Today on the Daily Standard Podcast, Politico‘s Elana Schor joins host Charlie Sykes to discuss the disappearance of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, military aid to Saudi Arabia, Senate confirmation of judges, the midterm elections, and what is… the “mob”?

Subscribe to The Daily Standard Podcast on iTunes, Stitcher, or Google Play.

Subscribe to Daily Standard in iTunes (and leave a 5-star review, please!), or by RSS feed. For all our podcasts in one place, subscribe to the Ricochet Audio Network Superfeed in iTunes or by RSS feed.

There are 7 comments.

  1. Coolidge

    Guys,

    Look. I like this magazine, and I listen to this podcast. I even still like Bill. I didn’t vote for Trump, and I find Kanye to be ridiculous. I think even Trump does when he recognizes that verbal stream as “something.”

    But I also don’t understand how you turn that into an attack of “Prager University,” which is not full of crackpots spouting venom, (and Dennis Prager lost me in 2016, so I promise I don’t have a dog to defend beyond fairness.)

    Perhaps there are some of those crackpot ideas swirling in there, but I’ve watched many right leaning academics who work at major universities simply sharing narratives/ideas that are rarely ever uttered on college campuses so need YouTube to be heard. Not because they are crazy narratives/ideas but because academics are overwhelmingly aligned more with a Zinn vision that they think is the only answer that is reasonable.

    I haven’t read How the Right Lost its Mind, and I’m sure it’s a fine work, but you need to be careful about calling people far beyond Kanye crazy–the Trump base is not actually loony, even if it contains some loons–and then immediately crafting a conspiracy theory about Saudi Arabia that could use a flowchart you envision which sounds to me worthy of a Michael Moore documentary. (It’s kinda like Bush was in Iraq for the oil??? Remember that flowchart? Did you think it had merit?)

    Oh. And a mob is “a large and disorderly crowd, especially one bent on riotous or destructive action.”

    There’s no reason to have a stance on the “m” word. It has meaning, and it can be found in Webster’s. It doesn’t apply to every Kavanaugh protest, but it applies to a lot of them.

    • #1
    • October 12, 2018 at 9:47 am
    • 4 likes
  2. Listener

    a conspiracy theory about Saudi Arabia

    Kashoggi walked into the Saudi Arabian consulate and did not walk out again. Is it a conspiracy theory to assume that they did something to him?

    • #2
    • October 13, 2018 at 11:26 pm
    • Like
  3. Coolidge

    DanielSterman (View Comment):

    a conspiracy theory about Saudi Arabia

    Kashoggi walked into the Saudi Arabian consulate and did not walk out again. Is it a conspiracy theory to assume that they did something to him?

    No. Absolutely not.

    It’s a conspiracy theory to imply that the Trump family had something to do with it per close ties to the Saudis.

    There was a discussion here about the Trump ties, as if those political optics were what mattered in that case. Trump would have to explain his closeness to a regime that ordered a hit.

    No. Trump will have to respond to that regime.

    Can you hear the difference?

    • #3
    • October 14, 2018 at 5:24 am
    • Like
  4. Listener

    Lois Lane (View Comment):
    It’s a conspiracy theory to imply that the Trump family had something to do with it per close ties to the Saudis.

    This is not what the podcast was saying at all. The Trump ties are the reason Trump doesn’t want to strongly attack the Saudis for what they did. Nobody’s saying they were involved.

    Lois Lane (View Comment):
    Can you hear the difference?

    You don’t need to be like this.

    • #4
    • October 14, 2018 at 9:15 pm
    • Like
  5. Coolidge

    DanielSterman (View Comment):

    Lois Lane (View Comment):
    It’s a conspiracy theory to imply that the Trump family had something to do with it per close ties to the Saudis.

    This is not what the podcast was saying at all. The Trump ties are the reason Trump doesn’t want to strongly attack the Saudis for what they did. Nobody’s saying they were involved.

    Lois Lane (View Comment):
    Can you hear the difference?

    You don’t need to be like this.

    @danielsterman

    You read tone into “Can you hear the difference?” that is not there. I am simply asking, “Can you hear the difference?” per what I’ve laid out to make sure my point is understood. I am not sneering “Can you hear the difference?” which is what I think you “heard” per your writing that I “don’t need to be like this.”

    I certainly heard a different implication in what was said on the podcast than you did, but if we go with the idea that the podcast is only implying Trump will treat this investigation with bias per his relationships, we are still making assumptions that may be unfair. I say this even after he has supported the Saudi position today because I don’t know what else is going on behind the scenes.

    For example, Donald Trump says all kinds of fawning things about authoritarian leaders, which is one reason I did not vote for him. However, while he might be having some weird bro-mance going with Putin, his administration’s policies do not indicate that he’s doing anything more than talking. Instead of saying this, many Trump critics leap to “collusion.” They make words trump actions, and I think that’s a mistake.

    I also think how the podcast frames the right steers me into the interpretation I gave. Perhaps this is a mistake on my part, but there were some broad strokes made about Trump voters, which seemed to me unnecessary.

    That’s pretty much all I meant.

    Even though I am not a Trump voter, I found this framing to be… misguided.

    • #5
    • October 15, 2018 at 10:13 am
    • Like
  6. Listener

    Lois Lane (View Comment):
    You read tone into “Can you hear the difference?” that is not there. I am simply asking, “Can you hear the difference?” per what I’ve laid out to make sure my point is understood. I am not sneering “Can you hear the difference?” which is what I think you “heard” per your writing that I “don’t need to be like this.”

    If you really didn’t mean it, then I apologize for misunderstanding you. It wasn’t just about sneering; I thought you were referring to “hearing the difference” between the two possibilities you wrote in your comment, not hearing the original podcast, which made it seem cynical and sarcastic.

    Lois Lane (View Comment):
    For example, Donald Trump says all kinds of fawning things about authoritarian leaders, which is one reason I did not vote for him. However, while he might be having some weird bro-mance going with Putin, his administration’s policies do not indicate that he’s doing anything more than talking.

    The Trump administration is not Trump the man. He’s clearly not the one controlling those policies, and they would be very different if he was a more hands-on president who actually knew what he was doing.

    • #6
    • October 15, 2018 at 12:29 pm
    • Like
  7. Coolidge

    I agree that the Trump administration is not Trump the man, but I can only judge concrete actions that come out of his White House.

    I think it is easy to have one’s analysis clouded by antipathy for the man while projecting some of that antipathy unfairly onto bigger groups, and I felt as if some of that was happening in the podcast.

    Keep in mind I would have been what some might call a “never trump” voter for I do not like the president. Even so… I do not use that dislike, which is built on real objections to Trump, as a staring point for trying to understand his voters. I think it’s very easy to do that, and I think that was done here.

    It doesn’t mean I’m mad at the publication—I’m a subscriber to the Weeky Standard—or that I won’t listen again. I always listen to this podcast.

    I just wrote my reaction as constructive criticism. 

    That can be assessed as with merit or completely discarded.

    It is what I honestly thought here.

    It is fair that we took different things away, and I do not have the ability to clarify the participants’ actual intent.

    • #7
    • October 15, 2018 at 2:38 pm
    • Like