Donald Trump Interview | Lex Fridman Podcast #442

[Buck Edwards]

Just now, Consept said:

He gets angry all the time when he gets questions he doesnt like, when he was president he pretty much wouldnt take questions from publications that he didnt like. Whats a lot more rare is seeing Trump genuinely laugh, i cant imagine that 

[zurew]

Lex is just a microphone for anyone who he is platforming and he usually is never prepared enough to have the ability to provide quality pushback.

It seems that people here and in other places as well have a distorted view about what centrism is. It doesn't mean that you pretend that when it comes to all issues that both sides are bad the exact same way and you are incapable for any nuance when it comes to your political analysis.

It also doesn't entail being non-judgemental , which btw would be false for Lex, because he is judgemental, but he only holds a standard for the left and not for the right. He multiple times downplayed Trump's actions in the past.

 

Centrist either means having values that would put you roughly in the middle, or it can mean that you have the ability to call out any side that you think should be called out.

Lex getting criticism shouldn't be labeled as "radical", because nothing is radical for having the spine to actually push Trump on his bullshit. Providing a platform for the guy before the election without almost any pushback obviously is incredibly irresponsible and pretending otherwise would be dishonest and naive.

So lets not pretend that pressing Trump should only be expected from the radical left - Any real conservative should call out Trump , let alone a "centrist".

 

In Lex's mind he is not Larry King, in his mind he is a centrist who calls out both sides for their shit and he provides enough pushback when it is necessary.

Edited September 5 by zurew

[Leo Gura]

@zurew The very notion of "I have to give pushback" is your own bias. One which Lex doesn't share. He doesn't see his job as "I must give my guest pushback". Again, all of this is your leftist bias. You are the one who sees Trump as dangerous and in need of pushback. That is your agenda.

[PurpleTree]

8 hours ago, Lyubov said:

Lex does not value truth. It’s not possible to occupy his position if one values truth and integrity, just my belief, I’m open to being wrong and other’s take on this. 

What if you/lex just wants to hear people speak their “truth” and learn?

i feel like many trumpers will see that he deflected and often didn’t answer questions, like the mushroom thing he didn’t even really acknowledge it. Maybe he doesn’t know anything about. Maybe it’s his religious fans who don’t want him to acknowledge it. He could have shined by saying “yes lex i will take mushrooms in huuuuge amounts massive mushrooms and so should kamala”

i mean the trump interview was boring-ish turned it off after a while

[Socrates]

18 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

I don't have a prob with Lex's character.

You should have a problem though. This isn't journalism this is straight shitposting on a professional podcast platform my dude.

Trump shouldn't be able to get away with making so many factually incorrect statements, and Lex didn't push back on any of them.

If a podcast is talking shit for hours and dodging and deflecting on some questions you can't answer and just plain out lying on the others, there is no point having this trash even uploaded at this point. 

straight-up noise with 0 substance.

[UnbornTao]

On 9/5/2024 at 2:42 AM, Inliytened1 said:

But they still ALL lie.   I guess it's OK to be less of a liar..we will give them a pass because we're democrats lol.

Is that a true statement? How do you know it's everyone?

Granted, politics is based on manipulation, but this is not the same as lying. Someone like Bernie Sanders, for example, seems to come from a place of sincere service and integrity, regardless of potential factual errors he might make, biases he holds, mistakes he makes, etc. Do you expect politicians to be Plato or Aristotle— idealized "honest" individuals?

"Less of a liar" can also be seen as less deceived than the opponent, which is a move in the right direction, especially when the difference in degree is so staggering between them. The "truth" isn't a fantastical place or fixed destination, which you seem to think; it's just what is, at any level.

Edited September 11 by UnbornTao

[PurpleTree]

15 minutes ago, Socrates said:

You should have a problem though.

Should seems to be one of the worst words

what a bummer

[gettoefl]

4 hours ago, Socrates said:

You should have a problem though. This isn't journalism this is straight shitposting on a professional podcast platform my dude.

Trump shouldn't be able to get away with making so many factually incorrect statements, and Lex didn't push back on any of them.

If a podcast is talking shit for hours and dodging and deflecting on some questions you can't answer and just plain out lying on the others, there is no point having this trash even uploaded at this point. 

straight-up noise with 0 substance.

Lex asked not one follow up question in the 45 minutes, just 20 unrelated random topics

The definition of idiotic softball

Absolute waste and prime fodder for Don One's meandering and prevaricating 

I think it could have been a brilliant interview as Don was well briefed and hugely eager to score some points

For example he said he would get Ukraine done as soon as he got into office and he also mentioned Israel

But Lex was too dumb to flesh anything out

[mysticalninja]

The only time Lex pushed back was when Trump didnt share his mutual love for Joe Rogan, which made me laugh.

[Hardkill]

This is total nonsense:

 

 

[Joshe]

Would he have pushed harder on Biden or Kamala? Obviously, yes, else he never would have heard the end of it from his social circle.

Is there any utility in assessing his integrity, or would doing so automatically assign you the label of green judger? Here's some yellow speak:

Observation scope: Leave lofty spiritual clouds and zoom into human society and its component parts

Component in observation: Lex Fridman

Goal of observation: Analyze component's motivations and integrity for purpose of assessing systemic impact

What are good and bad aspects of this component? (Good and bad relative to the goal—systemic health)
Good: Brings value to many in various ways
Bad: Audience captured, integrity is compromised

Attributes relevant to integrity assessment: 
- More vibes driven than ideological
- Audience captured to a significant degree
- Higher than average intelligence
- Higher than average conscientiousness
- Game-theory aware
- Heavily influenced by epistemically compromised social circle (Rogan, Musk, other popular kids)
- Myopic perspective. Naively values short-term social harmony over long-term systemic health. 

Opportunities:
- Non-alienating content can be used for deradicalization
- Foster sentiment of camaraderie and unity
- Normalization of diverse perspectives

Threats:
- Seeming acceptance of radical viewpoints can radicalize fence sitters and fortify bad actor positions
- Unconscious dissemination of misinformation fueled by naivety and bias (largely influenced by epistemically compromised social circle)
- Spread falsehood to large swaths of people

Obviously, you could spend days expanding upon this, but I think this is largely an accurate representation of this component's state. LOL.

Edited September 5 by Joshe

[What Am I]

7 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

@zurew The very notion of "I have to give pushback" is your own bias. One which Lex doesn't share. He doesn't see his job as "I must give my guest pushback". Again, all of this is your leftist bias. You are the one who sees Trump as dangerous and in need of pushback. That is your agenda.

Thank you so much for pointing this out, Leo. I've noticed this exact attitude of entitlement where pushback is considered a strict expectation of style. It strikes me as bizarre every time I see it to imagine an interviewer must be this way.

[Leo Gura]

Should, should, should...

Pissy leftists malding over Lex Fridman.

[zurew]

8 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

@zurew The very notion of "I have to give pushback" is your own bias. One which Lex doesn't share. He doesn't see his job as "I must give my guest pushback". Again, all of this is your leftist bias. You are the one who sees Trump as dangerous and in need of pushback. That is your agenda.

You can take that position, but then you shouldn't complain when people give valid criticism ,because that kind of attitude comes with certain negatives as well - such as what some of us already pointed out - you are just a microphone for bad faith people, who can further their agenda, or can literally spread lies without any pusback.

I don't know why you have an issue with people who point that out. Also this bias talk is completely and utterly useless, just address the criticism that is made. You always pivot to the meta, and by that you undermine some of your own points as well.

 

And again you are wrong about Lex being a non-judgemental dude - he doesn't hold himself that way. Again in his mind he is a rational dude who can see the limitations in both sides ,and in his mind he is a person who provides enough pushback. So no, from his pov he isn't just trying to be a platform for everyone, it is just that he is bad at giving pushback.

But even if he would truly just trying to be just a microphone the criticisms would still stand. If he would want to be that way, he should own it, that that kind of platforming style will come with certain negatives and no one should pretend otherwise.

Edited September 5 by zurew

[Leo Gura]

@zurew Lex's job is to just let his guest talk. If you can't understand that, I don't know what to tell you. You got your agenda and can't see beyond it.

[aurum]

Leo made a good point about non-confrontational interviewing being a valid style.

A guy like Larry King is not an investigative journalist. He’s not there to evaluate the accuracy of all his guest’s claims and challenge them. His guests bring a narrative and a perspective, and his skillset is getting people to open up about what that is and showing it to the audience as it is. He’s not even really qualified to do anything else.

Of course there are also downsides to this approach. In this case with Lex, I don’t like it because I already know what Trump is about and I know the BS he will push. But that is my political bias, my pre-existing knowledge bias, my bias for sense-making and even my bias for communication style, which tends to lean a bit more confrontational. And I want to be mindful of that.

You could argue social media needs stricter moderation guidelines if a U.S presidential candidate is going to be interviewed on their platform. Maybe a compromise would be that independent fact-checking would be done and provided for the viewers.

Edited September 5 by aurum

[zurew]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

Lex's job is to just let his guest talk. If you can't understand that, I don't know what to tell you. You got your agenda and can't see beyond it.

Again, you are wrong on this, and Lex disagrees with you, but you won't change your mind because you are viewing everyone on this forum as lesser compared to you and you start with every conversation with you being right by default, without actually making an argument - you are just asserting your opinions.

There are multiple episodes when Trump is brought up in a negative way and Lex isn't just letting his guest to talk, he is providing pushback against a lot of points that are negative towards Trump.

One is this: This is the Lex who just lets his guests talk , right Leo?   https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/1ea48ot/lex_fridman_being_a_centrist/.

 

Also here is Lex literally disagreeing with your characterization of him just being Larry King:

Quote

A lot of people on the internet, that say that I don't pushback on points or criticize people or ask the hard questions enough . First of all, often times  I disagree with that assessment.  But also, I don't think you guys realize how hard that is to do ,when you are sitting with a person.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/1f42ked/lex_freedman_on_whether_jan_6_was_a_bid_deal/

 

So again, let me reiterate  -  Lex is characterizing himself as a voice of reason, who provides enough pushback and who can see through the biases of the left and the right and who is a responsible platformer - and he doesn't characterize himself as Larry King.

 

Also your comment about "you got your agenda and cant see beyond it"whats the argument for that Leo? Where did I say that you cant do interviews Larry King's style? What I said was, that if you want to do that you should make that clear and own it in a way where you acknowledge the negatives that comes with that style and also own it in a way where your audience knows that you are just a voice amplifier and you are not there to challenge anyone in any kind of way.

Edited September 5 by zurew

[Leo Gura]

59 minutes ago, zurew said:

you are just asserting your opinion.

Of course it's just my opinion. This is such a silly topic that all I got are off-hand opinions.

Quote

So again, let me reiterate  -  Lex is characterizing himself as a voice of reason, who provides enough pushback and who can see through all bias and who is a responsible platformer

This doesn't contradict what I said. He does mild pushback at times, which doesn't contradict the Larry King style.

Quote

 and he doesn't characterize himself as Larry King.

I characterize him as such.

It's funny that the Lex/Destiny clip you linked is the best proof of Lex trying to be centrist and neutral.

Of course that doesn't mean being neutral on Jan 6th or Trump is intelligent. But Lex is the type of guy who would wanna be fair and neutral with Hitler, hear his side.

Lex wants peace and love through civility and neutrality, and this galls leftists.

Edited September 5 by Leo Gura

[Inliytened1]

20 hours ago, Emerald said:

Your viewpoint only works in a casual social setting like if you're choosing friends. Like you can avoid both Jim and Jane if both of them are dishonest (a lot or a little bit) because you have TONS of other people you can choose to spend time with.

And in this context, neither Jim nor Jane is having to navigate the realities of having power and being a politician, which often necessitates some degree of opacity to get elected and do the job effectively.

But, if you're going to vote to choose a commander in chief for the most powerful nation on the planet, and your only two real choices are one politician who is a pathological liar who CONSTANTLY lies every time he opens his mouth AND another politician who lies about as often as your average politician... then you're much wiser to choose the latter to be in the position of power. 

Having a pathological liar in a position of power is very dangerous, as the commander in chief's role is that of a very influential moral leader. And a moral leader who doesn't value truth or honesty at all can convince huge swaths of the population lies that mobilize them towards things that cause harm to themselves or others.

That comes down to choosing the lesser of two evils heres why: if there was a guy or gal that didnt lie at all i would say that having just a "liar" in office is terrible and cannot be allowed.  We have somone completely honest to contrast them with.  Unfortunately, the completely honest person would never get that far in todays politicis and never become a politician.  Which is a travesty.  So yes I agree - i am most likely going to vote Harris.  It's just funny how democrats or leftists wanna single out Trump for things other politicians do as well.  In fact as a politician he probably does them better than any other politician which is why he is so popular in the polls.    Politicians are like cemeteries, everyone is either  lyin- or dying to get in

 

Edited September 5 by Inliytened1

[Joshe]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Lex wants peace and love through civility and neutrality, and this galls leftists.

Maybe they're just skeptical about his desire for peace and love because when they look on the surface, the first thing they see is a rich guy who just so happens to be best friends with two of the most influential people on the planet, Rogan and Musk.

This "want" Lex has is highly unusual and odd for his station. People are right to be skeptical and if you're not or have not at least worked through the skepticism, you have a huge fucking blindspot, and it's weird. 

IMO, Lex believes he wants peace and love, but I think he's thoroughly self-deceived. Of course, he wants those, but he wants the lifestyle of the rich and famous first. You seem to be reluctant to touch upon the self-deception mechanisms that are potentially, and IMO, very likely in play here. 

I don't think Lex is a bad guy. I just think he's living the high life on the lifestyle brand of "peace and love". 

To assert and characterize the primary intentions of Lex and Musk as "wanting peace and love and what's best for humanity", just seems like a total failure of sense-making. TOTAL FAILURE! That's what galls me!

Edited September 5 by Joshe