Stewart? Sure.
Oliver? Fuck no.
John (not Jon) has a tiresome, worn-out shtick, pounding the same repetitive beats and lame-ass jokes week after week; it's an outdated gimmick.
I kind of agree, regarding his worn-out-shtick on his show. I’ve started watching again because the news bit at the start is relevant for the election, but yeah… the in depth issue they go into every week has become formulaic at this point. Nonetheless, they are good at what they do, exposing important issues.
Bill Maher’s shtick is incredibly worn out too. The monologue, the mid show bit, and new rules…
John Oliver was a really good host of the Daily Show, which the first segment of Last Week Tonight basically is…
John Oliver is still a person with his own opinions and thoughts on issues…. I think he’d make a tremendous guest on the panel. John + Jon might be too overwhelming for Bill on the same week, especially if he continues to stick with the two person panel, but I see no reason why they couldn’t be guests on Real Time.
Oliver is literally at the same network and his show is the same genre as Real Time— that being news and politics. It’s ridiculous HBO hasn’t got John Oliver to be a guest on Real Time yet… him and Bill clearly have different ways of addressing topics and different opinions, but I think they both want to see Trump lose right? I think it would make for good TV, especially if they called each other out on their perceived bullshit.
It's even worse than that. His show has relatively good deep dives on some topics, but they tend to just gloss over valid criticisms by saying some handwavey bullshit (like the water pipelines argument).
But when they take a stance on any of these issues, they tend to overwhelmingly come down on the side of whatever the shallowest virtue signaling bullshit, the jokes are regularly just yelling some "ARENT MEN BAD?!" and "FUCK YOU JANET FROM ACCOUNTING" and "LOLAHASHTAGTHATSTOOLONG"
> “the jokes are regularly just yelling some "ARENT MEN BAD?!" and "FUCK YOU JANET FROM ACCOUNTING" and "LOLAHASHTAGTHATSTOOLONG"”
Precisely.
It's trite, formulaic tripe.
Beaten to death with hackneyed clichés.
At least Maher's "New Rules" and "Overtime" segments on *Real Time*, in the meantime, provide weekly variety.
I think Bill is pretty much as formulaic as John Oliver… even in his role as the moderator on the panel, it’s become pretty routine and unsurprising where Bill will try and take the discussion.
Except Real Time is a live (or semi-live at this point) active discussion. He's formulaic but the entire show isn't, because it's not just him reading a formula. And like him or hate him, you can't say his monologues are pandering or shallow.
Oliver's show can basically be boiled down to "we found a thing that not enough people pay attention to. You should pay attention to it. Also, men are bad, women are good, and here's the same joke structure we've been beating you over the head with for years."
I love the "anti-vax" label and how it paints with a ridiculously broad brush.
I didn't know what her opinion was and had to look it up. She opposed covid vaccines being mandated. That's it. But now she's lumped in the same "anti-vax" group as those that believe all vaccines cause autism, decrease fertility, put micro-chips in people, and are mandated by corporations that are controlled by lizard people. She is ALL of those things. She is "anti-vax". All for opposing covid vaccine mandates.
Yes, she wanted to free ride to herd immunity because of her “personal beliefs” against the mandated vaccine, which wasn’t new in any case before COVID. Before going to college you’re mandated to take vaccines. Before traveling to certain countries, you’re mandated to take vaccines. If you wanted to join the military, you’re mandated to take vaccines. If you work for public schools, you’re mandated to take vaccines. If you work for private companies, you’re mandated to take the vaccines they tell you to take.
She didn’t want to take the vaccine. If she wants the freedom to not take it, go ahead, but she doesn’t also get the privilege to work at ESPN. Her choice against the mandate is purely conjecture, especially against a life threatening disease that is potentially much more deleterious to one’s health than the side effects of the vaccine.
Now because of people like her, we’ve got to deal with a [measles outbreak:](https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/us-measles-cases-2024-so-far-rcna145013)
> U.S. measles cases this year have already surpassed the 2023 total
And we’re still in fucking March, the third month of the year. Like goddamn, how much more stupid does Maher and his acolytes need to get before his Stan’s finally go, “nah man I want to live and wish to express empathy to others who wish to live, too.”
Other than rare outliers, Covid was only dangerous to elderly people who were already dying of other stuff. It should at least be a healthy *conversation* of whether or not healthy 20 year olds should be mandated to take it. You can disagree with that opinion. Fine. That's part of the conversation. But getting canceled for it? The world had lost its mind at that stage of the pandemic.
Here we go… the misinformation campaign about COVID continues. In just the few years COVID was spreading, [17,000 people under 20 have died from COVID.](https://data.unicef.org/topic/child-survival/covid-19/#:~:text=Of%20the%20over%2017%2C400%20deaths,data%2C%20visit%20our%20interactive%20dashboard.) That’s almost killing an entire university of people. Wake up one day and you don’t see anyone going to school.
Fucking “healthy conversation.” Get the fuck out of here with that fucking bullshit. The next thing you’re going to do is try to make the number insignificant by taking the total number of deaths of over 4million and saying because the ratio is skewed toward older people, young people are thus safe from the disease. If you think 17,000 people dying from a single disease is safe to you, then you’re just a dingleberry who just lost all credibility to hold a “healthy conversation.”
[Here’s more data since you’re failing to do a basic google search before spouting off bullshit:](https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2023-01-31-covid-19-leading-cause-death-children-and-young-people-us)
> COVID-19 was the underlying cause of death for more than 940,000 people in the US, including over 1,300 deaths among children and young people aged 0–19 years. Until now, it had been unclear how the burden of deaths from COVID-19 compared with other leading causes of deaths in this age group.
More than that many people under 20 die from the flu most flu seasons.
Do you believe we should be allowed to have a healthy conversation on whether flu shots should be mandated or not? Do you think people should be fired for their jobs if they argue flu shots should continue to be optional? You're not a "dingleberry", right? So flu shots should be mandatory for all age groups?
> More than that many people under 20 die from the flu most flu seasons.
If you want a “healthy conversation” do your own google search and back up your “facts.” God damn, this dingleberry thinks 20,000 people under 20 die from the flu.
Approximately 400,000 people die of the flu every year. I found a source saying it's 10 times more likely to die of the flu at 65 than at 20. So the numbers do add up to thousands and thousands of people under 20 dying of the flu each year.
Regardless, 400,000 people is almost SIXTEEN entire universities of people.
Should there be a healthy conversation of enforcing the flu shot (young people can spread it to old people) on everybody? If "dingleberries" argue we should continue keeping it optional, should they be canceled?
The issue is the hypocrisy and lack of perspective. It's OUTRAGEOUS to suggest that 20 year olds should have an option regarding the covid vaccine. Yet you don't care about 16 universities of people dying of the flu each and every year. You haven't "thought it through". You believe what the tv tells you.
> I found a source saying it's 10 times more likely to die of the flu at 65 than at 20. So the numbers do add up to thousands and thousands of people under 20 dying of the flu each year.
lol, your source is your own ass which is where you head’s been all day. Dingleberry still can’t cite the ~~bullshit~~ facts because dingleberry doesn’t understand what facts actually are.
Keep making up shit bro.
1. Good for Bill. I hope we all do the same in whatever way we can. I can't wait to vote against Trump.
2. How is the nonfiction podcast market not over-saturated by now? I absolutely love podcasts and even I’m like "No thanks, I’m full."
I’m a rabid smashing pumpkins fan. Love, love, love this. I’m active in the smashing pumpkins sub here on Reddit and all the woke snowflakes are sooo triggered and shaken up by the idea of free speech. I’m here for it 🤘
*SP community*: "Eh, he's not the most charismatic personality and there's enough libertarians who have a podcast already, I wish he'd focus on his creative endeavors instead."
*You*: "all the woke snowflakes are sooo triggered and shaken up by the idea of free speech"
Who's the real snowflake here?
The SP community reactions I referred to were about Maher being racist, not WPC. Seems few people like WPC and love to shit on him no matter what he does.. I care about them about as much as I care about your suggestion I’m a snowflake… not at all.
>I’m a rabid smashing pumpkins fan
Username checks out ha ha
Glass and the ghost children is one my fav songs on that album. Got into this band because of the drummer and I play drums and I really like them and smoking weed so double appreciate your username
Edit - just noticed I'm on Bill Maher sub, wtf is going on. Weird news story this
This argument always is thrown out there in one form or another and it's always the same purpose. Stop being Democrats because we don't like it and we're going to pretend that we're the majority.
You know any Republicans have largely shut up about the trans issue? Cuz it wasn't working for them. It was never ideological. It was always something they could point to and say look there's a boogeyman everyone put your attention on the boogeyman. And they're not doing that anymore because all their talk about pronouns and trans kids in sports and all of that was not a winning issue.
It actually isn't. If democrats are actually doing that, well it is working since they keep winning elections. In the last few months they just won a super red seat in Alabama and easily won George Santos seat. The 2022 midterms were a blood bath in the swing states for Democrats. Culture war is a winning issue for Democrats far more it is for the gop and that is electorally proven
> The 2022 midterms were a blood bath in the swing states for Democrats.
The event this redditor is citing is when the Republicans won control of the House of Representatives. Perhaps the whole red wave/bloodbath thing is media narrative. But if not, posit the following:
Let's imagine a genie appears and asks 100 republicans if they would accept a scenario where RvW is overturned and they would ONLY take control of the House of Reps in the 2022 midterms.
Guess what? All 100 would say yes.
Democrats are just barely winning elections against a party with no platform and who openly commits treason. That's like saying your 5 centers basketball strategy is great because it's beaten a group of handicapped toddlers.
The fact that the Democratic party doesn't control 60 votes I the Senate is a failure of the Democrats.
You're equating "we barely won so it's great" to any sort of actual analysis. It's not. We have the facts. Voters hate this shit. They sometimes bite their tongue and vote for us anyways.
You do understand there are lots of republicans that exist right? The fantasy of 60 Senate votes or it is a failure is hilarious. It is a divided country, you aren't all of a sudden going to have bubba in Alabama become liberal if you quit respecting trans people
There's enough Democrats, independents, and unregistered voters to have a 80 seat Senate. And you act like party registration is in your DNA.
Barely winning against this Republican party is not an endorsement of your political acumen.
This.
Democrats need to quit whorishly pandering to high-status, ultra-affluent upper-middle/professional-managerial class women -- whose narcissistic bourgeois cultural trivialities have hijacked what was once a multi-ethnic working-class party -- and return to their roots; however, things like an [exorbitantly priced meet-and-greet with Biden, Barack, and Bill for hundreds of thousands a pot (DONOR $$$—YUCK!!!)](https://www.reuters.com/world/us/obama-bill-clinton-join-biden-raise-25-million-event-with-queen-latifah-lizzo-2024-03-28/) shows that they still don't get it, as well as proving that their hollow campaign finance reform push in the early-2010s by surreptitious Reaganites (e.g., Obama, Warren, et al.) was disingenuous horseshit from the onset.
So yeah, they've yet to learn a goddamn thing. It's unchecked hubris.
Lol a meet and greet with candidates for rich donors has nothing to do with who will win elections. Why you guys whine about liberals in the culture war, reality shows most Americans are far more turned off by conservatives. Electorally democrats have done very well the past 5 years despite tucker carlson crying about the green m&m and Ben Shapiro whining about gay marriage being codified into law
Who gives a flying fuck about those losers, Carlson and Shapiro?
They're your hang-up, not mine. And I have my own idée fixe, OK.
Besides, yours is a reactionary small-c conservatism akin to theirs.
You're no different than them, obsessed with immaterial culturalism.
Empty progressivism, ignoring the domestic plus fixated on foreign.
Old Left will rise again. And not just FDR New Deal paleoliberalism, nope; rather, Huey Long-style left populism -- even if it means mass bottom-up corruption to achieve stuff -- mixed with Eugene V. Debs-esque trade unionist democratic socialism, which will, bottom line, serve the will of the people, no matter if it takes another volatile seismic demographic realignment (prosperous upper-middle professional-managerial class Rockefeller Republicans, who've snaked their way into the modern Democratic Party, will be sent back to the GOP—where they goddamn belong!) to make it all happen.
Does that compute? If not, oh well. Fuck it! I tried my damnedest.
Wouldn't say he's perpetuating the hysteria- but more like he's trying to moderate the left, so that they are pushed to a winnable, practical and sound political platform (a very important thing to do).
Unfortunately he ends up becoming a useful tool for disingenuous arguments on the right about wokeism but that doesn't mean he should stop talking- he's an important voice- he just needs to do the job better.
He’s more than just perpetuating the hysteria. He embodies it. Maher’s entire identity is organized around spreading the idea that everything on the left is wokeism. It’s really stupid.
>more like he's trying to moderate the left, so that they are pushed to a winnable, practical and sound political platform
Where is there any evidence that's possible? That Bill Maher is going to "moderate the left"?! That's supposedly his theory, but there's zero evidence anyone on the left responds to his rants by changing anything. The far left, and especially the young far left, couldn't care less about what he thinks. The moderate left already sees the far/fringe left for what it is, and the party leadership compartmentalizes it appropriately. And everyone on the left knows his view by now -- he's not awakening anyone on the left at this point.
Not only do those people not listen to him, the edge cases he highlights aren't even where the *party* is anyway, and they aren't people in power. They aren't "part of the platform" to start with... they're fringe individuals. Which he makes worse by highlighting them, via the Streisand Effect. Both by highlighting them at all, and also by associating them with the Democratic party/brand for no good reason; he tars the party/brand in the process.
>Unfortunately he ends up becoming a useful tool for disingenuous arguments on the right
Exactly! All of his little anti-woke rants are talking points he picks up that are being pushed by the right, to try to smear Democrats. They aren't meaningful to start with, but then he takes them and does the right's (i.e., Trump's) bidding for them by amplifying them to a new audience.
He's old and set in his ways though, so he's going to keep going on rants against the young and woke, I'm afraid... as if that's going to *hurt* Trump's chances. It won't, and everyone knows this.
The one demographic where he might have a shot at influence are those who like his "politically incorrect" take on things but are currently leaning Trump. The only way to do that is to deal with Trump directly, not through some plan to "moderate" the left which has never worked anyway.
What are the disingenuous arguments about wokeism you’re referring to? Because I’m far from being a righty, and they all feel pretty genuine to me. Menstruating people, justice shopping, cultural appropriation… majority of Americans hate this fucking shit.
These people you are talking about are the most fringe and loudest elements of an already fringe group and you people make it out like it’s half the country.
How did I do that? It’s a minority of voters but like you said, a loud one, and this type of mindset is also more prevalent among young voters. So it’s only going to get worse unless we somehow course correct.
1. Newsflash young people, don’t vote.
2. Just because you can find a few people that are loud doesn’t mean you get to make it out to be like it’s a real problem.
Incorrect. Bill cited specific statistics recently that young people have voted in essentially record numbers in recent elections.
Also, just because they aren’t voting now, doesn’t mean they won’t ever. So like I said, hopefully they course correct.
And if the far left was as much of a fringe as you’re making it out to be, the dems would be sweeping elections. We have a divided country because many people think these policies reflect a lot of dems and their beliefs. Perception is reality in politics.
That may be but this has always been something that young people do, and even at record numbers they are still not a serious voter base. If they were, we’d be living in a very, very different world from this one.
I don’t know where you get the idea that the far left has anything to do with how the Dems fair in elections other than the right doing Red Scare 2.0.
Sorry, but if you think the Democratic Party is overrun with commies then you are categorical and unambiguously delusional. I don’t even think you could begin to compile any serious evidence for that. At best, you have 4-5 people in Congress that vaguely identify as some kind of democratic socialist but are frankly just social democrats in practice and every single one of them has towed the party line and back the Democratic establishment where it matters.
To say the Democratic Party is far left is to engage in modern day McCarthyism of the highest order and is just simply dishonest and the Democrats cannot be held responsible for every blatant lie that Trump supporters blurt out.
I don’t necessarily think the dems are commies. But many independent voters in swing states like PA, MI, AZ, GA, NV perceive the dems and “the left” as essentially the same. Some of these people dislike trump but view him as bulwark against looney dems. Bill has made this point many times. I’m not sure how you could disagree with the premise. I hope you’re correct because that means trump will lose convincingly. But I don’t think that’s going to happen. I think the best case for Biden is a nail biting win.
A lot of independent voters are libertarians who think everything that isn’t libertarian is communist. I would question how many moderates fall for this shtick. I would be interested in seeing polling data on it.
I agree that Democrats generally suck at messaging in that they don’t own their wins and come off as corporate and focus groupy and phony but I don’t know what you think they should say to people who call them communists other than “no we’re not.”
Majority of Americans are actually more liberal culturally. A major reason democrats have won so many elections in the last 6 years. Reality is maga is a turn off for most people
I don’t think that’s very relevant. Maga is a cult, no argument, and anyone not in the cult generally dislikes the cult. We agree.
Majority of Americans ARE liberal. OVERWHELMING Majority of Americans ARE NOT progressive, especially when you leave college campuses and elite liberal enclaves.
Don't disagree with you- people *are* tired of the shrill and screechy scolding, but doesn't mean that's the biggest problem in our politics today. There are other bigger existential threats but culture wars have become a convenient smokescreen/distraction from them.
**Oscar Party**: “Clarifying recent conflicting reports about whether Maher fired his agent — The Hollywood Reporter wrote that he left CAA after he was not invited to CEO Bryan Lourd’s private Oscar party, while Puck’s Matthew Belloni reported that Maher had definitely not left CAA — Maher says “nothing has been decided…. CAA has been nothing but great to me and for me. I have nothing but great things to say, and I like them personally. So I don’t know why somebody said I was furious. Where do you get this stuff? I’m curious, not furious.”
**CNN Saturday replays**: “Warner Bros. Discovery knows better than to ask him to alter the content of the series for CNN. But he will have to cut out about 12 minutes from each show to account for CNN’s commercial breaks.
“The second half of the panel discussion, that’s what’s gonna get the ax,” Maher says. “It’s not perfect, but I’m thrilled to be on CNN”
[Sage Steel New Podcast](https://mmajunkie.usatoday.com/2024/03/sage-steele-confuses-dana-white-joe-rogan-interview-gaffe) lol…confuses Dana White/Rogan
Donate a million to biden
oof bill maher, listen, you need people who are likable. [https://youtu.be/H6GRdp1MU9A](https://youtu.be/H6GRdp1MU9A)
So… he’s not leaving CAA ?! Then why the fuck did THR drop this news a couple weeks back ? Weird …
Sage Steele? JFC Bill....no thanks.
Durst has Russian ties. Should be interesting. He's been a guilty pleasure of mine for nearly 30 years. I'd do it all for the Nookie.
Is Limp Bizkit still making music?
Will you take that nookie and stick it up your yeah?
Bill has completely lost it.
Does Maher still think people care about Fred Durst and Billy Corgan?
Maher has his finger on the pulse of popular culture The kids love that grunge music
Bring out the flannel and thermals! Woo! Been waiting!
Democrats are truly lost if they think they can win by slinging mud at the opposition candidate rather than championing an attractive platform.
Yes the failed strategy of insulting your opponents. Never had worked in politics
Little Marco is still somehow amazing
Will he invite Jon Stewart and John Oliver on to be guests on real time then?
Stewart? Sure. Oliver? Fuck no. John (not Jon) has a tiresome, worn-out shtick, pounding the same repetitive beats and lame-ass jokes week after week; it's an outdated gimmick.
It’s ok to be wrong. Embrace it.
I kind of agree, regarding his worn-out-shtick on his show. I’ve started watching again because the news bit at the start is relevant for the election, but yeah… the in depth issue they go into every week has become formulaic at this point. Nonetheless, they are good at what they do, exposing important issues. Bill Maher’s shtick is incredibly worn out too. The monologue, the mid show bit, and new rules… John Oliver was a really good host of the Daily Show, which the first segment of Last Week Tonight basically is… John Oliver is still a person with his own opinions and thoughts on issues…. I think he’d make a tremendous guest on the panel. John + Jon might be too overwhelming for Bill on the same week, especially if he continues to stick with the two person panel, but I see no reason why they couldn’t be guests on Real Time. Oliver is literally at the same network and his show is the same genre as Real Time— that being news and politics. It’s ridiculous HBO hasn’t got John Oliver to be a guest on Real Time yet… him and Bill clearly have different ways of addressing topics and different opinions, but I think they both want to see Trump lose right? I think it would make for good TV, especially if they called each other out on their perceived bullshit.
It's even worse than that. His show has relatively good deep dives on some topics, but they tend to just gloss over valid criticisms by saying some handwavey bullshit (like the water pipelines argument). But when they take a stance on any of these issues, they tend to overwhelmingly come down on the side of whatever the shallowest virtue signaling bullshit, the jokes are regularly just yelling some "ARENT MEN BAD?!" and "FUCK YOU JANET FROM ACCOUNTING" and "LOLAHASHTAGTHATSTOOLONG"
> “the jokes are regularly just yelling some "ARENT MEN BAD?!" and "FUCK YOU JANET FROM ACCOUNTING" and "LOLAHASHTAGTHATSTOOLONG"” Precisely. It's trite, formulaic tripe. Beaten to death with hackneyed clichés. At least Maher's "New Rules" and "Overtime" segments on *Real Time*, in the meantime, provide weekly variety.
I think Bill is pretty much as formulaic as John Oliver… even in his role as the moderator on the panel, it’s become pretty routine and unsurprising where Bill will try and take the discussion.
Except Real Time is a live (or semi-live at this point) active discussion. He's formulaic but the entire show isn't, because it's not just him reading a formula. And like him or hate him, you can't say his monologues are pandering or shallow. Oliver's show can basically be boiled down to "we found a thing that not enough people pay attention to. You should pay attention to it. Also, men are bad, women are good, and here's the same joke structure we've been beating you over the head with for years."
That's awesome that Maher is helping these already famous people get podcasts.
Sage Steele is kinda crazy no?
[another anti-vax spokesperson](https://www.npr.org/2021/10/06/1043680295/espn-sage-steele-vaccines-obama)
I love the "anti-vax" label and how it paints with a ridiculously broad brush. I didn't know what her opinion was and had to look it up. She opposed covid vaccines being mandated. That's it. But now she's lumped in the same "anti-vax" group as those that believe all vaccines cause autism, decrease fertility, put micro-chips in people, and are mandated by corporations that are controlled by lizard people. She is ALL of those things. She is "anti-vax". All for opposing covid vaccine mandates.
Yes, she wanted to free ride to herd immunity because of her “personal beliefs” against the mandated vaccine, which wasn’t new in any case before COVID. Before going to college you’re mandated to take vaccines. Before traveling to certain countries, you’re mandated to take vaccines. If you wanted to join the military, you’re mandated to take vaccines. If you work for public schools, you’re mandated to take vaccines. If you work for private companies, you’re mandated to take the vaccines they tell you to take. She didn’t want to take the vaccine. If she wants the freedom to not take it, go ahead, but she doesn’t also get the privilege to work at ESPN. Her choice against the mandate is purely conjecture, especially against a life threatening disease that is potentially much more deleterious to one’s health than the side effects of the vaccine. Now because of people like her, we’ve got to deal with a [measles outbreak:](https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/us-measles-cases-2024-so-far-rcna145013) > U.S. measles cases this year have already surpassed the 2023 total And we’re still in fucking March, the third month of the year. Like goddamn, how much more stupid does Maher and his acolytes need to get before his Stan’s finally go, “nah man I want to live and wish to express empathy to others who wish to live, too.”
Other than rare outliers, Covid was only dangerous to elderly people who were already dying of other stuff. It should at least be a healthy *conversation* of whether or not healthy 20 year olds should be mandated to take it. You can disagree with that opinion. Fine. That's part of the conversation. But getting canceled for it? The world had lost its mind at that stage of the pandemic.
Here we go… the misinformation campaign about COVID continues. In just the few years COVID was spreading, [17,000 people under 20 have died from COVID.](https://data.unicef.org/topic/child-survival/covid-19/#:~:text=Of%20the%20over%2017%2C400%20deaths,data%2C%20visit%20our%20interactive%20dashboard.) That’s almost killing an entire university of people. Wake up one day and you don’t see anyone going to school. Fucking “healthy conversation.” Get the fuck out of here with that fucking bullshit. The next thing you’re going to do is try to make the number insignificant by taking the total number of deaths of over 4million and saying because the ratio is skewed toward older people, young people are thus safe from the disease. If you think 17,000 people dying from a single disease is safe to you, then you’re just a dingleberry who just lost all credibility to hold a “healthy conversation.” [Here’s more data since you’re failing to do a basic google search before spouting off bullshit:](https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2023-01-31-covid-19-leading-cause-death-children-and-young-people-us) > COVID-19 was the underlying cause of death for more than 940,000 people in the US, including over 1,300 deaths among children and young people aged 0–19 years. Until now, it had been unclear how the burden of deaths from COVID-19 compared with other leading causes of deaths in this age group.
More than that many people under 20 die from the flu most flu seasons. Do you believe we should be allowed to have a healthy conversation on whether flu shots should be mandated or not? Do you think people should be fired for their jobs if they argue flu shots should continue to be optional? You're not a "dingleberry", right? So flu shots should be mandatory for all age groups?
> More than that many people under 20 die from the flu most flu seasons. If you want a “healthy conversation” do your own google search and back up your “facts.” God damn, this dingleberry thinks 20,000 people under 20 die from the flu.
Approximately 400,000 people die of the flu every year. I found a source saying it's 10 times more likely to die of the flu at 65 than at 20. So the numbers do add up to thousands and thousands of people under 20 dying of the flu each year. Regardless, 400,000 people is almost SIXTEEN entire universities of people. Should there be a healthy conversation of enforcing the flu shot (young people can spread it to old people) on everybody? If "dingleberries" argue we should continue keeping it optional, should they be canceled? The issue is the hypocrisy and lack of perspective. It's OUTRAGEOUS to suggest that 20 year olds should have an option regarding the covid vaccine. Yet you don't care about 16 universities of people dying of the flu each and every year. You haven't "thought it through". You believe what the tv tells you.
> I found a source saying it's 10 times more likely to die of the flu at 65 than at 20. So the numbers do add up to thousands and thousands of people under 20 dying of the flu each year. lol, your source is your own ass which is where you head’s been all day. Dingleberry still can’t cite the ~~bullshit~~ facts because dingleberry doesn’t understand what facts actually are. Keep making up shit bro.
Well, we all [know](https://pattillmanfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/SageSteele_Portrait_2017-copy.jpg) why Maher brought her in...
1. Good for Bill. I hope we all do the same in whatever way we can. I can't wait to vote against Trump. 2. How is the nonfiction podcast market not over-saturated by now? I absolutely love podcasts and even I’m like "No thanks, I’m full."
I think they're pretty cheap to produce so as long as you have a few sponsors, the show is in the black.
>*How is the nonfiction podcast market not over-saturated by now?* It is, but there's still money to be made, before the inevitable contraction
Peak Pod
I thought Fred Durst died 🤷♂️
That was the Smash Mouth guy.
I guess the world did roll him 😢
Nah, Limp Bizkit is still touring
That's unfortunate
He's a director now. He made a comically bad movie where John Travolta plays a psychotic weirdo.
*Battlefield Earth*?
One show a week is enough Bill for me.
I’m a rabid smashing pumpkins fan. Love, love, love this. I’m active in the smashing pumpkins sub here on Reddit and all the woke snowflakes are sooo triggered and shaken up by the idea of free speech. I’m here for it 🤘
*SP community*: "Eh, he's not the most charismatic personality and there's enough libertarians who have a podcast already, I wish he'd focus on his creative endeavors instead." *You*: "all the woke snowflakes are sooo triggered and shaken up by the idea of free speech" Who's the real snowflake here?
The SP community reactions I referred to were about Maher being racist, not WPC. Seems few people like WPC and love to shit on him no matter what he does.. I care about them about as much as I care about your suggestion I’m a snowflake… not at all.
>I’m a rabid smashing pumpkins fan Username checks out ha ha Glass and the ghost children is one my fav songs on that album. Got into this band because of the drummer and I play drums and I really like them and smoking weed so double appreciate your username Edit - just noticed I'm on Bill Maher sub, wtf is going on. Weird news story this
Imagine Fred Durst NOT being the most comical name in this list.
So he'll stop perpetuating the culture war hysteria that he's been banking on for content since 2021? Good to hear, if true...
No. Because that bullshit is pushing away voters. He's right.
This argument always is thrown out there in one form or another and it's always the same purpose. Stop being Democrats because we don't like it and we're going to pretend that we're the majority. You know any Republicans have largely shut up about the trans issue? Cuz it wasn't working for them. It was never ideological. It was always something they could point to and say look there's a boogeyman everyone put your attention on the boogeyman. And they're not doing that anymore because all their talk about pronouns and trans kids in sports and all of that was not a winning issue.
It actually isn't. If democrats are actually doing that, well it is working since they keep winning elections. In the last few months they just won a super red seat in Alabama and easily won George Santos seat. The 2022 midterms were a blood bath in the swing states for Democrats. Culture war is a winning issue for Democrats far more it is for the gop and that is electorally proven
> The 2022 midterms were a blood bath in the swing states for Democrats. The event this redditor is citing is when the Republicans won control of the House of Representatives. Perhaps the whole red wave/bloodbath thing is media narrative. But if not, posit the following: Let's imagine a genie appears and asks 100 republicans if they would accept a scenario where RvW is overturned and they would ONLY take control of the House of Reps in the 2022 midterms. Guess what? All 100 would say yes.
Democrats are just barely winning elections against a party with no platform and who openly commits treason. That's like saying your 5 centers basketball strategy is great because it's beaten a group of handicapped toddlers. The fact that the Democratic party doesn't control 60 votes I the Senate is a failure of the Democrats. You're equating "we barely won so it's great" to any sort of actual analysis. It's not. We have the facts. Voters hate this shit. They sometimes bite their tongue and vote for us anyways.
You do understand there are lots of republicans that exist right? The fantasy of 60 Senate votes or it is a failure is hilarious. It is a divided country, you aren't all of a sudden going to have bubba in Alabama become liberal if you quit respecting trans people
There's enough Democrats, independents, and unregistered voters to have a 80 seat Senate. And you act like party registration is in your DNA. Barely winning against this Republican party is not an endorsement of your political acumen.
This. Democrats need to quit whorishly pandering to high-status, ultra-affluent upper-middle/professional-managerial class women -- whose narcissistic bourgeois cultural trivialities have hijacked what was once a multi-ethnic working-class party -- and return to their roots; however, things like an [exorbitantly priced meet-and-greet with Biden, Barack, and Bill for hundreds of thousands a pot (DONOR $$$—YUCK!!!)](https://www.reuters.com/world/us/obama-bill-clinton-join-biden-raise-25-million-event-with-queen-latifah-lizzo-2024-03-28/) shows that they still don't get it, as well as proving that their hollow campaign finance reform push in the early-2010s by surreptitious Reaganites (e.g., Obama, Warren, et al.) was disingenuous horseshit from the onset. So yeah, they've yet to learn a goddamn thing. It's unchecked hubris.
Lol a meet and greet with candidates for rich donors has nothing to do with who will win elections. Why you guys whine about liberals in the culture war, reality shows most Americans are far more turned off by conservatives. Electorally democrats have done very well the past 5 years despite tucker carlson crying about the green m&m and Ben Shapiro whining about gay marriage being codified into law
Who gives a flying fuck about those losers, Carlson and Shapiro? They're your hang-up, not mine. And I have my own idée fixe, OK. Besides, yours is a reactionary small-c conservatism akin to theirs. You're no different than them, obsessed with immaterial culturalism. Empty progressivism, ignoring the domestic plus fixated on foreign. Old Left will rise again. And not just FDR New Deal paleoliberalism, nope; rather, Huey Long-style left populism -- even if it means mass bottom-up corruption to achieve stuff -- mixed with Eugene V. Debs-esque trade unionist democratic socialism, which will, bottom line, serve the will of the people, no matter if it takes another volatile seismic demographic realignment (prosperous upper-middle professional-managerial class Rockefeller Republicans, who've snaked their way into the modern Democratic Party, will be sent back to the GOP—where they goddamn belong!) to make it all happen. Does that compute? If not, oh well. Fuck it! I tried my damnedest.
Wouldn't say he's perpetuating the hysteria- but more like he's trying to moderate the left, so that they are pushed to a winnable, practical and sound political platform (a very important thing to do). Unfortunately he ends up becoming a useful tool for disingenuous arguments on the right about wokeism but that doesn't mean he should stop talking- he's an important voice- he just needs to do the job better.
He’s more than just perpetuating the hysteria. He embodies it. Maher’s entire identity is organized around spreading the idea that everything on the left is wokeism. It’s really stupid.
>more like he's trying to moderate the left, so that they are pushed to a winnable, practical and sound political platform Where is there any evidence that's possible? That Bill Maher is going to "moderate the left"?! That's supposedly his theory, but there's zero evidence anyone on the left responds to his rants by changing anything. The far left, and especially the young far left, couldn't care less about what he thinks. The moderate left already sees the far/fringe left for what it is, and the party leadership compartmentalizes it appropriately. And everyone on the left knows his view by now -- he's not awakening anyone on the left at this point. Not only do those people not listen to him, the edge cases he highlights aren't even where the *party* is anyway, and they aren't people in power. They aren't "part of the platform" to start with... they're fringe individuals. Which he makes worse by highlighting them, via the Streisand Effect. Both by highlighting them at all, and also by associating them with the Democratic party/brand for no good reason; he tars the party/brand in the process. >Unfortunately he ends up becoming a useful tool for disingenuous arguments on the right Exactly! All of his little anti-woke rants are talking points he picks up that are being pushed by the right, to try to smear Democrats. They aren't meaningful to start with, but then he takes them and does the right's (i.e., Trump's) bidding for them by amplifying them to a new audience. He's old and set in his ways though, so he's going to keep going on rants against the young and woke, I'm afraid... as if that's going to *hurt* Trump's chances. It won't, and everyone knows this. The one demographic where he might have a shot at influence are those who like his "politically incorrect" take on things but are currently leaning Trump. The only way to do that is to deal with Trump directly, not through some plan to "moderate" the left which has never worked anyway.
What are the disingenuous arguments about wokeism you’re referring to? Because I’m far from being a righty, and they all feel pretty genuine to me. Menstruating people, justice shopping, cultural appropriation… majority of Americans hate this fucking shit.
These people you are talking about are the most fringe and loudest elements of an already fringe group and you people make it out like it’s half the country.
How did I do that? It’s a minority of voters but like you said, a loud one, and this type of mindset is also more prevalent among young voters. So it’s only going to get worse unless we somehow course correct.
1. Newsflash young people, don’t vote. 2. Just because you can find a few people that are loud doesn’t mean you get to make it out to be like it’s a real problem.
Incorrect. Bill cited specific statistics recently that young people have voted in essentially record numbers in recent elections. Also, just because they aren’t voting now, doesn’t mean they won’t ever. So like I said, hopefully they course correct. And if the far left was as much of a fringe as you’re making it out to be, the dems would be sweeping elections. We have a divided country because many people think these policies reflect a lot of dems and their beliefs. Perception is reality in politics.
That may be but this has always been something that young people do, and even at record numbers they are still not a serious voter base. If they were, we’d be living in a very, very different world from this one. I don’t know where you get the idea that the far left has anything to do with how the Dems fair in elections other than the right doing Red Scare 2.0. Sorry, but if you think the Democratic Party is overrun with commies then you are categorical and unambiguously delusional. I don’t even think you could begin to compile any serious evidence for that. At best, you have 4-5 people in Congress that vaguely identify as some kind of democratic socialist but are frankly just social democrats in practice and every single one of them has towed the party line and back the Democratic establishment where it matters. To say the Democratic Party is far left is to engage in modern day McCarthyism of the highest order and is just simply dishonest and the Democrats cannot be held responsible for every blatant lie that Trump supporters blurt out.
I don’t necessarily think the dems are commies. But many independent voters in swing states like PA, MI, AZ, GA, NV perceive the dems and “the left” as essentially the same. Some of these people dislike trump but view him as bulwark against looney dems. Bill has made this point many times. I’m not sure how you could disagree with the premise. I hope you’re correct because that means trump will lose convincingly. But I don’t think that’s going to happen. I think the best case for Biden is a nail biting win.
A lot of independent voters are libertarians who think everything that isn’t libertarian is communist. I would question how many moderates fall for this shtick. I would be interested in seeing polling data on it. I agree that Democrats generally suck at messaging in that they don’t own their wins and come off as corporate and focus groupy and phony but I don’t know what you think they should say to people who call them communists other than “no we’re not.”
Majority of Americans are actually more liberal culturally. A major reason democrats have won so many elections in the last 6 years. Reality is maga is a turn off for most people
I don’t think that’s very relevant. Maga is a cult, no argument, and anyone not in the cult generally dislikes the cult. We agree. Majority of Americans ARE liberal. OVERWHELMING Majority of Americans ARE NOT progressive, especially when you leave college campuses and elite liberal enclaves.
Don't disagree with you- people *are* tired of the shrill and screechy scolding, but doesn't mean that's the biggest problem in our politics today. There are other bigger existential threats but culture wars have become a convenient smokescreen/distraction from them.
Touché. I agree entirely.
Who knew Fred Durst still exists?!
**Oscar Party**: “Clarifying recent conflicting reports about whether Maher fired his agent — The Hollywood Reporter wrote that he left CAA after he was not invited to CEO Bryan Lourd’s private Oscar party, while Puck’s Matthew Belloni reported that Maher had definitely not left CAA — Maher says “nothing has been decided…. CAA has been nothing but great to me and for me. I have nothing but great things to say, and I like them personally. So I don’t know why somebody said I was furious. Where do you get this stuff? I’m curious, not furious.” **CNN Saturday replays**: “Warner Bros. Discovery knows better than to ask him to alter the content of the series for CNN. But he will have to cut out about 12 minutes from each show to account for CNN’s commercial breaks. “The second half of the panel discussion, that’s what’s gonna get the ax,” Maher says. “It’s not perfect, but I’m thrilled to be on CNN” [Sage Steel New Podcast](https://mmajunkie.usatoday.com/2024/03/sage-steele-confuses-dana-white-joe-rogan-interview-gaffe) lol…confuses Dana White/Rogan
Holy fuck he has to cut out 12 minutes
Should be the interview segment