I've been doing it for a long time! I started watching Fox News every day for work in 2016. Not only am I fairly numb to it at this point, but it's also a great resource for newsy clips because so many elected Republicans go on there. I view the time I spend trawling through Fox shows day in and day out as part of my reporting and news gathering routine. It's my beat. Fox both sets the agenda for Republicans and amplifies the their priorities. There's nothing like it on the left -- and to be clear I'm glad there isn't!
My comment requires no research, just your opinion. It's inspired by the opinion of so many out there who keep saying that things are terrible in America. That Stepford wife who gave the Republican rebuttal last night started out by tearfully saying that she and her (presumably all white, middle class or better, Southern, safe) friends lie awake at night worrying about the state of America. Why do people like her think things are so bad when they measurably are not? Is it just a question of them not seeing what they don't want to see? Thank you.
It's obviously impossible to get inside someone's head, but my read is that Britt's performance is a means to an end. She wants Trump back in office, and Republicans seem to think the best way to make that happen is to convince people that we're still living amid American Carnage. They fear-monger about the scary cities and scary brown people to an audience that mostly lives in majority white suburban and exurban areas. It's the same play as 2016.
FWIW, Britt is pretty regularly on Fox, and while her showing last night was especially bizarre, her normal style of communication is overwrought and cringey. But she definitely turned it up to 11 last night.
Thank you, yes, I don't know WHY people love that American Carnage schtick, it's so depressing, but they do. There's a dude that golfs at a nearby course, drives a Hummer with an Ohio license plate (this is Florida, so that means he can afford to snowbird, which ain't cheap), tee times are $100 a pop (I can only afford the driving range, I golf at a cheap course), but he has a big flag next to his Trump flag saying that we Americans are mad as hell and not going to take it anymore. I always think: What on earth does he have to be mad about? Anyway, that last bit offered me some good context. I'd never heard of Britt at all before last night, so it felt very Twilight Zone-ish to me. I guess if she was already on one's radar it might not be as jarring.
didn't watch the kitchen speech, just your snippets. How are millions of Americans dying?? From What? As I recall, last time that happened was thanks to President "it will be gone by Easter."
Did she claim millions of people are dying? If so, 😆. I watched the speech but may have missed that line. It was honestly hard to focus on anything other than her very bizarre delivery.
no, I guess it was just innocent Americans (2nd clip of Xitter) though by implication a lot of them. Presumably because of the border crisis? Because of starvation- -Eagle Pass as Gaza? Expensive tomatoes? Maybe simply fear from all the mongering?
She may have been clearer before this part of the clip played. But I can guarantee you she wasn't referring to school shootings.
This was my question. I saw that snippet about people dying, and said to my husband, "What the f --- is she talking about?" And really, what the f--- was she talking about???
If you look at how elections have gone since the Dobbs decision of June 2022, I think it's irrefutable that abortion is an extremely motivating factor for voters who are casting ballots against Republicans and will continue to be. My sense is that while Democrats are on very solid political ground with gun control and supporting measures to mitigate climate change, they aren't quite as motivating for voters. But as we're already seeing with the conversation around IVF I think abortion will continue to be an albatross for Rs this cycle.
I thought Biden mostly did a good job, but I cringed hard when he used the term "illegal" to describe migrants. To me that term is a slur. That aside, I think Biden's strategy of calling Republicans' bluff by embracing border security is a good one. And I also think the fact Sean Hannity and company were accusing Biden of being hopped up on drugs during his speech is a reflection of the fact that he did some damage to their "too old" talking point.
On illegals.. There ARE in fact some who are illegal. Who have made no asylum claim, or have forfeited such claim. Who slip through the cracks. Apparently Riley's killer was one such. He had been paroled and released at the border, but then was arrested in NY, which would have put paid to any asylum claim, I would think.
Do you have any decisive info about that? Was he "paroled and released" for any particular reason, or just lack of personnel to do anything other than that?
While I am 100% against using the term "illegal" in general, part of the reason the bipartisan bill is needed is to up the funding to close any such cracks. So if someone actually IS here illegally--which does not include those who entered legally and then stayed beyond visas, since such overstay is a civil violation--we should probably CALL them that and point out as Biden did that the number of crimes they commit per capita is apparently WAY fewer than those committed by Americans
"Undocumented." A "person" is not "illegal." Just like if you jaywalk (illegally), you don't become "illegal." You don't even become "illegal" if you rob a bank at gunpoint.
actually not true. If you cross the border and do NOT claim asylum or other reason for staying and disappear into the wild, you are illegally here. So despite the grammar, the shoe may fit. But the vast, VAST majority of immigrants are not in that category. For them I agree, undocumented.
I've actually read the statutes involved.
My point is that such 'illegals" get IN because the authorities don't have the funds to be sure they don't--and that's an argument for why the GOP stalling is so counterproductive to their own narrative.
The point is that a "person" - any person (except maybe TFG?) -. is not "illegal." It's a slur because it demotes that entire person as being nothing other than their undocumented status. Again, you don't become 'an' "illegal" if you break a law - that's not all there is to say about you. That's the point and why the president apologized for using the term.
I certainly agree that grammatically "an" requires a noun, not just an adjective--an illegal alien. They are not "illegal" but their status is. And I agree it is demeaning because it has indeed been applied to so many that are not in fact here illegally.
Could it have been used rhetorically, to make the point I mentioned? It could have--saying it with air quotes would have worked. I don't think Biden was intending this--this wasn't part of his speech, just a reaction to something someone said--MTG I think, natch-- and he just mistakenly used the label because that's the one trumpeted all over the GOPOSphere in connection with her killer's name. . And he has apologized.
I'm just saying that if properly done--the sarcasm or irony clear--the point could have been made. Riley's killer was someone who slipped through several cracks, for lack of funding.
I would expect it to get very ugly. Trump, after all, has been talking about how a terrorist attack on the US is imminent, and to be blunt I don't get the sense he would mind being able to use something like that as a talking point. (Reflect on his "appreciate the congrats" rhetoric after a mass shooting in 2016.)
It's worth emphasizing that for Trump, this is about more than ego. His freedom literally depends on him returning to the White House and making his criminal prosecutions go away. Not only is our democracy on the line, but from his standpoint it's also a matter of whether he remains free or not.
I've got an important meeting w/ my podiatrist on Tuesday, so this is kind of time-sensitive. Thank you in advance.
(In all seriousness, you and the crew do tremendous work. As a (alleged) political comedy-writer, Public Notice has been the inspiration for more than one piece and/or joke. Admittedly, that's low on the list of importance in comparison to informing the public, but I'm deeply appreciative of both. Cheers.)
Aaron's great, I love when his pieces drop in my inbox. I am a writer too (non-political, thank goodness) and appreciate good, articulate writing that helps me understand what the AF is going on in the world.
It's not that hard for me! To be honest with you, I still feel very blessed to be able to cover historic times for a living. I couldn't believe it when I got hired as an editor for ThinkProgress in late 2015 and still have to pinch myself sometimes that I get to talk about politics for a living. The content obviously can be very bleak, but there are worse ways to make a living.
I wonder what you thought of Biden’s comments on the situation in Gaza. Do you think it was strong enough to win back the Arab communities in Michigan and elsewhere? To my ear it sounded too pro-Israel. Is Biden giving up on Michigan in favor of North Carolina so he doesn’t have to criticize Netanyahu more strongly? That feels risky.
I think it's past time for Biden to pivot from rhetoric to actually taking steps to help people in Gaza, so I was heartened to hear him announce specific measures to get more aid there. I am concerned about the high share of uncommitted votes in the Michigan and Minnesota primaries, but I'm also hopeful that the situation on the ground in Gaza will improve between now and November. I do think some of the uncommitted voters will come home to Biden, but I also think some of the loudest pro-Gaza voices are people who probably wouldn't vote for Biden anyway.
My broader read on Biden's handling of the Israel-Hamas is that there's nothing he could do that wouldn't alienate a key constituency. I think he's done a decent job threading a tight needle, though I wish he would've created more distance sooner between himself and Netanyahu. The quicker active hostilities come to an end the better for all involved.
What do you think fuels the idea that if America is run by Trump and the rest of his fascist pack, that the current crop of elected useful idiots peddling Russian disinformation to the detriment of the United States will be able to avoid the harms of living in the fascist republic they so heartily strove to create?
Trump-style fascism is by white people and for white people. I think most of the folks pushing for it and supporting it assume their families will be spared, and they're probably not wrong. That's one of the things that is so disconcerting about Dems' current shaky standing with Black and brown communities -- those are the people who will be in the crosshairs if Trump returns to power.
During Trump's term, and generally during the surge of lies from MAGA people, were Democrats told to say nothing in response? I mean, did Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer order them to let all that crap flow freely into the minds of people who'd never watched the news in their lives? The Jan. 6 Committee revealed brilliant communicators the people had home had never seen.
I was in DC at the time and can confirm there was no conspiracy to silence Dems during Trump's term. In fact I think a lot of them spoke out pretty strongly against him. The problem was that since he was president, the crap Trump said mattered and warranted a lot of coverage. Could the media have done a better job exposing him to voters? Yes, but that's a different conversation.
Thanks. I got the idea from something Ted Lieu said. That's actually what he said, but he didn't name Pelosi or Schumer. But who else would govern senators and congressmen's behavior? Elsewhere I heard that Democrats were just afraid that if they replied to GOP lies, the whole place would turn into a jungle. Anyway, I'm not discounting what you said.
I was in disbelief. I was familiar with Katie Britt and had seen her on Fox and Newsmax many times, but the transparent phoniness of her response and the terrible acting were jarring to witness. The Daily Beast had a report up last night that even Republicans were mortified by it. The optics of having a woman in a kitchen deliver the response also wasn't great. I doubt it does any lasting political damage for Rs, but it'll probably be something that follows Britt around for a long time. (See: Marco Rubio awkwardly drinking water)
No. Republicans today are talking about how he sounded so energetic that he must've been on drugs. But the brute fact of the matter is that Biden IS old (and so is Trump). I think he understands that the only thing he can do is demonstrate that he's still up for the job (which he did last night) while poking some fun at himself along the way. Hopefully in a cycle where everything is on the line, voters will ultimately realize that age should be the least of their concerns when deciding who to pull the lever for.
Just one more reason to loathe those awful emailers. "Doomed! We did not reach our fundraising goal! We've searched our records and notice you haven't replied to our email request: Are you a Trump fan?"
Anyway thank you for all your answers. I always liked your laughing picture.
Hey Aaron what’s your thoughts on the polls always being so negative on Biden?
Anyone who actually follows politics closely and supports Democrat policies are very pleased with Biden’s results / polices. I feel like anyone who’s moderately liberal or moderately republican would agree with this.
My read is that we're still in an early phase of the campaign where Biden's poor polling reflects general discontent with the state of things, but I'm hopeful that as the race becomes more of a binary his numbers will improve. I also think that Trump is not the kind of candidate who is going to benefit from more media attention and public scrutiny. He's benefitted from not being on twitter and from the general public not paying close attention to all the crazy stuff he's saying, but that'll change this summer. I still think it's more likely than not that Biden wins. It stinks that it's even close to begin with, and in some ways my feelings right now remind me a lot of how I felt in 2016 -- not a happy thought -- but ultimately I think Biden has a strong record to run on and is going up against a historically flawed candidate.
Also want to know where you find the infinite patience to watch Fox News and report out?
So so so so so so much this!!
I've been doing it for a long time! I started watching Fox News every day for work in 2016. Not only am I fairly numb to it at this point, but it's also a great resource for newsy clips because so many elected Republicans go on there. I view the time I spend trawling through Fox shows day in and day out as part of my reporting and news gathering routine. It's my beat. Fox both sets the agenda for Republicans and amplifies the their priorities. There's nothing like it on the left -- and to be clear I'm glad there isn't!
My comment requires no research, just your opinion. It's inspired by the opinion of so many out there who keep saying that things are terrible in America. That Stepford wife who gave the Republican rebuttal last night started out by tearfully saying that she and her (presumably all white, middle class or better, Southern, safe) friends lie awake at night worrying about the state of America. Why do people like her think things are so bad when they measurably are not? Is it just a question of them not seeing what they don't want to see? Thank you.
It's obviously impossible to get inside someone's head, but my read is that Britt's performance is a means to an end. She wants Trump back in office, and Republicans seem to think the best way to make that happen is to convince people that we're still living amid American Carnage. They fear-monger about the scary cities and scary brown people to an audience that mostly lives in majority white suburban and exurban areas. It's the same play as 2016.
FWIW, Britt is pretty regularly on Fox, and while her showing last night was especially bizarre, her normal style of communication is overwrought and cringey. But she definitely turned it up to 11 last night.
Thank you, yes, I don't know WHY people love that American Carnage schtick, it's so depressing, but they do. There's a dude that golfs at a nearby course, drives a Hummer with an Ohio license plate (this is Florida, so that means he can afford to snowbird, which ain't cheap), tee times are $100 a pop (I can only afford the driving range, I golf at a cheap course), but he has a big flag next to his Trump flag saying that we Americans are mad as hell and not going to take it anymore. I always think: What on earth does he have to be mad about? Anyway, that last bit offered me some good context. I'd never heard of Britt at all before last night, so it felt very Twilight Zone-ish to me. I guess if she was already on one's radar it might not be as jarring.
Thanks for answering my question (2nd in line) here!
didn't watch the kitchen speech, just your snippets. How are millions of Americans dying?? From What? As I recall, last time that happened was thanks to President "it will be gone by Easter."
Did she claim millions of people are dying? If so, 😆. I watched the speech but may have missed that line. It was honestly hard to focus on anything other than her very bizarre delivery.
no, I guess it was just innocent Americans (2nd clip of Xitter) though by implication a lot of them. Presumably because of the border crisis? Because of starvation- -Eagle Pass as Gaza? Expensive tomatoes? Maybe simply fear from all the mongering?
She may have been clearer before this part of the clip played. But I can guarantee you she wasn't referring to school shootings.
This was my question. I saw that snippet about people dying, and said to my husband, "What the f --- is she talking about?" And really, what the f--- was she talking about???
probably Lachen Riley. For the GOP, one example is instantly applied to several million people.
Watching her, I thought, this lady is just cray cray. Holy toledo.
Has reproduction, voting, and LGBTQ rights, gun law reform, and climate change, any hope to compete against Dark Money this election season?
If you look at how elections have gone since the Dobbs decision of June 2022, I think it's irrefutable that abortion is an extremely motivating factor for voters who are casting ballots against Republicans and will continue to be. My sense is that while Democrats are on very solid political ground with gun control and supporting measures to mitigate climate change, they aren't quite as motivating for voters. But as we're already seeing with the conversation around IVF I think abortion will continue to be an albatross for Rs this cycle.
What did you think of how Biden handled the heckling? Puts ‘too old’ to bed?
I thought Biden mostly did a good job, but I cringed hard when he used the term "illegal" to describe migrants. To me that term is a slur. That aside, I think Biden's strategy of calling Republicans' bluff by embracing border security is a good one. And I also think the fact Sean Hannity and company were accusing Biden of being hopped up on drugs during his speech is a reflection of the fact that he did some damage to their "too old" talking point.
On illegals.. There ARE in fact some who are illegal. Who have made no asylum claim, or have forfeited such claim. Who slip through the cracks. Apparently Riley's killer was one such. He had been paroled and released at the border, but then was arrested in NY, which would have put paid to any asylum claim, I would think.
Do you have any decisive info about that? Was he "paroled and released" for any particular reason, or just lack of personnel to do anything other than that?
While I am 100% against using the term "illegal" in general, part of the reason the bipartisan bill is needed is to up the funding to close any such cracks. So if someone actually IS here illegally--which does not include those who entered legally and then stayed beyond visas, since such overstay is a civil violation--we should probably CALL them that and point out as Biden did that the number of crimes they commit per capita is apparently WAY fewer than those committed by Americans
"Undocumented." A "person" is not "illegal." Just like if you jaywalk (illegally), you don't become "illegal." You don't even become "illegal" if you rob a bank at gunpoint.
actually not true. If you cross the border and do NOT claim asylum or other reason for staying and disappear into the wild, you are illegally here. So despite the grammar, the shoe may fit. But the vast, VAST majority of immigrants are not in that category. For them I agree, undocumented.
I've actually read the statutes involved.
My point is that such 'illegals" get IN because the authorities don't have the funds to be sure they don't--and that's an argument for why the GOP stalling is so counterproductive to their own narrative.
The point is that a "person" - any person (except maybe TFG?) -. is not "illegal." It's a slur because it demotes that entire person as being nothing other than their undocumented status. Again, you don't become 'an' "illegal" if you break a law - that's not all there is to say about you. That's the point and why the president apologized for using the term.
I certainly agree that grammatically "an" requires a noun, not just an adjective--an illegal alien. They are not "illegal" but their status is. And I agree it is demeaning because it has indeed been applied to so many that are not in fact here illegally.
Could it have been used rhetorically, to make the point I mentioned? It could have--saying it with air quotes would have worked. I don't think Biden was intending this--this wasn't part of his speech, just a reaction to something someone said--MTG I think, natch-- and he just mistakenly used the label because that's the one trumpeted all over the GOPOSphere in connection with her killer's name. . And he has apologized.
I'm just saying that if properly done--the sarcasm or irony clear--the point could have been made. Riley's killer was someone who slipped through several cracks, for lack of funding.
Thank you!
How ugly is this Presidential election going to get over the next 8 months?
I would expect it to get very ugly. Trump, after all, has been talking about how a terrorist attack on the US is imminent, and to be blunt I don't get the sense he would mind being able to use something like that as a talking point. (Reflect on his "appreciate the congrats" rhetoric after a mass shooting in 2016.)
It's worth emphasizing that for Trump, this is about more than ego. His freedom literally depends on him returning to the White House and making his criminal prosecutions go away. Not only is our democracy on the line, but from his standpoint it's also a matter of whether he remains free or not.
Why don't I have more personal confidence, Aaron?
I've got an important meeting w/ my podiatrist on Tuesday, so this is kind of time-sensitive. Thank you in advance.
(In all seriousness, you and the crew do tremendous work. As a (alleged) political comedy-writer, Public Notice has been the inspiration for more than one piece and/or joke. Admittedly, that's low on the list of importance in comparison to informing the public, but I'm deeply appreciative of both. Cheers.)
Aaron's great, I love when his pieces drop in my inbox. I am a writer too (non-political, thank goodness) and appreciate good, articulate writing that helps me understand what the AF is going on in the world.
Neil and Kelly, you are too kind, thank you!
What gives you the strength to get up in the morning?
It's not that hard for me! To be honest with you, I still feel very blessed to be able to cover historic times for a living. I couldn't believe it when I got hired as an editor for ThinkProgress in late 2015 and still have to pinch myself sometimes that I get to talk about politics for a living. The content obviously can be very bleak, but there are worse ways to make a living.
I wonder what you thought of Biden’s comments on the situation in Gaza. Do you think it was strong enough to win back the Arab communities in Michigan and elsewhere? To my ear it sounded too pro-Israel. Is Biden giving up on Michigan in favor of North Carolina so he doesn’t have to criticize Netanyahu more strongly? That feels risky.
I think it's past time for Biden to pivot from rhetoric to actually taking steps to help people in Gaza, so I was heartened to hear him announce specific measures to get more aid there. I am concerned about the high share of uncommitted votes in the Michigan and Minnesota primaries, but I'm also hopeful that the situation on the ground in Gaza will improve between now and November. I do think some of the uncommitted voters will come home to Biden, but I also think some of the loudest pro-Gaza voices are people who probably wouldn't vote for Biden anyway.
My broader read on Biden's handling of the Israel-Hamas is that there's nothing he could do that wouldn't alienate a key constituency. I think he's done a decent job threading a tight needle, though I wish he would've created more distance sooner between himself and Netanyahu. The quicker active hostilities come to an end the better for all involved.
What do you think fuels the idea that if America is run by Trump and the rest of his fascist pack, that the current crop of elected useful idiots peddling Russian disinformation to the detriment of the United States will be able to avoid the harms of living in the fascist republic they so heartily strove to create?
Trump-style fascism is by white people and for white people. I think most of the folks pushing for it and supporting it assume their families will be spared, and they're probably not wrong. That's one of the things that is so disconcerting about Dems' current shaky standing with Black and brown communities -- those are the people who will be in the crosshairs if Trump returns to power.
During Trump's term, and generally during the surge of lies from MAGA people, were Democrats told to say nothing in response? I mean, did Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer order them to let all that crap flow freely into the minds of people who'd never watched the news in their lives? The Jan. 6 Committee revealed brilliant communicators the people had home had never seen.
I was in DC at the time and can confirm there was no conspiracy to silence Dems during Trump's term. In fact I think a lot of them spoke out pretty strongly against him. The problem was that since he was president, the crap Trump said mattered and warranted a lot of coverage. Could the media have done a better job exposing him to voters? Yes, but that's a different conversation.
Thanks. I got the idea from something Ted Lieu said. That's actually what he said, but he didn't name Pelosi or Schumer. But who else would govern senators and congressmen's behavior? Elsewhere I heard that Democrats were just afraid that if they replied to GOP lies, the whole place would turn into a jungle. Anyway, I'm not discounting what you said.
What did you think of the Republican response?
I was in disbelief. I was familiar with Katie Britt and had seen her on Fox and Newsmax many times, but the transparent phoniness of her response and the terrible acting were jarring to witness. The Daily Beast had a report up last night that even Republicans were mortified by it. The optics of having a woman in a kitchen deliver the response also wasn't great. I doubt it does any lasting political damage for Rs, but it'll probably be something that follows Britt around for a long time. (See: Marco Rubio awkwardly drinking water)
Do you think Biden’s speech with begin to nullify the whole “Biden is old” narrative?
No. Republicans today are talking about how he sounded so energetic that he must've been on drugs. But the brute fact of the matter is that Biden IS old (and so is Trump). I think he understands that the only thing he can do is demonstrate that he's still up for the job (which he did last night) while poking some fun at himself along the way. Hopefully in a cycle where everything is on the line, voters will ultimately realize that age should be the least of their concerns when deciding who to pull the lever for.
When campaign emails say "300 x Match!" can that possibly be true? At least, generally speaking is it true?
I said no research 😆 (but it's almost always a scam. Source: https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/06/28/tim-griffin-political-donation-matching-00103804)
Just one more reason to loathe those awful emailers. "Doomed! We did not reach our fundraising goal! We've searched our records and notice you haven't replied to our email request: Are you a Trump fan?"
Anyway thank you for all your answers. I always liked your laughing picture.
Hey Aaron what’s your thoughts on the polls always being so negative on Biden?
Anyone who actually follows politics closely and supports Democrat policies are very pleased with Biden’s results / polices. I feel like anyone who’s moderately liberal or moderately republican would agree with this.
Why are the casuals not enthusiastic for Biden?
My read is that we're still in an early phase of the campaign where Biden's poor polling reflects general discontent with the state of things, but I'm hopeful that as the race becomes more of a binary his numbers will improve. I also think that Trump is not the kind of candidate who is going to benefit from more media attention and public scrutiny. He's benefitted from not being on twitter and from the general public not paying close attention to all the crazy stuff he's saying, but that'll change this summer. I still think it's more likely than not that Biden wins. It stinks that it's even close to begin with, and in some ways my feelings right now remind me a lot of how I felt in 2016 -- not a happy thought -- but ultimately I think Biden has a strong record to run on and is going up against a historically flawed candidate.
Thanks again for the link!