Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was a good interview, TBH. By that I mean it was strategically sound. He came across as sounding like he always has: an mediocre communicator, but with good comedic timing and clearly not "suffering from dementia".

Strategically, it's a hell of a good voter market to target. They Rogan listeners were never going to vote Harris, but they may have chosen abstention. Now with this appearance and the RFK endorsement / stumping, he has locked in that demographic. of (mostly) Gen Z listeners.

+1

I don’t count on democrats understanding this.

They will probably run another ad about nazis and flood the zone with more unsubstantiated rumors, their stale playbook is not deep.

Oh no, believe me, I understand it. Now Harris has to go on that show as well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I with Kamal did the Rogan podcast. Then people will see the contrast between the two. Unfortunately, a missed opportunity.

Her stated reason was that they couldn't make the schedule work. Which given that Trump would up basically missing his Michigan rally due to the taping,so that he could ramble incoherently for three hours, no makes her look like she's just more important and organized than Trump.

It's not like she's not going popular podcasts, either. I think she should do Rogan if they can make the schedules work.

But yeah, that Houston rally seemed like a bigger deal than Trump's interview or his sad little Michigan rally.

Here's hoping.

I'm not happy about this, but some of you are delusional. There is NO WAY the Houston rally is a bigger deal than Rogan. And to even suggest that scheduling conflicts are preventing her from going on the biggest podcast in the world is laughable.

Maybe she's waiting for him to fail, then going on the same podcast later to clean up? That would be a great move, actually!

To all the fools posting saying trumps having issues I'm an hour into this podcast he has not fumbled anything he's clear and on point. I'm sick of all the lies from you all here. Like or hate trump whatever who cares, what I can't stand is a liar trying to get their way lying to others to sway votes. It's sad.

Anonymous wrote:It was a good interview, TBH. By that I mean it was strategically sound. He came across as sounding like he always has: an mediocre communicator, but with good comedic timing and clearly not "suffering from dementia".

Strategically, it's a hell of a good voter market to target. They Rogan listeners were never going to vote Harris, but they may have chosen abstention. Now with this appearance and the RFK endorsement / stumping, he has locked in that demographic. of (mostly) Gen Z listeners.

It is literally the least reliable voting segment.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was a good interview, TBH. By that I mean it was strategically sound. He came across as sounding like he always has: an mediocre communicator, but with good comedic timing and clearly not "suffering from dementia".

Strategically, it's a hell of a good voter market to target. They Rogan listeners were never going to vote Harris, but they may have chosen abstention. Now with this appearance and the RFK endorsement / stumping, he has locked in that demographic. of (mostly) Gen Z listeners.

+1

I don’t count on democrats understanding this.

They will probably run another ad about nazis and flood the zone with more unsubstantiated rumors, their stale playbook is not deep.

Rogan laughed at him when he gave his non-answer to the question of how the 2020 election was stolen.

And Rogan can, but the appearance was still a net gain for that voter niche.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was a good interview, TBH. By that I mean it was strategically sound. He came across as sounding like he always has: an mediocre communicator, but with good comedic timing and clearly not "suffering from dementia".

Strategically, it's a hell of a good voter market to target. They Rogan listeners were never going to vote Harris, but they may have chosen abstention. Now with this appearance and the RFK endorsement / stumping, he has locked in that demographic. of (mostly) Gen Z listeners.

+1

I don’t count on democrats understanding this.

They will probably run another ad about nazis and flood the zone with more unsubstantiated rumors, their stale playbook is not deep.

Rogan laughed at him when he gave his non-answer to the question of how the 2020 election was stolen.

Anonymous wrote:It was a good interview, TBH. By that I mean it was strategically sound. He came across as sounding like he always has: an mediocre communicator, but with good comedic timing and clearly not "suffering from dementia".

Strategically, it's a hell of a good voter market to target. They Rogan listeners were never going to vote Harris, but they may have chosen abstention. Now with this appearance and the RFK endorsement / stumping, he has locked in that demographic. of (mostly) Gen Z listeners.

+2

Anonymous wrote:It was a good interview, TBH. By that I mean it was strategically sound. He came across as sounding like he always has: an mediocre communicator, but with good comedic timing and clearly not "suffering from dementia".

Strategically, it's a hell of a good voter market to target. They Rogan listeners were never going to vote Harris, but they may have chosen abstention. Now with this appearance and the RFK endorsement / stumping, he has locked in that demographic. of (mostly) Gen Z listeners.

+1

I don’t count on democrats understanding this.

They will probably run another ad about nazis and flood the zone with more unsubstantiated rumors, their stale playbook is not deep.

It was a good interview, TBH. By that I mean it was strategically sound. He came across as sounding like he always has: an mediocre communicator, but with good comedic timing and clearly not "suffering from dementia".

Strategically, it's a hell of a good voter market to target. They Rogan listeners were never going to vote Harris, but they may have chosen abstention. Now with this appearance and the RFK endorsement / stumping, he has locked in that demographic. of (mostly) Gen Z listeners.

they don't seem too impressed over on the rogan subreddit

https://old.reddit.com/r/JoeRogan/comments/1gcc4hx/joe_rogan_experience_2219_donald_trump/

lot of mocking trump for being dumb and just saying whatever he feels like

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I with Kamal did the Rogan podcast. Then people will see the contrast between the two. Unfortunately, a missed opportunity.

Her stated reason was that they couldn't make the schedule work. Which given that Trump would up basically missing his Michigan rally due to the taping,so that he could ramble incoherently for three hours, no makes her look like she's just more important and organized than Trump.

It's not like she's not going popular podcasts, either. I think she should do Rogan if they can make the schedules work.

But yeah, that Houston rally seemed like a bigger deal than Trump's interview or his sad little Michigan rally.

Here's hoping.

I'm not happy about this, but some of you are delusional. There is NO WAY the Houston rally is a bigger deal than Rogan. And to even suggest that scheduling conflicts are preventing her from going on the biggest podcast in the world is laughable.

At this stage in the campaign it's about turning out the people you know are voting for you. Rogan's base is young, mostly white men. They aren't going for Harris anyway. Meanwhile a rally with Beyoncé where she talked extensively about abortion rights? Might motivate more young women to get to the polls.

She's not going to convince the core Rogan listener to vote for her right now. It would be cool if she did it (because I think she'd do well-- 1:1 somewhat adversarial interactions are good for her because they show off her prosecutorial skills) but I don't think it should be a priority.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I with Kamal did the Rogan podcast. Then people will see the contrast between the two. Unfortunately, a missed opportunity.

Her stated reason was that they couldn't make the schedule work. Which given that Trump would up basically missing his Michigan rally due to the taping,so that he could ramble incoherently for three hours, no makes her look like she's just more important and organized than Trump.

It's not like she's not going popular podcasts, either. I think she should do Rogan if they can make the schedules work.

But yeah, that Houston rally seemed like a bigger deal than Trump's interview or his sad little Michigan rally.

Here's hoping.

I'm not happy about this, but some of you are delusional. There is NO WAY the Houston rally is a bigger deal than Rogan. And to even suggest that scheduling conflicts are preventing her from going on the biggest podcast in the world is laughable.

Podcast has 10 million views in 12 hours on YouTube. Obviously a lot more on Spotify and iTunes.

I find it difficult to believe people would devote three hours of their lives to listen to an old demented man’s stream of consciousness. But all the better if they did because no young guy is going to vote for that rambling. It’s weak.

You can play it at 1.25 or 1.5x speed. Just like any podcast, it’s largely just background chatter while people work, drive in the car, go for a jog, and clean the house.

If you want to listen to elderly dementia patient, you can also volunteer at an assisted living facility or visit with an aged relative or neighbor and probably score a smile.

Trump obviously doesn’t have dementia. You’ve never had a family member or friend with dementia, have you? Early stage dementia is far more noticeable than what you are projecting. Did you vote for Biden in the primary?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I with Kamal did the Rogan podcast. Then people will see the contrast between the two. Unfortunately, a missed opportunity.

Her stated reason was that they couldn't make the schedule work. Which given that Trump would up basically missing his Michigan rally due to the taping,so that he could ramble incoherently for three hours, no makes her look like she's just more important and organized than Trump.

It's not like she's not going popular podcasts, either. I think she should do Rogan if they can make the schedules work.

But yeah, that Houston rally seemed like a bigger deal than Trump's interview or his sad little Michigan rally.

Here's hoping.

I'm not happy about this, but some of you are delusional. There is NO WAY the Houston rally is a bigger deal than Rogan. And to even suggest that scheduling conflicts are preventing her from going on the biggest podcast in the world is laughable.

Podcast has 10 million views in 12 hours on YouTube. Obviously a lot more on Spotify and iTunes.

I find it difficult to believe people would devote three hours of their lives to listen to an old demented man’s stream of consciousness. But all the better if they did because no young guy is going to vote for that rambling. It’s weak.

You can play it at 1.25 or 1.5x speed. Just like any podcast, it’s largely just background chatter while people work, drive in the car, go for a jog, and clean the house.

You need to play it at 5x speed for Trump to sound like he has any energy

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I with Kamal did the Rogan podcast. Then people will see the contrast between the two. Unfortunately, a missed opportunity.

Her stated reason was that they couldn't make the schedule work. Which given that Trump would up basically missing his Michigan rally due to the taping,so that he could ramble incoherently for three hours, no makes her look like she's just more important and organized than Trump.

It's not like she's not going popular podcasts, either. I think she should do Rogan if they can make the schedules work.

But yeah, that Houston rally seemed like a bigger deal than Trump's interview or his sad little Michigan rally.

Here's hoping.

I'm not happy about this, but some of you are delusional. There is NO WAY the Houston rally is a bigger deal than Rogan. And to even suggest that scheduling conflicts are preventing her from going on the biggest podcast in the world is laughable.

Podcast has 10 million views in 12 hours on YouTube. Obviously a lot more on Spotify and iTunes.

I find it difficult to believe people would devote three hours of their lives to listen to an old demented man’s stream of consciousness. But all the better if they did because no young guy is going to vote for that rambling. It’s weak.

You can play it at 1.25 or 1.5x speed. Just like any podcast, it’s largely just background chatter while people work, drive in the car, go for a jog, and clean the house.

If you want to listen to elderly dementia patient, you can also volunteer at an assisted living facility or visit with an aged relative or neighbor and probably score a smile.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I with Kamal did the Rogan podcast. Then people will see the contrast between the two. Unfortunately, a missed opportunity.

Her stated reason was that they couldn't make the schedule work. Which given that Trump would up basically missing his Michigan rally due to the taping,so that he could ramble incoherently for three hours, no makes her look like she's just more important and organized than Trump.

It's not like she's not going popular podcasts, either. I think she should do Rogan if they can make the schedules work.

But yeah, that Houston rally seemed like a bigger deal than Trump's interview or his sad little Michigan rally.

Here's hoping.

I'm not happy about this, but some of you are delusional. There is NO WAY the Houston rally is a bigger deal than Rogan. And to even suggest that scheduling conflicts are preventing her from going on the biggest podcast in the world is laughable.

Podcast has 10 million views in 12 hours on YouTube. Obviously a lot more on Spotify and iTunes.

I find it difficult to believe people would devote three hours of their lives to listen to an old demented man’s stream of consciousness. But all the better if they did because no young guy is going to vote for that rambling. It’s weak.

You can play it at 1.25 or 1.5x speed. Just like any podcast, it’s largely just background chatter while people work, drive in the car, go for a jog, and clean the house.

I'm familiar with podcasts, thanks. I don't want to listen to three hours, two hours, one hour, or ten seconds of Trump talking. How's that - clear enough? I find everything he says weird, repellent, stupid, ignorant, and harmful, and I would like him to never have a reason to speak in public ever again. I don't need to listen to another podcast to feel confident in that evaluation.