Culture Kamala Harris ditched Joe Rogan podcast interview over progressive backlash fears - Decision seen as major blunder for campaign that lost male votes to Donald Trump

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
1731531678350.png

Kamala Harris’s fears of a progressive backlash killed a plan for her to appear on Joe Rogan’s podcast, a campaign official has said, shedding light on a decision that infuriated some Democrats who are reeling after Donald Trump’s election victory.

The Harris campaign and Rogan, whose audience is bigger than that of many television networks, had discussed an interview for his podcast — a move some Democrats hoped would help Harris reach young men who were gravitating towards Trump.

The talks faltered because of concerns at how the interview would be perceived within the Democratic party, said Jennifer Palmieri, a senior adviser to Harris’s husband, Douglas Emhoff, during the campaign.

“There was a backlash with some of our progressive staff that didn’t want her to be on it, and how there would be a backlash,” Palmieri said on Wednesday.

Palmieri, who previously worked in the White House and for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign, is among the first officials from the Harris campaign to go into detail over a decision that some Democrats fear may have contributed to their loss.

Just over a week after Harris’s heavy defeat the party is hunting for scapegoats, with some operatives blaming President Joe Biden. Others have said the campaign flubbed its media strategy and was too cautious with alternative media.

Rogan, who endorsed Trump the night before the US election, is widely viewed as the most popular podcaster in the country. He holds a particularly large following among young men — a demographic Trump successfully spent much of the past year courting through appearances across a “manosphere” of YouTubers and podcasters.

Palmieri also said news leaking that Harris was in talks to do Rogan’s show created a “very weird dynamic” with the podcaster.

“Because all of a sudden he’s on his heels about how his audience is going to react to this, and the demands that they were going to put on him to be tough on her,” Palmieri said at a conference organised by The Clearing House, a payments group owned by large US banks.

A representative from Harris’s campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Trump’s interview with Rogan has been viewed nearly 50mn times on YouTube, while the interview with vice-president-elect JD Vance racked up 16mn views.

By comparison, about 29mn people watched Harris’s speech to the Democratic National Convention and fewer than 8mn watched her interview on Fox News.

Rogan, a former UFC commentator, has gained a large following particularly among men for his hours-long, often meandering conversations with guests on a wide range of topics, including martial arts, aliens, workout routines and politics.

He also stirs controversy. In 2022, musicians including Joni Mitchell pulled their music from Spotify in protest against the platform’s ties with Rogan, who had recently interviewed a virologist who was critical of coronavirus vaccines. Backlash swelled when musician India.Arie posted a video of Rogan using the N-word multiple times on his show. Spotify removed more than 100 of his podcast episodes from its app.

Democratic senator Bernie Sanders this week argued members of his party should be speaking to podcasters such as Rogan. “I think we’ve got to get — and clearly you have an alternative media out there, a lot of podcasts that millions and millions of viewers — get on the show,” he told CNN on Sunday.

https://www.ft.com/content/9292db59-8291-4507-8d86-f8d4788da467 (Archive)

1731531752160.png

1731541878706.png
1731541904247.png

https://x.com/SantsPliego/status/1856829516036841882 (Archive)
 
Last edited:
If I remember correctly, Kamala agreed to the podcast, but wanted Rogan to come to her, to limit the interview to an hour, and severely restrict which questions could be asked going off a pre-approved list.

This was not a "strategy" so much as knowing he would laugh in their faces and say no. The terms were ones the sympathetic media likely constantly agreed to. Kamala was completely incapable of giving a freeform interview without getting herself into massive trouble. She was not only dishonest and deceptive, but too stupid to be able to think on her feet and make it sound good. Completely reliant on memorized sound bites, as we saw in the debate. Things would have gotten even worse if the media wasn't constantly covering for her.
Originally, she WAS going to go on a normal podcast - apparently she was talked out of it beforehand, which led to the disaster Beyonce rally in Houston instead. After Trump went on and did numbers, I believe the regret set in, but they still wanted some ability to control the narrative so they refused his terms, wanting a one hour interview with Rogan coming to her.
I'm actually of the opinion that missing out on Rogan was probably more beneficial to her campaign, she choked during 30 minutes interviews where she had prepared for the questions. Can you imagine her spiral for three hours of speaking off-the-cuff?
 
Palmieri also said news leaking that Harris was in talks to do Rogan’s show created a “very weird dynamic” with the podcaster.

“Because all of a sudden he’s on his heels about how his audience is going to react to this, and the demands that they were going to put on him to be tough on her,” Palmieri said at a conference organised by The Clearing House, a payments group owned by large US banks
this harris loser tells a completely opposite tale than rogan. Rogan wanted her to pop in whenever she was free in Texas and instead she wanted him to fly out for an hour long ep.

Can you imagine her spiral for three hours of speaking off-the-cuff?


the first hour with trump was rough but got better. i expect the same with harris: shed realize joe wants to talk about anything and she'd relax and actually talk like a human. the big thing that fucked her was inability to look normal, those pics with her neices are the happiest ive seen her.
 
It would have been a disaster and I am buttmad that we were robbed of that.
Deadass, if she went on JRE we could have called the election right then and there.
She would have lost votes doing that, holy shit could you imagine her fucking melting over "Jamie, pull up that thing she said" after denying that thing she said.
 
Deadass, if she went on JRE we could have called the election right then and there.
She would have lost votes doing that, holy shit could you imagine her fucking melting over "Jamie, pull up that thing she said" after denying that thing she said.
It would have been like the Biden debate. I think her handlers would have called in a fake bomb threat and the secret service would have bundled her out of the room. Fucking cowardly bitch, how dare she deny us that lulz which is rightly ours.
 
Future historians are going to view chickening out of doing the interview as one of the primary reasons she lost. (Similar to how historians today view the debates between Richard Nixon and John F. Kennedy as the reason why Kennedy won the 1960 election). It's really obvious the biggest problem Kamala had was she didn't appeal to men at all and they arrogantly assumed that abortion was the only issue that would swing the election.

An enormous amount of swing state voters stated they voted for Trump due to the JRE interview. For a lot of them it was the first time they actually heard Trump discuss what he wanted to do during his term. With Kamala meanwhile a surprising amount of people didn't even know that Joe Biden wasn't the nominee anymore.
 
I'm actually of the opinion that missing out on Rogan was probably more beneficial to her campaign, she choked during 30 minutes interviews where she had prepared for the questions. Can you imagine her spiral for three hours of speaking off-the-cuff?
One guy imagined how the interview would have gone if Kamala had gone to Joe Rogan and Rogan would have agreed to Kamala's demands.
 
Rogan's not hard on his guests at all. (Although, tbf, I've only listened to a few of his shows.) He lets them talk about all sorts of things and doesn't really challenge what they say, at least not in a hard-hitting, gotcha kind of way. But I still think Kamala would have bit it. She's either too afraid to let anyone know what she's really like or she really is a tremendous airhead, but, either way, there's no way she'd be able to handle talking for three hours regardless of the friendliness of the host.
E- celebrity anybody remember that smug condescending prick Adam Conover you know what destroyed his credibility he went on Joe Rogan and looked like an absolute fool because without all of his fancy editing manipulated tactics it showed the whole world that he's a midwit idiot
 
Originally, she WAS going to go on a normal podcast - apparently she was talked out of it beforehand, which led to the disaster Beyonce rally in Houston instead. After Trump went on and did numbers, I believe the regret set in, but they still wanted some ability to control the narrative so they refused his terms, wanting a one hour interview with Rogan coming to her.
I'm actually of the opinion that missing out on Rogan was probably more beneficial to her campaign, she choked during 30 minutes interviews where she had prepared for the questions. Can you imagine her spiral for three hours of speaking off-the-cuff?
Now I want Hillary to go on Rogan. Would be hilarious.
 
Anyone that has seen any interview with her knows it was the right decision of her to skip it.
3 hours of her talking word salad in circles would have been catastrophic.

The only guy that would look forward to such a podcast is the guy running the CIA black-site in Egypt. : "Tell us what we want to know or we will watch the podcast again"
 
Last edited:
If I remember correctly, Kamala agreed to the podcast, but wanted Rogan to come to her, to limit the interview to an hour, and severely restrict which questions could be asked going off a pre-approved list.

This was not a "strategy" so much as knowing he would laugh in their faces and say no. The terms were ones the sympathetic media likely constantly agreed to. Kamala was completely incapable of giving a freeform interview without getting herself into massive trouble. She was not only dishonest and deceptive, but too stupid to be able to think on her feet and make it sound good. Completely reliant on memorized sound bites, as we saw in the debate. Things would have gotten even worse if the media wasn't constantly covering for her.
she also wanted 3 msnbc moderators to be present during the duration of the podcast.
source: i made it up
 
I can't wait until this cunt is forgotten to time like other presidential losers such as Dukakas.

Dukakis "tanked" his career with a campaign stunt of him driving around in a tank with a goofy-looking helmet and goofier grin that pundits and critics compared to Snoopy, then Bush ran an attack ad over the footage of him and his anti-defense campaign.

backfire_5.webp

He was also notoriously arrogant and hated TV ads, which was a terrible move as that was the most dominant force for advertising and publicity. His staff wrote literally hundreds and hundreds of scripts for him and he hated them all.

The thing about Trump's campaign is that it wouldn't have worked in the 1980s or even 2004 when Howard Dean's scream was the nail in the coffin.

“Do you do anal?”

...and, perhaps, in the future, or even right now, a woman running for President might actually help her campaign if she could do "party tricks" on radio.
 
Its the same retarded logic r/joerogan was using to defend Kumhollah. He's too conservative so Kumhollah shouldn't cooperate even when he tries to reach across the aisle from the right wing position he supposedly occupies and give the democrats the exact same shot the republicans had and even though he's had extreme leftists on his podcast before and even though she's supposed to be demonstrating that she should be able to handle more than just puff piece interviews.
 
It's probably a toss-up, since she doesn't seem capable of having a long, casual conversation with a stranger, but not even trying looks weak. It ends up being yet another reason that she wasn't a good candidate, since an interview with a generally non-hostile media person shouldn't be a no win situation.
 
Back