Maher, Rogan and Musk are Libertarians at their core, even if they don't identify as Libertarians. And I can understand why, because not all idiots are Libertarian but all Libertarians are idiots. Who wants to identify themselves as an idiot?
Of course you can't paint people with such a broad brush, so let's look at them individually. Maher is the easy one; he was cast out of his position as a both-sideser when he spoke the objective truth about 9/11 hijackers; indeed, they were not cowards. But that is not what Bush the younger and his crowd wanted the American people to believe (mostly because they think labeling others as cowards somehow makes them seem less cowardly), so they turned on Maher and used their political power to get his "Politically Incorrect" program on ABC cancelled. Liberals rallied to his cause, mistakenly (in retrospect). Maher was never liberal. He was, and is, Libertarian. And yes, I know he claimed to give a $million to Obama's re-election; that does not make him liberal. That makes him another rich asshole trying to buy influence and frankly, adoration from the crowd that he needs to survive in his cushy Hollywood lifestyle.
I don't know that much about Rogan, but what I've listened to has not impressed me. In the lead-up to the election he didn't have much interesting to say; not for lack of talking, but what he said did not add anything to the conversation. It was like he was merely riding the waves of voter sentiment trying to capitalize on what he thought would play best to his audience. That's not being a thought leader or influencer. On the spectrum of shifting political loyalties, Rogan dismissed right from wrong and became enticed by the money he sees with that money coming from conservatives. And in the end it's as simple as realizing that Trump made America hate again, lucratively.
Elon sd, of course, the biggest and best example of the guy who wanted everyone to think he was liberal when being liberal was lucrative for his business interests. Anyone who was familiar with Elon and his background knew otherwise. He did not buy Tesla because he had liberal goals (environment, mostly) at the forefront of his plans; he bought Tesla because the opportunity to create havoc in a well-established industry was too great for someone who sees themselves as a disruptor. While Elon was born with a blood-diamond-encrusted silver spoon in his mouth (so wealth was not the immediate driving factor), he made his mark by disrupting the banking industry as part of the team that created PayPal, and he saw an industry populated by old money scramble to save their highly profitable businesses, and it tickled his fancy.
What we've seen in the past few years, however, is the real Elon: a highly insecure man-child hell bent on making his perceived enemies pay for the injustices he suffered as a child (neglected by a distant but ever-present father; ignored by women; mocked by the men he sees as "alphas" — although I hesitate to use that word because it has come to mean something dirivitive). And he achieved the element that we should fear in all insecure man-children: power sufficient to wreak some real havoc. DOGE was many things, but it was never about efficiency. It was merely the PR lies that gave him cover to achieve the real damage he intended: destroy the system that was holding him accountable, explaining his affinity for Trump, the poster child for petulant manbabies. That there are thousands, if not tens of thousands, of casualties in the process is insignificant. You can hear his thoughts from outer space (ha!): "That'll teach 'em."
And in the end, you have to view all three of these buffoons in the context of where we are in the world: a declining empire facing a massive cultural shift. All three tapped into the fear that the outgoing dominant group feels as they see their controlling influence wane.
