to the Independents?
Interesting & well-thought-out analysis. The main point, which you hit upon, is MAGA is trump, and I would conclude, MAGA is not Republican, as trump has no core beliefs, except unto himself. I would venture to say MAGA is not even American in the Constitutionalist and "more perfect union" true American ideal.
Very good analysis The sad thing is the figures on MAGA support for the war have actually been available, as you pointed out, for people that want to read them
I also like you pointing out a lot of the MAGA supporters aren't really into policy They believe Trump can't do wrong
I run across this with the MAGA supporters I know I pointed out to a couple that watching and reading expert analysts, including a lot of admirals and generals, they almost all say there is not strategy or goal in Iran But these friends tell me I'm just looking at incorrect media, that Trump and his people say there is
It all goes back to for the Democrats to do well next well they have to focus on the left behinds
What these polls never show is how many people surveyed are MAGA Repubs, Repub, Dems, Indies etc. Say they polled 1500 people, how many are MAGA Repub, how many are Dems, how many are Indies? Are there 125, 200, 500, out of 1500 that identify as MAGA's? 90% of 200 people is 180 people, 180 people out of 1500 is not a majority of people in favor of the Poll.
There is no MAGA split on Iran, but MAGA is a smaller and smaller part of the Republican coalition. It appears to be around 60%-ish from these surveys.
Republicans need Latinos for Trump, podcast bros, and suburban dads to win. MAGA isn’t enough.
As you point out, the media is interested in conflict because that is what sells. There is a chicken-and-egg problem. Does the media through its choices create a conflict-demanding public or does the public demand conflict for engagement and the media has no choice but to respond? I suspect that the latter is the true order. Since the founding of the U.S., media has been feeding the public's desire for conflict and salaciousness. The more vicious and raw, the better.
I try to avoid such stories, though I too fall victim to them more often than I care to admit. That is why I so value your Substack. It is refreshing to read data-driven, thoughtful analysis.
“Does the media through its choices create a conflict-demanding public or does the public demand conflict for engagement and the media has no choice but to respond?” Such an important question. I’ve given a presentation a few times where I talk about the “supply and demand of media polarization” - is it because we’re giving to you, or because you want it from us? It’s probably a chicken and the egg problem like you say where the answer is a little bit of both, but I think it’s exactly the right question to be asking and I wish more people making and consuming media were asking it.
Gabe and Derek, I highlighted this from Gabe's post, "more than being biased to the left or right, the media is biased towards conflict". We are a bunch of generations that fell into the lure of TV. The old cathode ray with its 60 cycle flashing dots puts one into the alpha state ( typically reserved for hypnosis or meditation, where positive imagery is the norm). However we were fed a steady stream of ANGER, ACTION, VIOLENCE & CONFLICT...even in sitcoms. Directly into our alpha-stated brains. There is little R&D on the effects of TV, as it was the main vehicle for selling mass quantities of stuff that floated the raft of GROWTH BASED ECONOMY. Most R&D was (and is) funded by the very corporations that benefitted from the alpha state. Welcome to the s#¡t show!
Stellar face chart, Mr. Fleisher.
If murdering Persian schoolgirls isn't enough to budge the MAGA hardcore, maybe rising prices for everything will.
If Americans knew their history, they would know that America has been stronger when it collaborates with its allies in the world. Alas, American education is in the toilet, with Trump's hand on the 'flush' lever.
Bigotry is their motivation
😪
Another great analysis. Thank you. Gabe
Gabe, you bring up such a great point about how to qualify a MAGA or even an Independent. Is an Independent someone with no viewpoint or someone who listens to both sides? That’s a great question that few talk about.
And made even more complicated by the fact that most self-identified independents actually routinely vote for one party or the other, making the Independent label seem like more of a self-ID than a reality. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2014/01/08/most-political-independents-actually-arent/
A brilliant and very telling analysis. Worth bearing in mind, however, that it should not be possible for GOP to win national elections (e.g., 2026) even if MAGA cuts 100% for Trump. The question becomes what, if anything, appeals to the non-MAGA voters who constitute more than two-thirds of the electorate -- and how does Trump plan to strip the electorate such that half of it, rather than a third of it, is MAGA?
This is one of, if not THE sharpest take I've read on this. Curious if you've come across this "Beyond MAGA" study on 10,000+ Trump voters that broke the coalition into four segments? http://beyondmaga.us
I was certainly surprised to see only 29% of his voters fall into the "MAGA Hardliners” category — which, as other comments mentioned, is still very much up for debate on how to define…I actually know the lead author well, if you'd ever want to talk to him. Think you guys would have a really interesting conversation about this.
Thanks, Hailee! I’ve chatted with Daniel a bit about this, definitely agree they had some interesting findings.
“Indeed, opposition to the war skews younger, while membership in the MAGA movement skews older (about half of the movement is over 65, according to one study). When you think of MAGA, it’s probably more accurate to think of a Fox News viewer 65 or older who is strongly committed to the Republican Party; the younger, more heterodox Tucker Carlson viewers clearly make up a small segment of the movement.”
Fascinating. Can’t wait for Gabe’s take on 2026 and 2028 in light of this analysis
I think the GOP is in for a rough 10-15 years after Trump dies, whether that be before or after the end of his term. Expect massive infighting as everyone tries to be the Brigham Young to Trump's Joseph Smith
The fact that 2/3 of self-identified GOP is MAGA, and that the definition of MAGA's policy preferences amounts to "whatever (and that means ANYthing) Trump decides to do tomorrow," does not at all bode well for the future of the GOP. That is the first point you seem to be making. And your second point that the media is primarily in the entertainment business and therefore always stresses conflict when it comes to politics goes a long way in explaining how MAGA came into existence in the first place. Fortunately, we will be rid of at least the first of those two negative influences in the near future.
Gabe, I think you're mischaracterizing the purpose of activism. It's not to "convince" people or the media that you speak on behalf of an entire identity group that you belong to. It's raising awareness about real issues affecting your community (backed by data!), which can cross identities, and promoting policy solutions to alleviate those issues. That often involves persuasion - even within your own identity group - and telling your story in public is one mechanism for persuasion. Youth activists hosting a march aren't saying, "All young people agree with us on climate change." They're saying, "Those of us marching care about this issue. Here's why we think you should too, and here's what we can all do about it." I also don't know what groups you're referencing when you're saying that there were Hispanic groups saying most Hispanic voters want looser borders, or when you say Black activists were "giving the impression" that Black voters wanted to defund the police. What groups? Most activists are not framing their arguments in this way.
If MAGA = Trust Trump then yes of course, by definition, there is no split in MAGA over the Iran war. Trump started the war and if you trust him then you support the war as well. What we should look at then is possible MAGA defection over the Iran war. Are there fewer people now with MAGA allegiance than before? For example, congressman Kevin Kiley, a man praised by Trump as a “MAGA champion”, recently left the Republican party altogether and is now an Independent. Marjorie Taylor Greene, Tucker Carlson and Steve Bannon, are now in disagreement with Trump and therefore no longer true MAGA. Have others, just plain folk, also abandoned MAGA? Or have become semi MAGA? Or have left the Republican party entirely and drifted over to the Independents?
Interesting & well-thought-out analysis. The main point, which you hit upon, is MAGA is trump, and I would conclude, MAGA is not Republican, as trump has no core beliefs, except unto himself. I would venture to say MAGA is not even American in the Constitutionalist and "more perfect union" true American ideal.
Gabe,
Very good analysis The sad thing is the figures on MAGA support for the war have actually been available, as you pointed out, for people that want to read them
I also like you pointing out a lot of the MAGA supporters aren't really into policy They believe Trump can't do wrong
I run across this with the MAGA supporters I know I pointed out to a couple that watching and reading expert analysts, including a lot of admirals and generals, they almost all say there is not strategy or goal in Iran But these friends tell me I'm just looking at incorrect media, that Trump and his people say there is
It all goes back to for the Democrats to do well next well they have to focus on the left behinds
What these polls never show is how many people surveyed are MAGA Repubs, Repub, Dems, Indies etc. Say they polled 1500 people, how many are MAGA Repub, how many are Dems, how many are Indies? Are there 125, 200, 500, out of 1500 that identify as MAGA's? 90% of 200 people is 180 people, 180 people out of 1500 is not a majority of people in favor of the Poll.
There is no MAGA split on Iran, but MAGA is a smaller and smaller part of the Republican coalition. It appears to be around 60%-ish from these surveys.
Republicans need Latinos for Trump, podcast bros, and suburban dads to win. MAGA isn’t enough.