politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Hey, good for him. I believe firmly in reformation, or reflection and changing your views and it sounds to me like he thought about it and came around, so good.
this is the second time he's changed his mind on this particular issue. After a certain point I wonder why we're still listening to him
He’s a total asshole. He may have had the show, but standup isn’t funny and his personal life and stances are questionable. I’d be glad if he just disappeared without a peep. That whiny nasally “I hate everything boo hoo” attitude.
I think he was trying to get a buzz for his stand-up by going anti-woke. Then those people didn't show up for him because they are still laughing at Rob Schneider.
After Jerry realized his mistake, he figured he would say he grew and learned to help any damage control. I don't think people really care enough about him for this, but he is rich enough to have people tell him.
I refuse to believe anyone is laughing at Rob Schneider.
What mistake would he need to be concerned about? Jerry has more money than he can spend. I seriously doubt his income is a motivating factor here but I could be wrong.
I was thinking about it through the lens of his PR people and long term. He's was very popular and has a bunch of money. He doesn't need to do anything. His PR team is thinking, what about any future money?
His mistake was exactly what he apologized for. Did you read it? It was about not adapting comedy to the audience and time. He mentioned ski slopes and stuff too. That is what I was referring to.
Wait, you wonder why we're still listening to Jerry Seinfeld about comedy?
Like, I don't agree with the guy and I don't think everything he does is funny, but... I mean, I'm a contrarian nerd on the Internet and even I would think about that one twice.
For what it's worth, you can change your mind on things as often as you want. Hell, I'll take older rich guys walking back their slow drift rightwards as many times as is necessary.
I personally loved his Getting Coffee series. Honestly, I just like watching him talk about his craft and talking w/ other comedians. I honestly think he could have kept that show going for as long as he felt up to the task and I would have watched.
I do think things like Twitter and being terminally online and trying to "get" people by recording them and starting a tempest in a teapot is very obnoxious. It's like next-level heckling and I guess I understand why some comedians are kind of done with that. The thing about comedy is that they've always talked about "finding the line" with a given audience. It's supposed to be a bit transgressive and so, yes, some will get offended, but now people seem to go out of their way to be offended by a set they didn't even attend...
He's flip-flopped on his bigoted views before. This isn't the first time and it probably won't be the last time he does this.
He's not changing any more than any other right-wing bigot. He's a conservative. Every word uttered by a conservative is deception or manipulation. In this case, it's both.
Cool.
Please, conservatives, continue to deceive and manipulate us by loudly agreeing with us in public. Much obliged.
He's not agreeing with us. He's still a conservative dickbag whose words are an attempt to maintain his relevance among his peers. He's aways been a bigot. That is not going to change.
Yeah, but I don't care, he's saying he does.
So yeah, cool, Jerry, keep doing that. Love you, Jer. Good job. Totally maintaining that relevance among your peers by doing that. You should go drive an expensive car to get coffee and tell people that more or something.
I don't trust it, they turn left and make a walking motion only to start moon walking. Lip service doesn't mean shit until I see actual actions.
OK, this thread is increasingly more interesting to me as a snapshot of people's perception and less about anything Seinfeld does.
So... we all understand that other people's opinions aren't held as an attempt to get our personal validation, right?
Like, we're not the adjudicators? Turns out right wing people don't need our permission. Shockingly, they don't even want it. The absolute hubris, I know.
Believe it or not, Seinfeld's status is not dependent on convincing any of us here that he has changed his mind on this one thing he said once. The right level of scrutiny of this statement is "Cool, I guess", not "Well, Jerry, I'm going to need you to take some steps to rebuild this relationship".
It's good when older men drifting right stop drifting right in that they become less annoying at family dinners and, if they're famous, they stop disseminating right wing propaganda. That's it. That's why. It's not a test and we're not grading it.
You're 100 percent right. I do internally think the 'cool, I guess.' it just wouldn't make a very good conversation on a forum.
The fact they're making a public statement does sorta imply they're looking for some validation, otherwise they would just apologize to their closed ones and move on.
Well, it was a podcast, I think he was asked.
But I agree with you, the call to action to comment incentivizes outrage. The normal thing to do is go "huh" and not post, but if you post you're probably on the outrage side.
I... really don't like the dynamics that causes. It's nobody's fault, it's the structural incentive system around this stuff.
To be fair, it's a complicated topic. Some people see humour as a form of therapy or control over dark topics while others see it as a channel to project them. And both are true. Unfortunately many people lack the spark to discern the two and subsequently fall back on the behaviour they are familiar with; picking a side and setting up camp in it.
Very true but it can be very easy also to find yourself joking about pain that isn’t yours to joke about. Humility is often crucial in dark jokes