• ObjectivityIncarnate@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 hours ago

    This tweet is essentially:

    You promised to lower prices, but prices went up, this is NOT what I voted for.

    For it to be LAMF, you have to actually get what you’re expecting others to get. The person you voted for NOT doing what they promised to do is literally the opposite of LAMF.

    Basically:

    I voted for the Leopards Eating Faces party, I never thought they’d…wait, they’re not eating anyone’s faces

    is the equivalent of the situation happening here.

    Not LAMF.

      • ObjectivityIncarnate@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        I think even ‘adjacent’ is giving it too much credit.

        After all, what’s happened is the literal opposite of what they wanted, while LAMF requires that the thing you supported happening is what happens, you just thought it’d happen to others and not you.

        • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 hours ago

          Trump promised to do tariffs. People assumed other countries would pay the cost so that was good. It turns out they are paying the cost.

          It would be straight up LAMF if the tariffs were front of mind when they voted. But inflation was what they were most concerned with, and they either didn’t pay attention to Trump’s tariff talk or assumed it wouldn’t be them paying the tariffs… you could say it’s not directly LAMF because people don’t understand the connection between higher tariffs and higher prices, but definitely LAMF adjacent because of the widespread assumption that people in other countries would be paying the tariffs, not them.