yeah, I was thinking that too. He has a lot of potential problems - who knows what's not be revealed? especially with the story of the disgusting right wing podcaster.
I have no problem with people being porn stars, but I can totally understand Democratic politicians being wary of being closely associated with them. You are right that Republican voters and politicians don't seem to care when they do it; but if a Democrat went on the show I'm sure they'd get blasted by republicans because - hypocrisy.
If the goal is to get persuadable voters to vote for Democrats, you have to meet those voters where they are. This guy has 4.8 million subscribers so his podcast isn't an unreasonable place to try to reach people.
For every stupid young man whom association wih Grandmaison might win for the Dems, 5-10 of traditional Dem-voting folks over 40 might flee from them in protest. He seems, to all appearances, to be exactly the sort of scumbag whom the Dems should keep far, far away.
I'm just gonna be blunt and then I think I've gotten my $18 worth for today: I think this is truly Grade-A, prime example, front-and-center exhibit losing politics—precisely what got us here. And just wrong. They won't flee, they won't flee to Trump, they won't flee in 40:1 numbers or even close. I mean chances are, you won't even know about it—how many of you knew exactly who this was and who Stew Peters was and which figures on the right have been appearing on which podcasts, outside of July through November of last year, at all?
if you do really focus on everything the party is doing, and what podcasts everyone is showing up on, and the pornography of every wife of every podcaster hosting every Democrat... you are a politico, and you probably vote on ideology. And it's the class of consistent voters, I think, who are more put off by this, are more aware of what politicians do afield of their direct interest, who don't ultimately vote based on podcast appearances
young voters are impressionable, more selfish (rationally, in some ways), more disengaged... everything that raises their yield from this. the people put off are everything that makes them stickier despite, frankly, non-issues.
how many of you reading this equate non-votes for Kamala as votes for Trump? and how many of you reading this would be ready to put Trump in office because Kamala appeared on a podcast with this guy? QED
Thank you. Some Dems can be extremely prissy. But the dominant message of this election is that voters don't care about the reputation of a podcast host: They just want to see that the Democrat knows how to hang.
These people all share the fundamental belief—even if they don't realize it—that half the voting population cannot ever be persuaded. Ever. People become immutable at 17, apparently, or even younger; they know because they have tried everything they possibly and not a single one of them has ever changed their minds.
It sounds absurd, on purpose, but it is the only belief that logically justifies the conclusions here
People don’t become immutable at 17 or younger, unless maybe you stay in your home town, never leave, never broaden your horizons through education and travel. So here in the US I can see why you think so, but it’s not true.
Agreed, if you have to go places..just go on Doug gotlieb , piers Morgan, Jubliee, Hot ones, An NBA players podcast, Rogan and the multiple other podcast that arent associated with adult film in any way.. just be out there over time and watch what does and doesn’t work
An odd newsletter today, Will. You ask "Why won’t Democrats team up with this hip-hop podcaster?" And then proceed to tell us exactly why.
Yes I particularly was not expecting the description of his "other show" he does...I was like...wait....what? SERIOUSLY? lol
yeah, I was thinking that too. He has a lot of potential problems - who knows what's not be revealed? especially with the story of the disgusting right wing podcaster.
His wife is a porn star. No shade but that seems more republican.
I have no problem with people being porn stars, but I can totally understand Democratic politicians being wary of being closely associated with them. You are right that Republican voters and politicians don't seem to care when they do it; but if a Democrat went on the show I'm sure they'd get blasted by republicans because - hypocrisy.
If the goal is to get persuadable voters to vote for Democrats, you have to meet those voters where they are. This guy has 4.8 million subscribers so his podcast isn't an unreasonable place to try to reach people.
This is bs. He’s a cheap knock off of urban culture. He’s a white man from New Hampshire. Similar to the pop star Drake
Are you implying that no black people like Drake's music??? In any case, Dems need to go where the people are.
For every stupid young man whom association wih Grandmaison might win for the Dems, 5-10 of traditional Dem-voting folks over 40 might flee from them in protest. He seems, to all appearances, to be exactly the sort of scumbag whom the Dems should keep far, far away.
I'm just gonna be blunt and then I think I've gotten my $18 worth for today: I think this is truly Grade-A, prime example, front-and-center exhibit losing politics—precisely what got us here. And just wrong. They won't flee, they won't flee to Trump, they won't flee in 40:1 numbers or even close. I mean chances are, you won't even know about it—how many of you knew exactly who this was and who Stew Peters was and which figures on the right have been appearing on which podcasts, outside of July through November of last year, at all?
if you do really focus on everything the party is doing, and what podcasts everyone is showing up on, and the pornography of every wife of every podcaster hosting every Democrat... you are a politico, and you probably vote on ideology. And it's the class of consistent voters, I think, who are more put off by this, are more aware of what politicians do afield of their direct interest, who don't ultimately vote based on podcast appearances
young voters are impressionable, more selfish (rationally, in some ways), more disengaged... everything that raises their yield from this. the people put off are everything that makes them stickier despite, frankly, non-issues.
how many of you reading this equate non-votes for Kamala as votes for Trump? and how many of you reading this would be ready to put Trump in office because Kamala appeared on a podcast with this guy? QED
Thank you. Some Dems can be extremely prissy. But the dominant message of this election is that voters don't care about the reputation of a podcast host: They just want to see that the Democrat knows how to hang.
These people all share the fundamental belief—even if they don't realize it—that half the voting population cannot ever be persuaded. Ever. People become immutable at 17, apparently, or even younger; they know because they have tried everything they possibly and not a single one of them has ever changed their minds.
It sounds absurd, on purpose, but it is the only belief that logically justifies the conclusions here
People don’t become immutable at 17 or younger, unless maybe you stay in your home town, never leave, never broaden your horizons through education and travel. So here in the US I can see why you think so, but it’s not true.
my man look again, nothing could be further from my belief
Agreed, if you have to go places..just go on Doug gotlieb , piers Morgan, Jubliee, Hot ones, An NBA players podcast, Rogan and the multiple other podcast that arent associated with adult film in any way.. just be out there over time and watch what does and doesn’t work
Hot Ones doesn't allow politicians on so they can remain nonpartisan. They turned Kamala down when she asked.