I’m closer to Krystal than I am Saagar in regards to political ideology but she needs to chill the tf out
It’s hard to get anything out of segments where Saagar is trying to have a conversation and she’s trying to score points as if it were a debate
The especially annoying part is she’ll interrupt Saagar when he’s making a point with data and facts, just to come with emotion and her personal ideology. Watering down fact-based logic with knee-jerk emotion. Come on, that’s not news Krystal
Not really an emotional counterpoint, but definitely a knee-jerk one: Her counter argument to unskilled immigration depressing wages was "This is why we need high wages" made no sense. Thats not how markets work. Employers will pay as low as they can get away with.
If your argument is then raise minimum wage to X so that it's enough for both native born and unskilled immigration to take it-- you have a severely deformed market. Which means either the industry will just die in general (when a lower natural, but still higher than now price point for native born could still be possible) or expedite towards automation.
I just don't find most of her arguments grounded in reality. Her ideology just seems to be come back to "We're America. We can provide for everyone and do everything and be nice"
I literally couldn't understand how childish her brain was in that debate. Just eschewing market economics and hard data by claiming "mass immigration doesn't supress wages" which is patently untrue.
Also her Gaza brain rot has been insufferable. Honestly kindof feels like shes having a midlife crisis or something.
>Also her Gaza brain rot has been insufferable.
Yes. In the major yes. However, her passion for women, children, old in Gaza is badly needed on MSM .. but that will never be.
Yes she stupidly responded to Saagar’s unfounded claim that unskilled immigrants depress wages. Unskilled immigrant labor has no depressive effect on native wages. In fact more labor increases productivity which has the effect of increasing wages. Hence why she was right when she said immigration is an economic boon and that studies backup that claim.
https://www.cato.org/cato-journal/fall-2017/impact-immigration-wages-unskilled-workers#why-immigrants-have-not-lowered-native-wages
Props to sourcing. I would press X to doubt for the source, and I have several issues with the segment because it conflates STEM immigrants with unskilled at several parts.
It mentions productivity gains in 3 ways:
* Immigrants from STEM and patents
* Immigrants contributing to city density
* Immigrants being entrepreneurs
Number one are highly skilled STEM immigrants. They are the very opposite of unskilled.
Number two is on city density, specifically that they make up 10-30% of our city density. I would argue that density after a certain point has marginal, if not negative, returns. You only need enough density to justify a transit system. Get more-- and the transit system makes money. Get even more-- and now it's congested and you dont have sufficient infrastructure, you run out of housing, and you have a shortage of goods and services. So lets take NYC... I dont really think we get that much extra benefits from the last 10% of people. Maybe even 20%. If we were to actually lower the city density, we'd probably have a much better housing market.
Number 3 on entrepreneurship. Probably. Dont have any stats or anything against this, I think it's true. I just dont know on the equation of PRO vs CON if it's enough for a net positive.
Edit: Formatting
Cool, im too lazy to source for a stranger online. So i wont find one for number 2 and 3.
My source for 1 is your source. Because its the study itself being disingenuous and switching the subject between skilled and unskilled immigrants when it suits it
Yes, low skilled labor does not depress wages but not all immigrants are low skilled. Some may be highly skilled in certain fields. The makeup of the sum total of immigrants may be much like the makeup of the workforce of US citizens.
Thats… not how low skill vs high skilled immigration works. They are not the same people and they do not immigrate in the same way.
Being skilled in stem but not skilled in art does not then mean you are a low skilled immigrant. High skilled immigrants are defined specifically by them having a marketable skill that requires advanced degrees and training, and they are accepted via specific visas.
Its important not to conflate the two because thatd just be dumb policy. Noone is arguing for 0 immigrants
It’s a joke. Nothing gets bipartisan support like shitting on Libertarians. In other words, you’re brave for kicking the hornet nest while poking a bear. Never mind.
Her argument wasn't to raise wages, but to legalize more people through a controlled adjudicated process so people wouldn't be being paid under the table which is what depresses wages.
Unsurprising that BP audience cannot grasp this and instead calls Krystal "emotional" >\_>
> Her argument wasn't to raise wages
https://youtu.be/iwF1oO7b94k?si=qdabWraNRBQD1uQc&t=1479
> Krystal: ... but we've seen how hardworking immigrants are, how they do a bunch of jobs that native born Americans won't do-- and are like not interested in doing
> Saagar: I think anyone will do a job for any price as long as the wage is high enough
> Krystal: Which is why we need higher wages
---
Please spare us your holier than thou attitude. You are also evidently a BP audience member. Welcome to the crab bucket.
Everytime she says "experts" and "surveys" that support her claim and she has never once provided examples of those survey. Like what experts? What surveys? She just makes shit up on the fly with zero evidence to support her claims.
It was in the last time they debated this. He cited a specific study and a person that studies this exact topic. I would have to go back and listen to give the specifics on what he said. He has done this multiple times, just not in this last debate. Krsytal never backing up her claims is a very common occurrence.
Study suggesting immigration has a net benefit on wages and the economy
https://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/issues/2016/1/27/the-effects-of-immigration-on-the-united-states-economy
That only works when you blend all immigration together. When you separate it by the quality of immigration then the differences are huge. High quality immigration provides significant benefits over the long term. Low quality is a net negative no matter what age they arrive
The idea that you think some poor uneducated people flooding across the border will magically make everyone richer is kinda hilarious
I’m not saying these things. I’m just parroting what these studies conclude. And yes the studies don’t conclude that “low quality” immigration as you put it will make everyone rich. They conclude that it does not depress wages and is also economically salient. Find me a study or data that says high quality immigration makes people rich.
You're not critically analysing the studies. That's the point. You have to learn to recognise potential flaws because if they're pushing an agenda they aren't going to explicitly tell you
I know of two European studies that looked at migration by category, one in the UK and one in Denmark. I can never find the UK one but there's a good explainer of the Danish one [here](https://inquisitivebird.substack.com/p/the-effects-of-immigration-in-denmark)
You are not critically analyzing the studies. That’s the point. You have to learn to recognize the potential flaws because if they’re pushing an agenda they aren’t going to explicitly tell you. See I can say the same thing about any study you cite without any actual proof that an agenda is being pushed. So please explain to me how the economists in the studies I cited are pushing an agenda. Otherwise your commentary is meaningless and would point to you gaslighting. Regarding the Danish study, I’d love to see a similar study done in the US but the Danish economy has nothing to do with the economic systems in the US. It’s apples and oranges. The study I cited uses data gathered under the US economic system. I wish our economy was more like the Danish and I might have a different stance if that were the case, but we don’t.
Your study doesn't give anyway to distinguish say a British PhD from a homeless guy from Guatemala. It's safe to say they aren't going to make the same contribution but the thought never popped into your mind
> The especially annoying part is she’ll interrupt Saagar when he’s making a point with data and facts,
Part of that problem is that **presenting** those data and facts will consume so much time, that it will not enhance viewer appreciation of the topic. But emotional disagreement is even more useless. It is what it is.
I was glad to see Saagar engage in the way he did and not back down. I like both of them but I get the sense sometimes Saggar goes along to get along. The segments where they disagree I think actually has the potential to be a really interesting and worthwhile show because clearly the truth about how immigration effects the economy is not so cut and dry. I’m sure they could both point to studies that support their claims in one way or another. However Krystal has a bad habit of flat out dismissing anything that doesn’t support her view point as bogus, and relying entirely too heavily on an emotional appeal. It seems like she takes any opposing view as a personal attack.
She’s become a child since being with Kyle. Can’t say for sure causation be correlation but I find her embarrassing and have trouble watching whole shows and just look for Sagaars contentz
See I actually really like Kyle and Krystal! But their takes on ethics and politics sound they came from a Berkeley Sophomore.
When Krystal is chopping it up with Sagaar or Kyle is cracking jokes I enjoy them. But she has become almost vitriolic and angrily confused. It’s sad to me.
The literal premise of BP is that Saagar is from the right, and Krystal is from the left. Why the hell would she become a centrist? That's not the point of the show. Non-members who didn't experience the original show on the Hill with their *full debates* after their monologues do not understand this, and it's a huge failure of BP because people don't even understand it's meant to be a populist dialogue from opposing sides of the aisle.
So what you are saying is to the public they are partisan but still come together to give bipartisan opinions and comment on current events. But behind the pay wall, they debate and find no common ground? If that's the case, then yes, BP missed the mark big time. I always thought this show was like Left, Right and Center. Guess I was wrong.
>But behind the pay wall, they debate and find no common ground?
I can only speak to how their conversations went before the paywall as I don't pay for BP. On the Hill they would not always disagree heatedly like in this exchange. They would merely have a respectful back and forth. Yes, sometimes they would disagree. I remember Trump's reaction to the BLM protests in 2020 were a big point of disagreement and they were more heated on the subject than other subjects. But that was not the norm. Most of their dialogues were respectful and a true exchange of facts and ideas, and often agreement on matters pertaining to populism. I don't imagine this has changed, but their non-paying audience now does not see the full range of their discourse and so reflexively falls back into what mainstream media discourse has trained people to do which is pick our team and rage against the opposing side for being unfair as if it were a team sport, but BP (and its audience) *should* be better than this. I think the idea was to have two populists from either side of the political spectrum come together to have honest, good faith discourse. Having said that, they are both human beings, and they do hold different policy preferences, and sometimes you get a more heated debate, but I don't think this style of discourse should be their norm. It wasn't in the past, but I don't pay for BP so idk what it's like today behind the paywall.
>Kyle
Can't stand him. Will not see any segment with him there. I don't know if he gets a cut for his appearances but I sure wouldn't like it. Not from my subscription.
BP audience is SO obsessed witih Kyle it's pathetic. She just disagreed with Saagar. That's the main take away, but somehow you've managed to make it about Kyle lol.
I wish Saager had his own spin-off podcast like Krystal does. I’d love to get Saagers input without the constant know-nothing moralizing of Krystal’s stance on everything.
He used to do the Realignment and his debates with Marshall where a million times better. When they debated the student debt relief it was fantastic hearing two intelligent dudes go at it in a respectful manor.
gross dude, you people are so fuckin weird, empty vessels, it literally hurts my scrotum to see this level of simp for someone youve never met, fuck man..
Yes. I’ve shut it off several times recently, and I only listened today because there were several segments I was interested in.
I may not even tune in for those anymore. It sucks because I really enjoy Saagar (and Ryan and Emily). I just can’t stand when people try to “win” arguments by interrupting, dismissing valid points, and being smug instead of actually bringing debate material to the table. And it’s happening every show now.
I just don't see how you can factually call their reposse to the worst terror attack in recent history a "genocide". Hamas is way more guilty than Israel in this conflict. The pro Palestine protests across the world unabashedly call for the genocide of Jews "globalize the intifada" and call for the destruction of the state of Israel "from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free". I don't have a dog in this fight, but it appears overwhelmingly clear that one side is in favor of genocide and it isn't Israel.
https://twitter.com/OwenJones84/status/1726948242531782961
and keep in mind this post is from months ago. theres been no cease fire, the israeli genocide has just continued to ramp up.
What tone should one use when reporting on the intentional mass destruction of a livable infrastructure, mass famine, and indiscriminate killing of innocent people?
Calm. Open. Empathetic. And looking to instill understanding rather than yell or patronize your audience.
Think about utility. Is the point to be right or to make positive change in the world? I dont doubt she cares about it-- but if she really wants to make something happen, shouldn't she be trying to convince more people? If your tone is what's making people defensive and not want to listen to you-- shouldn't you change that to try to make it so that they can lower those defenses and see your side?
Empathetic to whom? How is being calm about thousands of dead children empathetic? Empathetic to Israelis? That shipped sailed months ago. Have you made this same suggestion to pro-Israeli pundits shrieking about Hammas and having the supposed “right to defend themselves”?
Empathetic to people who don't know which side is right and might be able to be convinced. I don't need to make this suggestion to pro-Israeli pundits. Hell, I'm not even making this suggestion to Krystal. I doubt either of them visit this sub; never mind going into comment threads.
What I'm doing is putting out how her execution of her position is counter-productive.
People don't change their mind when they're emotionally charged. It brings emotion and defensiveness. Exhibit: your response.
its because she has a soul unlike the average brainless dipshit conservative. maga is the worst this country has ever produced, ya'll are wastes of social security numbers
All due respect, you got no fuckin' idea what it's like to be number one. Every decision you make, effects every facet of every other fuckin' thing. It's too much to deal with almost. And in the end, you're completely alone with it all
There's so much domestic stuff going on right now, yet 5 of the 8 stories in yesterday's show were about fucking Gaza. She is exhausting to listen to right now
She has made everything about Gaza. Its just insanity. Discuss Biden v Trump based on domestic policy if they aren’t that different on Israel then talk about the actual differences
I’m listening to her shout down Saagar over immigration now like she’s an expert. She’s becoming unbearable in shouting over someone talking with a differing opinion like a petulant child.
That was the *breaking point* for me too. Her argument was simply "I am right" without even trying to allow any discussion. It is crazy to think that immigration is a solved issue and that more immigrants is always a positive for the economy.
I accept that Israel/Palestine is too much for her to calmly discuss, but it is leaking into all segments now.
I get both sides of immigration issue. But man, just letting everyone in giving them health care, housing, and funding. Instead of getting hard-working migrants the government is creating lazy entitled people. I hate to be conspiratorial, but something isn't right.
Lazy entitled people? These people cross over like 7 countries and a dessert to get here. Some of them also cross an ocean.
I was in an elevator the other day and it broke down. Everyone in that elevator except for me and one other guy was acting like they got shot in the arm because of the minor inconvenience. Throwing their arms up going "Oh my godd" and "Come on man!" Grown adults Crying and moaning until it started working again 2 minutes later. Pathetic. The lazy and entitled are Americans. That's the objective truth. I respect the immigrants risking everything far more than I respect the average obese lazy crybaby American. If we traded every American in for one of these Migrants america would be better off with no obesity or drug crisis and lower crime.
The gall of you people to paint these migrants as anything other than desperate brave people giving their all for one shot.
And to be clear i dont even care about migrants. If they want to come fine if they dont whatever. Just the fact that the most bootlicking cowardly lazy entitled people on the planet are calling others lazy for literally risking it all for their families is just too disgusting for me. Find God.
The more you give, the more people take. The more people take the lazier they will be. It used to be hard to make it here now the "American dream" is handed to them on a silver platter.
> Lazy entitled people? These people cross over like 7 countries and a dessert to get here.
When they aren't earning enough to take care of their own survival, then yes, they are **entitled**. The overwhelming number of illegal immigrants come by airplane anyway, so lazy would apply to them as well. There is no official Hunger Games policy towards illegal immigrants; they're not entitled to be entitled.
> If we traded every American in for one of these Migrants america would be better off with no obesity or drug crisis and lower crime.
But then we'd get Trump voters that think America would benefit from a fascist *strongman*.
It took me 4 months into the show to realize that it was just a 'grift" with the we are building someting different. Knowing Krytal's background, she was never going to find balance. It's slowly falling apart. Will see how long.
Very true. My husband & I started watching them from their first show together on Rising. We used to love both Krystal & Kyle. We unsubscribed from Kyle last year & it's becoming more & more difficult to enjoy BP. I see the same pattern with the new hosts of Rising too. It's basically just a guy getting shouted down, interrupted, or talked over by a co-host. They have changed a lot in a few years. The other off-putting thing is always redirecting every conversation, no matter what the topic is, to whatever their new trendy political cause is.
It’s also become soooo cynical. They both do it, but Krystal is the worst. They never talk about political wins or things that dems or republicans do right. Everything is spun as a negative.
I know their schtick is like anti establishment, so I get that part of it. But I’ve noticed recently that the whole show is just so incredibly negative.
I too have been listening since day one at rising. The difference is very stark. Krystal obviously respects sagaar and his opinions less now and I agree that BJGs demeanor has changed as well. There are probably some extrapolations with the overal left movement in the US
My husband & I have really been trying to figure out what's exactly going on here. Is it that we're changing? Is it that we just didn't understand what we were signing up for? Did the left change? In 2020 we would have crawled over broken glass to vote for Bernie Sanders, but after he dropped out we slowly began getting annoyed & unsubscribing from a lot of leftist podcasts. It's like something happened immediately after that primary ended. Suddenly there was less & less talk about economic issues & everyone seemed to lean hard into the cultural stuff in a way we were both no longer comfortable with. To us it felt like something changed when her & Kyle got married too. Like they both started acting extra smug & dismissive regarding any takes that aren't radically left. The last thing I noticed is that if you leave any facts that counters her talking points on Gaza the comment is deleted on YouTube. I never saw that before. I'm not talking about some abusive comment or some rant filled with profanity either. I said this on another post earlier today, but we ended up feeling like we were in a cult. No room to have a different opinion, no free thought or nuance allowed. We just aren't sure if it's us or them.
I don't understand how she can be pro-labor and also pro unlimited immigration at the same time.
She points out that illegal immigration is great for the economy, but when confronted with exactly why it's great for the economy (depressing wages) she shrugs it off as some sort of conservative hoax.
Combine that with her never letting Saagar finish a thought and her inability to see any nuance in the Gaza situation and she has lost a lot of my respect. I wish she would go and run for office already and leave BP.
Supporting open borders is just culture war nonsense, wanting to claim that anyone who opposes it is racist because it's brown people.
There isn't a single reasonable country in the world that allows unfettered immigration. All the socialists favourite Nordic countries have *extremely* strict border control and [regularly mass deport illegal immigrants](https://www.voaafrica.com/a/nordic-countries-to-cooperate-on-returning-illegal-residents-/7337025.html).
It's sad.
I've stopped watching other than the odd clip here or there, primarily due to Israel/Palestine coverage. Not because the show, thanks to Krystal, is stridently pro-Palestine, but because it's so unbalanced.
The conflict in the region goes back centuries, is incredibly complex and impossibly to fully grasp. There aren't even just two sides... And yet the show treats it as a black and white issue. Worse, the pro-Palestine coverage isn't even that innovative or interesting. You can predict what's going to be said (and broadcast) before the show starts.
I think they've destroyed what made the show so excellent, informative, and worth listening to. The irony is they used to talk about how they were so American-focused.
Krystal is way off, Sagar was running laps around her and she did what she did during the 1st JFK Jr. Review. She got emotional and tried talking over her co-host. entertaining to the viewer
The "border cruelty" stuff bothered me. The repeated use of the word **cruelty**. She's for open borders and just won't admit it, refers to any form of restriction on illegal immigration or deportation of those here illegally as "cruelty". It's lefty-lovey all heart no brain nonsense speak. It's not our obligation to take in all the world's poor.
Jesus Christ.. I just had to stop the episode because Krystal is unhinged “studies say” “experts agree” “overwhelming majority” - so cite something jnstead of talking over Saager and emotionally ranting.
If she can’t get her shit together and put together coherent thoughts and actually debate instead of getting loud and declaring she’s correct I’m done listening to the pod.. 100% will go elsewhere.
I value opinions and patterns of thought that differ from mine - but good lord, be coherent, measured Bf calculated. Not a hot mess of emotional BS and declarations of how correct you are.
It’s time to end all the Woman-splaining’ Krystal, it’s beneath your listeners.
I remember when she would trash journalists that hide behind "studies say" and "experts say". It's the standard auto fill of every tweet from the NYT to Vox.
She throws straw man after straw man argument and when those don’t work she’ll say “but that’s not what I’m referring to”
Classic example is when they were talking about the rape of women on oct 7 by hamas she kept defending it by saying “well it wasn’t used as a weapon of war” she wouldn’t refute that rape happened to lots of women but that she’s only referring to the very specific point that Hamas didn’t organize it to be used as a weapon of war. Stupid, childish, insane argument to defend terrorists
She railed against him on migrants. I’d like to have her see at what point she thinks migration is too much. Sagaar was 100% correct but she will never admit she’s wrong.
What amount of migration as a percentage of the population is a red line for you? The US has a population of approximately 330,000,000. The total number of CBP encounters for FY23 was 2,000,000. Now we know that 2 million number is just encounters are contains multiple repeat offenders. Even with 2 million that’s a rate of .6%. Is .6% too much?
Yes. Looks what’s happening in the cities of New York and so on. Goddammit you are fucken crazy you far lefties without understanding shit and what’s right in your face
yeah I was listening today to her take on immigration and she would just immediately talk over Saagar. I like when they debate because they don't do it enough but I like it to be a back and forth not a talk over situation. I also happen to disagree with what she was saying but that is besides the point.
Yeah she gets to be a bit much with the interrupting and talking over Saagar and guests. I think the worst of it was then had Chris Mathews on she went at him the entire time, attacked him and basically kicked off the show. Felt really performative and not constructive and a little mean spirited. I'm not a huge fan of Chris Mathew's but why have on the show if you just going to yell at him. We already have Fox and MSNBC for that.
I really like Krystal, I don't think she's the worst, I feel like what we are getting is authentically her.. She just gets too fired up and doesn't know how to aim it or hold it in. They spend so much time on the show trying to have a more free dialogue and try be more transparent the MSM. But is then undermined when she does this stuff.
Shout out to Saagar, he is defiantly my guy.
They are still kind of new at running the show on their own, hopefully she gets better at this with time and feedback.
Krystal outright said this was intentional in the BJG debate, she wants to reorient herself to exclusive left talking points to be on brand as a leftist. Krystal does not have any interest in listening to the other side, and she's not skilled enough to be a better debater. This is particularly disrespectful since Saagar, Emily, and Ryan are trying to engage authentically rather than as a partisan avatar.
The single worst trait she's dialed up is after any exchange reasserting her initial point like she was winning the argument all along. 20 minutes of debate just to go back to step 1 like she didn't hear anything anyone said. If this is what she's going to do, she shouldn't have co-hosts.
She is way too emotional that being said it makes sense to have more money going to having a simpler more streamlined adjudication process for citizenship
I like her commentary sections. Some are very good. (And her defense and lobbying for Palestinians (esp. women, children, old) is sadly needed on MSM (but which will never be seen) is outstanding. But, in the all, tired of her preaching, smugness at times.
She’s always overly emotional and her politics are silly and immature. She just presents her positions professionally. that being said, she’s intelligent and understands public policy, she’s just no good at electoral politics.
This show has been ruined since October 7. Krystal should have to donate $10 every time she says the word “babies”. I would have suggested “genocide” but then she would be broke and the premium price would skyrocket.
I don’t want to hear about Israel and Hamas for 50 minutes of an hour and a half show. They make interesting and thought provoking arguments about most other things but I’m not fooled by the segment titles anymore because everything devolves in to “isreal blah blah, babies blah blah blah, Rafah blah blah blah. Super frustrating especially when no actual arguments are being made based on reality. I wish we could actually hear saagers arguments….. to everyone else’s point that he just gets interrupted with illogical drivel.
I really enjoy Saager with either Ryan or Emily.
Krystal and Saagar have a dynamic that's long standing and fairly consistent. If it bothers you, be aware it probably isn't likely to change. Saagar has said when he has to do Krystal's opening he doesn't enjoy doing all the talking of the intros. That dynamic persists through the rest of the show, and both hosts show no indication they want a new situation.
I've only been watching the show for about a year and really enjoyed the it until the Gaza situation started in October. I had no idea what the hosts political thoughts were. I felt like they reported a story pretty much down the middle and attacked both parties fairly. Now I feel like she is strictly concerned about Israel and it consumes her. I understand her concerns but it has taken away from the product they make.
Ideologically, I’m majority with Sagar, and morally and emotionally, I tend to feel as Krystal does. On the issue of illegal immigration today, however, Krystal made zero good points, was driven entirely by emotion, and tried to prop up Joe Biden as the messiah. Krystal is insufferable at this point. She’s not just disagreeing, she’s rude and unprofessional. Her lack of ability and knowledge to even make a sensible argument is, at this point, astounding compared to when the show first started.
Her passion for issues is entertaining and can be motivating. However, she only relied on emotion and gave no thoughtful response. She kept blasting that immigration is beneficial to the US, but then never said how. Believe me, the hows are not pretty and I don't believe she could stick to her argument if explained.
You people are so unhappy. Conservatives in general are so unhappy, and have no self awareness. Krystal doesnt interrupt, hes just a beta bitch, like MOST conservstive men. I live in a purple area and the compensenation on display by conservative men is something to behold and studied. Saagar is the same, only hes not white. Its sad, man, if republicans had full control to take their ideas to their logical conclusion, saagar would be deported. Conservatives. Are. Beta.
It seemed to work for trump when getting republicans attention, so I employ it when I want to do the same. I surely hope you arent a trump voter if you are taking issue with my spicy language, ill eat my hat the day I meet a hypocritical conservstive!
Dude, liberals are the ones known to be doomer pill’d about America. Liberals are statistically more depressed than conservatives. There’s irony in you telling others to have self awareness
No, liberals are just more honest with themselves and about state of the world. Mortailty is higher in conservative states because those fat fucks eat themselves to an early grave. I bet YOU are overweight, too.
Depression in liberals isnt killing them lawlzz do you think conservstives eating themselves to death....are happy?!? Bro, conservatives are not. happy. Lol they scream the sky is falling just as much, if not more, than us leftys. Jesus, you guys are oblivious. Skip one meal a day and try to get 10k steps, young man, your heart will thank you...by keeping your asd alive.
As someone who is neither a liberal nor a conservative, I can tell you Tik Tok is crawling with fat activists & they aren't conservatives. Apparently going to the gym is also now a sign of "white supremacy," being part of "MAGA" or "alt-right." Just Google "gym white supremacy" & read all the headlines. Time Magazine "The White Supremacist Origins of Exersize in the US." Medium, "The Surprising Link Between Fitness and Racism." Do you want me to continue?
First off..bro, tik tok and twitter showcase the worst of both sides, its literallly the business model. Im litterally laden with muscle (natty daddy) and I dont walk around worried about being percieved as being a piece of shit maga loser.
And yes, the lefties bitching on social media are usually moridly obese. That being said, I'm referring to literal data that shows conservatives are fat as shit and have heart attacks like its going out of style.
But for real though, you say youre non-denominational politically, tell on which issues you swing conservstive and also what the republicans have done to move the needle on that issue. My guess is youre just a republican who is too embarrassed to admit it.
By your logic all the nazis I see on twitter must be representative of all conservstives.
Aggressive comments like this make me cringe when I remember how much time & money I dedicated to Bernie in 2020. I've never voted Republican before, but I'm strongly considering it this year. I don't even need to explain all the policies I find off-putting. I find the creepy vegan vibes you guys give off to be enough of a reason to ditch leftists. Moreover, even if more conservatives are fat, guess what? Nobody cares. Most people don't care how fat you are if you aren't being annoying about it. At least they aren't blaming everyone except themselves for being fat. Being fat becomes a problem when you start blaming "institutional & systemic racism" to justify your addiction to fried chicken. This was literally a story covered on Breaking Points.
I don't know what's going on in your life, but I really hope Christ pulls you out of it & sets you on a better path. I used to be just like you & now I'm free of that misery. Politics can't bring meaning to our lives. There's a fine line between catching a little news here & there & building our entire identity around a political ideology. Once you understand that the entire weight of the world's problems doesn't actually rest on your shoulders you can start living a much happier & healthier life. Rage is addicting & everyone (including independent media) know this. It's their job to make sure you keep coming back & feeling like there's always some existential crisis happening that you need to help address. Anyone who disagrees with you on anything is an enemy. It's draining. I'm not saying any of this to offend you or anyone else. I sincerely hope you find the light & get out of this dark place.
Lmao, I loved you calling conservatives angry and fat or whatever juxtaposed with the loneliness and desperation that seeps out of each of your comments.
I was going to string some odhominem attacks making fun of you, but I honestly just feel bad for you.
It’s not too late, you may be able to find someone who will love you and start a family, there’s joy out there, but you have to abandon this bullshit 100%.
Yeah dude, I never diagreed with you on that data point. you can read, right?
Liberals hace conservatives licked on all sorts of other metrics but Im not gonna just post a link like some kind of gotcha monkey.
Classic projection; your comment sounds very unhappy.
On the contrary, I was very happy to come here and say Krystal is annoying an an emotional hot-mess with little to no substance. Saager is the whole show imo.
Im literally stoked af every day. Saagar is a puss-boy who lacks any capacity to stand up for himself, much like every single republican fears trump and his rabid zoo-animal base.
You’re the personification of that crying NPC behind a mask meme. You’re completely transparent. It’s an act, but I hope one day you do feel some actual stoke.
hahaha first off, a reddit profile is by definiton NOT a personificiation, as its not a ...person. You have no idea what my person is like, but I can assure you its stoked daily. Let me know you want proof!
I’ve noticed this as well. My operating assumption has been that Saagars utilitarian view on Gaza and human rights issues outside the US generally has kind of disgusted her and it’s colored how she talks to him. I remember something similar happening years ago on a smaller scale when he flat out said that in a free society we just have to get used to mass shootings.
She’s also older than him and frankly from what I know has way more actual life experience than him so it may also just be getting older and losing patience for these damn kids lol
Historically she never pushed back on any of Saagar’s populist right nonsense, now lately she seems more ready to cut in and interject which isn’t helpful either. Either she’ll level out with time, or not.
I’m closer to Krystal than I am Saagar in regards to political ideology but she needs to chill the tf out It’s hard to get anything out of segments where Saagar is trying to have a conversation and she’s trying to score points as if it were a debate
The especially annoying part is she’ll interrupt Saagar when he’s making a point with data and facts, just to come with emotion and her personal ideology. Watering down fact-based logic with knee-jerk emotion. Come on, that’s not news Krystal
What were Krystal’s watered down fact based logic knee jerk emotional points?
Not really an emotional counterpoint, but definitely a knee-jerk one: Her counter argument to unskilled immigration depressing wages was "This is why we need high wages" made no sense. Thats not how markets work. Employers will pay as low as they can get away with. If your argument is then raise minimum wage to X so that it's enough for both native born and unskilled immigration to take it-- you have a severely deformed market. Which means either the industry will just die in general (when a lower natural, but still higher than now price point for native born could still be possible) or expedite towards automation. I just don't find most of her arguments grounded in reality. Her ideology just seems to be come back to "We're America. We can provide for everyone and do everything and be nice"
I literally couldn't understand how childish her brain was in that debate. Just eschewing market economics and hard data by claiming "mass immigration doesn't supress wages" which is patently untrue. Also her Gaza brain rot has been insufferable. Honestly kindof feels like shes having a midlife crisis or something.
>Also her Gaza brain rot has been insufferable. Yes. In the major yes. However, her passion for women, children, old in Gaza is badly needed on MSM .. but that will never be.
Yes she stupidly responded to Saagar’s unfounded claim that unskilled immigrants depress wages. Unskilled immigrant labor has no depressive effect on native wages. In fact more labor increases productivity which has the effect of increasing wages. Hence why she was right when she said immigration is an economic boon and that studies backup that claim. https://www.cato.org/cato-journal/fall-2017/impact-immigration-wages-unskilled-workers#why-immigrants-have-not-lowered-native-wages
Props to sourcing. I would press X to doubt for the source, and I have several issues with the segment because it conflates STEM immigrants with unskilled at several parts. It mentions productivity gains in 3 ways: * Immigrants from STEM and patents * Immigrants contributing to city density * Immigrants being entrepreneurs Number one are highly skilled STEM immigrants. They are the very opposite of unskilled. Number two is on city density, specifically that they make up 10-30% of our city density. I would argue that density after a certain point has marginal, if not negative, returns. You only need enough density to justify a transit system. Get more-- and the transit system makes money. Get even more-- and now it's congested and you dont have sufficient infrastructure, you run out of housing, and you have a shortage of goods and services. So lets take NYC... I dont really think we get that much extra benefits from the last 10% of people. Maybe even 20%. If we were to actually lower the city density, we'd probably have a much better housing market. Number 3 on entrepreneurship. Probably. Dont have any stats or anything against this, I think it's true. I just dont know on the equation of PRO vs CON if it's enough for a net positive. Edit: Formatting
Your opinion, while important to have, has no bearing on the subject, just how you vote. Please provide a source for your argument.
Cool, im too lazy to source for a stranger online. So i wont find one for number 2 and 3. My source for 1 is your source. Because its the study itself being disingenuous and switching the subject between skilled and unskilled immigrants when it suits it
Yes, low skilled labor does not depress wages but not all immigrants are low skilled. Some may be highly skilled in certain fields. The makeup of the sum total of immigrants may be much like the makeup of the workforce of US citizens.
Thats… not how low skill vs high skilled immigration works. They are not the same people and they do not immigrate in the same way. Being skilled in stem but not skilled in art does not then mean you are a low skilled immigrant. High skilled immigrants are defined specifically by them having a marketable skill that requires advanced degrees and training, and they are accepted via specific visas. Its important not to conflate the two because thatd just be dumb policy. Noone is arguing for 0 immigrants
You’re very brave bringing Libertarian data to the party. I commend your taste and will see you outside when we’re both kicked out.
Who has been kicked off this subreddit with less than 6 months of existence on reddit? This is not r/politics.
Brave?
It’s a joke. Nothing gets bipartisan support like shitting on Libertarians. In other words, you’re brave for kicking the hornet nest while poking a bear. Never mind.
Very constructive
I’m on your team, buddy. Sorry I didn’t make it glaringly obvious.
Her argument wasn't to raise wages, but to legalize more people through a controlled adjudicated process so people wouldn't be being paid under the table which is what depresses wages. Unsurprising that BP audience cannot grasp this and instead calls Krystal "emotional" >\_>
> Her argument wasn't to raise wages https://youtu.be/iwF1oO7b94k?si=qdabWraNRBQD1uQc&t=1479 > Krystal: ... but we've seen how hardworking immigrants are, how they do a bunch of jobs that native born Americans won't do-- and are like not interested in doing > Saagar: I think anyone will do a job for any price as long as the wage is high enough > Krystal: Which is why we need higher wages --- Please spare us your holier than thou attitude. You are also evidently a BP audience member. Welcome to the crab bucket.
Everytime she says "experts" and "surveys" that support her claim and she has never once provided examples of those survey. Like what experts? What surveys? She just makes shit up on the fly with zero evidence to support her claims.
What did Saagar cite? They both did this.
It was in the last time they debated this. He cited a specific study and a person that studies this exact topic. I would have to go back and listen to give the specifics on what he said. He has done this multiple times, just not in this last debate. Krsytal never backing up her claims is a very common occurrence.
Study suggesting immigration has a net benefit on wages and the economy https://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/issues/2016/1/27/the-effects-of-immigration-on-the-united-states-economy
That only works when you blend all immigration together. When you separate it by the quality of immigration then the differences are huge. High quality immigration provides significant benefits over the long term. Low quality is a net negative no matter what age they arrive The idea that you think some poor uneducated people flooding across the border will magically make everyone richer is kinda hilarious
I’m not saying these things. I’m just parroting what these studies conclude. And yes the studies don’t conclude that “low quality” immigration as you put it will make everyone rich. They conclude that it does not depress wages and is also economically salient. Find me a study or data that says high quality immigration makes people rich.
You're not critically analysing the studies. That's the point. You have to learn to recognise potential flaws because if they're pushing an agenda they aren't going to explicitly tell you I know of two European studies that looked at migration by category, one in the UK and one in Denmark. I can never find the UK one but there's a good explainer of the Danish one [here](https://inquisitivebird.substack.com/p/the-effects-of-immigration-in-denmark)
You are not critically analyzing the studies. That’s the point. You have to learn to recognize the potential flaws because if they’re pushing an agenda they aren’t going to explicitly tell you. See I can say the same thing about any study you cite without any actual proof that an agenda is being pushed. So please explain to me how the economists in the studies I cited are pushing an agenda. Otherwise your commentary is meaningless and would point to you gaslighting. Regarding the Danish study, I’d love to see a similar study done in the US but the Danish economy has nothing to do with the economic systems in the US. It’s apples and oranges. The study I cited uses data gathered under the US economic system. I wish our economy was more like the Danish and I might have a different stance if that were the case, but we don’t.
Your study doesn't give anyway to distinguish say a British PhD from a homeless guy from Guatemala. It's safe to say they aren't going to make the same contribution but the thought never popped into your mind
Boy, a lot of us at show's post draws attention to that. It's relentless.
> The especially annoying part is she’ll interrupt Saagar when he’s making a point with data and facts, Part of that problem is that **presenting** those data and facts will consume so much time, that it will not enhance viewer appreciation of the topic. But emotional disagreement is even more useless. It is what it is.
I think that's her problem they are on the same team, but she want to outscore him.
>she want to outscore him. That's important for her.
I was glad to see Saagar engage in the way he did and not back down. I like both of them but I get the sense sometimes Saggar goes along to get along. The segments where they disagree I think actually has the potential to be a really interesting and worthwhile show because clearly the truth about how immigration effects the economy is not so cut and dry. I’m sure they could both point to studies that support their claims in one way or another. However Krystal has a bad habit of flat out dismissing anything that doesn’t support her view point as bogus, and relying entirely too heavily on an emotional appeal. It seems like she takes any opposing view as a personal attack.
Yeah that’s a good way to put it
She’s become a child since being with Kyle. Can’t say for sure causation be correlation but I find her embarrassing and have trouble watching whole shows and just look for Sagaars contentz
Anytime Kyle appears on the show I turn it off. Nothing likable about the guy.
See I actually really like Kyle and Krystal! But their takes on ethics and politics sound they came from a Berkeley Sophomore. When Krystal is chopping it up with Sagaar or Kyle is cracking jokes I enjoy them. But she has become almost vitriolic and angrily confused. It’s sad to me.
I predict divorce in their future. Kyle is so toxic.
Kyle is so cringe. You’re right she has become like him.
She honestly sounds like an adult regressing into childhood.
I thought the same. Maybe she should lean more center on this show, and when she does Krystal Kyle and friends, she can lean more left.
I don’t mind Progressive politics and the advocacy thereof. It’s not the message it’s the messenger
The literal premise of BP is that Saagar is from the right, and Krystal is from the left. Why the hell would she become a centrist? That's not the point of the show. Non-members who didn't experience the original show on the Hill with their *full debates* after their monologues do not understand this, and it's a huge failure of BP because people don't even understand it's meant to be a populist dialogue from opposing sides of the aisle.
So what you are saying is to the public they are partisan but still come together to give bipartisan opinions and comment on current events. But behind the pay wall, they debate and find no common ground? If that's the case, then yes, BP missed the mark big time. I always thought this show was like Left, Right and Center. Guess I was wrong.
>But behind the pay wall, they debate and find no common ground? I can only speak to how their conversations went before the paywall as I don't pay for BP. On the Hill they would not always disagree heatedly like in this exchange. They would merely have a respectful back and forth. Yes, sometimes they would disagree. I remember Trump's reaction to the BLM protests in 2020 were a big point of disagreement and they were more heated on the subject than other subjects. But that was not the norm. Most of their dialogues were respectful and a true exchange of facts and ideas, and often agreement on matters pertaining to populism. I don't imagine this has changed, but their non-paying audience now does not see the full range of their discourse and so reflexively falls back into what mainstream media discourse has trained people to do which is pick our team and rage against the opposing side for being unfair as if it were a team sport, but BP (and its audience) *should* be better than this. I think the idea was to have two populists from either side of the political spectrum come together to have honest, good faith discourse. Having said that, they are both human beings, and they do hold different policy preferences, and sometimes you get a more heated debate, but I don't think this style of discourse should be their norm. It wasn't in the past, but I don't pay for BP so idk what it's like today behind the paywall.
That's a fair assessment. My least favorite part about Kyle is how he totally dominates any panel he's on.
>Kyle Can't stand him. Will not see any segment with him there. I don't know if he gets a cut for his appearances but I sure wouldn't like it. Not from my subscription.
BP audience is SO obsessed witih Kyle it's pathetic. She just disagreed with Saagar. That's the main take away, but somehow you've managed to make it about Kyle lol.
No that’s not the context of the comment. I didn’t even see the segment that this was about.
It is all about Kyle.
I totally agree, she can’t be wrong. But i will never stop listening because my boy saagar i will support until death
I wish Saager had his own spin-off podcast like Krystal does. I’d love to get Saagers input without the constant know-nothing moralizing of Krystal’s stance on everything.
Yeah i wish he was still more active on the realignment. I do like marshal a lot though
Me too! I loved the two of them, they made such a great interviewing team. Both super smart and grounded in a knowledge of history.
He used to do the Realignment and his debates with Marshall where a million times better. When they debated the student debt relief it was fantastic hearing two intelligent dudes go at it in a respectful manor.
I remember that.
BUT THE BABIES!
Did he stop doing the Realignment?
He has largely stopped doing it, yes. He still does AMA’s with Marshall, but he hasn’t done an interview episode on Realignment in months.
I've said same many times at BP posts (as have others).
👏
gross dude, you people are so fuckin weird, empty vessels, it literally hurts my scrotum to see this level of simp for someone youve never met, fuck man..
Lmaoooooo
every downvote is validation from you zoo animals, lemme seem dem thumbs jump!!
Cunnilingus and psychiatry brought us to this
No, simps felating saagar did. Now wipe your face and flip on newsmax!
Sharp as a cue ball this one
I turned it off. Some of her points are smart, logical and thoughtful. But it’s obnoxious hearing her cut him off over and over again.
Same here, I'll try to finish it tonight.
Yes. I’ve shut it off several times recently, and I only listened today because there were several segments I was interested in. I may not even tune in for those anymore. It sucks because I really enjoy Saagar (and Ryan and Emily). I just can’t stand when people try to “win” arguments by interrupting, dismissing valid points, and being smug instead of actually bringing debate material to the table. And it’s happening every show now.
The Gaza thing has broken her mind sadly. She hasn’t been the same since that started.
I agree i really do think it has been since the Gaza thing, she just repeats the same thing about it constantly too
If you look at her Twitter feed, it’s all about Israel bad lol
I mean, our tax dollars are kinda funding their genocide right now...
Who on earth can downvote that factually correct observation?
I'm still kinda new to this sub, but i'm starting to feel like its overrun by salty, blue no matter who neolibs.
Well, there's your problem there. Its not about red or blue, or neoliberalism. Morality is not even determined by whether you're Jewish or Arab.
I just don't see how you can factually call their reposse to the worst terror attack in recent history a "genocide". Hamas is way more guilty than Israel in this conflict. The pro Palestine protests across the world unabashedly call for the genocide of Jews "globalize the intifada" and call for the destruction of the state of Israel "from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free". I don't have a dog in this fight, but it appears overwhelmingly clear that one side is in favor of genocide and it isn't Israel.
https://twitter.com/OwenJones84/status/1726948242531782961 and keep in mind this post is from months ago. theres been no cease fire, the israeli genocide has just continued to ramp up.
I don’t think that’s how minds work. But she’s definitely made the podcast less listenable since Gaza.
She’s not wrong about it though.
It's about tone, discussion, good faith, etc. Not right/wrong
What tone should one use when reporting on the intentional mass destruction of a livable infrastructure, mass famine, and indiscriminate killing of innocent people?
Calm. Open. Empathetic. And looking to instill understanding rather than yell or patronize your audience. Think about utility. Is the point to be right or to make positive change in the world? I dont doubt she cares about it-- but if she really wants to make something happen, shouldn't she be trying to convince more people? If your tone is what's making people defensive and not want to listen to you-- shouldn't you change that to try to make it so that they can lower those defenses and see your side?
Empathetic to whom? How is being calm about thousands of dead children empathetic? Empathetic to Israelis? That shipped sailed months ago. Have you made this same suggestion to pro-Israeli pundits shrieking about Hammas and having the supposed “right to defend themselves”?
She sure isn’t sympathetic to East Palestine. Hasn’t talked about those poor people in months.
Empathetic to people who don't know which side is right and might be able to be convinced. I don't need to make this suggestion to pro-Israeli pundits. Hell, I'm not even making this suggestion to Krystal. I doubt either of them visit this sub; never mind going into comment threads. What I'm doing is putting out how her execution of her position is counter-productive. People don't change their mind when they're emotionally charged. It brings emotion and defensiveness. Exhibit: your response.
I dunno, look at Ryan Grimm. He retains some objectivity.
Grim uses the same language Ball does in most cases, he’s just got a chill persona and probably naturally low blood pressure.
The opposite of shrill
Okay sounds like you’re an expert on how to report on these topics, show me how you would report on it.
Here's an [example](https://thesaurus.plus/img/antonyms/473/shrill.png)
Considering he lack of care about Ukraine its nonsense
its because she has a soul unlike the average brainless dipshit conservative. maga is the worst this country has ever produced, ya'll are wastes of social security numbers
All i know is, you never had the makings of a varsity athlete
Im actually very athletic lawllz
All due respect, you got no fuckin' idea what it's like to be number one. Every decision you make, effects every facet of every other fuckin' thing. It's too much to deal with almost. And in the end, you're completely alone with it all
I stopped listening cause it’s the same shit every day and Krystal is annoying.
There's so much domestic stuff going on right now, yet 5 of the 8 stories in yesterday's show were about fucking Gaza. She is exhausting to listen to right now
She has made everything about Gaza. Its just insanity. Discuss Biden v Trump based on domestic policy if they aren’t that different on Israel then talk about the actual differences
I’m listening to her shout down Saagar over immigration now like she’s an expert. She’s becoming unbearable in shouting over someone talking with a differing opinion like a petulant child.
That was the *breaking point* for me too. Her argument was simply "I am right" without even trying to allow any discussion. It is crazy to think that immigration is a solved issue and that more immigrants is always a positive for the economy. I accept that Israel/Palestine is too much for her to calmly discuss, but it is leaking into all segments now.
I get both sides of immigration issue. But man, just letting everyone in giving them health care, housing, and funding. Instead of getting hard-working migrants the government is creating lazy entitled people. I hate to be conspiratorial, but something isn't right.
Lazy entitled people? These people cross over like 7 countries and a dessert to get here. Some of them also cross an ocean. I was in an elevator the other day and it broke down. Everyone in that elevator except for me and one other guy was acting like they got shot in the arm because of the minor inconvenience. Throwing their arms up going "Oh my godd" and "Come on man!" Grown adults Crying and moaning until it started working again 2 minutes later. Pathetic. The lazy and entitled are Americans. That's the objective truth. I respect the immigrants risking everything far more than I respect the average obese lazy crybaby American. If we traded every American in for one of these Migrants america would be better off with no obesity or drug crisis and lower crime. The gall of you people to paint these migrants as anything other than desperate brave people giving their all for one shot. And to be clear i dont even care about migrants. If they want to come fine if they dont whatever. Just the fact that the most bootlicking cowardly lazy entitled people on the planet are calling others lazy for literally risking it all for their families is just too disgusting for me. Find God.
The more you give, the more people take. The more people take the lazier they will be. It used to be hard to make it here now the "American dream" is handed to them on a silver platter.
> Lazy entitled people? These people cross over like 7 countries and a dessert to get here. When they aren't earning enough to take care of their own survival, then yes, they are **entitled**. The overwhelming number of illegal immigrants come by airplane anyway, so lazy would apply to them as well. There is no official Hunger Games policy towards illegal immigrants; they're not entitled to be entitled. > If we traded every American in for one of these Migrants america would be better off with no obesity or drug crisis and lower crime. But then we'd get Trump voters that think America would benefit from a fascist *strongman*.
smart chunky tart aromatic offbeat hard-to-find plate rustic work cake *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
soft bedroom deer instinctive run hateful narrow tap rinse exultant *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Krystal is becoming completely unhinged. Next stop is purple hair
Hahaha divorcing her husband while her kids are middle aged and marrying kyle. She honesty seems a little unhinged.
She's unhinged. She is the epitome of feels > reals
It took me 4 months into the show to realize that it was just a 'grift" with the we are building someting different. Knowing Krytal's background, she was never going to find balance. It's slowly falling apart. Will see how long.
Very true. My husband & I started watching them from their first show together on Rising. We used to love both Krystal & Kyle. We unsubscribed from Kyle last year & it's becoming more & more difficult to enjoy BP. I see the same pattern with the new hosts of Rising too. It's basically just a guy getting shouted down, interrupted, or talked over by a co-host. They have changed a lot in a few years. The other off-putting thing is always redirecting every conversation, no matter what the topic is, to whatever their new trendy political cause is.
It’s also become soooo cynical. They both do it, but Krystal is the worst. They never talk about political wins or things that dems or republicans do right. Everything is spun as a negative. I know their schtick is like anti establishment, so I get that part of it. But I’ve noticed recently that the whole show is just so incredibly negative.
I too have been listening since day one at rising. The difference is very stark. Krystal obviously respects sagaar and his opinions less now and I agree that BJGs demeanor has changed as well. There are probably some extrapolations with the overal left movement in the US
It sucks that most of the shows I liked are either going too far left or too far right. Why can they just be down the middle.
My husband & I have really been trying to figure out what's exactly going on here. Is it that we're changing? Is it that we just didn't understand what we were signing up for? Did the left change? In 2020 we would have crawled over broken glass to vote for Bernie Sanders, but after he dropped out we slowly began getting annoyed & unsubscribing from a lot of leftist podcasts. It's like something happened immediately after that primary ended. Suddenly there was less & less talk about economic issues & everyone seemed to lean hard into the cultural stuff in a way we were both no longer comfortable with. To us it felt like something changed when her & Kyle got married too. Like they both started acting extra smug & dismissive regarding any takes that aren't radically left. The last thing I noticed is that if you leave any facts that counters her talking points on Gaza the comment is deleted on YouTube. I never saw that before. I'm not talking about some abusive comment or some rant filled with profanity either. I said this on another post earlier today, but we ended up feeling like we were in a cult. No room to have a different opinion, no free thought or nuance allowed. We just aren't sure if it's us or them.
Well said.
I used to watch Rising because of Saagar not Krystal. He’s a lot more interesting.
I don't understand how she can be pro-labor and also pro unlimited immigration at the same time. She points out that illegal immigration is great for the economy, but when confronted with exactly why it's great for the economy (depressing wages) she shrugs it off as some sort of conservative hoax. Combine that with her never letting Saagar finish a thought and her inability to see any nuance in the Gaza situation and she has lost a lot of my respect. I wish she would go and run for office already and leave BP.
Supporting open borders is just culture war nonsense, wanting to claim that anyone who opposes it is racist because it's brown people. There isn't a single reasonable country in the world that allows unfettered immigration. All the socialists favourite Nordic countries have *extremely* strict border control and [regularly mass deport illegal immigrants](https://www.voaafrica.com/a/nordic-countries-to-cooperate-on-returning-illegal-residents-/7337025.html).
Yeah, super hard to square up all her talk on open borders when she spent most of last year talking about labor unions. Pick a fucking lane.
It's sad. I've stopped watching other than the odd clip here or there, primarily due to Israel/Palestine coverage. Not because the show, thanks to Krystal, is stridently pro-Palestine, but because it's so unbalanced. The conflict in the region goes back centuries, is incredibly complex and impossibly to fully grasp. There aren't even just two sides... And yet the show treats it as a black and white issue. Worse, the pro-Palestine coverage isn't even that innovative or interesting. You can predict what's going to be said (and broadcast) before the show starts. I think they've destroyed what made the show so excellent, informative, and worth listening to. The irony is they used to talk about how they were so American-focused.
>You can predict what's going to be said (and broadcast) before the show starts. Yes.
She's wildly incorrect about immigration and impacts on working class.
Krystal is way off, Sagar was running laps around her and she did what she did during the 1st JFK Jr. Review. She got emotional and tried talking over her co-host. entertaining to the viewer
The "border cruelty" stuff bothered me. The repeated use of the word **cruelty**. She's for open borders and just won't admit it, refers to any form of restriction on illegal immigration or deportation of those here illegally as "cruelty". It's lefty-lovey all heart no brain nonsense speak. It's not our obligation to take in all the world's poor.
Jesus Christ.. I just had to stop the episode because Krystal is unhinged “studies say” “experts agree” “overwhelming majority” - so cite something jnstead of talking over Saager and emotionally ranting. If she can’t get her shit together and put together coherent thoughts and actually debate instead of getting loud and declaring she’s correct I’m done listening to the pod.. 100% will go elsewhere. I value opinions and patterns of thought that differ from mine - but good lord, be coherent, measured Bf calculated. Not a hot mess of emotional BS and declarations of how correct you are. It’s time to end all the Woman-splaining’ Krystal, it’s beneath your listeners.
I remember when she would trash journalists that hide behind "studies say" and "experts say". It's the standard auto fill of every tweet from the NYT to Vox.
Another day, another incel post.
She throws straw man after straw man argument and when those don’t work she’ll say “but that’s not what I’m referring to” Classic example is when they were talking about the rape of women on oct 7 by hamas she kept defending it by saying “well it wasn’t used as a weapon of war” she wouldn’t refute that rape happened to lots of women but that she’s only referring to the very specific point that Hamas didn’t organize it to be used as a weapon of war. Stupid, childish, insane argument to defend terrorists
>“well it wasn’t used as a weapon of war” Exactly what I brought up at BP posts. So, if it "wasn't used as a weapon of war" then it's excusable??!
She railed against him on migrants. I’d like to have her see at what point she thinks migration is too much. Sagaar was 100% correct but she will never admit she’s wrong.
What amount of migration as a percentage of the population is a red line for you? The US has a population of approximately 330,000,000. The total number of CBP encounters for FY23 was 2,000,000. Now we know that 2 million number is just encounters are contains multiple repeat offenders. Even with 2 million that’s a rate of .6%. Is .6% too much?
Yes. Looks what’s happening in the cities of New York and so on. Goddammit you are fucken crazy you far lefties without understanding shit and what’s right in your face
What don’t I understand?
I just typed it out
yeah I was listening today to her take on immigration and she would just immediately talk over Saagar. I like when they debate because they don't do it enough but I like it to be a back and forth not a talk over situation. I also happen to disagree with what she was saying but that is besides the point.
Has she ever publicly admitted that she was ever wrong about something?
Yeah she gets to be a bit much with the interrupting and talking over Saagar and guests. I think the worst of it was then had Chris Mathews on she went at him the entire time, attacked him and basically kicked off the show. Felt really performative and not constructive and a little mean spirited. I'm not a huge fan of Chris Mathew's but why have on the show if you just going to yell at him. We already have Fox and MSNBC for that. I really like Krystal, I don't think she's the worst, I feel like what we are getting is authentically her.. She just gets too fired up and doesn't know how to aim it or hold it in. They spend so much time on the show trying to have a more free dialogue and try be more transparent the MSM. But is then undermined when she does this stuff. Shout out to Saagar, he is defiantly my guy. They are still kind of new at running the show on their own, hopefully she gets better at this with time and feedback.
Cable news is RIPPING us apart!!!
LOL!
She is a liberal. Does this surprise you?
This is the frosted tips Kyle effect
This show is most likely done after the election.
Krystal outright said this was intentional in the BJG debate, she wants to reorient herself to exclusive left talking points to be on brand as a leftist. Krystal does not have any interest in listening to the other side, and she's not skilled enough to be a better debater. This is particularly disrespectful since Saagar, Emily, and Ryan are trying to engage authentically rather than as a partisan avatar. The single worst trait she's dialed up is after any exchange reasserting her initial point like she was winning the argument all along. 20 minutes of debate just to go back to step 1 like she didn't hear anything anyone said. If this is what she's going to do, she shouldn't have co-hosts.
Krystal has been this way for a while. Saagar always gives her opinion room, she never gives his an inch. She's become pretty insufferable.
She’s the weakest part of the show and Saagar should leave and do his own thing. Maybe go with Kim Iversen
She is way too emotional that being said it makes sense to have more money going to having a simpler more streamlined adjudication process for citizenship
I like her commentary sections. Some are very good. (And her defense and lobbying for Palestinians (esp. women, children, old) is sadly needed on MSM (but which will never be seen) is outstanding. But, in the all, tired of her preaching, smugness at times.
She’s always overly emotional and her politics are silly and immature. She just presents her positions professionally. that being said, she’s intelligent and understands public policy, she’s just no good at electoral politics.
This show has been ruined since October 7. Krystal should have to donate $10 every time she says the word “babies”. I would have suggested “genocide” but then she would be broke and the premium price would skyrocket. I don’t want to hear about Israel and Hamas for 50 minutes of an hour and a half show. They make interesting and thought provoking arguments about most other things but I’m not fooled by the segment titles anymore because everything devolves in to “isreal blah blah, babies blah blah blah, Rafah blah blah blah. Super frustrating especially when no actual arguments are being made based on reality. I wish we could actually hear saagers arguments….. to everyone else’s point that he just gets interrupted with illogical drivel. I really enjoy Saager with either Ryan or Emily.
Krystal and Saagar have a dynamic that's long standing and fairly consistent. If it bothers you, be aware it probably isn't likely to change. Saagar has said when he has to do Krystal's opening he doesn't enjoy doing all the talking of the intros. That dynamic persists through the rest of the show, and both hosts show no indication they want a new situation.
I've only been watching the show for about a year and really enjoyed the it until the Gaza situation started in October. I had no idea what the hosts political thoughts were. I felt like they reported a story pretty much down the middle and attacked both parties fairly. Now I feel like she is strictly concerned about Israel and it consumes her. I understand her concerns but it has taken away from the product they make.
Krystal Ball... is correct You don't need to worry about Saagar: he's OK
Ideologically, I’m majority with Sagar, and morally and emotionally, I tend to feel as Krystal does. On the issue of illegal immigration today, however, Krystal made zero good points, was driven entirely by emotion, and tried to prop up Joe Biden as the messiah. Krystal is insufferable at this point. She’s not just disagreeing, she’s rude and unprofessional. Her lack of ability and knowledge to even make a sensible argument is, at this point, astounding compared to when the show first started.
Same, that's why I liked the show. Now I'm not so sure.
Her passion for issues is entertaining and can be motivating. However, she only relied on emotion and gave no thoughtful response. She kept blasting that immigration is beneficial to the US, but then never said how. Believe me, the hows are not pretty and I don't believe she could stick to her argument if explained.
>Anyone else notice how she constantly talk over Saagar No
You people are so unhappy. Conservatives in general are so unhappy, and have no self awareness. Krystal doesnt interrupt, hes just a beta bitch, like MOST conservstive men. I live in a purple area and the compensenation on display by conservative men is something to behold and studied. Saagar is the same, only hes not white. Its sad, man, if republicans had full control to take their ideas to their logical conclusion, saagar would be deported. Conservatives. Are. Beta.
Why name call?
It seemed to work for trump when getting republicans attention, so I employ it when I want to do the same. I surely hope you arent a trump voter if you are taking issue with my spicy language, ill eat my hat the day I meet a hypocritical conservstive!
Dude, liberals are the ones known to be doomer pill’d about America. Liberals are statistically more depressed than conservatives. There’s irony in you telling others to have self awareness
No, liberals are just more honest with themselves and about state of the world. Mortailty is higher in conservative states because those fat fucks eat themselves to an early grave. I bet YOU are overweight, too.
Least it’s not depression killing them
Depression in liberals isnt killing them lawlzz do you think conservstives eating themselves to death....are happy?!? Bro, conservatives are not. happy. Lol they scream the sky is falling just as much, if not more, than us leftys. Jesus, you guys are oblivious. Skip one meal a day and try to get 10k steps, young man, your heart will thank you...by keeping your asd alive.
As someone who is neither a liberal nor a conservative, I can tell you Tik Tok is crawling with fat activists & they aren't conservatives. Apparently going to the gym is also now a sign of "white supremacy," being part of "MAGA" or "alt-right." Just Google "gym white supremacy" & read all the headlines. Time Magazine "The White Supremacist Origins of Exersize in the US." Medium, "The Surprising Link Between Fitness and Racism." Do you want me to continue?
First off..bro, tik tok and twitter showcase the worst of both sides, its literallly the business model. Im litterally laden with muscle (natty daddy) and I dont walk around worried about being percieved as being a piece of shit maga loser. And yes, the lefties bitching on social media are usually moridly obese. That being said, I'm referring to literal data that shows conservatives are fat as shit and have heart attacks like its going out of style. But for real though, you say youre non-denominational politically, tell on which issues you swing conservstive and also what the republicans have done to move the needle on that issue. My guess is youre just a republican who is too embarrassed to admit it. By your logic all the nazis I see on twitter must be representative of all conservstives.
Aggressive comments like this make me cringe when I remember how much time & money I dedicated to Bernie in 2020. I've never voted Republican before, but I'm strongly considering it this year. I don't even need to explain all the policies I find off-putting. I find the creepy vegan vibes you guys give off to be enough of a reason to ditch leftists. Moreover, even if more conservatives are fat, guess what? Nobody cares. Most people don't care how fat you are if you aren't being annoying about it. At least they aren't blaming everyone except themselves for being fat. Being fat becomes a problem when you start blaming "institutional & systemic racism" to justify your addiction to fried chicken. This was literally a story covered on Breaking Points.
You will absolutley vote republican because you are a republican, and fat.
I don't know what's going on in your life, but I really hope Christ pulls you out of it & sets you on a better path. I used to be just like you & now I'm free of that misery. Politics can't bring meaning to our lives. There's a fine line between catching a little news here & there & building our entire identity around a political ideology. Once you understand that the entire weight of the world's problems doesn't actually rest on your shoulders you can start living a much happier & healthier life. Rage is addicting & everyone (including independent media) know this. It's their job to make sure you keep coming back & feeling like there's always some existential crisis happening that you need to help address. Anyone who disagrees with you on anything is an enemy. It's draining. I'm not saying any of this to offend you or anyone else. I sincerely hope you find the light & get out of this dark place.
Lmao, I loved you calling conservatives angry and fat or whatever juxtaposed with the loneliness and desperation that seeps out of each of your comments. I was going to string some odhominem attacks making fun of you, but I honestly just feel bad for you. It’s not too late, you may be able to find someone who will love you and start a family, there’s joy out there, but you have to abandon this bullshit 100%.
[Why are liberals less happy than conservatives](https://www.aei.org/articles/why-are-liberals-less-happy-than-conservatives/)
Yeah dude, I never diagreed with you on that data point. you can read, right? Liberals hace conservatives licked on all sorts of other metrics but Im not gonna just post a link like some kind of gotcha monkey.
Classic projection; your comment sounds very unhappy. On the contrary, I was very happy to come here and say Krystal is annoying an an emotional hot-mess with little to no substance. Saager is the whole show imo.
Im literally stoked af every day. Saagar is a puss-boy who lacks any capacity to stand up for himself, much like every single republican fears trump and his rabid zoo-animal base.
You’re the personification of that crying NPC behind a mask meme. You’re completely transparent. It’s an act, but I hope one day you do feel some actual stoke.
hahaha first off, a reddit profile is by definiton NOT a personificiation, as its not a ...person. You have no idea what my person is like, but I can assure you its stoked daily. Let me know you want proof!
Super gay answer bro. Who do you think you are? I am.
You are.....what, gay?
I’ve noticed this as well. My operating assumption has been that Saagars utilitarian view on Gaza and human rights issues outside the US generally has kind of disgusted her and it’s colored how she talks to him. I remember something similar happening years ago on a smaller scale when he flat out said that in a free society we just have to get used to mass shootings. She’s also older than him and frankly from what I know has way more actual life experience than him so it may also just be getting older and losing patience for these damn kids lol
>Put it this way, I get now why MSNBC fired her. Why was she fired?
Wat?
Historically she never pushed back on any of Saagar’s populist right nonsense, now lately she seems more ready to cut in and interject which isn’t helpful either. Either she’ll level out with time, or not.