“He just wants the Democrats to be more interesting to young men.”
OK, but does it take an atmosphere of RICO cases, mail fraud, group sex podcasts, and Trump-voting pregnant side chicks to get young men interested?
If all Democratic politicians were avoiding were a heavily-tattooed rap YouTube journalist who’d been shot at several times, I’d share his bafflement at the avoidance. But it’s very obviously not.
People are allowed to go talk to people! A conversation isn't an endorsement! If that's the mindset, it's wrong. Politicians go meet people where the are, and talk to them. Have real conversations. That's legitmate! Stop politicizing basic contact and conversation.
I think you both make good points here. That's why I love the BW comment section.
Dem pols do some pre-worrying on these things, and it's not unwarranted. Imagine if Cory Booker went on this show today. Probably not many people would know or care. And then Adam22 gets arrested for fraud or domestic violence or whatever. Then CB announces for president.
Every Fox show would have a segment on his podcast appearance, every night, trying to tie Booker to every element of Adam22's resume and reputation, completely devoid of any context wherein outre or criminal behavior by GOP/MAGA figures is cited.
Now sub Pete Buttigieg for Booker, and think about the extra twists RW media would add. Heck, sub in any female Dem.
There are several ways you can look at this. Maybe rule that anyone watching Fox News, let alone Newsmax, is too far gone for us to care about his/her vote. Also consider that Fox is gonna generate "content" anyway, so why pre-worry? It's complicated, and I do understand why Dems choose to err on the side caution.
A good start for political guests on the show might be voices of liberalism who are not running for office. I can imagine Adam Kinzinger giving an accessible explanation of politics to an apolitical audience. Given the podcast demo's obsession with conspiracies and the "deep state," maybe Denver Riggleman to discuss the reality of national security intelligence?
Or how about some media figures? One guest who would be great at explaining the way conspiracy obsessions have undermined US politics and put our security and economic stability at risk is . . . Will Sommer.
“He just wants the Democrats to be more interesting to young men.”
OK, but does it take an atmosphere of RICO cases, mail fraud, group sex podcasts, and Trump-voting pregnant side chicks to get young men interested?
If all Democratic politicians were avoiding were a heavily-tattooed rap YouTube journalist who’d been shot at several times, I’d share his bafflement at the avoidance. But it’s very obviously not.
People are allowed to go talk to people! A conversation isn't an endorsement! If that's the mindset, it's wrong. Politicians go meet people where the are, and talk to them. Have real conversations. That's legitmate! Stop politicizing basic contact and conversation.
IMO
I think you both make good points here. That's why I love the BW comment section.
Dem pols do some pre-worrying on these things, and it's not unwarranted. Imagine if Cory Booker went on this show today. Probably not many people would know or care. And then Adam22 gets arrested for fraud or domestic violence or whatever. Then CB announces for president.
Every Fox show would have a segment on his podcast appearance, every night, trying to tie Booker to every element of Adam22's resume and reputation, completely devoid of any context wherein outre or criminal behavior by GOP/MAGA figures is cited.
Now sub Pete Buttigieg for Booker, and think about the extra twists RW media would add. Heck, sub in any female Dem.
There are several ways you can look at this. Maybe rule that anyone watching Fox News, let alone Newsmax, is too far gone for us to care about his/her vote. Also consider that Fox is gonna generate "content" anyway, so why pre-worry? It's complicated, and I do understand why Dems choose to err on the side caution.
A good start for political guests on the show might be voices of liberalism who are not running for office. I can imagine Adam Kinzinger giving an accessible explanation of politics to an apolitical audience. Given the podcast demo's obsession with conspiracies and the "deep state," maybe Denver Riggleman to discuss the reality of national security intelligence?
Or how about some media figures? One guest who would be great at explaining the way conspiracy obsessions have undermined US politics and put our security and economic stability at risk is . . . Will Sommer.
What do you say, Will? Test the water.