The Trump-Musk feud that wasn't: Media distracted by another MAGA spectacle
If one correctly understands the large role that spectacle and distraction play in the Age of Trump, then its full horror and ugliness are easily demystified and revealed. Unfortunately, too many Americans, especially those in the mainstream news media and the responsible political class, refuse to do so. Why? It is very frightening to wake up one day and realize that you are a stranger in your own country.
Billionaires Donald Trump and Elon Musk recently engaged in a major and highly publicized dispute. Its origins have been well-documented: ego, ambition, money and power.
The news media were predictably obsessed with this fight, labeling it a 'divorce' and using other such dramatic language.
Applying the logic of professional wrestling and carny culture, I do not know (nor do I care) if the fight between Donald Trump and Elon Musk is a 'work' (a pretend fight or some other scripted part of the business) or 'a shoot' (a real fight) or something in between ('a work' that becomes 'a shoot' and the audience is not exactly sure what is happening). We may never know the whole truth.
What really matters is that this fight, be it real or not, is a distraction from Trump's 'big beautiful bill' and how it further guts the social safety net and gives trillions of more dollars to the richest individuals and corporations. It is critically important to emphasize how Donald Trump and his MAGA Republicans' gutting of the social safety net, and further immiseration of the middle class and working poor to give even more money to the kleptocrats and plutocrats, is not separate and apart from the country's rapid collapse into authoritarianism. These destructive forces gut and weaken democratic life. Moreover, such forces may bring a people closer to the authoritarian leader in an attempt to win favor as a protected group. Learned helplessness becomes a survival mode.
At the risk of mixing my metaphors, the fight between Donald Trump and Elon Musk is ultimately an example of the old African proverb that when two elephants fight, it is the grass beneath their feet that suffers.
To that point, the economic and larger societal harm that Trump's 'big beautiful bill' will cause is well-documented, easily predictable and not hypothetical. In a public letter addressed to the Senate Finance Committee, public health experts at Yale University and University of Pennsylvania are warning that Donald Trump and his MAGA Republican policy changes and budget cuts to programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, the Affordable Care Act and the social safety net more broadly will kill at least 51,000 Americans a year.
Donald Trump's 'big beautiful bill' also guts educational funding, science and health research. These cuts will also imperil the health and well-being of the American people, making the country less prosperous and dynamic, both in the present and for future generations.
Decades of social science research have repeatedly shown that right-wing and 'conservative' policies across a range of issues cause harm to the American people. To that point, Republican-controlled parts of the country are a type of laboratory for what happens when these policies are applied without sufficient pushback: People who live in Red State America live shorter lives, have less economic mobility, wealth, and income, are less educated, have higher rates of preventable diseases, more suicides, higher rates of addiction, experience higher rates of murder and in total enjoy a worse quality of life. As journalist William Kleinknecht documents in his book 'State of Neglect,' 'What this means is that not all of us are living in a declining nation, only half of us":
If the United States were thought of as two countries, the Blue Nation would have much more in common with the America of the mid-twentieth century, when we led the world in almost every measure of progress, whereas the Red Nation would be middling and second-rate.'
When enacted, Trump's 'big beautiful bill' will take the harmful policies that have been inflicted on Americans who live in Republican-controlled parts of the country and make them national.
In a new essay at the Guardian, Brigid Schulte and Haley Swenson detail the harm that Trump's 'big beautiful bill' will cause tens of millions of the most vulnerable Americans and the fictions about poverty that are being used to justify this Darwinian right-wing social engineering:
Here's the reality check: a majority of those receiving this aid who can work are already working. More than 70% of working-age people who receive nutrition benefits or Medicaid, the health insurance program for low-income children and adults that covers one in five Americans, are already working, according to the Government Accountability Office. Those who aren't working, research shows, are mostly ill, disabled, caring for a family member, or in school.…
There is a problem with making policy decisions based on the unfounded belief that poverty is about people with bad moral character making bad choices, or on debunked racial tropes of undeserving 'welfare queens.' (In fact, white people make up the largest group receiving public food and healthcare aid.) Shaping policy around false stereotypes, rather than the complex reality, prevents policymakers from working together on real solutions.
Why is the American news media so easily taken in by the professional wrestling-like feud between Donald Trump and Elon Musk? On a basic level, this is a story that has heroes and villains, conflict and intrigue, an easy storyline to follow (and therefore is comparatively easy to write), and is 'fun' for mainstream liberals, progressives, and 'centrists." Perhaps most importantly, the Trump versus Musk narrative attracts attention (the clicks and downloads that drive the 21st-century media) and ad revenue. In so many ways, Trump versus Musk is a type of sugar high for the news media (and those pro-democracy Americans who are desperate for some good news to distract them from the reality that their side is getting rolled over, rather easily, by MAGA).
Al Jazeera's Andrew Mitrovica explains this as Trump's great power as 'the magician-in-chief':
Trump understands better, I reckon, than any US president since Ronald Reagan how to bend and manipulate the squirrel-like attention spans of much of the new and 'legacy' media to his will and advantage….
He does this by flashing shiny, fleeting baubles that further his parochial interests, while more consequential matters drift by like a passing cloud, unnoticed – leaving the hard, complex stuff to fade into neglect.
Trump is the human equivalent of a 24/7 cable news outlet pumping out intriguing content that the real cable news channels are happily addicted to – admitted or not….
What Trump wields is far more practised and pernicious. He doesn't just distract – he rewrites the story in real time, making the serious seem trivial, and the trivial seem epochal. Oh, and he figured out long ago that most political observers are far more captivated by personality than policy.
The Beltway press is conditioned to look where the president points – again and again….
The antidote to manipulation is not detachment – it's sharp, vigilant coverage of the profound, human consequences of the president's actions, not his antics.
In its exhausting dance with Donald Trump, the fourth estate can and must stop mistaking the fireworks for the fire.
In the end, the American news media, the responsible political class, and the general public who are closely following the Trump-Musk feud will likely end up being marks who were being worked the whole time. As journalist D. Earl Stephens writes in a new essay, 'Right-wing media will trumpet 'Hail to the Victors' and Democrats will be pointing at the smoking carnage of what was, while what is actually happening is even worse than it was 24 hours before":
Two weeks from now, all this will be forgotten, and we will be smack in the middle of the next existential crisis that will demand all of our time, while even more of our rights have been incinerated, and billionaires like Trump and Musk have even more of our money.
While Donald Trump's 'big beautiful bill' is being forced through Congress by his MAGA Republicans, he has federalized thousands of National Guard troops and 700 active-duty United States Marines to help put down protests in response to the ICE deportation raids in the Los Angeles area (and per Trump's Executive Order other parts of the country as well). This is a violation of long-standing norms and laws governing how the United States military should not be used against the American people. The United States Marines are the country's elite shock troops and an expeditionary force that specializes in amphibious assaults. The potential for a nightmare scenario is growing by the hour.
Once again, the American people and their news media and other leaders and gatekeepers are, in the words of media scholar Neil Postman, 'amusing themselves' and their democracy to death. Professional wrestling and carny culture can be great fun. Having a ringside seat for the end of American democracy and the rule of law in real-time is not.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Axios
10 minutes ago
- Axios
Padilla episode triggers five-alarm fire for Democrats
Democrats spooked by President Trump's state-sanctioned shows of force have shifted into five-alarm fire mode, warning he's pushing American democracy to the brink. Why it matters: They're pointing to what happened yesterday to Alex Padilla, California's senior senator, as a crossing-the-Rubicon moment. Driving the news: The jarring scene of Padilla, a Democrat, being forcefully removed from Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem's press conference after interrupting it — and then being dragged to the ground and handcuffed — felt like kerosene on the nation's political fire. To Trump's most loyal allies, Padilla's actions were merely an exercise in political theater. Back in D.C., House Speaker Mike Johnson was among the Republicans blaming Padilla, saying that "at a minimum," the senator should be censured. To Democrats, the episode crystallized fears about Trump's willingness to crush dissent, and shatter democratic norms and institutions. "This is the stuff of dictatorships. It is actually happening," said Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii). A few Republicans were just as alarmed. Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), who's repeatedly proved her independent streak, told reporters the incident was "shocking at every level. It's not the America I know." Padilla wasn't arrested, but the fallout from the incident promises to endure as Congress continues to wrestle with Trump's giant tax and spending bill. Zoom in: To fully understand the alarm that's gripping Democrats over the Padilla incident, consider two factors: 1. It took place in a mostly Democratic city where Trump's immigration agents are using military-style tactics to conduct raids and make arrests in mostly Hispanic communities and workplaces. Padilla is one of the nation's highest-ranking Hispanic public officials, and is the ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee's immigration panel. 2. Trump's over-the-top-enforcement seems to be about more than immigration. When Padilla interrupted Noem during her press conference to try to ask a question, the DHS secretary had just said that her agents were in Los Angeles "to liberate this city from the socialist and the burdensome leadership that this governor and this mayor have placed on this country."
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Josh Hawley proposes raising federal minimum wage to $15. What is Florida's minimum wage
Ultraconservative Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley joined Democratic Vermont Sen. Peter Welch to introduce a bill on June 10 to raise the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour. The bill, dubbed the 'Higher Wages for American Workers Act,' would raise the minimum wage starting in January 2026 and allow it to increase on the basis of inflation in subsequent years. It's unclear if the bill will be taken up for a vote. The federal minimum wage is currently $7.25 per hour and has not changed since 2009, while the cost of living has risen dramatically. Previous Congressional efforts to raise the minimum wage have failed. President Donald Trump said in December before he took office that he would "consider" raising the federal minimum wage, and rumors flew in April that he had bumped it to $25 an hour. Not only was that not true, he revoked a 2024 executive order that set the minimum wage for federal contractors at $17.75. 'For decades, working Americans have seen their wages flatline," Hawley said in a statement. "One major culprit of this is the failure of the federal minimum wage to keep up with the economic reality facing hardworking Americans every day." Welch, a member of the Senate Finance Committee, echoed a similar sentiment. 'Every hardworking American deserves a living wage that helps put a roof over their head and food on the table – $7.25 an hour doesn't even come close,' he said. Critics, such as the Employment Policies Institute, say the change would result in a loss of jobs. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office found in an analysis that raising the minimum wage would 'raise the earnings and family income of most low-wage workers' but would cause other low-income workers to lose their jobs and their family income to fall. How does this compare with Florida? States may choose their own minimum wage levels and many of them are far ahead of the federal minimum wage. Florida's minimum wage is currently $13 an hour for non-tipped employees and $9.98 for tipped employees. On Sept. 30, 2025, both those rates will go up another dollar. They'll go up another buck again in 2026 until the state minimum wage is $15 an hour, a move mandated by a constitutional amendment Florida voters approved in 2020. The state minimum wage was first established in 2004 by another voter-approved amendment "to provide a decent and healthy life for them and their families, that protects their employers from unfair low-wage competition, and that does not force them to rely on taxpayer-funded public services in order to avoid economic hardship." There have been efforts to work around it. Two bills in the 2025 Florida legislative session would have allowed people working in apprenticeships, internships or work-study programs to choose to work for less. Supporters said young students and teenagers were missing out on training opportunities due to high state-mandated wages. Critics warned that companies could label all entry-level jobs as 'apprenticeships' or 'internships' to force employees to work cheaply. However, both bills, SB 676 and HB 541, died on May 3, along with about 1,300 other bills in this year's session that were "indefinitely postponed and withdrawn from consideration" so Florida lawmakers could focus instead on the battle over the still-unfinished final 2025-26 state budget. One of the bills that did make it through the legislature this year severely limits the chances of Florida voters ever managing to do something raise the minimum wage again. On the same day it passed, Gov. Ron DeSantis quickly signed into law a bill that makes it more difficult for citizens to get constitutional amendments on the ballot, effective immediately. The federal minimum wage has been $7.25 an hour since 2009. Most states, including Florida, have established higher minimum wages and 21 states raised theirs at the beginning of the year. Michigan passed a gradual wage hike similar to Florida's. Fourteen states pay the federal minimum rate of $7.25, Georgia, Wyoming and Montana pay less, and Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Tennessee have no state minimum wage law. There are also certain occupations and situations where the Department of Labor allows exemptions to the federal minimum wage law and employees may be paid less, including farm workers, executive, administrative and professional employees. commissioned sales employees, seasonal or recreational establishment workers, minors under certain circumstances, employees with disabilities under certain situations, employees of enterprises with an annual gross income of less than $50,000, and more. Where is minimum wage going up? These states and cities are due for hikes in 2025 Even if it passes, gets signed by Trump and gets past any legal challenges, it's unclear if Florida would respond by immediately adopting the new federal minimum wage or simply waiting unto the state reaches that level in the time frame it's already on. When he was still president-elect in December, Trump said he would consider raising the federal minimum wage. But he has made no moves to do so, and his Treasury secretary flatly said no. During Scott Bessent's Senate confirmation hearing, Sen. Bernie Sanders asked him point-blank if he would work to raise the minimum wage to a living wage. "I believe that the minimum wage is more of a statewide and regional issue," Bessent replied. When asked again, he said simply, "No, sir." According to the U.S. Department of Labor, the highest minimum wage in the U.S. is $17.50 an hour in Washington, D.C. The highest state minimum wage is Washington state, with $16.66. California and parts of New York pay $16.50. Georgia and Wyoming businesses pay $5.15 an hour, although in Georgia, it only applies to employers of six or more employees. In Montana, businesses with gross annual sales of less than $110,000 pay $4 an hour. Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Tennessee have no state minimum wage law. Employers of tipped employees must pay their employees minimum wage, but they can count the tips the employees receive toward it up to the maximum of $3.02, the allowable Fair Labor Standards Act tip credit of 2003. So the direct wage they must pay is the minimum wage minus $3.02. The current minimum wage in Florida is $13 an hour, so the tipped minimum wage is $9.98. Both will go up a dollar each until they reach $15 an hour for non-tipped employees and $11.98 for tipped employees. The minimum wage is different from a living wage, however, which tries to calculate how much a person needs to earn per hour to afford the necessities — housing, childcare, health care, food, etc. — where they live. According to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's (MIT) living wage calculator, the living wage in Florida is $23.41 an hour for one adult with no children, $38.72 for an adult with one child, $47.53 for an adult with two children and $59.64 for an adult with three children, as of February 2025. Florida's minimum wage was initially tied to the federal minimum wage created in 1938 under President Franklin D. Roosevelt with the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) of 1938 which set the minimum hourly wage at 25 cents, banned oppressive child labor and capped the maximum workweek at 44 hours. In 2005, Florida voters approved Amendment 5 to establish a state minimum wage over the federal standard. Florida has paid its minimum wage workers more than the federal minimum ever since. Amendment 5 brought the hourly wage for non-tipped employees to $6.15, a dollar more than the federal minimum at the time, and required the Department of Economic Opportunity to calculate an adjusted state minimum wage rate based on the rate of inflation for the 12 months prior to Sept. 1, based on the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers. There have been several increases since: 2005: Raised to $6.15 an hour 2006: Raised to $6.40 an hour 2009: Raised to $7.21 an hour 2010: Raised to $7.25 an hour 2016: After 6 years, raised to $8.05 an hour 2017: Raised to $8.10 an hour 2018: Raised to $8.25 an hour 2019: Raised to $8.45 an hour 2021: Raised to $10 an hour to meet requirements from the 2020 amendment 2022: Raised to $11 an hour 2023: Raised to $12 an hour 2024: Raised to $13 an hour This article originally appeared on Tallahassee Democrat: Hawley introduces $15 minimum wage bill. How would this affect Florida?


Politico
21 minutes ago
- Politico
Wanted: One NASA administrator
Presented by WELCOME TO POLITICO PRO SPACE. Thanks to everyone who read our inaugural issue. The excitement continues this week with speculation on the next NASA administrator, Congressional Golden Dome talk, and a Florida push to snag NASA HQ. Who do you think the next NASA chief should be? Email me at sskove@ with tips, pitches and feedback, and find me on X at @samuelskove. And remember, we're offering this newsletter for free over the next few weeks. After that, it will be available only to POLITICO Pro subscribers. Read all about it here. The Spotlight Now that Donald Trump has pushed NASA administrator nominee Jared Isaacman through the airlock, the search is on to find the space agency's next boss. We spoke to 12 insiders and analysts about who could get the nod. The conclusion? They'll probably be retired military. Starship Troopers: At least three former two- and three-star generals with space ties could be in the mix, according to four industry officials, who like others were granted anonymity to discuss internal discussions. These include retired Space Force Maj. Gen. John Olson, Lt. Gen. John Shaw, and Air Force Lt. Gen. Steve Kwast. Olson served in the Space Force and in NASA. Shaw retired as deputy commander of Space Command in 2023. Kwast last served in the Air Force, but supporters pushed for him to lead the Space Force. (Notice a theme?) The industry buzz follows Trump's decision two weeks ago to rescind the nomination amid a feud between SpaceX founder and Isaacman ally Elon Musk. The president then made the head-turning announcement that Joint Chiefs Chair Gen. Dan Caine would weigh in on the search for the next administrator for NASA — an agency that is not part of the military. Starfleet: Retired service members rarely lead the civilian agency, whose employees are known more for studying the stars than working with weapons. It has some people worried. Other potential names floating in the stratosphere include NASA's Kevin Coggins and astronaut Mike Hopkins. Coggins is a former military official who serves as head of NASA's Space Communications and Navigation program. Hopkins is a former NASA astronaut who joined the Space Force — from space — and was the first astronaut for the U.S.'s newest military service. Former Rep. Mike Garcia (R-Calif.), who served on the House science subcommittee on space before Rep. George Whitesides (D-Calif.) unseated him this year, is yet another name circulating. Under Pressure: Both industry and lawmakers are eager to fill the role amid the White House's proposed budget cuts to NASA, competition with China to return to the moon, and Trump's plans to land astronauts on Mars. 'I had thought we would have [an administrator] by now,' Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), chair of the Senate Commerce Committee, which oversees NASA, told my colleague Joe this week. 'I don't know what their timing is, but I hope that the White House moves swiftly.' Some senators were even willing to swallow their concerns about Isaacman, a billionaire who had no experience in government, to speed up the process. 'In this landscape of getting back [to the moon] quickly, usurping China, I was ready to give a technology entrepreneur a chance,' Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), the ranking member of the Senate Commerce committee, told Joe. Twilight Zone: But industry officials were not aware of any candidates the White House had spoken with yet, a sign that no one has emerged as a frontrunner. A White House spokesperson declined to comment. The physics of the nomination process is also working against the space industry, thanks to a nomination backlog. Isaacman, who Trump tapped early relative to past NASA administrators, took six months to even get on the roster for a Senate vote. And we all know how that turned out. Galactic Government THE NASA HQ RACE TRAILS ALONG: States have spent months duking out who will snag NASA's headquarters once its Washington lease expires in 2028. Florida has just upped the ante. Much of the Florida congressional delegation sent a letter this week to Trump urging him to consider moving NASA headquarters to Florida's Space Coast. It looks remarkably like a letter sent in April by Texas Republicans making a similar plea to relocate NASA to Houston, aka the 'Space City.' All in? But only two of Florida's eight Democratic representatives stamped their approval. None of Texas' 12 Democrats did. 'Both states could rally their delegations if it was important,' an industry official said. Military GOLDEN GANG: The Trump administration may not know how it will build the president's 'Golden Dome' defense shield, but that hasn't stopped lawmakers from creating a caucus for it. Reps. Jeff Crank (R-Colo.) and Dale Strong (R-Ala.) launched the House Golden Dome caucus this week to complement its counterpart in the Senate, created in May by Sen. Tim Sheehy (R-Mont.). The highly nebulous plan involves placing interceptors in space to shoot down enemy missiles, a scheme that could cost more than $500 billion. Crank, a first time lawmaker, represents Colorado Springs, home of Space Command. Strong represents Huntsville, a space hub and possible future home of Space Command — over the opposition of his colleague. What Next: Trump announced in May that he had selected a design for the multi-layered system and tapped Space Force Gen. Michael Guetlein to lead development. But senators from both parties have said the plan is opaque, and the Pentagon canceled a major conference with industry on its plans just two weeks before the meetings were set to take place. The Reading Room House appropriators call for new Space Force acquisition pilot: Breaking Defense How Private Space Drives Space Force's Intel Delivery: Payload Space Force's first next-gen missile warning launch pushed to 2026: Defense News Voyager raises $383 million from upsized IPO: SpaceNews Event Horizon MONDAY: The Washington Space Business Roundtable holds a discussion on 2025 priorities for the FCC's Space Bureau. The Paris Air Show starts Monday and runs through Sunday. TUESDAY: The Lunar and Planetary Institute holds a virtual and in-person discussion of NASA's Europa Clipper mission. WEDNESDAY: The National Security Space Association hosts a classified forum on the Space Force's strategic plans. The Senate Armed Services Committee holds a hearing on the Defense Department's 2026 budget request. Photo of the Week