 |  |  |
| 0:00 | -1:32:58 |
On this episode, Jonah is joined by Charles C.W. Cooke of National Review. It’s an eclectic mix today, as the duo gets into a good deal of punditry surrounding the Trump campaign’s election challenges and then move onto the future of conservatism (or “conservatarianism” in Charlie’s case) as a whole before tying the whole thing up around the Thanksgiving theme of gratitude. As a freshly minted American living through a relatively chaotic period in our politics, what is Cooke grateful for when it comes to the U.S.? During this holiday season, Jonah thinks we might all do well to be grateful for the fact that “we still live in a country where following politics is essentially a hobby … and isn’t a matter of survival.”
Show Notes:
-Charlie’s main podcasting gig
-Charlie’s, uh, other main podcasting gig
-Florida man saves puppy from alligator
-National Review and the John Birchers
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
I gotta ask has Charlie literally ever considered what America is like for black people? I would never accuse him of racial animus but he just seems completely uninterested in the idea that America might feel different for different people. I’d welcome someone pointing to an article where he grapples with this reality at all.
Jonah, come on. When Charlie gets all upset that progressives doubted the 2016 election, you gotta remind him that Dems were upset because of reports coming from our own intelligence services, telling us to doubt the integrity of the election.
Dems in 2016:
Were dems freaked out? Yes.
Did they have reason to be? Yes.
Did they have any way to know the extent of the problem of Russian interference? No.
Did all those hack and leaks take a toll? Yes.
Was the election close? Yes.
Did the Mueller Report and the Senate Intelligence Committee bring in an enormous amount of evidence confirming contacts between the Trump campaign and Russia, and that Russia was hacking the DNC and Hillary? Yes.
Republicans in 2020:
Are republicans freaked-out? Yes.
Do they have reason to be? Yes. Trump/Lou Dobbs have been telling them the election is rigged.
Was the election actually rigged? No.
Is there any evidence the election was rigged? Sort of: individual, citizen reports. Bad math. Innuendo.
Is the FBI or any police department coming forward with evidence? No.
Is there any proof of the systemic fraud being alleged? None at all.
So you have two teams having similar emotional reactions, but that's where the similarity ends. The causes of those emotions couldn't be more different and pretending they're the same is some combination of dishonest and lazy. It suggests that Trump getting help from the Russians was in any way fair or ok, or that being concerned about that, and his overwhelming resistance to acknowledging that he got any help at all, was an overreaction. You guys focus on the fear of votes flipping? That was a teeny tiny part of the rational fear on the left. Everything else was center-stage. Trump also propelled by acting guilty. His clear fondness for Putin was weird.
Somehow, I don't think if the same thing happened in reverse (The Russians help Hillary through hacking, and she wins the election, then she thanks Putin and wants to share intelligence) that conservatives would be so airy and dismissive about it all...