"Fahrenheit 11/9': Michael Moore Exposes Trump, The New York Times and Establishment Democrats"

I loved Moore's older work, but I think there's a part of him that covets the struggle, and a bigger part that just doesn't fully grasp what we're up against right now. When your response is to shit on the one thing keeping us from going full autocracy, you've lost the plot.

He's totally lost the plot. And things like this do more harm that good. He's not helping to strengthen the party, he's only tarnishing it. (Where have we seen that before?) Ugh... he's become a victim of (and captive to) his "celebrity" status. He's addicted to the adoration and he does things like this as a way to seek attention, get interviews, make money, and to let his kookiest fans stroke his ego.

All I'm saying is that he's totally overrated and does not deserve the attention or adoration he seeks.

He lost me as a fan when i figured out he had a weird anti-Obama kink that was completely irrational. Even back in 2008, he wasn't really on board at all.

You can't always blame the messenger. Also, totally fair to disagree with the content of the message, but I'm not fond of disagreeing with presenting the message. That smacks too much of the kind of logic so popular in the W years, that you can't criticize a President in the time of war.

And the GOP thanks him for that message. He is terrific at carrying water for them. Few are better. In 2000 he said Bush and Gore were the same. Remind me how that worked out, as long as we're talking about the W years? That alone revealed Moore to be a gullible, idealistic fool.

like Moore's anything to hang their hat on.

But all critics and criticisms aren't created equally. In Moore's case, they veer more toward the irrational. So in that sense, it really wouldn't matter what Democrats do, there would still be plenty of room for sanctimony and criticism in the view of people like Moore.

analysis, is scrutinizing reporting from the left, with a hard left perspective. Even uncompromising, even if I'm far more nuanced than that myself.

It is not the same as "reporting" from the right. When things are complicated and not as cut and dry as depicted, that argument can be made, but I don't like things being off limits. If there is something that seems like it should be addressed, either because of the idealism on display, or the idealism it seems to contradict, I'd rather make up my mind in the context of the arguments actually being presented, than in the vacuum of said arguments.

Looking forward to seeing this myself.

whole film before commenting...Moore may not be subtle but he has a message for...US...always.

Get back to ya all when I can on this, meantime carry on, all! Plenty more threads on this topic to come....

Plus he made a better case for Hillary in it than her own campaign ever did, post-convention that is.

the point of this film..should have called it Trumpland 2.

the signs were there and were ignored. The backlash against Obama was coming. I still hoped, despite the weight of History, that things would have been different. But in totality: The disinformation war, history, the way Republicans stymied Congress, their abuse of Congress, the gutted Voting rights act/voter suppression, gerrymandering.... A combination of factors were there leading to Trump's win (plus all the toxic ISMS). ( before anyone says it, duh yeah the Clinton campaign made mistakes)

Moore, in my view, doesn't get the Cassandra title out of this. He too played a part in rationalizing the cultural backlash against Obama as "economic anxiety". His last pitch for Hillary came across as a last-ditch effort of apologia: After all, he was banging on about the "establishment" during the primaries. He went on to slander Perez as "establishment" in the race for the DNC chair after the election, clearly not learning lessons of 2016. But I know the Hillary documentary persuaded a lot of people last minute so I thank him for that.

Recently he went on Bill Maher talking about the Kavanaugh appointment and the need for Democrats to "fight" to prevent it, at no point did he indicate how. This is my main issue with him if he understood power he'd realize the only way for Dems to match GOP ammo is if voters give Dems that power in a majority. Right now Dems are trying their best to prevent an already rubber-stamped Federalist Society appointee - yet I'm sure even now he could find criticism.. somewhere.

The only "establishment" that is a threat to the American people is the GOP establishment which respects neither the rule of law nor traditions born out of sweat and tears. It is the GOP which uses legislation as a weapon to harm the vulnerable based on very twisted ideologies which they actually think produce better outcomes - how does Moore not understand this?

"Indeed, Moore’s best zingers and most penetrating indictments land on the Democratic Party"

Nooooo. You don't say?! What a shock!

2016 instead of motivating people to vote, undermining and demoralizing saying how the Democrats were going to lose, and no you are NOT FORGIVEN FOR 2000, or your speech along with Sarandon and others at Madison Square Garden telling your fans how a vote for Gore is a vote for bush.

https://www.nytimes.com/2000/10/15/us/the-2000-campaign-the-green-party-in-nader-supporters-math-gore-equals-bush.html

Then during the women's UNITY march after trump won, you tried to divide, but Ashley Judd was having none of your bullshit. IT WASN'T ABOUT YOU MICHAEL MOORE, that march was about WOMEN, and unity:

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-pol-womens-march-live-watch-ashley-judd-interrupt-michael-1485017688-htmlstory.html

You fooled me once a long time ago, but NEVER AGAIN

And he was just about to get into his favorite part of the speech, shitting on Democrats.

usual garbage on trashing Democrats

Though there are the fringe, dead inside types that populate places like JPR that will probably devour it joyfully.

And I'm sure Moore will try to take credit for it.

...and nobody who isn't a liberal political activist is going to go see the movie and end up convinced.

What's the point?

No conservatives or independents are going to see this. Heck, even more Democrats aren't going to watch it.

He's an entertainer, not a serious political thinker. He occupies more or less the same space on the left that Rush Limbaugh does on the right.

Which was a good (but not great) documentary. Somewhere along the line he got the idea the Democrats and the GOP were the same, and here we are. He became a Johnny One Note, which leads us back to your point. I don't get the appeal either, outside of those who are liberal but hate the party, which seems to be the case in a few of the responses in this thread.

But I know enough to know they are hot garbage, and not worth my time.

We are lost. God forbid we shut down voices that make us uncomfortable. That's what they call fascism.

You can't shut down an entire conversation because you dislike one thing about it. Do you ditch your friends the first time they say something you don't like?

But I figured you wouldn't be able to answer the question, so no surprise.

If Moore is going to make the accusation that it is Obama's fault for Flint, it's part of his argument, and not "the weeds". I sure as hell didn't come up with such a fucking kooky idea.

Also, ease off the melodrama and the hyperbole. Nobody is shutting Moore down. They are mocking him for his gullible, "both sides" trope and foolish worldview. There is a difference.

Are you familiar with the legal concept that silence gives consent? If you see something bad happening and do/say nothing to stop it, you consent to it happening.

Leaving Obama aside, what did Democrats DO about voter suppression and bullshit dirty tricks from 2000 on? What did they do about the banksters, about torture? What did Democrats do about Flint? What did they do about the treatment of the resistance to the Dakota Access Pipeline?

Yes, saying that they ought to have done something implies that they could have done something and you could argue they didn't have the power, etc...and you would be (mostly) right! Except they always had and have the power to speak up. How many of them did?

Glad to see them doing it now, in the Senate.

Oh well maybe at some point you’ll fully grasp the difference between the parties and what they stand for, though one could argue that it shouldn’t take quite so long.

In your eyes the people who tried, or tried and failed to resolve a problem are worse than those who caused it. That view is of course silly and illogical but we live in strange times.

Burn the witch.