Speaking of misunderstandings about Ukraine, I just encountered one of the most incredible self-unaware comments within a NYT article that read as follows:
"I can see Trump allowing Putin to install a puppet government in Ukraine and turn it into a vassal state."
Making this statement without any awareness that the US did literally the above in 2014 is unreal.
Exactly. But I bet if you pressed that person on the point, they'd ultimately concede that a US puppet government in Ukraine is for some reason preferable to a Russian one. That's the level of brainwashing Americans have received since childhood.
Right, and my following point would be why can't we return to the mentality as perfectly articulated in Barack Obama's 2014 editorial in The Atlantic (of all places!). This is what I find the most offensive about the Ukraine situation as it developed after 2016. Not a single shitlib with a Ukraine flag in their bio took issue with Obama's position back then.
I wish I could have voted for Fred Flintstone, but the Colorado Supreme Court and Alvin Bragg pissed me off enough that I voted for Trump. Close enough.
Well, Michael. You don't seem to really grasp the authoritarian nature of that regime even though you were one of the victims of it. And you really do not understand Trump's appeal as being anti-uni-party and anti establishment elite. And it took a jack hammer to break through that. Trump has done us a huge favor exposing the extent of government corruption and making government responsive to people for once. And he's exposed the lying media. Heaven forbid he should call someone stupid after they are calling him Hitler for 9 years, threatening to "take him out," "take him behind the school yard," decapitating him, calling him a rapist (but Bill Clinton is out campaigning for you all--it has nothing to do with anything then, does it?), and right from the shoot "gentleman" John McCain was part of paying for or at least giving that Russia garbage they all knew wasn't true to Hillary Clinton and calling him names. But he isn't supposed to call him a loser. You Democrats are used to calling everyone Hitler and all the Republicans before him just took it (and LOST). Donald Trump isn't gonna take that shit and nobody should. They did every authoritarian thing they accused him of including censoring the media, of which you were one, I believe. So while you might have talked to some young voter, you really do not understand what (besides the obvious, duh, open borders, economy, men in women's sports, price control, socialist programs, DEI, critical race theory, parental rights...) was really at stake for anyone who IS paying attention. Do you know that those who thought democracy was on the line was actually carried by TRUMP by 2 points? I don't mind you not voting for him, but I do mind your refusal to look at what's gone on here fairly. And this rhetoric you blame HIM for has been going on for 9 years and almost got him killed. So, maybe be honest and I'll pay for you substack again someday. I follow a lot of Democrats or previous Democrats. I lean libertarian but above all, I'm a civil libertarian. You seem to understand freedom of speech was at risk, yet you don't seem to understand the extent of the danger. You were cancelled I believe as I was--an adjunct professor who simply said our university should take NO political position and that universities were places where ideas were exchanged freely. I was also cancelled and unfriended by my publisher. Who BTW, university presses publish ONE pov even though most of them are paid for publicly. Like NPR. What a joke. But it's nice we protected your freedom for you since you couldn't "bring yourself" to vote for the orange man bad. Maybe you should hang more with the elitists.
I voted for trump and think you missed the point of the article. Trump resonated with real people, even the ones who may not be “in the know” of every corrupt thing the establishment has been doing like a lot of us are. He was relatable on a personal level and that can’t be overlooked. Yes, a lot of trump voters are fully versed on the downward spiral that the current administration has been taking us, but maybe some new voters saw a leader who wasn’t what the msm said he was. The man passed out big mac’s, turned the garbage comment into a big “stick it to the man” moment and went on Rogen for 3 hours straight! That may not be important to you, but if that’s part of what got them to the voting booth, I’m all for it! His relatability mixed with the fact that we had a lot more money in our pockets 4 years ago did it for a lot of people.
Greenwald has no fear of "alienating Trumpers," because Glenn will just continue doing what he always has: calling out hypocrites, and championing free speech.
I watch Greenwald's show every night. Glenn has a lot of respect for Michael, or he wouldn't leave System Update in his hands. Glenn may criticize Michael's fashion sense, but he is a fan of his interviews, using him as System Update's "roving, intrepid reporter."
Well, thanks to us, he'll be free to ride his own train, I guess. Eh? If she'd won, they'd have shut us all down and I've been on the end of that personally. MY point here is that Michael has a right to make this public blog and he has a right to vote as he pleases, but he TOLD us what he was going to do and I have a right to comment on that. That is what we are all here for. You don't have a right to silence me or shame me for criticizing him. And I criticize Glenn and Matt and Alex, too. You sound like a snow flake. I taught a lot of kids like this. I told them right off the bat, in university. There are no safe spaces. You have a right to your opinion and we'll hear it, but you do not have a right to an UNCHALLENGED opinion and neither does Michael and neither do you. That's what we are all fighting for. I am not saying Michael can't do as he pleases; or vote as he wants or write what he wants. But I do not have to agree with it. And these people are still trying to control the media. Trying to figure out how they can silence us. That's what all totalitarian societies do. That has to be protected at all costs because without it, we have nothing. And I have a right to that opinion, especially since I've paid for the privilege before. I like Michael, but I think he was wrong on this. That's all. You don't seem to understand the issue here. He has every right to piss us off and I have every right to say he's wrong. I already told you if he actually POSTED things, I would have kept paying for this. I do not expect him to agree with me but you should not expect me to not criticize him.
You shouldn't expect people not to refute, disagree with, or otherwise criticise your criticism, either. It is ironic you rant about there being no safe spaces and about snowflakes in response to someone politely saying there's nothing wrong with disagreement, and that it's good Tracey brings a different perspective. That's all the post you are replying to said.
No offense, but that in response to such a benign statement, you feel a need to go on about how nobody has the right to an "UNCHALLENGED" opinion, snowflakes and safe spaces, blah blah, it sounds a bit unhinged and like you are not actually responding to what someone else said, but to some imaginary version of what they said.
Maybe try exercising your own principles in discourse, since just as you are free to disagree with and challenge others, they are free to do so with you, and your response to someone doing that reads as unrelated rambling. By the way, no, it doesn't give you more of a right to have an opinion than others because you paid for a Substack subscription before, is that a joke?
ps. For instance, people should address whether or not they should ever vote for the lesser of two evils and make a case for or against that. That would have been fine. But they didn’t think I should criticize him. That is not fine. And yes, that’s why nobody has a right to an “unchallenged opinion.” So argue with me about voting, but don’t complain because I don’t agree. Round and round we go. So it’s pretty silly on substack which exists for free speech to claim it’s ok to criticize me for expressing my opinion at all and not addressing my points. REductio ad absurdum.
Don’t be ridiculous. They weren’t replying to any specifics of my comments; they were criticizing me FOR CRITICIZING him. Good try, but they didn’t address my comments, they just defended him and criticized me HELLO for criticizing him. Ludicrous posts.
And one more thing. What I said has nothing to do with DONALD TRUMP. It's about free speech. He can go ahead and be a never Trumper if he wants, but this particular issue is huge. So you don't shoot yourself in the foot. You vote for him and THEN you criticize him. That's my opinion. It's irrational not to. Alex Berenson got to this point because he IS rational and he did it reluctantly.
Oh bologne. He told people what he was going to do and I said he was taking freedom for granted. I know he has a right to vote as he wants and I have a right to say he should have voted for Trump on the censorship issue alone. Oh bologne. TRUMP is no neocon! Look who he is hanging with. You are just being ridiculous now. And yeah, if she had won, I would have been right about censorship. They are on right now talking about censoring social media and people like Joe Rogan. And they would have if they'd won. Michael is a journalist and he's been relegated to substack and they've talked about coming after that, too. He can vote for who he wants to and I TOLD you all I might support Michael (and I have) if he posted more often, but guess what, YOU are acting like the other side saying I can't have an opinion or criticize him. You don't like what I'm saying so instead of arguing with me, you try to SILENCE me. That's not how this works, Alex.
No one said what you just said they said, and nobody is trying to silence you. Hilarious you consider yourself pro-free speech, then flip out to anyone exercising their own to have a conversation in which they aren't agreeing with you. Maybe take your meds, what is with your persecution complex? Absolutely mental.
I guess it depends on how practical you want to be. If you are for the first amendment and you left those people in there, it was gone and nothing else you do after that matters. He can vote for whoever he wants, but we (and most of us are NOT Trump worshippers) protected his right to keep talking. People with these pure ideological minds can wallow in their own virtue, but that’s all it amounts to. He knows how this administration compromised free speech. Take a small win and THEN criticize Trump.
"socialist programs" LOL - the neoliberal Corporate Democrats? Tell me another one!
And speaking of freedom of speech, have a look at the Heritage people's "Project Esther" and get back to me. Wait until criticizing Israhell is actually a federal crime, and not just an implied one.
Oh please, you far leftists always say that crap but almost all of you supported these people and they rewarded you for it. Donald Trump is not a Heritage person. He might agree with a couple things on their lists. So get off that. He's said so repeatedly. Get real.
MT made it very clear in a previous article what he bases his vote on and that is foreign policy/wars. He defended his position very well with regard to Trump's record on that front. I like that approach. I think everyone should pick issues that matter to them and try to vote for the candidate that works well for them on those issues. Personally, I added our own economy to those issues but what pushed me over the top was the relentless bad behavior by the Democratic party over many years. I think national consciousness of that fact together with the weakness of their candidate is what really did them in.
Yeah, but he said he wasn't voting! We protected his right to free speech because this administration had they won sure wouldn't have. People annoy me when they know most of what the person does is good or they can't seem to weigh out the bigger danger, but they just don't "like" him. Or they've been lifelong Democrats and just can't bring themselves to vote for a republican. Trump was not an authoritarian last time and he's got JD Vance and folks reining in things like jail for burning flags, etc. He will fire the DOJ and FBI but they deserve it and all presidents do that. Unless I missed an article after that saying he was voting for Trump. But the last one I saw said he wasn't voting.
He clearly stated that he wrote in "Fred Flinstone". Again, he made it clear why he chose not to vote for either candidate and his reasonings were based on historical evidence on their behavior with respect to the only issue he chooses to base his vote on. I'm much more interested in getting unvarnished reporting on candidates than I am in seeing who a reporter decides to vote for. MT does a nice job even if he votes differently than I do.
And I told him I might pay for his thing again, but he told people publicly why he voted that way and I'm voicing my opinion about how that's crap. Too much at stake and he of all people should know that. So I am saying that. Fred Flintstone is not cutting it. And we gave Alex Berenson a lot of crap for a long time until he finally realized it was about freedom of speech first and foremost and did the right thing. This is too big a fight. I don't even remember his position on the wars; I'm assuming he's not for them which is another reason to prefer Trump over these people. But this is his blog where he puts out his opinions and we get to comment on that. I'm not saying he hasn't contributed. Mostly I stopped supporting him because he doesn't post often. We all disagree with Alex a lot and occasionally Matt. That's how it works. I just don't think he has the luxury of not voting when something this important is out there. Pretty sure Matt Taibbi, Glenn Greenwald (maybe Glenn doesn't vote here), and Alex Berenson voted for him even though they don't love everything about him. They either said they were going to or didn't say at all. SO. He can vote for who he wants to; he can say why he did it and guess what, I get to tell him how stupid I think that is after what we've all gone through.
I guess I am making a distinction between his opinions (and vote/non vote) and his reporting. I'm arguing that his reporting is fair and balanced and is a good resource for people to use in making their own opinions. That's what I value in a journalist. I pay for Greenwald and I have reservations about how he chooses to ignore some of Trumps shortcomings even if I agree that Trump represents a lesser of two evils. Still, that money is well spent in my opinion because I get real journalism with which to form my own opinions. My opinion is that MT is worth paying and if he had a regular nightly video program I just might do that.
There was so much at stake. I don’t like he might have been influencing people to stay home. That doesn’t mean I’m a Trump fanatic. I liked Rand Paul and people like him. But I do like a lot of who Trump is surrounding himself with now. I like Greenwald and he mostly cares about stopping wars at all costs—there is no justified one in his mind—and Trump came closest to that for him. I paid for Michael for a while for the reasons you suggest (and have even said so in my criticism) but he doesn’t post often enough so I stopped. If he posted more, I’d consider his opinions more. However, I get to criticize him, that’s part of the deal.
I like all these guys and I pay to support Glenn, Matt, and Alex and I used to pay for Michael. He doesn't post nearly as much. That's my biggest complaint. But all these guys know that this administration came after them (and Tucker Carlson) and that's mostly why they are here! I just don't agree you can afford not to vote these people out. Maybe the left will move center more, but right now, they have been dangerous. With weaponization of our justice system and censorship. They would have continued to go after free speech, accelerating that--they were saying so. SO I just don't agree with not voting against them if not FOR Trump. Trump is not perfect and I voted for Rubio way back when in the first primary (I really liked Rand Paul, but nobody else really did); but after I saw what they were doing to this guy, I started to admire his toughness. Nobody else could have withstood this and he exposed the corruption in the government and the media. Very important. So those issues are enough for me. Let alone the border, the wars, the trans crap, the DEI, critical race theory. Late term abortion. Come on, figure it out in 15-20 weeks and don't be a freaking barbarian. If you are raped, pretty sure you know it right away. And for the life of the mother whenever. There is nothing these people contribute anymore. Price controls? Can you say socialist? I don't know. I don't get it. But if he disagreed on everything else, I do not get him not voting against these people just for civil liberties alone. So....
Are you actually talking to Michael, or just a version of him that exists only in your imagination? Or perhaps you are simply performing an exercise in guilt-by-association on him?
"You Democrats are used to calling everyone Hitler and all the Republicans before him just took it (and LOST). Donald Trump isn't gonna take that shit and nobody should. They did every authoritarian thing they accused him of including censoring the media, of which you were one, I believe."
You should read Orwell's essay "Notes on Nationalism," about what the French call longueur; about "the habit of assuming that human beings can be classified like insects and that whole blocks of millions or tens of millions of people can be confidently labelled ‘good’ or ‘bad’." It is amazing how almost all of your post is an example of what he wrote about, and it is ironic you do not realise your own authoritarian proclivities.
Michael Tracey is a registered democrat and left-wing, therefore you group him in with "you Democrats" by which you mean those who referred to Trump as Hitler, despite that he has not ever done this. Absurd. You accuse him of accusation without any actual quote or citation, how is one to even fairly respond to such a non-specific statement? Or maybe that it is vague and therefore irrefutable is the point. Pointless to speculate what you might be referring to, although I am guessing it might by that you are in denial of how many of these "free speech" supporters are grifters who actively support censoring people they disagree with on e.g Israel.
"So while you might have talked to some young voter, you really do not understand what (besides the obvious, duh, open borders, economy, men in women's sports, price control, socialist programs, DEI, critical race theory, parental rights...) was really at stake for anyone who IS paying attention."
One of Tracey's points is that many people voted on the economy, and it was better under Trump. They don't watch media all day and don't care that much about all the other crap you listed, and want their grocery prices to go down. Amazing you don't understand any of the points Tracey is actually making such as this, then say he's the one who doesn't understand anything. You would make a good Democrat, you sound just like them when they go on about how others don't understand threats to democracy, fascism programs, abortion rights, etc.
"But it's nice we protected your freedom for you since you couldn't "bring yourself" to vote for the orange man bad. Maybe you should hang more with the elitists."
It is cute that you think you're a valiant protector of the freedom of the unworthy by casting a vote in an election, although it was not many months ago that it became more obvious than ever that who the President is hardly even matters because of the power of the deep state; something swiftly forgotten in the (s)election and post-(s)election hysteria. Hence also Larry Fink saying it doesn't matter who wins, they'll work with both sides. The elites and elitists will be most pleased you expend your energy on such wastes of time over anything that could actually threaten or diminish their power, and then even go lecture others for not playing the role the deep state expects them to.
Had a great conversation with the taxi driver this morning. He's stuck between his never-Trump mother, who is terminally screechy and calling him every hour, and his MAGA-hatted brother. He's trying to chart a middle course to keep his sanity, but it's not easy. He knows that people will still need taxis regardless of how an election turns out, and that's the only thing that counts.
I got a friend of mine who, like me, hacked for three years in Chicago. And I FINALLY learned a great lesson from my friend (and it took practice!!): How to "answer," yet say NOTHING. We hacked in the 1980s. But, here's some examples of how to say NOTHING:
PASSENGER: "Did you know that Putin helped Trump win--AGAIN??!!
HACK: "REALLY???!!!! Wow!!! I didn't KNOW that!!!
In the above exchange, the hack says NOTHING. It's a way to "answer" and make certain he still gets his TIP. Here's one in which the passenger and the hack are Black:
PASSENGER: "Did you know that Kamala put Black folks in prison on bullshit charges??!!
HACK: "REALLY???!!!! No shit!! I didn't KNOW that!!!"
Again, the hack said NOTHING. But, he (or she) gives the IMPRESSION of being outraged. So, MY advice (as decidedly "selfish" and EXPEDIENT as it sounds) to a hack is: Play it low and GET THAT DOUGH!!!!
That's good advice for any business! It's too bad that most big businesses have forgotten how to do it. All sorts of people might want to take a taxi or buy Bud Light. Pissing off half of them is a good way to lose the dough.
I can definitely empathize with Mike's *emotional* reasoning for not wanting a 2nd Trump term even though I disagree vehemently with the bullshit about "giving Ukraine back to Putin" whatever the fuck that even means. Only a person who had done little to zero reading outside of the legacy media ecosystem would think that's what "Putin" wants, and it completely ignores the reasons for the war. Regardless, I've also seen families and friendships damaged or destroyed due to the Trump phenomenon. I find his most devoted fans to be incredibly obnoxious too (like Obamabots, but turned up a notch). But at the end of the day, what he's doing is basing his vote on Trump Derangement Syndrome, which I'm 100% confident in asserting has been foisted on him by the same "legacy" or "establishment" media/social media organizations responsible for the aforementioned fear and misunderstanding of the Putler bogeyman. That and the fact that he couldn't even articulate a single area of policy where a Kamala presidency would differ from Trump, and there are several obvious ones.
"I have seen friendships get ruined, I have seen families get torn apart by that man" -- nope, it's guys who say that who ruin their families and friends over Trump. It's their own awful behavior and know-it-all smugness.
It's revealing that so many of the Kamala supporters didn't want to be photographed.
Are they afraid that Trump supporters are going to hunt them down? I really don't understand their fear. I've been watching a lot of their meltdowns, & it is clear that many of them are mentally ill. I do have compassion for them, but I don't know how we can really deal with them. They are terrified that Trump is going to start "rounding people up." I don't know what they're basing this on. It's hard to engage with them on an adult level, when they appear to be experiencing a break with reality.
Regarding the fear of rounding people up and putting them in camps, I heard those fears/comments come from people like Rachel Maddow. But if Rachel Maddow, et al., truly believed they would be rounded up for their political dissidence, why didn't they leave? They have the resources and surely would be accepted as "Trump political refugees".
I am in his base & I have no idea what you are referring to.
I have seen many, many disappointed Kamala supporters posting messages of hate, & threatening violence against Trump and/or his supporters, though.
I don't know any Trump supporters who hate Kamala voters, or who wish violence on them.
We're just normal people who did not like Biden/Harris energy/econ policies, because they are crushing us; who are weary of endless wars; who are concerned over the number of violent criminals streaming across our borders, preying on American women & children; and who abhor censorship, which is championed by the Biden/Harris Admin.
I don't condone violence at all, but most of the violence that day was instigated by feds in the crowd. Any MAGA people being violent deserved arrest, but I believe they've served enough time. I saw no evidence of Trump pushing violence that day.
Most J6 prisoners did no violence at all, of course, & should never have been arrested.
A specific example of Trump encouraging violence with his words: when he told police they don’t need to be so nice when placing someone under arrest, no need to worry about their heads not hitting the car when they are being placed inside … what does that mean? It’s ok to rough people up …
I found this 2-min, 39-sec opinion, offered by former CIA analyst, Larry Johnson, concerning why the Democrats lost the election, to be simple and on target:
Loved this: "Dylan said he wasn’t very political, but found Trump 'hysterical' — as in funny."
This is pretty much what my son told me, when he decided to vote, rather than sit it out: "I figure if the country's about to end, we might as well be laughing, & Trump is hilarious."
that’s too bad, because every American who isn’t a billionaire is going to suffer through this administration. Incompetent, ego-driven, misogynistic, largely uneducated, and almost all white. Real combination for failure.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvgwve4j176o Micheal I know you are not yet strong and confident enough yet to rock a loincloth. That's where you are wrong, and I am right. You are ready for it. That Grover Cleveland Shirt, perfect. It's useless now. All you need to do is slit the sides of the sleeves and pull the arms on your leg. You have probably a bath robe. That's perfect just pull up the sides and let hang down. You are going to pee out the button flap part. For the top, I'm thinking popcorn necklace and flowers too. Popcorn in coconut oil is tasty and flattering white against your beautiful dark curls. Everyone needs to open their heart and mind to being aligned with the new fashion of the times. Looking like "the best student" in class worked for you then, but this is now. The Future.
Speaking of misunderstandings about Ukraine, I just encountered one of the most incredible self-unaware comments within a NYT article that read as follows:
"I can see Trump allowing Putin to install a puppet government in Ukraine and turn it into a vassal state."
Making this statement without any awareness that the US did literally the above in 2014 is unreal.
Exactly. But I bet if you pressed that person on the point, they'd ultimately concede that a US puppet government in Ukraine is for some reason preferable to a Russian one. That's the level of brainwashing Americans have received since childhood.
Right, and my following point would be why can't we return to the mentality as perfectly articulated in Barack Obama's 2014 editorial in The Atlantic (of all places!). This is what I find the most offensive about the Ukraine situation as it developed after 2016. Not a single shitlib with a Ukraine flag in their bio took issue with Obama's position back then.
That is pretty funny!
I wish I could have voted for Fred Flintstone, but the Colorado Supreme Court and Alvin Bragg pissed me off enough that I voted for Trump. Close enough.
Heidi E., that’s very funny
Well, Michael. You don't seem to really grasp the authoritarian nature of that regime even though you were one of the victims of it. And you really do not understand Trump's appeal as being anti-uni-party and anti establishment elite. And it took a jack hammer to break through that. Trump has done us a huge favor exposing the extent of government corruption and making government responsive to people for once. And he's exposed the lying media. Heaven forbid he should call someone stupid after they are calling him Hitler for 9 years, threatening to "take him out," "take him behind the school yard," decapitating him, calling him a rapist (but Bill Clinton is out campaigning for you all--it has nothing to do with anything then, does it?), and right from the shoot "gentleman" John McCain was part of paying for or at least giving that Russia garbage they all knew wasn't true to Hillary Clinton and calling him names. But he isn't supposed to call him a loser. You Democrats are used to calling everyone Hitler and all the Republicans before him just took it (and LOST). Donald Trump isn't gonna take that shit and nobody should. They did every authoritarian thing they accused him of including censoring the media, of which you were one, I believe. So while you might have talked to some young voter, you really do not understand what (besides the obvious, duh, open borders, economy, men in women's sports, price control, socialist programs, DEI, critical race theory, parental rights...) was really at stake for anyone who IS paying attention. Do you know that those who thought democracy was on the line was actually carried by TRUMP by 2 points? I don't mind you not voting for him, but I do mind your refusal to look at what's gone on here fairly. And this rhetoric you blame HIM for has been going on for 9 years and almost got him killed. So, maybe be honest and I'll pay for you substack again someday. I follow a lot of Democrats or previous Democrats. I lean libertarian but above all, I'm a civil libertarian. You seem to understand freedom of speech was at risk, yet you don't seem to understand the extent of the danger. You were cancelled I believe as I was--an adjunct professor who simply said our university should take NO political position and that universities were places where ideas were exchanged freely. I was also cancelled and unfriended by my publisher. Who BTW, university presses publish ONE pov even though most of them are paid for publicly. Like NPR. What a joke. But it's nice we protected your freedom for you since you couldn't "bring yourself" to vote for the orange man bad. Maybe you should hang more with the elitists.
I voted for trump and think you missed the point of the article. Trump resonated with real people, even the ones who may not be “in the know” of every corrupt thing the establishment has been doing like a lot of us are. He was relatable on a personal level and that can’t be overlooked. Yes, a lot of trump voters are fully versed on the downward spiral that the current administration has been taking us, but maybe some new voters saw a leader who wasn’t what the msm said he was. The man passed out big mac’s, turned the garbage comment into a big “stick it to the man” moment and went on Rogen for 3 hours straight! That may not be important to you, but if that’s part of what got them to the voting booth, I’m all for it! His relatability mixed with the fact that we had a lot more money in our pockets 4 years ago did it for a lot of people.
No, I'm just responding to him saying he wasn't gonna vote in another article. I know this article was different.
Would Greenwald care that Tracey has a difference of opinion? I don't think so.
I highly doubt he "pissed off Greenwald."
Greenwald has no fear of "alienating Trumpers," because Glenn will just continue doing what he always has: calling out hypocrites, and championing free speech.
Oh!
I watch Greenwald's show every night. Glenn has a lot of respect for Michael, or he wouldn't leave System Update in his hands. Glenn may criticize Michael's fashion sense, but he is a fan of his interviews, using him as System Update's "roving, intrepid reporter."
Well, thanks to us, he'll be free to ride his own train, I guess. Eh? If she'd won, they'd have shut us all down and I've been on the end of that personally. MY point here is that Michael has a right to make this public blog and he has a right to vote as he pleases, but he TOLD us what he was going to do and I have a right to comment on that. That is what we are all here for. You don't have a right to silence me or shame me for criticizing him. And I criticize Glenn and Matt and Alex, too. You sound like a snow flake. I taught a lot of kids like this. I told them right off the bat, in university. There are no safe spaces. You have a right to your opinion and we'll hear it, but you do not have a right to an UNCHALLENGED opinion and neither does Michael and neither do you. That's what we are all fighting for. I am not saying Michael can't do as he pleases; or vote as he wants or write what he wants. But I do not have to agree with it. And these people are still trying to control the media. Trying to figure out how they can silence us. That's what all totalitarian societies do. That has to be protected at all costs because without it, we have nothing. And I have a right to that opinion, especially since I've paid for the privilege before. I like Michael, but I think he was wrong on this. That's all. You don't seem to understand the issue here. He has every right to piss us off and I have every right to say he's wrong. I already told you if he actually POSTED things, I would have kept paying for this. I do not expect him to agree with me but you should not expect me to not criticize him.
You shouldn't expect people not to refute, disagree with, or otherwise criticise your criticism, either. It is ironic you rant about there being no safe spaces and about snowflakes in response to someone politely saying there's nothing wrong with disagreement, and that it's good Tracey brings a different perspective. That's all the post you are replying to said.
No offense, but that in response to such a benign statement, you feel a need to go on about how nobody has the right to an "UNCHALLENGED" opinion, snowflakes and safe spaces, blah blah, it sounds a bit unhinged and like you are not actually responding to what someone else said, but to some imaginary version of what they said.
Maybe try exercising your own principles in discourse, since just as you are free to disagree with and challenge others, they are free to do so with you, and your response to someone doing that reads as unrelated rambling. By the way, no, it doesn't give you more of a right to have an opinion than others because you paid for a Substack subscription before, is that a joke?
ps. For instance, people should address whether or not they should ever vote for the lesser of two evils and make a case for or against that. That would have been fine. But they didn’t think I should criticize him. That is not fine. And yes, that’s why nobody has a right to an “unchallenged opinion.” So argue with me about voting, but don’t complain because I don’t agree. Round and round we go. So it’s pretty silly on substack which exists for free speech to claim it’s ok to criticize me for expressing my opinion at all and not addressing my points. REductio ad absurdum.
Don’t be ridiculous. They weren’t replying to any specifics of my comments; they were criticizing me FOR CRITICIZING him. Good try, but they didn’t address my comments, they just defended him and criticized me HELLO for criticizing him. Ludicrous posts.
And one more thing. What I said has nothing to do with DONALD TRUMP. It's about free speech. He can go ahead and be a never Trumper if he wants, but this particular issue is huge. So you don't shoot yourself in the foot. You vote for him and THEN you criticize him. That's my opinion. It's irrational not to. Alex Berenson got to this point because he IS rational and he did it reluctantly.
and ps. Not only are you trying to silence me, you are trying to SHAME me into silence. Who does that sound like? HM???
No one is trying to silence or shame you, are you stupid? They're disagreeing with you. You sound like you have issues.
Evil or stupid. That’s what Trump supporters are always called, ultimately. I wonder why people voted for Trump?
Cotton is no longer being considered for a position, according to an article a couple of days ago.
Musk, Carlson, & others in Trump's orbit have been publicly warning Trump against Pompeo for quite some time. We can only hope that he listens.
Trump's plans for dismantling the Deep State are brilliant, & we don't need Pompeo in the way.
Pompeo=Wormtongue
Oh bologne. He told people what he was going to do and I said he was taking freedom for granted. I know he has a right to vote as he wants and I have a right to say he should have voted for Trump on the censorship issue alone. Oh bologne. TRUMP is no neocon! Look who he is hanging with. You are just being ridiculous now. And yeah, if she had won, I would have been right about censorship. They are on right now talking about censoring social media and people like Joe Rogan. And they would have if they'd won. Michael is a journalist and he's been relegated to substack and they've talked about coming after that, too. He can vote for who he wants to and I TOLD you all I might support Michael (and I have) if he posted more often, but guess what, YOU are acting like the other side saying I can't have an opinion or criticize him. You don't like what I'm saying so instead of arguing with me, you try to SILENCE me. That's not how this works, Alex.
No one said what you just said they said, and nobody is trying to silence you. Hilarious you consider yourself pro-free speech, then flip out to anyone exercising their own to have a conversation in which they aren't agreeing with you. Maybe take your meds, what is with your persecution complex? Absolutely mental.
I guess it depends on how practical you want to be. If you are for the first amendment and you left those people in there, it was gone and nothing else you do after that matters. He can vote for whoever he wants, but we (and most of us are NOT Trump worshippers) protected his right to keep talking. People with these pure ideological minds can wallow in their own virtue, but that’s all it amounts to. He knows how this administration compromised free speech. Take a small win and THEN criticize Trump.
🤡
"socialist programs" LOL - the neoliberal Corporate Democrats? Tell me another one!
And speaking of freedom of speech, have a look at the Heritage people's "Project Esther" and get back to me. Wait until criticizing Israhell is actually a federal crime, and not just an implied one.
Oh please, you far leftists always say that crap but almost all of you supported these people and they rewarded you for it. Donald Trump is not a Heritage person. He might agree with a couple things on their lists. So get off that. He's said so repeatedly. Get real.
MT made it very clear in a previous article what he bases his vote on and that is foreign policy/wars. He defended his position very well with regard to Trump's record on that front. I like that approach. I think everyone should pick issues that matter to them and try to vote for the candidate that works well for them on those issues. Personally, I added our own economy to those issues but what pushed me over the top was the relentless bad behavior by the Democratic party over many years. I think national consciousness of that fact together with the weakness of their candidate is what really did them in.
🤡
Yeah, but he said he wasn't voting! We protected his right to free speech because this administration had they won sure wouldn't have. People annoy me when they know most of what the person does is good or they can't seem to weigh out the bigger danger, but they just don't "like" him. Or they've been lifelong Democrats and just can't bring themselves to vote for a republican. Trump was not an authoritarian last time and he's got JD Vance and folks reining in things like jail for burning flags, etc. He will fire the DOJ and FBI but they deserve it and all presidents do that. Unless I missed an article after that saying he was voting for Trump. But the last one I saw said he wasn't voting.
He clearly stated that he wrote in "Fred Flinstone". Again, he made it clear why he chose not to vote for either candidate and his reasonings were based on historical evidence on their behavior with respect to the only issue he chooses to base his vote on. I'm much more interested in getting unvarnished reporting on candidates than I am in seeing who a reporter decides to vote for. MT does a nice job even if he votes differently than I do.
And I told him I might pay for his thing again, but he told people publicly why he voted that way and I'm voicing my opinion about how that's crap. Too much at stake and he of all people should know that. So I am saying that. Fred Flintstone is not cutting it. And we gave Alex Berenson a lot of crap for a long time until he finally realized it was about freedom of speech first and foremost and did the right thing. This is too big a fight. I don't even remember his position on the wars; I'm assuming he's not for them which is another reason to prefer Trump over these people. But this is his blog where he puts out his opinions and we get to comment on that. I'm not saying he hasn't contributed. Mostly I stopped supporting him because he doesn't post often. We all disagree with Alex a lot and occasionally Matt. That's how it works. I just don't think he has the luxury of not voting when something this important is out there. Pretty sure Matt Taibbi, Glenn Greenwald (maybe Glenn doesn't vote here), and Alex Berenson voted for him even though they don't love everything about him. They either said they were going to or didn't say at all. SO. He can vote for who he wants to; he can say why he did it and guess what, I get to tell him how stupid I think that is after what we've all gone through.
I guess I am making a distinction between his opinions (and vote/non vote) and his reporting. I'm arguing that his reporting is fair and balanced and is a good resource for people to use in making their own opinions. That's what I value in a journalist. I pay for Greenwald and I have reservations about how he chooses to ignore some of Trumps shortcomings even if I agree that Trump represents a lesser of two evils. Still, that money is well spent in my opinion because I get real journalism with which to form my own opinions. My opinion is that MT is worth paying and if he had a regular nightly video program I just might do that.
Oh and BTW, the Democrats are on MSNBC talking about how they can control social media and information. I rest my case.
There was so much at stake. I don’t like he might have been influencing people to stay home. That doesn’t mean I’m a Trump fanatic. I liked Rand Paul and people like him. But I do like a lot of who Trump is surrounding himself with now. I like Greenwald and he mostly cares about stopping wars at all costs—there is no justified one in his mind—and Trump came closest to that for him. I paid for Michael for a while for the reasons you suggest (and have even said so in my criticism) but he doesn’t post often enough so I stopped. If he posted more, I’d consider his opinions more. However, I get to criticize him, that’s part of the deal.
I like all these guys and I pay to support Glenn, Matt, and Alex and I used to pay for Michael. He doesn't post nearly as much. That's my biggest complaint. But all these guys know that this administration came after them (and Tucker Carlson) and that's mostly why they are here! I just don't agree you can afford not to vote these people out. Maybe the left will move center more, but right now, they have been dangerous. With weaponization of our justice system and censorship. They would have continued to go after free speech, accelerating that--they were saying so. SO I just don't agree with not voting against them if not FOR Trump. Trump is not perfect and I voted for Rubio way back when in the first primary (I really liked Rand Paul, but nobody else really did); but after I saw what they were doing to this guy, I started to admire his toughness. Nobody else could have withstood this and he exposed the corruption in the government and the media. Very important. So those issues are enough for me. Let alone the border, the wars, the trans crap, the DEI, critical race theory. Late term abortion. Come on, figure it out in 15-20 weeks and don't be a freaking barbarian. If you are raped, pretty sure you know it right away. And for the life of the mother whenever. There is nothing these people contribute anymore. Price controls? Can you say socialist? I don't know. I don't get it. But if he disagreed on everything else, I do not get him not voting against these people just for civil liberties alone. So....
Are you actually talking to Michael, or just a version of him that exists only in your imagination? Or perhaps you are simply performing an exercise in guilt-by-association on him?
"You Democrats are used to calling everyone Hitler and all the Republicans before him just took it (and LOST). Donald Trump isn't gonna take that shit and nobody should. They did every authoritarian thing they accused him of including censoring the media, of which you were one, I believe."
You should read Orwell's essay "Notes on Nationalism," about what the French call longueur; about "the habit of assuming that human beings can be classified like insects and that whole blocks of millions or tens of millions of people can be confidently labelled ‘good’ or ‘bad’." It is amazing how almost all of your post is an example of what he wrote about, and it is ironic you do not realise your own authoritarian proclivities.
Michael Tracey is a registered democrat and left-wing, therefore you group him in with "you Democrats" by which you mean those who referred to Trump as Hitler, despite that he has not ever done this. Absurd. You accuse him of accusation without any actual quote or citation, how is one to even fairly respond to such a non-specific statement? Or maybe that it is vague and therefore irrefutable is the point. Pointless to speculate what you might be referring to, although I am guessing it might by that you are in denial of how many of these "free speech" supporters are grifters who actively support censoring people they disagree with on e.g Israel.
"So while you might have talked to some young voter, you really do not understand what (besides the obvious, duh, open borders, economy, men in women's sports, price control, socialist programs, DEI, critical race theory, parental rights...) was really at stake for anyone who IS paying attention."
One of Tracey's points is that many people voted on the economy, and it was better under Trump. They don't watch media all day and don't care that much about all the other crap you listed, and want their grocery prices to go down. Amazing you don't understand any of the points Tracey is actually making such as this, then say he's the one who doesn't understand anything. You would make a good Democrat, you sound just like them when they go on about how others don't understand threats to democracy, fascism programs, abortion rights, etc.
"But it's nice we protected your freedom for you since you couldn't "bring yourself" to vote for the orange man bad. Maybe you should hang more with the elitists."
It is cute that you think you're a valiant protector of the freedom of the unworthy by casting a vote in an election, although it was not many months ago that it became more obvious than ever that who the President is hardly even matters because of the power of the deep state; something swiftly forgotten in the (s)election and post-(s)election hysteria. Hence also Larry Fink saying it doesn't matter who wins, they'll work with both sides. The elites and elitists will be most pleased you expend your energy on such wastes of time over anything that could actually threaten or diminish their power, and then even go lecture others for not playing the role the deep state expects them to.
You just hate Fred Flintstone.
Well said.
🤡
Amen
Had a great conversation with the taxi driver this morning. He's stuck between his never-Trump mother, who is terminally screechy and calling him every hour, and his MAGA-hatted brother. He's trying to chart a middle course to keep his sanity, but it's not easy. He knows that people will still need taxis regardless of how an election turns out, and that's the only thing that counts.
I got a friend of mine who, like me, hacked for three years in Chicago. And I FINALLY learned a great lesson from my friend (and it took practice!!): How to "answer," yet say NOTHING. We hacked in the 1980s. But, here's some examples of how to say NOTHING:
PASSENGER: "Did you know that Putin helped Trump win--AGAIN??!!
HACK: "REALLY???!!!! Wow!!! I didn't KNOW that!!!
In the above exchange, the hack says NOTHING. It's a way to "answer" and make certain he still gets his TIP. Here's one in which the passenger and the hack are Black:
PASSENGER: "Did you know that Kamala put Black folks in prison on bullshit charges??!!
HACK: "REALLY???!!!! No shit!! I didn't KNOW that!!!"
Again, the hack said NOTHING. But, he (or she) gives the IMPRESSION of being outraged. So, MY advice (as decidedly "selfish" and EXPEDIENT as it sounds) to a hack is: Play it low and GET THAT DOUGH!!!!
(Hacking and politics DON'T MIX)
This is how I've been talking to my most liberal relatives for a year now. 🤣
Funny!!! So, you must have been a cab driver!! 😊😊😊 (OR, you'd BE a great hack!!)
Haha, good to have that as an option! 😁
That's good advice for any business! It's too bad that most big businesses have forgotten how to do it. All sorts of people might want to take a taxi or buy Bud Light. Pissing off half of them is a good way to lose the dough.
Yeah. 👍🏽 As they found out the hard way: “When you go woke, you’re bound to go broke.”
I can definitely empathize with Mike's *emotional* reasoning for not wanting a 2nd Trump term even though I disagree vehemently with the bullshit about "giving Ukraine back to Putin" whatever the fuck that even means. Only a person who had done little to zero reading outside of the legacy media ecosystem would think that's what "Putin" wants, and it completely ignores the reasons for the war. Regardless, I've also seen families and friendships damaged or destroyed due to the Trump phenomenon. I find his most devoted fans to be incredibly obnoxious too (like Obamabots, but turned up a notch). But at the end of the day, what he's doing is basing his vote on Trump Derangement Syndrome, which I'm 100% confident in asserting has been foisted on him by the same "legacy" or "establishment" media/social media organizations responsible for the aforementioned fear and misunderstanding of the Putler bogeyman. That and the fact that he couldn't even articulate a single area of policy where a Kamala presidency would differ from Trump, and there are several obvious ones.
"I have seen friendships get ruined, I have seen families get torn apart by that man" -- nope, it's guys who say that who ruin their families and friends over Trump. It's their own awful behavior and know-it-all smugness.
it's their information sources, the legacy media, who has pushed this hysterical narrative out to the public, who is to blame.
It's revealing that so many of the Kamala supporters didn't want to be photographed.
Are they afraid that Trump supporters are going to hunt them down? I really don't understand their fear. I've been watching a lot of their meltdowns, & it is clear that many of them are mentally ill. I do have compassion for them, but I don't know how we can really deal with them. They are terrified that Trump is going to start "rounding people up." I don't know what they're basing this on. It's hard to engage with them on an adult level, when they appear to be experiencing a break with reality.
Regarding the fear of rounding people up and putting them in camps, I heard those fears/comments come from people like Rachel Maddow. But if Rachel Maddow, et al., truly believed they would be rounded up for their political dissidence, why didn't they leave? They have the resources and surely would be accepted as "Trump political refugees".
I find Trump scary, because of the way he encourages & seems to approve of violence, at least that’s how some people in his base understand him.
I am in his base & I have no idea what you are referring to.
I have seen many, many disappointed Kamala supporters posting messages of hate, & threatening violence against Trump and/or his supporters, though.
I don't know any Trump supporters who hate Kamala voters, or who wish violence on them.
We're just normal people who did not like Biden/Harris energy/econ policies, because they are crushing us; who are weary of endless wars; who are concerned over the number of violent criminals streaming across our borders, preying on American women & children; and who abhor censorship, which is championed by the Biden/Harris Admin.
I don't condone violence at all, but most of the violence that day was instigated by feds in the crowd. Any MAGA people being violent deserved arrest, but I believe they've served enough time. I saw no evidence of Trump pushing violence that day.
Most J6 prisoners did no violence at all, of course, & should never have been arrested.
A specific example of Trump encouraging violence with his words: when he told police they don’t need to be so nice when placing someone under arrest, no need to worry about their heads not hitting the car when they are being placed inside … what does that mean? It’s ok to rough people up …
Agree, that is not cool.
More women buy milk and eggs than get abortions, alas for the Dems.
I found this 2-min, 39-sec opinion, offered by former CIA analyst, Larry Johnson, concerning why the Democrats lost the election, to be simple and on target:
https://ronchism.substack.com/p/wokeness-voted-out-hopefully-for
Poor Grover Cleveland lol that is a funny stat that I hadn’t heard yet 👍🏻
I feels sorry for everyone named Grover.
Loved this: "Dylan said he wasn’t very political, but found Trump 'hysterical' — as in funny."
This is pretty much what my son told me, when he decided to vote, rather than sit it out: "I figure if the country's about to end, we might as well be laughing, & Trump is hilarious."
I don't like Trump much but I voted for him because I HATE the Democrat Elites which is what that party now is. It was a vote against the ELITES!
Shoes on the ground reporting with opines (psychoanslysisl) to boot. Like this combo.
Keep up the good work...
I like it.
I was born in the Garden State. Michael Tracy is a traitor? Thanks for the truth . How do you pronounce coffee? Free Palestine.
that’s too bad, because every American who isn’t a billionaire is going to suffer through this administration. Incompetent, ego-driven, misogynistic, largely uneducated, and almost all white. Real combination for failure.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvgwve4j176o Micheal I know you are not yet strong and confident enough yet to rock a loincloth. That's where you are wrong, and I am right. You are ready for it. That Grover Cleveland Shirt, perfect. It's useless now. All you need to do is slit the sides of the sleeves and pull the arms on your leg. You have probably a bath robe. That's perfect just pull up the sides and let hang down. You are going to pee out the button flap part. For the top, I'm thinking popcorn necklace and flowers too. Popcorn in coconut oil is tasty and flattering white against your beautiful dark curls. Everyone needs to open their heart and mind to being aligned with the new fashion of the times. Looking like "the best student" in class worked for you then, but this is now. The Future.