(C) Daily Kos
This story was originally published by Daily Kos and is unaltered.
. . . . . . . . . .



Two Disruptors, Two Different Games [1]

['This Content Is Not Subject To Review Daily Kos Staff Prior To Publication.']

Date: 2025-04-10

Elon Musk played the game of influence with precision—charming, collaborating with, and ultimately outmaneuvering Donald Trump in the high-stakes world of power, politics, and public perception.

In recent years, few public figures have commanded more media oxygen than Donald Trump and Elon Musk. Both built loyal followings through social media spectacle. Both positioned themselves as anti-establishment icons. And both disrupted the norms of their respective fields—Trump in politics, Musk in tech and innovation. But beneath the surface of their similarities lies a striking difference: while Trump was loud, impulsive, and overt in his grab for control, Musk played a subtler, smarter, and far more strategic game.

This is the story of how Musk “snowed” Trump—not through manipulation in the traditional sense, but through a carefully calculated dance of proximity and distance. He stood close enough to gain access, yet far enough to remain untouched when the tide turned.

As Donald Trump took office the first time, amid protests and global skepticism, Elon Musk made what many considered a surprising move: he joined two of Trump’s most high-profile advisory boards—the President’s Strategic and Policy Forum and the Manufacturing Jobs Initiative.

At a time when other tech leaders distanced themselves from the new administration, Musk leaned in. But it wasn’t out of admiration. His explanation was utilitarian: “I and others will do our best to provide advice to the President that is constructive. Simply attacking him will achieve nothing.”

This approach allowed Musk to straddle the line. He positioned himself as a pragmatist—a problem-solver who believed in dialogue over division. For Trump, Musk’s involvement offered legitimacy in an industry that otherwise viewed him as toxic. For Musk, the seat at the table came with potential advantages: regulatory insight, influence on policy, and continued government partnerships for companies like Tesla and SpaceX.

It was influence, not ideology. And it worked—until it didn’t.

The turning point came when Trump announced the U.S. would pull out of the Paris Climate Agreement. That same time, Musk publicly resigned from both advisory councils. “Climate change is real,” he tweeted. “Leaving Paris is not good for America or the world.”

This wasn’t just a moral stand—it was brand management. Musk's companies were built on the future: clean energy, electric vehicles, and interplanetary travel. Being associated with climate denial could have damaged his long-term credibility with customers, investors, and international partners.

By stepping away at the right moment, Musk preserved his reputation and distanced himself from Trump just as the administration was growing more controversial. While other business leaders scrambled to explain their silence or defend their choices, Musk had already executed a clean exit.

Fast-forward to 2022: Musk acquires Twitter (now X), becoming not just a tech mogul, but a media baron. This move shifted the dynamic entirely. Trump, once banned from the platform, had relied on Twitter as his digital stage. Now, Musk owned the stage itself.

In the months that followed, Musk positioned himself as a “free speech absolutist,” restoring controversial accounts and allowing far-right narratives to regain traction. His tweets ranged from libertarian musings to conspiracy-adjacent commentary. While he never fully embraced Trump, he gave Trumpism digital oxygen.

Still, it was never about Trump. Musk’s real aim was control—not of ideology, but of infrastructure. He wasn't interested in supporting a candidate so much as shaping the terrain on which all candidates must now compete. In that sense, Trump’s shadow was useful—but never central.

Elon Musk and Donald Trump have proven themselves to be master manipulators, each wielding enormous influence over public opinion and national discourse—often to the detriment of truth, civility, and progress. Their uncanny ability to dominate headlines, stir division, and shape narratives through spectacle and social media has created a dangerous feedback loop where controversy equates to power. Rather than fostering unity or innovation for the greater good, both seem more invested in personal gain, ego, and control. If left unchecked, their recklessness and polarizing influence could hasten the erosion of democratic values and further destabilize a nation already at a tipping point.

[END]
---
[1] Url: https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2025/4/10/2315770/-Two-Disruptors-Two-Different-Games?pm_campaign=front_page&pm_source=more_community&pm_medium=web

Published and (C) by Daily Kos
Content appears here under this condition or license: Site content may be used for any purpose without permission unless otherwise specified.

via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/dailykos/