Jon Stewart would be a pretty good candidate. I mean, totally horrible as a president in objective terms, but would work as a pretty great counterpoint to Trump.
I don’t know why you think he wouldn’t be a good President. A presidents job is largely rhetorical and Stewart is good at that. He also showed his mettle in his support and advocacy for 9/11 first responders.
I mean I don’t disagree with you completely, but Stewart being the president would be like Trump (or, say, Reagan) in the way that none of them are politicians or have seriously studied the subject. Those people are some kind of entertainers.
I’m not sure that’s a fair comparison. Stewart has never served as an elected official, but he has ‘seriously studied’ politics his whole life. That’s more relevant than Trump or Reagan.
Doesn’t mean that all those people willingly sat down for an interview with him knowing he was going to be asking questions. Hard questions. Questions that they knew people were asking. All of those interviews… he served the purpose of a sock puppet.
He asked hard questions that embarrassed the interviewees, surfaced their hypocrisy/cravenness, etc. and the purpose served was to… support and defend them like a sock puppet? What?
I mean what kind of moron would expose them to that kind of media coverage knowing it would be that kind of media coverage?
Do you really think all those people go on thinking he’s gonna softball? No. Do you think they think they’re smarter or better? A few, maybe, but not most.
And all of those interviewees had media teams that set it up- who know all of this
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but sometimes it’s better to take the lumps and move on; and Stewart allows them to do that without being totally bloodthirsty.
Yes he’s “brutal”, but he’s also fair. He lets them respond. Gives airtime to their message while asking questions that are gonna get asked anyway.
Which is a damn sight more than what most media would be if there was no interview.
Watch the Gensler interview. Do you really think a the head of a federal chairperson doesn’t have access to a better space than an emptied-out-cubical-land? That’s all imaging to convince you of Gary’s narrative.
And Stewart has to more or less go with it; because otherwise the next person isn’t going to agree to sit down to an interview with him. They’ll go get someone else.
Do you really think all those people go on thinking he’s gonna softball? No.
Ask Tucker Carlson and Bill O’Reilly how they feel about that. Barrack Obama and John Kerry both had their own “give me a break here” moments with Stewart during their respective campaigns.
Jon Stewart would be a pretty good candidate. I mean, totally horrible as a president in objective terms, but would work as a pretty great counterpoint to Trump.
I don’t know why you think he wouldn’t be a good President. A presidents job is largely rhetorical and Stewart is good at that. He also showed his mettle in his support and advocacy for 9/11 first responders.
That berating he gave them was amazing. Also gave me my favorite pic of McConnell
This is one of my favorite pic’s of all time and it also shows precisely how to navigate things like the house and senate from the outside.
The jester should not be the king. The jester should be the jester. It is a necessary role.
I mean I don’t disagree with you completely, but Stewart being the president would be like Trump (or, say, Reagan) in the way that none of them are politicians or have seriously studied the subject. Those people are some kind of entertainers.
I mean, Zelenskyy?
Guy was basically an entertainer, not too dissimilar from Stewart even in style and content.
And when the shit hit the fan, this is who he proved to be:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9JVlYj2DX8
I’m not sure that’s a fair comparison. Stewart has never served as an elected official, but he has ‘seriously studied’ politics his whole life. That’s more relevant than Trump or Reagan.
Also he strikes me as the person to listen to experts. Not experts (1)
(1) paid for by corporate interests
Because he’s always been someone’s useful idiot.
Is he funny? Yes.
Does he have some pretty good takes? I think so.
Do I enjoy his interviews? Sure.
Doesn’t mean that all those people willingly sat down for an interview with him knowing he was going to be asking questions. Hard questions. Questions that they knew people were asking. All of those interviews… he served the purpose of a sock puppet.
He asked hard questions that embarrassed the interviewees, surfaced their hypocrisy/cravenness, etc. and the purpose served was to… support and defend them like a sock puppet? What?
Recondition their image, yes.
I mean what kind of moron would expose them to that kind of media coverage knowing it would be that kind of media coverage?
Do you really think all those people go on thinking he’s gonna softball? No. Do you think they think they’re smarter or better? A few, maybe, but not most.
And all of those interviewees had media teams that set it up- who know all of this
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but sometimes it’s better to take the lumps and move on; and Stewart allows them to do that without being totally bloodthirsty.
Yes he’s “brutal”, but he’s also fair. He lets them respond. Gives airtime to their message while asking questions that are gonna get asked anyway.
Which is a damn sight more than what most media would be if there was no interview.
Watch the Gensler interview. Do you really think a the head of a federal chairperson doesn’t have access to a better space than an emptied-out-cubical-land? That’s all imaging to convince you of Gary’s narrative.
And Stewart has to more or less go with it; because otherwise the next person isn’t going to agree to sit down to an interview with him. They’ll go get someone else.
Ask Tucker Carlson and Bill O’Reilly how they feel about that. Barrack Obama and John Kerry both had their own “give me a break here” moments with Stewart during their respective campaigns.
deleted by creator
Way to miss the fucking point.