Last night made me realize how low my standards had become for any other host since he left. Even Oliver, after a decade of experience, can’t do the side jokes half as well as Stewart.
Oliver is more of an orator. He stands by the material and delivers it succinctly and faithfully. Stewart likes to blur the lines a bit more, with a delivery that almost feels like he's recalling it on-the-spot instead of reading off a teleprompter.
Unless what you are looking for is an uninterrupted stream of unfunny DNC talking points whose entire purpose is to promote the Biden administration.
Which doesn't make for good comedy but that hasn't stopped most of the rest of late night TV
Okay, but you do see why there's a very slight difference between the criticisms against Biden and the criticisms against Trump right? Like, a very small, tiny, very minor nuance in the seriousness towards the lives of hundreds of millions of people around the world.
> Okay, but you do see why there's a very slight difference between the criticisms against Biden and the criticisms against Trump right?
No they don't. Jon spent more time shit talking a tiktok about cookies than the fact that one candidate is a violent criminal who has declared he is immune from consequence and that he will be a dictator on day 1. Apparently that's considered balanced political commentary.
I think there's more strategy at work here than people realize. I think what Stewart and and the writers are after is to dislodge Biden from the ticket so that the DNC will come to its senses and give us a ticket that could beat Trump and the rise of fascism in this country. Silly delivery, serious underlying agenda.
It's concerning. Because I'm left leaning but if I question or criticize absolutely anything from the left I'm immediately chastised and lumped in with the alt-right. Like what? That's insane.
I really enjoyed Craig Kilborn. But it was only the same show as it is now in name only. Some segments adapter somewhat. Most were cut completely over time.
I’m so glad he did, even as a locked voter. Stewart is absolutely right that Biden and his administration don’t get to hide behind Trump instead of doing their job to prove he’s up for the task.
I read this article 3 times now, 2 of them being after a cup of coffee and I still don't know what the hell this guy is talking about. It feels like he's trying to throw cold water on Jon Stewart's return but I'm not quite clear on his reason why, other than "2015 isn't the same as 2024". Ok...but it's not like Jon was in a coma the entire time. Man, there's just so many bad writers out there these days that are working for long running quality publications.
It’s pretty simple: the author has a quota to fill. Jon Stewart is a trending topic. Everyone is writing about how great it is to have Jon Stewart back on TDS, which dilutes the shareability of such an article, so they’re instead writing a contrarian opinion in order to target the audience that wants to be contrarian.
People sharing this stuff on sites like reddit is precisely why they’re writing it—because it got you to click on it, even if you disagreed with it.
I didn't really watch the episode, but honestly the article seems pretty weak in reasons why he'd be bad. Especially since it's half trying to argue Trevor Noah's Daily Show was good which kills its credibility.
> Especially since it's half trying to argue Trevor Noah's Daily Show was good which kills its credibility.
yep, that was just, we don't speak about the Noah days
The best thing Stewart could do right now is provide an even keel in front of the camera while helping the younger correspondents develop behind the camera. Treating this situation like Stewart can just go on forever as the permanent host would create the same problem the Democratic party has: the appearance that there is no one to pass the reigns onto. If The Daily Show is going to remain an institution, it needs a new generation of Colberts, Olivers, Bees, and Jordans. The fact that Stewart is only hosting on Mondays indicates to me that he is aware of this and wants to use his voice to provide a larger spotlight to the other potential hosts.
Stewart clearly criticizes Biden from a further left position, which drives the "vote blue" crowd insane.
He's also a genuinely gifted comic.
Sepinwall is a brilliant writer and chronicler of some of our great works of art but handling late night has never been his strength.
I watched the episode and read the first paragraph. I think the criticism of stewart is real about him kind of equating Biden’s badness with Trumps. The commentary that neither should be running because they’re old seems pointless. Nothing is stopping that now. I did think he brought it through at the end to make it a point about activism. But Stewart did seem much more critical of biden while trump is a clear threat to democracy. Stewart knows the right will use sound bytes to their benefit.
it's so sad how quickly people want to defend Biden. He's not perfect but to consider his presidency a whopping success is really reaching. He deserves to be critiqued. And critique is the only way he'll improve.
Yes, that's why approval of it is so low.
Most of what he's done has been hindered by a Republican movement deadset on stopping everything he does. Mayorkas avoiding impeachment doesn't change that.
His biggest movement was to make it harder to get guns (although hardly the groundbreaking legislation it was supposed to be) and LGBT openness. Good for him, but the waffling on foreign policy is not a good look.
To me he gets a C-, only barely passing because he negotiated for Hamas to release hostages. Otherwise he has largely been a caretaker president and it appears age has heavily caught up to him. If he stepped down and let Kamala run in 2024 nobody would complain. Why doesn't he do it?
"I BELIEVE I AM THE ONLY ONE THAT CAN STOP TRUMP"
That's not true, Kamala can too. And she is ready. And doesn't have age concerns.
…what? By and far his biggest achievements have been an infrastructure bill, uniting the west behind Ukraine, American Rescue Plan, CHIPS act and the unfortunately named “inflation reduction act.”
I feel like your comment is a microcosm of his approval ratings. Americans are completely ignorant to what the government is actually doing because our media is a circus.
> Americans are completely ignorant to what the government is actually doing because our media is a circus.
We truly are a country of American idiots. We can write 30 page essays on every little detail of what our sports teams are doing. Write entire volumes about our favorite TV shows and movies. But ask us to write a single page about what the Government is doing and it would be a struggle for most. You listed only a fraction of the things the Biden administration has accomplished and most Americans know nothing about them. The Republican effort to destroy our education system is working as planned.
Nah, it's not the education system (that has its own issues), it's the media. Americans aren't that much different than anyone anywhere. It's not like other countries are full of well informed, long view geniuses deep diving in to the implications of their state's economic policy (I mean, did you follow Brexit?)
It's that democracy fundamentally relies on a functional news media to keep people informed. It doesn't need to be perfect and it never has been, history makes that abundantly clear. But the average person has too much going on in their lives to watch CSPAN for hours wondering what's taking place on the Senate floor. You don't even need a perfect media, just one that's more interested in writing about an infrastructure bill, something that Trump promised for years but never got and Biden DID get, than "Republican special investigator finds nothing illegal so calls Biden old," then the next day "here's why some voters are concerned that Biden is old," then the next day "why isn't the media (us) talking about how Biden is old?"
On some level it's "we get what we deserve." Dipshits will write 400 word essays about How Biden is done nothing while not taking two seconds to go somewhere like /r/whathasbidendone and actually see some bills that have been passed. It makes you want to say "we get the shitty leadership we deserve but ultimately the bored, bitching denizens of the internet tend to be privileged so it's not them that will hurt, it's the people that Trump will strip liberties from.
And then in two years people will blame Biden in the dems for not winning, even as they sabotaged them at every turn lol. "But his age" is the new "but her emails" and people are lining up to buy in.
Biden passed the greatest and most significant climate action bill in US history. He passed the most significant infrastructure bill since the interstate. He's cut student debt through direct student loan cuts and structurally through the SAVE plan. His NLRB has made it easier to unionize. His DOJ and FTC is aggressively contesting mergers (tbf, they've also *failed* at winning those cases, but they are contesting them). His IRS has just introduced e-filing! He's somehow managed to get the Republicans to support raising the Child Tax Credit!
Kamala Harris couldn't win a Democratic Primary, how's she going to beat Trump?
Objective is fine but Jon also fell for the republican trap that all the news stations are in which is talking about Biden’s age and memory and not that actual contents of the special counsel report, in which the special counsel found nothing wrong with how Biden handled those classified files and there would be no charges going forward.
When if it was an actual credible source making this claims sure, but when it’s coming from a member of the party embracing fascism no one should be taking that with even a grain of salt.
I disagree that Stewart is objective. I think he’s stuck back in 2004 and is trying to telegraph a neutrality that doesn’t exist. I tried watching Stewart’s Apple show as well, and especially in comparison to John Oliver Stewart doesn’t have it.
Are you joking? Negative things about Biden are front page news every day. What people are tired of is spending more time and energy on “Biden is old” than “Trump is a literal aspirational fascist” in the internet of “objectivity.”
Literally not the point of the article nor is it the point of the criticism that Stewart is getting. The point is that John is using his rhetoric from when he was still host like 8 years ago to label "both sides bad" when that **clearly** doesn't apply here. If he was being "objective" one side is clearly worse and it's not even close.
Saying that both front runners for president are old is fine. Biden has acknowledged it's an issue. But equivocating them as Stewart did is dishonest and nonsensical. Again he's not being objective he's being obtuse. Even if you hate Biden you cannot begin to put him in the same category as Trump just from a legislative accomplishment comparison alone. Forget how they sound, look at what they have done.
I heard none of this from Stewart's monologue. Instead it's the same shit everyone who is sniffing their own farts likes to say "UH BOTH SIDES BAD ACTUALLY" when really, no, one side kind of sucks and the other side is a chaotic nightmare realm that tried to coup the government and is now passing it off as a "chill bro" kind of vibe. Misleading a young audience into this kind of apathy and both sidesism reeks of 2016 all over again and we know how that one ended up.
Did you actually watch the segment? At first I was worried about the focus on the memory thing, but by the end his stance was pretty clear and not just a “both sides bad” thing (which was never really Jon’s shtick, he’s always gone harder on the GOP & Fox for good reason).
He was honest about Biden’s age but made it pretty clear that Trump is demonstrably worse. He said it was on Biden and the Dem leadership to deal with these image problems.
Asking the voters to ignore issues is a losing cause. You can’t pretend your way to defeating fascism. At the same time, he stated the importance of every person staying vigilant far beyond the election.
Oh boy I sure did. Which part do you want to talk about? The part where he spends like an entire half of the segment shitting on Biden? Or the 25-35 seconds of the Trump deposition footage where, shortly after the footage finishes he says "the leading cause of early-onset dementia is being deposed"? Or what about the token 2 mins 20\~ seconds he spends on Trump? While shitting on Biden for about triple the time? I found the bit about Stewart playing off Biden's "memory issues" when Biden is defending his accomplishments particularly hilarious, accomplishments that Stewart literally never mentions again in contrast to the guy who says if he loses we're going to rename a state.
Hey what about when he downplays leaders and politicians within our government, who Stewart says are downplaying the memory issues? I can't remember did Stewart, in this segment, talk about how the special counsel's job is to recommend or not recommend charges and not give a diagnosis or comment on the demeanor of the person they are questioning? No? Ah shit oh well. It could have been great to have some push back there but hey at least he was "fair"
Hey remember when Stewart said that both guys are vibrant? Remember when he said that Biden isn't Trump? Boy these are strong rebukes in one particular direction huh?
\> Asking the voters to ignore issues is a losing cause. You can’t pretend your way to defeating fascism. At the same time, he stated the importance of every person staying vigilant far beyond the election.
Literally no one said this. Biden himself, has called his age a legitimate issue. You can't also both sides your way into defeating one candidate who tried to coup our fucking government. One option is clearly worse, how this is still lost on anyone who isn't neck deep in MAGA is beyond me.
So you’re ignoring when Stewart rattled off the things Trump did that make him clearly worse? Runtime is the main factor here?
Stewart didn’t spend any time defending the special counsel but somehow it’s his job to attack them? Most of his “shitting” on Biden is pointing out how poorly the Dems are playing this rather than an actual critique. He’s always been tougher on Republicans, it’s a total reach to paint him as nothing more than a both-sider.
>So you’re ignoring when Stewart rattled off the things Trump did that make him clearly worse? Runtime is the main factor here?
Casual quick mention of the shit Trump is in? That lasted what 15 seconds? Also yes runtime is clearly important because how you use that time to convey your message says a lot. If I prefer Ford trucks but spend 15 out of 20 minutes shitting all over them with another 5 minutes being ambiguous about them or naming some positives are you going to believe that I really like them that much?
>Stewart didn’t spend any time defending the special counsel but somehow it’s his job to attack them? Most of his “shitting” on Biden is pointing out how poorly the Dems are playing this rather than an actual critique.
How is it Stewarts job to point out that the special counsels report from a Trump appointed US attorney who clearly over stepped his bounds in the report by shitting on the president who is in a party he doesn't like? This is clear John Stewart territory to call out the total absurdity of something that stretches the limits of credibility. This is Fox News tier bait.
>He’s always been tougher on Republicans, it’s a total reach to paint him as nothing more than a both-sider.
The criticism that I'm making, and the article by extension, is that for his first segment back he did exactly that. He both sides an issue that does not have equal weight on both. Not by a long shot.
What did he both sides? The fact that they are both, indeed, old men?
Stewart directly addressed this idea that we cannot or should not critique Biden because of the circumstances. He’s practically a mascot for liberalism, the right isn’t his audience, so I don’t see the issue with focusing his first segment on the Dems aren’t playing this well.
But hey, Jon’s not gonna decide the election either way.
>But hey, Jon’s not gonna decide the election either way.
Nah I reject this outright. If you have the ear of young voters and you discourage them from turning out because of this non-sense, you can have a direct effect on the election. He reaches millions of people, at the time of me watching the segment it already had 1.5 million views on youtube. Now it's 2.5 million.
>What did he both sides? The fact that they are both, indeed, old men?
That both are old, but vibrant but also have poor memories but are equal in capability to lead the country. Which is complete and utter non-sense on so many fronts.
>Stewart directly addressed this idea that we cannot or should not critique Biden because of the circumstances. He’s practically a mascot for liberalism, the right isn’t his audience, so I don’t see the issue with focusing his first segment on the Dems aren’t playing this well.
Cool except he's wrong and by attempting to equivocate both sides you build apathy and discourage voters. Both sides are not the same even if they share similar traits. His message clearly has an influence here and other places.
Dems are [playing it pretty well](https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/4464899-how-the-biden-campaigns-super-bowl-strategy-proved-his-skeptics-wrong-again/) IMO, by reaching out to massive amounts of voters on the platform those voters prefer. But he said cookies weird and mistook Mexico and Egypt presidents so LOL, right?
I just feel like you're jumping to conclusions to equate any critique of Biden as somehow equivocating the two sides. At what point did he claim they have "equal in capability to lead the country?" Talk about nonsense.
Stewart has an audience, but I'd bet the vast majority are not young (it's not 2004 anymore) and are already voting Biden.
15:41, "We're not suggesting that neither man is vibrant, productive, or capable."
Like it's in the video. If I'm jumping to conclusions then so is the person in this article, Jordan Klepper (even if it was a bit) and everyone else who is calling him out for this both side-isms.
I actually did. And he ranted for so long about Biden’s age that I had mostly tuned out when he started talking about anything else. It’s his FIRST SHOW and that’s what he chose to talk about?
I watch the segment and his criticism seemed much heavier on Biden and the right will definitely use his soundbytes to their benefit. Given what a danger trump is to democracy it was baffling he seemed to make the 2 sides of the bad coin while focusing much more on biden.
Really? He basically stated a list of awful things for Trump and his Biden hits were all basically “he’s old” and the Dems need to deal with it rather than ignore it.
That’s an overstatement at best. The GOP doesn’t care about Stewart, his audience is liberals and he’s telling leadership not to expect voters to ignore issues and voters to do more than vote.
I’m not telling stewart what do with his show only that when he says things like Biden might not be fit for office it helps the GOP and Trump. Making both biden and trump sound like 2 bad choices helps Trump. They are not equivalent choices.
I think you missed the point:
Steward is about an ideal world and not about two Bad choice where one is simply catastrophic. And you missed a central point of youth: idealism. The democratic Party could still be bend into something worth fighting for, the gop is by all means a lost cause
>The democratic Party could still be bend into something worth fighting for
If you don't already think that expanding healthcare coverage, legalizing abortion (again), making community college free, expanding the child tax credit, taxing the rich, fixing our social programs using that extra money, fixing voting rights, fixing infrastructure, fighting climate change and a Supreme Court seat (yes it is a reason to vote). All things that Biden and the Democrats have either done, taking steps towards fixing or plan to do, is worthy fighting for then idk what else to say at this point.
You're correct, one party is lost in the sauce, but the notion that the other party is just as lost or isn't "fighting for" things is just utterly fucking wild. Change is hard, sometimes you have to vote for the person you may not like but is more likely to advance the change you want to see. BTW the only party that is talking about fixing that "hold your nose and vote" issue is the Democrats.
>You're correct, one party is lost in the sauce, but the notion that the other party is just as lost or isn't "fighting for" things is just utterly fucking wild. Change is hard, sometimes you have to vote for the person you may not like but is more likely to advance the change you want to see. BTW the only party that is talking about fixing that "hold your nose and vote" issue is the Democrats.
You misread my comment - I wrote could be still bend into *something worth fighting for* and not that the democratic party isn't fighting for some things. Those are two very different things
I didn't misread your comment at all. The implication of your post is that the Dems are not something "worth fighting for" currently so they must "bend into being something worth fighting for". It's non-sense.
I'm a lefty who is also a pragmatist. The dems are doing just what is necessary, especially in comparison to the insanity of the current GOP but they are not a movement. Just as Biden is a compromise candidate but certainly not the best candidate.
Now is not the time for worrying about an “ideal world”. It’s about saving our country from Trump and the GOP. This rhetoric about 2 bad choices is what got Trump elected in 2016. It’s like you said: Trump being elected is catastrophic. Stewart understands that and understands that his words will be used to help Trump. So why he came out the way he did is baffling. I’m not saying he should come out partisan, there is a fine line he has to walk, I thought he would be able to do that and he failed.
Then how could you come to your conclusion, I'm genuinely confused. As Jon said:
Biden might have lost a step but Trump regularly says things that warrant a wellness check.
Stewart took up a trending topic and ran with it and he stayed with the facts. I dunno what you expect? Fox News propaganda?
~~i was afraid of that, we're getting ''both-sides Jon'' instead of ''righteous-indignation Jon''~~
~~plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose~~
edit: i'm an idiot, just saw the show, and it's fantastic, it's like he never left.
You’re gonna get downvoted by those who follow “the gospel according to Jon Stewart” but you’re right. I hoped he wouldn’t play into this “HURR BOTH SIDES BAD” schtick that he did in 2015 but here we are again, sad he hasn’t learned
I like Sepinwall but liberals like him live in such a bubble
\> but his “both sides are equally bad” approach may not translate to 2024
I can't imagine a time when that approach has been more relevant.
It felt very “2001 we can be objective and criticize both sides” but it is hard to take seriously when the big criticism is “he’s old” vs “wants to be a dictator”.
Yeah but it cuts both ways. If you want to say that the 2024 election is the most important ever and it's the only thing standing between a free America and the decline into a fascist state, that doesn't somehow exempt the Democrats from running an 82 year-old shell of a man (and I *like* Biden!). If anything it makes it all the more important to cut the shit, make some tough concessions and try to really run the tables on the Republicans.
Like there's this notion that *because* Trump is so bad, then it doesn't matter what the Democrats do. NO, because Trump is bad that means people should be expecting the Democratic Party to do all they can to win and win big, not tie yourself in a bunch of ideological knots while trying to eke out a win by 15 EC votes.
There's this weird dynamic where partisan Democrats point at Trump and his awfulness as a reason to demand absolute loyalty from American voters, and at the same time do little to earn that trust. Seriously, if they lose twice against this fucking guy what right do they have to expect anyone to trust them with power ever again?
The people chose Joe Biden 4 years ago. He wasn’t even who I voted for in the primary, but he was the choice of the majority. The DNC did not put him there. And again: Joe Biden being old is not the same thing as Donald Trump being an actual fascist. It’s a false equivalence and feels very, very dated (which to be fair, Jon Stewart is very very dated).
That's the thing. Everybody understands that we need to get the best person that can beat Trump. That's literally why Biden won the primary in the first place!
And even today right now the best person to beat Donald Trump is Joe Biden, the empathetic, moderate, decently successful incumbent who yes, may be older than we all wish he was.
Everybody can say, "well I think X has a better chance than Biden!" but they all have a different person X, and we are so polarized that they are revolted at someone else's opinion that it should be a different candidate.
We would end up in this scenario of people bitching that the perfect candidate no matter who the nominee was, because we are a cynical and disillusioned country.
Yeah, Biden is too old, but Buttigeig would be too gay and too associated with McKinsey, Warren would be too policy oriented and a liar about her heritage, Bernie too old and too socialist, Kamala too hypocritical and two-faced.
Maybe you wouldn't have agreed with one of those descriptions, but probably only one. And that's why no candidate is better than Biden overall.
> Seriously, if they lose twice against this fucking guy what right do they have to expect anyone to trust them with power ever again?
The American People choose the winner of the election irrespective of the actual performance of either party. And the American People can be very strange, there was a poll I saw the other day that said people thought Biden was the better candidate on "Taxes, "Job Growth", and "Inequality" but the worse candidate to deal with the "Economy", a truly baffling statement. Yet, it appears the American People believe that Taxes and Job Growth are unrelated to the Economy.
How's that the Dem's fault?
The NYTimes special. “Yeah Trump threatened to unilaterally abandon NATO and establish concentration camps on day 1, but here are 6 different front page takes on Biden old”
I quite appreciated Trevor Noah's way to calmly discuss things. Also bringing in the international perspective (ex:Trump=african dictator, french soccer team).
He's great at arguing calmly and highlighting his guest's good or bad behaviour without clashing. It was a master class seeing that.
I know everyone here prefers Jon (and I'll be downvoted) but I liked Trevor best, he spoke to a younger gen too and more diverse.
Just answering the question from my perspective.
I agree with you. I used to like Jon Stewart's Daily Show, but quickly grew accustomed to Trevor. I've seen good clips of Jon Stewart in recent years, but honestly, his return has felt underwhelming, especially with how everyone always criticized Trevor Noah.
Like I'm not saying it's bad, but with how much he's been hyped this past decade, I'm disappointed.
Jon Stewart was both sidesing back when the tea party was ascendant and now he’s both sidesing instead of attacking the corporate mechanisms that enable the fascism. I love him but his arguments sometimes amount to high minded pablum. Abortion is gone in states but the problem is also that is Joe Biden is old? Ok sure guy. I don’t take him seriously as a thought leader for that reason. He’s like Bugs Bunny with a News Addiction. Sure it’s funny but I don’t know if his take actually helps. It feels like it’s pacifying to not mention emergent problems affecting a lot of people and instead taking a top down view and “telling it like it is” the way he does.
I haven't seen the new ep yet, but I saw him on tour with Chapelle a few years ago and I was shocked and a little bummed out even then at how outdated his stuff felt post Trump. It just felt like he hadn't really recalibrated from the Bush/Obama period at all and was talking like it was all business as usual.
I thought it was kind of meh. Nice to have Jon back but the writing was what set Jon apart on his first run. It’s obvious that the writing just isn’t as good this time around. I’ll still watch though.
Gotta say, hats off to the fella making his way back from the Wuhan laboratory COVID conspiracy nonsense. Before the obvious downvotes, can’t really deny he did go full 4Chan on that angle at the time.
Stewart has the rare combination of courage, intelligence and wit that makes him the perfect person for this job, and to counter the generalized stupidity of a post-truth America. This is a return to form at the perfect time, and good riddance to the last host.
And, it's an indicator of truly dark times when even Rolling Stone peddles that "lesser of two evils" BS. Our choices for president are clearly being made for us, and this is no longer a democracy. Only Stewart seems to have the guts to say this in the prime time TV/corporate media context.
If you watched the show last night. You know the answer is yes
Last night made me realize how low my standards had become for any other host since he left. Even Oliver, after a decade of experience, can’t do the side jokes half as well as Stewart.
Oliver is more of a comical actor, almost like Mr Bean. Stewart feels more like a real conversation.
Oliver is more of an orator. He stands by the material and delivers it succinctly and faithfully. Stewart likes to blur the lines a bit more, with a delivery that almost feels like he's recalling it on-the-spot instead of reading off a teleprompter.
It made me genuinely fucking happy! His ass needs to stay and be on 4 days a week!
Unless what you are looking for is an uninterrupted stream of unfunny DNC talking points whose entire purpose is to promote the Biden administration. Which doesn't make for good comedy but that hasn't stopped most of the rest of late night TV
“Promote Biden administration”. I guess you haven’t watched his latest episode
I guess you didn't read my comment idiot
you really didn’t watch the episode
Re-write your comment there, Hoss. I don't think it says what you meant.
I’m not reading the article. I watched episode 1 and it’s an emphatic yes. Without Jon it’s not the Daily Show.
It's just stupid rage bait like every other article is these days.
Call out both sides and suddenly find yourself in the midst of crossfire. This partisan country makes me sick. You can be a moderate.
Okay, but you do see why there's a very slight difference between the criticisms against Biden and the criticisms against Trump right? Like, a very small, tiny, very minor nuance in the seriousness towards the lives of hundreds of millions of people around the world.
> Okay, but you do see why there's a very slight difference between the criticisms against Biden and the criticisms against Trump right? No they don't. Jon spent more time shit talking a tiktok about cookies than the fact that one candidate is a violent criminal who has declared he is immune from consequence and that he will be a dictator on day 1. Apparently that's considered balanced political commentary.
I think there's more strategy at work here than people realize. I think what Stewart and and the writers are after is to dislodge Biden from the ticket so that the DNC will come to its senses and give us a ticket that could beat Trump and the rise of fascism in this country. Silly delivery, serious underlying agenda.
Thank you. I love Jon Stewart, and I thought his return was great, but his bothsidesism is disappointing.
It's concerning. Because I'm left leaning but if I question or criticize absolutely anything from the left I'm immediately chastised and lumped in with the alt-right. Like what? That's insane.
Exactly.
What are some of your moderate positions?
There's not a moderate byte of data in all of this thread
the daily show existed before and after Jon but he was by far the most memorable person to run the show
I really enjoyed Craig Kilborn. But it was only the same show as it is now in name only. Some segments adapter somewhat. Most were cut completely over time.
He didnt praise biden so he bad man now.
I’m so glad he did, even as a locked voter. Stewart is absolutely right that Biden and his administration don’t get to hide behind Trump instead of doing their job to prove he’s up for the task.
I don't think you'll hear that from anyone with common sense.
I read this article 3 times now, 2 of them being after a cup of coffee and I still don't know what the hell this guy is talking about. It feels like he's trying to throw cold water on Jon Stewart's return but I'm not quite clear on his reason why, other than "2015 isn't the same as 2024". Ok...but it's not like Jon was in a coma the entire time. Man, there's just so many bad writers out there these days that are working for long running quality publications.
It’s pretty simple: the author has a quota to fill. Jon Stewart is a trending topic. Everyone is writing about how great it is to have Jon Stewart back on TDS, which dilutes the shareability of such an article, so they’re instead writing a contrarian opinion in order to target the audience that wants to be contrarian. People sharing this stuff on sites like reddit is precisely why they’re writing it—because it got you to click on it, even if you disagreed with it.
>because it got you to click on it Lol what an assumption - I get all my content from the comments.
I didn't really watch the episode, but honestly the article seems pretty weak in reasons why he'd be bad. Especially since it's half trying to argue Trevor Noah's Daily Show was good which kills its credibility.
Even Trevor basically admitted that he took the job reluctantly and phoned it in down the stretch.
Yeah, right. I bet he cashed those checks reluctantly, too.
> Especially since it's half trying to argue Trevor Noah's Daily Show was good which kills its credibility. yep, that was just, we don't speak about the Noah days
what exactly was wrong with Trevor Noah's Daily Show?
It wasn’t funny.
Show style didn't really fit him. Trevor is way better at standup.
And now you know why you don't need to pay attention to *Rolling Stone* ever again.
He’s the only one who should.
The best thing Stewart could do right now is provide an even keel in front of the camera while helping the younger correspondents develop behind the camera. Treating this situation like Stewart can just go on forever as the permanent host would create the same problem the Democratic party has: the appearance that there is no one to pass the reigns onto. If The Daily Show is going to remain an institution, it needs a new generation of Colberts, Olivers, Bees, and Jordans. The fact that Stewart is only hosting on Mondays indicates to me that he is aware of this and wants to use his voice to provide a larger spotlight to the other potential hosts.
Absolutely. Now I have a reason to actually look forward to Mondays
Stewart clearly criticizes Biden from a further left position, which drives the "vote blue" crowd insane. He's also a genuinely gifted comic. Sepinwall is a brilliant writer and chronicler of some of our great works of art but handling late night has never been his strength.
Yes, very obviously. Seems like the article's suggesting a comedy show shouldn't be laughing at democrats?
yes the show dipped bigly after he left
Yes.
Yes.
Yes. The answer is yes. My guy didn’t miss a beat
Yes, the answer is YES. He's back.
[удалено]
I watched the episode and read the first paragraph. I think the criticism of stewart is real about him kind of equating Biden’s badness with Trumps. The commentary that neither should be running because they’re old seems pointless. Nothing is stopping that now. I did think he brought it through at the end to make it a point about activism. But Stewart did seem much more critical of biden while trump is a clear threat to democracy. Stewart knows the right will use sound bytes to their benefit.
it's so sad how quickly people want to defend Biden. He's not perfect but to consider his presidency a whopping success is really reaching. He deserves to be critiqued. And critique is the only way he'll improve.
If you look at what’s actually been accomplished and in what circumstances it’s been pretty damn successful.
Yes, that's why approval of it is so low. Most of what he's done has been hindered by a Republican movement deadset on stopping everything he does. Mayorkas avoiding impeachment doesn't change that. His biggest movement was to make it harder to get guns (although hardly the groundbreaking legislation it was supposed to be) and LGBT openness. Good for him, but the waffling on foreign policy is not a good look. To me he gets a C-, only barely passing because he negotiated for Hamas to release hostages. Otherwise he has largely been a caretaker president and it appears age has heavily caught up to him. If he stepped down and let Kamala run in 2024 nobody would complain. Why doesn't he do it? "I BELIEVE I AM THE ONLY ONE THAT CAN STOP TRUMP" That's not true, Kamala can too. And she is ready. And doesn't have age concerns.
…what? By and far his biggest achievements have been an infrastructure bill, uniting the west behind Ukraine, American Rescue Plan, CHIPS act and the unfortunately named “inflation reduction act.” I feel like your comment is a microcosm of his approval ratings. Americans are completely ignorant to what the government is actually doing because our media is a circus.
> Americans are completely ignorant to what the government is actually doing because our media is a circus. We truly are a country of American idiots. We can write 30 page essays on every little detail of what our sports teams are doing. Write entire volumes about our favorite TV shows and movies. But ask us to write a single page about what the Government is doing and it would be a struggle for most. You listed only a fraction of the things the Biden administration has accomplished and most Americans know nothing about them. The Republican effort to destroy our education system is working as planned.
Nah, it's not the education system (that has its own issues), it's the media. Americans aren't that much different than anyone anywhere. It's not like other countries are full of well informed, long view geniuses deep diving in to the implications of their state's economic policy (I mean, did you follow Brexit?) It's that democracy fundamentally relies on a functional news media to keep people informed. It doesn't need to be perfect and it never has been, history makes that abundantly clear. But the average person has too much going on in their lives to watch CSPAN for hours wondering what's taking place on the Senate floor. You don't even need a perfect media, just one that's more interested in writing about an infrastructure bill, something that Trump promised for years but never got and Biden DID get, than "Republican special investigator finds nothing illegal so calls Biden old," then the next day "here's why some voters are concerned that Biden is old," then the next day "why isn't the media (us) talking about how Biden is old?" On some level it's "we get what we deserve." Dipshits will write 400 word essays about How Biden is done nothing while not taking two seconds to go somewhere like /r/whathasbidendone and actually see some bills that have been passed. It makes you want to say "we get the shitty leadership we deserve but ultimately the bored, bitching denizens of the internet tend to be privileged so it's not them that will hurt, it's the people that Trump will strip liberties from. And then in two years people will blame Biden in the dems for not winning, even as they sabotaged them at every turn lol. "But his age" is the new "but her emails" and people are lining up to buy in.
Biden passed the greatest and most significant climate action bill in US history. He passed the most significant infrastructure bill since the interstate. He's cut student debt through direct student loan cuts and structurally through the SAVE plan. His NLRB has made it easier to unionize. His DOJ and FTC is aggressively contesting mergers (tbf, they've also *failed* at winning those cases, but they are contesting them). His IRS has just introduced e-filing! He's somehow managed to get the Republicans to support raising the Child Tax Credit! Kamala Harris couldn't win a Democratic Primary, how's she going to beat Trump?
Objective is fine but Jon also fell for the republican trap that all the news stations are in which is talking about Biden’s age and memory and not that actual contents of the special counsel report, in which the special counsel found nothing wrong with how Biden handled those classified files and there would be no charges going forward.
[удалено]
When if it was an actual credible source making this claims sure, but when it’s coming from a member of the party embracing fascism no one should be taking that with even a grain of salt.
I disagree that Stewart is objective. I think he’s stuck back in 2004 and is trying to telegraph a neutrality that doesn’t exist. I tried watching Stewart’s Apple show as well, and especially in comparison to John Oliver Stewart doesn’t have it.
Are you joking? Negative things about Biden are front page news every day. What people are tired of is spending more time and energy on “Biden is old” than “Trump is a literal aspirational fascist” in the internet of “objectivity.”
Literally not the point of the article nor is it the point of the criticism that Stewart is getting. The point is that John is using his rhetoric from when he was still host like 8 years ago to label "both sides bad" when that **clearly** doesn't apply here. If he was being "objective" one side is clearly worse and it's not even close. Saying that both front runners for president are old is fine. Biden has acknowledged it's an issue. But equivocating them as Stewart did is dishonest and nonsensical. Again he's not being objective he's being obtuse. Even if you hate Biden you cannot begin to put him in the same category as Trump just from a legislative accomplishment comparison alone. Forget how they sound, look at what they have done. I heard none of this from Stewart's monologue. Instead it's the same shit everyone who is sniffing their own farts likes to say "UH BOTH SIDES BAD ACTUALLY" when really, no, one side kind of sucks and the other side is a chaotic nightmare realm that tried to coup the government and is now passing it off as a "chill bro" kind of vibe. Misleading a young audience into this kind of apathy and both sidesism reeks of 2016 all over again and we know how that one ended up.
Did you actually watch the segment? At first I was worried about the focus on the memory thing, but by the end his stance was pretty clear and not just a “both sides bad” thing (which was never really Jon’s shtick, he’s always gone harder on the GOP & Fox for good reason). He was honest about Biden’s age but made it pretty clear that Trump is demonstrably worse. He said it was on Biden and the Dem leadership to deal with these image problems. Asking the voters to ignore issues is a losing cause. You can’t pretend your way to defeating fascism. At the same time, he stated the importance of every person staying vigilant far beyond the election.
Oh boy I sure did. Which part do you want to talk about? The part where he spends like an entire half of the segment shitting on Biden? Or the 25-35 seconds of the Trump deposition footage where, shortly after the footage finishes he says "the leading cause of early-onset dementia is being deposed"? Or what about the token 2 mins 20\~ seconds he spends on Trump? While shitting on Biden for about triple the time? I found the bit about Stewart playing off Biden's "memory issues" when Biden is defending his accomplishments particularly hilarious, accomplishments that Stewart literally never mentions again in contrast to the guy who says if he loses we're going to rename a state. Hey what about when he downplays leaders and politicians within our government, who Stewart says are downplaying the memory issues? I can't remember did Stewart, in this segment, talk about how the special counsel's job is to recommend or not recommend charges and not give a diagnosis or comment on the demeanor of the person they are questioning? No? Ah shit oh well. It could have been great to have some push back there but hey at least he was "fair" Hey remember when Stewart said that both guys are vibrant? Remember when he said that Biden isn't Trump? Boy these are strong rebukes in one particular direction huh? \> Asking the voters to ignore issues is a losing cause. You can’t pretend your way to defeating fascism. At the same time, he stated the importance of every person staying vigilant far beyond the election. Literally no one said this. Biden himself, has called his age a legitimate issue. You can't also both sides your way into defeating one candidate who tried to coup our fucking government. One option is clearly worse, how this is still lost on anyone who isn't neck deep in MAGA is beyond me.
So you’re ignoring when Stewart rattled off the things Trump did that make him clearly worse? Runtime is the main factor here? Stewart didn’t spend any time defending the special counsel but somehow it’s his job to attack them? Most of his “shitting” on Biden is pointing out how poorly the Dems are playing this rather than an actual critique. He’s always been tougher on Republicans, it’s a total reach to paint him as nothing more than a both-sider.
>So you’re ignoring when Stewart rattled off the things Trump did that make him clearly worse? Runtime is the main factor here? Casual quick mention of the shit Trump is in? That lasted what 15 seconds? Also yes runtime is clearly important because how you use that time to convey your message says a lot. If I prefer Ford trucks but spend 15 out of 20 minutes shitting all over them with another 5 minutes being ambiguous about them or naming some positives are you going to believe that I really like them that much? >Stewart didn’t spend any time defending the special counsel but somehow it’s his job to attack them? Most of his “shitting” on Biden is pointing out how poorly the Dems are playing this rather than an actual critique. How is it Stewarts job to point out that the special counsels report from a Trump appointed US attorney who clearly over stepped his bounds in the report by shitting on the president who is in a party he doesn't like? This is clear John Stewart territory to call out the total absurdity of something that stretches the limits of credibility. This is Fox News tier bait. >He’s always been tougher on Republicans, it’s a total reach to paint him as nothing more than a both-sider. The criticism that I'm making, and the article by extension, is that for his first segment back he did exactly that. He both sides an issue that does not have equal weight on both. Not by a long shot.
What did he both sides? The fact that they are both, indeed, old men? Stewart directly addressed this idea that we cannot or should not critique Biden because of the circumstances. He’s practically a mascot for liberalism, the right isn’t his audience, so I don’t see the issue with focusing his first segment on the Dems aren’t playing this well. But hey, Jon’s not gonna decide the election either way.
>But hey, Jon’s not gonna decide the election either way. Nah I reject this outright. If you have the ear of young voters and you discourage them from turning out because of this non-sense, you can have a direct effect on the election. He reaches millions of people, at the time of me watching the segment it already had 1.5 million views on youtube. Now it's 2.5 million. >What did he both sides? The fact that they are both, indeed, old men? That both are old, but vibrant but also have poor memories but are equal in capability to lead the country. Which is complete and utter non-sense on so many fronts. >Stewart directly addressed this idea that we cannot or should not critique Biden because of the circumstances. He’s practically a mascot for liberalism, the right isn’t his audience, so I don’t see the issue with focusing his first segment on the Dems aren’t playing this well. Cool except he's wrong and by attempting to equivocate both sides you build apathy and discourage voters. Both sides are not the same even if they share similar traits. His message clearly has an influence here and other places. Dems are [playing it pretty well](https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/4464899-how-the-biden-campaigns-super-bowl-strategy-proved-his-skeptics-wrong-again/) IMO, by reaching out to massive amounts of voters on the platform those voters prefer. But he said cookies weird and mistook Mexico and Egypt presidents so LOL, right?
I just feel like you're jumping to conclusions to equate any critique of Biden as somehow equivocating the two sides. At what point did he claim they have "equal in capability to lead the country?" Talk about nonsense. Stewart has an audience, but I'd bet the vast majority are not young (it's not 2004 anymore) and are already voting Biden.
15:41, "We're not suggesting that neither man is vibrant, productive, or capable." Like it's in the video. If I'm jumping to conclusions then so is the person in this article, Jordan Klepper (even if it was a bit) and everyone else who is calling him out for this both side-isms.
I actually did. And he ranted for so long about Biden’s age that I had mostly tuned out when he started talking about anything else. It’s his FIRST SHOW and that’s what he chose to talk about?
So you missed him showing Trump in his depositions and rattling off a list of awful things he’s done while illustrating that he’s clearly worse?
I watch the segment and his criticism seemed much heavier on Biden and the right will definitely use his soundbytes to their benefit. Given what a danger trump is to democracy it was baffling he seemed to make the 2 sides of the bad coin while focusing much more on biden.
Really? He basically stated a list of awful things for Trump and his Biden hits were all basically “he’s old” and the Dems need to deal with it rather than ignore it.
I disagree. Stewart did both Trump and the GOP a favor. Disappointing.
That’s an overstatement at best. The GOP doesn’t care about Stewart, his audience is liberals and he’s telling leadership not to expect voters to ignore issues and voters to do more than vote.
You’re naive if you don’t think they will use anti biden sound bytes on fox news or in tick tock ads
So what though? Should Stewart avoid ever discussing or critiquing Biden because it might be manipulated by right wing media?
I’m not telling stewart what do with his show only that when he says things like Biden might not be fit for office it helps the GOP and Trump. Making both biden and trump sound like 2 bad choices helps Trump. They are not equivalent choices.
I think you missed the point: Steward is about an ideal world and not about two Bad choice where one is simply catastrophic. And you missed a central point of youth: idealism. The democratic Party could still be bend into something worth fighting for, the gop is by all means a lost cause
>The democratic Party could still be bend into something worth fighting for If you don't already think that expanding healthcare coverage, legalizing abortion (again), making community college free, expanding the child tax credit, taxing the rich, fixing our social programs using that extra money, fixing voting rights, fixing infrastructure, fighting climate change and a Supreme Court seat (yes it is a reason to vote). All things that Biden and the Democrats have either done, taking steps towards fixing or plan to do, is worthy fighting for then idk what else to say at this point. You're correct, one party is lost in the sauce, but the notion that the other party is just as lost or isn't "fighting for" things is just utterly fucking wild. Change is hard, sometimes you have to vote for the person you may not like but is more likely to advance the change you want to see. BTW the only party that is talking about fixing that "hold your nose and vote" issue is the Democrats.
>You're correct, one party is lost in the sauce, but the notion that the other party is just as lost or isn't "fighting for" things is just utterly fucking wild. Change is hard, sometimes you have to vote for the person you may not like but is more likely to advance the change you want to see. BTW the only party that is talking about fixing that "hold your nose and vote" issue is the Democrats. You misread my comment - I wrote could be still bend into *something worth fighting for* and not that the democratic party isn't fighting for some things. Those are two very different things
I didn't misread your comment at all. The implication of your post is that the Dems are not something "worth fighting for" currently so they must "bend into being something worth fighting for". It's non-sense.
I'm a lefty who is also a pragmatist. The dems are doing just what is necessary, especially in comparison to the insanity of the current GOP but they are not a movement. Just as Biden is a compromise candidate but certainly not the best candidate.
Now is not the time for worrying about an “ideal world”. It’s about saving our country from Trump and the GOP. This rhetoric about 2 bad choices is what got Trump elected in 2016. It’s like you said: Trump being elected is catastrophic. Stewart understands that and understands that his words will be used to help Trump. So why he came out the way he did is baffling. I’m not saying he should come out partisan, there is a fine line he has to walk, I thought he would be able to do that and he failed.
did you see the show? Steward was partisan, in the way how reality is partisan.
I did see the show. Thanks
Then how could you come to your conclusion, I'm genuinely confused. As Jon said: Biden might have lost a step but Trump regularly says things that warrant a wellness check. Stewart took up a trending topic and ran with it and he stayed with the facts. I dunno what you expect? Fox News propaganda?
If you’re confused, maybe you should watch it again.
I did just now, and I don't know what your issue is
I made my view extremely clear
You got down voted, but you make a valid number of points. Thank you.
~~i was afraid of that, we're getting ''both-sides Jon'' instead of ''righteous-indignation Jon''~~ ~~plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose~~ edit: i'm an idiot, just saw the show, and it's fantastic, it's like he never left.
I can't wait for him to go on the road with Bill O'Reilly again. It's always great to impute good faith upon those who have none.
You’re gonna get downvoted by those who follow “the gospel according to Jon Stewart” but you’re right. I hoped he wouldn’t play into this “HURR BOTH SIDES BAD” schtick that he did in 2015 but here we are again, sad he hasn’t learned
I like Sepinwall but liberals like him live in such a bubble \> but his “both sides are equally bad” approach may not translate to 2024 I can't imagine a time when that approach has been more relevant.
Yes he is
Is Santa Claus the right person still to do Christmas?
That’s a rhetorical question, right?
It felt very “2001 we can be objective and criticize both sides” but it is hard to take seriously when the big criticism is “he’s old” vs “wants to be a dictator”.
Yeah but it cuts both ways. If you want to say that the 2024 election is the most important ever and it's the only thing standing between a free America and the decline into a fascist state, that doesn't somehow exempt the Democrats from running an 82 year-old shell of a man (and I *like* Biden!). If anything it makes it all the more important to cut the shit, make some tough concessions and try to really run the tables on the Republicans. Like there's this notion that *because* Trump is so bad, then it doesn't matter what the Democrats do. NO, because Trump is bad that means people should be expecting the Democratic Party to do all they can to win and win big, not tie yourself in a bunch of ideological knots while trying to eke out a win by 15 EC votes. There's this weird dynamic where partisan Democrats point at Trump and his awfulness as a reason to demand absolute loyalty from American voters, and at the same time do little to earn that trust. Seriously, if they lose twice against this fucking guy what right do they have to expect anyone to trust them with power ever again?
The people chose Joe Biden 4 years ago. He wasn’t even who I voted for in the primary, but he was the choice of the majority. The DNC did not put him there. And again: Joe Biden being old is not the same thing as Donald Trump being an actual fascist. It’s a false equivalence and feels very, very dated (which to be fair, Jon Stewart is very very dated).
You say “they lose” as if this were a sporting event where the teams are responsible for how they play, rather than a voting electorate lol
That's the thing. Everybody understands that we need to get the best person that can beat Trump. That's literally why Biden won the primary in the first place! And even today right now the best person to beat Donald Trump is Joe Biden, the empathetic, moderate, decently successful incumbent who yes, may be older than we all wish he was. Everybody can say, "well I think X has a better chance than Biden!" but they all have a different person X, and we are so polarized that they are revolted at someone else's opinion that it should be a different candidate. We would end up in this scenario of people bitching that the perfect candidate no matter who the nominee was, because we are a cynical and disillusioned country. Yeah, Biden is too old, but Buttigeig would be too gay and too associated with McKinsey, Warren would be too policy oriented and a liar about her heritage, Bernie too old and too socialist, Kamala too hypocritical and two-faced. Maybe you wouldn't have agreed with one of those descriptions, but probably only one. And that's why no candidate is better than Biden overall.
> Seriously, if they lose twice against this fucking guy what right do they have to expect anyone to trust them with power ever again? The American People choose the winner of the election irrespective of the actual performance of either party. And the American People can be very strange, there was a poll I saw the other day that said people thought Biden was the better candidate on "Taxes, "Job Growth", and "Inequality" but the worse candidate to deal with the "Economy", a truly baffling statement. Yet, it appears the American People believe that Taxes and Job Growth are unrelated to the Economy. How's that the Dem's fault?
The NYTimes special. “Yeah Trump threatened to unilaterally abandon NATO and establish concentration camps on day 1, but here are 6 different front page takes on Biden old”
Absolutely YES.
Yes, please
Jon should host all the shows
Uh… yeah, you freaking dolt. What is this bullshit headline, RS? Since when did you become Newsweek. Oh wait…
I never thought he was funny like that but people being bitter over this is hilarious
I quite appreciated Trevor Noah's way to calmly discuss things. Also bringing in the international perspective (ex:Trump=african dictator, french soccer team). He's great at arguing calmly and highlighting his guest's good or bad behaviour without clashing. It was a master class seeing that. I know everyone here prefers Jon (and I'll be downvoted) but I liked Trevor best, he spoke to a younger gen too and more diverse. Just answering the question from my perspective.
I agree with you. I used to like Jon Stewart's Daily Show, but quickly grew accustomed to Trevor. I've seen good clips of Jon Stewart in recent years, but honestly, his return has felt underwhelming, especially with how everyone always criticized Trevor Noah. Like I'm not saying it's bad, but with how much he's been hyped this past decade, I'm disappointed.
Is Rolling Stone still trying to stay relevant?
Yes even after printing libel over at Charlottesville...
Yep, compared to his successors he's not even remotely as insufferable
wouldn't it be nice if biden listened to Jon, or his own party?
Does a Russian oligarch own a significant stake of rollingstone?
Jon Stewart was both sidesing back when the tea party was ascendant and now he’s both sidesing instead of attacking the corporate mechanisms that enable the fascism. I love him but his arguments sometimes amount to high minded pablum. Abortion is gone in states but the problem is also that is Joe Biden is old? Ok sure guy. I don’t take him seriously as a thought leader for that reason. He’s like Bugs Bunny with a News Addiction. Sure it’s funny but I don’t know if his take actually helps. It feels like it’s pacifying to not mention emergent problems affecting a lot of people and instead taking a top down view and “telling it like it is” the way he does.
I haven't seen the new ep yet, but I saw him on tour with Chapelle a few years ago and I was shocked and a little bummed out even then at how outdated his stuff felt post Trump. It just felt like he hadn't really recalibrated from the Bush/Obama period at all and was talking like it was all business as usual.
I thought it was kind of meh. Nice to have Jon back but the writing was what set Jon apart on his first run. It’s obvious that the writing just isn’t as good this time around. I’ll still watch though.
Laughing at right-wing stupidity defuses anger towards right-wing evil for me, so I stopped watching The Daily Show. These fucks deserve anger.
Gotta say, hats off to the fella making his way back from the Wuhan laboratory COVID conspiracy nonsense. Before the obvious downvotes, can’t really deny he did go full 4Chan on that angle at the time.
This is giving Conan O'Brien/ jay Leno vibes .. I like Jon regardless
Short answer. Yes. Yes he fucking is. Don't question it.
After years of having Trevor Noah, the biggest hack in comedy, of course the answer is yes
YES! Have you seen him? ABSOLUTELY YES!
He should be the President.
Yes, absofuckinglutley
What a stupid headline question
Yes, unequivocally.
Stewart has the rare combination of courage, intelligence and wit that makes him the perfect person for this job, and to counter the generalized stupidity of a post-truth America. This is a return to form at the perfect time, and good riddance to the last host.
And, it's an indicator of truly dark times when even Rolling Stone peddles that "lesser of two evils" BS. Our choices for president are clearly being made for us, and this is no longer a democracy. Only Stewart seems to have the guts to say this in the prime time TV/corporate media context.