I would vote for Jesse in a heartbeat if his opponents were Biden and Trump. Jesse should run with Tulsi Gabbard as his VP. What a team they'd make! Both military vets, both free-thinkers, both willing to buck the establishment.
Please, God, or Thor, or someone, give us a choice in 2024. Jesse/Tulsi in 2024! Honesty, integrity, guts.
People make mistakes. And it’s not like Biden was running against Jesus Christ--Trump brings his own brand of dumpster fire, as Jesse alludes to in the interview.
I find that people are much more willing to change when you let them identify their own mistakes rather than rubbing their noses in them.
And to be clear, tulsi did not vote for Biden. She endorsed him as was the agreement amongst all the candidates in the primary. It was a contract to support the eventual winner.
She also bucked the current Open Border Invasion. When Biden leaves he will have increased the Unauthorized by 8,000,000 poverty stricken, foreign born
How do you know Tulsi didn't vote for Biden? I find it hard to believe that she would have voted for Trump, even though he is not nearly the neocon war hawk that Biden is.
Fair point on rubbing noses in it, do you how hard it is to look at biden voters in my temporary housing complex.....struggling to eat, fill the car up and NOT at least give them a lesson on cause and effect. But no.....I reach in my wallet instead.
Surely this is a snarky joke, and you can see how dumb this line of thinking is?
What you just said is akin to some upper middle class Biden voter saying “I try not to tell all those poor heroin addicts in trailer parks who voted for Trump why voting for him caused their current predicament, so I reach in my wallet instead…”
It vastly overestimates the power of a single president to determine local outcomes, and the speed of the impact of his policies. And it overlooks all the local historical factors that determine what a community looks like.
And all that misery started with Biden. Sounds like how I felt during the Trump years about many in my neighborhood, for which Trump really did nothing. As a matter of fact, more of them are working now.
What a lazy way to decide who you'll support or oppose. No intellectual integrity on your part. One minor little meaningless forgotten momentary thing and BAM -- "she's dead to me".
I was thinking the same thing of you, sit it out. We don't need a third party right now , it will split the vote. I'm not saying she can't change but do you think she voted for Trump? No way. Trumps dumpster fire looked so bad only because of the media. 1% inflation, 2 dollar gas and immigration enforcement is not.......a fire. What you have now......is a fire. A swampy, DC full on dumpster fire.
A three way race between Trump, Biden, and Jesse Ventura, would split the populist vote between Ventura and Trump, giving us 4 more years of Biden.
If it were just Ventura and Biden, Biden would also prevail. The religious right would never turn out for Ventura, because Ventura would never appease the religious right. Trump may not be a true member of the religious right, but hypocrisy is the Tribute that vice pays to virtue. And Trump delivered on judges and cultural issues.
The religious right is a critical part of the Trump coalition. If Jesse doesn't get their votes, which bloc of voters will make up the deficit?
If DeSantis is the nominee, likely same outcome.
Both establishment left, and establishment right combined, would be enough to beat any divided populist pair of candidates in a three way race.
Sooooo, what? Just continue to sorta “buy in” to the two-party system? I’m so fucking sick of this “Well, even though I can’t stand this candidate, we should all vote for them, otherwise this other candidate who I also hate might win…” attitude. Vote for whoever the fuck you wanna vote for. It’s not like there’s really gonna be any difference between the Democratic and Republican candidate. Their priorities are legit the exact same (make their wealthy donors and themselves wealthier). It’s only their messaging that’s different.
I think Ventura's job would be to win the populist support away from Trump, and he could point to the fact that Trump, in office, was a standard tax-cut Republican.
Besides, events on the ground are changing so intensely, the old coalitions probably won't hold.
You don't have to worry about that. Even if Biden survives his first term (which is highly problematical) he'll never get the nomination again. Of course, if the Biden Regime starts a nuclear war, we won't have another election anyway.
If it were just Ventura vs. Biden.. Jesse would hoover up the leftist votes away from Biden and also get a big proportion of the libertarian right. But in what scenario would it be just between Biden and Jesse?
hmm, trump already got all those Reagan democrats to vote for him in 2016. I think he already has lefty populist vote if a Reagan Democrat IS a lefty populist
Populist right voters (including a lot of the religious right) may not have liked Walker, but the Republican establishment was very effective in making sure that the only alternative was a Democrat.
Never liked Walker. Always struck me as a typical anti populist, pro corporate Republican - in the same mold as Jeb Bush - neither of which ever had more than a small sliver of popular support. Somehow the Republican and Democratic donors were always able to keep populist politicians off the ballot. Leaving general election voters to hold their nose and vote for the lesser of two evils every election.
Until Trump.
Trump showed that the religious right, combined with populists, and supporters of pro domestic US industry, pro growth, fair trade, controlled borders, and pro gun policies, made up a viable coalition, which wins against unpopular globalist ideology. This globalist ideology has weakened the once dominant US industry and economy. Voters know this, and aren't happy.
But having that ability would exact concessions from both parties. Bernie was and is too cowardly to hold the Sword of Damocles over the dualopoly's heads.
After the Dems cheated Bernie out of the 2016 nomination and relentlessly abused his supporters online, I, a lifelong Dem, broke with my entire voting past and voted for Republican (lite) Trump. I was overjoyed by the twin facts that a) Trump beat the Hildebeast and b) he won. He had excellent intentions and did pretty good as president until Covid came along and revealed his inexperience.
The 2020 Dem primary was a farce, Bernie had sold out years before, and the Greens were making a huge mistake in backing Howie. No way I could ever vote for a fake Green or a demented neocon Dem. So I wrote in Jesse Ventura for President and Cynthia McKinney for Veep and felt 100% good about it. Compared to the entire pool of pols out there, Jesse and Cynthia are clean as a whistle. Tulsi is complex but I still respect her. Honesty and independence are rare qualities these days, and we need them.
I like Jesse, and I believe that Jesse would do a better job than Trump or Biden. However, Jesse is 70 years old. I am not voting for another boomer. It is high time to let the younger generations take the helm.
If they run together, watch out. They will be Russian spies, collaborators, infidels, pick your words. I think it would be great to finally put a lid on the "media"
The Swamp would chew them up and spit them out. Jesse was Governor of the Socialist Republic of Minnesota. And though I really like Tulsi - but she doesn't have the chops to deal with the DC Cabal. Clinton/Wiener would have a better chance of winning in 2024.
Thank you YP for what I take as optimism in a time when some think optimism is simply foolish. But in your previous post you said, people are desperate for someone to
lead us(I'm paraphrasing) who has COMMON SENSE. Whatever part of the brain dictates
common sense, its been aversely affected by politics, and money, by those who have become politicians as a means of making money, rather than doing good.
We're not here to please the gods; we're here to entertain them. And, if our presidential elections are any indication, we're pretty damn good at making entertainment. But the deep state is our fate...until The Empire collapses, which is inevitable, if not imminent.
Damn, TK, me thinks you are right on the target. And what a loss, after good hardy men and women helped fashion this unique country into a United Philosophy of mostly Farmers and Tradesmen’s value system.
It is painful yet sobering to know and admit that we humans seem to prefer Kingly guidance over a Free but hard to maintain Republic form of governance. Afterall, we are basically mostly lazy animals of low interest in free choice and closer to our primate cousins in attitude and ambition. Our grandkids will inherit our legacy, and at this juncture, it don’t look to bright.
Can’t argue with your point of view friend. And I’m with you; both parties display only personal profit and power concerns by most their members. Still not committed to candidates yet, but you seem to have a clear vision of a team that’s really patriotic and smart. And I really like Tulsi. And thanks for recognizing the importance of choosing according to CHARACTER…
Thanks for the inquiry, but at this point, I’m still gathering information. And with the ‘fixed’ media so big in our country, it ain’t ez. Lots of aspects to yet consider…
Great interview and article. Our proxy war to destabilize Putin, pointlessly killing as many Ukrainians as possible along the way, may not lead to World War 3, but giving Jesse Ventura the Rachel Maddow slot on MSNBC certainly would.
That's like saying the Iraq war was "Bin Laden's proxy war".
Besides which, what do you think awaits the Ukrainian populace if they surrender? Peaceful coexistence with Russia in which their human rights are respected? You think they're fighting at the behest of the U.S.? Give me a break.
I do not know why the Russians or the Ukrainians are doing what they are doing to mindlessly slighter their own people. Massive numbers of children dead from bullets, bombs, displacement, orphaning, stunting, starvation and from easily curable diseases.
But I do know why our CIA and Pentagon want this debacle. They want a proxy war to destabilize Putin. And they hope Ukraine becomes a failed state and endless quagmire with hundreds of thousands of dead bodies. Because that is the surest way to hurt a nuclear superpower.
they do NOT want a failed state. They use Ukraine like a fucking seedy playground washing billions of dollars thru it and setting up bio labs all in putins backyard
“Iraq was Bin Ladin’s proxy war” is an idiotic analogy that does not match the Ukraine situation at all. We are fighting a proxy war in a third country instead of directly between two super powers. Bin Ladin was a non-state terrorist who was holed up in Afghanistan while we invaded Iraq to get Sadam. You explain why that aid applicable.
Oh, they care about it alright. There are about 350 billion reasons why; because that's collectively what hits their pocket books each year. That is $350B that doesn't go toward health care, infrastructure improvements, government services, etc each year. I think most folks are just so manipulated by MSM propaganda that they fail to make the link. Doesn't mean the link doesn't exist. Only children should believe that covering your eyes makes the boogey man go away.
Personally, I'd prefer the bomb to be diffused by the populous demanding the debt be paid down (at least down to a debt/gdp level comparable to that of China or Russia). I can dream, can't I?
"Believe it or not it does make sense for Donbas to be in Russia and it’s not a Hitler type land grab."
...so why attack Kyiv?
I'm afraid I don't believe it. It's literally the same pretext as Hitler's land grabs: 'our people are there, they're being mistreated, this is just self-defense, and that land rightfully belongs to us anyway.'
"Btw, Ukraine is going to lose that territory"
Okay buddy, maybe you could find a more useful outlet for that crystal ball, like lottery numbers or the stock market.
Yes, b/c we lured the evil egomaniac into invading a sovereign neighbor and sticking the Russian army’s collective dick in a rat trap./s
I’m not sure of the exact historical %’s, but in a huge % of wars against socially equal opponents ( ie NOT slaughtering indigenous peoples), the invading side who started the war ended up on the losing side.
The only possible end to this USA versus Russia proxy war (call it what it is — Ukraine is just the cannon fodder) is for a negotiated settlement which will include Crimea is permanently Russian, Donbas is Russian. And Ukraine can never join NATO and must remove US and NATO missiles. That was true before the first shot was fired. And remains true.
Maybe. But what’s to stop Russia in a few years from saying “yeah, we want all the provinces adjacent to the Donbas, too”? If Ukraine’s just going to capitulate and everyone else is going to say “we don’t support proxy wars” like you apparently want, why *wouldn’t* the Russians take more?
Getting the Euros to get serious about NATO as opposed to leaching off the US for the alternate funding of their welfare states is a side benefit of this sad mess, but I refuse to give anyone in DC for the past 20 years the intellectual credit for organizing such a scheme….there is an old saying along the lines of “Never attribute to malice that which can first be attributed to incompetence”
Did Iran help Iraq during that war? I'm not a student of the middle east, but I was pretty sure those two countries were bitter enemies.
More importantly, though: twisting the knife when your opponent steps in it is VERY different from manufacturing a situation where your opponent steps in it. What you're describing is pretty much just the concept of alliances.
Simplified model of Iraq before GWB toppled Hussein: 3 major areas. Largest was Shia area with cultural affinity for Iran (Iran is also Shia).
Smaller area was the semi autonomous Kurdish area, which was doing well economically.
Other smaller area was Sunni.
Sadaam Hussein held it together with Authoritarian and mostly secular rule - the "Baathists" (sic?).
It was obvious to anyone with even a passing knowledge of Iraq, that conqering Iraq was slmost certain to benefit Iran, as any democratic government would be dominated by Shia votes, leading to closer ties to (and influence by) Iran.
Bush senior was advised not to topple Sadaam (stop short of taking Baghdad) for this very reason, and wisely heeded that advice.
I have told this story before but when I was in college I helped organize an event (as an officer in a liberal organization on campus) for the then Governor Ventura to come speak. He came and basically said kids should need to serve (in one way or another) to have the government pay for their college, and a bunch of other things that were his honest opinions and not pandering to the audience. Unlike 98% of politicians you see (even sacred cows like Wellstone. I remember seeing Wellstone speak a few times, and each speech was just a list of promising the audience things they wanted that he wouldn't be able to provide. Didn't seem like a very hard job, or an honest one.).
Anyway, so MPR News and one of the Twin Cities papers wanted to interview students about the governor's speech and since I was a part organizer I was interviewed. When asked what I thought of the event I shared that I was impressed with a politician who wasn't spewing BS, but didn't agree with some of the things he said, and that I expected a lot of student felt the same.
The reporters and I had a few back and forths, where I definitely didn't get political, or mention any other politicians by name, but kept on the message of the students and their mixed but appreciative reception.
Well somewhere in there I must have said "it was good", because the one thing they took out of this relatively long discussion, and my quote in the paper was "it was good". I think in part because they wanted to write about how the students didn't like the speech, which is not at all what I saw or said, and their article made it seem like the audience had been both negative and/or too dumb to understand what the governor comments meant in terms of policies.
Was a very instructive example in "manufacturing consent".
While I do take your point, there's still a wide gulf between outlets that unethically cheerlead for the government, outlets that are covertly influenced by the government in unethical ways, and outlets where unethical coverage is the whole business model (like RT, or VOA).
It's not that the whole purpose of e.g. MSNBC is to parrot government talking points - it's just easy and profitable. Someone could hypothetically devise a more attractive business model that doesn't take cues from Washington or the Pentagon, and steer that organization into it.
RT exists explicitly and only to propagandize. It's just not the same thing.
Have you ever watched RT? I've watched a fair amount of their coverage of world events in years past and thought they were excellent and far better than any US MSM outlet.
The BBC is paid for by the British government. This does not differ in principle from RT; RT is probably modelled on it.
From Suez onwards; it would be hard to avoid the idea that at least part of the BBC is propagandist. But we don't shut it down for this reason; we are all enlightened enough to pick and choose, and not let someone steal that choice from us.
This theft of choice is exactly what is wrong with the decision to block RT. It is a theft of agency, from us, from the people the government is supposed to represent. We don't need a ministry of information to stand between us & the real world, gently picking for us those things we are permitted to see.
Exactly-lapping up press briefings and talking points from Jenn Psaki is easier and quicker than thinking for oneself. It isn’t “state produced” TV-just an easier and more profitable alternative. Huxley, not Orwell in this case.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant. I share concerns about foreign sources such as RT, and so long as remedies are limited to exposing and providing alternative views and sources, all is good.
But censorship - even of foreign government sources like RT - is an extreme remedy in my view, with truly slippery slopes.
As Jesse Ventura said, he was never edited, coerced, or censored by RT, which is absolutely done routinely on the most widely viewed media sources.
If the only place to hear critical voices is RT or other disfavored entities, censoring those channels is more dangerous than allowing them to broadcast, IMO.
The firehose of lies, lack of critical reporting, and censorship by our mainstream sources during the past 6 years has been shocking. At least in the former soviet union, much of the populace knew they were being lied to by outlets such as Pravda, while many US voters - and pols - are still oblivious.
RT is a propaganda outlet. Everyone knows it's a propaganda outlet. So, going over to RT and pushing your agenda there is *much worse* for your agenda than literally saying nothing. You might genuinely incur less reputational damage by murdering a child, hollowing out its body, and using it as a hand-puppet to discuss climate change.
"What would you rather have, an honest wrestler or a polished sellout?" Honesty and truth are so bitterly undermined in N. American culture. I know which one most of my family members would choose. A few too many F bombs, some liberals screaming "transphobe," and they're choosing "polished sellout" without blinking an eye. Discernment of true character goes out the window for far too many people.
Yeah, my comment was as simple as admitting that I cringe less when watching wrestling than a speech by Obama or a riff by Psaki. But I don't watch either to be honest. Politically speaking, Trump was only different from his predecessor because he was so obviously a stooge. After decades of snake tongue talkers, I imagine it was refreshing for some people to experience that type of dumbed down "transparency." As for myself, if I'm going to follow a politician, it's their actions.
actually the whole point of what he did was dishonest wrestling. I knew people who thought it was real. Smart people. Really hogan and trump are very very similar
I look forward to Mr. Ventura running to piss them off or better to bring average Americans back as topic. We all deserve better. Who also deserves better are our military people. Many join for lack of other opportunity, many to get the GI Bill but end up sick in their brain. Society just likes to shake their hands at an airport and thank them for their service. The USS George Washington is dry docked for years to come in a VA shipyard, life for junior enlisted is so very bad that 11 young sailors took their own lives within one year and nothing in the news except one article in Military Times, top Navy enlisted went to visit them and told them to curb their expectations, while he goes home at night to a real meal and clean bed. That is horrible. Also what is not discussed at all is the corruption in contracting and military housing, how many children have died from falling out of windows, mold in homes causing severe asthma etc., you'll find several episodes on the podcast Military Matters, what is so tragic about these things is that the service men & women can't speak up about it they are verboten to strike or contact TV news. We must care for them before they kill themselves or end up homeless on the streets. Kindly look these things up and pay attention to our military. Thank you!
OK--admittedly a minor point so don't pile on, but #(@$* him and that "Middle America is the true America" bull***. It's all the "true" America. Whatever the hell that means.
Ventura reminds me of an ethical physician. He will tell you his opinion without a secret agenda. He will listen to what you have to say. Isn't that a prescription for what the country needs, whatever the platform?
Anyone have a breakdown of where he stood on various issues? I can think of quite a few people who have said the "right things" that went down in flames when voters found out their real views. Anyone can say they want to cross partisan boundaries but most of the time they are full of crap. Hint, people on the right will not stand for a gun grabber or someone who is open borders, while people on the left get very jaded when they find out some guy is just a corporate stooge who does not give a damn about the little guy (the "success" of "trickle down economics" has put many on the right there too) or makes one visit to the inner city to pretend they care and then leave for the Hamptons. Oh yeah, one of the main reasons voters are looking for someone different is the "we are going to send your kids to another overseas fustercluck", so that is a deal breaker right there as well.
Yep. Not too thrilled that Jesse buys into the global warming scam. I’m not sayin there isn’t some measurements that indicate a rise in temperatures. I am saying it remains to be proven whether carbon caused it or if it actually means catastrophe. Meanwhile a huge industry is taking shape to profit from our fears.
Just started looking into him and initial impressions are that he is just another gun grabber and he is calling January 6th a "coup". Jessie is starting to sound like another political narcissist pretending that he cares about the American people, truth, principles, the Constitution, and all that bullshit. Here's hoping I can watch another one of these grifters burn up and fade away.
Here is the thing these pricks do not get. What do you think when you hear this? "I won't completely ban your guns. I will just try to take the ones that make it difficult for us to control you away... and then maybe the others." "Why yes, most most of my friends are venture capitalists, but I might put some anti-trust stuff in here and there if I feel like lit." "It's racist to complain you are competing against illegals for jobs. Oh, and this latest trade deal is probably going to offshore most of the jobs you have left." "These corporate tax cuts will absolutely filter down to you. Wait, are you asking for handouts? Go away you dirty peasant!" I know what I think. I am listening to a Republican/Democrat! What difference is there between you and a "corporate" Democrat, a loony Progressive, a "moderate" Republican, or a "you are on your own" Conservative at that point? We already have plenty of those to choose from.
My concern is the near-total silence from journalists on Assange's targeting by the US, for exposing American war crimes.
He is arguably the greatest journalist of our time, yet the near-unanimous indifference to his plight is deafening. Kudos to Consortium News for dissenting from this, at the cost of being targeted themselves.
Investigative reporter Stefania Maurizi joins the show to give an update on the Julian Assange case. Hosts Katie Halper and Matt Taibbi ...
YouTube · Rolling Stone · Jan 8, 2021
4 key moments in this video
Matt Taibbi: Julian Assange & the Media's Lost Ideals - YouTubehttps://www.youtube.com › watch
May 30, 2020 — JulianAssange #Media #TheZeroHourSubscribe to The Zero Hour with RJ Eskow for more: https://www.patreon.com/thezerohourIf you liked this ...
Useful Idiots with Matt Taibbi and Katie Halper - Apple Podcastshttps://podcasts.apple.com › podcast › reacting-to-assan...
Nils Melzer responds to the Julian Assange verdict on a special Useful Idiots Livestream. Nils Melzer is the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture; Human Rights ...
Ventura is one of the few courageous enough to discuss Palestine. I was pleased – and astounded – when he had me on his program: https://youtu.be/BDVy03Y4EWg
I would vote for Jesse in a heartbeat if his opponents were Biden and Trump. Jesse should run with Tulsi Gabbard as his VP. What a team they'd make! Both military vets, both free-thinkers, both willing to buck the establishment.
Please, God, or Thor, or someone, give us a choice in 2024. Jesse/Tulsi in 2024! Honesty, integrity, guts.
Uh dude, tulsi voted for biden. Thats not integrity, intellectual honesty or a winner in 2024.
People make mistakes. And it’s not like Biden was running against Jesus Christ--Trump brings his own brand of dumpster fire, as Jesse alludes to in the interview.
I find that people are much more willing to change when you let them identify their own mistakes rather than rubbing their noses in them.
And to be clear, tulsi did not vote for Biden. She endorsed him as was the agreement amongst all the candidates in the primary. It was a contract to support the eventual winner.
She also bucked the current Open Border Invasion. When Biden leaves he will have increased the Unauthorized by 8,000,000 poverty stricken, foreign born
What's the difference?
How do you know Tulsi didn't vote for Biden? I find it hard to believe that she would have voted for Trump, even though he is not nearly the neocon war hawk that Biden is.
Biden's bullshit was well known, can't forgive Tulsi, she knew better.
Fair point on rubbing noses in it, do you how hard it is to look at biden voters in my temporary housing complex.....struggling to eat, fill the car up and NOT at least give them a lesson on cause and effect. But no.....I reach in my wallet instead.
Surely this is a snarky joke, and you can see how dumb this line of thinking is?
What you just said is akin to some upper middle class Biden voter saying “I try not to tell all those poor heroin addicts in trailer parks who voted for Trump why voting for him caused their current predicament, so I reach in my wallet instead…”
It vastly overestimates the power of a single president to determine local outcomes, and the speed of the impact of his policies. And it overlooks all the local historical factors that determine what a community looks like.
And all that misery started with Biden. Sounds like how I felt during the Trump years about many in my neighborhood, for which Trump really did nothing. As a matter of fact, more of them are working now.
What a lazy way to decide who you'll support or oppose. No intellectual integrity on your part. One minor little meaningless forgotten momentary thing and BAM -- "she's dead to me".
Maybe you should just sit this one out.
I was thinking the same thing of you, sit it out. We don't need a third party right now , it will split the vote. I'm not saying she can't change but do you think she voted for Trump? No way. Trumps dumpster fire looked so bad only because of the media. 1% inflation, 2 dollar gas and immigration enforcement is not.......a fire. What you have now......is a fire. A swampy, DC full on dumpster fire.
Actually, we DO need a third party - a LEFT party that will CRUSH NeoLiberals and Trump Nazis alike.
And Jesse hated Trump so much that, if he voted, I'd bet he voted for Biden too.
Are you seriously blaming that on Trump?
A three way race between Trump, Biden, and Jesse Ventura, would split the populist vote between Ventura and Trump, giving us 4 more years of Biden.
If it were just Ventura and Biden, Biden would also prevail. The religious right would never turn out for Ventura, because Ventura would never appease the religious right. Trump may not be a true member of the religious right, but hypocrisy is the Tribute that vice pays to virtue. And Trump delivered on judges and cultural issues.
The religious right is a critical part of the Trump coalition. If Jesse doesn't get their votes, which bloc of voters will make up the deficit?
If DeSantis is the nominee, likely same outcome.
Both establishment left, and establishment right combined, would be enough to beat any divided populist pair of candidates in a three way race.
Jesse would get votes from the populist left that wouldn't vote for Trump.
Exactly. And the populist right would vote for Trump. Dividing the populist vote, and handing the election to Biden.
Sooooo, what? Just continue to sorta “buy in” to the two-party system? I’m so fucking sick of this “Well, even though I can’t stand this candidate, we should all vote for them, otherwise this other candidate who I also hate might win…” attitude. Vote for whoever the fuck you wanna vote for. It’s not like there’s really gonna be any difference between the Democratic and Republican candidate. Their priorities are legit the exact same (make their wealthy donors and themselves wealthier). It’s only their messaging that’s different.
I think Ventura's job would be to win the populist support away from Trump, and he could point to the fact that Trump, in office, was a standard tax-cut Republican.
Besides, events on the ground are changing so intensely, the old coalitions probably won't hold.
You don't have to worry about that. Even if Biden survives his first term (which is highly problematical) he'll never get the nomination again. Of course, if the Biden Regime starts a nuclear war, we won't have another election anyway.
If it were just Ventura vs. Biden.. Jesse would hoover up the leftist votes away from Biden and also get a big proportion of the libertarian right. But in what scenario would it be just between Biden and Jesse?
hmm, trump already got all those Reagan democrats to vote for him in 2016. I think he already has lefty populist vote if a Reagan Democrat IS a lefty populist
Maybe in Wisconsin, but then, ever since Wisconsin elected Walker, I've had my doubts about that state. "Cheese Heads" living up to the reputation.
Populist right voters (including a lot of the religious right) may not have liked Walker, but the Republican establishment was very effective in making sure that the only alternative was a Democrat.
Never liked Walker. Always struck me as a typical anti populist, pro corporate Republican - in the same mold as Jeb Bush - neither of which ever had more than a small sliver of popular support. Somehow the Republican and Democratic donors were always able to keep populist politicians off the ballot. Leaving general election voters to hold their nose and vote for the lesser of two evils every election.
Until Trump.
Trump showed that the religious right, combined with populists, and supporters of pro domestic US industry, pro growth, fair trade, controlled borders, and pro gun policies, made up a viable coalition, which wins against unpopular globalist ideology. This globalist ideology has weakened the once dominant US industry and economy. Voters know this, and aren't happy.
But having that ability would exact concessions from both parties. Bernie was and is too cowardly to hold the Sword of Damocles over the dualopoly's heads.
Yes!
What a wonderful dream, prayer etc.
After the Dems cheated Bernie out of the 2016 nomination and relentlessly abused his supporters online, I, a lifelong Dem, broke with my entire voting past and voted for Republican (lite) Trump. I was overjoyed by the twin facts that a) Trump beat the Hildebeast and b) he won. He had excellent intentions and did pretty good as president until Covid came along and revealed his inexperience.
The 2020 Dem primary was a farce, Bernie had sold out years before, and the Greens were making a huge mistake in backing Howie. No way I could ever vote for a fake Green or a demented neocon Dem. So I wrote in Jesse Ventura for President and Cynthia McKinney for Veep and felt 100% good about it. Compared to the entire pool of pols out there, Jesse and Cynthia are clean as a whistle. Tulsi is complex but I still respect her. Honesty and independence are rare qualities these days, and we need them.
I respect your right to do that but a vote like that was a vote for a neo con dem who....if at all.....barely won.
I like Jesse, and I believe that Jesse would do a better job than Trump or Biden. However, Jesse is 70 years old. I am not voting for another boomer. It is high time to let the younger generations take the helm.
If they run together, watch out. They will be Russian spies, collaborators, infidels, pick your words. I think it would be great to finally put a lid on the "media"
The Swamp would chew them up and spit them out. Jesse was Governor of the Socialist Republic of Minnesota. And though I really like Tulsi - but she doesn't have the chops to deal with the DC Cabal. Clinton/Wiener would have a better chance of winning in 2024.
Thank you YP for what I take as optimism in a time when some think optimism is simply foolish. But in your previous post you said, people are desperate for someone to
lead us(I'm paraphrasing) who has COMMON SENSE. Whatever part of the brain dictates
common sense, its been aversely affected by politics, and money, by those who have become politicians as a means of making money, rather than doing good.
With regard to pleasing Thor: Wyrd biõ ful ãræd.
We're not here to please the gods; we're here to entertain them. And, if our presidential elections are any indication, we're pretty damn good at making entertainment. But the deep state is our fate...until The Empire collapses, which is inevitable, if not imminent.
Damn, TK, me thinks you are right on the target. And what a loss, after good hardy men and women helped fashion this unique country into a United Philosophy of mostly Farmers and Tradesmen’s value system.
It is painful yet sobering to know and admit that we humans seem to prefer Kingly guidance over a Free but hard to maintain Republic form of governance. Afterall, we are basically mostly lazy animals of low interest in free choice and closer to our primate cousins in attitude and ambition. Our grandkids will inherit our legacy, and at this juncture, it don’t look to bright.
Paul
You know, I had to sit back and think what it might be like to see those two running together...
Haven't mad up my mind, but thanks, YP: a very good comment...
I’m with you, YP. Good comment! Taibbi once again proves his mastery of the interview!
Paul S.
Can’t argue with your point of view friend. And I’m with you; both parties display only personal profit and power concerns by most their members. Still not committed to candidates yet, but you seem to have a clear vision of a team that’s really patriotic and smart. And I really like Tulsi. And thanks for recognizing the importance of choosing according to CHARACTER…
Paul
Thanks for the inquiry, but at this point, I’m still gathering information. And with the ‘fixed’ media so big in our country, it ain’t ez. Lots of aspects to yet consider…
PS
...Substack needs a bundle option because this is getting expensive...
This is a good point, business-wise. There are plenty of substacks I like, but I’m not shelling out $30 a month for 6 or 7 of them.
Lowering the monthly fee would be one way... i'd love to subscribe to Jesse but my inbox is pretty filled already.
Agreed!
And my subscription list grows. Thanks a lot, Matt! 😝
The American psychosphere is ripe for another candidate who excels at pissing the commentariat off.
Yeah , like trump
Jesse Ventura 2024
Great interview and article. Our proxy war to destabilize Putin, pointlessly killing as many Ukrainians as possible along the way, may not lead to World War 3, but giving Jesse Ventura the Rachel Maddow slot on MSNBC certainly would.
"Our proxy war"
That's like saying the Iraq war was "Bin Laden's proxy war".
Besides which, what do you think awaits the Ukrainian populace if they surrender? Peaceful coexistence with Russia in which their human rights are respected? You think they're fighting at the behest of the U.S.? Give me a break.
Your analogy is not applicable at all.
I do not know why the Russians or the Ukrainians are doing what they are doing to mindlessly slighter their own people. Massive numbers of children dead from bullets, bombs, displacement, orphaning, stunting, starvation and from easily curable diseases.
But I do know why our CIA and Pentagon want this debacle. They want a proxy war to destabilize Putin. And they hope Ukraine becomes a failed state and endless quagmire with hundreds of thousands of dead bodies. Because that is the surest way to hurt a nuclear superpower.
They want a "failed state and endless quagmire" because that debacle = more big bucks for U.S. defense contractors.
they do NOT want a failed state. They use Ukraine like a fucking seedy playground washing billions of dollars thru it and setting up bio labs all in putins backyard
"Your analogy is not applicable at all."
...okay, why not? You're just gonna drop that take and move on without supporting it in any way?
“Iraq was Bin Ladin’s proxy war” is an idiotic analogy that does not match the Ukraine situation at all. We are fighting a proxy war in a third country instead of directly between two super powers. Bin Ladin was a non-state terrorist who was holed up in Afghanistan while we invaded Iraq to get Sadam. You explain why that aid applicable.
To the Biden regime, it's clearly a US proxy war. Thus the $50B.
So the scenario where the U.S. provides Ukraine with weapons because Russia invaded them doesn't enter into your calculations?
Jesus.
They're mostly fighting on the U.S. taxpayer (debt) dime.
Oh, they care about it alright. There are about 350 billion reasons why; because that's collectively what hits their pocket books each year. That is $350B that doesn't go toward health care, infrastructure improvements, government services, etc each year. I think most folks are just so manipulated by MSM propaganda that they fail to make the link. Doesn't mean the link doesn't exist. Only children should believe that covering your eyes makes the boogey man go away.
Personally, I'd prefer the bomb to be diffused by the populous demanding the debt be paid down (at least down to a debt/gdp level comparable to that of China or Russia). I can dream, can't I?
Lol Bin Laden baited us into an overreaction. Said so himself.
So you’re not wrong there.
You’re breathtakingly retarded.
yup, looking back on it , it really WAS about oil. Saddam threatened our oil.
Blow up the Twin Towers and watch us act the fool. Worked a treat. That was his thing.
Nah, they were tricked into it.
Not sure what’s worse.
The West wanted a flunky to help goad Russia. It’s really too bad, honestly.
Bush said it himself a couple weeks ago…..
"Believe it or not it does make sense for Donbas to be in Russia and it’s not a Hitler type land grab."
...so why attack Kyiv?
I'm afraid I don't believe it. It's literally the same pretext as Hitler's land grabs: 'our people are there, they're being mistreated, this is just self-defense, and that land rightfully belongs to us anyway.'
"Btw, Ukraine is going to lose that territory"
Okay buddy, maybe you could find a more useful outlet for that crystal ball, like lottery numbers or the stock market.
No shit, the Donbas stuff has been happening at a low level for years now. Driving for Kyiv and Kherson is a totally different strategic animal.
Yes, b/c we lured the evil egomaniac into invading a sovereign neighbor and sticking the Russian army’s collective dick in a rat trap./s
I’m not sure of the exact historical %’s, but in a huge % of wars against socially equal opponents ( ie NOT slaughtering indigenous peoples), the invading side who started the war ended up on the losing side.
The only possible end to this USA versus Russia proxy war (call it what it is — Ukraine is just the cannon fodder) is for a negotiated settlement which will include Crimea is permanently Russian, Donbas is Russian. And Ukraine can never join NATO and must remove US and NATO missiles. That was true before the first shot was fired. And remains true.
Maybe. But what’s to stop Russia in a few years from saying “yeah, we want all the provinces adjacent to the Donbas, too”? If Ukraine’s just going to capitulate and everyone else is going to say “we don’t support proxy wars” like you apparently want, why *wouldn’t* the Russians take more?
That’s why the Ukrainians are fighting.
I guess the Kremlin doesn't pay you to be subtle.
Going directly to insults only establishes your level of education.
Getting the Euros to get serious about NATO as opposed to leaching off the US for the alternate funding of their welfare states is a side benefit of this sad mess, but I refuse to give anyone in DC for the past 20 years the intellectual credit for organizing such a scheme….there is an old saying along the lines of “Never attribute to malice that which can first be attributed to incompetence”
Those are the biggest "if" qualifiers I've even heard in my life.
Did Iran help Iraq during that war? I'm not a student of the middle east, but I was pretty sure those two countries were bitter enemies.
More importantly, though: twisting the knife when your opponent steps in it is VERY different from manufacturing a situation where your opponent steps in it. What you're describing is pretty much just the concept of alliances.
Simplified model of Iraq before GWB toppled Hussein: 3 major areas. Largest was Shia area with cultural affinity for Iran (Iran is also Shia).
Smaller area was the semi autonomous Kurdish area, which was doing well economically.
Other smaller area was Sunni.
Sadaam Hussein held it together with Authoritarian and mostly secular rule - the "Baathists" (sic?).
It was obvious to anyone with even a passing knowledge of Iraq, that conqering Iraq was slmost certain to benefit Iran, as any democratic government would be dominated by Shia votes, leading to closer ties to (and influence by) Iran.
Bush senior was advised not to topple Sadaam (stop short of taking Baghdad) for this very reason, and wisely heeded that advice.
Not so with GWB, alas.
Jesse and Tyrel, PLEASE DO AN MST3K-STYLE SHOW FOR THE STATE OF THE UNION! That would make it soooo much more watchable.
Katie and Matt already do this, but still....
Thanks. How did I not know that?
This format would be great at any Biden press conference, too.
I have told this story before but when I was in college I helped organize an event (as an officer in a liberal organization on campus) for the then Governor Ventura to come speak. He came and basically said kids should need to serve (in one way or another) to have the government pay for their college, and a bunch of other things that were his honest opinions and not pandering to the audience. Unlike 98% of politicians you see (even sacred cows like Wellstone. I remember seeing Wellstone speak a few times, and each speech was just a list of promising the audience things they wanted that he wouldn't be able to provide. Didn't seem like a very hard job, or an honest one.).
Anyway, so MPR News and one of the Twin Cities papers wanted to interview students about the governor's speech and since I was a part organizer I was interviewed. When asked what I thought of the event I shared that I was impressed with a politician who wasn't spewing BS, but didn't agree with some of the things he said, and that I expected a lot of student felt the same.
The reporters and I had a few back and forths, where I definitely didn't get political, or mention any other politicians by name, but kept on the message of the students and their mixed but appreciative reception.
Well somewhere in there I must have said "it was good", because the one thing they took out of this relatively long discussion, and my quote in the paper was "it was good". I think in part because they wanted to write about how the students didn't like the speech, which is not at all what I saw or said, and their article made it seem like the audience had been both negative and/or too dumb to understand what the governor comments meant in terms of policies.
Was a very instructive example in "manufacturing consent".
👌🏼
yet again
Even Larry King worked at RT. Every on air personality there over the years was hardly a Pro-Russia propagandist.
So why go work for a propaganda outlet?
Uh which MSM is not?
While I do take your point, there's still a wide gulf between outlets that unethically cheerlead for the government, outlets that are covertly influenced by the government in unethical ways, and outlets where unethical coverage is the whole business model (like RT, or VOA).
It's not that the whole purpose of e.g. MSNBC is to parrot government talking points - it's just easy and profitable. Someone could hypothetically devise a more attractive business model that doesn't take cues from Washington or the Pentagon, and steer that organization into it.
RT exists explicitly and only to propagandize. It's just not the same thing.
Actually the MSM is far more dangerous and I find little to pick and choose between RT and WaPo for example. Yes WaPo is somewhat more subtle.
Look at the things they ~ don’t report on
1) failure of the Pentagon, with impunity, to provide auditors with material needed for audit
2) ~nothing on rape in the US military where 1/10 F soldiers were raped by one or more of their colleagues. About 25,000 in the last couple of years
3) nothing on Cuba passing the US for longevity even though they spend 1/10 per cap on health care.
Blah, blah
Etc. The MSM is kayfabe Inc. Through and through. NPR is as bad as any despite the citizen-friendly name.
Have you ever watched RT? I've watched a fair amount of their coverage of world events in years past and thought they were excellent and far better than any US MSM outlet.
The BBC is paid for by the British government. This does not differ in principle from RT; RT is probably modelled on it.
From Suez onwards; it would be hard to avoid the idea that at least part of the BBC is propagandist. But we don't shut it down for this reason; we are all enlightened enough to pick and choose, and not let someone steal that choice from us.
This theft of choice is exactly what is wrong with the decision to block RT. It is a theft of agency, from us, from the people the government is supposed to represent. We don't need a ministry of information to stand between us & the real world, gently picking for us those things we are permitted to see.
Exactly-lapping up press briefings and talking points from Jenn Psaki is easier and quicker than thinking for oneself. It isn’t “state produced” TV-just an easier and more profitable alternative. Huxley, not Orwell in this case.
I’m sort but you sound naively committed to a good guys / bad guys argument.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant. I share concerns about foreign sources such as RT, and so long as remedies are limited to exposing and providing alternative views and sources, all is good.
But censorship - even of foreign government sources like RT - is an extreme remedy in my view, with truly slippery slopes.
As Jesse Ventura said, he was never edited, coerced, or censored by RT, which is absolutely done routinely on the most widely viewed media sources.
If the only place to hear critical voices is RT or other disfavored entities, censoring those channels is more dangerous than allowing them to broadcast, IMO.
The firehose of lies, lack of critical reporting, and censorship by our mainstream sources during the past 6 years has been shocking. At least in the former soviet union, much of the populace knew they were being lied to by outlets such as Pravda, while many US voters - and pols - are still oblivious.
I'm not sure why you are here if you didn't read the article above, in which your question is clearly answered.
Clearly to your satisfaction, perhaps.
RT is a propaganda outlet. Everyone knows it's a propaganda outlet. So, going over to RT and pushing your agenda there is *much worse* for your agenda than literally saying nothing. You might genuinely incur less reputational damage by murdering a child, hollowing out its body, and using it as a hand-puppet to discuss climate change.
So saying nothing is better than espousing anti-war sentiments on RT?
Lol - than literally saying nothing?
I suppose Ventura should’ve been a good little war monger and sucked that Bush cock.
Fuckouttahere.
I love a smart sense of humor
"What would you rather have, an honest wrestler or a polished sellout?" Honesty and truth are so bitterly undermined in N. American culture. I know which one most of my family members would choose. A few too many F bombs, some liberals screaming "transphobe," and they're choosing "polished sellout" without blinking an eye. Discernment of true character goes out the window for far too many people.
"honest wrestler"
lol
Never forget, this dude made it big by play-acting for dumb people.
Yeah, my comment was as simple as admitting that I cringe less when watching wrestling than a speech by Obama or a riff by Psaki. But I don't watch either to be honest. Politically speaking, Trump was only different from his predecessor because he was so obviously a stooge. After decades of snake tongue talkers, I imagine it was refreshing for some people to experience that type of dumbed down "transparency." As for myself, if I'm going to follow a politician, it's their actions.
who did trump pander to exactly?
actually the whole point of what he did was dishonest wrestling. I knew people who thought it was real. Smart people. Really hogan and trump are very very similar
I look forward to Mr. Ventura running to piss them off or better to bring average Americans back as topic. We all deserve better. Who also deserves better are our military people. Many join for lack of other opportunity, many to get the GI Bill but end up sick in their brain. Society just likes to shake their hands at an airport and thank them for their service. The USS George Washington is dry docked for years to come in a VA shipyard, life for junior enlisted is so very bad that 11 young sailors took their own lives within one year and nothing in the news except one article in Military Times, top Navy enlisted went to visit them and told them to curb their expectations, while he goes home at night to a real meal and clean bed. That is horrible. Also what is not discussed at all is the corruption in contracting and military housing, how many children have died from falling out of windows, mold in homes causing severe asthma etc., you'll find several episodes on the podcast Military Matters, what is so tragic about these things is that the service men & women can't speak up about it they are verboten to strike or contact TV news. We must care for them before they kill themselves or end up homeless on the streets. Kindly look these things up and pay attention to our military. Thank you!
I think unemployment is carefully controlled to ensure adequate supplies of young impressionable cannon fodder candidates.
OK--admittedly a minor point so don't pile on, but #(@$* him and that "Middle America is the true America" bull***. It's all the "true" America. Whatever the hell that means.
Ventura reminds me of an ethical physician. He will tell you his opinion without a secret agenda. He will listen to what you have to say. Isn't that a prescription for what the country needs, whatever the platform?
Anyone have a breakdown of where he stood on various issues? I can think of quite a few people who have said the "right things" that went down in flames when voters found out their real views. Anyone can say they want to cross partisan boundaries but most of the time they are full of crap. Hint, people on the right will not stand for a gun grabber or someone who is open borders, while people on the left get very jaded when they find out some guy is just a corporate stooge who does not give a damn about the little guy (the "success" of "trickle down economics" has put many on the right there too) or makes one visit to the inner city to pretend they care and then leave for the Hamptons. Oh yeah, one of the main reasons voters are looking for someone different is the "we are going to send your kids to another overseas fustercluck", so that is a deal breaker right there as well.
Yep. Not too thrilled that Jesse buys into the global warming scam. I’m not sayin there isn’t some measurements that indicate a rise in temperatures. I am saying it remains to be proven whether carbon caused it or if it actually means catastrophe. Meanwhile a huge industry is taking shape to profit from our fears.
Just started looking into him and initial impressions are that he is just another gun grabber and he is calling January 6th a "coup". Jessie is starting to sound like another political narcissist pretending that he cares about the American people, truth, principles, the Constitution, and all that bullshit. Here's hoping I can watch another one of these grifters burn up and fade away.
Yeah gun grabbing a nonstarter for me too. Also January 6 is a travesty of justice.
Here is the thing these pricks do not get. What do you think when you hear this? "I won't completely ban your guns. I will just try to take the ones that make it difficult for us to control you away... and then maybe the others." "Why yes, most most of my friends are venture capitalists, but I might put some anti-trust stuff in here and there if I feel like lit." "It's racist to complain you are competing against illegals for jobs. Oh, and this latest trade deal is probably going to offshore most of the jobs you have left." "These corporate tax cuts will absolutely filter down to you. Wait, are you asking for handouts? Go away you dirty peasant!" I know what I think. I am listening to a Republican/Democrat! What difference is there between you and a "corporate" Democrat, a loony Progressive, a "moderate" Republican, or a "you are on your own" Conservative at that point? We already have plenty of those to choose from.
thank you. But why did Matt go there? He must have known all this
yup
Good article, as always. I'm still waiting for Taibbi to weigh in, significantly, on Assange.
I've written like a dozen articles on Assange over the years, and contributed to a book called "In Defense of Julian Assange": https://www.orbooks.com/catalog/in-defense-of-julian-assange/
My concern is the near-total silence from journalists on Assange's targeting by the US, for exposing American war crimes.
He is arguably the greatest journalist of our time, yet the near-unanimous indifference to his plight is deafening. Kudos to Consortium News for dissenting from this, at the cost of being targeted themselves.
Good. When did your most recent Assange article appear? Could you give me a link?
Head of the Snake
Shouldn't Hillary Clinton Be Banned From Twitter Now?
Trial testimony reveals Hillary Clinton personally approved serious election misinformation. Is there an anti-Trump exception to content moderation?
https://taibbi.substack.com/p/shouldnt-hillary-clinton-be-banned?utm_source=%2Finbox&utm_medium=reader2&s=r
Matt Taibbi – May 27, 2022
Shouldn't Hillary Clinton Be Banned From Twitter Now? (substack.com)
Way to go Boris. Thank you!
Heard of Google or Matt should dedicate his precious time on serving you ;-))
The Assange Reporter That Was Spied On, Plus Covid Cow ...https://www.youtube.com › watch
PREVIEW
1:23:14
Investigative reporter Stefania Maurizi joins the show to give an update on the Julian Assange case. Hosts Katie Halper and Matt Taibbi ...
YouTube · Rolling Stone · Jan 8, 2021
4 key moments in this video
Matt Taibbi: Julian Assange & the Media's Lost Ideals - YouTubehttps://www.youtube.com › watch
May 30, 2020 — JulianAssange #Media #TheZeroHourSubscribe to The Zero Hour with RJ Eskow for more: https://www.patreon.com/thezerohourIf you liked this ...
Useful Idiots with Matt Taibbi and Katie Halper - Apple Podcastshttps://podcasts.apple.com › podcast › reacting-to-assan...
Nils Melzer responds to the Julian Assange verdict on a special Useful Idiots Livestream. Nils Melzer is the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture; Human Rights ...
Wednesday's Other Story
On the case of Julian Assange, and fearing empire more than Trump
Matt – TK – Jan. 8
Wednesday's Other Story - TK News by Matt Taibbi (substack.com)
Ventura is one of the few courageous enough to discuss Palestine. I was pleased – and astounded – when he had me on his program: https://youtu.be/BDVy03Y4EWg