By John Q. Hosedrinker 
This article champions a newsroom committed to unwavering, independent reporting, urging readers to become members to support its mission. Membership ensures the continuation of courageous journalism that remains unswayed by external pressures. By joining, individuals actively contribute to maintaining the integrity and backbone of this vital journalistic endeavor.
Read the original article here
It seems the internet is buzzing with the idea of a “breakup” between Donald Trump and Bill Maher, and rather ironically, it’s happening around Valentine’s Day. This whole situation stems from Trump’s recent public comments, where he seemingly detailed a past encounter with Maher that didn’t go as planned from Trump’s perspective. Apparently, Trump felt Maher was nervous and lacking confidence, even needing a drink to steady his nerves before their meeting. He even described Maher as being “scared,” which, in a bizarre twist, Trump found somewhat endearing.
This narrative, coming from Trump, is being viewed by some as surprisingly well-written and credible, even if it paints both individuals in a somewhat unflattering light. The idea of these two prominent, and let’s be honest, bombastic personalities interacting, and then having that interaction become public fodder, is itself quite the spectacle. It’s been suggested that Maher, with his platform, was even seen as a potential bridge for some on the left to consider right-leaning viewpoints, a role he apparently played through his political commentary.
What’s particularly amusing to many is the framing of this disagreement as significant news. It’s been characterized more as a “cross-platform clout farming” exercise between two professional provocateurs rather than a genuine news event. The irony isn’t lost on observers that Trump, who himself is often accused of seeking attention, is now taking shots at Maher over perceived low ratings or relevance. It’s a situation where everyone seems to be vying for attention, and perhaps not in the most dignified way.
The notion of a “breakup” is further fueled by the fact that Maher is not the current President, whereas Trump is. This distinction is crucial, as it highlights the unusual behavior of a former President seemingly engaging in public spats over television shows and personal interactions. The question is raised: which past President would publicly complain about a television show? The general consensus seems to be that no one else would, suggesting a unique and perhaps concerning tendency in Trump’s approach to public discourse.
There’s also the underlying sentiment that Maher might still be harboring some resentment, perhaps stemming from a feeling of being “canceled” in the past, even if the extent of this cancellation isn’t widely acknowledged by everyone. The idea that Maher can’t let go of past grievances, even years later, and continually brings them up, points to a lingering bitterness that colors his interactions.
This dynamic has also brought Maher’s past commentary under scrutiny. It’s been noted that Maher once described Trump as charming and understanding during their dinner. This observation has led to some rather sharp criticism, with comparisons drawn to how even figures like Hitler could be charming to gain power. The suggestion is that Maher, by highlighting Trump’s perceived charm, was inadvertently making a kind of “commercial bend the knee” to someone with authoritarian tendencies, a move some believe he, along with other powerful figures, made. Therefore, this “breakup” from Trump could be seen as a Valentine’s Day gift, allowing Maher to perhaps reconnect with his conscience.
Adding another layer to this complex relationship is the idea that it’s Maher who might have initiated the “dumping” of Trump. Given Trump’s history, where accusations and denials are often seen as projections, the theory is that Maher ended things, perhaps mirroring other past relationships that ended abruptly. The juxtaposition with Jeffrey Epstein is particularly stark and suggests a pattern of negative associations.
The commentary also delves into Trump’s broader political leanings and his tendency to align with certain groups, like Israel-apologists. The surprise expressed at the idea of Trump and Maher “dating” highlights the unexpected nature of their past interaction. It’s been pointed out that Maher had a rare opportunity to have a direct, face-to-face meeting with the President on relatively equal footing, a chance to air grievances and potentially influence him. However, it’s argued that Maher squandered this opportunity by resorting to emotional appeals.
This appeal to emotion, directed at someone who has been accused of serious transgressions, including being an adjudicated rapist, shielding pedophiles, and displaying a pattern of denigrating and dividing people, is seen as a profound miscalculation. The argument is that Maher chose the wrong approach for the historical moment, damaging his own credibility by attempting to “both sides” an individual who, in his view, regularly abuses power. The feeling is that Maher was outmaneuvered and that this was obvious to everyone but him.
There’s a hope among some that Trump’s public criticism might finally make Maher realize this, though there’s skepticism that it will. Maher has been characterized as “washed up” for a significant period, with questions about his current audience. The concern is that if Maher doesn’t respond forcefully to Trump’s attacks, it will confirm him as someone easily dismissed.
The notion of being “lukewarm” is used to describe Maher’s position, suggesting he’s neither fully committed to one side nor the other, and thus, is on the verge of being rejected by everyone. The suggestion that he might find solace with Jimmy Kimmel implies a desire for him to find a new comedic home, especially if this Valentine’s weekend is otherwise a failure. The sentiment is that having been discarded by the left, he’s now facing rejection from the right, potentially landing him in the “dustbin of irrelevancy.”
Many long-time Maher fans express disgust at his past interactions with Trump, particularly his perceived “capitulation.” The bewilderment stems from the idea that someone as intelligent as Maher couldn’t grasp that Trump could be charming while simultaneously being a fundamentally flawed individual. The implication of alcoholism is also raised as a potential factor in Maher’s past behavior.
Maher’s tendency to pit mainstream Democrats against the most extreme elements of the left, in an attempt to appear unbiased, is also a point of irritation for some. This “straw man” argument is seen as tired and disingenuous. The overall sentiment from some is that both Trump and Maher are problematic figures.
Bill Maher is repeatedly described as a self-serving individual, and the idea of him having a “man crush” on Trump is floated. A linked essay by Larry David, humorously poking fun at Maher’s dinner with Trump, further underscores the perceived absurdity of their past interactions. The idea of a “breakup” is also questioned by those who point out Maher’s consistent criticism of Trump, predating his presidency.
Ultimately, the narrative paints a picture of two polarizing figures whose public interactions, or lack thereof, continue to generate debate and amusement. The Valentine’s Day timing adds an extra layer of irony to what many see as a petty squabble between two individuals who thrive on controversy, and whose alleged “breakup” is just another chapter in their ongoing public performances.