John, bless his heart, is in full denial. And, not just of the implications of the election, but in WHY people believe and happily cast a ballot for DJT. Not to be too harsh, but John is, in fact, one of those coastal elites that Glenn references.
Re: John's blithe, knee-jerk statement JD Vance won't was music to my ears! I hope that opinion takes hold of the left -- if so, we'll see a 2028 election like the 1984 presidential election (or better?). What John fails to get is that in this election, a lot of people did "hold their nose" and vote for Trump -- those same people LOVE JD Vance, and that attitude will spread. Vance is Trump without the qualities than make Trump divisive; while Trump just rubs some people the wrong way, Vance doesn't (even John would have to fight like hell to dislike him if he ever spent time with him). Trump is a colossus, a master disrupter. Vance is a conciliator; dedicated to the same vision and hard as nails when need be; graceful, humble, polite otherwise. He has Ivy League credentials (Yale law school) and clerked for Brett Kavanaugh, then for John Roberts at the SCOTUS, which makes it essentially impossible to dismiss him casually as an intellectual lightweight (as John would probably like to), as anyone who listens to him knows. Central casting could hardly produce a more ideal(ized) candidate for the upcoming election, with the possible exception of Tulsi Gabbard (odds-on favorite for his running mate). Together, they will be unstoppable.
Also telling is John's assertion that Vance will lose to some phantom who has yet to appear, even dimly, on the horizon. That is maybe the most vapid thing I've heard him say. From whence will this mythical savior appear, we might ask? Obama -- John's example -- was elected to the senate in 2004 and gave a famous speech and the 2004 DNC, so was at least on the nation's radar at that point. Today, we search the Left's ranks in vain for any similar individual (as John freely acknowledges). So will it be candidate Godot, perhaps? (I'm lost on who his running might be, though.)
What a wonderful time to be alive (even for John -- even though he's loath to admit it).
I'm very fond of John -- I have been for years. It's been said over and over, but I'm say it again: he's a brilliant person who has got an emotional problem with Trump (who's a "gorilla") and it makes him react emotionally and when he tries to rationalize his emotions, he says dumb, ill-considered and just plain wrong things about others -- a kind of emotive collateral damage. Like a lot of brilliant people, this kind of emotional reaction is hard to deal with -- they just can't grasp it when their emotions overpower their intellect, which is the bedrock of how they see themselves; they must rationalize -- the way they see their identity depends on it. So John's "TDS" is the price he pays for being brilliant in other ways. He's not done paying that price; he's bound himself to it with chains forged "link by link and yard by yard" throughout his cozy existence as a privileged academic and who knows if he'll ever break free.
But he'll have to live with the current reality for many years -- far into his dotage. Will he spend those years, chained to an increasingly obsolete milieu, peering at the horizon (or if one prefers. waiting for Godot), murmuring "we're gonna win... next time, I'm sure we're gonna win..."? I hope not. I like him and that's sad. But sad things happen all the time. And (as they) time will tell...
It is a human custom -- who among us has not indulged at some time to some extent? The point is rather that, perhaps a bit like Othello's jealousy writ small, the poignancy of John's situation is in direct proportion to his manifest virtues and great intellectual gifts. Perhaps it would be charitable to consider this before unleashing the "the slings and arrows of outrageous" commentary.
Note: I am no Aristides: I have taken my own pokes at John when he's blurted out something that struck me as particularly egregious (see above) and can't promise to resist doing so in the future, so should anyone choose to lay a charge of pot meet kettle, they may have a plausible case; if so, mea culpa.
Though I am a democrat and think Trump isn't qualified to hold the office, one has to admit that there is a kernel of truth to the policies he proposes and hopefully he will deliver certain changes without causing too much damage.
Not trying to be off topic but I only got a 15 minute snippet of this very interesting Q&A- and nothing else is listed - no more video or audio. I’m a paid subscriber. Am I missing something?
Our records show that you're a full subscriber. If you can't access the full episode and the Q&A for some reason, please let me know and I'll investigate.
I grew up "Republican" because my parents were - in a very purple union-heavy part of rural PA. I left the Republican party during Bush 2 because I experienced the Republican party acting like a less principled, less convicted version of the Dems (pandering, spending, over-regulating, ...) I never became a Dem because even back then they were the party of chaos - feelings over laws; spending over thrift; punishment for social differences rather than unity; union bosses getting filthy rich while there rank and file went backwards, ...)
I will never join the Republicans again - guys like McConnell and Cornyn, the Cheneys, ...., these people have poisoned the party for their own gain. They represent themselves, and unlike the Dems, have no principles (the principles the Dems stand for I fully reject - punishing whites for generational "crimes"; sexual fluidity for children; freeing criminals and imprisoning political opponents; illegal immigrants given priority over citizens and legal immigrants such as my family). But this new incoming government is something different. Watch how the "establishment" Republicans writhe and scream at the cabinet nominees. The Republican Senate is more viscous and bloodthirsty against Trump's cabinet picks than they were against Biden's! No principles...
I am, like Glenn, hopeful that something new is coming. Thank you Glenn for expressing my own feelings better than I can. I am hopeful and optimistic. It's not a "Republican" thing, it's a change. And it is a change that seems to be led by smart and truly principled people (even if one doesn't like Trump, many of his lieutenants are hard to make a strong case against).
Glenn laid out his reasons for being "excited" beautifully. John's juvenile face expressions towards Glenn were super annoying. Those are the exact expressions (that of contempt and smugness) that I endure as a conservative living in San Francisco. Notice how when Glenn asked John what he got out of the last four years from the Democrats John cited something about Infrastructure then immediately turned the conversation back to Glenn. Boy o Boy was that telling... Glenn gets it and John either feigns ignorance or is flat-out TDS. Voters are sick and tired of the progressive left and the party has left the middle class behind. This was a vote not necessarily for Trump rather a giant F-You to the Dems. From all of my conservative friends/family, who don't all like Trump btw, agree on one thing...a weight has been lifted.
My issue is with the headline: "It's time for a change." Am I the only one that has a problem with saying, "It's time for a change," instead of, "It's time for improvement"?
Any idiot can change things. It takes knowledge, skill and perseverance to improve things. If 'they' can't improve things, then 'they' shouldn't change them.
General misogyny and racism cannot explain the victory of Democratic female Senate candidates in Nevada. Wisconsin and Michigan—all states which voted for Trump; or the victory of a Democratic Hispanic Senate candidate in Arizona—a state which voted for Trump; or the passage of abortion rights laws in Nevada, Arizona’s, Montana and Missouri—all states which voted for Trump.
Perhaps the misogyny exists at the level of President. Or perhaps Harris was as poor a candidate in 2024 as she was in 2020: weak, vague, untrustworthy. Her selection of idiotic Tim Walz did not inspire trust either.
As a self-described snob John has no choice but to be a Democrat. To move right of the Party he would have to stop being a snob, and it's fun being a snob. You get to look down on the smelly idiot Walmart hoi polloi with your fellow elites and aspiring elites reading the New York Times in the morning and listening to NPR in the evening. You get caressed by your fellow academics and media types as long as you stay in the club. You drink better wine. There's a lot on the line.
John, bless his heart, is in full denial. And, not just of the implications of the election, but in WHY people believe and happily cast a ballot for DJT. Not to be too harsh, but John is, in fact, one of those coastal elites that Glenn references.
Re: John's blithe, knee-jerk statement JD Vance won't was music to my ears! I hope that opinion takes hold of the left -- if so, we'll see a 2028 election like the 1984 presidential election (or better?). What John fails to get is that in this election, a lot of people did "hold their nose" and vote for Trump -- those same people LOVE JD Vance, and that attitude will spread. Vance is Trump without the qualities than make Trump divisive; while Trump just rubs some people the wrong way, Vance doesn't (even John would have to fight like hell to dislike him if he ever spent time with him). Trump is a colossus, a master disrupter. Vance is a conciliator; dedicated to the same vision and hard as nails when need be; graceful, humble, polite otherwise. He has Ivy League credentials (Yale law school) and clerked for Brett Kavanaugh, then for John Roberts at the SCOTUS, which makes it essentially impossible to dismiss him casually as an intellectual lightweight (as John would probably like to), as anyone who listens to him knows. Central casting could hardly produce a more ideal(ized) candidate for the upcoming election, with the possible exception of Tulsi Gabbard (odds-on favorite for his running mate). Together, they will be unstoppable.
Also telling is John's assertion that Vance will lose to some phantom who has yet to appear, even dimly, on the horizon. That is maybe the most vapid thing I've heard him say. From whence will this mythical savior appear, we might ask? Obama -- John's example -- was elected to the senate in 2004 and gave a famous speech and the 2004 DNC, so was at least on the nation's radar at that point. Today, we search the Left's ranks in vain for any similar individual (as John freely acknowledges). So will it be candidate Godot, perhaps? (I'm lost on who his running might be, though.)
What a wonderful time to be alive (even for John -- even though he's loath to admit it).
I'm very fond of John -- I have been for years. It's been said over and over, but I'm say it again: he's a brilliant person who has got an emotional problem with Trump (who's a "gorilla") and it makes him react emotionally and when he tries to rationalize his emotions, he says dumb, ill-considered and just plain wrong things about others -- a kind of emotive collateral damage. Like a lot of brilliant people, this kind of emotional reaction is hard to deal with -- they just can't grasp it when their emotions overpower their intellect, which is the bedrock of how they see themselves; they must rationalize -- the way they see their identity depends on it. So John's "TDS" is the price he pays for being brilliant in other ways. He's not done paying that price; he's bound himself to it with chains forged "link by link and yard by yard" throughout his cozy existence as a privileged academic and who knows if he'll ever break free.
But he'll have to live with the current reality for many years -- far into his dotage. Will he spend those years, chained to an increasingly obsolete milieu, peering at the horizon (or if one prefers. waiting for Godot), murmuring "we're gonna win... next time, I'm sure we're gonna win..."? I hope not. I like him and that's sad. But sad things happen all the time. And (as they) time will tell...
I think there’s more than a little rationalization that happens amongst Trump supporters as well.
It is a human custom -- who among us has not indulged at some time to some extent? The point is rather that, perhaps a bit like Othello's jealousy writ small, the poignancy of John's situation is in direct proportion to his manifest virtues and great intellectual gifts. Perhaps it would be charitable to consider this before unleashing the "the slings and arrows of outrageous" commentary.
Note: I am no Aristides: I have taken my own pokes at John when he's blurted out something that struck me as particularly egregious (see above) and can't promise to resist doing so in the future, so should anyone choose to lay a charge of pot meet kettle, they may have a plausible case; if so, mea culpa.
Linda McMahon as the education secretary and Marjorie Greene will play a key role in Trump’s DOGE. Is this affirmative action?
Though I am a democrat and think Trump isn't qualified to hold the office, one has to admit that there is a kernel of truth to the policies he proposes and hopefully he will deliver certain changes without causing too much damage.
Not trying to be off topic but I only got a 15 minute snippet of this very interesting Q&A- and nothing else is listed - no more video or audio. I’m a paid subscriber. Am I missing something?
This is a clip from this week's regular episode. Full version is here: https://glennloury.substack.com/p/john-mcwhorter-trumps-historic-win
And here's the latest Q&A: https://glennloury.substack.com/p/october-2024-q-and-a-1fb
Our records show that you're a full subscriber. If you can't access the full episode and the Q&A for some reason, please let me know and I'll investigate.
Thank you so much, Mark. I did finally figure out what the deal is but I can’t seem to remove my comment. My apologies! Thank you for your follow up.
I grew up "Republican" because my parents were - in a very purple union-heavy part of rural PA. I left the Republican party during Bush 2 because I experienced the Republican party acting like a less principled, less convicted version of the Dems (pandering, spending, over-regulating, ...) I never became a Dem because even back then they were the party of chaos - feelings over laws; spending over thrift; punishment for social differences rather than unity; union bosses getting filthy rich while there rank and file went backwards, ...)
I will never join the Republicans again - guys like McConnell and Cornyn, the Cheneys, ...., these people have poisoned the party for their own gain. They represent themselves, and unlike the Dems, have no principles (the principles the Dems stand for I fully reject - punishing whites for generational "crimes"; sexual fluidity for children; freeing criminals and imprisoning political opponents; illegal immigrants given priority over citizens and legal immigrants such as my family). But this new incoming government is something different. Watch how the "establishment" Republicans writhe and scream at the cabinet nominees. The Republican Senate is more viscous and bloodthirsty against Trump's cabinet picks than they were against Biden's! No principles...
I am, like Glenn, hopeful that something new is coming. Thank you Glenn for expressing my own feelings better than I can. I am hopeful and optimistic. It's not a "Republican" thing, it's a change. And it is a change that seems to be led by smart and truly principled people (even if one doesn't like Trump, many of his lieutenants are hard to make a strong case against).
Thank you as always!
I'm glad you're glad. The country will be better with Trump's coalition!
Glenn laid out his reasons for being "excited" beautifully. John's juvenile face expressions towards Glenn were super annoying. Those are the exact expressions (that of contempt and smugness) that I endure as a conservative living in San Francisco. Notice how when Glenn asked John what he got out of the last four years from the Democrats John cited something about Infrastructure then immediately turned the conversation back to Glenn. Boy o Boy was that telling... Glenn gets it and John either feigns ignorance or is flat-out TDS. Voters are sick and tired of the progressive left and the party has left the middle class behind. This was a vote not necessarily for Trump rather a giant F-You to the Dems. From all of my conservative friends/family, who don't all like Trump btw, agree on one thing...a weight has been lifted.
My issue is with the headline: "It's time for a change." Am I the only one that has a problem with saying, "It's time for a change," instead of, "It's time for improvement"?
Any idiot can change things. It takes knowledge, skill and perseverance to improve things. If 'they' can't improve things, then 'they' shouldn't change them.
General misogyny and racism cannot explain the victory of Democratic female Senate candidates in Nevada. Wisconsin and Michigan—all states which voted for Trump; or the victory of a Democratic Hispanic Senate candidate in Arizona—a state which voted for Trump; or the passage of abortion rights laws in Nevada, Arizona’s, Montana and Missouri—all states which voted for Trump.
Perhaps the misogyny exists at the level of President. Or perhaps Harris was as poor a candidate in 2024 as she was in 2020: weak, vague, untrustworthy. Her selection of idiotic Tim Walz did not inspire trust either.
As a self-described snob John has no choice but to be a Democrat. To move right of the Party he would have to stop being a snob, and it's fun being a snob. You get to look down on the smelly idiot Walmart hoi polloi with your fellow elites and aspiring elites reading the New York Times in the morning and listening to NPR in the evening. You get caressed by your fellow academics and media types as long as you stay in the club. You drink better wine. There's a lot on the line.
They DO NOT drink better wine. More expensive, maybe. Better? No.
John's been hanging out at the NYT too much.
That’s the brilliant Harvard professor I remember…