Thing$ $till not going well for Joe Rogan, I $ee.

[alincoln 2,371]

1 minute ago, wildcat09 said:

How does anyone have the time to listen to two hours of Elon getting stoned?

Are you really asking this question on CR?    

[Brisketexan 105,139]

2 minutes ago, BrickHorn said:

Could be. Whether the DKE reflects a real inverse relationship between competence and confidence or a mere statistical quirk, it seems DK showed at a minimum that some members of the most incompetent group will wildly overestimate their competence. So Dunning-Kruger remains a useful shorthand for an idiot who believes himself to be an expert. And we’re seeing a lot of those these days.

This.  What's shocking isn't overestimation -- it's the DEGREE of that overestimation.

If someone says "yeah, I can throw a football 60 yards," but it turns out that they can only throw it 50 yards, that's an overestimation, but it isn't one that wildly misses the mark.

But we've got people with no functioning arm, who have never held a football before, shouting as loudly as they can that they can throw a football over them there mountains.  Dude.  They can't toss it 10 feet.

That's what leaves us agog.  The LEVEL of disconnect.

[wildcat09 29,354]

4 minutes ago, alincoln said:

Are you really asking this question on CR?    

If you ever compare us to Elon again I will cut you.

[DonkeyCigars 143]

6 minutes ago, BrickHorn said:

Could be. Whether the DKE reflects a real inverse relationship between competence and confidence or a mere statistical quirk, it seems DK showed at a minimum that some members of the most incompetent group will wildly overestimate their competence. So Dunning-Kruger remains a useful shorthand for an idiot who believes himself to be an expert. And we’re seeing a lot of those these days.

I would argue we've seen a lot of that since time immemorial.

I would say that Joe Rogan is a skeptic, not in the true philosopher sense of skepticism, but more in the anti-intellectual intellectualism someone coined above. That's really about the perfect characterization of it and I think there is a place for it. Again, I think Joe Rogan gets a lot of ire from folks because he doesn't just subscribe or adhere to what a lot of people think are fundamental and mandatory truths of moral ethics and he pushes back on things with some skepticism. I would argue pushing back on things is a healthy mechanism for the machine at large, as stress testing is always a good idea.

Take for example the latest of his snafu's he's getting attention for: Not wanting to get the vaccine for himself. What Joe Rogan is essentially saying is that from his perspective, he is fine with the managed risk that is not getting the vaccine. There isn't enough data, there hasn't been enough time lapsed to feel comfortable with short-medium term effects, and there is a natural distrust from big pharma with respect to side effects and honesty in the regular process, much less a rush job with who knows how many corners being cut or exception acceptances occurring or creative data reporting? He figures, hey, I'm not fat and pretty wealthy and work out and am comfortable with how I'm handling the pandemic-- I'm good without the vaccine.  As of press time I actually feel that way as well. Of course I'm hoping this changes and I'll be wanting to vaccinate late summer/early fall, but right now? Nah, I'm good. You guys go ahead and test it out and I'll watch and see how it goes for you.

What's so wrong with that opinion? Especially if it's a minority one? But even if it's not?

[DonkeyCigars 143]

11 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

This.  What's shocking isn't overestimation -- it's the DEGREE of that overestimation.

If someone says "yeah, I can throw a football 60 yards," but it turns out that they can only throw it 50 yards, that's an overestimation, but it isn't one that wildly misses the mark.

But we've got people with no functioning arm, who have never held a football before, shouting as loudly as they can that they can throw a football over them there mountains.  Dude.  They can't toss it 10 feet.

That's what leaves us agog.  The LEVEL of disconnect.

And I was just making a semantic argument because it's topical and interesting research from McGill, but also because psuedo-intellectuals just love saying "Dunning-Kruger". They can't get enough of it. It's like they are paid a royalty for how many times they get to invoke it's name and it's usually done so because they don't agree and don't have the patience or ability to dissent rationally but instead just want to be dismissive because "you are dumb because you don't believe what I believe and are too dumb to convince otherwise".

Think about it biologically, why aren't there as many non-DK justifiers on message boards as there are people who are stupid? We are a heck of a lot discreet then they are, aren't we? They can't do it enough. They love it. Can't do it enough. Well you know what? This is me from now on: "DK is lazy". Yea!

[Hank Kingsley 20,940]

7 minutes ago, DonkeyCigars said:

What's so wrong with that opinion? Especially if it's a minority one? But even if it's not?

He has, what, 10+ million views/downloads of every episode? That's what's wrong. He has a responsibility with that much influence. 

I don't give a fuck if DonkeyCigars doesn't want to get the vaccine. Nobody knows who you are and your opinion is heard by a minuscule amount of people.  

[Brisketexan 105,139]

1 minute ago, DonkeyCigars said:

And I was just making a semantic argument because it's topical and interesting research from McGill, but also because psuedo-intellectuals just love saying "Dunning-Kruger". They can't get enough of it. It's like they are paid a royalty for how many times they get to invoke it's name and it's usually done so because they don't agree and don't have the patience or ability to dissent rationally but instead just want to be dismissive because "you are dumb because you don't believe what I believe and are too dumb to convince otherwise".

Think about it biologically, why aren't there as many non-DK justifiers on message boards as there are people who are stupid? We are a heck of a lot discreet then they are, aren't we? They can't do it enough. They love it. Can't do it enough. Well you know what? This is me from now on: "DK is lazy". Yea!

That take is not without merit.

The core questions to come out of what we've really been seeing writ large in the past 20 years are these:

1 -- why are people so gullible/inclined to believe what they WANT to believe, in spite of rational evidence to the contrary?

and

2 -- why do people WANT to believe these things?

My hypothesis is that it all comes out to some reptilian, hard-wired functions of tribalism, coupled with the "tribe I was raised in/live among" providing the path for that hard wiring to lead them down.  Once I start from a standpoint of "my tribe believes that all who oppose them are commies, and commies want to take all our stuff and murder us in gulags," then anything that even remotely allows me to characterize someone as having different beliefs ALSO allows me to characterize that person as a murderous commie, and man, my decision-making is easy after that.  After all, who doesn't agree with opposing murderous commies?  And who doesn't like to feel like they're part of something bigger - a great movement to purge our homeland of murderous commies!

My hypothesis is that it all comes back to some animal-level wiring we have that's tied to our survival mechanisms of in-group v. out-group, etc.

[wildcat09 29,354]

Whole lotta "just asking questions" from the board's new old conservative dude.

[DonkeyCigars 143]

2 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

He has, what, 10+ million views/downloads of every episode? That's what's wrong. He has a responsibility with that much influence. 

I don't give a fuck if DonkeyCigars doesn't want to get the vaccine. Nobody knows who you are and your opinion is heard by a minuscule amount of people.  

I don't think that his platform should matter. He's not sharing disinformation or actively trying to push conspiracy theories or whatever, he's sharing an honest assessment of how he perceives the situation which is pretty reasonable. The only reason you are mad about it is if, as I mentioned earlier, you are someone who thinks that what he is skeptical of should be some fundamental, sancrosanct truth and moral ethic.

It's not morally wrong or unethical to not want to be one of the first people to get the vaccine if you don't have comorbidities and want to take that risk. That's American and freedom, baby. 

 

[DonkeyCigars 143]

3 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Whole lotta "just asking questions" from the board's new old conservative dude.

If this is directed at me, I'm not really asking questions as much as stating a point of view and defending why I personally feel that way in an honest manner. Agree or disagree, it's all good, as we are just having a conversation.

But if I were engaging in that old trope of "Just asking questions", there is not a more appropriate place on this board then the Joe Rogan thread.

Edited February 1, 2021 by DonkeyCigars

[BrickHorn 18,234]

10 minutes ago, DonkeyCigars said:

I would say that Joe Rogan is a skeptic, not in the true philosopher sense of skepticism, but more in the anti-intellectual intellectualism someone coined above.

Joe Rogan is a skeptic in the same sense that anyone who holds up a microphone and asks open-ended questions that allow fruitcakes to jabber endlessly without challenge is a “skeptic.” Naive acceptance of the counterintuitive is not skepticism. Nor is uniform contrarianism. 

[DonkeyCigars 143]

5 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

That take is not without merit.

The core questions to come out of what we've really been seeing writ large in the past 20 years are these:

1 -- why are people so gullible/inclined to believe what they WANT to believe, in spite of rational evidence to the contrary?

and

2 -- why do people WANT to believe these things?

My hypothesis is that it all comes out to some reptilian, hard-wired functions of tribalism, coupled with the "tribe I was raised in/live among" providing the path for that hard wiring to lead them down.  Once I start from a standpoint of "my tribe believes that all who oppose them are commies, and commies want to take all our stuff and murder us in gulags," then anything that even remotely allows me to characterize someone as having different beliefs ALSO allows me to characterize that person as a murderous commie, and man, my decision-making is easy after that.  After all, who doesn't agree with opposing murderous commies?  And who doesn't like to feel like they're part of something bigger - a great movement to purge our homeland of murderous commies!

My hypothesis is that it all comes back to some animal-level wiring we have that's tied to our survival mechanisms of in-group v. out-group, etc.

Bravo on the Joe Rogan impersonation and pastiche. You win this thread.

[Brisketexan 105,139]

1 minute ago, DonkeyCigars said:

Bravo on the Joe Rogan impersonation and pastiche. You win this thread.

And I didn't even need roids to do it.

[DonkeyCigars 143]

Just now, BrickHorn said:

Joe Rogan is a skeptic in the same sense that anyone who holds up a microphone and asks open-ended questions that allow fruitcakes to jabber endlessly without challenge is a “skeptic.” Naive acceptance of the counterintuitive is not skepticism. Nor is uniform contrarianism. 

Maybe I'm not as well versed to Joe Rogan as you are because the videos I've seen generally have him questioning/skeptical of things and never accepting the counterintuitive or opposite side of a take. As someone mentioned above he's generally pretty hard to nail down and likes to keep the "talking out of both sides of his mouth option open" from what I've seen, but I don't watch a ton of his stuff.

I'm more of a Theo Von guy. David Foster Wallace was ahead of his stuff with the New Sincerity movement.

[Captainant 27,669]

Just now, DonkeyCigars said:

Maybe I'm not as well versed to Joe Rogan as you are because the videos I've seen generally have him questioning/skeptical of things and never accepting the counterintuitive or opposite side of a take. As someone mentioned above he's generally pretty hard to nail down and likes to keep the "talking out of both sides of his mouth option open" from what I've seen, but I don't watch a ton of his stuff.

I'm more of a Theo Von guy. David Foster Wallace was ahead of his stuff with the New Sincerity movement.

So, you don't watch and haven't watched a ton of JRE, but you're in here defending him and deflecting criticisms of him? Classic Fozzz!

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13,585]

I like " mandatory truth". Occasionally, I order 2+2 to equal 4 and then spend some Me Time flexing in the mirror.

 

Also, it seems like Californians who move to Texas cuz they're sick of California's liberalism usually move to the blue (or blue adjacent) areas of Texas. Plenty of low taxes and freedom from political correctness in Muleshoe to soak up.

[DonkeyCigars 143]

9 minutes ago, Captainant said:

So, you don't watch and haven't watched a ton of JRE, but you're in here defending him and deflecting criticisms of him? Classic Fozzz!

No I watch a good bit, but I'm not an acolyte is the point, or, was the point I was trying to make and was trying to be gracious to Brick.

But man, you are grasping at straws here, what's that mean?

[SizzleChest 8,284]

Joe Rogan doesn't have convictions or beliefs.  Only thoughts and questions.  He makes it up as he goes along and depends on his audience believing that the outcomes of his pretzel logic diatribes are golden notions along the pathway to truth.  But it's just sloppy bullshit contrived to look meaningful.

[Tom 2,959]

1 minute ago, SizzleChest said:

Joe Rogan doesn't have convictions or beliefs.  Only thoughts and questions.  He makes it up as he goes along and depends on his audience believing that the outcomes of his pretzel logic diatribes are golden notions along the pathway to truth.  But it's just sloppy bullshit contrived to look meaningful.

 

To be fair, that's only true outside of weed, DMT, having four presidents, and MMA.  If you come on his show and don't support drug legalization, he will furrow his brow hard at you.  But yeah, anything else like saying Sandy Hook didn't really happen is fair game.

[SizzleChest 8,284]

6 minutes ago, Tom said:

 

To be fair, that's only true outside of weed, DMT, having four presidents, and MMA.  If you come on his show and don't support drug legalization, he will furrow his brow hard at you.  But yeah, anything else like saying Sandy Hook didn't really happen is fair game.

The no convictions or beliefs part was rhetorical, but you made my point better than me.

Edited February 1, 2021 by SizzleChest

[Tom 2,959]

His podcast is one of those in that it's only as good as his guests, since he transitions his opinions and personality into whoever his guest is.  If I were to scroll and see someone I really liked on his podcast, I'd listen. 

Until I saw this thread bumped, I completely forgot Joe has moved 100% over to Spotify.  I didn't even notice he was no longer on my podcast feed.  On his own, he's completely forgettable.   

[Fletch 5,800]

44 minutes ago, DonkeyCigars said:

I don't think that his platform should matter. He's not sharing disinformation or actively trying to push conspiracy theories or whatever, he's sharing an honest assessment of how he perceives the situation which is pretty reasonable. The only reason you are mad about it is if, as I mentioned earlier, you are someone who thinks that what he is skeptical of should be some fundamental, sancrosanct truth and moral ethic.

It's not morally wrong or unethical to not want to be one of the first people to get the vaccine if you don't have comorbidities and want to take that risk. That's American and freedom, baby. 

 

Just the other day he said we can’t trust what the government is telling us about covid now that trumps gone and Biden’s in. Fuck off, Rogan. He’s been fucking terrible through this whole pandemic 

[bad_teammate 13,195]

6 minutes ago, Tom said:

On his own, he's completely forgettable.   

Yes, and his stand-up isn't funny.

[Willfully Horn 8,017]

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

 

That's what leaves us agog.  The LEVEL of disconnect.

I am wondering why DK draws scrutiny that ‘truther’ does not. Spellcheck corrects it to Rueters, and that galls.

Edited February 1, 2021 by Willfully Horn
Stationary. Fuck spellcheck.

[hayden_horn 11,362]

49 minutes ago, Tom said:

His podcast is one of those in that it's only as good as his guests, since he transitions his opinions and personality into whoever his guest is.  If I were to scroll and see someone I really liked on his podcast, I'd listen. 

Until I saw this thread bumped, I completely forgot Joe has moved 100% over to Spotify.  I didn't even notice he was no longer on my podcast feed.  On his own, he's completely forgettable.   

this is such a good point. he tries to be an interviewer like stern (of whom, full disclosure, i'm not the biggest fan), but he's too obsequious to his guests. he basically plays the part of "wondering idiot" to whatever his guest says.  

[seven 1,367]

The most concerning part of this thread is that multiple people have referred to Rogan as a journalist. 

[Fudge Nuggets 19,190]

So exactly what things aren’t going well for this meathead?

[hayden_horn 11,362]

Just now, Fudge Nuggets said:

So exactly what things aren’t going well for this meathead?

this is also a good point. i think he's a moron, but he's a moron with a $100M+ contract, and i'm just a corporate wage slave, so...

[hpslugga 4,058]

3 hours ago, hayden_horn said:

this is such a good point. he tries to be an interviewer like stern (of whom, full disclosure, i'm not the biggest fan), but he's too obsequious to his guests. he basically plays the part of "wondering idiot" to whatever his guest says.  

Oh no doubt. You will never see Rogan challenge even the battiest shit that squirts into his podcast. 

[JohnnyRage 1,617]

 

QED

[Gil Bang 25,958]

fucking meathead

 

 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,870]

he's such a dumb dildo

[Tom 2,959]

Is he already in another new studio in Texas?  What happened to the little red spaceship looking studio he was in a few months ago?

 

Also, from the replies, Bill Burr telling Rogan to just shut up and listen to the CDC.

 

 

[Buzzrock 14,920]

this is such a good point. he tries to be an interviewer like stern (of whom, full disclosure, i'm not the biggest fan), but he's too obsequious to his guests. he basically plays the part of "wondering idiot" to whatever his guest says.  

I don’t think he’s playing a part.

[troph 24,798]

On 2/1/2021 at 9:42 AM, DonkeyCigars said:

I would argue we've seen a lot of that since time immemorial.

I would say that Joe Rogan is a skeptic, not in the true philosopher sense of skepticism, but more in the anti-intellectual intellectualism someone coined above. That's really about the perfect characterization of it and I think there is a place for it. Again, I think Joe Rogan gets a lot of ire from folks because he doesn't just subscribe or adhere to what a lot of people think are fundamental and mandatory truths of moral ethics and he pushes back on things with some skepticism. I would argue pushing back on things is a healthy mechanism for the machine at large, as stress testing is always a good idea.

Take for example the latest of his snafu's he's getting attention for: Not wanting to get the vaccine for himself. What Joe Rogan is essentially saying is that from his perspective, he is fine with the managed risk that is not getting the vaccine. There isn't enough data, there hasn't been enough time lapsed to feel comfortable with short-medium term effects, and there is a natural distrust from big pharma with respect to side effects and honesty in the regular process, much less a rush job with who knows how many corners being cut or exception acceptances occurring or creative data reporting? He figures, hey, I'm not fat and pretty wealthy and work out and am comfortable with how I'm handling the pandemic-- I'm good without the vaccine.  As of press time I actually feel that way as well. Of course I'm hoping this changes and I'll be wanting to vaccinate late summer/early fall, but right now? Nah, I'm good. You guys go ahead and test it out and I'll watch and see how it goes for you.

What's so wrong with that opinion? Especially if it's a minority one? But even if it's not?

The vaccine discussion is classic pseudo intellectual / pseudo scientific bullshit. If logic and reason win every time every single adult American gets the vaccine. The biased thinking leading one to say no is wildly blind and cloaked in a belief one has superior critical thinking skills. Reality is the logic fails in 2 seconds. It’s actually moronic.  Comparing the risk of covid and its unknowns to the risk of vaccines and their unknowns isn’t difficult and makes the decision very easy. He’s not a skeptic he’s an idiot who likes to argue.

Edited April 27, 2021 by troph

[Brisketexan 105,139]

28 minutes ago, troph said:

Comparing the risk of covid and its unknowns to the risk of vaccines and their unknowns isn’t difficult and makes the decision very easy.

This.  The math is overwhelming, and it's not even close.  I've used the analogy before -- it's like the morons who argue AGAINST wearing a seatbelt because of the risk of your car going over a bridge into the river, and then you'll be trapped in the car and drown....telling you that they never did the simple math of "number of wrecks where a seatbelt HURT your chances of survival" vs "number of wrecks where a seatbelt IMPROVED your chances of survival."  Yes, the possibility of a negative outcome from wearing a seatbelt/getting a vaccine exists.....but the odds of THAT outcome are a fraction of the odds of wearing a seatbelt/getting a vaccine PROTECTING you.

TLDR: all of these fucking arguments require that the arguer be really, really, really fucking bad at math.  So....most Americans are vulnerable to this bullshit.

[washparkhorn 9,939]

 

[Neonmoon 38,129]

Rogan, like all “just asking questions” idiots, take one simple truth out of a complex system and defend it to the death, excluding the 8 million other data points and variables. 
 

Yes, a young person has a less likely chance of being harmed by Covid-19, and most likely will be fine as far as we know. That is true. HOWEVER, getting vaccinated not only protects other people from you transmitting the virus to other people, it helps suppress the virus via herd immunity, stops the development of variants, protects you from serious illness from possible variants,    and protects you from any unknown long term complications of Covid. 

Edited April 27, 2021 by Neonmoon

[Brisketexan 105,139]

1 minute ago, washparkhorn said:

 

Also, "if you're a human being, and you say to me 'should I get life/medical advice from meathead Joe Rogan?'  I'll go no."

[troph 24,798]

5 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Rogan, like all “just asking questions” idiots, take one simple truth out of a complex system and defend it to the death, excluding the 8 million other data points and variables. 
 

Yes, a young person has a less likely chance of being harmed by Covid-19, and most likely will be fine as far as we know. That is true. HOWEVER, getting vaccinated not only protects other people from you transmitting the virus to other people, it helps suppress the virus via herd immunity, stops the development of variants, protects you from serious illness from possible variants,    and protects you from any unknown long term complications of Covid. 

And the risks for that young person still weigh heavily toward getting the vaccine. In other words the likelihood of infection and significant complications from covid are drastically higher than the risk of significant complications from the vaccine. 

[Brisketexan 105,139]

3 minutes ago, troph said:

And the risks for that young person still weigh heavily toward getting the vaccine. In other words the likelihood of infection and significant complications from covid are drastically higher than the risk of significant complications from the vaccine. 

DING DING DING.  Morons define the risks from COVID only by considering the most extreme bad outcome (death), disregarding all the other bad outcomes which occur at a 20X rate of frequency (hospitalization, long-term health damage, etc.).....while they simultaneously consider ALL possible negative effects of vaccines (from the super-rare risk of death, all the way down to feeling achy), and then weigh those things against each other equally.  Again....horrible at data, facts, and math.

[DonkeyCigars 143]

14 minutes ago, troph said:

And the risks for that young person still weigh heavily toward getting the vaccine. In other words the likelihood of infection and significant complications from covid are drastically higher than the risk of significant complications from the vaccine. 

I think we are trending for this to be objectively true, but we can’t sit here months ago when I first posted that you quoted and pretend to know that then. We still don’t have great clarity on long term effects, as it is. What you are advocating for is a blind trust to private and public markets which in 2021, you can understand the apprehension. Which is also why BIPOC’s are less likely to be vaccinated to, as discussed previously.

At any rate, FWIW, I’ve actually been fully vaccinated (Pfizer 1&2), so I came around to seeing the value earlier than I thought I would. More power to you.

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,870]

seriously, what kind of dumb dildo takes medical advice from a dumb dildo like Joe Rogan?

[hayden_horn 11,362]

30 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

 

lulz, they get into "virtue signalling" and i'm out. fucking rogan. i think he's trying to somehow slide into that rush limbaugh audience. 

the reason every person should get the vaccine is because there are vulnerable people out there, some of whom might not be able to get the shot. 

get the fucking shot. as soon as 12-15 ages open up, my sons are first in line.

just because your kids, rogan, got it, and "it was nothing" doesn't mean your fucking anecdotal bullshit applies broadly across society. 

['stache 21,815]

33 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Rogan, like all “just asking questions” idiots, take one simple truth out of a complex system and defend it to the death, excluding the 8 million other data points and variables. 
 

Yes, a young person has a less likely chance of being harmed by Covid-19, and most likely will be fine as far as we know. That is true. HOWEVER, getting vaccinated not only protects other people from you transmitting the virus to other people, it helps suppress the virus via herd immunity, stops the development of variants, protects you from serious illness from possible variants,    and protects you from any unknown long term complications of Covid. 

I posted in the "that guy" thread the "devils advocate" guy. The guy who likes to latch onto something to argue against mainstream thinking, in this case, anything from Fauci or the CDC. It's just a dishonest and disingenuous way to get attention. They latch on to people like Rogan who are the same way but with a bigger platform. I seriously don't see any appeal to Rogan, but I guess that's because I'm not a meathead. He and Stanhope sucked when the took over The Man Show and I never really followed him afterwards until I saw his new meathead persona. Fuck anybody who thinks this way.

[NWBuck 8,567]

9 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

seriously, what kind of dumb dildo takes medical advice from a dumb dildo like Joe Rogan?

But he sells health supplements and so forth! Of course he know what he's talking about!!

[MC Fresh Breath 4,074]

dude has been mainlining test/HGH/DMT and eats a shit ton of red meat but vaccines might be unhealthy.

 

Edited April 27, 2021 by MC Fresh Breath

[hayden_horn 11,362]

2 minutes ago, MC Fresh Breath said:

dude has been mainlining test/HGH/DMT and eats a shit ton of red meat but vaccines might be unhealthy.

 

he's also looking pretty, pretty rough.

[Al_4_ISU 12,463]

Well we pretty much covered it. He’s an above average comedian who’s a bit too open minded which makes him think it’s ok to have dudes like Alex Jones on. But also let’s him have on all sorts of interesting characters from some interesting ass professions. I don’t particularly mind SOME of the conspiracy stuff as long as it’s him and some stoner being like “duuuude I bet the Clintons and Bush’s and all them do some Eyes Wide Shut kind of shit! I mean they have to be bro, right!?!?” The shit he pulled with the wildfires along with endorsing Bernie who HAD A FUCKING HEART ATTACK to making fun of Biden for being old and senile all while defending trump all the fucking time, yeah. He’s lost me for the time being. I also think he was spreading some dangerous covid info back in the spring. Could be wrong though.

This is where I’m at. I enjoyed it for a long time, and mostly because of the guests. I also thought Rohan did a good job of checking his own idiocy and not trying to be the voice of anything.

Once he leaned hard into Trump, he lost me.

[Fletch 5,800]

17 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

This is where I’m at. I enjoyed it for a long time, and mostly because of the guests. I also thought Rohan did a good job of checking his own idiocy and not trying to be the voice of anything.

Once he leaned hard into Trump, he lost me.

Yeah I’ll listen to the clips that are like “Joe and (some guy) talk about how crazy the Amazon Jungle is!!!” I won’t watch any of his political or covid takes, unless Burr is on haha. But yeah, he’s at his best when he had on journalist and physicists and whatnot or someone awesome like Burr. Him having Crenshaw on is downright criminal. Same with Shapiro. Stick to mind blowing stoner shit or shooting the shit with other comedians, please