Left Wing Media FURIOUS Chris Evans DARE Talk With Republicans
Leftist Media SLAMS Chris Evans For Talking With Conservatives. Far left activists and leftist writers are outraged at Chris Evans dare talk to republicans about complex issues. The far left dog whistle "both sidesism" is dropped to imply that Chris Evans is going to fed fake news and propaganda because the left really believes there are not other arguments to complex issues and they are morally absolute.Chris Evans has been taking increasing heat over his meetings with conservatives and republicans, being accused of meeting with "Hydra."Left wing and Far left individuals are not at the table talking about politics as they don't believe in "platforming." This is a good example of why the far left is outraged, that he is proving a platform for "the others."But what makes Chris' project interesting is that he is an outspoken Trump critic and has gained the ire of many a trump supporter over his statements.Whether or not Chris Evan's project will be effective is yet to be seen but "A Starting Point" with Chris Evans may be just what we need, a place to start a conversation to help bring people back together.
Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Chris Evans is facing a growing anger from the left over his meeting with Republicans.
Now, you may know Chris Evans from the Marvel films where he plays Captain America, and you may also know him from his various controversial statements he's made, usually about Trump and Trump supporters.
But it was recently announced he was starting a website called A Starting Point, where he would sit down with Democrats and Republicans to talk about various political issues.
Naturally, the left is angry because they call this both-sides-ism.
That there aren't two sides to an issue.
There's only one side to climate change, and there's only one side to immigration, and talking to anyone else is to justify ideas that aren't correct or right.
This is a problem the left has.
In my line of work, I've tried interviewing people, and typically, it is very, very difficult to sit down with the left because they don't want to validate or platform your ideas.
But the reality is, in this country, Around half of the people who live here hold differing views.
So it's not about two sides or both sides, it's about complex issues.
While I think it's great that Chris Evans is launching this program, I don't think it will be effective.
But I think it's a good starting point.
However, the left doesn't think so and they're kind of pissed off about it.
So today, let's take a look at what's happening with Chris Evans and talk about the issue of the left not wanting to come to the table to have a discussion.
Now before we get started, I want to give a quick shout out to today's sponsor, VirtualShield, who helps make this podcast possible.
VirtualShield is a virtual private network service that can protect your data from prying eyes as you browse the web.
You can find out way more at hidewithtim.com, but essentially, There are people like hackers, there are governments, corporations that want to track and even steal your data, and a virtual private network like VirtualShield can help keep that data safe.
Now we don't expect people to break into our homes, but we put locks on our doors and windows anyway.
The same is true for the internet.
It makes sense to have that simple layer of defense.
So if you're interested, go to hidewithtim.com and you can get 40% off with their Easter special today.
But now, back to the story.
A couple weeks ago, we saw this story from the Rep.
Captain America vs. Trump.
Chris Evans to launch politics website, A Starting Point.
The story says, Captain America has a new mission for the Trump era, to create informed, responsible, and empathetic citizens.
Chris Evans, who stars in the upcoming Avengers Endgame, is launching, quote, A Starting Point, a new website aiming to get regular citizens involved in politics.
You don't want to alienate half your audience, Evans told The Hollywood Reporter, but I'd be disappointed in myself if I didn't speak up, especially for fear of some monetary repercussions or career damage.
That just feels really gross to me.
Evans, an outspoken Trump critic, was spotted in Washington, D.C.
in recent weeks with several lawmakers, including U.S.
senators from both parties.
The site, which doesn't have a launch date, is co-founded by Evans with actor Mark Kassin and entrepreneur Joe Kiani.
Now what makes this story so interesting is that Chris Evans is actually one of the more bombastic anti-Trump personalities.
He's very famous with millions of followers, and we recently saw this story.
Chris Evans is open to playing Tom Brady as long as he's no longer a Trump supporter.
The story says, the 37-year-old actor told The Hollywood Reporter that it's been tough being a Patriots fan in the age of Trump because of Brady's purported friendship with the president.
This is no small declaration for Evans as he was born and raised in Boston and has been a lifelong follower of the team.
I don't know.
I really hope he's not a Trump supporter, Evan told The Hollywood Reporter in a story published on Wednesday when asked if he'd be open to playing Brady in a movie.
I'm just hoping he's one of those guys that maybe supported him and now regrets it.
This isn't the only controversial thing that Chris Evans has said.
He's tweeted many things.
But it does show something good.
That even though Chris Evans is biased and doesn't like the president, he's willing to sit down with politicians, both Democrat and Republican alike, and actually talk to people because this is what we need.
One of the most common tropes we've seen in the culture war or in modern politics is that it's typically only Republicans sitting at the table waiting to have a discussion.
And I know that's not necessarily true at the political level in Congress, per se.
But at the ground level, at the grassroots level, it's damn near impossible to even sit down for interviews with people on the left.
There are many people on the left who have done interviews with me and other people, and I have had many people on the left reach out to me, but it's dramatically different still.
There have been circumstances where I've interviewed people on the left, and then they say, you know what, no, don't use it, you can't use it.
And I can't say I'm surprised.
They don't believe in the idea that other people have opinions and reasons for believing their opinions.
So at least Chris Evans is launching a starting point.
But what do you think the left and even mainstream journalism has to say about this?
It's dumb, it's a terrible idea, and it's problematic.
The Daily Beast, of course, wrote this story.
Chris Evans, both sides political news site is Thanos level dumb.
Captain America is set to launch a non-partisan civic engagement project where politicians from both sides of the aisle answer the questions they like.
What a terrible idea.
Of course, they don't believe in nuance and they don't believe in the idea that there are many things to consider before making a political decision.
They say in this story, here's the thing.
If you can hear the phrase both sides in contemporary American discourse and not immediately see red flags, you are in deep trouble, pal.
First of all, there are more than two positions on any given political issue.
Democrats do not all agree, nor do Republicans.
There are liberals and moderates and conservatives, a whole spectrum of ideology.
And the idea that framing every issue as something in which you choose between two parties' positions will somehow reduce partisanship seems very flawed.
Secondly, not all political issues in contemporary America have more than one, quote, side.
Here are some issues on which you might find benefit from understanding different positions.
Medicare for all, universal healthcare single-payer, open borders, free college, universal basic income.
Here are some issues that do not fall under that category.
White nationalism.
Tracking the menstrual cycles of imprisoned immigrant girls to prevent them from obtaining abortions.
Putting immigrant children in cages.
Separating immigrant children from their parents and then losing track of their origins so they can't be reunited.
They go on.
In fact, most issues would benefit more from fact-checking than from a view of both sides.
Are claims about the cost incurred by undocumented immigrants accurate?
How many children have been lost by the federal government?
Would universal healthcare really be prohibitively expensive?
But let's take a look at what the Daily Beast did here.
Medicare for all.
Of course, there's nuance here, but whatever the nuance is, it's typically a left-wing position.
Open borders.
There's no nuance between the right and the left.
Only the left.
The right is 100% opposed to this.
Free college.
Once again, the right is opposed to this.
And universal basic income.
The right is typically opposed to this.
White nationalism, I have to agree, actually.
Almost everyone in this country, including everyone in political office, agrees.
There's not really two sides or any more side to what this is.
However, when it comes to discussions of free speech, there absolutely is.
As detestable as you may find these people, they have a right to express their opinion so long as they aren't violent, calling for violence, inciting violence, etc.
Talking about tracking menstrual cycles is an overly complicated way of talking about what's really happening.
This is called framing.
They're framing this issue in such a way that makes you think it's really bad, and of course there can't be two issues.
Putting immigrant children in cages is not a way that any good faith argument would present the issue.
Putting kids in cells or holding facilities, whatever you want to call it, the left calls them cages, and that implies they're in a tiny, tiny space where they have two feet of room.
No.
They're being held while their parents are going through a process, and it's a complicated issue that needs to be discussed.
Because if we want to improve the situation, we have to discuss it.
What the Daily Beast is doing is a perfect example of why we do need Chris Evans' project.
And I think it's rather funny for me to say that, because I've been critical of him.
But I gotta hand it to him.
Tremendous respect for trying to sit down and bring people together.
Now, personally, I don't think it will be effective because partisanship and extremism is pretty damn crazy and you have many people who refuse to talk to another.
Admittedly, however, and I think most of the people who watch my channel know this to be a fact, I can sit down with any Republican or conservative Like that.
Absolutely easy.
I can walk right up to any right-wing personality or moderate, conservative, whatever, and say, can I ask you some questions?
99.9% of the time, they'll say yes.
But what do you think happens when I do that for people on the left?
They either say no, demand money, want to preview or edit or control what we're putting out.
It's very, very difficult.
It's not impossible, but it is very difficult.
And then you see what they do in The Daily Beast.
They frame things that they disagree with in such a way to sour what people might think about these issues.
They're poisoning the well.
Framing a narrative in such a way that you couldn't possibly agree with those issues because they want you to say you're right.
There clearly can't be two sides or more to that issue.
But when it comes to the issue of immigration, there's a ton of nuance.
Yes, sure, call it putting children in cages.
We definitely need to talk about it and hear what the other side is saying if we want to solve this problem.
Because believe it or not, there are tens of millions of people supporting this president and many Republicans.
You can't just trample over what they want and their civil liberties.
That means you have to come to the table.
But what may be the scariest thing I've seen having to do with this is the Columbia Journalism Review saying, The problem with Captain America's new both sides website I have to say both sides in my opinion is a far-left dog whistle I hate using the term dog whistle, but it really is something unique to the left moderates
Conservatives, regular Americans understand that yes, there's not really two sides to an issue, there's nuance.
And journalists have to explore that nuance.
For an educational news website like CJR to say that exploring both sides is a problem is actually rather worrying, because what does this say about the next generation of journalists?
What does it say about the people who work in media and are at this university?
They even try to liken this to Charlottesville, saying, The term both sides, which harkens back to Donald Trump's infamous response to the tragedy in Charlottesville, I think there is blame on both sides, he'd said, after white supremacists killed an activist fighting for racial equality, isn't the best phrase to use when promoting a source of information.
Evans mentions in the teaser that his site will give a politician the chance not only to galvanize your base, but you might change some minds.
Andrew Bujan of the Washingtonian senior editor tells CJR, It's this centrist fantasy that if we only listen to each
other, we'd be able to make up our own minds about an issue and
suddenly John F. Kennedy Jr.
is going to come back to life and become president and everything is going to be like the West Wing.
He adds, when politicians come on and lie to him, and they're going to lie to him,
How is he going to handle it?
Is he going to fact check?
Bujan also takes issue with the promised additional reading.
How do we know that the material is going to be honest?
It won't be honest.
It's not going to be white papers.
It's going to be news articles they believe agree with them.
How interesting that a journalist and the Columbia Journalism Review would be shocked that someone might use an opposing news source for information.
It seems like they're explaining basically how most Trump supporters feel.
Why should you trust any of these news sites at all?
You're only now getting it because Chris Evans wants to talk to Republicans about what they're seeing and believing?
Seems kind of weird now you're criticizing news articles.
Ultimately, what I find to be very strange is that they say there needs to be thoughtful public debate about politics, but Evans doesn't seem to be creating the platform for it.
I think it's always a good idea to have more information about issues available to voters, especially around election time.
It's nice that Evans is willing to try, he adds.
But if your goal is to create an informed electorate, and getting people to discern what is true and what is not, especially in this time and age and this administration, I'm not sure how that would accomplish that goal.
In my opinion, journalists can do a better job of helping you serve as the BS detector on what's going on in Washington.
But that's false.
100% false.
Look at the years of Russiagate.
No, trust in media is at an all-time low, and perhaps we need someone from the left to step forward and say, how about we come to the table and have a conversation?
Makes a lot of sense.
And again, I commend Chris Evans for being an outspoken Trump critic who wants to sit down with people like Dan Crenshaw even when they say he's meeting with Nazis.
And yes, There were some people trying to claim that Chris Evans was meeting with Nazis because he sat down with Republican Representative Dan Crenshaw, and that has to be one of the most absurd things ever.
A story from the Daily Wire highlights how some people said, One person saying, you should have maybe considered googling this dude first, and someone else saying, dawg, that guy is literally Hydra.
Hydra is, of course, the Nazi offshoot supervillain organization from the Captain America comics.
So there's the good news and the bad news, but maybe this is more so good news, that someone like Chris Evans is willing to come out, sit down, and have his conversations, because polarization is getting crazy.
And it is really hard to get people on the left to have these conversations, so fantastic.
Good on Chris Evans.
I'm not surprised that he's receiving pushback from people.
Admittedly, not the worst pushback we've ever seen, but they're insulting him over doing this.
They really don't like the idea of someone breaking ranks and communicating with the other side.
One of the most interesting bits of information we've heard in recent time was from the Sam Harris podcast with Jack Dorsey.
From this website podcast notes, they say, Sam also suggests that Twitter implement some form of
dashboard so people would be able to see how siloed they are in terms of information. People
might not know or be aware that they're only getting one side of a story. Leading up to the 2016
presidential election, Twitter realized the following. The amount of journalists on the left who
were following folks on the right end of the spectrum was very small. But the amount of
journalists on the right following left-wing people was very high.
Yes, conservatives are actively engaging with the left, or at least trying to, and the left gets mad at anyone who dare talk to Republicans, claiming they're meeting with Nazis, because they live in a weird fantasy extremist world.
The video I made the other day kind of talked about this problem.
That Democratic politicians are now chasing after this fringe activist base, thinking it's mainstream America, and it's not.
And conservatives are sitting there watching and laughing about it.
If the Democrats on the left want to win anything, they can't chase after the fringe minorities.
And if someone comes out saying maybe we should have a conversation, a starting point, when the left attacks them, I have to say, I'm not surprised.
But let me know what you think in the comments below.
We'll keep the conversation going.
You can follow me on Mines at TimCast.
Stay tuned, new videos every day at 4 p.m.
Eastern.
And I'll have more videos on my second channel, youtube.com slash TimCastNews at 6 p.m.
