- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
After scuttling a months-long search for a new host, the Paramount Global network said it had enlisted Jon Stewart, who presided over the late-night mainstay’s most popular era, to serve as its host on Monday nights throughout the 2024 election cycle and to run the program. He is expected to oversee the program through 2025. Various “Daily Show” correspondents will host the program Tuesday through Thursday nights, and Jen Flanz, the current executive producer, will continue her duties on the show.
I’ll never not believe that if Jon was running the Daily Show for the 2016 election season, Trump wouldn’t have been elected.
Either way, Zelenskyy proved what a satirical comedian with good character can do on the world stage. Wish Jon would just run for office already…
Side note: Mehdi Hasan has left MSNBC… Apart from Jon, I can think of nobody else more qualified to run the Daily Show.
I’ve thought the same thing ever since that dipshit got elected president in 2016.
Stewart’s presence in the media was real and impactful. Really wish he had stayed a few more years.
Idk if so many people remember this now, but watching him on Crossfire absolutely shut them down was so satisfying. Then the show just happens to get cancelled not long after for ‘unrelated reasons’, like they didn’t get destroyed and quit in shame.
Oh yes I remember that fondly. Crazy to think that bumbling bow-tie dipshit would go on to have one of the biggest conservative followings and basically be a Kremlin mouthpiece. Fuck Carlson.
Plus it would have been a golden age. The Bush years all over again
Yeah it’s no way the timing of Trump was an accident. He literally ran before when Jon was still working and was laughed off the stage. Then Jon retired…
Bassem Youssef is the only not-Jon i want.
What Zelenskyy did, his career trajectory I mean, is nothing short of… well, the sitcom fiction he wrote himself. A good one, btw— it’s called Servant of the People. It’s on Netflix. He’s hilarious. And that may be the most fucked up part: he seemingly predicted all of this (to some degree) in the form of, honestly, a pretty hilarious sitcom that got cancelled before the 3rd season started production because it fucking came true.
It’s not a direct A:B comparison of reality, but it’s uncannily close— also, proof that Ukraine is perfectly capable of making a delightfully funny politically-oriented sitcom for streaming. Well, until the guy became president and globally-beloved war daddy. Nonetheless, it’s bizarre how it coincided with, or perhaps provoked, real-word events that led to him becoming a popularly-elected anti-corruption president against all of the “influence” Russia could throw at the elections.
And he’s lived up to all of his promises. He spent the first pert of his presidency cleaning house, something he’s kept doing, even after meeting deep parliamentary resistance. Fucker has stood up to Trump’s attempts to extort him, over which Trump got impeached, btw. Like… holy shit! World leaders from far greater nations have melted in front of US presidents. Not this guy. After the Russians invaded, something nobody expected a comedian to have the temerity to face, he, in no uncertain terms - with a raised middle finger to Putin - has become one of the most inspiring world leaders of the 21st-century.  not only his people, but people all over the world fucking love him.  More importantly, they respect him. 
He’s amazing.
I think Jon would be great as president. Definitely better than our current options. But if he was done with the Daily Show (and even if he never left) I wouldn’t be surprised at all if he didn’t want the actual job of being president.
He has explicitly said before that he does not want to run for president and does not want that job.
Which is ironically part of the reason he’d be so good at it.
Which is all the more reason to have a massive write in campaign for him.
Those who do not lust for power, are those most suitable to be burdened with it.
I get what you’re saying but that’s cruel as fuck.
I think that job would kill him.
Something tells me electing a fucking mentally declining nazi with a hitler fetish is just a skosh more cruel.
Fair point, but I’m talking about the cruelty to a man who does not want the job.
It’s not that cruel. I get what you’re saying and agree a little. But if drafted into the job, I think he’d be proud to serve his country and the world.
I think it’s not just the main part of the job he doesn’t want. He doesn’t want to be the center of the media storm. He doesn’t want his years of testicle jokes to end up harming the country. He doesn’t want the job of begging for the job.
And the main job would be a duty he’d serve, not a fulfillment of a lifelong dream.
If the circumstances are right, I’d consider writing him in. If there wasn’t a more important vote. Honestly I should have done it when I lived in Maryland.
I don’t think Zelensky is a good example of anything lol his government has been the most right-wing and authoritarian government in Ukraine in recent memory. They banned all left-wing parties for goodness sake….
Those of us who remember the Orange Revolution understand the incredible political attack that Ukraine has been under for decades. Russia has expended unprecedented expenditure understanding democracy in order to develop mechanisms to undermine it.
It’s extremely unfortunate the reality in which former Soviet states exist. While it’s distasteful, it’s certainly necessary given a reality that westerners barely understand… Which is kind of shocking to me given the outcome of Jan 6.
I think when the war is over, it would be appropriate for him to not even run. Hard men make hard decisions when under existential threat. I’m glad Ukraine had a Churchill when Ukraine needed a Churchill… But when that time comes for a peacetime leader, it doesn’t mean he wasn’t the right man in the right place at the right time.
It is from a position of privilege and ignorance that we criticize the necessary actions of wartime leaders.
You think necessary actions is absorbing and legitimising far-right and Nazi militias? Literally banning and arresting left-wing activists? Kidnapping men in the middle of the night to conscript them? Bombing indiscriminately civilians on the East? Bro fuck off.
Churchill was a genocidal racist maniac btw, if he’s your idea of a hero, I understand where you’re coming from. And again, bro fuck right the fuck off.
I’m continually perplexed by people who claim to be anti-nazi but are here to light up (checks notes) Winston Churchill.
I think there’s room for “Churchill was instrumental in the fight against fascism” and “Churchill was himself racist and enacted racist policies that lead to genocide” to coexist.
In the context of a good faith conversation, I agree.
When people are bending over backwards to intentionally push well-defined buttons to drive state-level propaganda, I do not.
It’s so incredibly well crafted, this doofuses original post. He argues that Zelenski is a nightmare to the Left-wing.
Why? Because it’s a position and delivery crafted to the general Lemmy populace. “I’m left wing! Is Zelensky against me? Should I be reconsidering my position? Am I against Ukraine, because I’m certainly for left-wing stuff”
It’s nausiatingly transparent propaganda. Ever meter of Ukraine under Russian occupation, it is illegal to even SUGGEST that LGBT is good, it’s ILLEGAL to merely express POSITIVE SENTIMENT. While we can agree in Ukraine it isn’t perfect, it’s NOT EVEN CLOSE to the oppression in Russia.
There is nuance that adults in good faith can examine. The FBI investigation into Russian interference in US elections pointed out that the EXACT vulnerability in western sensibilities that their propeganda exploits is the concept that every assertion warrants a discussion. Just cycle wedge issues. Drop in, drop a bomb, fuck off.
It’s entirely appropriate to just say “No, you’re clearly a bad faith actor and I’m not going to give the illusion of legitimacy of your claims by digging into the nuances with you”
You really seem misinformed. Wagner has more association with nazism. Even Putin’s right-hand man, his modern Rasputin if you will, is a literal dyed-in-the-wool neo-nazi who wrote the plans Putin is literally carrying out.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is of no difference than Hitler’s justification to invade Poland “for ethnic Germans.”
At the end of the day, the Jewish leader Zelenskyy who lost family in the Holocaust, disrupted the sockpuppetry that was originally taking place in Ukraine. As the war continued, the remnants of corruption have continued to be weeded out, though still some remain.
You really seem misinformed. There are Nazis in Russia, nobody said there weren’t. But Russia didn’t absorb the Nazis into their government and state apparatus, gave them leadership positions in ministries etc.
And Nazi Germany invaded Poland because of Lebensraum, basically German Manifest Destiny. Russia invaded Ukraine because of NATO and the color revolution in 2014.
Yes Russia did, what are you smoking? I just told you Putin’s right-hand man is a nazi. You just ignored that conveniently lol. RT, the Kremlin mouthpiece, spouts nazi propaganda on the daily.
What absorption of nazism in Ukraine are you talking about and when, specifically?
No, Russia didn’t even Ukraine “because NATO,” considering Ukraine wasn’t in NATO and intentionally didn’t join to stop Russian aggression. Yet Russia did so anyway.
Ironically the DEFENSIVE Alliance that is NATO would’ve saved many lives of women and children from the brutal Russian invasion because Russia knows they’d get demolished by NATO.
You are clearly drinking far too much Russian vodka, my friend.
Finally, please learn your history regarding WWII:
But you’re right: this was just a convenient excuse. Just as Russia is using it as a convenient excuse for their own sort of Lebensraum, basically Russian Manifest Destiny. Or wait – did you not read Putin’s 5,000 word essay where he spells this out…?
Assuming you’re talking about the Azov Batallion, if you are fighting a war for your country’s survival and you have a rabid band of ethnonationalists, who clearly suck in terms of their views and beliefs, but are otherwise willing to die to protect your country, why wouldn’t you let them?
… I’m talking about right-sector, azov, national corps etc. They were brought into leadership and legitimized as part of the national guard and army. That is inexcusable. You would really side with Nazis to defend “your country”? After the war is over, Ukraine will become an ultra-right wing state. The state apparatus will have been completely overtaken by these militias and groups.
That’s like saying the UK should’ve legitimized and absorbed the British Fascist Party during WW2, made Oswald Mosley the minister of defense (which was done in Ukraine…) etc. That’s insane, but it does show how you liberals see the world. Scratch a liberal etc etc
Do you think Nazis don’t exist in modern western militaries? Also, you think Nazis are liberal? You seem like either a troll or an idiot.
Azov et. al., literally make up <1% of the total UAF. lol what are you talking about? These people just have a common enemy and it’s all-hands-on-deck to oust the foreign invader. The same thing even happened in WWII America when pro-Nazi sects of our society took up arms against Japan.
Yknow what? If nazis are willing to die to defend your country, let them.
Right I don’t get what’s so hard to comprehend.
In America we have an arguably bigger base of right-wing nazi extremists. The Base, Oathkeepers, 3%ers, Proud Boys, etc.
… And you know what? If someone invaded our country that may actually be the only time my bleeding heart leftist would share a fox hole with them out of common goals.
That doesn’t make USA a nazi state lol. But of course, let’s not pretend this was ever a legitimate argument by Russia in the first place.