2024 Presidential Election Thread - Let's keep the party going.

[Surly Bevo 24899]

1 minute ago, Horn Under a Bad Sign said:

I think it might for a few. Not many who were there, of course, because they are cultists. But, yes, a few. As I said, it's easy to understand. What kind of person drives his supporters out into the desert and then ditches them in the darkness?

The kind of guy who also

https://www.gcrr.org/addendum-b

 

[Brian Fantana 6676]

39 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

So you're saying within the group of people who knows who he is, more people know who he is? That's not really saying anything, so you can understand the confusion. 

After all, out of the people who know who I am, I'm more famous than Taylor Swift. 

No, that isn't what I'm saying. Within the spaces he exists, aka the right/right leaning influencer space, the MMA space, the broad podcasting space which leans heavily right wing overall, the anti-vaxxer/conspiracy theory kook space, etc etc Kamala Harris is not a well known figure (beyond clips/sound bites from their favorite content creator). She's more well known now, because she's the candidate, but before that I guarantee you at least 60% of those people couldn't name Biden's VP off the top of their head.

Don't take my word for it, you can just go look at worldwide Google trends over the past 5 years or whatever the fuck.

Regardless, it's not really worth arguing about. The overall point is it's beneficial for her to get her face and voice in front of Joe's very large [and very ignorant about her and her politics] audience, and not in the form of clips or sound bites broken down by their favorite talking heads. Her going on the show doesn't lend Rogan any clout, he's already got that locked down. The point is to generate clout for her in the minds of his audience.

36 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Ok, Joe Rogan and Andrew Schulz are not for "normies". WTF. Their base consists of ignorant bros who think they're smart/funny and the majority lean heavily towards Trump.

Yeah, you're not wrong, that's the reason I believe it's a slam dunk for her to go on Rogan. Those bros you speak of, there are a lot of them. And there are also a lot of people that watch both of those podcasts that aren't meatheads, but people who aren't necessarily as online and/or plugged into the political sphere as most of us are, and only base their opinions on what they see in mainstream American media. Like you said, most of those people are voting Trump, or at least leaning Trump.

That whole sphere Rogan and Schulz inhabit contains millions of Americans, and you're not trying to reach the willfully ignorant bros that wanna turn themselves into a ninja turtle like Rogan has, you're trying to reach the politically ignorant [but not complete asshole] "normie" that has a Trump sign in his yard because most of his friends/family do, and might tune into Rogan because he has a UFC fighter on that they like or whatever the fuck, and might just tune in and watch Kamala Harris have a conversation with a person they [think they] relate to before their eyes and consider voting for her.

Edited October 15 by Brian Fantana
sp

[atomheartbevo 89589]

5 hours ago, Js1 said:

Harris went IN on the Orange Fascist and his enemy within comments tonight in Erie, PA

Huge crowd too

3 hours ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Tens of thousands in attendance.

Bigly crowds.

It's pretty wild how unenthusiastic Trump supporters are as a whole.  

[mchookem 16304]

3 hours ago, Jive Turkey said:

 

what is even happening 😳

[Bullneck 19070]

5 hours ago, Ted Lange said:

 

Noem - "After we leave I want to show you something. Just you and me.  Alone."

Trump - "Is it your boobies?  Where are we going, anyway?"

Noem - "We're going to the gravel pit."

Edited October 15 by Bullneck

[bluto 4905]

https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-town-hall-concern-dancing-24290775c8e11223fde1d440a7a5cf7c

[tx 3 putt 76773]

[SizzleChest 8282]

3 hours ago, Brian Fantana said:

No, that isn't what I'm saying. Within the spaces he exists, aka the right/right leaning influencer space, the MMA space, the broad podcasting space which leans heavily right wing overall, the anti-vaxxer/conspiracy theory kook space, etc etc Kamala Harris is not a well known figure (beyond clips/sound bites from their favorite content creator). She's more well known now, because she's the candidate, but before that I guarantee you at least 60% of those people couldn't name Biden's VP off the top of their head.

Don't take my word for it, you can just go look at worldwide Google trends over the past 5 years or whatever the fuck.

Regardless, it's not really worth arguing about. The overall point is it's beneficial for her to get her face and voice in front of Joe's very large [and very ignorant about her and her politics] audience, and not in the form of clips or sound bites broken down by their favorite talking heads. Her going on the show doesn't lend Rogan any clout, he's already got that locked down. The point is to generate clout for her in the minds of his audience.

Yeah, you're not wrong, that's the reason I believe it's a slam dunk for her to go on Rogan. Those bros you speak of, there are a lot of them. And there are also a lot of people that watch both of those podcasts that aren't meatheads, but people who aren't necessarily as online and/or plugged into the political sphere as most of us are, and only base their opinions on what they see in mainstream American media. Like you said, most of those people are voting Trump, or at least leaning Trump.

That whole sphere Rogan and Schulz inhabit contains millions of Americans, and you're not trying to reach the willfully ignorant bros that wanna turn themselves into a ninja turtle like Rogan has, you're trying to reach the politically ignorant [but not complete asshole] "normie" that has a Trump sign in his yard because most of his friends/family do, and might tune into Rogan because he has a UFC fighter on that they like or whatever the fuck, and might just tune in and watch Kamala Harris have a conversation with a person they [think they] relate to before their eyes and consider voting for her.

I consider myself a “normie” (although I avidly avoid listening to Rogan, I sure as hell know who he is and have friends who listen to him).

Harris went on Call Her Daddy week before last.  Host is Alex Cooper. Huge audience.  Near equivalent to Rogan in terms of number of listeners.

I had no fucking clue who Alex Cooper was or anything about her podcast before Harris went on it.

You are painfully trying to associate “normies” with “people who know famous podcasters”.  Shit man, there’s a lot of people that still have cable TV or a satellite dish (DirecTV/Dish) and have never listened to a podcast.  They are “normies” as much or more than those you are describing - they just consume their media differently.  If you are going to associate Rogan to the masses, it’s almost exclusively males  that are conservative or libertarian, wear Oakleys, consider themselves widely open to new ideas (but not really), I.e. pseudo intellectuals, smoke pot, and and get hard whenever someone mentions the word “octagon”.

 

[WhatTheBuck 28764]

9 hours ago, Pancho said:

The “Harris is slipping support among Black men” is a fucking myth. It’s being put out there on purpose. 

If Harris loses, it will be solely because of the lack of the White vote. Her support among Blacks (and Black men) is fucking sky high.

Jesus Christ.

You should write a letter to Barack Obama and let him know because he seems to be under the impression that support isn’t as high for Kamala Harris as it was for him. If it’s a myth then it’s a myth perpetuated by the Harris campaign and Democratic pollsters. I just saw it reported on BBC this morning that support is slipping among black men. It’s still high but not as high as it has been in recent elections. In a tight election, every vote matters. 

[Francisco 2.0 32379]

There's no way Trump knew how much this guy is making grifting. 

https://www.thedailybeast.com/donald-trumps-campaign-manager-chris-lacivitas-multi-million-payday-revealed?ref=home?ref=home

 

Quote

The co-manager of Donald Trump’s White House campaign has raked in $22 million and counting from the Republican nominee’s political operation in just two years, the Daily Beast has learned.

Chris LaCivita, an influential GOP operative, reaped a $19 million financial windfall in 2022 when he served as a “strategic consultant” to two Trump-affiliated super PACs, campaign finance records show. Then, after joining the Trump campaign, he negotiated three contracts that gave his tiny LLC a generous cut of Trump’s TV and digital ads, direct mail and other campaign spending. He also collected retainers that at times amounted to $75,000 a month, according to multiple sources familiar with the campaign’s finances and campaign finance records.

 

Quote

That has netted LaCivita’s consulting firm $3 million from the campaign, records show, and there are plans to award his firm nearly $5 million more by the time the election is over—including a $150,000 bonus if Trump wins, according to a source familiar with an informal and controversial “audit” ordered up by another campaign senior adviser, Corey Lewandowski. The campaign disputes the figure for the additional monies owed to LaCivita, but did not offer an alternative estimate.

By contrast, the campaign’s other co-manager, Susie Wiles, is a volunteer, while Jennifer O’Malley Dillon, Kamala Harris’ campaign manager, is paid $13,442 a month, campaign finance records show.

 

 

Quote

It is hardly unheard of for political consultants to collect huge sums from presidential campaigns and super political action committees, or PACs. And LaCivita, a veteran political knife-fighter, is not the first to get paid as a senior adviser while simultaneously collecting commissions for media ad buys and direct mail—a practice some describe as “double-dipping.”

But campaign finance experts say LaCivita’s compensation is unusually high, and potentially raises questions about whether his personal stake in the campaign’s ad buys and direct mail operations has influenced key decisions about how the campaign has been spending its money.

 

Spoiler

“I’ve never heard of a package that rich in a presidential campaign,” said Trevor Potter, a former chairman of the Federal Election Commission who served as the chief counsel for John McCain’s presidential campaign. Calling the totals flowing to LaCivita’s company “eye-opening,” Potter said they also inevitably raise questions as to what extent others in the campaign had approved or were even aware of them.

The stunning sums being made by LaCivita, 58, have other Republicans accusing him of “cashing in,” even while the campaign itself is strapped for cash and badly lagging behind the Kamala Harris campaign in spending power.

LaCivita defended his compensation and fired back at his detractors in a response he emailed to the Daily Beast.

“This entire story is fabricated nonsense, cooked up by talentless grifters who lack the integrity and skill to contribute to President Trump’s continued electoral success,” he said. “Every member of this team, myself included, has been fairly and responsibly compensated, with the priority of electing President Trump at the forefront of every strategic and financial decision we have made.

“While the individuals responsible for attempting this kamikaze operation are known, their self-serving attempt to defame me will not distract us from continuing to deliver for President Trump and winning this election.”

Advancing Strategies, LaCivita’s company, has no apparent website and appears to be headquartered in his home, which is outside Richmond, Virginia, according to state corporate records.

A senior campaign official argued that the amounts recorded on campaign finance records as being paid to Advancing Strategies are misleading because a chunk of these are “pass through” payments to other vendors. The official said all of LaCivita’s contracts—which were signed by the campaign’s treasurer—had been approved by the campaign’s lawyers.

Questions over LaCivita’s consulting fees come at a sensitive time, with the Trump operation lagging far behind Harris’ fundraising juggernaut. Her teamannounced last week it had raised more than $1 billion, a staggering amount that allows Democrats to flood battleground states with attack ads in the final stretch of a neck-and-neck race.

That has left Trump increasingly grumpy in private meetings with donors, reportedly even at times berating some for not coughing up enough cash.

His campaign, which had raised a little more than $300 million by the end of August, is hoping to help bridge the gap with a gala fundraiser at Mar-a-Lago this Wednesday complete with a “candlelight dinner” and private round tables—for couples willing to give or raise $924,600.

The Trump campaign, run by LaCivita, has become increasingly concerned about its huge disadvantage to Harris. Trump himself is running a fundraiser at Mar-a-Lago on Wednesday and while the maximum amounts are eye-watering, it is possible to be there for as little as $5,000.

 

Couples who donate $250,000 or raise $500,000 also get a roundtable, but without the candlelight, an invitation shared with the Daily Beast shows. The lowest entry point is $5,000 per individual. All contributions go toward a joint fundraising committee to benefit the presidential campaign, Trump’s Save America PAC, the Republican National Committee and state GOP parties.

LaCivita’s deals mean that if the cash from the Mar-a-Lago event is spent on ads, he will benefit from those, too.

The questions about LaCivita’s consulting fees have been quietly circulating in GOP circles for some time.

Last year, a super PAC backing Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis circulated an “opposition research” dossier depicting LaCivita as a grifter with no political principles. The memo, a copy of which was obtained by the Daily Beast, highlighted the huge sums LaCivita’s firm had collected from two Trump super PACs—$15.7 million from Make America Great Again and $4 million from Save America—during the 2022 midterm election cycle, contending the payments were far in excess of what LaCivita had received in previous campaigns.

The memo accused LaCivita of “cashing in on Trump” and “personal enrichment.” (It also sought to portray LaCivita as a political flip-flopper, noting that in 2015, when he was working for Rand Paul’s presidential campaign, he co-authored news op-eds describing Trump as a “fake conservative” and a “chameleon.” The senior campaign official responded: “I don’t think anybody questions his bona fides” as a pro-Trump conservative.)

The issue of LaCivita’s salary and campaign spending was revived in August, when Trump brought back Lewandowski, his campaign manager in 2016, in an apparent effort to regain momentum after Harris started to pull ahead in public polling.

Known as a combative and polarizing figure, Lewandowski—who wasn’t taking a salary—was given no clear role in the campaign, although at times he reportedly referred to himself as “the chairman.” He soon showed up at campaign headquarters and started interviewing aides about how campaign funds were being spent. 

He then ordered the informal “audit,” or review of the campaign’s books, resulting in a nasty public blow-up over his role in the campaign.

“Corey was going around and acting like he was a Bain consultant,” one Trump insider told the Daily Beast, referring to Bain & Company, the global management consulting firm once headed by Mitt Romney. “People thought it was weird.”

Lewandowski’s efforts were widely viewed as an attempt to trigger Trump’s notorious fear of being ripped off. It was no surprise that Lewandowski focused on LaCivita, who he apparently viewed as a rival for power.

LaCivita had joined the Trump campaign shortly after the November 2022 elections when he signed a contract that guaranteed him a monthly retainer of $30,000, the Daily Beast has established. The figure is especially striking given that Wiles, his co-campaign manager, wasn’t taking a salary at all.

In addition, the contract gave LaCivita’s firm a 3 percent cut of the first $100 million the campaign spent on TV ads, with his commission dropping to 1.5 percent on the next $100 million.

He was also promised a $150,000 bonus if Trump won the Republican nomination, a standard arrangement for political campaigns. The contract was signed by Bradley Crate, the campaign’s treasurer.

Asked to what degree Trump signed off on the details, the senior campaign official said: “Any and all conversations that senior staff have with President Trump are confidential. All contracts were negotiated and approved by legal counsel as is appropriate.”

The official added that campaign finance reports showing hefty payments to Advancing Strategies under the contract were misleading because “much” of these funds were “pass through” payments to other vendors” and “was not income” to LaCivita’s company.

LaCivita’s compensation grew even more in June of 2023 when he renegotiated his contract to give him an additional $45,000 a month retainer for “voter contact consulting,” boosting his monthly take to $75,000. The new contract also added an extra four per cent commission for LaCivita on all campaign digital ads on top of the 3 per cent commission he was still receiving on TV ads.

Throughout the Republican primary contest, the campaign spent heavily, paying LaCivita’s Advancing Strategies firm $1.1 million for placing TV ads and for video production services, as well as $776,000 for direct mail. One of the questions raised by Lewandowski was whether some of these payouts, especially for direct mail, were the best use of campaign funds given Trump’s commanding lead in the polls over his GOP rivals throughout the primary season.

The Trump campaign official defended the large expenditures for direct mail by LaCivita’s company during the primary season, saying “in primaries, the voting electorate is older, relies less on digital advertising to obtain information and mail has consistently proven its worth.”

By April of this year, Trump had clinched the GOP nomination and LaCivita renegotiated his contract again. This time, the $45,000 retainer to pay Advancing Strategies for voter contacts was dropped after the Federal Election Commission apparently loosened rules that allowed much of that activity to be handed off to super PACs, which can raise unlimited funds. But the voter contact retainer was replaced by another $20,000-a-month retainer from the Republican national Committee. And, having guided Trump to victory in the GOP primaries and collected his first $150,000, LaCivita is in line for another one of equal size if Trump emerges victorious.

The source familiar with the review of the campaign’s books conducted by Lewandowski said it showed that Advancing Strategies was also due another $4.7 million from the campaign, bringing his total estimated take to $7.7 million. The Trump campaign disputed those figures, but did not offer what it considers correct numbers.

Lewandowski, who still travels on Trump’s campaign plane, declined comment for this story.

LaCivita, a Marine who fought in the first Gulf War, had toiled for years in Virginia political races. But he burst onto the national scene when he crafted the brutal “Swift Boat” ads that derided Kerry’s military record in Vietnam—a controversial line of attack that Sen. John McCain called “dishonest and dishonorable.” LaCivita, for his part, has consistently defended the ads as faithfully representing the views of some Vietnam vets, telling Mother Jones this year ,”I don’t really care what people think.”

The ads cemented LaCivita’s reputation as a no-holds-barred political brawler, one he reinforced four years later when he founded a political dark money group that ran ads trying to tie Barack Obama to former Weather Underground radical Bill Ayers.

“What he’s mainly known for is being cutthroat,” said Larry Sabato, a University of Virginia professor who once wrote a book on political consultants, and has known LaCivita for decades. “This is a guy who will come after you with anything he could. He’s among the toughest I’ve ever met in politics. In that sense, he’s perfect for a Trump campaign of revenge and retribution.”

But Sabato added that he’s not surprised by the huge amounts he is collecting working for Trump. In his own conversations with LaCivita, the operative had a complaint. “He felt he was dramatically underpaid in some prior campaigns,” Sabato said. LaCivita “wanted a sinecure,” he added, and appears to have found one—a lucrative one at that—by tying himself to Donald Trump.

 

 

[ChiTownDoc 21118]

8 hours ago, Chuckie Finster said:

What’s all this talk tonight about “validating”? Joe Rogan has the number one podcast in the world. There is nothing Kamala could do to validate him more than the general public already has.

Yeah it’s not like he ever claims to be smart.  He basically admits to be a popular dope.  There’s no validating.  If Kamala was a moron, like her opponent, maybe I’d have second thoughts but she’s not.  She should take the opportunity if it’s there…

[mdmost 42993]

I don't mind the idea of her on Rogan. I think it will be a great opportunity for her to dispel a lot of notions about her. Ultimately, it won't move the needle that much for the morons who tune in but it would show she's not afraid of questions that would be outside her comfort zone. The Fox News interview is in the same vein. Maybe it converts some people who were on the fence that she won't bring about the end of the world if elected as they have been led to believe. 

Edited October 15 by mdmost

[HenryJames 65969]

[Hank Kingsley 20900]

7 hours ago, Brian Fantana said:

Yeah, you're not wrong, that's the reason I believe it's a slam dunk for her to go on Rogan. Those bros you speak of, there are a lot of them. And there are also a lot of people that watch both of those podcasts that aren't meatheads, but people who aren't necessarily as online and/or plugged into the political sphere as most of us are, and only base their opinions on what they see in mainstream American media. Like you said, most of those people are voting Trump, or at least leaning Trump.

That whole sphere Rogan and Schulz inhabit contains millions of Americans, and you're not trying to reach the willfully ignorant bros that wanna turn themselves into a ninja turtle like Rogan has, you're trying to reach the politically ignorant [but not complete asshole] "normie" that has a Trump sign in his yard because most of his friends/family do, and might tune into Rogan because he has a UFC fighter on that they like or whatever the fuck, and might just tune in and watch Kamala Harris have a conversation with a person they [think they] relate to before their eyes and consider voting for her.

I don't necessarily disagree with the strategy to go on Rogan, I just reject the idea that these are "normal" people. You're right, there's a shitload of them. But that is more of an indictment on what has happened to too many men in this country. 

Also, Rogan knows where his bread is buttered. While he seems "open" to discussion on many topics, my guess is he'd be combative with Kamala as to not risk losing a significant chunk of his listeners. 

[Chuckie Finster 22688]

I don't necessarily disagree with the strategy to go on Rogan, I just reject the idea that these are "normal" people. You're right, there's a shitload of them. But that is more of an indictment on what has happened to too many men in this country. 
Also, Rogan knows where his bread is buttered. While he seems "open" to discussion on many topics, my guess is he'd be combative with Kamala as to not risk losing a significant chunk of his listeners. 

Rogan isn’t Ben Shapiro or JD Vance, he’s not a bully who thrives on debate. He might frame his questions from a right wing point of view, but he’ll quickly back down and nod along to whatever Kamala says. He might talk shit about her the next day, but he’s not built to make the interview combative.

[Js1 85223]

4 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

Rogan isn’t Ben Shapiro or JD Vance, he’s not a bully who thrives on debate. He might frame his questions from a right wing point of view, but he’ll quickly back down and nod along to whatever Kamala says. He might talk shit about her the next day, but he’s not built to make the interview combative.

Yeah, everything I am reading is that he’s kind of a dream interviewer. He just nods along and goes woah! And wow! And doesn’t really push back or get aggressive 

[Radical Larry 28539]

 

[wildcat09 29324]

16 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

Rogan isn’t Ben Shapiro or JD Vance, he’s not a bully who thrives on debate. He might frame his questions from a right wing point of view, but he’ll quickly back down and nod along to whatever Kamala says. He might talk shit about her the next day, but he’s not built to make the interview combative.

This. 
 

The point of going on Rogan isn’t to win a lot of votes, it’s to persuade his audience not to vote for Trump. And it’s very low risk, Rogan isn’t a challenging interview. It’s fine.

[Brisketexan 104924]

Well, I literally had a nightmare last night that TFG won the election with a national popular vote margin of 50-45 (5 went to dipshit third party types).  Utterly fucking depressing.  And THEN, it got weird.  On election night, after all the parties wound down, he was occupying a shared suite -- like, we shared a bathroom -- with me and my crew.  The horrific part: he left the bathroom door open, and we saw his saggy old ass.  The great part: my crew was two attractive women, and they were not shy about prancing around the room with no clothes on.  So I'm petty sure I suggested a threesome to get the horrible evening's events out of our minds, and they enthusiastically agreed.

So, turned a nightmare into a pretty nice scenario.  Sometimes I'm not sure what to do with my subconscious mind.

[Js1 85223]

I mean, I had a dream last night where the only way I could wake up was to be kicked in the head with a soccer ball, but no one could bend it like Beckham and kept missing.

Gotta lay off that spicy food for dinner.

[Brisketexan 104924]

7 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Gotta lay off that spicy food for dinner.

Yeah...choosing a dinner of three leftover slices of Conan's Savage, add jalapenos and anchovies, may have been a touch unwise.  

I mean, Part II of the dream was great.  Just had to get through the horror of Part I to get there.

[Fudge Nuggets 19169]

Well going on the Girl Daddy podcast didn't do shit to help the polls so I'm sure going on Rogan will be different.

Fuck podcasts, get back to dunking on dotard, couch fucker and all the other weirdos 24/7.

[hookemATL 11669]

I had a dream we beat the fuck out of OU and all everyone could do was bitch about funnel cakes, coupons, water lines, and DART. 
 

then I banged all your moms. 

[Js1 85223]

1 minute ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Well going on the Girl Daddy podcast didn't do shit to help the polls

LOL did you have some expectation that a podcast appearance a week ago would cause bigly movement in the polls? 

[Pancho 44656]

2 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Well going on the Girl Daddy podcast didn't do shit to help the polls so I'm sure going on Rogan will be different.

It’s too early for that. 

[Js1 85223]

It's Pennsylvania day for the campaign (except Harris) - 

VP Harris in Michigan (I think) after being in Erie yesterday
Joe Biden in Philly
Jill Biden in the Philly burbs
Tim Walz in Pittsburgh
Gwen Walz in Harrisburg and Altoona

VP Harris is in Philadelphia tomorrow + Fox News interview taping

 

[Hank Kingsley 20900]

6 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Well, I literally had a nightmare last night that TFG won the election with a national popular vote margin of 50-45 (5 went to dipshit third party types).  Utterly fucking depressing.  And THEN, it got weird.  On election night, after all the parties wound down, he was occupying a shared suite -- like, we shared a bathroom -- with me and my crew.  The horrific part: he left the bathroom door open, and we saw his saggy old ass.  The great part: my crew was two attractive women, and they were not shy about prancing around the room with no clothes on.  So I'm petty sure I suggested a threesome to get the horrible evening's events out of our minds, and they enthusiastically agreed.

So, turned a nightmare into a pretty nice scenario.  Sometimes I'm not sure what to do with my subconscious mind.

[Brian Fantana 6676]

43 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

Rogan isn’t Ben Shapiro or JD Vance, he’s not a bully who thrives on debate. He might frame his questions from a right wing point of view, but he’ll quickly back down and nod along to whatever Kamala says. He might talk shit about her the next day, but he’s not built to make the interview combative.

 

38 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Yeah, everything I am reading is that he’s kind of a dream interviewer. He just nods along and goes woah! And wow! And doesn’t really push back or get aggressive 

 

25 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

This. 
 

The point of going on Rogan isn’t to win a lot of votes, it’s to persuade his audience not to vote for Trump. And it’s very low risk, Rogan isn’t a challenging interview. It’s fine.

The flip side of this is his interview with Dr. Sanjay Gupta, where he got pretty debate-lordy and somewhat combative. The conversation centered mostly around the COVID vaccines. He can get this way if the topic at hand is one of his few true hot buttons, but I don't think there's much risk of that with anything he and Harris would talk about.

[HenryJames 65969]

[Pancho 44656]

[Pato del Muerto 52462]

2 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

The story of Minneapolis is cops killing people and the Vikings never winning the superb owl, right?

[Js1 85223]

2 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

Isn’t Minneapolis, like,  thriving? 

[royiv 9193]

There’s a Joe Rogan thread in CR for all of you Rogan jock sniffers. The obsession some of you guys have with Rogan as the panacea for Harris is bizarre.

[Hank Kingsley 20900]

52 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

Rogan isn’t Ben Shapiro or JD Vance, he’s not a bully who thrives on debate. He might frame his questions from a right wing point of view, but he’ll quickly back down and nod along to whatever Kamala says. He might talk shit about her the next day, but he’s not built to make the interview combative.

Maybe combative was the wrong word, but I don't think Rogan would be as submissive in an interview with Kamala. 

 

[SubliminalHorn 6770]

Just now, royiv said:

There’s a Joe Rogan thread in CR for all of you Rogan jock sniffers. The obsession some of you guys have with Rogan as the panacea for Harris is bizarre.

Panacea? Who said that? 

[BamaATL 16592]

So my wife watches the local Fox news program in the morning, they are doing every story imaginable to attempt to ignore early voting.  Thus far, we got one 2 min blurb about it, along with a massive line in Dekalb County in the background, and then everything from a 10 minute conversation about the hosts favorite snacks to a 20 minute review and live performances from the new Amelie production.  Headed to the polls, you are damn right I'm blasting Turn Down for What pulling in.  

[royiv 9193]

1 minute ago, Js1 said:

Isn’t Minneapolis, like,  thriving? 

My wife and I went up there last summer for my birthday to visit one of my best friends and his wife that live there. We were ready to start looking for houses there after a long weekend there. It’s a great city. It’s high on our list for relocation when we become climate refugees.

[Js1 85223]

1 minute ago, SubliminalHorn said:

Panacea? Who said that? 

Nobody. People are making up weird shit 

[royiv 9193]

1 minute ago, SubliminalHorn said:

Panacea? Who said that? 

The dozens of posts over the last several weeks obsessing over Harris going on Rogan. A couple of posters in particular act like it’s the one thing keeping a bunch of basic white bros from voting for Harris. They’re trying to make fetch happen.

[SubliminalHorn 6770]

2 minutes ago, royiv said:

The dozens of posts over the last several weeks obsessing over Harris going on Rogan. A couple of posters in particular act like it’s the one thing keeping a bunch of basic white bros from voting for Harris. They’re trying to make fetch happen.

Your definition of obsessing is interesting. It was mentioned a few times a few weeks ago, and it’s being talked about more now because it’s being reported she may go on the show. No one has said it’s a panacea. What people have said is, it might help neutralize some of the white bro vote. That’s it. It may help. At this point, she should be doing EVERYTHING possible to win. 

[Js1 85223]

You gotta meet them where they are. They aren’t going to get exposure to her otherwise 

[TwiceHorn 31414]

Somewhat interesting piece on AP about journos' struggles with how to report on Trump. https://apnews.com/article/trump-media-election-rallies-facts-kamala-harris-e906e990b5dcfe44b5e672336fe82b32

[Helobious 9515]

4 hours ago, SizzleChest said:

 

Harris went on Call Her Daddy week before last.  Host is Alex Cooper. Huge audience.  Near equivalent to Rogan in terms of number of listeners.

 

Lol wut. There’s no way she has even half the listeners as Rogan

[Aqua Buddha 14581]

3 minutes ago, Helobious said:

Lol wut. There’s no way she has even half the listeners as Rogan

It's one of the Top 5 podcasts out there.  

[Js1 85223]

 

 

[royiv 9193]

3 minutes ago, SubliminalHorn said:

Your definition of obsessing is interesting. It was mentioned a few times a few weeks ago, and it’s being talked about more now because it’s being reported she may go on the show. No one has said it’s a panacea. What people have said is, it might help neutralize some of the white bro vote. That’s it. It may help. At this point, she should be doing EVERYTHING possible to win. 

 

2 minutes ago, Js1 said:

You gotta meet them where they are. They aren’t going to get exposure to her otherwise 

There are a finite number of days and hours between now and Election Day. There are a million more effective ways for Harris to spend her time than going on Rogan. That audience is the lowest IQ group of mouth breathers you can find. It’s a complete waste of time. Let Cuban or someone else do it. I will say it again, the hard on for doing Rogan with some of you guys is weird.

[High Plains Drifter 11013]

On 10/13/2024 at 10:51 PM, 4th&Five said:

 

 

The R's had a meltdown, and the media reported on the meltdown. 

If kamala or the D's had a meltdown over the use of "retard", the media would report on that. If no D's have a meltdown, why should the media?

 

[Helobious 9515]

3 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

It's one of the Top 5 podcasts out there.  

Wow. It is currently at #1 on Spotify. I’d never heard of it and neither had anyone else before Harris went on. I wonder where it would sit on the rankings on a normal week

[Js1 85223]

3 minutes ago, royiv said:

 

There are a finite number of days and hours between now and Election Day. There are a million more effective ways for Harris to spend her time than going on Rogan. That audience is the lowest IQ group of mouth breathers you can find. It’s a complete waste of time. Let Cuban or someone else do it. I will say it again, the hard on for doing Rogan with some of you guys is weird.

It’s one podcast. You’re turning a bit into Chainsaw melting down over one campaign stop with Cheney. 

[Hank Kingsley 20900]

He did it. He fucking did it. Well done, Jimmy.