Basically speaking like a podcaster rather than a politician. Probably because they recognize how effective it is and that there's enough rhetorical tricks in speaking candidly to simultaneously gain more trust while shaping the narrative with false dichotomies etc.
Also, fuck Rubio, give trans people their passports you freak.
I really appreciate Rubio's candor. Turns out there's more to him than just anti-Castro Cubanism. Nice to see.
I'll be paying close attention to the efforts to engage Putin. Shocking to consider the previous admin never even tried. Blinken/Biden fed us a steady diet of reheated Cold War cliches while the death toll climbed to 1 million. How does that pass for foreign policy?
Anyway, it's time for new people to take their shot. If Putin won't be swayed, at least they can say they made a sincere effort.
This new spin that Putin wants the war to continue is just wrong. Putin has been the target of a plan for regime change in Russia forever. He knew that NATO expansion to include Ukraine was intended to weaken the Russian Federation, oust Putin, and control Russia's vast wealth, a neocon obsession since Putin foiled their plan when he succeeded the hapless Yeltsin and clawed back much of what had been lost to Western oligarchs. The 2019 Rand Corporation brief on this plan is as clear as Putin has been on his response to it. All Trump has to do is admit that, stop sending weapons to Ukraine, and agree to Putin's terms: a neutral Ukraine and annexation of the oblasts Russia now controls. He will withdraw immediately if this is agreed to, though with some reluctance as agreements with the West are seldom honored by the West. He trusted us and withdrew in 2022, then U.S. lackey Boris Johnson nuked the deal Ukraine had agreed to, giving Putin no choice but to invade again. That this invasion was "unprovoked" is simply preposterous.
Biden’s approach to the war was about using Ukraine as a pawn to weaken Russia. It succeeded for the most part.
Unfortunately, Putin was too foolish to accept defeat and sue for peace quickly and every time Zelensky gained the upper hand the war was only extended further. A million+ lives later and here we are.
Totally. It's tragic that this is only happening in an administration where what department heads say could not be less relevant. Our standards for political communication are so low that we get excited when a person with no power tells us that sometimes we just have to talk to bad people.
In which they ask no challenging questions, let alone pointed follow-up questions? Just to sum up his answers: Gazans should die cuz Hamas; Covid was almost definitely/kinda/maybe a lab leak; Canada is plundering American goodwill, and; this format of non-confrontational questions and zero fact checking fuckin' rocks, chica!
Oh! And this was published ONLY on the social media platform owned by the richest man in the world, whose extra-governmental agency is currently in the midst of facilitating funding cuts that are resulting in starvation, disease, job losses, and, potentially, the decimation of the American welfare system, such that it exists.
But, hey: Maybe Rubio will sign up for your newsletter!
Interesting, but my first blush reaction is that he feels free to say what he thinks, more or less, because Donald Trump isn't listening to him anyway.
Most any department of government. In the case of Rubio, surely Trump doesn't trust any avowal on Rubio's part that he agrees Trump won the 2020 election, which I suspect is the fundamental test of whether or not Trump accepts you in his tiny inner circle. It's possible he let Rubio into his cabinet (in a job Trump had no respect for anyway) for some idea about Florida politics that is stuck in his head. Just guessing.
Some people seem to be misunderstanding the focus of this article, which is not about political opinion, but about media literacy and analysis. He is reviewing the tone, candor, and setting that Rubio chose to convey his statements—not whether he was “right” or not. The point being that this approach provides more transparency than the “assumed” transparency of the previous administration.
This ties into a larger issue, where people like Jeffries and other Dem insiders claim they are doing good work for the American people, but the message isn’t getting through. By examining this interview, there are potential lessons for Dems who hope to win an election in the future (lol). Does it mean everything Rubio said was authentic? No. But the impression he gave off was authentic, which is a part of image development that Dems struggle with.
Yes, people who are highly religious have an extremely hard time admitting that anything even peripherally related to something that would undermine their beliefs could be at all true.
I don't know how much I can stand to read about this anymore. None of these people are at all trustworthy. And something very clearly in our domestic national interest would be responding to the Ebola outbreak in Africa. USAID is not all bad, just like it's not all good. I can't read anymore.
I am skeptical that this signals a change for the better for journalism. I think the power imbalance is too high. This interview happened because they knew the interviewer was friendly. I am also skeptical that it wasn't rehearsed in some way.
Ken, your willingness to forgive bypassing democratic process is disturbing. You say Rubio's statements are the basis of a conversation, but they cut the programs. They fired the people already. Where do you think that conversation should take place? In the oval office? I think that conversation should happen in Congress, and it should happen before people get fired. You talk about hard working regular Americans. Who do you think got fired? Oh, right, bureaucrats. Well, they must not matter.
There is no evidence that COVID-19 came from a Chinese "lab leak", nor has there been an intermediate animal identified that infected humans with the virus.
However like SARS and MERS before it and based on epidemiological and genetic evidence the most likely scenario is that COVID-19 has zoonotic origins at the Wuhan Wholesale Market. This is the current scientific consensus, not that some Chinese dude walked out of a Level-4 lab and spread a global pandemic that China now needs to be "held accountable for".
What Rubio said is only marginally better than "the Chinese created a virus to attack us" that many Republicans unequivocally say they believe absent any evidence (including Rubio's boss Donald Trump) but his "lack of hemming and hawing" delivery doesn't make it any more true.
Uncertainty in science isn't a political opinion, nor is it refreshing that a politician lies about that uncertainty to push an obvious political agenda.
While I appreciate your comments that Rubio was more "human" and responsive in this interview, I'd push back and say that it's much easier to do in the American version of a state-compliant journalistic format. Do you, Klip, believe he'd respond with the same level of "asshole-unclenched" (i.e., colloquial) manner in the face of an intellectually-combative journalist? For example, if Emma Vigeland sat with Rubio for The Majority Report on X, do you honestly believe he'd answer her questions in the same manner? Imo, it ain't the format, homie, it's the questions...AND...(big reveal) the fucking medium, yo! (とりあえず、love your work).
Well, you've committed the cardinal sin. You complimented a form of interview that allows for nuance and demands full answers but it was the wrong team sitting there! Never mind that what he said makes perfect sense and I'm glad to know they are thinking about these issues in a reasonable way. Hope you don't get kicked out of the club. I appreciate you.
Thanks, this is a really good article. I’ll try to check out the “recording”. Rubio sounds like he recognizes some troubling strategic realities and is trying not to appear a zealot.
To me the Trump administration is going to be transactional diplomacy and whether Rubio likes it or not he’s going to follow suit. That’s not all bad, however. Trump is moving the ball forward, whereas Biden was playing hide and seek. I guess we get to find out if the deal maker can lead the USA to success or just fractured relationships.
Nice job. Thanks for relaying the information. I concur on the long form format being superior to the soundbite and gotcha approach. I suppose gotcha journalism can be done in long form. Maybe I'm mistaken, but I presume it would be more difficult to pull off.
With regard to this comment board. I am finding the reflexive 'the cup must be half empty' view many folks are taking here humorous. It's okay to give Marco or the Administration a lukewarm compliment occasionally. You can still hate them the other 99.9% of the time.
EDIT: I changed 'full' to 'empty'. I apologize for any confusion caused by my rather egregious mistyping of my thoughts may have caused. I meant to say it's okay to occasionally provide Trump et. al. a lukewarm compliment.
Thanks for reporting on the communication change. The decoder ring I used was that the exact opposite would happen of the humanitarian response Blinken was pretending to uphold.
Basically speaking like a podcaster rather than a politician. Probably because they recognize how effective it is and that there's enough rhetorical tricks in speaking candidly to simultaneously gain more trust while shaping the narrative with false dichotomies etc.
Also, fuck Rubio, give trans people their passports you freak.
Yeah, insane to me that politicians don't do alternative media more - it's so much more humanizing
Oh, and controlling the narrative. Like not mentioning he just banned all trans foreigners from getting visas.
Thanks for saying that about not giving trans foreigners visas. I didn’t realize that happened.
Thanks for covering this.
I really appreciate Rubio's candor. Turns out there's more to him than just anti-Castro Cubanism. Nice to see.
I'll be paying close attention to the efforts to engage Putin. Shocking to consider the previous admin never even tried. Blinken/Biden fed us a steady diet of reheated Cold War cliches while the death toll climbed to 1 million. How does that pass for foreign policy?
Anyway, it's time for new people to take their shot. If Putin won't be swayed, at least they can say they made a sincere effort.
This new spin that Putin wants the war to continue is just wrong. Putin has been the target of a plan for regime change in Russia forever. He knew that NATO expansion to include Ukraine was intended to weaken the Russian Federation, oust Putin, and control Russia's vast wealth, a neocon obsession since Putin foiled their plan when he succeeded the hapless Yeltsin and clawed back much of what had been lost to Western oligarchs. The 2019 Rand Corporation brief on this plan is as clear as Putin has been on his response to it. All Trump has to do is admit that, stop sending weapons to Ukraine, and agree to Putin's terms: a neutral Ukraine and annexation of the oblasts Russia now controls. He will withdraw immediately if this is agreed to, though with some reluctance as agreements with the West are seldom honored by the West. He trusted us and withdrew in 2022, then U.S. lackey Boris Johnson nuked the deal Ukraine had agreed to, giving Putin no choice but to invade again. That this invasion was "unprovoked" is simply preposterous.
Biden’s approach to the war was about using Ukraine as a pawn to weaken Russia. It succeeded for the most part.
Unfortunately, Putin was too foolish to accept defeat and sue for peace quickly and every time Zelensky gained the upper hand the war was only extended further. A million+ lives later and here we are.
So the new wisdom is if the tone is regular-folks-chatting-comfortably then the substance is irrelevant?
No, that informal mediums lead to more substantive interviews.
I wish other politicians would try it!
Totally. It's tragic that this is only happening in an administration where what department heads say could not be less relevant. Our standards for political communication are so low that we get excited when a person with no power tells us that sometimes we just have to talk to bad people.
Maybe that's why they do it. The department heads can say anything they want because they aren't making the decisions
In which they ask no challenging questions, let alone pointed follow-up questions? Just to sum up his answers: Gazans should die cuz Hamas; Covid was almost definitely/kinda/maybe a lab leak; Canada is plundering American goodwill, and; this format of non-confrontational questions and zero fact checking fuckin' rocks, chica!
Oh! And this was published ONLY on the social media platform owned by the richest man in the world, whose extra-governmental agency is currently in the midst of facilitating funding cuts that are resulting in starvation, disease, job losses, and, potentially, the decimation of the American welfare system, such that it exists.
But, hey: Maybe Rubio will sign up for your newsletter!
Interesting, but my first blush reaction is that he feels free to say what he thinks, more or less, because Donald Trump isn't listening to him anyway.
Trump definitely does not have a high opinion of the state department
Most any department of government. In the case of Rubio, surely Trump doesn't trust any avowal on Rubio's part that he agrees Trump won the 2020 election, which I suspect is the fundamental test of whether or not Trump accepts you in his tiny inner circle. It's possible he let Rubio into his cabinet (in a job Trump had no respect for anyway) for some idea about Florida politics that is stuck in his head. Just guessing.
Some people seem to be misunderstanding the focus of this article, which is not about political opinion, but about media literacy and analysis. He is reviewing the tone, candor, and setting that Rubio chose to convey his statements—not whether he was “right” or not. The point being that this approach provides more transparency than the “assumed” transparency of the previous administration.
This ties into a larger issue, where people like Jeffries and other Dem insiders claim they are doing good work for the American people, but the message isn’t getting through. By examining this interview, there are potential lessons for Dems who hope to win an election in the future (lol). Does it mean everything Rubio said was authentic? No. But the impression he gave off was authentic, which is a part of image development that Dems struggle with.
Yes, people who are highly religious have an extremely hard time admitting that anything even peripherally related to something that would undermine their beliefs could be at all true.
I don't know how much I can stand to read about this anymore. None of these people are at all trustworthy. And something very clearly in our domestic national interest would be responding to the Ebola outbreak in Africa. USAID is not all bad, just like it's not all good. I can't read anymore.
I agree parts of USAID are good! What makes you think otherwise?
Yes! Some of USAID’s work is important
And some of it is a cover for US propaganda, regime change, and subversion of free speech. Which is the main goal?
Michael Shallenberger is reporting on questionable USAID activities that undermine democracy here in the US.
I am skeptical that this signals a change for the better for journalism. I think the power imbalance is too high. This interview happened because they knew the interviewer was friendly. I am also skeptical that it wasn't rehearsed in some way.
Ken, your willingness to forgive bypassing democratic process is disturbing. You say Rubio's statements are the basis of a conversation, but they cut the programs. They fired the people already. Where do you think that conversation should take place? In the oval office? I think that conversation should happen in Congress, and it should happen before people get fired. You talk about hard working regular Americans. Who do you think got fired? Oh, right, bureaucrats. Well, they must not matter.
Doesn't matter what he is saying or how. Not a trustworthy figure.
Just a new way of 'gaslighting' the people.
There is no evidence that COVID-19 came from a Chinese "lab leak", nor has there been an intermediate animal identified that infected humans with the virus.
However like SARS and MERS before it and based on epidemiological and genetic evidence the most likely scenario is that COVID-19 has zoonotic origins at the Wuhan Wholesale Market. This is the current scientific consensus, not that some Chinese dude walked out of a Level-4 lab and spread a global pandemic that China now needs to be "held accountable for".
What Rubio said is only marginally better than "the Chinese created a virus to attack us" that many Republicans unequivocally say they believe absent any evidence (including Rubio's boss Donald Trump) but his "lack of hemming and hawing" delivery doesn't make it any more true.
Uncertainty in science isn't a political opinion, nor is it refreshing that a politician lies about that uncertainty to push an obvious political agenda.
While I appreciate your comments that Rubio was more "human" and responsive in this interview, I'd push back and say that it's much easier to do in the American version of a state-compliant journalistic format. Do you, Klip, believe he'd respond with the same level of "asshole-unclenched" (i.e., colloquial) manner in the face of an intellectually-combative journalist? For example, if Emma Vigeland sat with Rubio for The Majority Report on X, do you honestly believe he'd answer her questions in the same manner? Imo, it ain't the format, homie, it's the questions...AND...(big reveal) the fucking medium, yo! (とりあえず、love your work).
Well, you've committed the cardinal sin. You complimented a form of interview that allows for nuance and demands full answers but it was the wrong team sitting there! Never mind that what he said makes perfect sense and I'm glad to know they are thinking about these issues in a reasonable way. Hope you don't get kicked out of the club. I appreciate you.
Thanks, this is a really good article. I’ll try to check out the “recording”. Rubio sounds like he recognizes some troubling strategic realities and is trying not to appear a zealot.
To me the Trump administration is going to be transactional diplomacy and whether Rubio likes it or not he’s going to follow suit. That’s not all bad, however. Trump is moving the ball forward, whereas Biden was playing hide and seek. I guess we get to find out if the deal maker can lead the USA to success or just fractured relationships.
Nice job. Thanks for relaying the information. I concur on the long form format being superior to the soundbite and gotcha approach. I suppose gotcha journalism can be done in long form. Maybe I'm mistaken, but I presume it would be more difficult to pull off.
With regard to this comment board. I am finding the reflexive 'the cup must be half empty' view many folks are taking here humorous. It's okay to give Marco or the Administration a lukewarm compliment occasionally. You can still hate them the other 99.9% of the time.
EDIT: I changed 'full' to 'empty'. I apologize for any confusion caused by my rather egregious mistyping of my thoughts may have caused. I meant to say it's okay to occasionally provide Trump et. al. a lukewarm compliment.
thanks for this. i would have missed it. really interesting.
Thanks for reporting on the communication change. The decoder ring I used was that the exact opposite would happen of the humanitarian response Blinken was pretending to uphold.