***Official Political Discussion Thread***

[dacomeup]

Not calling you any names, but this reads like you are saying you think contrarianism makes for more entertaining political television. Which all things considered, is kinda funny

 

[HNL HI]

"Switch" to water? I wasn't aware it was a binary choice or that people could forego water completely.

I worked with a guy who I only seen drink diet pepsi, asked about drinking water he said "there's water in the ice"

 

[rexanglorum]

I’m getting ads meant for aepps20 again.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

I must have been watching a different Daily Show then

They were probably airing something different for Canada

Because Jon Stewart's critique of the Iraq War was the progressive far-left critique.

Not calling you any names, but this reads like you are saying you think contrarianism makes for more entertaining political television. Which all things considered, is kinda funny

Having a contrary opinion is not enough. Tucker Carlson has "contrary" opinions, Glen Greenwald has "contrary" opinions. They are not interesting to me.

I think it was entertaining to watch a smart person pointing out absurdities that were being uncritically being accepted by the media as in the Iraq war situation.

Which Jon Stewart was really good at doing as a comedian. Which mostly had him making fun of the right, and centrist media, but not exclusively.

It did not feel like a dude just reciting progressive talking points.

If someone was pointing out the same absurdities from a right wing perspectives it would still be compelling.

Tellingly I think the most old Jon Stewart bit he had was not on his show.the lab leak bit on Colbert.

While I don't even agree totally with his conclusion, I think it was classic Jon Stewart exposing an obvious absurdity in the media.


But on the problem which feels to me much more driven by his writing staff you don't get that.
It's recitations on things we've already seen done by various progressive media figures.

If you are going to say the say the same thing as everyone else. The bar is really high interns of excecution to make it interesting.

And imo the problem doesn't reach.

But if you think the problem is as good as the daily show , that's fine minds can differ.

 

[IATT]

 

[IATT]

 

[IATT]

 

[1995]

"Antifa revenge"

 

[rexanglorum]

osh kosh bosh

Feel free to tell me where I’m going wrong.

Are you saying that prime Jon Stewart was once opposed to malignant and powerful forces such as the Bush administration’s drive for war in 2002-2003; but now washed up Jon Stewart accommodates malignant and powerful forces including trans people and those in solidarity with trans people?

That’s how I am reading what you said about Jon Stewart’s decline.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

osh kosh bosh

Feel free to tell me where I’m going wrong.

Are you saying that prime Jon Stewart was once opposed to malignant and powerful forces such as the Bush administration’s drive for war in 2002-2003; but now washed up Jon Stewart accommodates malignant and powerful forces including trans people and those in solidarity with trans people?

That’s how I am reading what you said about Jon Stewart’s decline.

im saying that, Jon Stewart was willing to confront absurdities and enforced media narratives even from ideological allies during the run up to the iraq war and over the course of the his first run on the daily show.

and now he seems unwilling to the same now that the some of the obvious absurdities coming from his own side.

so either he was never committed to this ideal, or he is letting in group pressures influence his judgment. either way this represent a decline either in him or my previous estimation of him.

including trans people and those in solidarity with trans people?

also please let's be clear, I don't want narratives to start I never said anything negative about trans people,
i certainly didn't call them malignant.

I made specific and pointed criticisms of gender affirmative care model, and trans maximalist activists.

 

[aepps20]

I’m getting ads meant for aepps20 again.

 

[IATT]

 

[elpablo21]

Cal Cunningham should have tried this strategy tbh

 

[RustyShackleford]

Having a contrary opinion is not enough. Tucker Carlson has "contrary" opinions, Glen Greenwald has "contrary" opinions. They are not interesting to me.

I think it was entertaining to watch a smart person pointing out absurdities that were being uncritically being accepted by the media as in the Iraq war situation.

Which Jon Stewart was really good at doing as a comedian. Which mostly had him making fun of the right, and centrist media, but not exclusively.

It did not feel like a dude just reciting progressive talking points.

But the thing is, he was using progressive talking points regarding the Iraq War. It is just that progressive talking points were more fringe when compared to other media than now

It is weird you ignore that part when talking about his work on the Iraq War.

If someone was pointing out the same absurdities from a right wing perspectives it would still be compelling.

Tellingly I think the most old Jon Stewart bit he had was not on his show.the lab leak bit on Colbert.

While I don't even agree totally with his conclusion, I think it was classic Jon Stewart exposing an obvious absurdity in the media.


But on the problem which feels to me much more driven by his writing staff you don't get that.
It's recitations on things we've already seen done by various progressive media figures.

If you are going to say the say the same thing as everyone else. The bar is really high interns of excecution to make it interesting.

And imo the problem doesn't reach.

The Daily Show was unique and had a first-mover advantage, his new show doesn't

Stewart went on about Fox News and Bush for years, the Iraq War went bad relatively quickly, so he was not alone on the left in attacking the right's nonsense

Your argument ignores a lot of factors when it comes to differences

But if you think the problem is as good as the daily show , that's fine minds can differ.

I don't think his new show is as good as the Daily Show for various reasons, it is just that your argument is not really compelling

Really seems like you are just hung up about the gender politics thing, and you are using your usual "capture by the left" framing

 

[dinyc3st]

Bruh lol

 

[osh kosh bosh]

But the thing is, he was using progressive talking points regarding the Iraq War. It is just that progressive talking points were more fringe when compared to other media

It is weird you ignore that part when talking about his work on the Iraq War.



The Daily Show was unique and had a first-mover advantage, his new show doesn't

Stewart went on about Fox News and Bush for years, the Iraq War went bad relatively quickly, so he was not alone on the left in attacking the right's nonsense

Your argument ignores a lot of factors

I don't think his new show is as good as the Daily Show for various reasons, it is just that your argument is not really compelling

if what you are saying is, that jon Stewart has always just been reciting progressive talking points.

and was never really authentically committed to his self professed ideological mission.

fine, he didn't decline, he was never that good to begin with.

Personally I think that while yes the media has moved closer to him ideologically. and yes he had first move advantage.

I thought that he'd still be willing to call out absurdity on his own side.
If you think it's because he was always hack that's fine. I think I disagree.

Seems like you are just hung up about the gender politics thing, and you are using your usual "capture by the left" framing

I don't even know what this means. but yes i guess a thing that I think is bad, is bad.
but again we descend into your usual meta argument.

 

[RustyShackleford]

The thing is, the mainstream right-wing view on transgender individuals is absurd, his attacking them with progressive talking points lines up with what he did with a lot of subjects on the Daily Show.

One of the biggest left-wing shows on TV, the Bill Maher show, **** on progressives and their views on gender all the time. It is like a weekly occurrence

MSNBC morning show, is run by conservatives does it too. The NYT publishes critiques of progressivism all the time, even on gender issues. osh kosh bosh you even posted one on NT.

There is no unified message from the left or left-wing sources regarding gender issues like we see often in the right, so what is being asked on Stewart here? Pushback on an absurd media consensus or engage in more inter-coalition culture warring.

 

[letsgetit22]

Edit.. already posted

 

[RustyShackleford]

if what you are saying is, that jon Stewart has always just been reciting progressive talking points.

and was never really authentically committed to his self professed ideological mission.

fine, he didn't decline, he was never that good to begin with.

Personally I think that while yes the media has moved closer to him ideologically. and yes he had first move advantage.

I thought that he'd still be willing to call out absurdity on his own side.
If you think it's because he was always hack that's fine. I think I disagree.

I don't think you are even attempting to respond to what I am saying

Just what you think I am saying

I am saying your comparisons have an issue, because Stewart used progressive attacks against Fox News too

I am not claiming he is a hack, I am not claiming he was not authentically committed to calling out nonsense.

I just think that is important but of context, you are ignoring that undercuts your argument

I don't even know what this means. but yes i guess a thing that I think is bad, is bad.
but again we descend into your usual meta argument.

Spare me

You were just in the NBA thread subtweeting people because your feeling got hurts weeks before and could not let it go

I'm just saying that you have this reactionary hang-up about this one issue that your jump out the window when you get a whiff of it. And I notice that, multiple people do, I am not alone

Progressive views on gender have replaced progressive views on policing

Stop doing this stupid thing where you act like only you have a memory and can observe things

 

[elpablo21]

 

[osh kosh bosh]

The thing is, the mainstream right-wing view on transgender individuals is absurd, his attacking them with progressive talking points lines up with what he did with a lot of subjects on the Daily Show.

One of the biggest left-wing shows on TV, the Bill Maher show, **** on progressives and their views on gender all the time. It is like a weekly occurrence

MSNBC morning show, is run by conservatives does it too. The NYT publishes critiques of progressivism all the time, even on gender issues. osh kosh bosh you even posted one on NT.

There is no unified message from the left or left-wing sources regarding gender issues like we see often in the right, so what is being asked on Stewart here? Pushback on an absurd media consensus or engage in more inter-coalition culture warring.

talking about this issue without exploring the obvious and clear ethical issues and lack of evidence at the heart of it is totally irresponsible.

and the framing of this issue like it's totally uncontroversial settled science, that all these medical orgs have just developed without ideological bias is just flat out objectively wrong,

he either knows this, and he's ignoring it to own the cons which imo sucks.
or he doesn't know this and he's ignorant about the topic.


either way I like to think he wouldn't have done this at the daily show. but maybe im wrong.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

I don't think you are even attempting to respond to what I am saying

Just what you think I am saying

I am saying your comparisons have an issue, because Stewart used progressive attacks against Fox News too

I am not claiming he is a hack, I am not claiming he was not authentically committed to calling out nonsense.

I just think that is important but of context, you are ignoring that undercuts your argument

using progressive attacks is not the issue, it's not like everytime someone says something progressive say it's wrong.


using progressive attacks when the progressive attacks are correct on the merits is one thing.
but then later when you use progressive attacks when on the merits they are deeply problematic.

to me it makes it obvious you are mindlessly reciting talking points from ideological allies
rather than really considering the merits of the arguments.

so either
a] he was always a hack and thus my opinion of him will decline.
b] the quality of his analysis has declined.

either one makes me sad.

 

[RustyShackleford]

talking about this issue without exploring the obvious and clear ethical issues and lack of evidence at the heart of it is totally irresponsible.

and the framing of this issue like it's totally uncontroversial settled science, that all these medical orgs have just developed without ideological bias is just flat out objectively wrong,

he either knows this, and he's ignoring it to own the cons which imo sucks.
or he doesn't know this and he's ignorant about the topic.


either way I like to think he wouldn't have done this at the daily show. but maybe im wrong.

Do you hold yourself to this standard?

Like for once, I wish people like you would discuss with the topic without all the silly culture war nonsense

Because "our healthcare system has a bad incentive for providers generally, and when you map gender-affirming care onto that you will get some bad results" is right there to be argued in depth.

But instead, it is the constant laziness of progressive capture is the cause

That we can discuss what is happening on the median instead of the margin

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Spare me
You were just in the NBA thread subtweeting people because your feeling got hurts weeks before and could not let it go

I'm just saying that you have this reactionary hang-up about this one issue that your jump out the window when you get a whiff of it. And I notice that, multiple people do, I am not alone

Progressive views on gender have replaced progressive views on policing

Stop doing this stupid thing where you act like only you have a memory and can observe things

you can observe what ever you want, I think the observations are stupid.
it's just a way to delegitimize dissent.

you spend days go on and on about conservatives,
but I don't not sit here claiming there is some secret reactionary animus towards conservatives.

that i have secret insight via my ethernet connection.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Because "our healthcare system has a bad incentive for providers generally, and when you map gender-affirming care onto that you will get some bad results" is right there to be argued in depth.

and how do you explain Canada, UK, Sweden also producing similarly bad outcomes.

I can totally agree USA health care system adds a particular kind of fuel to the fire.


of course this is true. but there is a deeper rot withing progressive institutions that allows incoherent ideologies to bloom.

dismiss it as culture war none sense if you want, I think it matters.