Joe Money, Joe Problems: the November 2021 U.S. Politics Thread

"The Limbaugh of the liberals" has already been a joke topic on e.g. Prairie Home Companion.

I guess it depends on execution but. If this were a thing that could truly move the needle, it would be out there and doing so.

Daily Show and Sam Bee and many others have tried to occupy a space like this and. Well. Whole lotta choir-directed preaching. Which is fine and pretty harmless. But we are not convincing the unconvinced at this time, and that is concerning.

no $$ there

MSNBC is pretty unhinged, just in an incredibly shitty way. Remember Maddow's tax return bombshell?

Selling people on grievances is easy, that's why political talk radio can cross over so easily with sports talk in style and substance - being mad about the head coach of the Ravens vs. being mad about the head coach of the country.

Which you can totally do from a left perspective, as Air America failed at and Sam Seder/Chapo have succeeded at in their way - but you don't get money thrown at you or Clear Channel stations dedicated to you when you're airing grievances aimed at the corporations buying advertising. So you get safe old MSNBC or the Daily Show getting more toothless over time until it reached the Rally To Restore Sanity.

can’t fathom a cable network with a labor bent. simply can’t happen in this country

MSNBC is pretty unhinged, just in an incredibly shitty way. Remember Maddow's tax return bombshell?

https://cbsnews2.cbsistatic.com/hub/i/2021/10/10/c45a1a92-aecd-4a4b-9e01-6745792a1066/49-pay-fors.png

Yeah I mean I wasn’t being entirely serious, it’s just so frustrating how you can be right and still lose on messaging and culture war bullshit. How does this stuff get more traction than reality? Amplification, understanding of human nature, and skillful use of media, I guess.

People are dumb.

People are acritical. Almost as if the people in power planned it that way. But that's the root of the problem and where a helluva lot of reform needs to happen. Teach the children how to identify propaganda and logical fallacies, etc.

https://hillreporter.com/report-pence-aides-and-staff-forced-into-hiding-on-jan-6th-because-they-were-locked-out-of-their-offices-117343?fbclid=IwAR2oMDptSTGcAErPYG8lfKYUr44Fg5LbGil7YeEODsuUO7eGt02BV7gyMt8

People overthink the intelligence of the average voter. I asked my uncle why he voted for Trump and he couldn't give me a reason besides recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capital.

He's a black man who's never stepped in a church and can't state 1 thing about Jews or Palestine.

— Darrell Owens (@IDoTheThinking) November 10, 2021

Regarding a follow up tweet in that thread - my suspicion about Trump fans has always been that a lot of them are just assholes and like the idea of an asshole President who can be their king.

That's my uncle and his wife, they loved having a president that gave them free reign and reasons to treat the "other" as horribly as possible.

that's a big part of it but also having someone who validates every idiotic opinion you've ever had and sticks it to those who use pesky things like "facts" against you has a hell of a lot of appeal

Oh absolutely, that was a huge part of Trump's appeal and of me-first conservatism in general. The freedom to look out for #1 and not give a shit about anyone else. But it also squares with those policy preferences above, which are mostly variations on "more stuff for me" and "make other people pay (for more stuff for me)."

One reasonable progressive approach to that would be to lean into it and really go full-bore on fuck-the-rich, just like the right leans into fuck-the-poor/fuck-everybody-else-who's-not-like-me. But liberals have been scared off of that both by a century-plus of "communist/socialist" screeching from the right and of course by a good number of their own disproportionately influential donors.

FDR was pretty good at that, rhetorically. He wasn't shy about rattling cages. But most Democratic presidents since have been selling variations on the "we're all in this together/gotta look out for each other" theme — which as any 1st-grade teacher can tell you is a much harder sell.

can you believe a Dem president sounding like this? Using these terms? What would Peter Baker say?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjSTQwamo8M

One reasonable progressive approach to that would be to lean into it and really go full-bore on fuck-the-rich

Interesting idea. Maybe people could, like, occupy a street or something? Maybe in some place like New York?

Nah. You're right. Silly idea. That's why no one has tried it.

One reasonable progressive approach to that would be to lean into it and really go full-bore on fuck-the-rich, just like the right leans into fuck-the-poor/fuck-everybody-else-who's-not-like-me.

kinda tough to do that when you're raising millions of dollars off those people though

Well exactly, to the two posts above. Which is where "reasonable progressive approach" and "likely Democratic approach" diverge paths.

pareene has been banging the liberal media drum for a while

https://newrepublic.com/article/162723/liberals-propaganda-democratic-autopsy-ads
https://newrepublic.com/article/159876/liberals-losing-journalism-wars-brian-timpone

NEW: Prominent Democrats (including @RepAdamSchiff @RepMalinowski) slam Biden's decision to sell $650 million in new weapons to Saudi Arabia, citing its continued brutality in Yemen. pic.twitter.com/UXF1qXEG7v

— Akbar Shahid Ahmed (@AkbarSAhmed) November 10, 2021

I want to scream and rant and create outrage about how fucking awful conservative policy and politics are, and I would be glad to listen to someone doing just that.

Pod Save America is kind of like that, and the hosts/founders have basically said that they started the Crooked Media company to provide an unabashedly partisan media platform on the left.

I know DSA types like to make fun of it and consider it too establishment or whatever ("Obama bros"), which is probably true to some degree, but maybe not as much as one might think. The podcast is definitely pro-Democratic Party in the sense that it treats the party as the primary locus for political action, though the hosts don't shy away from criticism of individual Democratic politicians when the situation calls for it. Their sympathies generally lie on the progressive side of the Democratic coalition; I think one of them admitted that he voted for Elizabeth Warren in the primary, which probably gives you some idea.

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/11/10/scott-fairlamb-jan-6-sentencing-520592

I guess that's cool unless you put it in the context of black people getting 5 years in prison for illegally voting by mistake

Oh great, the ever popular "That is not Scott Fairlamb, that’s not who I am" confession.

If you can’t handle me at my punching a Capitol cop you don’t deserve me at my not punching a Capitol cop.

Sad lol, but assuming Rittenhouse hasn't already been set free, did I just see that the psycho judge's ringtone went off in the middle of the trial and it was (reportedly? allegedly?) that Lee Greenwood song?

Haven't been paying as close attention this week, but it certainly seems to be a common line that the prosecution did a pretty shitty job. Surprising to me that they'd put him on the stand at this point, seems like allowing themselves to fumble.

I think I heard that since his is largely a self-defense claim it would be kind of weird *not* to take the stand.

Which makes sense, but I also saw some (alleged, self-proclaimed) experts saying that would normally be true, but that the prosecution's case was so weak that there was a greater chance of it doing more harm than good.

I keep seeing people saying the prosecution is weak and blowing the case, but I can't seem to find any explanation of where they are going wrong. What's the story?

Essentially it sounds like they've just done a sloppy job in general, but specifically didn't do a great job with the survivor's testimony, from what I've read it only strengthened the self-defense argument. But I should emphasize this is just what I've gleaned via twitter and reddit quick takes.

Prosecutors in the Kyle Rittenhouse trial rested their case Tuesday after presenting more than 20 witnesses, many of whom explicitly or inadvertently made statements that supported the defense's self-defense case.

Also the judge just seems to be perpetually short and pissy with the prosecution.

(xp - thanks caek! was looking for a more concise summary)

Yeah, the one guy who lost his bicep/arm said he could see why Rittenhouse might have feared for his life.

yeah it really seems like he's gonna walk. really curious how these high-profile cases seem to keep drawing hardline rightwing judges

the whole thing seems fucked to me, even if Rittenhouse did legitimately fear for his life, he still brought an illegally acquired gun across state lines into a zone where violence was occurring and actively engaged in that violence. pretty messed up that you apparently can do that if you think one of the guys might damage a Walgreens or something

I keep seeing people saying the prosecution is weak and blowing the case, but I can't seem to find any explanation of where they are going wrong. What's the story?

The prosecution tried to make an issue of Rittenhouse staying silent (constitutional no-no) and brought up something on cross the judge had ruled wasn't relevant (surefire way to piss off a judge and jury and potentially give Rittenhouse a new trial if he was convicted).

I will be shocked if Rittenhouse gets convicted of the most serious charges.

This sort of shit is *exactly* why I put no faith in the legitimacy of US jurisprudence. What an absolute crock.

Frogbs otm, even if you could determine that he legit felt threatened in the situations he placed himself in, he... placed himself there. I am ot hearing a lot of discussion of that.

Like, is anyone asking: why the fuck were you there anyway? did anyone ask you to be there with your penis gun? No they did not. Was there some reason for you to be there in tactical gear, stalking about looking for someone you could could legally shoot? Sounds like hunting, not self-defense. Ok so you got into one situation where it might be construed as self-defense... well, you know what also might have worked as a self-defense strategy? STAYING THE FUCK HOME.

I have been "defending myself" by avoid life-threatening situations for... let's see... fifty years. There is literally no time at which I've deliberately placed myself in a potentially life-threatening situation, while (just coincidentally) carrying lethal weaponry.

In completely unrelated news I also haven't strolled through alligator-infested swamps while wearing a vest made of raw chicken meat. As a result, I haven't had to defend myself against alligator attacks.

That's not how Law works. There are very specific charges against him, and the judge and/or jury can't just say "well he shouldn't have been in that location at that time, so he should be punished". It's a very blinkered process.

Yeah, I agree with everything you said YMP, but sadly that's not the trial. It fucking sucks, but that's our justice system ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Actually the jury CAN say that lol. But they shouldn't. About 15 yrs ago I was on a jury and the defendant was so obviously an asshole (he was his own attorney even tho had no legal training, so that should give you a sense of his personality) but I was the only juror who didn't immediately say "this guy is a prick, I'm voting guilty" and wanted to discuss whether or not he actually violated his restraining order.

The term 'crocodile tears' (a superficial display of anguish) comes from a medieval belief that crocodiles shed tears of sadness when killing their prey. https://t.co/tkuVCEbBRa

— Merriam-Webster (@MerriamWebster) November 10, 2021

Like, is anyone asking: why the fuck were you there anyway? did anyone ask you to be there with your penis gun? No they did not.

Actually, the prosecution absolutely asked this. They put on the owner of the store and asked him whether he had asked Rittenhouse or anyone else to protect his store. He had not.

i know this clown has no money (?) but surely there's wrongful death suits in the wings, right?

Not watching live, but I'm seeing some stuff on Twitter hinting that his testimony took a turn that is not good for the defense at all. Anyone up to date that can confirm? Or is this just wishful projection?

Lol, or on trying to further keep up, I'm not seeing that the judge may have managed to handwave away that too in his jury instructions? Of fucking course.

Not watching live, but I'm seeing some stuff on Twitter hinting that his testimony took a turn that is not good for the defense at all. Anyone up to date that can confirm? Or is this just wishful projection?

they sort of hit on this today
Like, is anyone asking: why the fuck were you there anyway? did anyone ask you to be there with your penis gun? No they did not. Was there some reason for you to be there in tactical gear, stalking about looking for someone you could could legally shoot?

ask Kyle why he lied to people saying he was a medic and really drilled down on what the hell was he thinking when he killed those people and general made the self defense stance seem a bit wobbly

One of the guys he shot literally was a medic.

I'm seeing he also admitted that one of the people he shot had their hands raised?