Dispatch From Trump World: The Spirit of '24
"It's harder to be snotty or snarky when I'm looking you in the eye.”

Two weeks after Donald Trump won the 2024 election in anything but a nail-biter, some of the people packed into a VIP room at New York City's Comedy Cellar this Tuesday night might have had reason to feel a little bit smug.
It was the first on-stage performance of Mark Halperin's The Morning Meeting (though this one was subtitled "After Dark"), a weekday news show that airs live on YouTube and on Halperin's new 2Way platform, where he and his cohosts—former White House Communications Director Sean Spicer and Democratic strategist Dan Turrentine—provide an interactive experience "devoted to unique conversations, unbiased discourse, and open debate." Halperin opens each time with the watchwords, "Peace, love and understanding."
Where a cynic might see this as airy-fairy, others find respite. One VIP looked nearly beatific as he told me Halperin was the only host he knew that "shoots straight."
"It's the one show that's giving people actual insight into what's going on," said Spicer. "On the networks, it's five minutes of a pundit who's never been in the game, never worked in government."
All three men have had, if not a fall from grace, at least a dinging up during the Trump era. Halperin faced unproven allegations of sexual impropriety which cost him his roles at Showtime and NBC News. Spicer served as White House Communications Director in 2017 until he was unceremoniously replaced by Anthony Scaramucci (who lasted all of ten days). Turrentine is the former chief of staff to Democratic Colorado Gov. Jared Polis and became something of a pariah in his own party when he questioned Biden's fitness to stay in office before others were ready to hear it or the media was ready to report on it.
After having watched a dozen episodes of The Morning Meeting (and, full disclosure, being called on several times to be a talking head), I can attest the audience seems to find relief in conversations where they are not accused of being a traitor.
"The show is to me a little bit of a version of the 21st century talk radio, it's a two-way interaction," said Turrentine. "It's harder to be snotty or snarky when I'm looking you in the eye, as opposed to Twitter or even on a telephone, where you can flex all you want and hang up."
At 5 p.m., Halperin, Spicer, and Turrentine took the stage for what looked like an all-ages, entirely packed house. After Halperin delivered the opening grace note and said they'd be taking questions, he reminded the crowd the show was being livestreamed.
"Not unlike being in Mar-a-Lago, everything you do can be seen and heard by the Chinese," he said, then turned to Spicer. "Now, it's going to be about confirmations—who will win? The swampy establishment Republicans or MAGA?"
"Oh, MAGA wins every day of the week," Spicer said.
Halperin asked if they both thought Trump would get all his picks confirmed.
"Yeah," said Spicer.
"No. No, I do not," said Turrentine.
This was about as confrontational as things got. Halperin occasionally threw an elbow, as when he counseled an audience member to "consider Elon Musk like a less stable Kim Jong Un," but the mood was light—teasing instead of opportunistically looking to chew the other guy's face off.
"Chuck Schumer: put him on a milk carton," said Halperin. "Normally, the guy loves to talk to the press. Have not seen him. What do you think's going on there, Dan?"
"Yeah, Dan?" jibed Spicer.
"Can we go back to nominations?" Turrentine mock-pleaded.
It was that kind of night, with Spicer doing a not-bad Trump impersonation ("I don't even know who this Chuck Schumer is. I used to donate to his campaign. He'd come in and beg like a dog, and then I said, 'Get out Chuck, Chuck Wagon'") and Halperin jumping in with pop news quizzes which the audience shouted answers to— all of which created a sort of unifying soup.
People may have started at different spots on the political field, but they had migrated here, to a room that, often to participants' surprise, skewed bigly for Trump in a city that went 68 percent for Harris.
"Raise your hand if you voted for Donald Trump in the election," asked Halperin. More than half the room put up their hands. "Incredible. Now raise your hand if you think there are people in the room who voted for Donald Trump but didn't raise their hands."
The laughter was reflexive, like something people had been holding in for years. Were they allowed to laugh now, after what had been several bruising election cycles and sometimes a shitshow? There was a sense they could, that they were among friends, that they could take a breather. It was about this time I started to see the room—and the three hosts in particular—like the Revolutionary War soldiers in the Spirit of '76 painting: battered but, with fife and drum, carrying the message forward.
But what was the message? Audience members wanted to know. They had been Bernie bros, they used to be Hillary stans, they had never not voted Democrat down the line. But this time…
"I voted for RFK, but deep down, I wanted Trump to win," said one young man. A 2020 Bernie delegate said he had voted for Trump and that he was currently wearing a Trump shirt under his flannel. "I couldn't wear it on the street," he said, to general laughter and applause.
A woman who said she worked in "heterodox spaces" took the mic. "This election, I think, has been the most divisive we've really ever seen, at least in my lifetime," she said. "The Dems, Republicans, and the media, do you think they're going to ratchet things down? Do you think people have had it or do they think they still need to kind of ramp stuff up in order to get ratings, to get clicks, to get the algorithm going?
"So basically, you're asking about Joy Reid," said Halperin.
Turrentine picked up the question. "I think the Democrats will tone it down a little because Trump thumped them," he said. "The fact that Trump made inroads in every single demographic and almost every geographic center of this country, you can't, if you're a Democrat, look at it and say, 'Yep, Hitler and fascist is the winning message. Let's just double down on that.'"
"There are some folks that want to pounce and say, 'We are finally able to be loud and vocal about our victory!' And there are others that want to be a little bit more welcoming," said Spicer. "To Dan's point, outrage sells, it's how you raise money, it's how you get on cable TV."
There was another half hour of quizzes, prescient skepticism for Trump's nominating Matt Gaetz to lead the Department of Justice—Halperin asked an audience member, "If you were at the airport and you needed to use the men's room, would you say to [Gaetz], 'Would you watch my luggage?'" to which the audience member responded, "I… don't know?"—and general bonhomie.
Halperin assured a gay woman, who said she feared Project 2025, that she was supported here, and the audience murmured appreciation and offered group hugs—they were grateful for 2Way and would follow its lead, if not into a future of peace, love, and understanding, then at least to a place where they could exercise their better angels.
"We're going to close with Sean and Dan commenting on a story that is breaking," said Halperin, reading a headline off his laptop: "The New York Times: 'Comcast is moving forward with a spinoff of its NBC Universal Cable Channels including MSNBC.' Sean, what do you think?"
"If I were Joe [Scarborough] and Mika [Brzezinski], I'd be on LinkedIn right now," said Spicer, to applause from the crowd. "Comcast is doing smart business. The viewership is gone. Look, there's a reason the platforms like [2Way] are flourishing….And so I hope the best for Mika and Joe. I look forward to them driving my Uber, all the best for them."
More laughter and even buoyancy followed, suggesting that, underneath the goodwill, there was still a little room left for schadenfreude.
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
"If you were at the airport and you needed to use the men's room, would you say to [Gaetz], 'Would you watch my luggage?'" to which the audience member responded, "I… don't know?"—and general bonhomie.
I know there's at least one person serving in the current administration that I definitely would not trust my luggage with.
The ignorance of urban progressives is profound though I believe the creature known as Sam Brinton got canned or resigned after multiple luggage thefts.
The question and answer are both dumb. So much of this highlights out of touch urbanites.
Layers deep.
Like they've never been to an airport or observed or enforced security anywhere and generally aren't ashamed about unloading their baggage on someone else who may have better, or just other, shit to do.
Ill-informed urbanites too.
?Halperin assured a gay woman, who said she feared Project 2025, that she was supported here, and the audience murmured appreciation and offered group hugs"
Trump said he wouldn't be signing up to it; but even if he did, there's nothing scary in it for your average lesbian. The number of people who were able to be manipulated into a panic because they didn't read it for themselves is stunning.
Wrong adjective. The number of people who were manipulated into a panic is: pathetic; embarrassing; an indictment of our media; an indictment of our schools; an indictment of people who vote Democrat; and just generally retarded. Unfortunately, "stunning" is what it is not.
And a son of a member of the administration whom I wouldn't let my luggage.
Unless you’re a chick with terrible fashion sense, your luggage is probably fine with old sticky Sammy.
The nation gives two fucks about NYC. Reason has become too local.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJcS60LXy7Q
Nancy, did some illegals kidnap wisegal Liz?
Not enough people subscribed to the new YT channel.
Or
Thanksgiving week and everyone is slacking off.
I want my links!
It posted. Maybe a Sunday evening Reason cocktail party or too many bong hits.
Which ones? Wapo, nyt, masnick, yglesias?
A Reasonistas social media account.
Nope, not gonna cut it.
Only those who have worked in government are allowed to have opinions on government?
I'd rather go back to the pre-Civil Service paradigm where a new President could fire and replace every single last government worker. Even if there were the same number of them, they wouldn't be the same entrenched deep state interests.
Yeah, the spoils system had it's big flaws but as it turns out those flaws might have been better than the current systems issues.
Dispatch from jeffsarcs open borders.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2024/11/dozens-of-massachusetts-children-have-been-sexually-assaulted-by-illegal-aliens-this-year/
The illegals didn’t assault those kids, they made love to them.
I agree; think today is glyphosate (Roundup) -free.
Actually, illegals rape children at a much lower rate than native-born citizens...or something. So those crimes don't count.
And when they do, sometimes they only jack off. And sometimes they say they're sorry. So it's all good, let them enjoy their cultural differences.
As long as they feel bad or at least pretend to.
https://www.spiked-online.com/2024/11/25/children-in-needs-trans-pandering-has-got-to-stop/
In a scathing resignation letter seen by The Times, former CIN chair Rosie Millard accused the organisation’s management of ‘institutional failure’, after it took three months to suspend funding to the controversial trans charity, LGBT Youth Scotland (LGBTYS).
Until 2009, LGBTYS was headed by convicted child abuser James Rennie. He was sentenced to life in jail for sexually assaulting his three-month-old godson, and for conspiring to gain access to children in order to abuse them. He and another man were revealed to be the leaders of Scotland’s biggest paedophile ring.
In fact, the first tranche of cash from CIN was awarded to LGBTYS just seven months after Rennie was sentenced. Then, in 2010, LGBTYS distributed ‘coming out’ guidance co-written by a Scottish drag queen called Andrew Easton. Easton was later convicted of child sex offences, which included sharing disturbing pictures of newborn babies.
Things continued to get worse for LGBTYS. In 2022, two men claimed to have been groomed at the charity around the time that Rennie was still chief executive. In response to the allegations, LGBTYS suspended one staff member and referred itself to the police. Yet it wasn’t until two years later in September 2024 that CIN announced that funding for LGBTYS had finally been suspended. In the interim, the charity was awarded £466,000.
In Millard’s damning resignation later, she writes that, upon questioning CIN’s decision to continue funding LGBTYS, members of management ‘did everything in their power to distract the board from its duty to sever funding’. She alleges that CIN chief executive Simon Antrobus only agreed to withdraw funds ‘out of fear of publicity’. Millard claims that when Antrobus was informed of the historic child-sex abuse, he complained that the news had spoiled his evening out at a Bruce Springsteen concert.
[And some folks here will cheer..."Just jacking off..."]
As Cowie suggests, LGBTYS is not the only LGBT charity funded by CIN that has made safeguarding errors. In 2019, CIN gave funding to Mermaids, the scandal-hit trans-youth charity. Mermaids is infamous for encouraging minors to take puberty-blocking drugs and sending children dangerous breast-binders behind their parents’ backs. It also appointed Dr Jacob Breslow as a trustee, an academic who once gave a speech to a symposium for ‘people who are attracted to minors’. During this, he compared child abuse to masturbating on to a shoe. He resigned following the revelations. CIN has never apologised for awarding Mermaids funding.
Did they say sorry?
""I voted for RFK, but deep down, I wanted Trump to win," said one young man. A 2020 Bernie delegate said he had voted for Trump and that he was currently wearing a Trump shirt under his flannel."
This is the vital realignment that has so many OG pundits throwing temper tantrums. I have watched this in the Libertarian Party as the Old Guard freaks out about the Mises Caucus. I have watched asthe staunch old republicans complain about the ideological impurities of these people.
How is it possible that a BERNIE BRO would support Trump? People have reprioritized their issues. Sure, they still want socialism lite, and the Trumpaloos still want their deportations, and the MC still wants the elimination of government. But these people have all reprioritized their "Must Haves" to "Nice to haves".
The many, many people who have shifted to support Trump have done so because they see the existing Regime as an overriding concern that transcends specific ideological details. Right, wrong or indifferent, they see Biden importing millions of immigrants and calling you a racist if you ask questions. They see the massive inflation of the past 4 years. They see the insane war in Ukraine. They see all of this and then they see RFK Jr, Tulsi, Bernie and others claiming that an Elite Cabal is running a government un-accountable to the people.
These people no longer see the fractures along Single Payer Healthcare or Privatizing Social Security. To them the clear division is: are you in the circle of Elites running our government right now, or are you on the outside.
The many, many people who have shifted to support Trump have done so because they see the existing Regime as an overriding concern that transcends specific ideological details.
If this continues, and I'd agree it's happening, it's perhaps the biggest danger to entrenched interests in my lifetime. Social division issues have won the day for most of my adult life, but it seems people are paying attention and starting to realize maybe those divisions are less important than previously thought.
People might think those issues are super important when things are going well, but when things start to collapse people are going to take notice and act accordingly. This is the first world mentality collapsing, where minor things are treated as world-ending and actual issues that could end the world are ignored. That trend, hopefully, could reverse itself as people realize their very existence is being threatened.
"but when things start to collapse people are going to take notice and act accordingly."
Yes. Sullum was previously scratching his head about this exact trend- with his article proclaiming that "Inflation makes people go crazy."
Of course it is Sullum who is the crazy one- because he doesn't understand why people stopped caring about universal health care, inheritance taxes and other ideological red meat when their real wages are dropping 10% a year and they see homeless encampments encroaching on their kids' soccer fields.
More like clown world.
Lol. Pour sarc still can’t recover from long TDS.
MSNBC being spun off really hit you hard.
Still nursing your hangover from this weekend’s binge?
Any particular reason why?
Oh I don’t know. Maybe because his cabinet is shaping up to be the cast of a partisan opinion program on Fox News that his retarded defenders (sorry for the redundancy) believe is actually a fair and balanced portrayal of current events.
Weird how Sarckles suddenly has a problem with this even though the Clinton, Biden and Obama administrations had a revolving door with the media.
For example Jay Carney went from Time to the White House press secretary's office. Shailagh Murray went from the Washington Post to the Veep's office while married to Neil King at the Wall Street Journal. Neil King has left the Wall Street Journal to work for Fusion GPS. Linda Douglass went from ABC News to the White House and then the Atlantic. Jill Zuckman went from the Chicago Tribune to the Obama Administration's Transportation Department. Douglas Frantz went from the Washington Post to the State Department and Stephen Barr went from the Post to the Labor Department.
Ruth Marcus, who heads the Washington Post Editorial Board, is married to the Obama Administration's former Federal Trade Commission Chairman. Jonathan Allen had been at the Politico before going to work for Debbie Wasserman Schultz, then back to Politico before going to the left leaning Vox. Now he is at NBC News. Andy Barr worked for the Politico before leaving for Democrat politics. Michael Scherer was at both Salon and Mother Jones before going to Time. Laura Rozen was at Mother Jones and the American Prospect before Foreign Policy magazine. Even Nate Silver had started out at Daily Kos. Then, of course, there is Matthew Dowd, who worked for scores of Democrats before working for George Bush. That, though he later washed his hands of Bush, bought him street credibility with ABC News to become its senior politically analyst alongside George Stephanopoulos, formerly of the Clinton Administration. And who can forget Psarc's favorite MSNBC personality, Psaki.
I suppose that's different and wHaTaBoUtisM though...
Silly me, I thought you were referring to the subject of the article, not Trumps possible cabinet.
A woman who said she worked in "heterodox spaces" took the mic.
The infiltration of this boilerplate academese into ordinary conversation is one of the more obnoxious Current Year features.
Using that term suggests that she doesn't really get out of a specific bubble.
She probably works in academia, hence the use of the language.
Language that's intended to confuse rather than illuminate is just about never a good sign.
If they do work for a university, the idea that they work in 'heterodox spaces' is just projection since in NYC that doesn't seem possible even if she believes it to be so.
> If they do work for a university, the idea that they work in ‘heterodox spaces’ is just projection since in NYC that doesn’t seem possible even if she believes it to be so.
This is the key. It is literally not possible to work at any uni in NYC that isn't DEI-obsessed and would recoil at the insinuation. But simultaneously, they would say it's never enough. It's impossible to slay the heterodox dragon because you must always have a dragon to slay. 1984 war analogies and all that.
>>Halperin faced unproven allegations of sexual impropriety which cost him his roles at Showtime and NBC News.
Gaetz faced unproven allegations of sexual impropriety which cost him his role at Justice.
>>It's harder to be snotty or snarky when I'm looking you in the eye
amateur.
"...suggesting that, underneath the goodwill, there was still a little room left for schadenfreude."
If someone is going to gloat over the loss of others, there has to be some basis in reality for that.