Trump on the Joe Rogan podcast

[Basman]

2 hours ago, Lyubov said:

The problem I’ve seen with her is that she has completely failed to market herself to the Joe Rogan crowd. Her strategy to get straight men to vote for her is abismal. I’m seeing trump all over podcasts and stuff I would watch and she is nowhere to be seen. Meanwhile she has “trust women”, this feminist crap on large screens at her rallies and in her crowd I see a huge lack of testosterone. I’m tired of the dem party being so effeminate. She could of went more centrist and really campaigned more with the military. She’s too scared to disrupt far left voices in her party. I don’t like how “soft” the dems are, no offense. If it’s the party of democracy it needs to make room for masculinity. I’m not voting for either. 

I feel like this is an issue with left in general, not just in the US. Its why I never vote far left. They are too idealistic and entrenched in their own culture and are bad at politics in my opinion.

[hoodrow trillson]

3 hours of Trump yapping is an ultra fail

 

[DocWatts]

50 minutes ago, MrTruf said:

Hi, Doc. The reality of the situation is that Trump is most likely to be the winner of this election cycle. My question to you is: what’s next?

Hi, MrTruf. In the event of Trump victory, I plan to stay engaged, build grass roots support for midterm elections on the local and state level, push my local representatives to resist implementing discriminatory federal policies towards marginalized people in my state, support the shit out of pro-democracy organizations like the ACLU which will be working to protect American citizens from having their rights and freedoms stripped away.

Also take steps to protect myself and people I care about from state sponsored violence, if it comes to that.

[Lyubov]

3 hours ago, What Am I said:

I'm pretty confident she would have been on more podcasts if she was capable, but her campaign likely did the calculus and realized it would ultimately hurt them more than help. She may be a personable individual with the effeminate crowd you're describing, but based on what I've seen in her interviews, I really doubt her facade-like demeanor would work on Rogan or anything similar.

Why didn’t she go on Joe Rogan and have a deep nuanced discussion? She was a prosecutor and could of perhaps won over the deeper thinking side of Rogan’s audience but instead she went all in on this Beyoncé crap. A Rogan interview would of established her as a strong centrist. 

[What Am I]

6 minutes ago, Lyubov said:

Why didn’t she go on Joe Rogan and have a deep nuanced discussion? She was a prosecutor and could of perhaps won over the deeper thinking side of Rogan’s audience but instead she went all in on this Beyoncé crap. A Rogan interview would of established her as a strong centrist. 

I'm guessing it's due to her campaign realizing she simply isn't capable of having a deep nuanced discussion on those types of podcasts. At least not one that would benefit her electorally.

Someone in her camp must have made the call that more podcast appearances would be to their detriment. They're probably worried about her making vocal flubs or getting caught in situations where she's not sure what to say. It seems like an issue that comes along with not knowing how to improvise an appropriate response.

Edited October 26 by What Am I

[MrTruf]

2 minutes ago, DocWatts said:

Hi, MrTruf. In the event of Trump victory, I plan to stay engaged, build grass roots support for midterm elections on the local and state level, push my local representatives to resist implementing discriminatory federal policies towards marginalized people in my state, support the shit out of pro-democracy organizations like the ACLU which will be working to protect American citizens from having their rights and freedoms stripped away.

Also take steps to protect myself and people I care about from state sponsored violence, if it comes to that.

So, nothing out of the ordinary, I reckon? You seem extremely dedicated to this political spiel. I hope you're getting paid for it (and not just helping others get theirs).

[Raze]

2 minutes ago, What Am I said:

I'm guessing it's due to her campaign realizing she simply isn't capable of having a deep nuanced discussion on those types of podcasts. At least not one that would benefit her electorally.

Someone in her camp must have made the call that more podcast appearances would be to their detriment. They're probably worried about her making vocal flubs or getting caught in situations where she's not sure what to say. It seems like an issue that comes along with not knowing how to improvise an appropriate response.

That’s just dumb. Joe and Lex are extremely non-combative interviewers. It would be a free campaign ad to millions of people to go on their podcasts.

Her campaign advisors are insane if they actually think avoiding podcasts is smart. They are trying to lose at this point. 

Edited October 26 by Raze

[hoodrow trillson]

9 minutes ago, Lyubov said:

Why didn’t she go on Joe Rogan and have a deep nuanced discussion? She was a prosecutor and could have perhaps won over the deeper thinking side of Rogan’s audience but instead she went all in on this Beyoncé crap. A Rogan interview would have established her as a strong centrist. 

Rogan is the most disingenuous dickbag when it comes to interviewing anybody even remotely on the left.  He will nod to and suck off all right wing talking points though!
 

Also loling @ “deeper thinking side of Rogan’s audience”.  This is some hilarious shit right here.

[Nilsi]

The fundamental issue with the Democrats is that they just suck at marketing themselves. You could have all the "right" policies, but if you can't persuade people of that, it won’t matter at all.

This is what people who genuinely want to change things in the world need to understand and focus their efforts on more than anything else.

[Lyubov]

2 minutes ago, What Am I said:

I'm guessing it's due to her campaign realizing she simply isn't capable of having a deep nuanced discussion on those types of podcasts. At least not one that would benefit her electorally.

Someone in her camp must have made the call that more podcast appearances would be to their detriment. They're probably worried about her making vocal flubs or getting caught in situations where she's not sure what to say. It seems like an issue that comes along with not knowing how to improvise an appropriate response.

She went on “call her daddy”… this is fucked up. If she loses it’s because she didn’t get enough straight men. 

Also keep in mind her campaign could be banking heavily on all the effeminate people to get her over the finish line. Dem campaigners are notoriously nervous and they don’t have this outward masculine energy. It’s really all about “never trump” and “trump is so mean.” I don’t want to vote for someone who lacks vision. Trump has vision but it’s shit. Give me someone with the intellectualism and collectivism of the left but the ambition of the right. 

[What Am I]

2 minutes ago, Raze said:

That’s just dumb. Joe and Lex are extremely non-combative interviewers. It would be a free campaign ad to millions of people to go on their podcasts.

Right lol, good point on them being non-combative. In my mind, that demonstrates an even clearer sign of incompetence on her part in terms of being a poor podcast guest.

3 minutes ago, Raze said:

Her campaign advisors are insane if they actually think avoiding podcasts is smart. They are trying to lose at this point. 

It could be smart if it avoids her saying some crazy shit. Three hours is quite a long time.

[Lyubov]

2 minutes ago, hoodrow trillson said:

Rogan is the most disingenuous dickbag when it comes to interviewing anybody even remotely on the left.  He will nod to and suck off all right wing talking points though!
 

Also loling @ “deeper thinking side of Rogan’s audience”.  This is some hilarious shit right here.

Dude it’s this dismissive attitude why the average American thinks left leaning campaigns are tailored for effeminate soy milk drinking, pinky waving people. There are plenty of interesting guests who go into nuanced topics on the Joe Rogan podcast and he does have mature people in his audience. If she wanted to appeal to more Americans she would, she’s banking on far left never trumpers. In a way this sense of fear in them actually could get her to win. She’s banking on abortion ban outrage. Statistically there are more on the left that can’t stomach trump than the other way around with trump voters not wanting Kamala. 

[What Am I]

3 minutes ago, Lyubov said:

She went on “call her daddy”… this is fucked up. If she loses it’s because she didn’t get enough straight men. 

Also keep in mind her campaign could be banking heavily on all the effeminate people to get her over the finish line. Dem campaigners are notoriously nervous and they don’t have this outward masculine energy. It’s really all about “never trump” and “trump is so mean.” I don’t want to vote for someone who lacks vision. Trump has vision but it’s shit. Give me someone with the intellectualism and collectivism of the left but the ambition of the right. 

Yeah, I agree that a combination of attributes is obviously the ideal scenario. I remember that being so clear to me when I first began paying attention to politics. Unfortunately, each side seems to be inclined to repel the other's ideas, often at their own detriment.

[MrTruf]

4 minutes ago, What Am I said:

Someone in her camp must have made the call that more podcast appearances would be to their detriment. They're probably worried about her making vocal flubs or getting caught in situations where she's not sure what to say.

I would guess the same. I watched her recent appearances, and they don’t serve her well. It seems that after every public appearance, the bookies decrease her chances by a couple of points. In my country, you can triple your money if you bet on Kamala. That’s rough.

[What Am I]

14 minutes ago, MrTruf said:

So, nothing out of the ordinary, I reckon? You seem extremely dedicated to this political spiel. I hope you're getting paid for it (and not just helping others get theirs).

I definitely respect that his plan is level-headed and reasonable, though, and likely an effective form of resistance. I'm sure the same can't be said for all others, who may be planning unhinged shit that's difficult to imagine in the event of a Trump presidency.

[What Am I]

3 minutes ago, MrTruf said:

I would guess the same. I watched her recent appearances, and they don’t serve her well. It seems that after every public appearance, the bookies decrease her chances by a couple of points. In my country, you can triple your money if you bet on Kamala. That’s rough.

lol yeah, and I'm sure her campaign made note of her decreased odds after each appearance as well.

[hoodrow trillson]

4 minutes ago, Lyubov said:

Dude it’s this dismissive attitude why the average American thinks left leaning campaigns are tailored for effeminate soy milk drinking, pinky waving people. There are plenty of interesting guests who go into nuanced topics on the Joe Rogan podcast and he does have mature people in his audience. If she wanted to appeal to more Americans she would, she’s banking on far left never trumpers. In a way this sense of fear in them actually could get her to win. She’s banking on abortion ban outrage. Statistically there are more on the left that can’t stomach trump than the other way around with trump voters not wanting Kamala. 

I’ve been watching Rogan since like 2011 lol, he used to be quite nuanced with other topics and guests (and sometimes still is) but after 2020, this political toilet he’s gotten himself into is incredibly embarrassingly biased.  People with half a brain can see this.

Also:

average American thinks left leaning campaigns are tailored for effeminate soy milk drinking, pinky waving people

 

You've been online too much, you’ve already mentioned effeminate twice in this thread describing the left.  Somebody is hella salty for some unknown reason lmao

[enchanted]

8 hours ago, Basman said:

 

He doesn't sound so bad in these interviews. Even in the Bloomberg interview he seems somewhat normal. I don't get why there's all these crazy clips of him and his supporters. 

Edited October 26 by enchanted

[Lyubov]

22 minutes ago, hoodrow trillson said:

I’ve been watching Rogan since like 2011 lol, he used to be quite nuanced with other topics and guests (and sometimes still is) but after 2020, this political toilet he’s gotten himself into is incredibly embarrassingly biased.  People with half a brain can see this.

Also:

 

 

You've been online too much, you’ve already mentioned effeminate twice in this thread describing the left.  Somebody is hella salty for some unknown reason lmao

Dude stop throwing out random ad hoc projections on my stance. I’m stating her demographics issue quite starkly. Her base is largely effeminate and doubling down on the abortion ban while trump has gained black and Latino voters. If you can’t see the truth of the situation that she has image problems, I don’t know what to tell you. Someone in this thread even said that she may look bad on podcasts hence why she’s avoiding them. It’s a real issue for her campaign.

Edited October 26 by Lyubov

[Joshe]

Trumpist like derogatory language, so here ya go:

Anyone weighing whether to vote Kamala or Trump is a straight fucking idiot. It's really simple. You look at January 6 through your eye holes and let that information fall into your brain bucket. Then, if you're not a full on retard, you will say "Oh, shit, Trump is a serious threat to democracy and I should probably do all I can to prevent him from fucking that up, because...you know... that's like some serious shit". That's it! End of sensemaking. Jesus fucking Christ the amount of idiocy on this forum is embarrassing. And you fancy yourselves high-conscious people? 

If you find yourself shirking your responsibility to vote against Trump, your sensemaking apparatus is in dire need of fixing.