Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search
Log-in Changes With Upcoming Upgrade

Mondays With Jon Stewart

GHScorpiosRule

By GHScorpiosRule
in The Daily Show

  • Reply
  • Start Topic

Recommended Posts

DoctorAtomic

DoctorAtomic

21 minutes ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

When Buck did manage to speak, and he did manage to do a little bit of it, what he said just had me rolling my eyes. Because of course.

I agree that Jon isn't the strongest interviewer, and he has always interrupted a lot. However,  Buck was kind of doing the usual deal too, and I think Jon was trying to push him on that. In this instance, I didn't mind Jon. I was actually disappointed in Buck because he was on Real Time, and he wasn't that bad. He had a longer time on Real Time and Mahr touched on a lot more issues than just the Trump case. 

I'm not sure what Buck's angle is coming on the show. Certainly he'd have to think the usual talking points wouldn't fly. 

To be fair, I think Ion's opening segments the last couple of weeks were strong.

  • Like 1
  • Love 1
  • Replies 133
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

angora
angora

I kept thinking, you'd rather spend your 20 minutes talking about Biden's age than the Supreme Court ruling on Chevron and presidential immunity?

Bastet
Bastet

Jon made me cry talking about his dog.  "He was ready, but I wasn't" is a place all of us who've loved and lost pets have been.  I remember seeing a picture of them together long ago, and loving that

Bastet
Bastet

I'm still very bitter over the show not managing to hold onto Roy Wood Jr., but am going to take the start of this new format - Jon on Mondays, correspondents taking turns for the rest - as the moment

sskrill

sskrill

On 6/6/2024 at 8:19 AM, DoctorAtomic said:

I agree that Jon isn't the strongest interviewer, and he has always interrupted a lot. However,  Buck was kind of doing the usual deal too, and I think Jon was trying to push him on that. I was actually disappointed in Buck because he was on Real Time, and he wasn't that bad.

I'm not sure what Buck's angle is coming on the show. Certainly he'd have to think the usual talking points wouldn't fly. 

Yeah I think Jon is excited to be back and talk to these people so he gets too excited to engage and can't stop himself.

I don't understand why Buck was there either and when Jon said something about having similar values (or whatever) I thought his "God I hope not" reply was pretty rude.

It's like he was just there to get the Trump stank off him.  I'm guessing he did that with an eye on another job and thinks this will help him get the job.

  • Like 1
Bastet

Bastet

I found the corporate pandering segment disappointingly flat and misfocused.  Of course it's pandering, dropped in a flash if it hurts the bottom line, but your solution is to just shrug and say let corporations go back to doing zero instead of the scintilla they are, laying waste to the flimsy DEI initiatives they'd briefly cobbled together because, hey, it's disingenuous, so just stop it altogether?

But, holy hell, did I like the interview, with Jon laying out succinctly the bullshit going down in pontificating on the WNBA by people who started paying attention to it last Wednesday and Monica McNutt laughing he gets it, he should have a talk show. 

And then he largely just let her talk, after asking good questions  -- such as how the idea sports exist outside of the fault lines of regular society rather than being just another avenue of those battles of racism, sexism, homophobia, etc. is ridiculous, and women's sports sits in the midst of all of it. 

Jon telling her Clark made her go viral, but she fundamentally got herself here, and detailing his history listening to her analysis, was a nice moment. 

As was her saying, yeah, there's a part of her that - despite the obvious benefits of increased popularity for the league - is akin to a from-the-beginning fan when an indie band hits it big and thinks "I don't want this to belong to everybody, only to this band of sisters who worked so hard to make it something", because how much is this narrowly-focused interest going to translate into your wanting to know about the league as a whole?  "We've opened the door, but we're still looking in rather than walking in" was well phrased.

And the fundamental, recurring point that yeah, it's great what the attention Clark is garnering is doing to further the WNBA's popularity, but let us please not act like this was some obscure little thing with no history of growth in attention until now.  A whole hell of a lot of women - many of whom, unlike Clark, are Black and/or lesbian - made it consistently grow, year after year, and I will not allow them to be erased in this current conversation.

  • Like 2
  • Applause 1
  • Love 1
Bastet

Bastet

I'm behind again, and just watched Jon's episode from last Monday.  The segment on how right wing media frames crime in blue cities had some fantastically scathing verbiage, turning their language about immigrants around to use about guns. 

Just pointing out over 90% of guns used in NYC crimes were originally purchased in southern states with lax gun laws, so Republicans have enabled the flood of weaponry to our cities they claim to be under siege in the first place, would have been enough, and then talking about the flood of "undocumented weapons" and obstructing attempts to "stem the tide" is a brilliant bonus.  Adding in skewering the "Great Replacement Theory" and "Build That Wall" made it art, especially playing on Trump's infamous statement by saying:

Quote

Florida isn't sending us their best guns, they're bringing guns for drugs, and crime, and rapists - and some, I assume, are good guns.

 

  • Like 4
  • Love 2
newsjunkie

newsjunkie

(edited)

@DoctorAtomic

No, but it's still on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/@TheDailyShow  \

And they've eliminated the old Daily Show/Colbert archives:

https://latenighter.com/news/paramount-axes-comedy-central-website-show-clips-library/

Really hope that gets reversed somehow and they are either uploaded to Paramount Plus or Youtube....

Anyone going into the audience in the coming weeks should try and ask Jon how he feels about this/get him to address it on his show.

Edited by newsjunkie
  • Like 4
Bastet

Bastet

I did not watch the debate - the combination of bourbon and Ativan I would need to avoid stroking out would be just as fatal - and just reading about it has been painful enough, so seeing clips of it is only happening in short bursts.  Thus, I've only watched a little bit of Jon's live post-debate episode, but he has managed to make me laugh twice already, first at calling a real estate agent in New Zealand and second at "resting 25th Amendment face".

  • Like 6
shapeshifter

shapeshifter

I did “watch” the debate, multitasking as necessary to protect my sanity.

Unfortunately for Jon, he did not exercise that luxury.

I couldn’t tell if Jon was kidding when he gave kudos to his staff for having the foresight to have as post-debate guest author Lori Gottlieb, who is a psychotherapist who has a new best-selling book, "Maybe You Should Talk to Someone.” 

 

He also mentioned psilocybin micro-dosing. Hrmmm… 

  • Like 3
DoctorAtomic

DoctorAtomic

(edited)

I'm going to reiterate that I don't think the debate really matters, and I do agree there's way too much pearl clutching over it. I take his point, and the segment was funny with the charts, but next week is the gop convention, and this is likely all shoved out the news cycle. 

 

Edited by DoctorAtomic
  • Like 3
  • Applause 3
Sarah 103

Sarah 103

13 hours ago, gesundheit said:

Speaking of that major shift, good segment on the ridiculous criticism of Harris. Surely Jon will get the candidate herself on before too long!

My guess is after the convention. I don't know if this is actually true or just urban myth, but I heard somewhere that many Americans do not start paying attention to politics in an election year until after Labor Day. 

  • Like 1
Dewey Decimate

Dewey Decimate

Kosta's been doing a really good job - he adeptly rides that line between sarcasm and earnestness. Loved the line about Megan Kelly seeing a woman in the prime of her career. And I should be embarrassed to admit how hard I laughed at the French pole vaulter stuff, but hell, sometimes it feels good to titter at dick jokes instead of despair at existential hell.

  • Like 4
SoMuchTV

SoMuchTV

On 1/27/2024 at 12:28 PM, scarynikki12 said:

Clarification: this thread is for talking about Jon specifically in the same vein as the Trevor and correspondents threads.

I know we no longer have the same moderator as the one who posted the note above, but is anyone else getting a little confused by the way the comments for this season’s episodes have been split between this thread and the actual season thread? Do we want to agree to keep current show  comments (including for Monday shows) in the season thread? That’s how I read the intention of this thread, but if it turns out that’s just a “me problem” I’ll defer to the rest of you folks. 

GHScorpiosRule

GHScorpiosRule

  • Author
31 minutes ago, SoMuchTV said:

I know we no longer have the same moderator as the one who posted the note above, but is anyone else getting a little confused by the way the comments for this season’s episodes have been split between this thread and the actual season thread? Do we want to agree to keep current show  comments (including for Monday shows) in the season thread? That’s how I read the intention of this thread, but if it turns out that’s just a “me problem” I’ll defer to the rest of you folks. 

I think it's split because Jon is only hosting through February, which is why Jon has his own thread, while the show will still go on with other hosts after. 

But as it happens, people post wherever they post.

SoMuchTV

SoMuchTV

2 hours ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

I think it's split because Jon is only hosting through February, which is why Jon has his own thread, while the show will still go on with other hosts after. 

But as it happens, people post wherever they post.

Oh for sure, people definitely post where they post. But since the regime change a few months ago, we’ve been given a little more leeway with being self-policing, so that’s why I was hoping my suggestion wasn’t totally out of line. 

possibilities

possibilities

I personally think it's easier to just have all the episodes per season in one thread, but I am guessing the idea was that some people would only watch on Mondays because they only want to see Jon, and they would want a thread just for that.

I personally have found Jon's hosting to be... let's say "a disappointment"... so sometimes i skip Mondays even when I watch the rest of the week. But I still don't mind if Mondays are discussed with the rest of the week in one thread. 

Basically, I am saying I think I know why they split it up, but I also don't mind if they get merged.

  • Like 5
shapeshifter

shapeshifter

2 hours ago, Mod-Tigerkatze said:

Sneaking in to address @shapeshifter 's post. When two threads are merged, the posts are automatically sorted by date and time. As it's a forum wide feature, I'm not sure if it could be changed. 

Actually, that sounds perfect.

But I haven't been very active on these threads.
And I haven't read (or noticed?) other merged threads.

Does it create confusion for posts that don't quote a post and are no longer directly under the post to which they were referring? 

Do folks actually go back and read old posts on these threads?

  • Like 3
SoMuchTV

SoMuchTV

6 hours ago, shapeshifter said:

I wonder if there’s a way to merge the 2 threads, keeping the posts in order?

 

2 hours ago, Mod-Tigerkatze said:

Sneaking in to address @shapeshifter 's post. When two threads are merged, the posts are automatically sorted by date and time. As it's a forum wide feature, I'm not sure if it could be changed. 

If I were Queen of Primetimer Land, I would say, keep all the posts up to Jon's actual start date (Feb 13 maybe?), re-pin the mod note about the intention of the thread, and merge the rest into the main season thread.  (I've seen threads for old shows I've just gotten around to watching, where it's obvious that multiple threads have been merged, but it's still understandable.)

But then, I've occasionally been shocked(!) to learn that not everyone agrees with my train of thought, so that's why I asked the question rather than made a direct request.

  • Like 2
Bastet

Bastet

(edited)
On 8/23/2024 at 2:32 PM, DoctorAtomic said:

The small town. I think it's a peeve of Jon (and mine) because I think he's done a monologue on it before.

I don't remember if he did a monologue, but I'm pretty sure he said, following the 9/11 attacks, that when the terrorists came for America, they didn't attack small towns/the heartland/however he phrased it, it was NYC and DC, so kindly shut up and quit calling small towns (or whatever) "real America".

And I know, because I saved it in my quotes file, he said, at a university talk in 2008: "Today again, [Sarah Palin] was talking to a small town, and she said that small towns she really likes going to because that's the pro-America part of the country. And I just want to say to her, just very quickly, 'Fuck You.'"

Edited by Bastet
  • Like 2
  • Applause 2
  • Useful 1
  • Love 1
GHScorpiosRule

GHScorpiosRule

  • Author
22 minutes ago, DoctorAtomic said:

So if you're the governor and you live in the capital city, did you cease to become America? Or do you not bother governing any cities in the state and only the small towns? 

Sounds like it's enough of a peeve of Jon that he's brought it up a lot. 

I think it was also when Romney also used (in 2012) growing up in small town or how America was such, blah, blah, and cited Mayberry (Andy Griffith Show) and Jon came back with the lack of Civil Rights, and just exactly what that time in the US was really like and who it benefited.

  • Like 2
  • Applause 1
  • Useful 1
DoctorAtomic

DoctorAtomic

I'm no fan of Cheney, and I don't think there needs to be any celebrating, but this is a realpolitik election. You can spin that Trump is so bad on *insert whatever you want* that even Cheney won't vote for him. If it only serves to block McMasters ranting on Iran, then I think it's sufficient. Would someone like Cheney vote for a 'Marxist?' 

As to who is swung because of Cheney? I don't know, but there could be some pro Ukraine pro NATO neocons who could stomach 4 years of Harris. 

  • Like 5

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...