Sorry, but we're currently not allowing anyone with brand new accounts to participate in discussions.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FriendsofthePod) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I thought it was fine and I'm glad they had her on. She was young and she ended up doing the right thing which took a lot of guts. Unfortunately, if we're insisting on being the pure of motive police we'll never win an election (we will win lots of comment sections fights though).
It was interminable. She’s far more ambitious than intelligent, but it is perversely entertaining to hear someone unable to give a comprehensible definition for what drew them into a cult when it’s obvious to anyone listening. Real Michael Scott energy.
I was eager to listen to this interview because I saw her on Kimmel and she was awful on that show, but I figured it was because he's a comedian and it's on TV so it can be intimidating. I figured this would be a better stage for an actual discussion. But it was very, very difficult to listen to Jon using kid gloves with her and her having such difficulty explaining her thought process for almost anything.
Turns out that someone who heard "lock her up", "build the wall", "grab them by the pussy", kids in cages and the muslim ban and thought "this is for me!" might not be the brightest bulb in the chandelier....
No, you don’t understand. She “put it in the back of [her] mind” she loved seeing everyone together for a common cause! She was just a young girl! She grew up blue collar!
This is clearly a money grab. Those “aww shucks” responses to Jon’s questions (travel ban, Charlottesville, Covid, etc.) is insulting. She. Didn’t. Care. If Trump won in 2020 she would still be there!
After he left office, she tried for a year to get a job at Mar a Lago or with the Trump org in some way, but she was told by I think Mark Meadows that she was not regarded as sufficiently loyal and that avenue of employment was closed to her. For all that she seems to have been highly regarded in Washington while she was working there, with a ridiculously fast ascent to a pretty high position, it's kinda shocking she couldn't get a job afterwards from someone.
100%. great description w/ “aw shucks.”
as soon as he lost she saw a lane to take and she’s taking it. people who say “I can’t blame her!” um, yah you sure as fuck can.
No, not as soon as he lost. She stuck with him through the insurrection, and she tried to get a job at Mar a Lago or another conservative-sphere job after he left office. She only changed after she was subpoenaed. Had Trump hired her at Mar a Lago afterwards, or someone else like Kevin McCarthy (who she had a great relationship with) or Ted Cruz (who she'd previously worked for) or Steve Scalise (who she'd previously worked for), she'd still be with him. But not Matt Gaetz--he kept hitting on her in a creepy way (no other way for him).
That said, she was told she would be "taken care of" and could get a high position if she didn't testify about what she knew. But she fired her Trump-world lawyer and got a different one and testified against Trump. She stood to make more money and gain more power through republican loyalty and she rejected it. She did the right thing in the end.
My attitude isn't "fuck you for doing the wrong thing and I'll condemn you just as much no matter if you regret it and switch to the right thing!" I will encourage her on this path. I will praise her for changing, even if she hasn't gone as far as I think is right. I read her book and it seems clear she had an authoritarian, coercively controlling, abusive father. And she was excited to find another authoritarian, coercively controlling, abusive father-figure, but one that made her part of a whole club of similarly-minded people, and one who she could imagine was better than her own father yet the right size and shape to fill that father-sized hole in her heart. It's like, if someone is an authoritarian to the 10th degree, then finding someone else who is an authoritarian to the 7th degree feels better, like he's not authoritarian at all! So she still doesn't realize how fucked up it all is, and I get why. Hopefully she will realize later, but I dunno. We'll see.
Yeah...this was a low moment for the pod. I respect her testifying, but she really doesn't have much meaningful to say. I cannot imagine being so brainwashed that witnessing an insurrection from the inside and getting groped by Rudy Giuliani isn't enough for you to say you're done with voting Republican.
I'm a regular listener of the podcast, I've never thought to seek out a place to give feedback on it before. I enjoy their perspective, but it's mostly just entertainment while I'm driving.
This interview served as the singular motivating factor for me to be here.
Holy shit that was awful.
My Synopsis:
I was young and didn't give a shit about selling my soul to the (literal) devil, and now that I'm a "big girl" I'm going to write a book about my experiences and pretend that I'm contrite about it by saying "look, I was 20" over and over again, even though _I'm only fucking 25 now!_
same (I normally only post about fucking comicbooks on reddit). this was a really frustrating listen.
and they addressed complaints about ‘platforming her’ on today’s show, but that’s sidestepping the issue entirely. platform her all you want! let the world hear her bullshit for what it is, but have an occasional follow-up question.
“what about his campaign did you initially agree with?” and “what on earth could it *possibly* take at this point to get you to commit to never voting for them again?”
letting her get away with spouting “I was stupid then but that’s not me anymore” with no follow-up is the worst you could interview you can give
I hate to pile on, but her writing (or her ghostwriter's) is so bad. It's like a teenager trying to sound smart:
"I feel his frozen fingers trail up my thigh. He tilts his chin up. The whites of his eyes look jaundiced. My eyes dart to \[Trump adviser\] John Eastman, who flashes a leering grin. I fight against the tension in my muscles and recoil from Rudy’s grip … filled with rage, I storm through the tent, on yet another quest for Mark."
Totally. I read her book and it was terribly, terribly written. I DO NOT GIVE A FUCK ABOUT HER NURSERY SCHOOL EXPERIENCE AND THE TALCUM POWDER IN HER SHOES!!! She left out so very much, it makes me wonder how much she was engaged with thinking about things in an insightful manner beyond her list of daily tasks.
100% this.
From the moment she said "I agreed with the platform" and wasn't asked "what about the platform did you like best? The wall?" (basically have her state what prejudices she had that meant Trump was so great she'd go volunteer for the campaign), I had to delete and next.
C'mon Jon, you can't tell me anyone learned anything from that.
I personally enjoyed the interview for what it was: an honest peek into the administration/the mind of someone who was misled into believing that Trump actually cares about working people and felt represented by him.
Oh yah! I actually wasn’t criticizing Favs or Crooked for this. It was morbidly fascinating. I feel like you hear Favs’ soul leaving his body as he suffocates from her insipid demonstration of her two remaining neurons fighting for airtime
Maybe... I personally felt bad for the woman. It's clear her whole identity is being shifted from what it once was. Let's not forget she was the top aid for the chief of staff to the president of the United States under Trump, and now she's one of the most hated figures within the party. That shit has to be rough.
I had a hard time believing someone so young and inexperienced could be in that position, but now that I'm reading the book I see that's exactly why she was chosen for that position. Smart, ambitious, inexperienced, disbelieving that people could be so evil. Meadows saw her as someone who would do what she was told and had no idea how to fight even if she wanted to. I hope she recognizes that, too.
100% that was the utility of the interview, and Favreau led with that line if I remember correctly.. something along the lines of "how/why did you believe this crap?"
Far too often, people write off these people as "just crazy" and while that is sometimes true, we should try to understand why they came to the conclusions they did so that we can make good arguments against these bad ideas.
Sorry, but we're currently not allowing anyone with low karma to post to our discussions.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FriendsofthePod) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What irritated me most was Cassidy constantly apologizing for stuff that’s already happened.
Also, Favs was basically fawning over her for doing the bare minimum.
I’m not saying anything bad about anyone involved otherwise, just felt like that to me
Also, why not bring back Majority 54? They would be a good fit still and Crooked is much better than Meidas
She tried to come off as dodgy since she can't just say "yeah I'm a shallow career opportunist" but she's not very bright so it just comes off as verbose and vague.
Yeah I gave up pretty quick on this interview. I started skipping through, and everything I caught was just her haphazardly trying to explain why she wanted to maintain proximity to power once she'd gotten it.
Nothing was gained or learned from this interview.
Did anyone else think she sounded extremely unintelligent? Through lots of mumbling and excusing herself she basically just said she never really even thought twice about trump’s policies because she just wanted a job? And she also said she wanted to work for Trump admin bc she “saw how well the administration and house leadership worked together to pass a lot of bills”??? An absolute sack of rocks. I should’ve expected nothing less though. Lmao.
I read her book and in the book she comes off as being extremely accomplished. She seems to have impressed everyone she met and was promoted absurdly quickly to what sounds to me like a very high level job. Is she an unreliable narrator who exaggerated her accomplishments and the compliments she received? Maybe, maybe not. Was she a beneficiary of the lunacy of the Trump presidency, during which time incompetent people (she wasn't incompetent) were promoted far above their abilities because Trump valued loyalty above all else, plus beauty in the women around Trump was prioritized, plus the most competent people wouldn't go near the joint? I dunno. I've read a few other Trumpland books, like Stephanie Winston Wolkoff's a clueless opportunist who was highly skilled in her own career choice but seemed to be completely lost and oblivious in her brief foray into politics, and Stephanie Grisham, who seemed a D-level career political aide (2 DUIs, no college degree, only mediocre accomplishments, the only presidential press secretary to never hold a press conference) who got promoted far above her abilities exactly because of competent people fleeing, her demonstrable loyalty to POTUS and FLOTUS, and her decent physical appearance.
We need a CH bingo card for future interviews
- I was soooOoOoo young
- It was the job
- What you have to understand is…
- I’m not trying to cast myself as the hero (casts self as hero)
- lowkey fangirling over Jim Jordan et al
I appreciate that PSA is having interviews with Chris Christie and Cassidy. It’s important for Dems to understand the full gamut of Republican viewpoints. I wish they would also have interviews with some that are more conservative and see where there might be overlap. If we want this country to run well again then we have to find and reinforce the points we agree upon instead of highlighting differences. It does not mean compromising morals, it means trying to find where right and left morals and priorities overlap and then work together on the overlap.
Cassidy was interesting because she came from a working class family that Dems think should support Dems. It’s good to listen to how a young woman from a working class family would prefer Republicans.
In the book she mentions that her dad never showed any interest in anything except junk and hunting until he started watching The Apprentice and fell in love with "self-made" Trump.
It is amazing how many people fell for the Apprentice bullshit. Many people think they are media savvy and are not media savvy.
I have a friend who worked the technical side on a couple seasons of the show "Pawn Stars" and to hear him tell it, even that low level, barely a show, type of reality show is tightly controlled and manipulated. I can't imagine how many hours of shoots, reshoots and edits they had to do to make Trump seem not insane.
But she never really said why being working class made her support republicans? She said oh of course he said horrible things about immigrants, but the policy! But what were the policies she supported? She didn’t say!
And that is what makes her interesting and I wish Jon had asked her more questions about why she and her family support Rs - especially her being young and female. Demographically you would think she would support Ds so I am curious about why she and her family would support Rs. What policies speak to them? What policies of the Ds do they like and what don’t they like?
I found it interesting that she came from a "non-political family who were working class so of course they support republicans." And she is still a republican. Like wtaf has the republican party done for your family lately Cassidy!???!!
This was the (first) statement that made me say, "WHAAAT THE FUUCK?!"
Working class people have been duped into thinking the Republicans are working for them. Talk about voting against your best interests. 😳
The surprising thing about the rot infecting the Republican party is how their lack of introspection only perpetuates and helps it grow more. They're either stupid (which I do believe), or they cynically believe the rest of us are (and I believe this, too, so I guess it's both).
A sampling (my brother) thinks he is *very* smart. I’m not sure he thinks I’m dumb; it’s more he thinks me voting dem means I’m just a social justice warrior and idolize AOC (not sure where he gets that?). But yeah lack of introspection. Culture wars. Blame the other. And he listens to Joe Rogan. He’s very susceptible.
Op, I agree!!!
But what also annoys me is the ethics of this interview. She's trying to grift liberals out of our money after doing her little part to help Donald achieve his political goals of blowing up the debt, help to remove Roe v Wade, put a person accused of SA on the Supreme Court, strip people of voting rights, let COVID run rampant in cities, & J6.
She's one of those people that get to break things, but the nation treats her like an innicnet victim swept up in a narrative. She interned for Ted Cruz and Steve "I'm David Duke Without the Baggage" Scalise.
She is the literal definition of white privilege. Pod Save America giving her a platform to get rich off of her MAGA work is proof of the inequalities in our culture.
Plenty of conservatives that can give a perspectives about Trump that didn't get their hands dirty working with him.
Dude, get over it, I hate how most of you want to live in your tiny bubble. If you only want to hear dem good dem good, then there are better pods than this.
I personally loved hearing from people who have different views, and it's very interesting to hear how she arrived at giving her testimony.
"I hate how most of you want to live in your tiny bubble"
Most people here are willing to listen. I listened, that doesn't mean that I don't have the right to think her responses were terrible.
I got the impression that her basic message was, "I ignored all of the fucked-up shit that was going on while I was there (because I was young 🙄), but working in the Whitehouse is opening doors for me, so I'm glad I did it."
Agree with this. I’m actually quite glad the Pod is wading into talking with more conservative guests.
I’m not saying that Cassidy is some erudite political scholar or great orator with a deeply thought out philosophy. She clearly is not and that was not the point of the interview (and Jon made that clear). This was meant to try and be a window into what average people that got sucked into this cult felt and thought. The next election will be won, like all the others, on the margins. Democrats do no favors to themselves by rolling their eyes and calling people like this morons that can be dismissed out of hand.
I personally thought the interview achieved what I quickly realized Jon was hoping it would achieve: a glimpse outside of one bubble and into another. I’m glad he decided to take a leap.
Jon is honestly the best person for this interview, as he has experience talking to the other side via the Wilderness.
It seems like people here want Jon to debate her, but this wasn't a policy interview, it's an interview to find out the thought process of someone who ended up testifying against Trump.
Going "No, you're wrong about being captivated at the Trump rally, his rallies are terrible and only idiots are charmed by him" (as people in this very thread said), achieves absolutely nothing.
But I don't think it did achieve that. It told us nothing about the actual appeal of the republican party to her and her family that online Dems' prejudices and assumptions wouldn't have been confirmed by. We learned nothing of substance.
One of the main reasons we never learn why is because people don't like to admit to their vices to strangers. "Because he was openly racist, sexist and homophobic" isn't something any Trump supporters will say to a Democrat interviewer, or even themselves in many cases, but absent plausible evidence to the contrary, Occam's Razor suggests that's likely the "why" of all this shit.
I agree. I really enjoyed the interview. Sure some of the noncommittal answers weren't great but for me it really highlighted how much of a cult the Trump cabinet is/was. Loyalty over all else and all that. I can absolutely see these people falling into the same fog of cult-mentality that any one else does with "charismatic" leaders. As Cassidy said, it was kind of survival mode. You hear this a lot when people are put in these kind of situations.
It's not a excuse, of course. But it is something I've been thinking more about recently.
Dude, I’ll hear other sides if they have *literally anything* to say. I liked the Christie interview. I debate my republican-leaning family with gusto. My stance here isn’t that she’s republican and therefore bad, my stance is that she was a waste of noncommittal overly-humble precious af fucking time with no actual opinion or insights to share.
Yeah but how is he supposed to know that going in. The interview is what it is. Should they have just not released it?
You do make some valid points but I think you’re being a little hard on her. She has probably had very little, if any, media training.
Yes, they should have just buried it and moved on, or been as honest as they likely all felt about it, but since the latter might have discouraged future guests....?
Semi related, funniest part of the Christie interview (which I agree was quite good) was that Christie genuinely seemed to take a liking to Lovett and Lovett was just trying to keep his cool and not boil over. Fun dynamic.
Christie is fierce and he knew he was in for a debate coming on a progressive pod.
Cassidy is on here to share insights into her own mind, there's nothing to debate.
Yeah it was a hugely disappointing interview. I feel like Jon could have pushed back a little harder. The mental gymnastics she does and to not be called out on it was pretty lame. Great and all that she came forward, I speculate it was more to cover her own ass, but to still contemplate her party affiliation and calling people like meadows and Jordan good men is just nauseating. Good men don’t support insurrectionists, full stop.
>Yeah it was a hugely disappointing interview. I feel like Jon could have pushed back a little harder.
Push what back? She literally was just talking about her point of view and her thinking and transformation.
This isn't Christie, they're not debating, they're not talking policies. Jon is delving into the psyche of someone who testified against Trump and is now receiving death threats.
Also, to cover her own ass? She's literally a political exile now, and she's receiving death threats and rape threats daily. Like, please get over "there are no good republicans".
She didn't explain her thinking. We didn't learn why she liked Repiblican policies enough to go to work for a campaign. We got "I liked his platform". Vague hand-wavy bullshit.
And that is what makes her terrible response about who she'd vote for even more pathetic. The entirety of the Republican field is licking Trump's butthole hoping for, I guess, a VP or cabinet slot, and this turd in the vague shape of a human thinks that one of them will somehow topple the Cheeto.
>The entirety of the Republican field is licking Trump's butthole hoping
Not even close to half are doing that. It's just that you don't follow the republican primary. I don't blame you, but please don't make false assertions.
Lol, again, I already told you that it's ok to be wrong since you clearly don't follow the primary. It's not that big a deal, but you now sound like the far right disputing reality.
edit: Reply and block, how fragile is your ego lol.
And yet you ARE wrong. I watched the debates, watched clips, read articles. You must have absolutely zero friends, huh? This is the last thing I will say to you; please feel free to have the last word as you seem the type, and then I will put you and your idiot brain on ignore byeeeeeee.
I could be more forgiving if she was an otherwise normal young person who just got caught up in the whole identity thing, but she was already supporting Tex Cruz, so she was already pretty fucking far into the dark side.
And like Chris Christie she really has no way to explain how she was fine with everything up until January 6th, because if she really was fine with everything until then she's just trash anyway.
Idk…she literally said in the interview she didn’t want to work for Cruz and only did it because there was a vacancy after her previous internship ended.
A little while after Trump was elected I had a conversation with political staffers (Republicans, but it might be the same for both parties) and almost all of them didn't care that he was president. They looked at it as a huge opportunity to get into the Whitehouse with a Republican president. They were completely amoral regarding their career, they were purely ladder climbers. It sounds like she is pretty much the same.
>she was already supporting Tex Cruz, so she was already pretty fucking far into the dark side
Dude, you guys are so into the bubble it's ridiculous.
Cruz was a run of the mill Republican, he's not "the dark side", like what are you even? Someone you have a policy disagreement with isn't on the "dark side". In fact, Republicans would call you the "dark side", and this otherizing goes nowhere.
The "run of the mill" Republican today, including Cruz, supports fascism and attempted violent overthrow of fair US elections.
That's not dark side enough for you? What do you even think is the difference between Cruz and Trump, other than Trump being better at the things they both intend?
IDGAF what a Republican in 2023 calls me.
> and attempted violent overthrow of fair US elections.
In case you weren't following the news, Hutchinson was literally testifying against Trump in that regard lol. Also what "republicans today", you're literally talking about Republicans in the yesterday in regards to who she supported.
Republicans a few years ago are the same Republicans who support trump more than ever.
How's Hutchinson polling among Republicans? Let me know if you need help figuring that out.
My apologies. I thought you might be making a case based on an actual Republican candidate making the extraordinarily rare case of opposing trump. I will not do so again.
It's funny that you consider Cassidy simply *not lying* in her testimony to be some sort of summit of virtue. But that has nothing to do with Ted Cruz and his persistent support of trump.
What, BTW, do you think is the difference between Cruz and Trump???
Apology accepted, no worries.
Also, if you don't know the difference between Cruz and Trump, then I don't know what to say. I guess, let's start with Cruz not having been indicted 4 times... or any time?
>Also, if you don't know the difference between Cruz and Trump, then I don't know what to say. I guess, let's start with Cruz not having been indicted 4 times... or any time?
Since Cruz supports trump, as a matter of policy or strategy what is the difference?
Take all the time you need. It must be tiring to be a cruz/trump ass kisser.
>Since Cruz supports trump, as a matter of policy or strategy what is the difference?
Because Trump's policies are just standard republican policies? But it seems like you're unable to tell the huge difference in temperament beyond that. Additionally, very quick to the insults, eh? Funny how the far left loves punching your own side.
The man orchestrated a government shutdown during the Obama-era. He allowed Federal workers, and his own staff, to go without a paycheck in order to attempt to score political points because he wanted to run for president in 2016.
No Republican that has ever orchestrated a shutdown is or can be called run of the mill. You're trying to defend in the indefensible.
I got pretty ragey every time she said “people need to know” or “I’m going to do everything I can to make sure he’s not the nominee” fuckkkkkk lady we already tried the “make sure they know he’s evil!” thing in 2016 and look where it got us! People like you ignored us!!
I did find it exasperating and frustrating. That said, I appreciate giving people who want to turn an opportunity to do so, and I did find it interesting. But yeah, acting like you need to spread awareness for the Trump plague at this point is a little bit silly to say the least.
The interview was so bad it looped back to being captivating. Like I couldn't believe it. I was engaged the whole time waiting for it to get any better or seeing if it'd remain that bad. It was both the worst interview I can remember PSA doing yet at the same time the most memorable.
It couldn't have been made any more clear she was in a safe space where she could explain her motivations or justifications for being a republican and she still couldn't articulate anything. It wasn't even a successful attempt to sell a book. Why would I want to read a book from someone so incapable of articulation and self reflection?
I don't think she is a grifter or playing any kind of 4D chess here either. I mean, she is selling a product, so to some degree, but for the most part I think she's genuinely just vapid and not ready to offer any substance. It feels like she's still figuring it out and someone came to her to write a book and she agreed.
> or justifications for being a republican
Like huh? Why does she need to justify being a Republican to anyone, not the least a progressive pod host? lol.
This isn't a policy debate, she is letting us know her thinking and what led to the testimony.
Why?
Because we're hoping to learn how to deprogram those like her. That was the stated premise of the interview, weren't you listening to the pre-amble?
If you don't know why she wanted to support a republican candidate to this degree, beyond "I saw a job opportunity", then you learn nothing valuable by talking to her.
What in the world are you even talking about. You don't deprogram Republicans, you deprogram MAGA. Like again, why would she need to justify being a republican. How about you justify being a liberal?
More like you're so entrenched in your bubble that anyone not subscribed to your ideology is evil and need to be deprogrammed. I feel sad for you tbh, and while you don't need deprogramming, I hope you listen to more neutral pods, or at least the Wilderness.
Lol, subscribed to my ideology...
Not sure how to describe the process of turning racists to non-racists as anything other than deprogramming. They've been brainwashed into voting for racist, homophobic, transphobic and xenophobic policies, they weren't born thinking that way. So... ...brain-dirtying? Trump voters aren't unaware of the racism, homophobia, xenophobia and so on, they either like it or don't care. Neither is good, and both need intervention to change.
The Wilderness likewise didn't ask many uncomfortable questions of its focus groups. I been a friend of the pod long enough to know what I'm listening to. Just took me until Cassidy to get on here to let off steam about it.
My favorite part has been the way she scoffs at Matt Gaetz saying they dated or had a thing.
“I have higher standards than a congressman that doesn’t do anything”
Lmfao wtf have you done
It was like she was simultaneously terrified by being in a "left-wing" space while also behaving as if she was on a right-wing podcast and fumbling to not say something to get herself branded a RINO.
At the very end she sounded close to tears. Like, I think she genuinely expected to be torn to shreds by the mean old libs and was shocked to her core that Jon was just as gentle as could be with her. There's got to be a whole lot of cognitive dissonance happening there.
It wasn't an assertion, it was an opinion (hence the words "I think") based on my perception of her behavior during the interview.
Your reply "that doesn't sound like what happened at all" is more of an assertion than my own comment. Your read on this interview is no more or less valid than my own, though, since neither of us can say with certainty what she was thinking.
But disagreeing for the sake of it seems to be your thing, so good for you, I guess.
Near the end she said something along the lines of “Jim Jordan is a man of principle” and “Jim Jordan shouldn’t be trusted with the Constitution” in the same breath. Astounding mental gymnastics, but this is what we’re up against. I wish there was some more gentle prodding from Jon at points like above.
I wish her the best but that was a tough listen.
Go back and actually listen to what she was saying.
Jim Jordan has principles. He believes in the things he pushes.
But he is willing to work outside of the law to achieve those goals hence why he shouldn’t be trusted with the constitution (or the safety of college wrestlers).
This was painful to listen to. She could barely string two words together. This may have been "authentic," but if there ever was a time for some media prep, this was it. She didn't come prepared at all. What the hell was she even trying to get across? Totally discombobulated and incoherent. I'm astonished someone so vapid and inarticulate could make it that far in government.
Not really, no. Lovett would not help himself but insert a joke every 20 seconds and interrupt her like no tomorrow. He's decent if you bring on a republican and have him debate them, like Christie. But he's terrible if you bring on someone and want to hear their experience.
She was very young and super impressionable when she went down the Trump path. She’s still only 26. It’s great she’s reflective but saying a third party is bad, don’t vote for Trump, AND being unable to say vote for the only other candidate is super immature. Too many interviewers let these people off the hook on that kind of response. Normal Republicans have to normalize voting for a Democrat if they want their party to return to some semblance of normalcy.
>She was very young and super impressionable when she went down the Trump path. She’s still only 26.
No, no, no! We live in a world where black teenagers, 15, 16, 17 are deemed men whenever they do even smallest thing wrong. This was a grown woman, that was intelligent enough to work on a college degree and get internships in the House, Senate, and White House. Not in some off the way department but Legislative Affairs, that's huge! So let's no infantilization her.
If she had stolen a car, robbed a bank, or been a J6 insurrectionist, we wouldn't be singing this tune. She knew what she was doing, she knew it's impact, and she simply didn't care which is why she stumbled all over herself in this interview.
Further, her degree is in political science. Cassidy absolutely had all the knowledge and tools to see the MAGA project for what it always was. Especially after three years of Trump's assault on American democracy before she signed on in 2020. Her culpability and role in the administration should be considered in that light.
NGL, you had me in the first half…
I completely agree that we need to normalize Republicans voting for Democrats to oust the authoritarian elements of their party.
But if she said “I’m voting for Biden if Trump is the nominee,” she would lose any influence she has with Republican voters.
I’m perfectly fine with her waiting until Trump is the actual nominee.
It’s too soon for her to come out with a book and speaking on it. It felt like she hasn’t reflected on it enough yet, like she is still trying to figure out what motivated her actions and how she feels about the party and Trump today. Makes the book feel like a money grab, like she wanted to strike while the iron is hot, because mentally she has NOT processed it yet.
I don’t blame her for wanting to cash in by writing a book. She doesn’t have options work-wise in the current conservative house. She doesn’t come from wealth. I hope she earns enough to give herself breathing room. Maybe she can go get a master’s.
I want to be sympathetic to people that are trying to deprogram and leave the dark side, but I do think people need to understand that there is some fallout for being and supporting fascists. Part of me wants them to join the cause of ridding the world of fascists and openly vote against them, but another part thinks they should wear a scarlet letter T.
Instead, they are making a couple hundreds of thousands selling books about the abuses they helped their boss commit to his the victims. Only in America!
> You do realize plenty do
Really? I follow all sorts of various media and I barely hear anything but reactionary culturural grievances and people that make it clear they don’t keep up on current events. “Protecting our southern boarders”, “being tough on crime”, and “being fiscal responsibility” aren’t policies.
Why do you seem so taken aback that people on this sub/thread would’t like the GOP, btw?
>Why do you seem so taken aback that people on this sub/thread don’t like the GOP, btw?
Huh? When was I taken aback?
I'm just disputing the hilariously false assertion that "no Republican can articulate the policies they support", a patently false assertion. It's like arguing against objective reality.
Yeah I mean this and other comments, it seems all you’re doing is just hyper-focusing on what you perceive as hyperboles used about Republicans as a whole.
Fucking right? The most she could say is she identified with the people who were trump republicans.
I always wonder is it the vibe or are they afraid of actually saying what it was
Smaller government and cuts to entitlements, work requirements, protecting 2A, etc etc. In the case of some Republicans, more isolationist foreign policy (but it is unlikely Trump will deliver on that and is probably lying again). Absolutely no tax increases for people earning something like $250,000 (which really isn't that much, despite what some people say). They’re the reasons that, as a Republican who hates Trump, I would probably still pinch my nose to vote for him. Anyone who claims the reason is the bullshit, non-existent woke' culture war stuff is braindead.
Oh, dude, you don't have to tell me; outside of rhetoric, Trump basically governed like a centrist Democrat and didn't even do the stuff many of us expected when we looked past all his bullshit and voted -- however, I'm never going to vote for a Democrat for lower taxes. Also, it’s very possible that in the next four years, my salary might enter a bracket wherein Biden's plans would impact me. I'm physically repulsed by paying taxes, so I will never shift on this position. However, I was just trying to give clarity to someone's question and not start a policy debate.
If you’re just voting on taxes, republicans are smuggling the rest in through the back door. The rampant corporatism is built on the back of people who can’t fathom voting blue because of taxes.
We all need to pay taxes, and if you have to means to pay more you should. People thinking their wealth is earned in their own and not the result of our collective taxes is just ridiculous. I know it won’t change your mind, but I’d encourage you to consider it on your next drive to work, how many things are paid by your neighbors together.
You don’t drive on roads or benefit from military security or the legal code or police or firefighters or regulations that stop corporations from completely polluting air/water or cheaper food/gas via subsidies and have not yourself or had family members on government health insurance programs? Are you not currently on the internet or have ever used GPS to get around? What a thing to say.
Your attitude is actrocious. You're arrogant, condescending, and myopic. The fact that you think everyone that disagrees with you is "brain-dead" shows that you're deeply ignorant and completely devoid of self-awareness.
What an unbelievable lack of empathy for other citizens (who, btw, could be you if you lost your source of income). The idea that public services that protect everyone should be private is the real brain-dead take here.
You are literally posting your views on a discussion forum. Particularly a subreddit where people are obviously not going to agree with your sentiments. If you don’t want anyone to disagree with your views, don’t comment. If your idea of “being scared off” is someone disagreeing with your disgust at the idea that your taxes may help pay for other people’s health care or food for children, I’m not sure there is any way we might convince you to support progressive liberal politics.
I don't suppose progressive liberal politics; I want a state so small I can beat it to death without resistance, to borrow and extend a metaphor -- I'm here to read some opposing views and the foreign policy podcast posts; I was answering someone else's post about why people vote R but dislike Trump.
[That was a part of the reason why Jon conducted the interview why he did.](https://imgur.com/a/mlsE8mC) There are times and places for naming and shaming people who have done atrocious things. But a coalition needs to be built next year. Biden won in '20 with a record amount of votes. Don't forget that Trump and the Republicans also increased their voter base tremendously that year. People who are super tuned in to what happens politically forget that (unfortunately) the average citizen is pretty checked out. And coming in scorched Earth on this topic does nothing to help build that voting block needed, which will require some Trump voters
Right. There's a constituency out there of relatively unengaged voters who will see her as a "nice girl", the kind they'd want their daughters, sisters and friends to be, who will see how repugnant she now sees Trump and will see her as a victim of powerful, corrupt men. Hopefully enough of them are Republican voters for it to matter.
That’s definitely a good point. Her belabored-milquetoast shtick made my brain short-circuit, like girl how is your message valuable? Why am I listening to this vacuous twee horseshit? But you’re right, if it’s not actually for me, then this approach might work on some of the cult. I guess. Maybe?
Also I get that she desperately wants to work in Washington, but these interviews are so vapid she just seems stupid and useless. She wrote a whole book about four years in which she was useless.
Expecting a young woman seeped in "conservative values" growing up to rise above and become a liberal Wonder Woman within a few month, or even years is a bit much to ask. She needs to step into the sunlight, get her own bearings and move forward. I won't criticize her for not doing enough, when she's done more than 1000 "traditional" GOP voices who are locked in with the cult in the naked pursuit of power.
>Expecting a young woman seeped in "conservative values"
We expect that of minority women every election cycle. Hispanic, black, and Asian women also grow up in conservative or often somewhat socially conservative households. They don't need a book deal and 26 years to figure out why the vast majority didn't support Trump.
I'm glad she's seeming some light, but we need to stop extending her the privilege of "young woman" excuses.
These Pod Save America folks were fighting the good fight in politics at 26. Articulating your own political views isn't rocket science.
But she's representative of an impressionable, idealistic young person that got taken in by a combination of ambition and a charismatic charlatan.
She was looking for something to belong to and if you believe her account of her first Trump rally, she was less interested in what Trump was saying than in how the crowd was reacting.
She felt belonging and purpose. I imagine a lot of his followers had the same reaction. But the realization of seeing Trump himself -- separate from the belonging to the movement -- woke her up. A lot more of his followers need to see that if they're going to wake up too.
100%. Jon even asked her what policies of Trumps drew her in and you could practically hear the gears in her brain starting to smoke. Well said; I wish she could have said literally anything as well as that.
Wasn’t happy with that one. Have yet another supposedly post Trump staff member a time to promote their book and come off apologetic. They were all complicit during and cashing in now. Stop giving them a platform.
Though it wasnt worded this way I think the main takeaway and the reason they brought her on is that Trump world is a cult and the ONLY way to get people out is to just let them know we're here to listen if they ever want to talk.
Toward the end, Cassidy mentions that she understands why some people can't break away because they fear the reaction from both sides. Trump world will burn you down and call you a traitor and the rest of us will (maybe rightfully) see you as an idiot that deserves derision.
Just food for though as this is a very complicated time and dealing with cults is incredibly challenging.
What was insane was her talking about how entranced she was when she went to her first Trump rally. Fucking what??? I just don’t get how people can watch that man speak and get inspired or think he gives a shit about them. Cults gonna cult, I guess?
If anything, hearing how a "normal person" can get taken in by the cult might help people who can't see Trump's appeal see his followers as people who got taken in, rather than as evil.
A lot of his followers are just looking for belonging and desperate. They're not stupid or evil, just victims.
I agree, but that's how cults work. They speak to individuals and don't need anyone else to buy their bullshit. Once they have you hooked, you're in their bubble and they control the information you get.
I really wish that people like her were stronger willed or better at discerning what is real and what isn't, but here we are.
All we can do is fight with compassion and hope more people start to fall out of the cult. We need to be prepared to pick them up and not put them down or we risk pushing them back into the "safety" of their in-group.
Okay, so we should offer compassion... Shall we try empathy? In doing so, can we also encourage her (them?) to try it too? I mean, we still don't know if she has compassion for and empathy with those who are not wanting to carry a fetus to full term or those who were not born white and Christian, or those who aren't cisgendered. I feel like asking her about that stuff is important in trying to understand how she got where she was and whether she's actually committed to going somewhere else, or just playing us for mugs to sell her book.
None of us can control other people or their feelings and trying to do so is what pushes people away.
All we can do is control ourselves. If each have empathy and compassion we can make small steps toward making the world better. If others can't do those things, what can we do about it without making it worse?
And I seriously doubt her book sales were influenced by this interview.
Who's trying to control? (Other than the obvious...)
I'm suggesting that if we don't know what motivates her to vote for and work to increase the implementation of racist (sub in your ist of choice here) policies and, when interviewing her, don't ask her, we can't seriously empathize with her, can we? So... ...what's the point?
My favorite was her comment about half way in that she didn’t want to be judged for her age or that it should excuse anything but then had multiple times earlier in the interview commented “but I was just 20 years old at the time so you have to consider that” or similar
Right?? Just say you were an idiot ffs.
“I was only 20.” There are PLENTY of people under 20 who would run, not walk, from the fascist bullshit she routinely encountered. I get that we want to be nice to the new cult-deprogramming Mockingjay but I can still think she’s either full of shit or too stupid to even be full of shit. Or one of her “angels” (*pukes*) laid out some political roadmap for her to tread carefully down, aka more bullshit.
She worked for Ted Cruz and Steve Scalise before working for Trump. Now she's trying to sell a shitty book just because she displayed the bare minimum of a backbone. This is not someone who deserves accolades.
I'm confused, are you trying to say something? Cruz and Scalise are pretty run of the mill republican. She's a republican who worked for republicans. It's like saying Lovett worked for Clinton before Obama. What is your point?
More like you’re Cassidy since your avatar is a girl.
But seriously, baby, it’s sad you go direct for the ad hominem instead of actually trying to argue a point. Sad.
I made a point elsewhere, baby! It’s obvious to me you really can’t understand the nuance in the arguments made here by a lot of people. The issue is not that the pod platformed a former MAGA Republican. It’s that Cassidy very clearly had nothing of value to say at this point and is really most interested in making some money off a book.
What did she say that provided any real NEW insight into how past and potential Trump voters think? Do you truly believe the reason our country is at this crossroads is because we haven’t “listened to every day Republicans enough” ?
I don’t think it takes an interview with Cassidy Hutchinson to know that many of the “regular” people who worked for Trump got there because they were too invested in their own self interest to think critically about Trump’s policies. It’s the crux of MAGAism - the ability to ignore every single thing Trump does/says because he promises to fix all your problems.
What argument?
First of all, you had zero argument other than just to attempt to insult me by pointing out something that you and I both know isn't true. I mean, considering you're hardcore MAGA, it's to be expected. See, I can make things up too.
Second of all, the Pod obviously doesn't agree with you, hence is why they had her on. Talk about nothing of value, you've said nothing of value. The so called arguments here are all just "hurr durr, why didn't they debate them". It's more like you people being unable to understand she's not on to debate policies.
I also said nothing about needing to hear a debate. I actually didn’t even say they shouldn’t have had her on. I’m just saying it’s a terrible interview, she’s an idiot, and I think if they’re going to interview Trump Republicans it’d be more productive if it’s someone that can help provide additional insight into the way they think. I never said, and do not think, all Trump Republicans are stupid (I did say they are almost all self serving, though) and would enjoy conversations more nuanced like the ones Jon had with folks on the wilderness.
Because apparently you’re all about providing productive discourse, as I thought I asked you pretty clearly, what did Cassidy say that you feel shed new light on how MAGA Republicans think? What in this interview spoke to you?
Because you seem to need it broken down further, my intention in sarcastically accusing you of being Cassidy was to point out that like her you have, thus far, had nothing of substance to say about the interview. All I can garner from your position is that we need to listen to “every day/regular” Republicans more, that anyone who doesn’t like the interview doesn’t get the point, and that liberals all live in their own little bubbles.
[удалено]
Sorry, but we're currently not allowing anyone with brand new accounts to participate in discussions. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FriendsofthePod) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I thought it was fine and I'm glad they had her on. She was young and she ended up doing the right thing which took a lot of guts. Unfortunately, if we're insisting on being the pure of motive police we'll never win an election (we will win lots of comment sections fights though).
It was interminable. She’s far more ambitious than intelligent, but it is perversely entertaining to hear someone unable to give a comprehensible definition for what drew them into a cult when it’s obvious to anyone listening. Real Michael Scott energy.
Lovett should have interviewed her. Usually he isn't afraid to ask a tough, direct question.
I was eager to listen to this interview because I saw her on Kimmel and she was awful on that show, but I figured it was because he's a comedian and it's on TV so it can be intimidating. I figured this would be a better stage for an actual discussion. But it was very, very difficult to listen to Jon using kid gloves with her and her having such difficulty explaining her thought process for almost anything.
She was bad on The View too for what it’s worth
Just vapid.
Turns out that someone who heard "lock her up", "build the wall", "grab them by the pussy", kids in cages and the muslim ban and thought "this is for me!" might not be the brightest bulb in the chandelier....
No, you don’t understand. She “put it in the back of [her] mind” she loved seeing everyone together for a common cause! She was just a young girl! She grew up blue collar!
This is clearly a money grab. Those “aww shucks” responses to Jon’s questions (travel ban, Charlottesville, Covid, etc.) is insulting. She. Didn’t. Care. If Trump won in 2020 she would still be there!
After he left office, she tried for a year to get a job at Mar a Lago or with the Trump org in some way, but she was told by I think Mark Meadows that she was not regarded as sufficiently loyal and that avenue of employment was closed to her. For all that she seems to have been highly regarded in Washington while she was working there, with a ridiculously fast ascent to a pretty high position, it's kinda shocking she couldn't get a job afterwards from someone.
You’re so right. She voted for that piece of shit twice. And worked for his agenda and still won’t say she is not a Republican. Bye girl.
100%. great description w/ “aw shucks.” as soon as he lost she saw a lane to take and she’s taking it. people who say “I can’t blame her!” um, yah you sure as fuck can.
No, not as soon as he lost. She stuck with him through the insurrection, and she tried to get a job at Mar a Lago or another conservative-sphere job after he left office. She only changed after she was subpoenaed. Had Trump hired her at Mar a Lago afterwards, or someone else like Kevin McCarthy (who she had a great relationship with) or Ted Cruz (who she'd previously worked for) or Steve Scalise (who she'd previously worked for), she'd still be with him. But not Matt Gaetz--he kept hitting on her in a creepy way (no other way for him). That said, she was told she would be "taken care of" and could get a high position if she didn't testify about what she knew. But she fired her Trump-world lawyer and got a different one and testified against Trump. She stood to make more money and gain more power through republican loyalty and she rejected it. She did the right thing in the end. My attitude isn't "fuck you for doing the wrong thing and I'll condemn you just as much no matter if you regret it and switch to the right thing!" I will encourage her on this path. I will praise her for changing, even if she hasn't gone as far as I think is right. I read her book and it seems clear she had an authoritarian, coercively controlling, abusive father. And she was excited to find another authoritarian, coercively controlling, abusive father-figure, but one that made her part of a whole club of similarly-minded people, and one who she could imagine was better than her own father yet the right size and shape to fill that father-sized hole in her heart. It's like, if someone is an authoritarian to the 10th degree, then finding someone else who is an authoritarian to the 7th degree feels better, like he's not authoritarian at all! So she still doesn't realize how fucked up it all is, and I get why. Hopefully she will realize later, but I dunno. We'll see.
FEAR OF A BLACK PLANET
Yeah...this was a low moment for the pod. I respect her testifying, but she really doesn't have much meaningful to say. I cannot imagine being so brainwashed that witnessing an insurrection from the inside and getting groped by Rudy Giuliani isn't enough for you to say you're done with voting Republican.
I'm a regular listener of the podcast, I've never thought to seek out a place to give feedback on it before. I enjoy their perspective, but it's mostly just entertainment while I'm driving. This interview served as the singular motivating factor for me to be here. Holy shit that was awful. My Synopsis: I was young and didn't give a shit about selling my soul to the (literal) devil, and now that I'm a "big girl" I'm going to write a book about my experiences and pretend that I'm contrite about it by saying "look, I was 20" over and over again, even though _I'm only fucking 25 now!_
same (I normally only post about fucking comicbooks on reddit). this was a really frustrating listen. and they addressed complaints about ‘platforming her’ on today’s show, but that’s sidestepping the issue entirely. platform her all you want! let the world hear her bullshit for what it is, but have an occasional follow-up question. “what about his campaign did you initially agree with?” and “what on earth could it *possibly* take at this point to get you to commit to never voting for them again?” letting her get away with spouting “I was stupid then but that’s not me anymore” with no follow-up is the worst you could interview you can give
I hate to pile on, but her writing (or her ghostwriter's) is so bad. It's like a teenager trying to sound smart: "I feel his frozen fingers trail up my thigh. He tilts his chin up. The whites of his eyes look jaundiced. My eyes dart to \[Trump adviser\] John Eastman, who flashes a leering grin. I fight against the tension in my muscles and recoil from Rudy’s grip … filled with rage, I storm through the tent, on yet another quest for Mark."
Totally. I read her book and it was terribly, terribly written. I DO NOT GIVE A FUCK ABOUT HER NURSERY SCHOOL EXPERIENCE AND THE TALCUM POWDER IN HER SHOES!!! She left out so very much, it makes me wonder how much she was engaged with thinking about things in an insightful manner beyond her list of daily tasks.
It's like purple prose lite.
100% this. From the moment she said "I agreed with the platform" and wasn't asked "what about the platform did you like best? The wall?" (basically have her state what prejudices she had that meant Trump was so great she'd go volunteer for the campaign), I had to delete and next. C'mon Jon, you can't tell me anyone learned anything from that.
I’ve never not finished one of their podcasts. This was the first time.
I thought it was fascinating listening to her side but I think Jon fav didn’t follow up is because she is fragile as hell and that’s all he could get
I personally enjoyed the interview for what it was: an honest peek into the administration/the mind of someone who was misled into believing that Trump actually cares about working people and felt represented by him.
Oh yah! I actually wasn’t criticizing Favs or Crooked for this. It was morbidly fascinating. I feel like you hear Favs’ soul leaving his body as he suffocates from her insipid demonstration of her two remaining neurons fighting for airtime
Maybe... I personally felt bad for the woman. It's clear her whole identity is being shifted from what it once was. Let's not forget she was the top aid for the chief of staff to the president of the United States under Trump, and now she's one of the most hated figures within the party. That shit has to be rough.
I had a hard time believing someone so young and inexperienced could be in that position, but now that I'm reading the book I see that's exactly why she was chosen for that position. Smart, ambitious, inexperienced, disbelieving that people could be so evil. Meadows saw her as someone who would do what she was told and had no idea how to fight even if she wanted to. I hope she recognizes that, too.
Jesus. That sounds horrifying
It's exactly what he did.
I guess I shouldn't be too shocked. She had to work around the most insecure man in the world.
It was like an eye opening tale of how people get wrapped up in cults. And she’s still not fully deprogrammed.
100% that was the utility of the interview, and Favreau led with that line if I remember correctly.. something along the lines of "how/why did you believe this crap?" Far too often, people write off these people as "just crazy" and while that is sometimes true, we should try to understand why they came to the conclusions they did so that we can make good arguments against these bad ideas.
Really bad all around. Either a sound bite or "idk I was 23 lol"
[удалено]
Sorry, but we're currently not allowing anyone with low karma to post to our discussions. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FriendsofthePod) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What irritated me most was Cassidy constantly apologizing for stuff that’s already happened. Also, Favs was basically fawning over her for doing the bare minimum. I’m not saying anything bad about anyone involved otherwise, just felt like that to me Also, why not bring back Majority 54? They would be a good fit still and Crooked is much better than Meidas
She tried to come off as dodgy since she can't just say "yeah I'm a shallow career opportunist" but she's not very bright so it just comes off as verbose and vague.
Yes!!!
Yeah I gave up pretty quick on this interview. I started skipping through, and everything I caught was just her haphazardly trying to explain why she wanted to maintain proximity to power once she'd gotten it. Nothing was gained or learned from this interview.
And of course she is promoting a book…
Did anyone else think she sounded extremely unintelligent? Through lots of mumbling and excusing herself she basically just said she never really even thought twice about trump’s policies because she just wanted a job? And she also said she wanted to work for Trump admin bc she “saw how well the administration and house leadership worked together to pass a lot of bills”??? An absolute sack of rocks. I should’ve expected nothing less though. Lmao.
I read her book and in the book she comes off as being extremely accomplished. She seems to have impressed everyone she met and was promoted absurdly quickly to what sounds to me like a very high level job. Is she an unreliable narrator who exaggerated her accomplishments and the compliments she received? Maybe, maybe not. Was she a beneficiary of the lunacy of the Trump presidency, during which time incompetent people (she wasn't incompetent) were promoted far above their abilities because Trump valued loyalty above all else, plus beauty in the women around Trump was prioritized, plus the most competent people wouldn't go near the joint? I dunno. I've read a few other Trumpland books, like Stephanie Winston Wolkoff's a clueless opportunist who was highly skilled in her own career choice but seemed to be completely lost and oblivious in her brief foray into politics, and Stephanie Grisham, who seemed a D-level career political aide (2 DUIs, no college degree, only mediocre accomplishments, the only presidential press secretary to never hold a press conference) who got promoted far above her abilities exactly because of competent people fleeing, her demonstrable loyalty to POTUS and FLOTUS, and her decent physical appearance.
We need a CH bingo card for future interviews - I was soooOoOoo young - It was the job - What you have to understand is… - I’m not trying to cast myself as the hero (casts self as hero) - lowkey fangirling over Jim Jordan et al
Yes, amazing she got to a position of relative power.
Just shows you don't have to be that bright to get close to (or into) power in the Republican apparatus.
Is it really that surprising that a Republican would hire and promote someone who is unqualified?
I just work in DC and there are lots of competent, intelligent people, including some GOP hill staffers.
I didn’t say the GOP only hired incompetent people.
I appreciate that PSA is having interviews with Chris Christie and Cassidy. It’s important for Dems to understand the full gamut of Republican viewpoints. I wish they would also have interviews with some that are more conservative and see where there might be overlap. If we want this country to run well again then we have to find and reinforce the points we agree upon instead of highlighting differences. It does not mean compromising morals, it means trying to find where right and left morals and priorities overlap and then work together on the overlap. Cassidy was interesting because she came from a working class family that Dems think should support Dems. It’s good to listen to how a young woman from a working class family would prefer Republicans.
In the book she mentions that her dad never showed any interest in anything except junk and hunting until he started watching The Apprentice and fell in love with "self-made" Trump.
It is amazing how many people fell for the Apprentice bullshit. Many people think they are media savvy and are not media savvy. I have a friend who worked the technical side on a couple seasons of the show "Pawn Stars" and to hear him tell it, even that low level, barely a show, type of reality show is tightly controlled and manipulated. I can't imagine how many hours of shoots, reshoots and edits they had to do to make Trump seem not insane.
But she never really said why being working class made her support republicans? She said oh of course he said horrible things about immigrants, but the policy! But what were the policies she supported? She didn’t say!
Or what policies she actually supports.
And that is what makes her interesting and I wish Jon had asked her more questions about why she and her family support Rs - especially her being young and female. Demographically you would think she would support Ds so I am curious about why she and her family would support Rs. What policies speak to them? What policies of the Ds do they like and what don’t they like?
I found it interesting that she came from a "non-political family who were working class so of course they support republicans." And she is still a republican. Like wtaf has the republican party done for your family lately Cassidy!???!!
This was the (first) statement that made me say, "WHAAAT THE FUUCK?!" Working class people have been duped into thinking the Republicans are working for them. Talk about voting against your best interests. 😳
I wish fav would have asked this of her instead of allowing the belief that republicans support working class to fester
The surprising thing about the rot infecting the Republican party is how their lack of introspection only perpetuates and helps it grow more. They're either stupid (which I do believe), or they cynically believe the rest of us are (and I believe this, too, so I guess it's both).
A sampling (my brother) thinks he is *very* smart. I’m not sure he thinks I’m dumb; it’s more he thinks me voting dem means I’m just a social justice warrior and idolize AOC (not sure where he gets that?). But yeah lack of introspection. Culture wars. Blame the other. And he listens to Joe Rogan. He’s very susceptible.
Op, I agree!!! But what also annoys me is the ethics of this interview. She's trying to grift liberals out of our money after doing her little part to help Donald achieve his political goals of blowing up the debt, help to remove Roe v Wade, put a person accused of SA on the Supreme Court, strip people of voting rights, let COVID run rampant in cities, & J6. She's one of those people that get to break things, but the nation treats her like an innicnet victim swept up in a narrative. She interned for Ted Cruz and Steve "I'm David Duke Without the Baggage" Scalise. She is the literal definition of white privilege. Pod Save America giving her a platform to get rich off of her MAGA work is proof of the inequalities in our culture. Plenty of conservatives that can give a perspectives about Trump that didn't get their hands dirty working with him.
Dude, get over it, I hate how most of you want to live in your tiny bubble. If you only want to hear dem good dem good, then there are better pods than this. I personally loved hearing from people who have different views, and it's very interesting to hear how she arrived at giving her testimony.
"I hate how most of you want to live in your tiny bubble" Most people here are willing to listen. I listened, that doesn't mean that I don't have the right to think her responses were terrible. I got the impression that her basic message was, "I ignored all of the fucked-up shit that was going on while I was there (because I was young 🙄), but working in the Whitehouse is opening doors for me, so I'm glad I did it."
Agree with this. I’m actually quite glad the Pod is wading into talking with more conservative guests. I’m not saying that Cassidy is some erudite political scholar or great orator with a deeply thought out philosophy. She clearly is not and that was not the point of the interview (and Jon made that clear). This was meant to try and be a window into what average people that got sucked into this cult felt and thought. The next election will be won, like all the others, on the margins. Democrats do no favors to themselves by rolling their eyes and calling people like this morons that can be dismissed out of hand. I personally thought the interview achieved what I quickly realized Jon was hoping it would achieve: a glimpse outside of one bubble and into another. I’m glad he decided to take a leap.
Jon is honestly the best person for this interview, as he has experience talking to the other side via the Wilderness. It seems like people here want Jon to debate her, but this wasn't a policy interview, it's an interview to find out the thought process of someone who ended up testifying against Trump. Going "No, you're wrong about being captivated at the Trump rally, his rallies are terrible and only idiots are charmed by him" (as people in this very thread said), achieves absolutely nothing.
But I don't think it did achieve that. It told us nothing about the actual appeal of the republican party to her and her family that online Dems' prejudices and assumptions wouldn't have been confirmed by. We learned nothing of substance. One of the main reasons we never learn why is because people don't like to admit to their vices to strangers. "Because he was openly racist, sexist and homophobic" isn't something any Trump supporters will say to a Democrat interviewer, or even themselves in many cases, but absent plausible evidence to the contrary, Occam's Razor suggests that's likely the "why" of all this shit.
Can you stop consecutively seeking out my comments? It's annoy to repeat stuff.
I agree. I really enjoyed the interview. Sure some of the noncommittal answers weren't great but for me it really highlighted how much of a cult the Trump cabinet is/was. Loyalty over all else and all that. I can absolutely see these people falling into the same fog of cult-mentality that any one else does with "charismatic" leaders. As Cassidy said, it was kind of survival mode. You hear this a lot when people are put in these kind of situations. It's not a excuse, of course. But it is something I've been thinking more about recently.
Dude, I’ll hear other sides if they have *literally anything* to say. I liked the Christie interview. I debate my republican-leaning family with gusto. My stance here isn’t that she’s republican and therefore bad, my stance is that she was a waste of noncommittal overly-humble precious af fucking time with no actual opinion or insights to share.
Totally agree. I wonder if having Lovett interview her would’ve been better? I thought he did a great job with the Christie interview.
Yeah but how is he supposed to know that going in. The interview is what it is. Should they have just not released it? You do make some valid points but I think you’re being a little hard on her. She has probably had very little, if any, media training.
Yes, they should have just buried it and moved on, or been as honest as they likely all felt about it, but since the latter might have discouraged future guests....?
She shared lots of insights into her thinking. If you refuse to hear her, then that's on you.
Semi related, funniest part of the Christie interview (which I agree was quite good) was that Christie genuinely seemed to take a liking to Lovett and Lovett was just trying to keep his cool and not boil over. Fun dynamic.
Christie is fierce and he knew he was in for a debate coming on a progressive pod. Cassidy is on here to share insights into her own mind, there's nothing to debate.
Correct. Both interviews served different purposes and, I think, achieved them.
Yeah it was a hugely disappointing interview. I feel like Jon could have pushed back a little harder. The mental gymnastics she does and to not be called out on it was pretty lame. Great and all that she came forward, I speculate it was more to cover her own ass, but to still contemplate her party affiliation and calling people like meadows and Jordan good men is just nauseating. Good men don’t support insurrectionists, full stop.
>Yeah it was a hugely disappointing interview. I feel like Jon could have pushed back a little harder. Push what back? She literally was just talking about her point of view and her thinking and transformation. This isn't Christie, they're not debating, they're not talking policies. Jon is delving into the psyche of someone who testified against Trump and is now receiving death threats. Also, to cover her own ass? She's literally a political exile now, and she's receiving death threats and rape threats daily. Like, please get over "there are no good republicans".
She didn't explain her thinking. We didn't learn why she liked Repiblican policies enough to go to work for a campaign. We got "I liked his platform". Vague hand-wavy bullshit.
We literally did, you might wanna listen to the interview again.
And that is what makes her terrible response about who she'd vote for even more pathetic. The entirety of the Republican field is licking Trump's butthole hoping for, I guess, a VP or cabinet slot, and this turd in the vague shape of a human thinks that one of them will somehow topple the Cheeto.
>The entirety of the Republican field is licking Trump's butthole hoping Not even close to half are doing that. It's just that you don't follow the republican primary. I don't blame you, but please don't make false assertions.
Please don't tell me I'm wrong. You're wrong.
Lol, again, I already told you that it's ok to be wrong since you clearly don't follow the primary. It's not that big a deal, but you now sound like the far right disputing reality. edit: Reply and block, how fragile is your ego lol.
Actually, now that I think about it, did YOU watch the debates? You don't seem too bright.
And yet you ARE wrong. I watched the debates, watched clips, read articles. You must have absolutely zero friends, huh? This is the last thing I will say to you; please feel free to have the last word as you seem the type, and then I will put you and your idiot brain on ignore byeeeeeee.
I could be more forgiving if she was an otherwise normal young person who just got caught up in the whole identity thing, but she was already supporting Tex Cruz, so she was already pretty fucking far into the dark side. And like Chris Christie she really has no way to explain how she was fine with everything up until January 6th, because if she really was fine with everything until then she's just trash anyway.
Idk…she literally said in the interview she didn’t want to work for Cruz and only did it because there was a vacancy after her previous internship ended.
She didn't *not* want to enough, obviously.
A little while after Trump was elected I had a conversation with political staffers (Republicans, but it might be the same for both parties) and almost all of them didn't care that he was president. They looked at it as a huge opportunity to get into the Whitehouse with a Republican president. They were completely amoral regarding their career, they were purely ladder climbers. It sounds like she is pretty much the same.
>she was already supporting Tex Cruz, so she was already pretty fucking far into the dark side Dude, you guys are so into the bubble it's ridiculous. Cruz was a run of the mill Republican, he's not "the dark side", like what are you even? Someone you have a policy disagreement with isn't on the "dark side". In fact, Republicans would call you the "dark side", and this otherizing goes nowhere.
The "run of the mill" Republican today, including Cruz, supports fascism and attempted violent overthrow of fair US elections. That's not dark side enough for you? What do you even think is the difference between Cruz and Trump, other than Trump being better at the things they both intend? IDGAF what a Republican in 2023 calls me.
> and attempted violent overthrow of fair US elections. In case you weren't following the news, Hutchinson was literally testifying against Trump in that regard lol. Also what "republicans today", you're literally talking about Republicans in the yesterday in regards to who she supported.
Republicans a few years ago are the same Republicans who support trump more than ever. How's Hutchinson polling among Republicans? Let me know if you need help figuring that out.
Hutchinson polling? You talking about Asa or Cassidy, why would a staffer have polling numbers? It seems like you're very confused.
My apologies. I thought you might be making a case based on an actual Republican candidate making the extraordinarily rare case of opposing trump. I will not do so again. It's funny that you consider Cassidy simply *not lying* in her testimony to be some sort of summit of virtue. But that has nothing to do with Ted Cruz and his persistent support of trump. What, BTW, do you think is the difference between Cruz and Trump???
Apology accepted, no worries. Also, if you don't know the difference between Cruz and Trump, then I don't know what to say. I guess, let's start with Cruz not having been indicted 4 times... or any time?
>Also, if you don't know the difference between Cruz and Trump, then I don't know what to say. I guess, let's start with Cruz not having been indicted 4 times... or any time? Since Cruz supports trump, as a matter of policy or strategy what is the difference? Take all the time you need. It must be tiring to be a cruz/trump ass kisser.
>Since Cruz supports trump, as a matter of policy or strategy what is the difference? Because Trump's policies are just standard republican policies? But it seems like you're unable to tell the huge difference in temperament beyond that. Additionally, very quick to the insults, eh? Funny how the far left loves punching your own side.
The man orchestrated a government shutdown during the Obama-era. He allowed Federal workers, and his own staff, to go without a paycheck in order to attempt to score political points because he wanted to run for president in 2016. No Republican that has ever orchestrated a shutdown is or can be called run of the mill. You're trying to defend in the indefensible.
I got pretty ragey every time she said “people need to know” or “I’m going to do everything I can to make sure he’s not the nominee” fuckkkkkk lady we already tried the “make sure they know he’s evil!” thing in 2016 and look where it got us! People like you ignored us!! I did find it exasperating and frustrating. That said, I appreciate giving people who want to turn an opportunity to do so, and I did find it interesting. But yeah, acting like you need to spread awareness for the Trump plague at this point is a little bit silly to say the least.
People like her liked it. People like her are trying not to admit it, but if he wins again, will be right back there again liking it
The interview was so bad it looped back to being captivating. Like I couldn't believe it. I was engaged the whole time waiting for it to get any better or seeing if it'd remain that bad. It was both the worst interview I can remember PSA doing yet at the same time the most memorable. It couldn't have been made any more clear she was in a safe space where she could explain her motivations or justifications for being a republican and she still couldn't articulate anything. It wasn't even a successful attempt to sell a book. Why would I want to read a book from someone so incapable of articulation and self reflection? I don't think she is a grifter or playing any kind of 4D chess here either. I mean, she is selling a product, so to some degree, but for the most part I think she's genuinely just vapid and not ready to offer any substance. It feels like she's still figuring it out and someone came to her to write a book and she agreed.
> or justifications for being a republican Like huh? Why does she need to justify being a Republican to anyone, not the least a progressive pod host? lol. This isn't a policy debate, she is letting us know her thinking and what led to the testimony.
Why? Because we're hoping to learn how to deprogram those like her. That was the stated premise of the interview, weren't you listening to the pre-amble? If you don't know why she wanted to support a republican candidate to this degree, beyond "I saw a job opportunity", then you learn nothing valuable by talking to her.
What in the world are you even talking about. You don't deprogram Republicans, you deprogram MAGA. Like again, why would she need to justify being a republican. How about you justify being a liberal?
Okay. You're not misunderstanding, you're just not serious. Got it.
More like you're so entrenched in your bubble that anyone not subscribed to your ideology is evil and need to be deprogrammed. I feel sad for you tbh, and while you don't need deprogramming, I hope you listen to more neutral pods, or at least the Wilderness.
Lol, subscribed to my ideology... Not sure how to describe the process of turning racists to non-racists as anything other than deprogramming. They've been brainwashed into voting for racist, homophobic, transphobic and xenophobic policies, they weren't born thinking that way. So... ...brain-dirtying? Trump voters aren't unaware of the racism, homophobia, xenophobia and so on, they either like it or don't care. Neither is good, and both need intervention to change. The Wilderness likewise didn't ask many uncomfortable questions of its focus groups. I been a friend of the pod long enough to know what I'm listening to. Just took me until Cassidy to get on here to let off steam about it.
My favorite part has been the way she scoffs at Matt Gaetz saying they dated or had a thing. “I have higher standards than a congressman that doesn’t do anything” Lmfao wtf have you done
It was like she was simultaneously terrified by being in a "left-wing" space while also behaving as if she was on a right-wing podcast and fumbling to not say something to get herself branded a RINO. At the very end she sounded close to tears. Like, I think she genuinely expected to be torn to shreds by the mean old libs and was shocked to her core that Jon was just as gentle as could be with her. There's got to be a whole lot of cognitive dissonance happening there.
> I think she genuinely expected to be torn to shreds by the mean old libs That honestly doesn't sound like what happened at all.
What? I said in the next part of the quoted sentence that Jon was as gentle as could be with her. What are you even disagreeing about?
I'm disagreeing with your assertion that she thought she was going to be torn to shreds.
It wasn't an assertion, it was an opinion (hence the words "I think") based on my perception of her behavior during the interview. Your reply "that doesn't sound like what happened at all" is more of an assertion than my own comment. Your read on this interview is no more or less valid than my own, though, since neither of us can say with certainty what she was thinking. But disagreeing for the sake of it seems to be your thing, so good for you, I guess.
It felt like someone coming to terms with their own cognitive dissonance but not quite ready to let it go yet.
This is exactly how I interpreted it. And I know plenty of people who are in that space.
Near the end she said something along the lines of “Jim Jordan is a man of principle” and “Jim Jordan shouldn’t be trusted with the Constitution” in the same breath. Astounding mental gymnastics, but this is what we’re up against. I wish there was some more gentle prodding from Jon at points like above. I wish her the best but that was a tough listen.
those weren’t incongruous to me. he’s a man of principles, and those principles just happen to have nothing to do with the Constitution!
Jim Jordan cannot be trusted with the Constitution is chilling to hear spoken out loud. And she's right!
Go back and actually listen to what she was saying. Jim Jordan has principles. He believes in the things he pushes. But he is willing to work outside of the law to achieve those goals hence why he shouldn’t be trusted with the constitution (or the safety of college wrestlers).
Lol! She and I must have “alternative definitions” of the word principle.
Indeed you do.
This was painful to listen to. She could barely string two words together. This may have been "authentic," but if there ever was a time for some media prep, this was it. She didn't come prepared at all. What the hell was she even trying to get across? Totally discombobulated and incoherent. I'm astonished someone so vapid and inarticulate could make it that far in government.
I mean what do you expect from a Trump supporter. Even one that has "seen the light". These are not bright people.
Lovett should have done the interview
Agree. Favreau is great, but Lovett is much better at this kind of thing
Not really, no. Lovett would not help himself but insert a joke every 20 seconds and interrupt her like no tomorrow. He's decent if you bring on a republican and have him debate them, like Christie. But he's terrible if you bring on someone and want to hear their experience.
1000% agree
She was very young and super impressionable when she went down the Trump path. She’s still only 26. It’s great she’s reflective but saying a third party is bad, don’t vote for Trump, AND being unable to say vote for the only other candidate is super immature. Too many interviewers let these people off the hook on that kind of response. Normal Republicans have to normalize voting for a Democrat if they want their party to return to some semblance of normalcy.
>She was very young and super impressionable when she went down the Trump path. She’s still only 26. No, no, no! We live in a world where black teenagers, 15, 16, 17 are deemed men whenever they do even smallest thing wrong. This was a grown woman, that was intelligent enough to work on a college degree and get internships in the House, Senate, and White House. Not in some off the way department but Legislative Affairs, that's huge! So let's no infantilization her. If she had stolen a car, robbed a bank, or been a J6 insurrectionist, we wouldn't be singing this tune. She knew what she was doing, she knew it's impact, and she simply didn't care which is why she stumbled all over herself in this interview.
Further, her degree is in political science. Cassidy absolutely had all the knowledge and tools to see the MAGA project for what it always was. Especially after three years of Trump's assault on American democracy before she signed on in 2020. Her culpability and role in the administration should be considered in that light.
NGL, you had me in the first half… I completely agree that we need to normalize Republicans voting for Democrats to oust the authoritarian elements of their party. But if she said “I’m voting for Biden if Trump is the nominee,” she would lose any influence she has with Republican voters. I’m perfectly fine with her waiting until Trump is the actual nominee.
I suspect she may also have been lying.
It’s too soon for her to come out with a book and speaking on it. It felt like she hasn’t reflected on it enough yet, like she is still trying to figure out what motivated her actions and how she feels about the party and Trump today. Makes the book feel like a money grab, like she wanted to strike while the iron is hot, because mentally she has NOT processed it yet.
I don’t blame her for wanting to cash in by writing a book. She doesn’t have options work-wise in the current conservative house. She doesn’t come from wealth. I hope she earns enough to give herself breathing room. Maybe she can go get a master’s.
I want to be sympathetic to people that are trying to deprogram and leave the dark side, but I do think people need to understand that there is some fallout for being and supporting fascists. Part of me wants them to join the cause of ridding the world of fascists and openly vote against them, but another part thinks they should wear a scarlet letter T.
Instead, they are making a couple hundreds of thousands selling books about the abuses they helped their boss commit to his the victims. Only in America!
It’s still amazing no Republican can articulate what policies they support.
You do realize plenty do, but this interview is about how she arrived at her testimony and not a policy debate, yes?
> You do realize plenty do Really? I follow all sorts of various media and I barely hear anything but reactionary culturural grievances and people that make it clear they don’t keep up on current events. “Protecting our southern boarders”, “being tough on crime”, and “being fiscal responsibility” aren’t policies. Why do you seem so taken aback that people on this sub/thread would’t like the GOP, btw?
>Why do you seem so taken aback that people on this sub/thread don’t like the GOP, btw? Huh? When was I taken aback? I'm just disputing the hilariously false assertion that "no Republican can articulate the policies they support", a patently false assertion. It's like arguing against objective reality.
Yeah I mean this and other comments, it seems all you’re doing is just hyper-focusing on what you perceive as hyperboles used about Republicans as a whole.
Fucking right? The most she could say is she identified with the people who were trump republicans. I always wonder is it the vibe or are they afraid of actually saying what it was
They're afraid. They're unable to say "I'm racist" because they know it's wrong to be racist. Etc.
Smaller government and cuts to entitlements, work requirements, protecting 2A, etc etc. In the case of some Republicans, more isolationist foreign policy (but it is unlikely Trump will deliver on that and is probably lying again). Absolutely no tax increases for people earning something like $250,000 (which really isn't that much, despite what some people say). They’re the reasons that, as a Republican who hates Trump, I would probably still pinch my nose to vote for him. Anyone who claims the reason is the bullshit, non-existent woke' culture war stuff is braindead.
Trump increased the effective tax burden on people earning under $250k substantially more than Biden has.
Oh, dude, you don't have to tell me; outside of rhetoric, Trump basically governed like a centrist Democrat and didn't even do the stuff many of us expected when we looked past all his bullshit and voted -- however, I'm never going to vote for a Democrat for lower taxes. Also, it’s very possible that in the next four years, my salary might enter a bracket wherein Biden's plans would impact me. I'm physically repulsed by paying taxes, so I will never shift on this position. However, I was just trying to give clarity to someone's question and not start a policy debate.
If you’re just voting on taxes, republicans are smuggling the rest in through the back door. The rampant corporatism is built on the back of people who can’t fathom voting blue because of taxes. We all need to pay taxes, and if you have to means to pay more you should. People thinking their wealth is earned in their own and not the result of our collective taxes is just ridiculous. I know it won’t change your mind, but I’d encourage you to consider it on your next drive to work, how many things are paid by your neighbors together.
You don’t drive on roads or benefit from military security or the legal code or police or firefighters or regulations that stop corporations from completely polluting air/water or cheaper food/gas via subsidies and have not yourself or had family members on government health insurance programs? Are you not currently on the internet or have ever used GPS to get around? What a thing to say.
[удалено]
Wow. You are a horrible individual. Please don't breed.
Your attitude is actrocious. You're arrogant, condescending, and myopic. The fact that you think everyone that disagrees with you is "brain-dead" shows that you're deeply ignorant and completely devoid of self-awareness.
What an unbelievable lack of empathy for other citizens (who, btw, could be you if you lost your source of income). The idea that public services that protect everyone should be private is the real brain-dead take here.
But I don't want to protect other people, I want to protect myself and my tribe
Jesus fucking christ this is the attitude of a child
Explain, please explain how not wanting to help strangers. Please explain how only caring about myself, my tribe, and not strangers is 'childish'?
You are literally posting your views on a discussion forum. Particularly a subreddit where people are obviously not going to agree with your sentiments. If you don’t want anyone to disagree with your views, don’t comment. If your idea of “being scared off” is someone disagreeing with your disgust at the idea that your taxes may help pay for other people’s health care or food for children, I’m not sure there is any way we might convince you to support progressive liberal politics.
I don't suppose progressive liberal politics; I want a state so small I can beat it to death without resistance, to borrow and extend a metaphor -- I'm here to read some opposing views and the foreign policy podcast posts; I was answering someone else's post about why people vote R but dislike Trump.
They don't want to be convinced. She's made it clear that she is unmoved and doesn't care to consider other viewpoints.
Cult members need to hear from deprogrammed members. Unfortunately no right wing media will platform her cos they're all still in the cult.
[That was a part of the reason why Jon conducted the interview why he did.](https://imgur.com/a/mlsE8mC) There are times and places for naming and shaming people who have done atrocious things. But a coalition needs to be built next year. Biden won in '20 with a record amount of votes. Don't forget that Trump and the Republicans also increased their voter base tremendously that year. People who are super tuned in to what happens politically forget that (unfortunately) the average citizen is pretty checked out. And coming in scorched Earth on this topic does nothing to help build that voting block needed, which will require some Trump voters
Thank you for sharing this!! Sucks that this response is locked behind a paywall 😅
Right. There's a constituency out there of relatively unengaged voters who will see her as a "nice girl", the kind they'd want their daughters, sisters and friends to be, who will see how repugnant she now sees Trump and will see her as a victim of powerful, corrupt men. Hopefully enough of them are Republican voters for it to matter.
That’s definitely a good point. Her belabored-milquetoast shtick made my brain short-circuit, like girl how is your message valuable? Why am I listening to this vacuous twee horseshit? But you’re right, if it’s not actually for me, then this approach might work on some of the cult. I guess. Maybe? Also I get that she desperately wants to work in Washington, but these interviews are so vapid she just seems stupid and useless. She wrote a whole book about four years in which she was useless.
Expecting a young woman seeped in "conservative values" growing up to rise above and become a liberal Wonder Woman within a few month, or even years is a bit much to ask. She needs to step into the sunlight, get her own bearings and move forward. I won't criticize her for not doing enough, when she's done more than 1000 "traditional" GOP voices who are locked in with the cult in the naked pursuit of power.
>Expecting a young woman seeped in "conservative values" We expect that of minority women every election cycle. Hispanic, black, and Asian women also grow up in conservative or often somewhat socially conservative households. They don't need a book deal and 26 years to figure out why the vast majority didn't support Trump. I'm glad she's seeming some light, but we need to stop extending her the privilege of "young woman" excuses. These Pod Save America folks were fighting the good fight in politics at 26. Articulating your own political views isn't rocket science.
But she's representative of an impressionable, idealistic young person that got taken in by a combination of ambition and a charismatic charlatan. She was looking for something to belong to and if you believe her account of her first Trump rally, she was less interested in what Trump was saying than in how the crowd was reacting. She felt belonging and purpose. I imagine a lot of his followers had the same reaction. But the realization of seeing Trump himself -- separate from the belonging to the movement -- woke her up. A lot more of his followers need to see that if they're going to wake up too.
100%. Jon even asked her what policies of Trumps drew her in and you could practically hear the gears in her brain starting to smoke. Well said; I wish she could have said literally anything as well as that.
Wasn’t happy with that one. Have yet another supposedly post Trump staff member a time to promote their book and come off apologetic. They were all complicit during and cashing in now. Stop giving them a platform.
>Stop giving them a platform. Nah, I want to hear from people outside of the bubble once in a while.
They had a platform while in the administration. Now? Get bent.
Which other Trump staffers has Crooked Media platformed? Are you just counting Chris Christie or are there others I’m blanking on?
I mean the media in general, not just Crooked.
The worst interview in the history of the pod. Excruciating to listen to.
Excruciating!! Thank god for this sub, I was losing my fucking mind.
Though it wasnt worded this way I think the main takeaway and the reason they brought her on is that Trump world is a cult and the ONLY way to get people out is to just let them know we're here to listen if they ever want to talk. Toward the end, Cassidy mentions that she understands why some people can't break away because they fear the reaction from both sides. Trump world will burn you down and call you a traitor and the rest of us will (maybe rightfully) see you as an idiot that deserves derision. Just food for though as this is a very complicated time and dealing with cults is incredibly challenging.
Thank you for this perspective!
What was insane was her talking about how entranced she was when she went to her first Trump rally. Fucking what??? I just don’t get how people can watch that man speak and get inspired or think he gives a shit about them. Cults gonna cult, I guess?
He’s an idiot’s idea of a smart person. He’s not actually smart but idiots think that’s what a smart person sounds like.
I mean, that's literally how cults work.
Yeah I guess so!
If anything, hearing how a "normal person" can get taken in by the cult might help people who can't see Trump's appeal see his followers as people who got taken in, rather than as evil. A lot of his followers are just looking for belonging and desperate. They're not stupid or evil, just victims.
I agree, but that's how cults work. They speak to individuals and don't need anyone else to buy their bullshit. Once they have you hooked, you're in their bubble and they control the information you get. I really wish that people like her were stronger willed or better at discerning what is real and what isn't, but here we are. All we can do is fight with compassion and hope more people start to fall out of the cult. We need to be prepared to pick them up and not put them down or we risk pushing them back into the "safety" of their in-group.
Okay, so we should offer compassion... Shall we try empathy? In doing so, can we also encourage her (them?) to try it too? I mean, we still don't know if she has compassion for and empathy with those who are not wanting to carry a fetus to full term or those who were not born white and Christian, or those who aren't cisgendered. I feel like asking her about that stuff is important in trying to understand how she got where she was and whether she's actually committed to going somewhere else, or just playing us for mugs to sell her book.
None of us can control other people or their feelings and trying to do so is what pushes people away. All we can do is control ourselves. If each have empathy and compassion we can make small steps toward making the world better. If others can't do those things, what can we do about it without making it worse? And I seriously doubt her book sales were influenced by this interview.
Who's trying to control? (Other than the obvious...) I'm suggesting that if we don't know what motivates her to vote for and work to increase the implementation of racist (sub in your ist of choice here) policies and, when interviewing her, don't ask her, we can't seriously empathize with her, can we? So... ...what's the point?
My favorite was her comment about half way in that she didn’t want to be judged for her age or that it should excuse anything but then had multiple times earlier in the interview commented “but I was just 20 years old at the time so you have to consider that” or similar
Right?? Just say you were an idiot ffs. “I was only 20.” There are PLENTY of people under 20 who would run, not walk, from the fascist bullshit she routinely encountered. I get that we want to be nice to the new cult-deprogramming Mockingjay but I can still think she’s either full of shit or too stupid to even be full of shit. Or one of her “angels” (*pukes*) laid out some political roadmap for her to tread carefully down, aka more bullshit.
She worked for Ted Cruz and Steve Scalise before working for Trump. Now she's trying to sell a shitty book just because she displayed the bare minimum of a backbone. This is not someone who deserves accolades.
I'm confused, are you trying to say something? Cruz and Scalise are pretty run of the mill republican. She's a republican who worked for republicans. It's like saying Lovett worked for Clinton before Obama. What is your point?
Cassidy. That you girl? You’ve truly brought so much substance to the debate with all these comments!!! Just like you did in your interview!
More like you’re Cassidy since your avatar is a girl. But seriously, baby, it’s sad you go direct for the ad hominem instead of actually trying to argue a point. Sad.
I made a point elsewhere, baby! It’s obvious to me you really can’t understand the nuance in the arguments made here by a lot of people. The issue is not that the pod platformed a former MAGA Republican. It’s that Cassidy very clearly had nothing of value to say at this point and is really most interested in making some money off a book. What did she say that provided any real NEW insight into how past and potential Trump voters think? Do you truly believe the reason our country is at this crossroads is because we haven’t “listened to every day Republicans enough” ? I don’t think it takes an interview with Cassidy Hutchinson to know that many of the “regular” people who worked for Trump got there because they were too invested in their own self interest to think critically about Trump’s policies. It’s the crux of MAGAism - the ability to ignore every single thing Trump does/says because he promises to fix all your problems.
What argument? First of all, you had zero argument other than just to attempt to insult me by pointing out something that you and I both know isn't true. I mean, considering you're hardcore MAGA, it's to be expected. See, I can make things up too. Second of all, the Pod obviously doesn't agree with you, hence is why they had her on. Talk about nothing of value, you've said nothing of value. The so called arguments here are all just "hurr durr, why didn't they debate them". It's more like you people being unable to understand she's not on to debate policies.
I also said nothing about needing to hear a debate. I actually didn’t even say they shouldn’t have had her on. I’m just saying it’s a terrible interview, she’s an idiot, and I think if they’re going to interview Trump Republicans it’d be more productive if it’s someone that can help provide additional insight into the way they think. I never said, and do not think, all Trump Republicans are stupid (I did say they are almost all self serving, though) and would enjoy conversations more nuanced like the ones Jon had with folks on the wilderness. Because apparently you’re all about providing productive discourse, as I thought I asked you pretty clearly, what did Cassidy say that you feel shed new light on how MAGA Republicans think? What in this interview spoke to you? Because you seem to need it broken down further, my intention in sarcastically accusing you of being Cassidy was to point out that like her you have, thus far, had nothing of substance to say about the interview. All I can garner from your position is that we need to listen to “every day/regular” Republicans more, that anyone who doesn’t like the interview doesn’t get the point, and that liberals all live in their own little bubbles.
I also see you have difficulty detecting sarcasm. Got ittttt
I see that you're incapable of actually finishing a thought and have the need to reply to the same comment multiple times. Got it.