"I’d posit that Rogan fundamentally isn’t a leftist or a conservative. He’s someone who occasionally pays attention to politics, has a just a few firm beliefs (like what he thinks about abortion or drugs), and is genuinely curious and open-minded."
Yeah, he just likes to have interesting conversations -- and, of course, many guys are somewhat interested in politics alongside other issues. Given Kamala is very bad at formal interviews, but seems like a lovely, endearing, and engaging person outside those settings, I'm shocked she turned down this opportunity.
I listen semi regularly to both Rogan and Theo Von. They are stand up comedians doing long form podcast shooting the shit w/ interesting people about so many topics. Kamala interview w/ Rogan likely didn't occur because her campaign insisted marijuana legalization was not to be brought up, because this might naturally lead to how many black & brown males she put in jail for weed, while AG of California.
"In other words, he’s the most high-profile swing voter in America." I can't decide if that comment was genius or simply inspired. Either way, you nailed it!
This beautiful post was full of potent, thought-provoking sentences, even by Zaid's standards, but I agree: This sentence represented a pretty extraordinary moment of nailing it. So grateful to start my day with this open-hearted, open-minded post.
I think I saw someone on MSNBC describing some sort of "fascist rabbit hole" that Rogan herds viewers into, which is totally unhinged. Rogan's sense of humor, & his desire to understand the world around him, are what make his show so good. Apparently, Kamala's staffers think of his show as a fascist recruitment program.
"Rogan's sense of humor, & his desire to understand the world around him, are what makes his show so good." I've only listened a couple of times when he was interviewing authors whose works I enjoy, but those listens showed me exactly what you describe.
The first time I recall listening to Rogan was when Jon Haidt was on to promote The Anxious Generate. I'd only just read a book (Within Reason: A Liberal Public Health for an Illiberal Time) in which author/public health expert Sandro Galea drew on Joe Rogan as an example of what public health should today aspire to (again) be. Wrote Galea:
"he is frequently out of his depth. What separates him from many other high-profile interviewers is that he makes no effort to hide this. Rogan will often pause conversation to ask guests to explain concepts to him, sometimes quite basic ones. He issues corrections and responds to new information in real time, learning on the spot in front of a vast community of listeners. It could well be that he is trusted by millions not because he cloaks his ignorance in authoritative tones, but because he does precisely the opposite, deriving authority from a candid acknowledgment of his limits while working to broaden those limits, one conversation at time. Might we perhaps learn from this?"
When I began listening to the Haidt episode, I did so with a mind to see how well Joe Rogan matched Galea's representation of Rogan. The match was excellent, as is the match between this post's representation of Rogan and actual-Rogan.
There is no way KH could have handled a real Rogan interview and everyone on her campaign knew it. They tried to dictate the terms to mitigate that fact.
Don't forget believes in a social safety net, pro gun, thinks corporations will do bad things if they can get away with it, and thinks law enforcement needs to be held accountable but hated the 2020 BLM riots. He is also one of those rare individuals who thinks both Hamas and Israel can engage in bad behavior.
I had not previously realized how closed-minded "progressives" were.
One would think, with her enormous budget, at least one of Kamala's campaign staffers could have invested a few days watching Rogan videos. But since they couldn't even be bothered to address the financial distress afflicting the working class, & much of the middle class, it's not really that surprising.
I mostly agree with this post, but having Fetterman on doesn’t prove anything about Rogan’s openness to Democrats. Fetterman is a DINO at this point who supports taking Greenland FFS.
If you mean me that’s exhibit A for why the problems can’t be solved: comments that don’t actually address the original reply. Leftists have nothing to do with the fact the Rogan is a simpleton.
How did your comment address anything? You called him a simpleton.
I'm simply pointing out that your reactionary "he's dumb" has been deployed by countless leftists when confronted with ideas they don't like. They don't engage (because they can't) so they disparage and move on. And it's costing you votes and elections ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Rogan's also been pro gay marriage since before prominent Dems were, and, although he's gender-skeptical, has had trans individuals on and uses their preferred pronouns. He called Buck Angel a "great guy." His most vociferous pushback has been against people like Matt Walsh on these very issues. None of these stands are conservative, either.
Zaid, I discovered your substack from your also great piece at New Lines Magazine on the election. I rarely sub to substack but need to read your work regularly. I'm a late 60s Michigan Daily, Liberation News Service, Student Communications Network journalist who is returning to the fold. I've got the bug again. Here is my Election Analysis Bib, and on my home page are two preliminary How t=To Survive the Next Four Years analyses: https://michaelalandover.substack.com/p/2024-election-analysis
Trump was *authentically* Trump, whatever you think of that.
The Democratic Party today is a walking HR department, its anti-authenticity. That repels Rogan.
"I’d posit that Rogan fundamentally isn’t a leftist or a conservative. He’s someone who occasionally pays attention to politics, has a just a few firm beliefs (like what he thinks about abortion or drugs), and is genuinely curious and open-minded."
Yeah, he just likes to have interesting conversations -- and, of course, many guys are somewhat interested in politics alongside other issues. Given Kamala is very bad at formal interviews, but seems like a lovely, endearing, and engaging person outside those settings, I'm shocked she turned down this opportunity.
I listen semi regularly to both Rogan and Theo Von. They are stand up comedians doing long form podcast shooting the shit w/ interesting people about so many topics. Kamala interview w/ Rogan likely didn't occur because her campaign insisted marijuana legalization was not to be brought up, because this might naturally lead to how many black & brown males she put in jail for weed, while AG of California.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/joe-rogan-says-kamala-harris-campaign-had-condition-avoid-marijuana-legalization-talk-interview
That’s incredible. I can’t believe they didn’t want her to talk about that issue.
"In other words, he’s the most high-profile swing voter in America." I can't decide if that comment was genius or simply inspired. Either way, you nailed it!
This beautiful post was full of potent, thought-provoking sentences, even by Zaid's standards, but I agree: This sentence represented a pretty extraordinary moment of nailing it. So grateful to start my day with this open-hearted, open-minded post.
I think I saw someone on MSNBC describing some sort of "fascist rabbit hole" that Rogan herds viewers into, which is totally unhinged. Rogan's sense of humor, & his desire to understand the world around him, are what make his show so good. Apparently, Kamala's staffers think of his show as a fascist recruitment program.
And that's why they lost.
"Rogan's sense of humor, & his desire to understand the world around him, are what makes his show so good." I've only listened a couple of times when he was interviewing authors whose works I enjoy, but those listens showed me exactly what you describe.
The first time I recall listening to Rogan was when Jon Haidt was on to promote The Anxious Generate. I'd only just read a book (Within Reason: A Liberal Public Health for an Illiberal Time) in which author/public health expert Sandro Galea drew on Joe Rogan as an example of what public health should today aspire to (again) be. Wrote Galea:
"he is frequently out of his depth. What separates him from many other high-profile interviewers is that he makes no effort to hide this. Rogan will often pause conversation to ask guests to explain concepts to him, sometimes quite basic ones. He issues corrections and responds to new information in real time, learning on the spot in front of a vast community of listeners. It could well be that he is trusted by millions not because he cloaks his ignorance in authoritative tones, but because he does precisely the opposite, deriving authority from a candid acknowledgment of his limits while working to broaden those limits, one conversation at time. Might we perhaps learn from this?"
When I began listening to the Haidt episode, I did so with a mind to see how well Joe Rogan matched Galea's representation of Rogan. The match was excellent, as is the match between this post's representation of Rogan and actual-Rogan.
There is no way KH could have handled a real Rogan interview and everyone on her campaign knew it. They tried to dictate the terms to mitigate that fact.
Wasn't there a little power struggle, too?
"You come to me."
"No, my place, my constructed setting."
"Sorry, not sorry, going fishing."
Or something like that?
Don't forget believes in a social safety net, pro gun, thinks corporations will do bad things if they can get away with it, and thinks law enforcement needs to be held accountable but hated the 2020 BLM riots. He is also one of those rare individuals who thinks both Hamas and Israel can engage in bad behavior.
Spot on Zaid!!
Perfectly encapsulates my thoughts on the situation, very well said!
I had not previously realized how closed-minded "progressives" were.
One would think, with her enormous budget, at least one of Kamala's campaign staffers could have invested a few days watching Rogan videos. But since they couldn't even be bothered to address the financial distress afflicting the working class, & much of the middle class, it's not really that surprising.
Zaid when are YOU going to be on the Pod?
I mostly agree with this post, but having Fetterman on doesn’t prove anything about Rogan’s openness to Democrats. Fetterman is a DINO at this point who supports taking Greenland FFS.
He's a pedophile
He’s still a fucking simpleton
Exhibit A why leftists keep losing. They can't get out of their own way.
If you mean me that’s exhibit A for why the problems can’t be solved: comments that don’t actually address the original reply. Leftists have nothing to do with the fact the Rogan is a simpleton.
How did your comment address anything? You called him a simpleton.
I'm simply pointing out that your reactionary "he's dumb" has been deployed by countless leftists when confronted with ideas they don't like. They don't engage (because they can't) so they disparage and move on. And it's costing you votes and elections ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Rogan's also been pro gay marriage since before prominent Dems were, and, although he's gender-skeptical, has had trans individuals on and uses their preferred pronouns. He called Buck Angel a "great guy." His most vociferous pushback has been against people like Matt Walsh on these very issues. None of these stands are conservative, either.
"Joe Rogan Isn’t a Right-Winger -- He’s a Swing Voter"
Why do dumb liberals think this is a meaningful distinction?
Zaid, I discovered your substack from your also great piece at New Lines Magazine on the election. I rarely sub to substack but need to read your work regularly. I'm a late 60s Michigan Daily, Liberation News Service, Student Communications Network journalist who is returning to the fold. I've got the bug again. Here is my Election Analysis Bib, and on my home page are two preliminary How t=To Survive the Next Four Years analyses: https://michaelalandover.substack.com/p/2024-election-analysis