SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Reuters tells us:
As Jon Stewart winds down his 19-year stint as host of Comedy Central's The Daily Show, he and Stephen Colbert sit at the peak of American punditry despite their left-leaning view of life, the universe and everything.
In an era of diffused voices and divided politics, they are well known, widely admired, and speak to Americans in ways that no one else does, according to a recent Reuters/Ipsos poll.
This poll tracks 10 different pundits. Split evenly between conservative and liberal. It is also worth noting that four of the five on the liberal side are comedians, while none of the conservative pundits are trained to tell jokes.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Jon Stewart Stands at the Peak of American punditry
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 94 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
In Tulsa, Oklahoma, it is against the law to open a soda bottle without
the supervision of a licensed engineer.
(Score: 1) by Bogsnoticus on Tuesday May 12 2015, @01:20AM
An an aussie, I have staunchly defended our compulsory voting regime against all those who have tried to tear it down as an afront to freedom, liberty etc etc.
If you don't cast your vote, you have no legitimate right to piss and moan about the people who end up running the country. They are all too happy to whine loudly about the politicians, but they cant be arsed to do the one thing that matters to try and hold them accountable.
Sure, these days it doesnt seem to matter much whether you vote right, left, centre, or just scrawl "fuck them all sideways with a bargepole" on the ballot form, but at least going in to vote actually shows you give a shit about how you want your country run.
Genius by birth. Evil by choice.
(Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Tuesday May 12 2015, @02:34AM
If you don't cast your vote, you have no legitimate right to piss and moan about the people who end up running the country.
That right is called "freedom of speech", and yes, they would have that right if they failed to vote. And no, even if they didn't vote, that wouldn't make their observations incorrect, as arguments stand on their own merit. You might argue that if they want to see things change, they should vote for candidates who will implement changes. I would agree. But saying they don't have a right to complain if they don't vote makes no sense no matter how I look at it.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by tangomargarine on Tuesday May 12 2015, @03:08AM
"Ah, but Mr. Anderson, how can you vote for a candidate who will implement changes, if such a candidate cannot get on the ballot?"
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Bogsnoticus on Tuesday May 12 2015, @04:27AM
Perhaps you should have read my comment fully, before claiming something that does not exist in the context to which you are replying. I draw your attention to "As an aussie".
Now, unlike the US, we do not have "the right to free speech" enshrined in our constitution. It's not even listed as a common law principle in our country. It is, however, staunchly defended by threat of beating politicians to death with a cricket bat, should they try to remove our "free" speech.
In the US, you may have a "legal" right to whinge, bitch and moan about whoever gets into power, but if all you do is whinge, bitch and moan, instead of acting as a force of change, then that "right" is only a legal one, and not a legitimate one.
Get out and vote. Hold your politicians accountable for their actions towards you, and your society. To do otherwise is the equivalent of telling your parents you're going to hold your breath until they buy you that candy bar.
Genius by birth. Evil by choice.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Tuesday May 12 2015, @06:01AM
And, the Aussie wins! Yeah! Now you were saying about internet freedom and not being a nation of criminals, and that Bufo toads are _not_ a problem? But good on ya, mate! Free speech is not free! I like that slogan.
(Score: 1) by Bogsnoticus on Tuesday May 12 2015, @07:26AM
We're not a nation of criminals. We are a nation that has descended/evolved from criminals. Working class criminals I hasten to add.
Upper class criminals (d)evolve into politicians.
Genius by birth. Evil by choice.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Tuesday May 12 2015, @07:39AM
Yes, of course. This is why America and Australia have so much in common. They both are equally opposed to Bloody Poms. (Americans don't call them that, but share the sentiment.)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 12 2015, @07:47PM
...until a baby is born to the royal family.
...or a commoner marries into that inbred lot.
...or that commoner dies in a car wreck.
We fought a revolutionary war to dump the lot but there is a certain portion that still feels a need to fawn over aristocratic overlords.
-- gewg_
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday May 13 2015, @11:54PM
(Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Tuesday May 12 2015, @01:26PM
Perhaps you should have read my comment fully, before claiming something that does not exist in the context to which you are replying. I draw your attention to "As an aussie".
I don't care if you're an aussie, because even you have free speech rights, even if they're not in some constitution.
In the US, you may have a "legal" right to whinge, bitch and moan about whoever gets into power, but if all you do is whinge, bitch and moan, instead of acting as a force of change, then that "right" is only a legal one, and not a legitimate one.
It's fully legitimate either way.
Get out and vote.
I did say that that's a good idea for the people who want change.