Brené Brown vs. Joe Rogan
Plus: Trump at Madison Square Garden, Florida's abortion amendment, Israel's Iran retaliation, and more...

Pick your poison: Over the weekend, depending on your political flavor, you could have chosen between listening to a comedian hurl insults on stage at Madison Square Garden as part of a campaign rally; watching a sitting U.S. representative and a vice-presidential contender play video games and talk about scrapping the filibuster via Twitch; hearing a presidential candidate's thoughts on whale psychology; or listening to a vulnerability researcher (?) and a presidential candidate gab about birth order.
Our sharpest political minds these are not.
It's almost like everyone is avoiding talking about the actual issues—things like how to reduce inflation, how to bring government spending under control, how to make Social Security solvent, how to create an orderly and just immigration process, or how to improve the quality of our schools. The podcasting industry has, between the last election cycle and now, taken a glorious wrecking ball to cable news, creating a whole bunch of scrappy independent upstarts that presidential candidates (and their political consultants) finally understand to be an important way voters are receiving news and commentary. Unfortunately, the candidates themselves appear to have their heads filled with little more than fluff.
First, a predictable scandal: Tony Hinchcliffe, an insult comedian known for his off-color jokes, took to the stage to open for Donald Trump at Madison Square Garden yesterday. He made jokes about the Clintons, Diddy, and Latinos "making babies" and how they love to "come inside"—"just like they did to our country!"
He also said, "I don't know if you guys know this but there's literally a floating island of garbage in the middle of the ocean right now. I think it's called Puerto Rico." This became a political scandal, possibly jeopardizing Trump's ability to win Puerto Rico's electoral college votes. (Oh, wait…)
"When you have some a-hole calling Puerto Rico 'floating garbage,' know that that's what they think about you….It's what they think about anyone who makes less money than them," said New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in a response livestream with the Democrsats' vice-presidential candidate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz. (They're apparently quite chummy now, or so they want voters to believe.)
"Can't get over this dude telling someone else to change tampons when he's the one shitting bricks in his Depends after realizing opening for a Trump rally and feeding red-meat racism alongside a throng of other bigots to a frothing crowd does, unironically, make you one of them," Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wrote on X. "You don't 'love Puerto Rico.' You like drinking piña coladas. There's a difference."
Can't get over this dude telling someone else to change tampons when he's the one shitting bricks in his Depends after realizing opening for a Trump rally and feeding red-meat racism alongside a throng of other bigots to a frothing crowd does, unironically, make you one of them. https://t.co/kr82avveYs
— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) October 28, 2024
Were Puerto Ricans in attendance at the rally offended by this? Not really, or so it seems. But this whole saga is actually pretty emblematic of how this whole election has gone: We've almost entirely neglected to talk about actual issues. The Trump campaign keeps courting controversy, again and again and again, while the Harris/Walz campaign frequently defines itself in opposition to the Trumpists, reactive and apoplectic but rarely proactively defining what it is they would actually do.
Trump did Rogan: The most unhinged, meandering, and occasionally entertaining presidential candidate met his match in the most unhinged, meandering, and occasionally entertaining podcaster, and it was wild. Donald Trump and Joe Rogan talked about whale psychology. They talked about how Trump staffed his administration. They talked about the CHIPS and Science Act—which aimed to reduce reliance on Asia-manufactured chips, handing out subsidies for companies to produce semiconductor parts here at home—which Trump called "put[ting] up billions of dollars for rich companies," saying he instead favored slapping large tariffs on the companies to try to boost growth of American manufacturing capacity. He explained his comments about the "enemy from within" and how he takes it to mean that there are "people that I really think want to make this country unsuccessful." He, at times, got quite catty toward the ladies on The View.
Meanwhile, you have J.D. Vance—ostensibly the policy guy of the Trump campaign—talking about globalization on comedian Tim Dillon's podcast. Vance said "London doesn't feel fully English anymore," while "New York of course is the classic American city. Over time, I think New York will start to feel less American." (Is he saying that large cosmopolitan cities are adopting a certain sameness over time? What exactly is he predicting or talking about?)
Between Trump's protectionism, Hinchcliffe's off-color jokes, and Vance's unclear issues with globalization, it all comes together to paint a portrait of a campaign with very different values and priorities than, say, what I have.
Then there's Kamala: The Democratic presidential candidate went on vulnerability/empathy/shame researcher Brené Brown's podcast and it was…kind of full of nothing. Brown asked Harris plenty of questions about her background—birth order! Harris' nickname given to her by her sorority!—but never did they ever get to anything serious. They talked about the core values of "daring leaders." If you had been playing a drinking game where you take a shot every time someone says "lived experience" or "Venn diagrams," you would be face down on the rug.
Maybe we don't deserve better from our leaders. Maybe our politics were always fated to be ground down to this. But boy is it depressing to see it all laid out before you, via hours and hours of longform content on different podcasts, consumed by polar-opposite portions of America who increasingly seem to believe they have very little in common with one another.
Scenes from Miami: I'm in Miami for an event run by Founders Fund, and I went to a Catholic Church yesterday that is coming out in full force against Florida Amendment 4, which would add abortion protections to the state constitution, including the text: "No law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient's health, as determined by the patient's healthcare provider." (More on Amendment 4 here.)
Currently, Florida outlaws abortion after 6 weeks, and doctors and activists have been engaged in a campaign to draw attention to edge-case stories where women have been forced into medically difficult situations because the law purportedly does not make it clear that doctors are allowed to abort in life- and health-threatening circumstances. Proponents claim Amendment 4 will clarify this. The bishops of Florida, on the other hand, write: "We urge all Floridians of goodwill to stand against the legalization of late-term abortion and oppose the abortion amendment. In doing so, we will not only protect the weakest, most innocent, and defenseless of human life among us but also countless women throughout the state from the harms of abortion."
QUICK HITS
- On Saturday, Israeli fighter jets hit multiple "air-defense systems, missile-making facilities and launchers" in Iran, reports Bloomberg, in response to Iran's attack on Israel earlier this month. The attack was not extremely damaging in terms of lives lost—four Iranian soldiers have been reported killed—but it showed critical vulnerabilities in Iran's weapons and nuclear-development infrastructure. An American military official, "speaking to reporters on the condition of anonymity, said President Joe Biden's administration had worked with Israel to come up with a 'proportional' response and urged Iran not to retaliate again," per Bloomberg.
- On a campaign stop in West Philadelphia, Kamala Harris "announced a plan to boost Puerto Rico's economy and power grid," again per Bloomberg.
- "Egypt has proposed an initial two-day ceasefire in Gaza to exchange four Israeli hostages of Hamas for some Palestinian prisoners, Egypt's president said on Sunday as Israeli military strikes killed 45 Palestinians across the enclave," reports Reuters.
- Interesting trend piece on how younger women are eschewing wearing their engagement rings and wedding bands daily; as a surfer, I am precluded from wearing mine for much of the summer, but I didn't realize all the others were copying me.
- This "coach in chief" New York Times article is the most cringe thing I've read in a long while. Consume with caution.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Fuck
Joe BidenKamalaFuck Kamala We Ain’t Voting for That Hoe” reads sign as Crowds of Trump Supporters gathered outside MSG for Trump’s rally.
Any landscaper can tell you that a hoe is not needed to have a lawn one can be proud of.
2024: The Hoe vs. The Rake.
Here’s a shovel, can you dig it?
Interesting trend piece on how younger women are eschewing wearing their engagement rings and wedding bands daily;
Because they are still looking for something better.
I think it's more young people just don't care for tradition as much. Seems like a nothing burger.
Yeah. Somewhere between two tweets and a plate 'o shrimp.
Women have always taken their rings off to cheat. Lots of them have taken them off to wash dishes or unclog the sink. If you've got ostentatious, protruding gems, which would be the husband primarily, or at least partially, making the purchase, you would take them off to avoid losing them if you played softball or to avoid hurting someone if you played basketball or whatever.
But, a couple of all-female book clubs in Manhattan noticed that none of them were wearing their wedding rings much the way truck nuts were popular once and we get "news" about flash-in-the-pan (lack of) accessories.
I don't think that is accurate (not that I agree it is that they are shopping around). There has been a huge trend among the millenials and zoomers to adopt the "Old Money" pastiche. Look on TikTok, Insta, and elsewhere and you see this notion of old mansions, classic trips to italy, etc. This traditional view is prominent. And so if they are forgoing engagement rings I think something else is at hand.
I think it's an issue of those two generations being so over-stimulated with technology that they're reaching back for less atomized experiences and grasping at anything which might provide it, even temporarily.
Honestly, just getting rid of the smartphone or at least rendering smartphones into a dumbphone, and staying off social media in particular, would do more for their mental health and well-being than anything else. There's literally no reason to start scrolling through fucking social media the second you wake up, other than being addicted.
I think it is more countercultural than that. Because they are still posting this shit to instagram. It's the same reason at some point Bell Bottoms become cool again. Then Parachute Pants.
The 2000's were full of celebrities doing the whole Lord thing- "Gold Teeth, Grey Goose, trippin' in the bathroom, bloodstains, ball gowns, trashin the hotel room...Cristal, Myaback diamonds on your timepiece, jet planes islands, tigers on a gold leash..."
That's a cycle. New Money creates its fashions with gauche, flashy displays of money and saturate the market. Then the culture shifts, and the signals if having "made it" are refined elegance.
20 years ago, kitchens with the giant Wolf or Viking ranges and sub-zero stainless steel monoliths were the cover of the magazines. Now you go into kitchens and you are hard pressed to tell they ARE kitchens because the fashion is to hide everything inside cabinets that themselves are understated.
That’s a cycle. New Money creates its fashions with gauche, flashy displays of money and saturate the market. Then the culture shifts, and the signals if having “made it” are refined elegance.
I'll concede that this likely makes up a huge part of the landscape. Look how rapidly the culture shifted from the late 80s socio-economic excess, to the "don't be so materialistic, maaaaaaan," early-mid 90s, then right back to the "make it rain" consumerism of the dotcom boom by the end of the decade.
My oldest is very plugged into fashion. I was taking her shopping and said, "Oh are Bell bottoms back". She noted that they had been starting since spring, and they will be gone very soon. Now it is cheetah print and- well I kind of lost interest at this point.
But anyway, the sense I got is that we have reached this hyper rapid change where you see drastically new cycles every order from china. Fashions last less than a season on the coasts, though it takes time to percolate into middle america.
Thing is, you've got to get the $8k Sub-Z built-in fridge to get the option of getting it covered to match the cabinetry (seems like Ikea-style melamene is the hot fashion for that at the moment). Meanwhile the "poors" are stuck with the Frigidaire stainless behemoths that mimic the style of what would have been on MTV Cribs in the late 90s.
They still go with the Wolf/Viking/Thermador built-in cooktops when they can afford it (and when they're in an area where gas lines into the house are an option).
It did blow my mind to see the drawer-style microwave in my friend's kitchen a couple years back (I haven't had a microwave of any sort for 20 years now as a tactic to try to stop myself from eating the kind of trash I would if I had one).
“”And so if they are forgoing engagement rings I think something else is at hand.””
An engagement ring is a promise to a major commitment. Kind of like a student loan.
Serious question: Why aren't these modern women having their "rings" tattooed?
Serious answer: Some are. But back to the original point I was making is that the symbol of the ring is overall less important to them.
Your point is well-taken. However, I'll wager most would willingly accept (and keep) valuable rings, however symbolic.
My wife is bugging me to do it. I have no objections, but don't have any ink and no eagerness to get it done. Tbh, it makes sense for us because I shouldn't be wearing my ring at work and her hands swell up too often for her to wear hers regularly.
But it's definitely noticeable that the younger generations carry no no respect for tradition, commitment, or personal responsibility. Everything is disposable for them and easily cast aside when it stops feeding their egos.
You mean it's not because of their fear of getting it caught in various pieces of intricate machinery and having a finger removed or the ring(s) itself (themselves) getting abraded to the point of destruction by hours and days of hard, callousing manual labor? Huh.
I've had a few times where my ring got caught and could have caused big problems. Don't really care about damaging it since I have several tungsten carbide rings that I switch between (lost the one from my wedding a couple years ago)
Will be nice to have the tattoo done
Because no one can afford jewelry under a democrat administration?
"Because they are still looking for something better."
Does that include a libertine life without male oppression (and symbols of sexual slavery)?
Hypergamy
+ no fault divorce.
Not a young woman, but the reason I don't wear my wedding ring is two things.
When doing things with my hands (dishes/cleaning, gym, rock climbing) I would take it off and forget to put it on. Sometimes multiple times a day.
As I've gotten older, my fingers are a little bit plumper then they were 11 years ago when we got the wedding ring. As such, while I can put it on with effort, and pull it off with elbow grease and actual grease, it's a bit of a challenge sometimes.
As such, I don't think I've worn my wedding ring on my finger in months. Instead it sits on a chain around my neck.
Cannot figure out why men do not want to commit to Western women.
I don't know if you guys know this but there's literally a floating island of garbage in the middle of the ocean right now. I think it's called Puerto Rico.
Tell me how he is wrong.
And the Puerto ricas said he's right
It is called the UK. An Irish friend sent that some months ago. A recycled joke, which is good as opposed to one that would get discarded into the ocean.
JD Vance is wrong about Puerto Rico.
TDSarc is wrong about Cubans
Puerto Rico is an archipelago and it’s in the Caribbean Sea, not the Ocean.
And they don't eat peoples' pet cats there.
According to NPR, he is completely right. And undoubtedly funnier.
According to WaPoo:
"Anti-Puerto Rico comments at Trump rally spur outrage as Bad Bunny supports Harris"
"Trump rally speakers lob racist insults, call Puerto Rico ‘island of garbage’"
I watched ABC news tonight because... Anyway, they could not even repeat this on air because it was "so bad."
Really? You can tell they need to push this to the maximum anti Trump levels. You really do not hate the mainstream media enough.
Call It Like They See It
GPS RALLY STATS For Trump's New York City rally:
A total of 98,678 mobile devices were in the vicinity of Trump’s Madison Square Garden rally.
Just under 20,000 were in the venue itself.
The remaining balance watched from outside.
47% of attendees were first-time rally goers.
- Bellum Acta
This may Trump other events held there.
That’s not an accurate number, some people carry more than one phone ya know!
/jeff
Well, 78,678 were just watching, so don't judge them. They may have just been jacking off on the rally and not participating.
---Fatty McGee
And they probably felt bad about it afterwards, so no big deal.
Was the rally too drunk to say no?
Did you see how that stadium was dressed? Just asking for it.
But way too old for MAPs.
Needs a newer stadium, one where the bushes outside have yet to grow.
Pedo Jeffy approves.
That would be his arena.
Who knew that Hitler reenactors would be so popular?
Reenacting the time that Hitler didn't want to invade Poland and talked against war and censorship, and accused the opposition of not supporting the Jews.
Well, de o rats are working to reenact the Holocaust.
""A total of 98,678 mobile devices were in the vicinity of Trump’s Madison Square Garden rally.""
Penn Station is in the vicinity of MSG. Literally a few floors below. Just sayin.
things like how to reduce inflation, how to bring government spending under control, how to make Social Security solvent, how to create an orderly and just immigration process, or how to improve the quality of our schools.
Welcome to being a trump voter. The guy who had 4 years of real pay growth, and removing regulation
Maybe a better question to ask Libertarian Liz Wolfe….are any of those federal issues? = how to reduce inflation, or how to improve the quality of our schools
You know how they have the term Cafeteria Catholic….what is the Libertarian equivalent? Lazy Libertarian?
First, yes those are federal issues even for a Libertarian. Because even a Libertarian has a vested interest in removing the Federal Government from the equation. Trump has flirted with the idea of eliminating the Dept of Education. That is something a Libertarian should want to hear about.
Second, my big problem with Wolfe's analysis is that Trump DID talk about these things. She obviously didn't watch, and only saw the highlights. People actually care about the environment, and the "Whale Psych" bit was a digression from the discussion about how bad windmills are for energy policy.
And whether you like it or not, Trump has continued to give his story of mass deportations and sealing the border- his method of addressing the immigration process. Again, I am sure his prescriptions aren't what Wolfe wants, but that is different from not talking about it at all.
Was about to say... she starts by complaining nobody is talking about policy... but over 7 podcasts a lot of policy was discussed.
It is more of they only hear what corporate media tells them to hear.
Yeah remember when Nancy DeVos was in charge of the DOE? Struggling to remember who appointed her. And yeah I figured that Reason editors wouldn't bother to actually watch the interview. So much easier to respond to soundbites on Mastodon. And I really have to question using "unhinged" as a descriptor for Trump or Rogan. There was a lot of serious policy discussion in that interview and, as you point out, the whale conversation was not some frivolous comedy skit. It's an issue that's completely relevant to energy production, something that is a federal issue whether we like it or not.
Yeah, anyone who watched it with an open mind would not come away thinking either Rogan or Trump was unhinged.
That comment from Wolfe cemented for me that she didn't watch/listen to it. He was talking about windmills and how they seem to be at fault for a bunch of whales dying on beaches. The "whale psychologist" line was just a funny quip about wanting to understand their behavior.
I like Wolfe, but she needs to be more aware of how dishonest are the MSM narratives she is fed.
It was an ok episode. Trump was fine and there were several points that would make most people laugh. He said some things that should highly interest libertarians.
IMO, this would probably have been a much more interesting episode if Trump wasn't running for president and had to turn things towards politics so much. Ultimately it was a success for him because they got along well and were able to casually shoot the shit about normal interests.
Democrat.
how to create an orderly and just immigration process
An orderly process, absolutely. A "just" process? Why, and for who exactly?
Just the tip of the migrant caravan?
George Lopez can make racist jokes at Harris/Walz rallies, and strangely, no one’s panties get bunched
"White people tacos"
"Whats that, Mayo and Tuna fish?!?!"
- the not racist folks
If they made tacos any other way it would cultural appropriation.
Even using the word "taco" is colonial oppression.
Taco looks Caucasian to me:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsGjFh1ke44
Lots of Caucasian Tacos……
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDNG2vRl0K0
He's in a protected class.
and he's making fun of the approved class to shit on.
culture war is really bad and horrible unless you direct it the right way, then its good
No, he was saying Mexicans are thieves.
“Trump said he wanted to build a border wall. George Lopez said he better finish it in one day, because if you leave all that material out overnight…”
What we see is the version for public consumption, but you also described the core theology of DEI intersectional "scholarship".
Well Hinchcliffe is gay if you listen to the roasts targeting him.
"Maybe we don't deserve better from our leaders."
We don't because it's all cultural war BS and gotcha quips from both sides.
It is going to take a historical financial calamity for people and politicians to actually be invested in policy concerns.
Both sides?
The media 99% of the time takes trump out of context. They are still repeating the very fine people lie.
Meanwhile people are posting full length clips of Kamala rallies where she has 10 "doctors" look confused when someone needs medical attention
Other favorites include the "bleach injection suggestion" and the "Jan 6 incitement speech".
"If you repeat a lie often enough, ...." 8-(
The idea that speech can cause a riot is so absurd that to merely say it is to refute it.
Not sure of your point, but those who claim *that* speech caused a riot have obviously never listened to it.
I’m sure that they can quote the part that was riot inducing, where's Sarc?
No, no, no. That speech was so powerful it reached back in time and started events that had already begun, but Kamala and the media running the constant drumbeat of "end of democracy" and the existential threat that is DJT could obviously not influence anyone to do something rash.
Pedo Jeffy is still claiming that.
I think this kinda proves my point.
People are more interested in the memes and playing gotcha with the other side. And yes, both sides do it.
Politicians (yes, again, both sides) and people wont’ start paying attention to the important stuff (budget, spending, free markets and regulation) until there is a historical financial calamity, one that can’t be pushed down the road.
Imbeciles, too simpleminded to see the differences, fall into the "both sides" fallacy.
I'll grant some sympathy toward the abysmally ignorant.
Can you point to a major gop politition or media (fox News is controlled opposition) taking things out of context in order to have a gotcha moment?
Getting evidence to support claims from imbecilic TDS-addled shits is not possible.
Immigrants. Vance is talking about immigrants.
> “London doesn't feel fully English anymore… Over time, I think New York will start to feel less American."
Isn't it weird how he is conflating legal and illegal immigration again? It's almost as if that's been their plan all along...
Oh wow! Are you actually pretending most of London's "immigrants" right now are legal?
He ‘pretends’ a lot of things.
Does that make him a Dreamer?
More of an ‘eater’, and a ‘groomer’.
It is funny you pretend that there is a smidgeon of difference in the two under Biden/Harris, given that they will give "legal status" at the drop of a hat with zero checking on their history.
Even funnier since he continually conflates the two.
Obvious to anybody who's informed about the percentage of foreign immigrants in London. But Liz remains puzzled.
"This "coach in chief" New York Times"
Walz is a "coach" in the same way Harris keeps touting herself as a "parent"...AKA almost not at all.
He is a volunteer assistant football coach. He is as much a coach as Dwight Schrute was a sheriff.
Kamala married a mega millionaire who had run through a train of pussy and landed on her with one kid already out of the house and the other in high school, likely raised by a series of nannies their entire lives BEFORE Kamala came along.
They are about the most phony astroturfed candidates in the history of candidates.
likely raised by a series of nannies
You know what else in the Emhoff house was raised by a series of nannies?
Legit LOL, nice.
Didnt even realize I did that, well done
LO fucking L
Assistant to the football coach.
He needed an excuse to have access to the locker room.
ding ding ^^
Was he installing tampon dispensers? Weird.
Volunteer senpai.
But you just described the dream "motherhood" that many elite women crave: no pregnancy or annoying birthing, no tedious child care, and selective feelings of accomplishment detached from reality. Oh, and the rich husband.
I’ve heard Emhoff plays a mean slapjack, essentially against petite female opponents.
There isn't going to be a ceasefire, Liz Wolfe. Israel will locate the hostages themselves and retrieve them, dead or alive.
Hamas, OTOH, will continue to be hunted down like the human animals they are, and offered terms: surrender and submit to Israeli justice, or die.
I am fine if the hamasshole chooses death.
The ceasefire will happen when Israel decides they are done hunting down the cowards, and decides to occupy or return the strip to some sort of authority willing to govern the savages, not a moment before.
They attacked Israel, they broke the ceasefire, now it ends when Israel decides it ends.
I dont know how many times we have to teach these people "fuck around and find out"
Israel should ignore the noise, hunt down hamas, retrieve their hostages, and annex gaza and be done with this.
Part of FAFO is losing your land. Arabs understand that.
Truly they should annex it and demand that neighboring arab countries take in the terrorist sympathizers they are all howling about. Certainly one of these UN approved countries that cry about Israel being evil can take in these poor refugees they pretend to care about.
"Part of FAFO is losing your land. Arabs understand that."
But that never happened before 1948, right?
Yeah. Israel shouldn't deny Hamas their basic human right to become martyrs.
Joe_Dallas put it best: There will be a cease fire when the last hamasshole is killed, and they cease firing.
Then 25-35 years from now the cycle will repeat. This is not the last Israeli conflict. Far from it.
Perhaps an asteroid striking Jerusalem might precipitate an end to the conflict?
If every Jew left the Middle East, how long would "peace" last?
Less than a week?
Well you're a little positive huh?
There are plenty of arabs in Israel that aren't murderous psychopaths so a generation or two without Hamas dripping venom in their brains could make a difference.
We've almost entirely neglected to talk about actual issues. The Trump campaign keeps courting controversy, again and again and again, while the Harris/Walz campaign frequently defines itself in opposition to the Trumpists, reactive and apoplectic but rarely proactively defining what it is they would actually do.
In a nutshell!
Because Democrats keep screaming controversy, Trump is courting controversy?
A comedian made jokes. You and dems seemingly want comedy to die if it means hurting Trump.
Most of the controversy is anonymous sources to the Atlantic.
Exactly this. Trump's "controversy" and "divisiveness" always boils down to commie jOuRnOliStS getting their panties in a bunch because he is using Bill Clinton's rhetoric on immigration.
And Ross Perot's rhetoric on trade. It's not an accident that he was floating around the Reform Party during the 90s. He's always been something of a disaffected Gephardt/Moynihan Democrat, even when he was registered as a Republican.
Ross Perot?
Problem solved.
Sure, because none of the progressive priorities from the past few decades are controversial.
RE: JRE podcast 10/25/24
President Trump won the election with that JRE appearance. That whole 3-hour interview completely obliterated the MSM canards that Pres Trump is an incipient hitler in waiting, or a threat to democracy.
VP Word Salad declined repeated offers to appear on JRE. The entire world can see why.
The woman was a stupendously unpopular VP and did anyone think that when they replaced Joe with Kamala, that that deserved unpopularity magically disappeared?!
LMFAO - what was Team D thinking?!
Also...does anyone think we will ever see a presidential debate again with MSM moderators? The long form interview is here to stay. It will change everything from campaign financing, to messaging, to candidate selection. Just watch.
I wonder if part of it is that Team D doesn't want to legitimize Rogan as media.
Seeing as there is a revolving door between Corporate Media and the Party, I bet that's one of the major reasons.
YouTube is already throttling it heavily. If you search for Trump Rogan you get a bunch of MSNBC and other bullshit. The video has 33M views in 3 days and they don't want you finding it easily. Brilliant strategy by Google.
Yeah, one of their fastest growing videos ever and the kept it off the “trending” page.
This is in itself, election interference.
But the "libertarians" here at Reason will wail "private companies" no matter how many 3 letter agencies they find pulling the strings.
If so, they're a dollar short.
"President Trump won the election with that JRE appearance. "
I dunno, I think he might have won it through 2 other things:
1- the MSM apparatus, IC, and deep state going full mask off and showing us in real time how they are putting their thumb, foot, and elbow in the scales to make certain Trump stays out. Dick Cheney all but solidified this coalition and the image of the fix being fully in
2- Kamala flailing hard in every interview, notably the Bret Baier interview was a right hook to the jaw, and ever since she has been on the ropes unable to recover
Trump doing JRE was a cherry on top, but I think the other side fully own goaled this election.
I think that the Cheney's campaigning with Harris helped Trump enormously.
Even Shrike and Lying Jeffy have been reluctant to try to rehabilitate them here, choosing instead to ignore their new roles.
The clique of "reputable officials", Kelly et al, coming out to confirm the "Trump is a Hitler-fascist that loves Nazi's" wreaks of the same group of elite IC officials that signed the letter saying the Hunter Biden laptop was Russian disinformation right before the last election...
Honestly, wouldnt be surprised if the overlap isnt >75%
The lates Kelly one is the best since there are multiple credible people who were in the room denying it. When people told the atlantic otherwise, they just printed can't be confirmed.
Yeah, it's not an accident that nearly every single Bush-era neocon is voting for Harris. This is all about trying to protect their institutionalization of power, and like the parasites they always were, have latched on to a new host.
But we should admire neocons for transcending "left" and "right".
I listen to almost every Dave Smith POTP podcast. He's said all along that he's not going to vote for Trump (or Oliver, and definitely not Kamala). Last week he changed that and said he's "probably" going to vote for Trump. What pushed him over the edge was seeing Kamala proudly campaigning with Liz Cheney and bragging about the endorsement of Dick Cheney.
Seriously, who was that for? It won’t motivate their base. Undecided voters aren’t Cheney fans, and Liz Cheney is completely toxic to nearly all republicans. Especially judging by how badly she was crushed in her own primary in 2022.
I think that the Cheney’s campaigning with Harris helped Trump enormously.
Seeing the Dems and their puppets whipsaw themselves to ignore everything they said about the Bush neocons, and the Cheneys and Dick in particular over the last 25 years, has been a delight. Rather elegant proof that these people have long been controlled opposition, which couldn't be demonstrated more than Cocaine Mitch trying to submarine GOP Senate races in Texas, Nevada, Arizona, and Florida, since Montana and West Virginia are all but flipped at this point.
You're right, Trump isn't Hitler.
He is, instead, an idiot. He's a typical Boomer who repeats and believes what he reads on social media (his curated right-wing social media, natch) and broadcasts it to the world as if it were true. He surrounds himself with lackeys and sycophants, some of whom really are authoritarian dickheads (Steve Miller). He is a fraud who was successful only in projecting a false image of himself and monetizing that image. He is a conman who will happily take your money for Trump-branded crap and if his investments don't work out, as they typically do, he will leave his creditors holding the bag. He is a bigot who demonizes and scapegoats foreigners - he compares them to fucking cannibals for heaven's sake. And his tremendous ego does not permit him to admit when he has lost, even when the evidence is overwhelming, even when trying to fight a losing battle has real destructive consequences such as the riot on Jan. 6.
You don't have to think Trump is Hitler to think that he is an unfit candidate.
"He’s a typical Boomer who repeats and believes what he reads on social media"
In fairness, youve been caught falling for left wing propaganda on here tons of times. If you are one of our enlightened college educated left leaning elites, why should I think Trump particularly stupid when you fall for dumber (and more obviously) false stories than he does?
So I note that in your response, you don't actually refute what I write about Trump. That you try to spin it into a whataboutism gotcha moment only says that I am right and you refuse to admit it.
Im on record stating I dont really like the man, I dont find him to be particularly bright (except politically, in which he might be genius level), so you are probably right.
It also still puts him firmly ahead of Kamala in terms of appropriateness for office. She is dumb AF, and clearly cant think on her feet, has been put in every position not due to her IQ or performance, but fucking the right people or checking the right boxes.
So my point that Trump might not be bright, but you clearly are no brighter, and Kamala certainly isnt, seems relevant.
Does this make sense?
He can’t admit it.
Jeffy isn’t capable of honesty.
Or portion control.
That post caused a package or two of doublestuff Oreos to be inhaled.
Regardless of what you may think about my intellectual abilities, I'm not running for political office. Besides, I can't be that dumb if I was able to see through your obvious attempt at misdirection.
So it looks like our choices this year from Team Red and Team Blue are "dumber and dumber". So why again should anyone vote for either shade of dumb?
" So why again should anyone vote for either shade of dumb?"
One shade of dumber is in near direct opposition to the constitution as a default, but Im not going to campaign for your vote. I thought Trump was a terrible choice to run and would have preferred someone else, but man did the dems do a bang up job in potentially own-goaling him back into office.
One choice is better than the other, I dont know what else to tell you
I thought Trump was a terrible choice to run and would have preferred someone else, but man did the dems do a bang up job in potentially own-goaling him back into office.
I've said since the 2020 debacle that Trump was getting too fucking old, and after the Time article where they bragged about how the "cabal" conducted their color revolution to prevent him from winning, I was certain there wasn't anything they wouldn't stoop to in order to keep him out in 2024, either.
Ironically, I was actually proven right up to this point, because he's had two assassination attempts against him, AND the Dems are not only actually suing to keep dead people on the voter rolls, they're going all-in on the Hitler nonsense. Meanwhile, Harris is releasing ads stating that Trump is going to give massive tax cuts to billionaires when he's talking about getting rid of the income tax entirely and her own campaign is funded by the richest shitlib champagne socialists in the country, her campaign is getting direct foreign influence from British Labour, and they're all plotting on how to suppress any sort of dissent against them as "misinformation" after chopping up her interviews more than a Freddy Kreuger film.
Our resident morbidly obese pedophile won’t address that.
The dumb billionaire who develops NYC real estate? Puleeeze.
It is almost like Jeff is forcing me to post his Twitter.
Look at who he follows and retweets lol.
https://x.com/chemjeff
Sulu, MuellerSheWrote, etc.
Also: Dave Smith, Reason writers, Todd Hagopian, etc.
Funny how you fail to mention those follows.
I thought you couldn't stand Dave Smith and the rest of the Mises Caucus?
He attacks the MC and Dave Smith constantly. He pushes the narratives of MSW, Sulu, and other dem Twitter accounts.
Here’s some pictures of MAPedo Jeffy from Twitter.
https://x.com/RhianFazzini/status/1793500361489322162
He is, instead, an idiot. He’s a typical Boomer who repeats and believes what he reads on social media
Lying Jeffy just took all the arguments about the older boomers and corporate media and swapped in the word "social" instead.
Low effort, Jeffy. It's laziness like this that got Buttplug fired.
Oh good, ML the whore has shown up. Who are you going to prostitute yourself for today?
Nice try, shill... no wait, that didn't make sense either. Are you implying I started supporting a different candidate? Were you drinking with Sarcles or something last night?
I'm saying that you prostitute yourself out to whatever team member you think needs defending in the moment. You'll defend anyone doing anything on your team.
So by pRoStiTutiOn you mean that I join in kicking you when someone else has knocked you down? What a retarded analogy.
But I'll play along and say that I guess I'm just a big old whore then because I sure do. What part of I loathe you and everything you represent, did you not understand?
No, I mean that you trick yourself out to anyone on your team to defend them even if they are wrong. You lie and gaslight and defend the indefensible. You prostitute out your own integrity for cheap likes and attaboys from your mean grrl tribe.
So how is he getting paid? We don’t do a lot of ‘attaboys’ around here. We just despise you because you’re a far left sophist liar who advocates for open borders no matter what and always takes the side of groomers and pedophiles like your good friend Shrike.
He’s not original and has to defend some incredibly awful things so it always ends up with him trying to throw our own accusations against him back at us.
He’s really gotten. Ore shrill and nasty in recent weeks. He’s obviously falling apart. I suggest we push him even harder just to see what happens.
Why don't you tell us why Trump, using his enormous platform on the debate stage, decided to repeat a lie about Haitians eating cats in Springfield.
I believe it is because he read it on his right-wing social media feed and chose to believe it uncritically.
Because Haitians are eating cats in Springfield. There’s plenty of evidence, much of which has already been posted right here in responses to you, which you always ignore deliberately. And you and people like you are purposefully and knowingly lying when you say it isn’t happening.
Notice he moves to cats to avoid the ducks.
Notice how Jesse deflects to ducks, when Trump didn't mention ducks at the debate.
"TRUMP DIDN'T MENTION THEY WERE EATING THE DUCKS AND GEESE AT THE PARK DURING THE DEBATE!!!!!!!"
But they have been eating duke and geese, right?
"SHUT UP, CHUMBY!!!" Jeff explained
It is difficult to hear clearly when there are three doughnuts and five cookies in his mouth.
More sophist parsing from the morbidly obese pedophile.
Because Haitians are eating cats in Springfield. There’s plenty of evidence, much of which has already been posted right here in responses to you, which you always ignore deliberately.
There has been zero evidence posted of Haitians eating cats in Springfield. There has been evidence posted of people who may or may not be Haitians, eating what may or may not be a cat, in a location that is not Springfield. You know this, and this is why I call you a whore. You trick yourself out to any cause on your team that needs defending even if it is completely false.
Liar. It's been posted here innumerable times, and I know that you know this.
Bullshit. No one has posted any proof whatsoever of Haitians in Springfield eating cats. You defend the indefensible because it is your team. This is why I call you a whore, whore.
No one cares what you have to say. You have zero credibility.
It's amusing how easily the most hated and despised commenter here thinks people believe him.
Oh, I’m sure Drunky and the skinnier pedo believe him. Although I haven’t seen as much of Shrike lately. Perhaps he manage to capture a new victim.
You’re just angry that you didn’t get to at them first, you fat hungry bitch.
You are 100% certain that at no time, ever, has any Haitian EVER eaten a cat in Springfield Ohio? Like, willing to bet about getting shot in the face if you're wrong sure? For imprint certain?
Since the time of that infamous Facebook post, in which someone posted a third-hand account of a rumor of some Haitian eating a cat, I am quite certain that there is zero tangible evidence of a Haitian eating a cat in Springfield. Your team scoured the earth searching for evidence and the best your team could come up with is a person who may or may not be a Haitian, possibly cooking something which may or may not be a cat, in a location that is not Springfield. I think if there was any evidence whatsoever, your team would have broadcast it to the stars.
I think if there was any evidence whatsoever, your team would have broadcast it to the stars.
Do you think that matters? They feel that it is true. Just like the stolen election and all the rest. Feelings don't require evidence. They feel true so they are true.
Not really. They've fully embraced the "fake but accurate" strategy.
Why not? Democrats did it first, that makes it ok.
Except that you two chucklefucks are lying, and it doesn't matter how much evidence people here have given you. You ignore it and pretend that you saw nothing.
Sarckles does it because he's a troll, Lying Jeffy does it for fifty-cents.
Why don’t you tell us why Trump, using his enormous platform on the debate stage, decided to repeat a lie about Haitians eating cats in Springfield.
The best way to convince Trump defenders that something he said was true is to say he lied. At that point they’re on the defensive and will do anything to prove what he said was true, and if they can’t then they go on the attack.
The best way to show psarc he is a psaki Democrat is to post the entire Trump speech after he repeats psaki talking points.
Hey, as far a Sarc is concerned, if Jake Tapper or
potatoBrian Stelter don’t say it, it never happened.I don’t know who those people are so I looked them up. CNN? Really? Last time I watched that was in an airport, and it’s been over 20 years since I got on a plane.
What part of "I don't have cable" do you not understand?
I'm pretty sure that's all the TV in the reception area plays.
Way to miss the point.
What part of ‘we know you’re a drunken liar’ don’t YOU understand?
What part of “I don’t have cable” do you not understand?
You know they have a website right?
As 2nd level IT tech he should know what a website is.
What kind of steak burning skills are required as a 2nd level IT tech?
With all the more-or-less valid complaints Jeff makes, one has to wonder why Harris goes with the Hitler comparisons?
My take is that she is so much more stupid, vapid, and incapable of breathing without considerable focused mental activity than he is. One simply has to hear her attempt to speak ad lib to make that clear.
To be fair Jeff and sarc also go with the Hitler comparisons.
https://reason.com/2023/12/19/texas-new-immigration-law-will-lead-to-more-policing-with-less-accountability/?comments=true#comment-10364358
Fatman and Bobbin, the Dynamic Trio
"Hey, Neil and Bob! Are those your names or just what you do?"
Fat Man and Little Boy.
Morbidly Obese He/She and Little Drunk?
At what point does morbidly obese validly qualify as they?
In Jeffy’s case, about a hundred pounds ago. Or a little past this…….
https://x.com/RhianFazzini/status/1793500361489322162
I’ll be reposting that one a lot.
That is ChemCastrateJeff’s vision of a nuclear family. I was posting their Fifty Center Halloween party costumes.
With all the more-or-less valid complaints Jeff makes, one has to wonder why Harris goes with the Hitler comparisons?
Because Team Blue is doing the same thing that Team Red is doing - trying to scare people into voting for their team because they lack substantive policy.
Team Red tries to scare people into voting for their team by scapegoating foreigners and stoking fear that they are rapists, murderers, cannibals, pet eaters, etc.
Team Blue tries to scare people into voting for their team by accusing Trump of being Hitler.
It's the same tired schtick and that is one reason of many why I am rejecting both teams.
This from the guy who, implicitly or explicitly, accuses anyone who doesn't support Chase Oliver as being homophobic and only rejecting Oliver because he's a "*faggot."
*Faggot is the word chemjeff uses when he pretends to be speaking in the voice of Oliver opponents.
It's called "projection".
Jeff admitted to being 57% Trump on isidewith the other day which makes him 57% Hitler. And given his body mass compared to Hitler makes him really 200% Hitler.
Jeff is the same mass as 50 Hitlers.
A weapon of mass obstruction.
Was Jeffy bitten by a radioactive Hitler?
You mean like this guy?
https://reason.com/2024/05/26/chase-oliver-is-the-libertarian-partys-presidential-pick/?comments=true#comment-10577062
Remember all the times you said it's unfair to post stories about illegals committing crimes, because, according to you, that means we're saying all illegals commit violent crimes. We've corrected you many times on that, but you insist on using that metric.
Now you point out one commenter who says some pretty objectionable things, as a response to me calling you out for claiming everyone who objects to Chase is only doing so because he's a "faggot."
Do you see the problem? So one commenter represents all of the rest of the commenters in this case, but specific illegals committing crimes DOESN'T represent all of the other illegals.
You never seem to want your standard applied to you. You have excuses and emotional arguments, but applying your own standard to you is somehow illegitimate.
How about if you start applying your own standards to yourself. Because every illegal deserves to be blamed for the actions of a few (according to you), every one of you Chase haters deserve to be blamed for the tasteless slurs of a few. Or is it instead that you get to paint everybody else with broad brushes, but you should be treated as a special snowflake?
You are the only one saying that a story about an illegal committing a violent crime means the person who posted it is claiming that means every single illegal is committing violent crimes. This is the strawman you use to dismiss all of the reports of individual illegals who committed violent crimes. Somehow we can't report on that without it meaning that we believe every fucking illegal is committing rape and murder. I guess the news shouldn't report on a murder in a small town, because, according to your logic, that means that every resident in the town must also be a murderer.
You then point out one jabroni (haven't used that term in a while) in the comments section who called Oliver a "fag." My response was that that's not representative of all of the rest of us who really don't care about his sexual orientation. We oppose him for being fine with transing minors chemically and wanting de-facto open borders. But no, you, without fail, attribute commenters' non-support of Oliver to homophobia.
So, yes, let's hold each other to our own standards. I'm fine with being held to my standard, but you squirm any time I or someone else applies your standard to you.
*and to cut you off at the pass, please cite where I have ever said every illegal is a violent criminal.
You are the only one saying that a story about an illegal committing a violent crime means the person who posted it is claiming that means every single illegal is committing violent crimes.
That is a slanderous lie. That has never been my position. My position has been, that when people like Jesse post story after story of illegal immigrants ONLY behaving badly and doing terrible things, it is for the purpose of pushing a narrative that illegal immigrants *as a group* are behaving badly and doing terrible things. So quite the opposite, it is not that I think Jesse & co. actually believe that every illegal immigrant is a violent criminal. They are trying to gaslight everyone else and push false narratives that will lead people to erroneous conclusions and deliberately so. They're not doing it to inform you. They're doing it to lie to you, to vilify them in order to seek power.
That is my position. You are wrong to so blatantly misstate it.
My response was that that’s not representative of all of the rest of us who really don’t care about his sexual orientation. We oppose him for being fine with transing minors chemically and wanting de-facto open borders.
Oh, so you speak for everyone now? Your statement is not even true when it comes to people like Jesse and Chumby. They dismiss him entirely, not just based on those two issues. Go look up the discussion from a few days ago. Chumby wants us all to ignore *everything* that Chase claims to stand for because "he plays identity politics" and "he voted for Obama once" and "he doesn't have a track record". It is not about just those two issues. It is about Chase in his entirety. And yes I do believe he is being held to an unreasonably high standard (for a Libertarian candidate) because he is not being given the benefit of the doubt that other Libertarian candidates would have received, because he is perceived as "on the left" so he is treated with undue suspicion. It was similar treatment with JoJo - she was 90% correct on all the issues but because she made one tweet that pissed people off, that was the only excuse they needed to dump her.
It is as if they were looking for any excuse to dump JoJo, and to dump Chase. And when they find the flimsiest of reeds, they jump on it and claim that's the reason. The real question is why they were so quick to dismiss both candidates, ESPECIALLY coming from the crowd who insists that we must look at Trump's policies, and only Trump's policies, when judging him as a president. It is, in my opinion, because they were never going to support any Libertarian candidate based on policy alone. They had to also accept the candidate's identity. Both JoJo and Chase fail the test in their minds.
This from the guy who, implicitly or explicitly, accuses anyone who doesn’t support Chase Oliver as being homophobic and only rejecting Oliver because he’s a “*faggot.”
Not quite - it is that the Chase Oliver haters around here exalt his gay identity above all else. That his gay identity somehow means that he is some hard-core leftist progressive or something.
He’s gay? Why didn’t sarc tell us?
HE'S GAY???
I've been reliably told here that nobody will vote for a gay guy... and to think, he seemed like such a pussy-hound.
Somebody should do a Ctrl+f on the entire website to see if Lying Jeffy has mentioned Chase's homosexuality more than all the other commenters here combined.
it is that the Chase Oliver haters around here exalt his gay identity above all else.
This is what you do any time someone says he's not supporting Chase. Just like any conversation with Sarc and you about illegals ends (often begins) with sarc or you saying outright or implying your opponent is racist.
You both go straight to identity politics to smear your opponents. You use the tactics of the left, but, somehow, are not on the left.
Why don't you stop pretending that "identity politics" is only practiced on one side. Do you not think that there is identity politics on the right?
You both go straight to identity politics to smear your opponents.
No, those are the Chase haters. He never got a chance with your team because too many of you think that his gay identity automatically means he is associated with leftwing politics. Furthermore, they accuse Chase of engaging in "identity politics" when all he has done is be himself. For example, Jesse criticized Chase for telling his story about first becoming involved with the Libertarian Party by going to a Pride parade and chatting with the LP folks at a booth there. He called that "identity politics". What is "identity politics" about that? It can only be considered "identity politics" if you think the very IDEA of going to a Pride parade is wrong on some level. Plenty on your team have stated that Chase has made claims like "you should vote for me because I'm gay". AFAICT he has never said anything remotely like that. Why would your team make up claims like that? It is only because he is gay. If Chase had said he became involved with the Libertarian Party after seeing a group at, say, a gun range, or if Chase had said "I'm a proud Christian Libertarian", not a single one of you would be criticizing or condemning him for "identity politics".
THIS is the identity politics that is practiced on the right: only the mainstream, 'approved' identities are permitted to be fully expressed in public. Straight white Christians can do whatever they want and it's all considered 'normal', and anyone criticizing them are "hating on whitey" or "launching a war on Christmas" or some such. But those who have identities that are not on the Team Red 'approved' list, they must hide or conceal their identities to the extent that they deviate from the Team Red norm, otherwise, they are guilty of 'identity politics' and are to be banished from the town square. Gays who act gay in public are 'perverts', drag queens are 'groomers', Muslims are 'terrorists', people who don't speak English are 'undermining America', etc.
Once again, Mr "I'm above all this team politics" is engaging in team politics. Criticize me for what I have said, if I said something wrong. If you want to debate Jesse, go ahead and do so (for the 1000th time).
Every time I've attacked your reasoning, or held you to the standard you always apply to others, you come back with, "your team said this" or "your team thinks this." For a radical individualist, you sure do love to make everything about groups.
I guess you can't actually argue with someone without bringing up what others have said.
No, I'm tired of your concern trolling. I'll believe you are serious about "holding people to standards" when you hold anyone on your team to any standard whatsoever that is even slightly above garbage level.
There you go again with the team politics shit.
You might be tired of what you call "concern trolling." I'm tired of your hypocrisy.
Pedo Jeffy is a democrat pawn. Pawns don’t have values, they have marching orders.
Oh, and no one give a shit what you believe, Fatfuck.
Now get the Hell out of here.
Nope. Trump has staked out specific policy positions that are extensions of his first term. Harris contradicts herself even with vague statements, babbles about ‘growing up in a middle class household’ (she didn’t) or attacks Trump.
Harris has no policy platform other than shrill discredited accusations about a Trump. Thats YOUR candidate. So stop lying.
They're desperate. Their internal polling is disastrous.
2016 A New Hope
2020 The Empire Strikes Back
2024 The Return of the Jedi
C3PedO appeared in all three as did R2Dee2O2.
Everyone hated Sarc-Sarc Binks.
Scarf Tader
Of all the insane TDS rants I've seen you post here, this one takes the take.
typical TDS content. All flavor, no substance. "He's crazy! He's an idiot!" You cant point to a single thing that substantiates any of of your claims in this unhinged rant.
I'll even pre-empt one of your baseless points:
he compares them to fucking cannibals for heaven’s sake
He was talking about Haitians, who come from a country where acts of cannibalism occur and in fact was literally recently in the news. But your lunatic TDS cant handle that can it.
He was talking about Haitians, who come from a country where acts of cannibalism occur and in fact was literally recently in the news.
That's the bigotry. Imagine if some European had compared Americans to "mass murderers", and said:
"He was talking about Americans, who come from a country where school shootings occur and in fact was literally recently in the news."
Do you think that is a fair characterization of Americans broadly? Of course not. The bigotry is applying the worst stereotypical trait of a group to the entire group.
>>That’s the bigotry.
tribes have been tribes for 5785 years you aren't going to fix it with your keyboard.
Stereotyping is not bigotry. Hope this helps.
The bigotry is applying the stereotype to everyone in the group. It is seeing a bunch of Asians and saying "oh, they must be good at math".
Clearly, that is why you like Trump, because he reflects your bigotry and tries to make it respectable.
lol, yeah. got it spot on. you genius.
The bigotry is applying the stereotype to everyone in the group.
Also, again, you need to look up some definitions of the words you're using. That is not bigotry.
Misusing words, redefining them, or giving them different meaning are some of Jeff's favorite tricks.
Lol. Nobody said that every Haitian in Springfield is eating cats, you idiot.
“A bunch of Asians”
THAT is bigoted, or at least very reductive. As if everybody from that part of the world is even close to the same. But I suppose to you they’re interchangeable, right?
Who gives a shit that Europeans probably actually think like that?
magine if some European had compared Americans to “mass murderers”
Isn't this done pretty often?
I'm pretty sure it is.
"imagine if someone stereotyped white americans" lol
no self-awareness whatsoever. Stumbling through a fever dream of NPR snippets.
What are you talking about? I, for one, am outraged that showing up on time and problem solving are stereotypes of white supremacy!
Signed: The Dude.
Didn’t Biden claim his uncle was eaten by Haitians?
Oh boy, here we go again. *as a group* Lol.
Jeff is gettin all selectively nuanced again.
And showcasing his inherent bigotry. Just like every democrat.
OK you dumb leftist cunt, please tell us how the warlord nicknamed barbeque got that name. This would be the guy that took over the Hatian capital for a bit recently.
Was he more authoritarian than Meow Zedong?
You mean like your team calling everyone Nazi's right? What about everyone being garbage?
I wouldn't call him an idiot by a long shot either. He's a strange, boastful man, prone to exaggeration and hyperbole. And yes, he does often repeat things that turn out not to be true. But if you watch him on Rogan, or another non-hostile interview, it's pretty clear that he's neither stupid nor some kind of unhinged maniac who could do any crazy thing at any time.
Exactly....that is why he won the election with that interview. The caricature that Team D painted was nowhere to be found in that interview.
I don't know. I was excited for the Rogan episode with Trump, as I generally like the JRE.
I got through 18 minutes before I couldn't listen any more. Trump's rambling about the Lincoln Bedroom that became a ramble about Robert E. Lee, when the question was about how he felt to become president right after inauguration was a little too much for me.
I'm glad he doesn't seem to have hurt his chances in the election with that appearance, but, man, that was hard to listen to.
I've heard that he got better past the point that I turned it off. I might try to continue to listen to the rest, but I wasn't all that enthused to keep listening when I thought the whole episode would be like that.
Yeah, he didn't talk like a glib politician. I found it refreshing.
Look, I already voted early for the guy. I want him to win. I just couldn't take any more of his meandering way of speaking. Perhaps I should have just continued on with the podcast and I'd have a different opinion.
Was the beginning of the podcast not as good as the rest?
I like that Trump doesn't often speak like a politician. He often will say whatever is on his mind, without filtering it through a firewall determining if it's politically advantageous, the way almost every other politician does.
Probably because you were tired. I jumped ahead when they started talking about MMA. I think everyone paid attention to the Kennedy assassination and are aliens real bit.
I wasn't tired. I began streaming it Saturday afternoon, but couldn't get through Trump's answer to Joe's first question. I probably should have just skipped forward to a question/answer I cared more about. I really would like to hear the back and forth about aliens and the Kennedy assassination.
Similar to what Ersatz said below, I'm not a big fan of Trump's meandering, "weave" method of speaking. It's better than canned answers politicians will often give, but it's hard for me to listen to it for more than a few minutes at a time.
Yeah, I’m with ya man. I can listen to trump for about 2 minutes longer than any other politician, but that ain’t much.
But damn, I sure do hope he wins.
I don't know. Seemed about right for a Rogan podcast to me. I found it pretty interesting as I haven't really listened to Trump speak at length very much.
The most interesting Trump interview was the podcast he did with Theo Von. Particularly when they started talking about drugs and addiction.
I’m with you – I have never gotten used to his ‘weave’. It comes across as hard to follow and\or repetitive. Never cared for his speaking style.
That being said, as a candidate – outside of his oratoracle skills – he brings something I havent seen any candidate can. He by his very existence makes all the deep state, academia, media et al actors beclown and depants themselves. They are compelled to delegitimize themselves out of their own self destructive hatred for him. Plus his last term ripped the mask off of the theatre of ‘democracy’. It is a coordinated effort by elites in previously mentioned societal groups to force their candidates and their policies onto the public.
Well said.
I agree it was slow but it showed him as person. You can knew he starts goes off, makes five points, comes back to original.
At this point, he's out having fun. Harris and the Dems (Like Chemjeff here), lost all their joy. Their masks are slipping. They'll still get 40 something of the vote because some are just brainwashed or watch MSM.
I wouldn’t call him an idiot by a long shot either.
I guess I agree. The problem I see with Trump is that he'll speak with 100% certainty and confidence on a subject he knows nothing about. So sometimes he comes off like an idiot. He seems to have no interest in educating himself either or maybe he just can't admit he was wrong so he digs in. It's a pretty common human trait. It is refreshing that he doesn't do the typical politician shift to prepared talking points, but it is alarming to think he may make important decisions Dunning-Kruger style.
I think you underestimate the election fortification efforts. There's a new Covid variant scaring the kiddies.
If fortification fails, assassination will be next.
If assassination fails, it will be 47 impeachments.
If impeachments fail, it will turn on the MAGAs. Just like J6.
Trump is simply unacceptable. they will stop at nothing to end him and his followers.
Team Blue using the four boxes approach.
57 impeachments, and nothing’s on.
I honestly think that if Trump miraculously makes it past the fraud factor, the Democrats and their GOPe allies will refuse to ratify the vote, Garland will have Trump and Vance arrested for who know what, Mike Johnson and Patty Murray will step aside and Antony Blinken will be declared president. He will select Kamala as his Vice again.
Raskin has already straight up said they'll refuse to certify him and need to go forward with a no shit coup.
Dems are already saying they are going to lockup him up on Jan 5th
Also…does anyone think we will ever see a presidential debate again with MSM moderators? The long form interview is here to stay. It will change everything from campaign financing, to messaging, to candidate selection. Just watch.
I don’t think the debates will end (it’s still useful to at least have one so the candidates can formally square off in the same setting), but given that the MSM (especially the Big 3 networks) are openly acting as in-kind house organs for the Democrats now, there’s little incentive for Republicans to go beyond that since they’re debating both the Dem candidate and their MSM allies in the same venue.
Bypassing these people to go on large podcasts for deep dive conversations is definitely going to be SOP for the conceivable future because you can conduct targeted demographics that way, and the clips from these reach even more people than the podcast itself, which broadens the audience. Harris doing the Call Her Daddy podcast shows the same trend.
"but given that the MSM (especially the Big 3 networks) are openly acting as in-kind house organs for the Democrats now, there’s little incentive for Republicans to go beyond that since they’re debating both the Dem candidate and their MSM allies in the same venue."
3rd party debates should be the norm. Lex Fridman has hosted quite a few, Peterson and Sam Harris debated with moderation by a 3rd party, people in the 'public intellectual' sphere do this all the time. Involvement by the MSM networks cant continue going forward, this cycle put an exclamation mark on that point.
Involvement by the MSM networks cant continue going forward, this cycle put an exclamation mark on that point.
I'll concede that the days of MSM-hosted debates are probably done at this point. The networks are too partisan, and Dems would have an issue going on one hosted by Fox for the same reason.
Third-party debates might work as a short-term replacement, but that's going to inevitably become captured by the same partisanship, where a clearly biased moderator uses the perception of neutrality to push their own agenda.
Think about how that change to long form might change campaign financing, messaging. It is a new ballgame.
I that depends on whether, after 2024, Republicans fully embrace "MAGA" or if they regress to mean.
Simply put, all politicians lie. But the degree and frequency of Trump's lies really is --historically speaking-- abnormal. And would-be-Trump politicians have embraced this (see "they're eating cats and dogs" and "Jewish space lasers").
So if post 2024 Republicans tone it down to a more historical level of lies (both in frequency and severity) then debates will resume and be normalized again. If they instead fully embrace the "MAGA" philosophy and it goes from being a wing in the party to being the party? Then nah, debates are dead.
If they instead fully embrace the “MAGA” philosophy and it goes from being a wing in the party to being the party?
LOL, you really think the GOP is going back to the "go along to get along and don't spook the liberals" paradigm of the Kristol years?
Nah, son, those days are long gone, with only a few remaining outliers left like McConnell, who are going to join up with the rest of the neocons in the Democratic Party after this election is done. "We aren't going back" isn't just a Kacklin' Kammy slogan.
Lol. 2024: “Biden is as sharp as ever!”
2020: dems - “I wouldn’t trust the ‘trump vaccine’.”
2021: “Right wingers are causing ‘vaccine hesitancy’! “
You like being lied to EE, as long as it’s by dems.
Idiot.
"VP Word Salad declined repeated offers to appear on JRE. The entire world can see why."
I guess the whole world is just not smart enough to understand Harris' "nuanced" speech.
We are not unburdened by grammar or logic
The White Man's Burden (according to the Smithsonian).
Check your grammar and your privilege.
Her move was to go on Shannon Sharpe’s podcast, which is actually pretty smart because that’s mostly an audience dominated by black males, and he's gotten massive credibility after the Katt Williams interview. Based on the reporting, she didn’t exactly cover herself in glory or make herself seem relatable, though. She still can’t help but come off like the nagging significant other that might have sucked good dick, but was a pain in the ass to deal with outside the bedroom.
"Is he saying that large cosmopolitan cities are adopting a certain sameness over time? What exactly is he predicting or talking about?"
I'd guess he is talking about the Islamification of London specifically, the UK in general, and predicting the potential for same in NYC.
^THIS^
55% of London’s population were born outside the UK. 70% have no native British ancestry.
They way Leftists talk about "colonizers", one might assume that 99% of people around the world have British ancestry.
Simple asymmetric oppression. When we do it to them, it's fascism. When they do it to us, it's justice.
"That's not happening, and it's good that it is."
All of the above!
+6
I’d guess he is talking about the Islamification of London specifically, the UK in general, and predicting the potential for same in NYC.
I thought this was pretty obviously what Trump was referring to. The fact Liz couldn't recognize what's happening in the UK, and London specifically, goes to show the bubble she's living in.
"Our sharpest political minds these are not."
Not cool, Liz. You kind of misrepresented what was being said in your examples... even with Kamala and Walz.
Trump supporters in PA are getting threatening letters not to vote for Trump.
“We know where you live, you are in the data base," "there is no knowing what may happen," and "your family may be impacted, your cat may get shot."
"your cat may get shot."
One step up from Ohio, where it may be dinner
Right next door, so maybe they're being harvested in PA for Ohio consumers.
Crazy cat ladies can't imagine a worse threat.
I must be like Keyser Söze to these people.
The Venn diagram intersection of a mostly peaceful BLM rally attendee and a cat burglar.
Stealing cats? Are we back to Haitians?
I don't think these marxist chucklefucks realize that they're in the same database.
Anyone getting these letters should make a note of where the Harris/Walz signs are so they get a taste of their own "liberating tolerance." Also, all Antifa rioters should be exterminated with prejudice.
Childless cat ladies hardest hit.
To be fair, sometimes it takes a hard whack to dislodge their hairballs and stop them choking.
That letter reads like it's written by someone who doesn't speak English as their native language.
Also, the Trump supporter has a long lost rich uncle in Nigeria that needs help exporting some of that wealth.
and I went to a Catholic Church yesterday
Can someone explain the difference to be between a catholic church and "regular" one? I went to (lutheran? I think) church a few times on Xmas as a kid with my grandparents. It was mostly just singing and boredom.
Cutting both ways: Do you have trouble distinguishing an actual Texas barbecue from a Golden Corral from a McRib sandwich too?
More like distinguishing Disneyland from the county fair.
+1 Full marks.
I was raised Catholic, and outside of Catholic mass I've attended one Lutheran mass and one Episcopalian baptism. The main differences seemed to be references to the Pope and the Vatican that are present at Catholic mass and are obviously not part of the Protestant services.
The rest was pretty much the same thing; singing and boredom indeed.
I was raised Catholic, went to Catholic schools on and off (pretty sure it was only in the years my parents could afford it, looking back). Like many, stopped somewhere in HS, and it's been probably 40 years since I attended Mass on my own accord. But I still respond to the sights and sounds and could still go by rote based on many many Masses attended in the 60's and 70's.
I recently attended a very Catholic relative's wedding, and I had no idea what was going on. Seems like in 2008 a set of significant changes to the liturgy had occurred (and took effect in 2011).
Color me not a fan...the argument for the changes is a "better translation" but the newer language seems like an awkward AI translation with no poetry or flow.
For example,
Old "We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all that is seen and unseen.
New "I believe in one God, the Father almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible.
But, it's the Pope's new rules, so...
The difference between a traditional Orthodox service and a Pentecostal one are like the difference between an opera and a rave. Maybe not a perfect example because there’s a little less dancing at a rave.
A modern Catholic service would sit closer to the Orthodox, think of a highly choreographed musical perhaps. Lutheran and Episcopalian are basic and closer to the middle but still on the Orthodox side, maybe a school play would be analogous. Quakers would be a street busker with a guitar. Evangelicals range from a mime show (old Baptists) to a rock concert.
Went to a Greek Orthodox service many years ago. Craziest thing I've ever seen.
The easiest way to distinguish Catholics and Protestants is Mary. Mary is as important as Jesus in Catholic church, not so much in Protestantism.
Crucifixes and icons too. Protestants generally see them as idolatry.
Yeah if you see crucifixes and Mary everywhere, you're in a Catholic church.
Though shall not covet thy neighbor’s altar boy.
That can make the preacher cross.
More incense and kneeling in Catholic churches.
I was just going to say: bells, and smells.
Was that where Kamala got her career started?
One plays with rattlesnakes and drinks strychnine, the other has a 10% finders fee.
Lutherans murder Jews. Catholics, well, Hitler was raised in a Catholic family. Once belief in falsehood is threatened into a child, what other outcome could you possibly expect?
We've almost entirely neglected to talk about actual issues.
Were you not around in 2016 when a candidate ran on opposing fake news, opposing the deep state, draining the swamp, and making America great again? If you don't recall it was met with a wave of "PEEING HOOKERS!", "RUSHUN KOLLOOSHUN!", and "ILLEEGUL PAYMENTS TO PORN STARZ!"
If you were around in 2016, were you not around in 2020 when a candidate campaigned entirely from his basement, did zero debates, everyone was locked in their home, and the media (and the candidate) openly bragged about how they got the candidate elected? Your employer and co-workers seem to have 'reluctantly and strategically' avoided reading or talking about the candidate's platform in any substantial way.
Now that we're in 2024, and a week away from the election, when one candidate could stand to lay out *any* policy and the other would be stupid to make any big name changes... *now* is when you ask "Why is no one talking about the issues?"
If you were around in 2016, were you not around in 2020
Died from covid in 2020.
Only once?
I got better.
We had a (mostly) orderly and just immigration process in this country until it was deliberately wrecked by far left asshokes like Ted Keneddy, the same way they wreck everything else they're allowed to get their hands on.
The good news is that we're going to have a much more orderly and just immigration process once again in about three months, when President Trump replaces that scumbag Mayorkas with a loyal and patriotic real American who instructs the Border Patrol officers that they are once again free to do their actual job as instructed by existing law, without any fear of punishment or reprisal.
The days of illegally spending unauthorized taxpayer dollars on all the gift cards, mobile phones, bus rides, plane tickets, hotel rooms, and free breakfasts are finally and mercifully amost over.
The good news is that we’re going to have a much more orderly and just immigration process once again in about three months, when President Trump replaces that scumbag Mayorkas with a loyal and patriotic real American who instructs the Border Patrol officers that they are once again free to do their actual job as instructed by existing law, without any fear of punishment or reprisal.
Unfortunately, it's not going to mean much without the repeal of Hart-Cellar.
I'm not really sure what's funnier from this past weekend--Trump and Rogan talking about aliens during a 3-hour podcast, or the left and NeverBlumph jobbers having a Godwin meltdown about the MSG rally.
@Liz, is Reason having a Halloween cocktail party? If so and you are attending, what’s your costume?
Hot Dog. Classic.
Whine and Cheese.
That is Boehm, Binion, Brown....the B Bobbleheads.
...
What other presidential candidate could you get to just talk so frankly about the business of running for and being president? And who could "weave" in so many subjects and still get back to the question?
The Tony Hinchcliffe debacle is emblematic of Trumpism's shallowness, lack of discipline, and absence of forethought. Most of all, it's low-IQ. MAGA isn't very bright.
In 2020, the Democrats tried to hand the Republicans the election on a silver platter with the George Floyd riots and an Alzheimer's patient for a candidate. In 2024, Democrats tried again with an mindless incompetent on the ticket who can barely deliver a sentence.
A semi-competent Republican would probably be cleaning up right now. Instead, MAGA once again said, "Hold my beer!"
Prepare to be disappointed.
Your post is emblematic of some TDS-addled steaming pile of shit.
FOAD, asshole.
"The Tony Hinchcliffe debacle is emblematic"
Its emblematic, but not of what you think it is.
Its emblematic of the dichotomy of the MSM and elites clutching their pearls and screaming "RACIST HITLER" while pretty much everyone else has a laugh and moves on.
The hysterics turned up to 11 because someone said an offensive thing worked when PC culture and posting of black squares was in vogue. Everyone got really tired of that show.
The hysterics turned up to 11 because someone said an offensive thing worked when PC culture and posting of black squares was in vogue. Everyone got really tired of that show.
Leaving the NeverBlumph prigs aside, these complaints are being made by the same people who have gleefully promoted cultural crassness and deviance since the end of World War II, because they thought that doing so would help bring the communist utopia to fruition. It's a big reason the NeverBlumph prigs ultimately got kicked to the curb, because the GOP voters finally realized that the double standard is the whole point.
"Make the enemy live by their own rules" doesn't just apply to systems of government, it applies to politial conflicts as well, and the left's main rule for decades has been "It's okay when we do it." They didn't think the right would ever actually invert that against them.
The Tony Hinchcliffe debacle is emblematic of Trumpism’s shallowness, lack of discipline, and absence of forethought. Most of all, it’s low-IQ. MAGA isn’t very bright.
LOL, yeah, the Big-Brained Ones have certainly done a bang-up job of disabusing us of the notion that intelligence is actually good for anything these days.
A semi-competent Republican would probably be cleaning up right now. Instead, MAGA once again said, “Hold my beer!”
I keep hearing this and the more I hear it, the less it says something about the intelligence of your average MAGA voter and the more it says about the speaker's unwillingness or inability to think outside the echo chamber of their own skull, let alone past their own nose.
Only slightly less better than the retardation that the only reason Trump in '16 was because of all the racists.
If you think that the only reason people disagree with you or like different things than you do is that they are stupid idiots, then you will never understand anything.
"...An American military official, "speaking to reporters on the condition of anonymity, said President Joe Biden's administration had worked with Israel to come up with a 'proportional' response and urged Iran not to retaliate again," per Bloomberg..."
A NYT cite wasn't available?
I get the feeling that, per usual, the people most offended by the Puerto Rican joke will not be Puerto Rican.
basically AOC and a shitload of white progs
Did she nearly die?
If only it were more than ‘nearly’…….
Should Trump win next week, or whenever the dust settles, a potential epidemic of democrat suicides will be a real cherry on top of the sundae.
I for one will gladly accept the transfer of millions of liberty living Canadians for a similar number of disaffected leftists in the US, I'll even accept multiples Canada's contribution in emmigrants from the US.
...could have chosen between listening to a comedian hurl insults...
Honey! Get my pearls!!
Maybe we don't deserve better from our leaders. Maybe our politics were always fated to be ground down to this. But boy is it depressing to see it all laid out before you, via hours and hours of longform content on different podcasts, consumed by polar-opposite portions of America who increasingly seem to believe they have very little in common with one another.
This is the fatal flaw of any democratic system, and it's not like it wasn't foreseen. The Founders and De Toqueville were certainly aware enough of it to comment on the fact.
No matter how much the internationalists try to brute-force a world where everyone gets along, or else, conflict is the natural order of things, and democracies in particular ultimately reach a point where factions decide that they can't live alongside each other anymore. This isn't unique to complex post-modern societies: Native American tribes were intensely democratic in nature, and it wasn't uncommon for groups within a village to break off and live elsewhere when they didn't agree with how the village was being run.
we need to limit the franchise.
The assertion that "we need as many people to vote as possible" has always been based on circular reasoning. Just in the last decade, we've had Dems as high up as Nancy Pelosi claiming the voting age needs to be lowered to 16 or even 12. It's a blatant attempt to pander to the fetish for democratizing everything, as if someone in the throes of puberty is mature enough to make decisions on how society should be run. These are people who eat Tide pods on a bet, for fuck's sake.
Lowering the voting age to 18 was always a sop to the Boomer New Leftists, due to Vietnam and the draft, and never should have passed to begin with. And considering the participation rates for 18-20 year olds, doing so was utterly pointless anwyay.
What we actually need to do is 1) get rid of every single Wilson-era Constitutional amendment; and 2) pass another one that actually RAISES the voting age to 25. If you're not old enough to run for Congress, and if your brain isn't fully developed, you're not old enough to make decisions about who should run, either. If you're not old enough to walk into a gun store and buy a handgun, you're not old enough to vote, either. Make the exception for people who enlist in the military ("Service Equals Citizenship!"), but that's it.
Make the exception for people who enlist in the military
I'm not convinced your average G.I. is any more intelligent or ready to vote than any other 18 year old.
They tend to vote much more prudently.
Just knock out 17th amendment.
But it almost worked for decades in the US when social activists had less reach (and actual political power). Even now, I suspect most people motivated to support Trump are reacting to what they see as intrusive insanity from the Blue Wave.
And some native groups were not exactly democratic, unless that includes head-bashing on scales ranging from the nearby village to all of Central America.
>>Our sharpest political minds these are not.
sharp political minds know better than to run for office.
>>It's almost like everyone is avoiding talking about the actual issues
Step One: Save the Bill of Rights.
Step Two: ??
Step Three: Projects!
>>(Is he saying that large cosmopolitan cities are adopting a certain sameness over time? What exactly is he predicting or talking about?)
eye. roll.
I like Liz but comments like this reveal a very shallow depth of what is common knowledge to most of us. She would do well to reduce the number of topics she chooses to address and research those more thoroughly. Sorry but this is Kamala level stupid.
I like Liz too and assume she knows the answer so why pretend ... ergo eyeroll.
>>it all comes together to paint a portrait of a campaign with very different values and priorities than, say, what I have.
waaahmbulance? those assholes are at least trying to stop the communists from running the country into the ground. if you're scared go surf.
“Maybe we don’t deserve better from our leaders. Maybe our politics were always fated to be ground down to this.”
Not even remotely. Repeat after me, Liz: “It’s the two-party system … it’s the two-party system … it’s the …” The Constitution does not require two parties or any parties whatever. Although it may be inevitable that political parties will form, it’s not inevitable that politics will devolve into a series of mock battles between a red team with no principles, only slogans; and a blue team with no principles, only slogans. We can eliminate the two-party stranglehold by eliminating district-based elections for representatives in every state in the union, without a Constitutional amendment by holding statewide, at-large, ranked-choice voting and assigning the required districts for Congress proportionally. We can do it in less than a decade if the 45% of us antiestablishmentarians put all of our focus and resources on it starting now.
Assigning them proportionally to what? Usually that'd be done by party-list elections, and that would institutionalize parties rather than eliminating their stranglehold.
Please allow me to explain "stranglehold" in that context: right now the only way you can have any say at all in your state legislature or in Congress is to get elected as a Republican or as a Democrat. In a district-based election all of the winners are a Democrat or a Republican with rare "independents" who are transparently one or the other, never Libertarians of Socialists. The Constitution requires each state to establish election districts which are reapportioned every ten years after the required Census. In an at-large election the representatives would be chosen in a ranked-choice fashion proportional to the number of voters who prefer each candidate regardless of party. Since political parties cannot be eliminated, the next-best option would be to have the representatives proportionate to the number of members of each party over the minimum threshold. If there were fifteen Congressional election districts and fifteen representatives elected, each representative would be assigned to one of the fifteen districts. This would break the stranglehold that the two largest parties have maintained because of the "lesser of two evils" natural principle that always evolves otherwise.
How would that work? Do citizens in a state vote for a party instead of a candidate, so that if the Dems won 55% of the statewide vote, Repubs won 40%, and, say, Libertarians won 5%, then Dems would get 55% of the representatives in the House for that state, and so on? What if a state has only six seats in Congress? How would you apportion 55% of the six seats to the Dems, or 5% to Libertarians? Does each party that got votes decide who the House Rep apportioned to them will be? So no one actually runs, it's just parties?
No, the candidates would list party affiliation or preference just they currently do, but the entire slate of candidates would be on the ballot for every voter in that state. Voters would still choose their favorite candidate, with ranked choice of their second and third choices on iterative counting at the close of the election. On each cycle any candidate who exceeds the pre-determined threshold for election "wins" and is dropped from further allocation of votes, with second or third or fourth choices being allocated down-ballot until all positions are filled.
Interesting proposal. I'd have to think about it more before I could give an informed response.
>>Brené Brown's podcast
NPR rejected because too boring.
"Brené Brown"
Who?
She's Jordan Peterson for middle-aged women.
can't dunk ... good fundamentals.
I thought a herd of cats and White Claw was for middle aged women.
Donald Trump and Joe Rogan talked about whale psychology.
This is a disingenuous talking point all the libs are spreading around about the interview.
To believe Trump was genuinely saying he wants to be a whale psychologist is BlueAnon level nonsense. This is like when he said California has giant spigots they can turn on in the sac river and people thought he meant actual spigots instead of just a using a simile for the fact that they CHOOSE not to capture the water in order to save a herring fish's breeding grounds.
But no, he genuinely believes there are giant spigots in the sac river. The people who say this in earnest ironically show how stupid they are.
Yeah this "whale psychologist" talking point is complete nonsense.
For those that don't know, there's something of an epidemic right now of whales beaching themselves and they were discussing why it was happening. One possible explanation that's been put forth is offshore wind power affecting the whales' habitat. It's in the context of that discussion that the "whale psychologist" remark was made.
In other words, a discussion of actual policy as Liz desires. Also, that's a good reason to try and stick to primary sources as much as possible.
Big issue among environmentalists and Rogan I think counts himself among that group. Nobody seems to know exactly why whales are beaching near windmills but it seems to be a psychological reaction. It's a serious issue and again Liz reveals her willful ignorance.
I thought it was the noise messing with their navigation (or just annoying the fuck out of them). But maybe that's not as certain as I thought.
It's unclear what's going on. It's apparently definitely true that the construction of off shore wind power had a massive disruptive effect on the whale population. They swam like hell just to get away from that.
It's less clear what the effects of the windmills merely existing is.
In any event, it's a legitimately policy point either way, so pretending like it was some irrelevant Trump non-sequitur is highly disingenuous.
I take it as a warning to leave the ocean alone.
Certainly unless there's a really huge benefit. I mean if we suddenly discover a super cheap form of desalination, well we should still be careful in affecting the ocean, but a whole bunch sea-water is gonna get desalinated regardless of how careful we are.
"To believe Trump was genuinely saying he wants to be a whale psychologist is BlueAnon level nonsense. "
We've got shitlib neighbors who are always on about whatever fantastical thing Trump definitively was serious about.
"A convicted felon who thinks we should inject bleach, nuke hurricanes, and said Nazi's are good people!"
Im always amazed. Imagine either being so gullible/stupid to believe it, or just having to keep up with the pretend outrage that its totally real. Its really cult stuff
Like the nobility of old, our current elites are truly stupid and detached from reality.
Liberal arts education and a career in academia will do that to you
>>Kamala Harris "announced a plan to boost Puerto Rico's economy and power grid"
you sure? I didn't hear anything about T announcing a plan to boost PR's economy and power grid.
I do know she has zero plan to end the Jones Act, so no, she has no plans to do either.
'He also said, "I don't know if you guys know this but there's literally a floating island of garbage in the middle of the ocean right now. I think it's called Puerto Rico." This became a political scandal'
I guess critiquing the mounds of garbage on Puerto Rico and the local dysfunction was OK when NPR did it. But not as funny.
Funny stuff:
https://x.com/Dannyjokes/status/1850684098848694757
Danny's great.
It was not a very good joke as jokes go. Meh.
But:
"Some guy at a Trump rally made a poor-taste joke about Puerto Rico so now I'm voting Kamala". That's not a real person. I dont believe that.
Have you listened to college humanities faculty lately?
They already vote '(D)umber'
Yeah, that's a bit like the retarded article in my local paper-- about how American Indians in WA could lead Harris to victory.
Um, news flash, WA is a bluer-than-blue-found-in-nature-blue state. 100% of the electoral college votes are pre-promised to Harris. So we're done here.
They are already for team D no matter who it is.
If someone was on the fence and then decided to vote Kamala because of this one specific joke, I am shocked.
I don’t know if you guys know this but there’s literally a floating island of garbage in the middle of the ocean right now. I think it’s called Puerto Rico.
The joke is completely insulting and tasteless, and I know that because if he were talking about a peninsula instead of an island it would be a great joke about Florida.
Did you hear about the giant pile of garbage off the East Coast of Pennsylvania?
Also, I don't know if anybody else has heard this but it seems that Washington D.C. is actually a swamp in need of drainage.
DC was not thought to be fit for human habitation from the beginning. The idea was that everyone would leave during malaria season. Then they invented air conditioning…
“We urge all Floridans of goodwill to stand against the legalization of late-term abortion and oppose the abortion amendment.”
WTF? Pre-Viable =/= “late-term”.
One has absolutely NOTHING to do with the other.
By "late term," they mean anyone born 75 years after their birth.
Everyone could just let their imaginative $cience 'fads' go and support the Constitution's Individual Right to Fetal Ejection "The right of the people to be secure in their persons."
There really wasn't much of an excuse for Pre/Post viable assignment when *reality* is what the basis should've been.
Course, the Pro-Life movement is fulfilling the "Little Power granted corrupts absolutely through time" phrase. I was mostly okay with that "little power" of Post-Viable State violation of the 4A & 13A but the Pro-Life movement just couldn't settle for a Little UN-Constitutional POWER. They had to go full-on Gov-Gun FORCED reproduction and fulfill that "Power corrupts absolutely".
"Our sharpest political minds these are not."
That's been true since 1865.
Who is Brene Brown?
Who is Andre the Giant?
FYI, whenever someone says we're increasingly living in an anarchy, this is the stuff I point to to prove them wrong:
So a blackout drunk homeless guy decided to walk here, the exact thing you'd expect to happen happened, and the person who hit him is arrested for vehicular homicide.
Okay, if that driver was drunk, he deseeves to go down for that.
But as described, the collision does not appear to be his fault.
Yes, the DUI charge is 100% reasonable, the homicide charge is retarded in a microwave.
Your story is just standard procedure. If there’s an accident and someone behind the wheel has been drinking, they get all the blame. Doesn’t matter who caused the accident. They could be t-boned by a sober person felony-speeding through a red light, and be the only one charged in the accident. That’s normal.
They could be t-boned by a sober person felony-speeding through a red light, and be the only one charged in the accident. That’s normal.
I'm not sure that is normal. What would be 'normal' to me is that you would be cited for DUI, not for murder of a guy who jumped in front of the barrel of your gun.
In my scenario if the drunk driver’s passenger was killed by the speeder who ran the red light, the drunk driver would have been charged with homicide. They’d also be forced to pay restitution to the guy who hit them, as in replace their car. That’s just how it works. Police only cite one party when there's an accident, and that party gets all the blame for everything.
What would be ‘normal’ to me is that you would be cited for DUI, not for murder of a guy who jumped in front of the barrel of your gun.
If you are sober and someone jumps in front of your gun, you’re in the clear. But if you’ve been drinking then it’s your fault. That’s just how the system works.
Easy fix. Don’t be drunk in public.
Look who your talking to. He may as well not breathe.
Racist!
Also, having nothing to do with the facts of the story, the quality of writing is either going down in journolisming, or it never was good and I'm just noticing it, here's how I would write the paragraph:
Jounolismist:
The man walked in front of a car, and its driver, a 20-year-old woman from Oklahoma, swerved and braked to avoid hitting him. The driver of the car behind the woman’s vehicle, a 30-year-old Renton man, swerved and hit both the pedestrian and the woman’s car, WSP said.
Me:
The pedestrian walked in front of a car whose driver, a 20-year-old Oklahoma woman swerved to avoid hitting him. A 30 year-old Renton man who was following the Oklahoma woman's car hit both the pedestrian and the woman's car after swerving, WSP said.
It's called anarcho tyranny, tone, doncha know? they do it every where now. Apparently the bolsheviks invented it but it's gone mainstream now.
While I'm not a fan of some of Trump's policy proposals, I listened to the Rogan episode, and he did talk a lot about policy, inclusive of the "whale psychologist" comment, which was part of a discussion on energy policy and how offshore wind farms may be affecting whale populations.
This feels like an intellectually dishonest take from someone who caught a poorly edited highlight reel. Makes me question the rest of the takes in this article.
Liz Wolfe, I understand your dislike of Trump as I dislike him myself. I do however need to mention that I did listen to Joe Rogan's conversation with former president Donald Trump. I also very specifically said conversation instead of interview, because Joe Rogan does not really interview his guests, but rather has a conversation with them.
Former president Donald Trump comes across as authentic even is you don't like him which is far different from how current vice president Kamala Harris comes across. She comes off are plastic and managed. Everything appears to be a calculated move to manipulate. She is comprised of the worst aspects of politics.
When Trump was president, the very worse part was not Trump himself, but rather the reaction to Trump. I say this as a person who has never voted for and never will vote for Trump. I've always disliked Trump even before he ran for president. As much as I don't like Trump, I dislike the way over the top anti-Trump crowd. Personally the anti-Trump crowd are by far much more dangerous than Trump is.
It's not that I want Trump to win, but Harris and the hysterical anti-Trump crowd truly deserve to lose and to lose by huge margins. To me it is amazing the lengths they will go and the complete detachment from reality they have. I would rather have a mediocre Donald Trump as president that triggers the crazies than the very real assault on personal liberties that the current regime has pursued and the continuation of these assaults that Kamala Harris embodies.
Trump just held an actual nazi rally at madison square garden which was the exact copy of the 1938 rally the nazis held there and you're defending him?!?!?!
And it was not at all the same as when Carter and Clinton and other presidents held rallies there. TOTALLY different ok?
/sarc
"Mika Brzezinski claims Donald Trump 'forced' Washington Post to not endorse Kamala Harris"
How, pray tell, did he do that?
Nazi mind control rays.
LOL, these claims show just how unhinged these vermin have become. If he had that kind of authority, why didn't he make the owners endorse him in the first place instead of this bullshit "no endorsement" nonsense.
Oh, yeah, I know why--because we all fucking know who these people are voting for, and their endorsements really don't mean shit anymore as far as influencing voters. You're all Democrats, everyone knows you're all Democrats, so let's cut the crap and stop acting like you're a bunch of impartial observers. You're not any better than the pigeons on The View.
"If he had that kind of authority, why didn’t he make the owners endorse him in the first place instead of this bullshit “no endorsement” nonsense."
Guy was walking along, and sees a turtle on a fence post. Turtle sees the guy, and says "Please, help me get down from here. If you help me get down from here, I will grant you three wishes!"
Guy helps the turtle down. Turtle takes a few steps, and says "Thanks!" as he disappears into his burrow.
"Hey! What about my wishes?"
Turtles voice emanates from his burrow "If I had the power to grant wishes, do you think I'd have been stuck on that post?"
Of course, there's the classic "post turtle" joke...
While stitching a cut on the hand of an old farmer, the doctor struck up a conversation with the man and eventually the topic got around to politicians and their role as our leaders.
The old farmer said, “Well, as I see it, most politicians are 'Post Turtles'".
The old farmer saw a puzzled look on the doctor’s face so he continued to explain.
The old man said, “When you come across a fence post with a turtle balanced on top, that’s a 'post turtle'. And you know he didn’t get up there by himself, he doesn’t belong up there, he’s elevated above his ability to function, and you just wonder what kind of idiot put him up there to begin with!”
What were the insults?
"This became a political scandal, possibly jeopardizing Trump's ability to win Puerto Rico's electoral college votes. (Oh, wait…)" Or the electoral votes of Pennsylvania. You know, where 400k Puerto Ricans live, genius.
Maybe it's Liz, and not Claudine Gay, who's the "affirmative action hire."
Rogan meandering? Yeah ok he fills hours and hours of mic time so that will cause some meandering.
Rogan unhinged? Based on what? Cite please.
I generally only listen to Rogan if I'm interested in the guest. It's a conversation that goes wherever they choose to take it. Sometimes it's an in depth dive into whatever theory or subject the guest is an expert in where Joe wants to learn. Some are just them sharing stories. Most are like this where there's some politics, conspiracy talk, MMA, health, hunting, and joking around.
Calling Rogan unhinged is strange because he not only deals in celebrity/comedy stuff but also gets into deep conversations of science, philosophy, technology, etc.
Smart people talk about ideas
Trumpanzista Liz talks about other insult comedians
Hank talks about Liz in a projecting post sharing his distaste for himself.
The joy of heating with wood processed from one’s own forest means decoupling from the broken system.