Donald Trump, Kurt, President Trump discussed on Intelligence Squared U.S. Debates
I want to thank intelligence squared for inviting me to be here tonight. To argue the premise that Donald Trump is not bad for comedy an issue. I felt passionately about for over quarter of a century. As my colleague, Kurt pointed out, we're not here. The bar for us for our team is not to to argue the dome. Trope is good for comedy though, though, I'll take that position at least partially, but that's simply that he's not bad for comedy. And in that regard. I I would ask you all to consider the contra positive situation in which we might have found ourselves at this point if things had gone very differently on election day two thousand sixteen which is that we would have. Perhaps president Jeb Bush or president Marco Rubio or president Hillary Clinton or even president Bernie Sanders. Would any of those people have been better for comedy than Donald Trump? I don't think so I think we would be in a situation where we would see not only the shows that Kurt brought up with significantly lower ratings. But conceivably some of them off the air all together as tripoint out. We're not arguing whether Donald Trump is good or bad, and we're not arguing whether Donald Trump is good or bad at comedy. But I would argue that Donald Trump whether or not you think he's funny uses comedy, particularly ridicule. Very effectively Donald Trump actually gets his audience, and possibly some people on the fringes of his audience worked up on his side and changes their minds by virtue of the way that he uses ridicule and that. Is not something that happens perhaps as often as those of us who work in comedy like to think it does. And I think an example that maybe it's top of mind for a lot of us is his referring to Senator Elizabeth Warren as Pocahontas, which one person seems to think is funny. But the rest of you, maybe not so much, and I'm not going to express an opinion about that as a as a aknowledged professional in the in the area. But I'll say it forced her to do something, which I would say at least at this point appears to have been a terrible error possibly one. That's maybe disqualifying in terms of ambitions to be president. So that's an effective use of comedy. That is good for comedy in that it proves its its potency. But which perhaps is a bad thing. And every other way that that you can think of however. If you agree with that from I believe, you still have to support our side. I will report to you listening on radio or on the podcast that are opponents have left the stage. And. I don't know they were shaking their heads. And we're just going to try and carry on. Thank you. Thank you, Billy Kimball. Conclude round one of this intelligence squared US debate where our resolution is Trump is bad for comedy. Now, we move onto round two and round to the debaters address one of the other directly, and they take questions from me. And from you our live audience here at the Cape playhouse in New York City the team arguing four the resolution. Trump is bad for comedy, Sara Schaefer, and PJ O'Rourke are saying that conditions for comedy under the Trump era have turned sour that when we cannot disagree on the truth. You can't really set up the premise of joke in the first place comics are actually afraid they're being harassed team. Arguing against the resolution, Kurt Anderson and Billy Campbell. They're saying it's issue isn't whether comedy Trump is good for comedians. But whether it is good for comedy. They're saying, yes. From the point of view of how the industry is doing they point to the ratings of shows on Trump and how well. They're doing and bottom line. They say because of Trump audiences today are dying to laugh and Sarah. I want to take it back to you that this notion that audiences are dying to after Kurt Andersen laid out you challenged that I think to some degree in your opening statements to take a response to that..