The Late Show with Stephen Colbert just screwed the pooch

[frankfrank]

Personally I'm surprised he's running.

Now, if he should happen to, say, have a family tree handy that shows the longevity of his particular line and his direct male relative's ages should just-so-happen to live to, oh, let's say mid-nineties, then I'd consider voting aye and takin' my chances.

You've put my very same thoughts into good and succinct words...thank you for that! Along with your post directly above my #22 (i. e. your #21 showing up just after what I quoted above which was #20)...yes, I really do feel that he is too old to be running. (Though I digress: consider how old some of the Soviet Union Premiers were, when they got into office...) I think that being President it tantamount to aging a decade for each four-year term served.

Donald Trump is a total exception to the rule - almost as though the office is making him younger because he is so, so into the nearly unfathomable power that he now has. He apparently doesn't get all that much sleep, and he is badly out of shape and he thrives on shitty food preferences, yet he seems like the Energizer Battery bunny..."it keeps going, and going, and going..." I am entirely perplexed by his stamina, but there was the time a couple weeks ago that nobody really saw him for about a week. Is it possible he was trying to "nurse himself through" some health issues?

 

[opinterph]

The [Late Show] audience is reliably to the left and all the lampoons and low-hanging fruit barbs are well received and cheered, both online and in the studio audience.

Most of the late-night comedy shows did similar parodies in response to Sanders’ announcement.

Late-Night Hosts Weigh In on Bernie Sanders' 2020 Presidential Campaign (Hollywood Reporter; February 19, 2019)

Fallon donned a white wig to impersonate the Vermont senator, while Stephen Colbert and Trevor Noah attempted the lawmaker's accent while cracking a few jokes.

Mocking Sanders' age

Sanders is only about 14 years older than the average viewer of The Late Show.

The average viewer of all three [late-night shows] is still an AARP member: Tonight's average viewer is 57.5 years old to 59.4 for Jimmy Kimmel Live! and 63.3 for The Late Show. [Link]

 

[opinterph]

network TV … people … admit they take orders from the DNC.

Is that admission available for public viewing?

 

[TickTockMan]

Is that admission available for public viewing?

Of course, but you always dismiss it because you don't like who reports it. I have posted it before. You guys just ignore it or obfuscate.

 

[opinterph]

Of course, but you always dismiss it because you don't like who reports it. I have posted it before. You guys just ignore it or obfuscate.

I don't recall ever seeing any credible evidence to suggest that network TV people take orders from the DNC.

 

[TickTockMan]

I don't recall ever seeing any credible evidence to suggest that network TV people take orders from the DNC.

Like I said you guys dismiss it. The employees admitted it after Hillary lost and she was blaming them (and everyone and everything else) for the loss. They were pissed.

 

[luckynumbah7]

Donald Trump is a total exception to the rule - almost as though the office is making him younger because he is so, so into the nearly unfathomable power that he now has. He apparently doesn't get all that much sleep, and he is badly out of shape and he thrives on shitty food preferences, yet he seems like the Energizer Battery bunny..."it keeps going, and going, and going..." I am entirely perplexed by his stamina, but there was the time a couple weeks ago that nobody really saw him for about a week. Is it possible he was trying to "nurse himself through" some health issues?

Dunno, but I've been envisioning a type of Dorian Grey situation, where once the subjects into the long haul & presidential portraits are hung the connection goes permanent & the very last dregs of vitality are slurped away to keep the office going.

That's about as far as I've gotten but I'm certain with a bit of computer aging with a cockeyed gilt frame perched in front it'd be on-the-mark joke wise - possibly with a 'Oops, sorry Audience, but it appears there's a surprise in store, whatever could it be? Ah, seems the algorithm can no longer age the man to the end of his suggested term! And it seems the program has chosen this...this just gorgeous and oh-so-modest, very modest plaque for the incumbent's resting place."

As for Colbert's & other comedian's quips, I thought they could've been more on-the-nose. I'm not irritable they referenced age but it could've been much tighter about the 'we're afraid you won't live through this, the fuck are you thinking? Has senility crept in since the last attempt and addled the your math skills, Sir?' instead of dancing around Sanders being the oldest candidate to have ever run for the office and hoping the audience gets the point. I've concerns with how it was done, but not because I thought they were too harsh by mentioning it at all.

Of course, some people might notice my version of comedic wordplay is a little more pointed than what the Big Names put forth - that's because they were all-around gentle about their material, keeping it to one liners and middling accents instead of a whole dropped-in-it bit.

- if Cheeto is looking unwell I suspect it's probably mental indigestion because he certainly doesn't seem to be giving anything to the job.

 

[luckynumbah7]

...hell, There could even be a riff about past portraits & the Oval Office Job's vampirism to work into the shebang. Ooooo and the portraiture could be 'rolled out' by plunking an empty frame in front of a desktop screen. With a brief lineup of 'before' & 'after' images of the last half dozen countryheads as a prequel to the expected unveiling of our new slew of presidential hopefuls via a brand spankin', we-just-invented-it-no-really program, the P.O.S.! (Supposedly standing for 'presidential overload sequencer tho I have my doubts...). Measures the not-so metaphorical load of the presidency by aging algorithm, the years hoovered out & the photo taken at a candidate's announcement.

But perhaps an empty frame with a tac-pinned note for Trump during the past & current presidential flip-through. Slip of notebook paper, simple, easy-to-read-quickly print explaining its absence - "still choosing selfie, the Biggliest!"

On the other hand, It could be a hank of prison orange cloth stappled to the canvass-on-the-screen with "No Collusion send file" scrawled on said torn hem. Anyway, the camera pans down to focus on the Agregattor 2020(tm) company logo & catchphrase ("Your Beginning Matters!") running in the corner of the screen. A Vanna White pose here, maybe - "A handy new app built to assuage the curiosity of the public! All 'bout gatherin' up a representation of those future presidential "I'm here to serve the you, the populace" years and piling 'em up, yes Sir & Ma'am! See how the president ages battling the spiritual & ethical horrors of the highest office in our land from the comfort of your screen! (A fist-meets-desk thump may ensue)

I mean, as far as delicacy goes, once you hold back I think it gets more difficult to have standalone lines make up the program when it focuses on one candidate, that's more of a circular dance there where context may not be as tight as one would hope. But that's also the nature of the thing when it's meant to be gentle. I think he could've dropped the pudding references though. Everyone likes pudding. (Feel free to cut to a pic of Cosby for low hanging fruit)

 

[rareboy]

Like I said you guys dismiss it. The employees admitted it after Hillary lost and she was blaming them (and everyone and everything else) for the loss. They were pissed.

This is rather lazy, isn't it? It is pretty easy to make an assertion without any references to back it up, but the good thing about this forum is that there is a higher standard expected.

Do you actually have real sources to cite or are you basin it on an op ed opinion from some fringe youtube hack?

 

[TickTockMan]

This is rather lazy, isn't it? It is pretty easy to make an assertion without any references to back it up, but the good thing about this forum is that there is a higher standard expected.

Do you actually have real sources to cite or are you basin it on an op ed opinion from some fringe youtube hack?

I post things all the time. You guy ignore it. Why waste my time.

I know you feel the DNC does no wrong. Hell they admitted in open court they cheated. You say you don't care, but in CE&P right now is a thread of you bitching someone not on your side (Republicans) was caught cheating. For you things are only wrong when it is not "your" side. Your posts and lack of posts about the Covington Kids and Smollett case show this. You have a narrative. That is fine, but I am not going to waste my time.


And by the way everything Jimmy Dore reports is easily fact checked. And you know why? Because he is running a comedy show that points out the stupid and outlandish. That's what makes it funny. If he had to make it up, it wouldn't be funny. All he does is what Jon Stewart use to do on The Daily Show, but he attacks all sides which your partisan self can't handle.

 

[rareboy]

So you are saying you've got nothing.

 

[TickTockMan]

So you are saying you've got nothing.

I'm saying you would do what you always do when you see something you don't like. Ignore it. Anyone can see your pattern on the site.

 

[luckynumbah7]

...Tho I did spelunk through some of the other routines and some bits of those I'd consider overly harsh. There's questioning whether someone'll last through a term, which I find a perfectly reasonable query since death & taxes are the only absolutes verse, say, relying on weakened bladder muscles for cheap gag to indicate age of candidate. Not much originality in the most of the work.

 

[NotHardUp1]

Most of the late-night comedy shows did similar parodies in response to Sanders’ announcement.

I wouldn't say Colbert was singular. Sanders wasn't squeezed out the first time by any one mouthpiece. Those who are beating the drum find him unappealing. More to the point, they don't think he can win, so they don't want all those young, idealistic voters following him into the ditch. Like most of the kingmakers, they feel like democracy isn't to be trusted in its truest form.

Sanders is only about 14 years older than the average viewer of The Late Show.

As would be Speaker Pelosi or Vice President Biden. It'll be a cold day in Hell when you find the late night left crowd demeaning either for age or likelihood to die in office.

It was a naked attempt broadly by media on the left to make Sanders appear like a comical candidate, a foolish old man. No similar thing was done to mock Castro or other favorites.

Elsewhere in CE&P is a thread alleging the right is attempting to divide the left. As if. The left is already self-dividing, as well as both parties never stop trying to rive the other. On the left, you have the loosely stitched constituency of Blacks and Latinos who are religiously conservative and broadly anti-gay and enroll in the military in higher percentages than the marjority Caucasian populace. In the same bucket, you have to the leftist university intelligentsia who have little truck with the religious, as well as conservationists and animal rights advocates who are disproportionately Caucasian. And you have greater strength in young voters, IF they vote, who are not backing universal health care plans as they don't feel like they benefit them. In Congress, you have the new left inbound who do not want to play footsies with the status quo, including the Speaker. You also have the blue collar union members who are at odds largely with the anti-gun positions in the DNC platforms.

I've never voted Republican in my life, but honest appraisal of the status quo is the first step to preventing the disaster that led to 2016's election.

 

[luckynumbah7]

As would be Speaker Pelosi or Vice President Biden. It'll be a cold day in Hell when you find the late night left crowd demeaning either for age or likelihood to die in office.

I believe both those jobs are significantly less stressful on the age + continuing ability combo than the the toll and the, well, sheer breadth of the president's workload. There's also the emotional cost to consider for country; neither is likely to cause national emotional turmoil should they pass while on the job while the same cannot be said of a presidential disruption. Yanked from history news network,

"Two vice presidents resigned: John C. Calhoun (served under Andrew Jackson) and Spiro Agnew (served under Richard Nixon). The vice presidency has been vacant due to resignation or death a total of 37 years and 290 days, about a fifth of the time."

(they're considerably more 'sit-down' jobs than the president's position is; the stress isn't as likely to kill 'em from what I've seen. Hell, Ginsberg is still going, though that's probably mostly out of patriotic duty. I don't believe she'd remain alive either if she'd taken the presidency at a coming-on-advanced-for-female's age range)

Though I can certainly agree much of the material floating around was ageist in nature, I think it stems in a large part from the likelihood of a president who is judged unlikely to be able to fulfill their duty to the end of their term.

 

[luckynumbah7]

^Which I think is a different box of ballots than pointing out that ageism in general is a valid concern. And that much of the comedic material out there that shows age leaves much to be desired along an 'examined for accuracy' angle.

For some work, however, discrimination is required. Much like how I wouldn't hire a 79 year old as a race car driver (reflexes) or anyone under 35 as president (to squish dynastic tendencies). Specifics do matter depending on the details of the job.

 

[luckynumbah7]

Well, usually wouldn't hire. Desperate times and lack of other qualified applicants could force my hand with any number of hypothetical jobs. Including voting for a contender under 35, tho the 'presidents must be over 35 is a constitutional requirement for the job. And again, if Sanders should show that his line regularly lives to the mid nineties, then that's a smidgen of a different story.

 

[luckynumbah7]

And when I see complaints of 'no contender under 35' being ageism as well, I agree. It is ageism. But just because it's an -ism doesn't mean I'm inclined to change the rules - I believe there must be harm accrued by the dismissal that surpasses the harm the rule mitigates.

 

[opinterph]

Those who are [smearing Bernie] … don't want all those young, idealistic voters following him

It seems that your complaint is less concerned with comedians making jokes about political candidates than it is the perceived lack of a “fair and balanced” approach to comedy involving candidates more generally. I'm not inclined to pay much attention to YouTube likes/dislikes as a means to determine the relative success of a comedy routine, but how do we know that the dislikes were because the viewers were offended that Bernie was the subject of jokes? Maybe the folks who thumbed-down the video simply object to any humor that involves age, physical appearance, or mental acumen.

---

Elsewhere in CE&P is a thread alleging the right is attempting to divide the left.

The 'Divide the Left' Campaign​

 

[NotHardUp1]

how do we know that the dislikes were because the viewers were offended that Bernie was the subject of jokes? Maybe the folks who thumbed-down the video simply object to any humor that involves age, physical appearance, or mental acumen.

May I suggest you go to the effort to actually read the comments of the viewers of the YouTube video who reacted to it. They are the primary evidence, and it's plain for anyone to read, and the percentages are strikingly out of line with The Late Show's other YouTube posts.

Please consider taking a moment to survey them before dismissing them out of hand speculatively.

Briefly scanning the YouTube posts of Late Show monologues, it is EXTREMELY rare to find any viewers critical of them. They are not frequented by conservatives, so are generally a praisefest of the politically sympathetic to the lampoons.

Hugely the opposite for this one. 40% disapproval of those voting is remarkable and portends something. Bernie is hardly sending out attack dogs in social media.