By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

The Establishment Declares WAR On Nina Turner - Corp Dems, Big Oil, Big Pharma, Fox News, Wall Street are fund raising for Turners primary opponent Shontel Brown in Ohio congressional race

The Establishment, including in the Dems are actively trying to bring down Nina Turner (previous national co-chair of the Bernie Sanders 2020 presidential campaign and democratic socialist) 

It is feared by the Establishment Dems that she will disrupt their 'business as usual' model going forward, she is a very strong advocate for M4A, Tuition free college Education, making Israel accountable, The Green New Deal, destroying the exploitation of Big Pharma, higher minimum wages, stronger unions, much higher taxes on the Rich, and many other socialist/progressive policies 

The system has united against her 

  



Around the Network
sundin13 said:
LurkerJ said:

What's more worthless is your attempt at branding JoRO with a bunch of labels without backing it up your claims.

The guy has a total of 1,670 UNSCRIPTED podcasts published since 2013; averaging 3 hours each; 5k hours in total. He's not hiding behind a keyboard calculating everything he says like you do. Most people with that number of recorded video/audio will end up sounding stupid a lot more than he would've liked because... he's a human. Very few with that number of recorded hours will come off as "pure enough" for the modern left. Who said anything about not criticising him anyway? 

And why should we validate this brand of pseudo-intellectual bullshit, where he regularly makes dumb-ass statements about things that he knows nothing about? Like, after the recent controversy regarding vaccination, he said something to the effect of "I'm a fucking moron and I'm not a respected source of information". I agree. I think it is damaging to validate this type of "Idiot talks about things that he knows nothing about" content as being more than worthless drivel. If you don't know what you are talking about, you shouldn't be talking about it to millions of people, and you shouldn't be welcoming far-right voices to talk on your show when you lack the tools to challenge them.

As for "who said anything about not criticizing him", well, Krystal Ball wants the left to treat Rogan more like the right treats Rogan, and how does the right treat him? Largely by celebrating when he says something they like and not paying much attention to the rest. 

You're dumbing down the conversation by taking whatever he or Krystal or me said and turning it into another labels & silly questions game. Well-done, the twitter left has taught you well. 

Validation? lol. That ship has sailed long ago, and the left has embraced him whether the twitter-left like to admit it or not. Andrew Yang, Bernie Sanders, Tulsi, Sam Harris, Krystal & Saagar, the co-founder of Justice Democrats (Kyle), and David Packman are some of the few who have no problem appearing on his show and helped bridge the gap and he has the fastest growing podcast among whichever demographic, even the crazy lefties that I don't follow anymore like Dore and TYT don't have a problem with the guy. That's ignoring the Hollywood and Billboard Hillary-loving figures like Miley Cyrus and Demi Lovato. More importantly, if you step out of the tribalistic shithole, you'd know that Harvard professors like the amazing David Sinclair and other renowned biologists, doctors, and tech CEOs make regular valuable appearances on his show and chime in with the latest scientific discoveries or emphasising old-new knowledge. His show can be as intellectual as it can get for most people but also can be casual chats that people enjoy listening to. Your poor attempt at boxing his show under "pseudo-intellectual" is baseless, tell it to the scientists appearing on his show. He's a learner and he's doing more to educate his listeners by bringing such diverse talents to his table. And hey, Biden might want to leverage his new position and send another interview request to JoRo, he just might be able to fit him in now that he is a president. Would that "validate" him for you? 

And what is the twitter-left bar for validating (lol) anything or anyone anyway? Both the left and the right have set the bar so low for TV pundits from Fox or MSNBC or CNN are lying hacks who only challenge what they feel like challenging and let BS fly all the time. Rachel Maddow is one of the most popular lefty TV shows and got a court case against her dismissed because she's not a source of information

  • "Obama-appointed federal judge, Cynthia Bashant, dismissed the lawsuit on the ground that even Maddow's own audience understands that her show consists of exaggeration, hyperbole, and pure opinion, and therefore would not assume that such outlandish accusations are factually true even when she uses the language of certainty and truth when presenting them (“literally is paid Russian propaganda")."

As for your benchmark on how to "treat JoRo" from a left-wing perspective, your benchmark is copying what the right-doing but from a different angle? Bravo? You're basically happily engaging in mischaracterisation, smearing, besmirching, or whatever you want to call it. Miss me with your tribalistic BS. 



For anyone with questions about the deficit, why it is there, why it's widening, and why it's not like a problem. Give the following book a chance:

A great read. 



Rab said:

The Establishment Declares WAR On Nina Turner - Corp Dems, Big Oil, Big Pharma, Fox News, Wall Street are fund raising for Turners primary opponent Shontel Brown in Ohio congressional race

The Establishment, including in the Dems are actively trying to bring down Nina Turner (previous national co-chair of the Bernie Sanders 2020 presidential campaign and democratic socialist) 

It is feared by the Establishment Dems that she will disrupt their 'business as usual' model going forward, she is a very strong advocate for M4A, Tuition free college Education, making Israel accountable, The Green New Deal, destroying the exploitation of Big Pharma, higher minimum wages, stronger unions, much higher taxes on the Rich, and many other socialist/progressive policies 

The system has united against her 

  

Well she better learn how to swim or she will sink.  Since I live in Ohio, what she is platforming on isn't going to get strong support so she will need to gain as many allies as possible.  Having ideals are great, working to get them accepted is something different.  If you are going to beat the establishment you better come prepared in a general conservative area with the right firepower.



So I thought it was interesting that Mike Pence finally made a stand. For such a long time he tried to play the middle. Trying to please the Trump faithful while still trying to hold on to something coming close to intelligence. I guess he finally realize that he is never going to get that Trump core base and anything effort trying to please them while standing up to how he handled Jan 6 was a waste of time. Should be interesting to see how things go once we can see who lines up for the Republican primary come 2024.



Around the Network
LurkerJ said:
sundin13 said:

And why should we validate this brand of pseudo-intellectual bullshit, where he regularly makes dumb-ass statements about things that he knows nothing about? Like, after the recent controversy regarding vaccination, he said something to the effect of "I'm a fucking moron and I'm not a respected source of information". I agree. I think it is damaging to validate this type of "Idiot talks about things that he knows nothing about" content as being more than worthless drivel. If you don't know what you are talking about, you shouldn't be talking about it to millions of people, and you shouldn't be welcoming far-right voices to talk on your show when you lack the tools to challenge them.

As for "who said anything about not criticizing him", well, Krystal Ball wants the left to treat Rogan more like the right treats Rogan, and how does the right treat him? Largely by celebrating when he says something they like and not paying much attention to the rest. 

You're dumbing down the conversation by taking whatever he or Krystal or me said and turning it into another labels & silly questions game. Well-done, the twitter left has taught you well. 

Validation? lol. That ship has sailed long ago, and the left has embraced him whether the twitter-left like to admit it or not. Andrew Yang, Bernie Sanders, Tulsi, Sam Harris, Krystal & Saagar, the co-founder of Justice Democrats (Kyle), and David Packman are some of the few who have no problem appearing on his show and helped bridge the gap and he has the fastest growing podcast among whichever demographic, even the crazy lefties that I don't follow anymore like Dore and TYT don't have a problem with the guy. That's ignoring the Hollywood and Billboard Hillary-loving figures like Miley Cyrus and Demi Lovato. More importantly, if you step out of the tribalistic shithole, you'd know that Harvard professors like the amazing David Sinclair and other renowned biologists, doctors, and tech CEOs make regular valuable appearances on his show and chime in with the latest scientific discoveries or emphasising old-new knowledge. His show can be as intellectual as it can get for most people but also can be casual chats that people enjoy listening to. Your poor attempt at boxing his show under "pseudo-intellectual" is baseless, tell it to the scientists appearing on his show. He's a learner and he's doing more to educate his listeners by bringing such diverse talents to his table. And hey, Biden might want to leverage his new position and send another interview request to JoRo, he just might be able to fit him in now that he is a president. Would that "validate" him for you? 

And what is the twitter-left bar for validating (lol) anything or anyone anyway? Both the left and the right have set the bar so low for TV pundits from Fox or MSNBC or CNN are lying hacks who only challenge what they feel like challenging and let BS fly all the time. Rachel Maddow is one of the most popular lefty TV shows and got a court case against her dismissed because she's not a source of information

  • "Obama-appointed federal judge, Cynthia Bashant, dismissed the lawsuit on the ground that even Maddow's own audience understands that her show consists of exaggeration, hyperbole, and pure opinion, and therefore would not assume that such outlandish accusations are factually true even when she uses the language of certainty and truth when presenting them (“literally is paid Russian propaganda")."

As for your benchmark on how to "treat JoRo" from a left-wing perspective, your benchmark is copying what the right-doing but from a different angle? Bravo? You're basically happily engaging in mischaracterisation, smearing, besmirching, or whatever you want to call it. Miss me with your tribalistic BS. 

If the left has "embraced" Rogan, than what exactly was Ball complaining about? Clearly she thinks there is some powerful force on the left which hasn't embraced Joe Rogan, so this argument is lost on me.

Also, when I describe Rogan as "pseudo-intellectual", I am describing Rogan as pseudo-intellectual, not every person who goes on his show. He really likes to nod along when he has someone smarter than him (or someone who pretends to be smarter than him) on his show, but he does a very poor job at actually challenging his guests and I don't believe this is really a hot take, even among people who like him. But let me ask you, do you think it is good of him to try to educate his viewers by "such diverse talents" as Alex Jones and Steven Crowder onto his show? 

I also don't like Maddow (and she isn't popular among a lot of leftists) so I'm not sure what this whataboutism really seeks to accomplish. 



Machiavellian said:
Rab said:

The Establishment Declares WAR On Nina Turner - Corp Dems, Big Oil, Big Pharma, Fox News, Wall Street are fund raising for Turners primary opponent Shontel Brown in Ohio congressional race

The Establishment, including in the Dems are actively trying to bring down Nina Turner (previous national co-chair of the Bernie Sanders 2020 presidential campaign and democratic socialist) 

It is feared by the Establishment Dems that she will disrupt their 'business as usual' model going forward, she is a very strong advocate for M4A, Tuition free college Education, making Israel accountable, The Green New Deal, destroying the exploitation of Big Pharma, higher minimum wages, stronger unions, much higher taxes on the Rich, and many other socialist/progressive policies 

The system has united against her 

  

Well she better learn how to swim or she will sink.  Since I live in Ohio, what she is platforming on isn't going to get strong support so she will need to gain as many allies as possible.  Having ideals are great, working to get them accepted is something different.  If you are going to beat the establishment you better come prepared in a general conservative area with the right firepower.

The take away from Hillary's Dems and Fox teaming up against Nina Turner, is how terrified they are of her, and her 'for the public good' ideas 

This move says a lot about the Establishment actually, how they have tried to crush opponents to stay in politics for the Powerful helping stop ideas like M4A

Nina is actually standing against that, it's crucial for the US Public that she succeeds, the forces of "Of the Rich and Powerful, business as usual model" have rallied  

Nina in the most recent poll currently has 50% of the vote, the next closest candidate has 15% 

https://www.wkyc.com/article/news/politics/nina-turner-leads-poll-11th-congressional-district-race/95-5842fe8f-4824-4185-8020-c0f16a47da96 

Last edited by Rab - on 25 June 2021

There's an epidemic of right-wing debate bros running away from debates with the left. The latest one was quite entertaining. It involved a prominent right anti-intellectual Steven Crowder, who is anti-science, an anti-vaxer, open racist, open homophobe/transphobe, and flat Earther.

Crowder got pissed off at H3 Podcast host Ethan Klein's pro-science approach, and wanted to debate him on vaccines. He accused Ethan about "likely going to run from the debate because it would be a layup for Crowder." -- a statement that would later prove to be dripping with irony.

Ethan agreed, he's not a debate guy, but accepted anyway. Steven Crowder was surprised he accepted, and then understood why he should be frightened, very frightened. Just before the debate was scheduled to go off, Crowder quit, and said they'd have to reschedule. Crowder made up a dirtbag lie, saying his wife had an emergency at the hospital. This lie was later exposed.

To find out why Crowder was so desperate to avoid the debate with Klein that he'd lie about his wife having a medical emergency, a little backstory is needed. We have to rewind to 2019, Steven Coward earned the hashtag #ColdFeetCrowder after ducking The Majority Report host Sam Seder at Politicon. Making excuses, constantly, as to why he's unable to debate Sam Seder. Of course, Crowder didn't want to admit he was dodging Sam Seder.

Ethan Klein happened to be friends with Seder, and this was brought to his attention. Crowder had been monitoring The Majority Report live show, and noticed it went off the air early, suspecting that Sam Seder might stand in for Klein, they went into panic mode, and cancelled the debate with the false excuse; but he told Klein (as previously stated) that there was a medical emergency with his wife.

Crowder and Klein rescheduled the debate. This time a little earlier, coincidentally, at the same time The Majority Report live show would begin. Crowder didn't make an appearance until 2 minutes after The Majority Report went live. 

What Crowder didn't know is that The Majority Report had been pre-recorded.

Crowder starts bragging about how easy it will be, makes fun of Klein's tourettes syndrome. Klein agreed, it would be easy... if he had come alone. But Klein brought an equalizer. Sam Seder shows up, and Crowder FREAKS out, solid. Crowder was so white faced shocked that he blurted out that he knew it last week when he saw the show go off the air early, admitting that the whole story about his wife was a lie, and that cancelling and rescheduling the debate was actually all about dodging Sam Seder, once again.

Sam Challenges Steven Crowder to debate the issue, and after trying to make excuses to get out of the debate, Crowder flees the scene... you know, the way a coward would.

This is only the most recent of prominent American right-wing personalities (such as "Cold Feet" Steven Crowder, Dim Tim Pool, and Ben Shabibo) chickening out of debates with left-wingers. Interesting enough, these guys built their reputations off of their so-called debate prowess... mostly against teenagers.

David Pakman has a theory on this... that these right-wing debate bros are just shit at debating when up against anyone remotely competent, as evidenced in this compilation.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Since we seem to collectively be so bored with events these days that we're no longer even talking about the actual news and current events so much as about how much we trust, or don't trust, individual program hosts and outlets to deliver that news we wish existed, thought I'd weigh in.

Gotta admit that these days I don't typically watch more than like 20 or 30 minutes worth of news in a day, though there are some days when I'm just bored and opt to watch for hours. In any event, I have a viewing schedule of news programming that's on after work on the weekdays that I can dip into or drop out of as I feel the need in a given moment. That schedule is (currently) as follows:

6-7 PM: The PBS News Hour
7-8 PM: Tucker Carlson Tonight
8-9 PM: The Rachel Maddow Show

Other than that, it's mostly my online niche preferences and stuff people link me to. I like to get a variety of perspectives anymore, as you can doubtless gather. So let's go through why I like these programs the most:

I've been watching what is today called the PBS News Hour off and on since I was a kid back in the '90s. It's my favorite news program. I'm a lifelong socialist -- a real one who favors social ownership and democratic control of the means of production, not a Bernie Sanders type welfare state "socialist" -- and a strong believer in public television and really favor the News Hour's glorious lack of commercial "breaks" and fancy, animated corporate logos and ticker tape reels and stock prices distracting you on the bottom of the screen. There's a welcome minimalism to it that keeps your focus on the story, or topic, at hand. Most of all though, I like the program's wide variety of stories -- many of which you can't get on the for-profit news networks because they're not sensational or U.S.-centric enough -- and its civil tone. I find it both interesting and calming. The show often even ends with the reading of a poem or the performance of a song or some other kind of artistic reflection on life. No sports updates or weather (unless it's a hurricane or something), as gets views on your local news broadcast. Art and science news instead because it's public television and they're not in it for the ratings and the money. It's just so refreshing!

As to the other two, Tucker Carlson is the highest-rated conservative news host on television and Rachel Maddow is the highest-rated liberal news host on television. I suspect these things are true for a reason. That's why I watch them both. Since it will likely be the most controversial, let me start with the topic of Tucker.

Yes, I do like to get a dedicated, more conservative take on current events anymore. I have to admit that I really couldn't bear this during the Trump era when it was all just pro-administration propaganda, but now that Republicans are relatively powerless at the federal level and liberals run all the major social medias, and in a media climate wherein it really does feel like the press writ large really has started showing a clear political leaning and wherein most major advertisers have stopped airing their commercials on Fox News, Fox really has started feeling like opposition media to me, and I find there's something almost intrinsically refreshing about that. Traditionally, I'd have watched All In With Chris Hayes during this time window instead, but these days his show is so fixated on Trump and Covid and the killer racist cops and state-level election laws and all the other same subjects as last year that it doesn't feel like it's really keeping up with the times anymore. It feels intellectually frozen in 2020 (or January 6th at the latest). Carlson's show is often more interesting to me. It certainly always provides me a different perspective on events. I find I agree with Carlson's perspective only about a third of the time, but that's way up from a year ago. It's the stories his show covers that you don't find on the other networks that I find most interesting, NOT his latest anti-vaccine bullshit type of stuff. Any time he starts going off on like how getting vaccinated will surely kill you or how maybe George Floyd died of a heart attack and not the painfully obvious knee pressed against his neck for some nine minutes or interviews Marjorie Taylor Green or some other idiotic violation of my basic sensibility, I reflexively change the channel or turn off my TV. No, what I come back for again and again is the actually rational stories on, critical race theory, new gender identity policies, the silencing of free speech in this country, that sort of thing. If Republicans are to make an electoral comeback next year, I guarantee you those sorts of things will be the reasons why because topically they certainly interest me!

What I find distinguishes Tucker from other prime time hosts on Fox News is his willingness to criticize Republicans and corporate lobbying and hegemonic capitalism. I've observed that Josh Hawley seems to be the Senator he interviews most often and suspect that there's a reason for that. Tucker strikes me as a Josh Hawley type of conservative more than anything else. More so even than a true Donald Trump type of conservative really. Ya know, he supports Elizabeth Warren's bill to break up the tech giants and condemns the American Enterprise Institute for its history of hawking Purdue Pharma to rural America because they were among the principal donors to the AEI, this sort of thing. It makes the subsequent program, Hannity, seem like a jarringly partisan and brainless contrast to what you just saw in the previous hour sometimes. ...What I'm saying is that there's just a certain working class type of mindset to Tucker's program, in my observation, that isn't so present on any of Fox's other shows. That I think is what makes his show stand out the most and has helped it emerge as the most popular one on all of cable news. It's a quality I find appealing as, you know, a blue collar type myself. Even if I don't actually agree with his perspective more than like a third of the time.

Moving on, yes I also still like Rachel Maddow's program. She has such a distinctive style! Most every show of her's opens by telling a story, and it can go on for like 10 or 15 minutes even sometimes. I can't help but find all the dots she connects fascinating, and often brilliant! She also tends to revolve her entire show around one or two topics per evening anymore, which on the one hand makes for a sometimes-frustratingly narrow range of subjects, but on the other hand offers a really deep-dive into the selected topics of the evening in place of more topics. It's this unique sort of approach that keeps her liberal perspective from ever feeling generic or stale to me even in politically good times for the Democrats like we have on our hands today. I usually do come away feeling like I learned the importance of a topic I'd previously found mundane and uninteresting. No wonder her's is consistently MSNBC's highest-rated show!

The online spaces I like to occasionally check back in with are niche spaces mostly composed of offbeat feminist sites that fall outside the conventional conservative-to-progressive spectrum, like Canada's Feminist Current blog, Britain's Mumsnet Feminism sub-forum, South Korea's lesbian feminist Womad board (which is my favorite, to the extent I can read it anyway, as only a small minority of threads and posts are available in English), France's Femen organization site, and femcel social medias, each of which is, in their own way, more than a little controversial. So I do have my more radical fascinations too.

I'm just a curious person/weirdo.

Last edited by Jaicee - on 26 June 2021

double post