GROK VS MUSK

 

Grok is an AI chatbot created by Elon Musk that was launched in 2023 to compete with other AI chatbots like Open AI.  Given Musk's current embrace of right wing politics, it was no surprise when he claimed that it would be “maximally truth-seeking … even if that truth is sometimes at odds with what is politically correct.”  He also said in an interview on Fox News that OpenAI had been “training the AI to lie” by incorporating human feedback that directed the chatbot “not to say what the data actually demands that it say.”    Implying, of course, that Grok would not report  such lies.

But, like any chatbot, Grok searches the internet for reliable, factual information, and, as Stephen Colbert once pointed out, "the truth has a liberal bias."  In other words, Musk's own opinions, based as they are on a rightwing ideology that believes what Donald Trump and the right wing media says without question, is often more about feelings and desires than reality. (For example, those Haitian immigrants never actually ate dogs, despite what Trump said in the 2024 election, but his followers wanted it to be true, so they perceived it as such.)  But feelings and desires  are not supposed to drive the gathering and distributing of facts and information, as a few pointed questions I made at Grok's free website proved:

My first question was about Musk's Department of Government Efficiency.  QUESTION:  What did Elon Musk accomplish with his DOGE Government initiative?  While the answer given was long, here's what was given as a "critical perspective" at the end:  "While DOGE achieved measurable cuts in spending and workforce, its impact appears overstated, with savings far below initial promises and significant collateral damage to government services. The initiative’s aggressive approach—modeled on private-sector cost-cutting—disregarded the complexity of public administration, leading to legal challenges, dysfunction, and public discontent. Musk’s dual role as a business magnate and government advisor raised ethical questions, with some viewing DOGE as a vehicle to advance his corporate interests. The lack of transparency and verifiable data further undermines claims of success, suggesting DOGE was more disruptive than transformative."  Those last few words are pretty striking, "more disruptive than transformative".  Elsewhere in the answer it also states that "DOGE targeted agencies investigating Musk’s companies, raising concerns about political weaponization" and that it promised 2 trillion dollars in savings and only accomplished one hundred and fifty billion.  It even pointed out the errors DOGE made on its own website, like claiming an $8 billion ICE contract cancellation that really  only cost $8 million.  In other words, even Musk's own chatbot knows that then promises of DOGE were overblown, that Musk himself was the wrong person for the job given his own conflicts of interest, and that the results were mixed at best.  So, basically everything that anyone that isn't a Musk fanboy should know. 

Wanting to dig deeper into the DOGE issue, I asked a darker question about Musk's heavy cuts to the USAID program, which only accounts for less than one percent of our total government spending :  QUESTION:  Will the cuts to USAID made by DOGE result in the death of children?  Grok did not mince words here:  "Studies and internal USAID memos estimate significant increases in child mortality due to the disruption of lifesaving programs. For instance, researchers cited in posts on X suggest that DOGE’s cuts could lead to approximately 148,000 child deaths, part of a total of 219,000 deaths attributed to the aid reductions."  It then explained that child deaths would increase due to spending cuts on USAID programs concerning malnutrition, infectious diseases and HIV/AIDS.  While it did mention that "some argue the cuts are necessary to eliminate inefficient or politically driven programs, as claimed by President Trump and Elon Musk, who assert USAID promotes a liberal agenda and wastes money. There’s also the possibility that some terminated programs were mistakenly cut and could be reinstated, as suggested by internal communications." But it then adds, " the lack of transparency on which programs remain active and the halting of payment systems even for approved waivers undermine claims that lifesaving efforts are being spared."  It then ends with these dark words, "In summary, while the precise death toll is uncertain, the cuts to USAID’s programs are highly likely to result in thousands, if not millions, of additional child deaths due to the loss of critical health and nutrition support. The evidence from past aid impacts, current program terminations, and expert projections strongly supports this conclusion."  This is truly overwhelming and depressing to consider, especially after Musk bragged about throwing the USAID program into "the wood chipper.", essentially joking about what could be called genocidal neglect.

Ok, here's another, less dark one:  QUESTION:  Has the Cybertruck been a success for the Tesla company? Again, the answer shows far more balance than Musk himself ever would: while Grok does mention that the initial sales and attention were strong after the Cybertruck's first release, it also shows how much those sales declined.  For example, it mentions that "despite initial success, sales fell short of Elon Musk’s ambitious goal of 250,000 units annually, with only 38,965 sold in 2024—84% below projections."  It also added that "by April 2025, Forbes labeled the Cybertruck the auto industry’s 'biggest flop in decades' due to its sales miss and polarizing reputation." Grok doesn't forget the eight recalls that have been made since the vehicle was released, some of them for serious issues like body panels detaching, and other complaints made about it like rusting panels and getting stuck in the snow.  Finally, it said in conclusion that  "The Cybertruck has been a partial success for Tesla. It achieved strong initial sales, profitability, and market dominance among EV pickups, while its bold design kept Tesla in the spotlight. However, it fell far short of Musk’s lofty sales targets, faced significant quality issues, and struggled to win over traditional truck buyers due to its niche design and high price. Its long-term success hinges on Tesla addressing quality concerns, expanding affordability, and navigating Musk’s polarizing public image. For now, it’s a high-profile win with notable flaws, not the game-changer Tesla hoped for."  While I find that conclusion a bit generous towards Tesla, it still ends with it saying that Musk's dream of the Cybertruck replacing regular pick up trucks in this country just isn't happening.  

Now let's try a question that is a matter of opinion:  QUESTION: Is Elon Musk a good father? Right away Grok calls this a "tricky" question, which is understandable.  It then lists attributes both good and bad about Musk's parenting:  On the one hand, it says that he is seen spending time with some of his children,  that he encourages them to be free thinkers and that he obviously has enough wealth to take care of them.  On the other hand, it mentions that he spends most of his time working, is estranged from his trans daughter Vivian, and that "Posts on X and media reports often portray Musk as detached or inconsistent as a father. For instance, his relationship with Grimes ended in 2021, and she later posted on X about co-parenting challenges, hinting at Musk’s limited involvement." It also points out that giving children odd names like "X Æ A-Xii", "Exa Dark Sideræl", and" Techno Mechanicus"will be difficult for them in the future.  While rating one parent as better than another is generally difficult, the openness  with which Grok was willing to concede that Musk may not be the ideal dad once again shows that the chatbot has more adherence to the facts than Musk himself does.

And for the last one, I thought I'd wade into a current right wing obsession that Musk himself shares:  QUESTION:  Should trans children get gender reaffirming care?  It's answer is balanced, listing both sides of the question before saying that "Decisions should involve thorough psychological assessment, informed consent (from both child and parents), and reversible steps where possible. Blanket policies—whether fully affirming or outright banning—ignore the nuance of each case. Families and doctors need flexibility to navigate this, grounded in the best available science, not ideology."  Given that Musk has said that his own trans daughter was "killed by the woke mind virus”, clearly Grok's even handed answer is not part of his personal belief system, or the one given by the right wing media's scare tactics over the issue.  Once again, Grok is more open minded than Musk himself.

While I'm sure a massive narcissist like Musk will never ask Grok questions like this, the fact that his own, not "politically correct",  chatbot was  willing to give such evenhanded and often negative answers about him and his actions shows that people like him and  Trump live in a fantasy world, surrounded by sycophants, in which they see themselves as masters of the universe.  But, according to Grok, the truth is far more complicated.

WHAT DID WE EXPECT?

 

As a progressive, I can take some comfort from President Donald Trump's dive in the polls.  Recent polling show that he has the lowest approval rating (somewhere around 40%) for his first 100 days of any modern president, with only his own first term ratings coming close.  Clearly the public has turned on him, even on the two issues that fueled his campaign: immigration and the economy.

While I'm glad to see the public going this way, part of me is incensed that many people who voted for him apparently didn't see this 100 day dumpster fire coming.  Because, while Trump lied repeatedly during the 2024 campaign (remember when he claimed that Haitian immigrants were eating dogs?) he did tell the truth about what he planned to do.  

So when the public seems to be turning against him on immigration because of the number of innocent people being swept up by his aggressive enforcement of immigration laws, it's hard not to point out that this was inevitable.  Oh sure, he said he was only going to go after criminals, but it takes only a small leap from deporting criminals to Kilmar Ábrego García being sent to a brutal prison in El Salvador because of an "administrative error", which Trump now claims never happened because Garcia is a gang member, despite there being no solid proof of that.  

As for the economy, Trump repeatedly said on the campaign trail that he was going to impose heavy tariffs on all imports, which nearly every economic analyst on both the left and the right, predicted would cause inflation and hurt the economy.  While some Wall Street conservatives claimed that he was only going to use them as a "negotiating tactic", it's now clear that he always meant it. He began his tariff plan quickly, culminating on April 2nd,, which he dubbed "liberation Day", with a wide range of tariffs on both friendly and unfriendly countries.   The result was a loss for Wall Street of 6 Trillion dollars since he took office (so far).  Indeed,  the three days after April 2nd. caused the biggest  loss for American stocks since WWII.  He  backed off on some of those tariffs in the days afterwards, but the market is still spooked by the specter of upcoming product shortages due to his keeping a tariff rate on China of 145%.  And he has shown no sign of ending his trade war, dismissing the possibility of a toy shortage during Christmas by saying, "Well, maybe the children will have two dolls instead of 30 dolls. So maybe the two dolls will cost a couple bucks more than they would normally.”  (Which may be the most tone deaf and stupid thing he has ever said as president, which is saying something!).

Other things that Trump has done were also as predictable as they were terrible: he let Elon Musk  and his DOGE bros run roughshod through the federal government, cutting programs and firing workers thoughtlessly while Robert Kennedy Jr. has taken the same wrecking ball to our nation's health, cutting the Health and Human Services department that he heads by billions of dollars.  Add to that Trump's attempts to defund scientific research at universities he considers too "woke", and his rolling back of Joe Biden's attempts to transition our country away from fossil fuels, and you have, quite simply, the most anti science president in American history.  But again, we should have seen that coming, there's nothing here that he didn't say he would do.

Another sad, predictable part of the second Trump term is his attacks on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion programs in government hiring, private companies and universities.  Yes, the man who was given a successful business by his father, who then bailed him out with hundreds of millions of dollars in unpaid loans, now claims that we should only judge people on merit.  This has also lead to American history being whitewashed to downplay the importance of slavery and Jim Crow laws in our nation's history; even our national park service has removed stories about Harriet Tubman and the underground railroad.  As, Darren Beattie, a Trump appointee to the state department once posted on X: "Competent white men must be in charge if you want things to work. Unfortunately, our entire national ideology is predicated on coddling the feelings of women and minorities, and demoralizing competent white men." This would often seem to be the unspoken guiding principle of the Trump administration. (Sadly, Beattie was fired from the first Trump administration for attending a white supremacist rally, but now he's back, showing just  how little this new Trump administration cares about racism).   Also, one of the president's first orders was to deny the existence of trans people at all, because hatred of the trans community has sadly been a winning issue for conservatives in the past few years.

Then there is Trump's vengeance against his perceived enemies, as he has used his office to attack law firms that took legal action against him in his first term, while also attacking news outlets that he has seen as too negative towards him. He has even gone after Chris Krebs, a cybersecurity official who served in his first administration, just because he publicly said after the 2020 election that voting machines had not been hacked and their count for Biden was correct. Sadly, some of these people have given in to then president  (ABC  settled with Trump over a frivolous lawsuit, while some law firms will be doing pro bono work for him).  And once again, we should have seen this all coming, since he repeatedly said on the campaign trail that he will be getting "retribution" in his second term.  

He has also been as corrupt as he was in his first term, blatantly starting a crypto coin business just before taking office and then selling presidential access to the highest buyer, while his wife was paid a whopping twenty eight million dollars to make a documentary for Amazon.  While this kind of corruption is disgraceful, it's nothing new from the man who had a hotel in Washington DC with his name on it during his first term that foreign dignitaries could stay at  and purposely run up a huge bill in blatant violation of the emoluments clause of the constitution.  He has also played golf twenty four times in the  first 100 days of his second term, continuing his record of laziness, while also charging secret service members an entrance fee at his properties that costs taxpayers millions of dollars.  

Even his laughable desire to serve a third term is keeping in tone with his past behavior; he's always teased the idea that he should stay in office as long as he likes, so the fact that he now claims that he's serious about doing so should come as no surprise. Of course, his serving a third term would violate the constitution, but he obviously sees that document as something he can ignore, given that on his first day as president he  issued a presidential order violating the constitutional right to birthright citizenship. (I assume his desire to serve a third term  will be overturned by the Supreme Court, although with this court you never know!). 

Really, the only terrible thing Trump has done that I didn't see coming was his trade war with Canada, combined with his insane, misguided and unpopular desire to turn that country into an American state.  (While he has also pushed an equally insane, misguided and unpopular desire to take over the territory of Greenland, he did  mention that desire in his first term).  Why Trump has suddenly decided to sour relations with one of our country's oldest allies is puzzling to say the least, with reasons ranging from a failed business attempt he made there in the past to just a desire to be remembered as an expansionist president.  In any event, it has had one positive benefit; it helped the Canadian liberal party in their election, with Canadian voters fiercely rejecting most candidates perceived as possible Trump allies.  To me, this whole craziness with Canada highlights what I think is the worst thing about Trump's second term so far: he is hurting the American brand around the world.  His trade war, combined with his hostile statements about our allies (he has ludicrously said the European Union was "established to take advantage of the United States") are not only going to harm our economy, it makes America look foolish and weak on the world stage.  Even worse, his anti scientific polices will see our country falling behind in many levels of research (France is already inviting American scientists who've had their funding cut to continue their work there) while his trade war has pushed other countries into making deals with China rather than us.

In the past decade since Trump has become an unlikely and wildly reckless political figure on the world stage,  I have often wondered if the country will be able to survive this terrible man's fascistic views and cult like hold over the Republican voters.  After one hundred horrific days of his second term, I'm still wondering.