Is mocking Donald no longer funny?
 

I tried to watch a TIVOed Colbert a couple nights ago. He is still on Donald, who I really do despise. I don't, however, find anything funny in the schtick anymore. This isn't Gerry Ford falling down the stairs. For someone who really wanted to be an anarchist years ago, I seem to have an unhealthy respect for the potential of the Executive office. I'm wondering if it's old for any of you guys. Is there any value in it? I can't help but think these comedians would be oh so respectful if the other crime family had won.

I disagree. I think if the other family had won and presented as disastrous a first 100 days they'd have ripped them to shreds. had either side won and presented as ill-quipped, uneducated, inconsistent and incompetent a face to the watching world, they'd have ripped them to shreds.

Bush was bad, at times, in the face he showed to the camera, and the people he surrounded himself with seemed dangerous and far more powerful than the president himself, but this administration?... is a car crash. The president is tweeting random declarations of policy and intent, accusation and proffered proof based on the rantings of tv conspiracy theorists. Watching his people try to explain his thought process to the world is painful.

And that's before any mention of the Russia thing. Or the trampling all over historic ties of diplomacy and friendship with other nations. Random fucking sideswipes, like the refusal to shake Merkel's hand.

I'd say keep that light shining right onto the political shenanigans - and mock it to within an inch of its life, it deserves nothing more til the administration demonstrates at least some capacity for rational policy making and political competency.

I think it is absolutely the job of comedians and late night hosts to focus their comedy on the comedy of errors currently in effect in Washington.

They're just jumping on the simple popularity bandwagon. That's what translates into ratings. If Clinton had won the Presidency and Trump the popular vote, they'd be satirizing her. I tire of any comedian who goes overboard on a comedy theme for easy laughs. I prefer the ones who are well rounded.

Just for clarity - this is not about left v right. This is about a staggering level of unpreparedness and incompetence.

They had 7 fucking years to draft a potential replacement for the ACA. 7 years!

The conservatives in the US, even those leaning marginally right, or just unhappy with how ACA affected their health insurance, had the right to expect that the Republican candidates who campaigned on repeal and replace at the very least had a fucking plan.

The replublicans don't like the current health care system? Then draft a replacement that everyone can live with. You claim it is possible to have a health system that doesn't leave ordinary Americans crippled by insurance costs, allows them the level of choice they want, and doesn't drop millions of Americans outside of cover altogether - then devise a plan to get there your way.

The worst things about Trump and his administration are nothing to do with left and right.

I think the political situation is so surreal that late night comedy is a form of catharsis.

Only in a placebo sort of way.

From a parliamentarian perspective that makes sense. It seems effective because incompetence can be quickly addressed. The US system isn't built for addressing incompetence. We have the nuclear option which the Presidents own party has to set off. Won't his party push back against the mocking more than the serious presentation of issues? I don't think we've had someone as unhinged as this before. We seem to lack statesmen (McCain?) right now for a serious addressing of the issues, so maybe mocking is our only angle.

smrt actually

We have a system of checks and balances. It's been working. Don't sweat the small stuff.

To your initial point, I tried to watch Saturday night live last night. Repeat from Feb 11. Tried. I thought that show was supposed to at least try to make you laugh.

I find sarcastic snark to be joyless comedy, built on exclusion. Intellect-free intellectualism, pretending to be smart. I've never felt less connected to the national funny bone. And I believe it's part of how we got here.

But I'm influenced by my ex, who was endlessly snarky, self-congratulatory about it even, and it was all out of a personal psychology that informed her of how great she was, and how much everything else sucked.

Ha ha no. Remember when there was a national moratorium on saying ANYTHING bad about her? She literally couldn't focus her eyes correctly due to having suffered a blood clot in her brain -- and in most of the media, this was simply off-limits for discussion.

No, they give the first female Democratic President a pass for two full years.

Nothing to do with left and right, but a scant two sentences later... for two full paragraphs... the right did this, the right the right the right. Then ending with it isn't about left right. You see what you did there?

It's fine, knock yourself out! But can we stop pretending it's not political? Because it totally is.


ETA: if Hillary had failed to pass something healthcare-related, would the late night comics mock her for it? Well that actually happened; let's watch all these clips from 1993 where it's... never even brought up.

LJ, SNL is enjoying its big resurgence. Everyone says so.

I haven't watched but that's ALL I ever hear about it. So you must be mistaken if you didn't laugh. All channels are telling us that it's a fucking riot.

You can change that. Just move the thread to Arts & Entertainment. :lol2:

Ut, Lj, you two are grumpy old men who don't understand 'what the kids are doing these days,' and attribute it to a decline in moral, intellectual, or creative capabilities--the 'downfall of society'--it's the oldest, WRONGEST fallacy in the book. Life goes on, old men die, new ideas rise up from the ashes of your reverie for the glory days.

That may be it.

SNL is weak because it's no longer counter-culture. It is very much a mouth piece of the corporate wing of the Democratic Party.

Yes... I mentioned the Republicans because they are the party in power - that's the point. And if it were the democrats in power and being this unbelievably pathetic, it would be the democratic party deserving of scorn.

Let me put it another way: My criticism of the Republicans isn't because of them being on the right in this instance, it is because they are making a egregious mess.

SNL is, and always has been, staffed by amateurs. All of the good bits they've been known for over the last several years (which, again, were okay but not THAT funny) were guest appearances from bigger stars like Tina Fey, Alec Baldwin, Melissa McCarthy. It's ironic because it's not the performances that are usually lacking, but the writing.

I don't really watch SNL. From time to time I've seen an odd sketch on youtube that's funny, but mostly there's something lacking.

Much of it is the mood of the live audience, live performers get instant feedback from them and can kill enthusiasm of the cast in a heartbeat.

I believe the time to stop mocking Trump's actions will probably never come.

I find the silly funny things, like seeing his image made over in clown makeup, not so funny anymore. But they take on new value and validity when he himself mocks the appearance of others.

Your observation that more statesmenlike behavior (McCain?) would be an effective response to the unpresidented behavior of the current holder of the Executive Office. But I don't see any statesmen doing the mocking. I see comedians and pundits mocking Trump, and Hilary fucking Clinton, really, when does the statute of recriminations run out on that one? They're getting paid for it. You can vote with your wallet and affect the result that way.

I think the ongoing abuse of privilege, utter tone-deafness, outright pandering and condescension, and especially the hypocrisy are textbook examples of attributes displayed by leaders that SHOULD BE mocked. That's right at the top of the list of low hanging fruit for mockery. He's actively destroying the trustworthiness of the *office* by his shenanigans. I'm prepared to use the means I have to expose his bullshit and fight against the destruction he spreads. Very few other levers have any traction against such abuses.


One more point. It's not mockery to have his statements revealed to be wrong. Fact checking is not mockery, even if he cries and whines about it.

Yeah, he supplies plenty of valid material without making shit up.
If you think "Respect for the Office" should take precedence over his shenanigans, you probably thought respect for the church should take precedence over priests diddling little boys.

Let's not forget that Trump's presidency was disadvantaged in its youth. The Norwegian Nobel Committee didn't nominate him for a Nobel Peace Prize, on his eleventh day in office, like they did for his predecessor. Trump is having to pull himself up by his bootstraps. Gotta cut the guy a little slack. Maybe hold out an olive branch by inviting him to host SNL.

What's the alternative to mocking him, silence acquiescence? Fuck that! Give this asshole a pass because he figured out how to fool stupid people? No way. Mock the shit out of him, just like they mocked Obama for 10 years. The difference is we don't have to make shit up.

But is it at all funny? Pete turned on another Colbert tonight. I tuned out during the monologue and back in for Amy Mann. The situation is serious. I have never spent so much time contacting politicians, but it ceased to be funny or watchable long ago. The comedy about Trump is pret near as depressing as Trump himself. It isn't cathartic so what exactly is the point?

While I generally support mocking politicians, in Trump's case I think it is a bad idea because making light of his actions normalizes them and, as in UT's description of his ex, makes it about "us" being better than him, when people should really be holding him accountable for his actions.

At this point I feel, as a nation we are so beyond fucked that a zombie apocalypse would be welcome.

Has Amy Mann put on any weight? She is scary skinny.

Nawwww, say something like: And that's our interaction for 2017. See you next year. :D

Very thin, but I adore her voice and this new cut was lovely.

Griff I keep on not posting to thread but -- I had your same exact moment but with Seth Meyers, which J put on the other day. And there was one single non-Trump item. And I'm like, at what point does exhaustion kick in? Is nobody just looking for some relief from this shit? Did nothing else happen and is nothing else ever going to happen? Comedy is supposed to be unpredictable, this is the opposite of that; is that why this feels like "B" material?

This is exactly how he won, so I repeat, war or disco.

That brings up a point that I had forgotten about, probably how he won the election in the first place. He is such a catastrophic train wreck and the media love him for that reason. People can't help but look at the train wreck and that sells ad space/time/clicks or whatever you kids are doing these days. Maybe he has some sort of planetary alignment (gratuitous Uranus joke) but whatever, what was the stat about hours of media coverage during the pre-election months? Something like a 400:1 ratio with Sanders and 200:1 with Clinton?

For whatever reason, the guy is loved by the media. Mock him, praise him, gnash your teeth and beat your breast - it doesn't matter.

8 more years? HAH! We should be so lucky, We will be hearing about that asshole until we die.

I voted, 'makes me uneasy,' because as foot3 says, too normalizing. Also, really people?--size of his hands, etc. is more compelling than nightmarish policies and record-breaking incompetence?? Or even legitimate character flaws, and, "he's orange" is what you have to say??

Reading comments, here, reminds me, I don't watch TV, so I really don't know what the volume or content of comedic enterprise is re: Trump, other than memes, and the FB highlight reel.



And whether 8 years, or "rest of our life," one thing is for sure: if you EVER supported him, I'll never be able to fully respect you, ever, ever again. I'd have to be a completely different person with unrecognizable values in order to make that untrue.

Seth Meyers is a regular nemesis, Trevor Noah, he has good writers and excellent delivery. Stephen Colbert is still butthurt *and* can make some funny jokes about it. Samantha Bee also has some biting commentary. You can look up their clips on youtube and skip most of the commentary and commercials, and all of the FB highlight reel.

edited to add:

SNL has had some epic pieces about Trump and his entourage. Much of it is spot on.

I've seen some funny clips, even SNL, but I guess I'm not bombarded by it because I don't *state at the TV all day* --a funny video is 2-3 minutes and then I move on with my life.

Everyone who pays taxes is supporting him.

People in the ABC (Anyone But Clinton) camp could care less; because, they already feel the same about you and don't value your opinion.

Those who actually think Trump is a good thing aren't looking for respect. They're looking for compliance.

On the road of life, there are drivers (outcome winners) and there are passengers (outcome losers). Noisy passengers are called back seat drivers (pretenders).

I recognize that thought because I used to think it...

... and I was wrong.

You were a completely different person.

I acknowledge, that happens.

Your mom is a grumpy old man. And SNL is not funny.

And Trump is awesome. Tip that shit over and see what spills out. He is chaos.

DEFINITELY NOT, I had the very same values as I have today. I just participated in a different school of thought and started from different premises.

DEEPLY QUESTIONING those premises was an incredibly hard thing to do, but I found that once I merely "allowed in" different premises, and REQUIRED myself to ask myself "OK, what if I'm wrong?" I was very surprised at what I found.

This required finding the very best counter arguments against my beliefs - not the arguments I was aware of, but the best ones. (One thing I found was that the counter arguments for the other side that came from MY side were LOUSY! Everybody says "I'm right, and here's why"; nobody ever says "I may be wrong and here's why.")

Great stuff! That's some of the best stuff, right there.

I do that stuff (I try! right?) and I think everybody should, because it can be pretty transformational--leading to levels of personal growth that can be described as "being a completely different person."



I propose that core values are not the same thing as critical thinking skills.

I would say that the 13 years (13 fucking years! Jesus christ) I've spent in the Cellar has had a transformational effect on my thinking and political views. Complemented by my experience in local government, true, but mainly my interactions here.

I no longer think of those on the right as my natural and inevitable enemies. I no longer have that absolute conviction that my political analysis is the 'right' one. I still firmly believe in a socialist approach to many aspects of society (health care, unemployment benefits, pensions, basic transport and utilities infrastructure) but I also can see that the other side of that equation isn't necessarily the debil. That people can just as firmly believe in individual responsibility as the most important factor and do so with good and laudable intentions for the health of the nation as a whole is a step forward :P

I also am less certain than I once was that the socialist approach is the right, or only way to achieve a healthy society that benefits all.

I still think it's the best way - but I am also open to other ideas in a way I really wasn't 13 years ago.

Changing position is not necessarily growth.

I think the biggest change for me was to recognise the value in the other side. We need both sides - we need the left to mitigate the right and we also need the right to mitigate the left - in general - from an economic perspective the right seems to have had mostly its own way for a long time. The ground has shifted drastically over the last 20 years or so, empowering corporations and disempowering the workforce.

But in general - the body politic needs to be just that, a body incorporating the myriad views and needs of all those who participate.


[eta] also - as much as I want 'my' side to win - I don't want the supporters of the other side to 'lose'; it's a shitty feeling. Every election we (UK and also US) end up with half the electorate feeling upset, disenfranchised and unrepresented.

I just don't think it is a healthy way to organise a country.

Dana yeah - not as certain - like, at this point, I know I don't know what is actually best for everyone. How to govern the country? Who knows. I will leave that up to the people who figure they know.

Capitalism or Socialism? It sure looks like people have made both work, and made both fail.* It seems like the character of the people is waaaaay more important, but I have no clue how to make that work out, and nobody is having elections about that, or even talking about it.



*The Swedes made Socialism work hardest, and Chavez made it fail hardest. The USA made Capitalism work hardest, and the Albanians made it fail hardest. Or so it appears. I'm not sure.

Doesn't matter. It ain't gonna stop.

Failed 'socialism' and successful 'socialism' has little in common other than that word. It was never about capitalist verses socialist. It was always about details that exist in both socialist and capitalist economies. Details that are missing or perverted in failed economies - both socialist and capitalist.

For example, one parameter is the purpose of a company. In successful capitalist and socialistic economies, purpose is the advancement of mankind and that organization's product. In failing economies, too many want a reward; do not understand or appreciate its purpose.

Hugo Chávez had both charisma and credit lines to literally mortgage a Venezuelian economy. Purpose was not advancement of the country. He chose to cure symptoms rather than solve problems or advance his people.

Maduro does not have charisma. Everything has been mortgaged. Maduro is stuck with (and is a victim of) what Chavez created. Chavez mortgaged everything to promote a socialism that ignored purpose; as found in successful socialism and capitalism.

Purpose is relevant. 'Socialism' or 'capitalism' says less.

Having said that, what is the 'purpose' of The Donald? (To be more famous than the duck?)

Mock? Reality?

You know - a couple of days before you posted this thread - well a few times really over the past couple of weeks - I was thinking about Colbert's monologues recently.

I have found most of them funny, but I also think that, underneath the more lighthearted, or childish elements (drawing dicks on the board and pokes about little hands) there's a real darkness to this humour.

I think that's to be expected. He's far more a Letterman than a Leno.

It's necessary...

Here's a surprise, as completely unwatchable as I find his monologue right now, his Nielsen Ratings put him at number 1 for late night. I guess if Trump is messing with your sleep pattern maybe you do get catharsis from Colbert?

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment...t-ratings.html

As far as the darkness of the humor goes, there is real anger there but I can't decipher if the rage is that of a Democratic team player who can't Clinton or a patriot who is actually concerned about our institutions and people? I hope its the latter. I guess his bubble is under assault. My bubble took another hit yesterday when the Post reported that Eric Prince (evil incarnate) may be the Trump Putin go between and someone close to me spent his morning on a Clinton rant right out of Trumps tweets. Folks are doubling down on protecting their bubbles. Shit gonna pop.

"Shit gonna pop."

I wish it would...the U.S. could use a nice, clarifying, civil war right now.

Instead, it's gonna be the same old, same old.


As for mocking the prez (or congress, or the supremes, or govs, or...): meh...if you got the time and interest, sure...kinda just singin' to yourself in the shower, though.

Wars. Zombie Apocalypses. Epidemics.

Everyone always assumes they are going to be among the survivors. Odds are, you'll catch a bullet in a civil war, Henry. Or more likely, starve.

Moot.

As I say: it's gonna be same old, same old

Figures the right would want to start another war. Even among themselves. So extreme that even a right wing propaganda tool, Fox News, is at war with itself - its president and on screen personalities.

War is good. It even made George Jr popular. And the Chinese rich.

I think Louis said it best:

I get the distinct impression, given the focus of the humour, and the times when Colbert's anger is most apparent (you can kind of see a glint of it in his eyes at times) that it is the latter.

The way I see it, whoever is in the top job is going to mocked. The tenor and tone of that mockery depends on a couple of factors: which side won is one of them - a liberal or left leaning comedian may feel more anger at the policies and approach of a right leaning or right wing president and is also likely to have felt a sense of loss or disappointment when their preferred candidate lost.

But the other factor is how well or badly that president is doing in office, and that transcends the party political to a degree. The anger that seems to be coming through with Trump reminds me a little of the anger that came through with George W. during times when much of the country was feeling lied to and at times when it seemed the president himself was being led by his team. But even then, with the Daily Show, and even later with Colbert, much of the focus was on how all that was covered by Fox, and much of the humour was based on the machinations of Bush's cabal, with occasional swipes at his dumb hick persona.

With Trump and his administration the focus is on rank incompetence at almost all levels, a total and utter disregard for the truth and the absolute lack of respect shown by Trump for the office he now occupies.

Little known fact, Colbert is actually a conservative. A pretty moderate one, but he's talked in interviews about some pretty fiscally conservative stuff. He's genuinely refused to do bits mocking the Pope before.

He's a Sunday school teacher.

right here seems as good a place as any to do this...
 

The ten year (re)taught me a valuable lesson last night, that being, one doesn't have to be a dick to hold, assert, and defend a view.

More so than many, I can be a real dick.

My apologies to all I've been dickish to (which, I guess, is pretty much anyone and everyone reading this).

I can be a hard pill to swallow in the best of circumstances, when I'm tryin' to be nice, so, when I'm not tryin', well...as I say, my apologies to any and all.

Hi henry.

Kids are an everlasting source of surprise, are they not?