Why didn’t Kamala go on the Joe Rogan podcast?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump shoots from the hip and his supporters have already said they don't care about his gaffes and lies and derogatory words. Kamala is someone who has a harder time speaking impromptu and she would be scrutinized relentlessly plus the audience would be mostly male and confrontational towards whatever she said.

Shouldn’t someone who wants to be President figure out how to take it and now cower in fear?

You ... you know the election is over, right?

You know Kamala lost right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One thing this interview proved. The legacy media is dead. No one trusts it anymore.

Yeah that's what happens when we have Americans with zero critical thinking skills, and the airwaves are flooded with sketchy pundits and podcasters who say the media lies and to never trust the media - while these same podcasters and pundits are out there telling even bigger lies than the media.

Joe Rogan himself is a fountain of disinfo - from wildfire conspiracy theories to anti-vax conspiracy theories to hosting numerous insane conspiracy theorists like Alex Jones.

No, the media isn't perfect, yes, they are biased but this has been known for years. But meanwhile as we point at CNN or CBS or other MSM and cite their lies, it's more like over the last 20 or 30 years they have either lied or misrepresented about as many instances of this as one could count on one's fingers during that entire time span, while shrieking "THEY LIE" and then abandoning them to instead seek out other outlets that have an EVEN WORSE history of bias and lies makes no sense to me. But that's what we've done. When you abandon MSM for FOX, Newsmax, and others who have a far worse record of lies and distortions, what even was the point of complaining about lies? What statement are you making about trust when you turn to far more untrustworthy sources?

Let's be honest here, it's not about any moral stance against lies, or of seeking out trustworthy media. What you're actually doing is going to even more biased and even more untrustworthy sources not for truth, but because they tell you the lies that you want to hear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One thing this interview proved. The legacy media is dead. No one trusts it anymore.

Yeah that's what happens when we have Americans with zero critical thinking skills, and the airwaves are flooded with sketchy pundits and podcasters who say the media lies and to never trust the media - while these same podcasters and pundits are out there telling even bigger lies than the media.

Joe Rogan himself is a fountain of disinfo - from wildfire conspiracy theories to anti-vax conspiracy theories to hosting numerous insane conspiracy theorists like Alex Jones.

No, the media isn't perfect, yes, they are biased but this has been known for years. But meanwhile as we point at CNN or CBS or other MSM and cite their lies, it's more like over the last 20 or 30 years they have either lied or misrepresented about as many instances of this as one could count on one's fingers during that entire time span, while shrieking "THEY LIE" and then abandoning them to instead seek out other outlets that have an EVEN WORSE history of bias and lies makes no sense to me. But that's what we've done. When you abandon MSM for FOX, Newsmax, and others who have a far worse record of lies and distortions, what even was the point of complaining about lies? What statement are you making about trust when you turn to far more untrustworthy sources?

Let's be honest here, it's not about any moral stance against lies, or of seeking out trustworthy media. What you're actually doing is going to even more biased and even more untrustworthy sources not for truth, but because they tell you the lies that you want to hear.

The cable news media is a propaganda arm for the CIA, Big Pharma, and the Pentagon. They’ve manufactured consent for wars, for vaccines, for intelligence dossiers that aren’t real dossiers. They are truly fake news. Most cable news anchors are psychopaths. They aren’t even real journalists, just reality show personalities. Something happened to journalism in the 90s with the OJ trial and Clinton impeachment. People found that were millions of dollars to be paid in infotainment and making tragedy into a four ring circus. Like sows to the trough, CNN and The NY Times have led the public to war, to bleaching their Amazon packages and double masking while in the car to all other types of foolishness

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can you imagine Kamala doing a three hour unscripted, unedited interview? Nope and neither could her campaign handlers. Her idiocy and ultra-left agenda would have been front and center. She would not have been able to give detailed answers to any questions especially on her ever-changing “policies”. It would have been word salad after word salad. We would have been unburdened by what has been.

This is truth. No one could imagine her doing such an interview like that with anyone. And worse still is that her people didn’t even havr faith in her.

She probably will provide a great candid interview now post politics. That’s what I don’t understand about the Democrats. The same thing happened with Hillary. They’re trying to make their candidates politicians instead of real people. You shouldn’t have to study how to talk to people. Just talk to people like you’re at your kitchen table. Tell it like it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can you imagine Kamala doing a three hour unscripted, unedited interview? Nope and neither could her campaign handlers. Her idiocy and ultra-left agenda would have been front and center. She would not have been able to give detailed answers to any questions especially on her ever-changing “policies”. It would have been word salad after word salad. We would have been unburdened by what has been.

This is truth. No one could imagine her doing such an interview like that with anyone. And worse still is that her people didn’t even havr faith in her.

She probably will provide a great candid interview now post politics. That’s what I don’t understand about the Democrats. The same thing happened with Hillary. They’re trying to make their candidates politicians instead of real people. You shouldn’t have to study how to talk to people. Just talk to people like you’re at your kitchen table. Tell it like it is.

What if she doesn’t? What if the person that we saw on the campaign trail is all that she is and there is nothing else there?

Considering that I have not read anything about her to indicate that in private she’s much different, this is the awful truth that I have come to terms with about her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump shoots from the hip and his supporters have already said they don't care about his gaffes and lies and derogatory words. Kamala is someone who has a harder time speaking impromptu and she would be scrutinized relentlessly plus the audience would be mostly male and confrontational towards whatever she said.

Shouldn’t someone who wants to be President figure out how to take it and now cower in fear?

You ... you know the election is over, right?

You know Kamala lost right?

Yeah, it's over. Why is it living rent-free in your head?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can you imagine Kamala doing a three hour unscripted, unedited interview? Nope and neither could her campaign handlers. Her idiocy and ultra-left agenda would have been front and center. She would not have been able to give detailed answers to any questions especially on her ever-changing “policies”. It would have been word salad after word salad. We would have been unburdened by what has been.

This is truth. No one could imagine her doing such an interview like that with anyone. And worse still is that her people didn’t even havr faith in her.

She probably will provide a great candid interview now post politics. That’s what I don’t understand about the Democrats. The same thing happened with Hillary. They’re trying to make their candidates politicians instead of real people. You shouldn’t have to study how to talk to people. Just talk to people like you’re at your kitchen table. Tell it like it is.

What if she doesn’t? What if the person that we saw on the campaign trail is all that she is and there is nothing else there?

Considering that I have not read anything about her to indicate that in private she’s much different, this is the awful truth that I have come to terms with about her.

The election is over. Who cares what she does now?

[Anonymous]

Why isn’t Kamala the leader of the democratic party now? She was good enough to be their presidential candidate! But now she’s consigned to the scrap heap?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One thing this interview proved. The legacy media is dead. No one trusts it anymore.

Yeah that's what happens when we have Americans with zero critical thinking skills, and the airwaves are flooded with sketchy pundits and podcasters who say the media lies and to never trust the media - while these same podcasters and pundits are out there telling even bigger lies than the media.

Joe Rogan himself is a fountain of disinfo - from wildfire conspiracy theories to anti-vax conspiracy theories to hosting numerous insane conspiracy theorists like Alex Jones.

No, the media isn't perfect, yes, they are biased but this has been known for years. But meanwhile as we point at CNN or CBS or other MSM and cite their lies, it's more like over the last 20 or 30 years they have either lied or misrepresented about as many instances of this as one could count on one's fingers during that entire time span, while shrieking "THEY LIE" and then abandoning them to instead seek out other outlets that have an EVEN WORSE history of bias and lies makes no sense to me. But that's what we've done. When you abandon MSM for FOX, Newsmax, and others who have a far worse record of lies and distortions, what even was the point of complaining about lies? What statement are you making about trust when you turn to far more untrustworthy sources?

Let's be honest here, it's not about any moral stance against lies, or of seeking out trustworthy media. What you're actually doing is going to even more biased and even more untrustworthy sources not for truth, but because they tell you the lies that you want to hear.

The cable news media is a propaganda arm for the CIA, Big Pharma, and the Pentagon. They’ve manufactured consent for wars, for vaccines, for intelligence dossiers that aren’t real dossiers. They are truly fake news. Most cable news anchors are psychopaths. They aren’t even real journalists, just reality show personalities. Something happened to journalism in the 90s with the OJ trial and Clinton impeachment. People found that were millions of dollars to be paid in infotainment and making tragedy into a four ring circus. Like sows to the trough, CNN and The NY Times have led the public to war, to bleaching their Amazon packages and double masking while in the car to all other types of foolishness

100% this. Don’t drop too many facts on this forum.

I guarantee 99.9% of the people talking down on Rogan have never even listened to him. He is far more intelligent and level headed than someone like Howard Stern and would debate circles around most cable news talking heads.

[Anonymous]

Being okay with Dick Cheney’s endorsement and campaigning with Liz Cheney, but not going on Rogan because of pushback from woke staff, is a perfect anecdote to why she lost this election and the Dems are in shambles.

Just think how backwards and nonsensical that is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Being okay with Dick Cheney’s endorsement and campaigning with Liz Cheney, but not going on Rogan because of pushback from woke staff, is a perfect anecdote to why she lost this election and the Dems are in shambles.

Just think how backwards and nonsensical that is.

The same Dick Cheney that leaked to NYT about WMD to get us into a destructive war and then went on Meet The Press and said "see even the liberal NYT is reporting it". I'm supposed to trust that guy, his daughter, and the NYT and if I don't I am in a cult and my family members shouldn't speak to me. OK!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump shoots from the hip and his supporters have already said they don't care about his gaffes and lies and derogatory words. Kamala is someone who has a harder time speaking impromptu and she would be scrutinized relentlessly plus the audience would be mostly male and confrontational towards whatever she said.

Shouldn’t someone who wants to be President figure out how to take it and now cower in fear?

You ... you know the election is over, right?

You know Kamala lost right?

Yeah, it's over. Why is it living rent-free in your head?

Lol. Yes nobody is talking about it anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being okay with Dick Cheney’s endorsement and campaigning with Liz Cheney, but not going on Rogan because of pushback from woke staff, is a perfect anecdote to why she lost this election and the Dems are in shambles.

Just think how backwards and nonsensical that is.

The same Dick Cheney that leaked to NYT about WMD to get us into a destructive war and then went on Meet The Press and said "see even the liberal NYT is reporting it". I'm supposed to trust that guy, his daughter, and the NYT and if I don't I am in a cult and my family members shouldn't speak to me. OK!

Yes. In the upside down world that we live in you’re on the wrong side of history if you’re not :checks notes: in league with Dick Cheney.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump shoots from the hip and his supporters have already said they don't care about his gaffes and lies and derogatory words. Kamala is someone who has a harder time speaking impromptu and she would be scrutinized relentlessly plus the audience would be mostly male and confrontational towards whatever she said.

Shouldn’t someone who wants to be President figure out how to take it and now cower in fear?

You ... you know the election is over, right?

You know Kamala lost right?

Yeah, it's over. Why is it living rent-free in your head?

Lol. Yes nobody is talking about it anymore.

Perhaps you should talk about it (I’m assuming you’re a Democrat) in order to learn from the mistakes of this campaign. An autopsy needs to be done. Democrats are so quick to discard someone as soon as one thing doesn’t go their way (just like they did to Biden) and that’s part of the problem.

Republicans will stick around and have stuck around with Trump for nine years around three different campaigns and it was the same deal with McCain and others. The problem with Democrats is they show no loyalty.

Look at how Obama and Nancy threw Biden under the bus and now Nancy is throwing Kamala under the bus. “This isn’t what we wanted”. Well, who cares about what Nancy wanted? Shouldn’t the candidate be whoever the American public selected?

[Anonymous]

The N word debacle from Rogan was a good enough reason to not go in his show.

Dems lost because Biden and the DNC ignored voters.