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.
If you think about it on a bigger scale, it still is her getting what she expected others to get. The Trumpian/fictional definition of tariffs claims that other countries will now “pay their fair share”. Which is utter bullshit because the companies have always passed on as much of the cost of a tariff as the market will bear, if they can afford to absorb any at all. In interviews they are STILL repeatedly pretending like other countries are paying the tariffs and the rise in costs has nothing to do with them.
Anyways, she expected other countries costs to go up, not hers. Classic leopard eating face, imo.
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.
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.
This tweet is essentially:
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:
is the equivalent of the situation happening here.
Not LAMF.
If you think about it on a bigger scale, it still is her getting what she expected others to get. The Trumpian/fictional definition of tariffs claims that other countries will now “pay their fair share”. Which is utter bullshit because the companies have always passed on as much of the cost of a tariff as the market will bear, if they can afford to absorb any at all. In interviews they are STILL repeatedly pretending like other countries are paying the tariffs and the rise in costs has nothing to do with them.
Anyways, she expected other countries costs to go up, not hers. Classic leopard eating face, imo.
You’re not wrong. I’d say this post is LAMF adjacent. Not directly LAMF.
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.
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.