r/television • u/SanderSo47 Person of Interest • 15h ago

Dan Levy Slams Shane Gillis’ ‘SNL’ Monologue: “Speechless That Something Like That Can Exist On Live National Television”

https://deadline.com/2026/10/dan-levy-slams-shane-gillis-snl-monologue-women-1237154744/
5.2k Upvotes

78% Upvoted

3.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

-22

u/Quankers 14h ago

I put Rogan on ignore for a decade and it didn't work. He got bigger and helped elect Trump.

113

u/jamerson537 14h ago

Are you under the impression that if you vocally criticized Rogan for that decade it would have changed the course of national politics? What a heavy burden to carry.

-50

u/Quankers 14h ago

Rogan doesn't have the power and influence he has because people just ignored what they objected to.

17

u/jamerson537 14h ago

I… totally agree. Your ignoring him has zero relevance to whatever “power and influence” he has, and it’s bizarre that you seemed to think otherwise in your first comment.

-13

u/Quankers 14h ago edited 14h ago

Putting a spotlight on something bad has more impact ... than ignoring it.

edit: Are you saying rogan has power and influence because detractors criticize him?

3

u/jamerson537 13h ago

Rogan has “power and influence” because of the people who like him and listen to him, and they don’t give a fuck whether you criticize him or ignore him.

0

u/Quankers 13h ago

I disagree. They are humans and intelligent enough to grasp truth when they are exposed to it.

3

u/jamerson537 13h ago

I can’t imagine the level of sheer arrogance it takes to believe that the people who don’t agree with you are such empty vessels that their mere exposure to your perspective would rewrite their beliefs and preferences. It’s ironic that you wrote that they’re humans, because this delusion is dehumanizing and treats them like props upon which you can impose your outlook.

Hell, why haven’t I changed my mind now that I’ve been exposed to your “truth?”

-1

u/Quankers 13h ago

>such empty vessels

I literally said the opposite.

> They are humans and intelligent enough to grasp truth when they are exposed to it.

There is a lot of misinformation in media, do you not agree?

>why haven’t I changed my mind

I guess your hungry mind has nit been sufficiently nourished. Keep eating.

1

u/jamerson537 12h ago

You may have emptily claimed to see them as human, but your belief that all humanity could ever be monolithically reduced to one set of beliefs disposes of much of what humanity actually entails. Your concept of truth is a hollow and vacuous reflection of your own stunted, delusional perspective.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/FoolsballHomerun 9h ago

False, people believe what they want to believe. Take a look around you dude. If i'm being completely honest, it's calling out every little thing that bothers you that made MAGA as powerful as it is. Majority of America doesn't like people complaining about literally everything that bothers them.

7

u/June1994 14h ago

The idea that people merely "ignored" Rogan and didn't speak out is absurd lmao. Plenty of people have opined their distaste of his retarded podcast.

-2

u/Quankers 14h ago

>plenty

By definition plenty means it had a desired effect. It was not plenty it was insufficient.

2

u/June1994 14h ago

That's not how "plenty" is defined. This is like saying, there weren't "plenty" of votes for Kamala Harris, because Donald Trump won.

-2

u/Quankers 14h ago

Plenty means a sufficient amount aka: more than enough. Kamala had lots of votes, by definition, she did not have plenty.

2

u/June1994 13h ago

There is a wonderful quality to the English language. A word can have more than one meaning and can be used in many different contexts.

You can review the definition of "plenty" here;

PLENTY Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster

0

u/Quankers 13h ago

Except we are using the pronoun definition. The very first entry in your link. It confirms what I said.

1

u/June1994 13h ago

Damn you're right. But you're still wrong. In this context, "plenty" means "a substantial amount of people, sufficient enough to make your claim that people simply ignored him" to be false.

-13

u/No_Morning5397 14h ago

No one thinks that. But maybe we should have stopped him earlier than just pretending that ignoring them works.

13

u/jlfh01 14h ago

How were you going to stop him earlier?

-8

u/No_Morning5397 13h ago

He was fired for these kinds of jokes from SNL in 2019, maybe dont hire him back?

4

u/jlfh01 13h ago

You were talking about Rogan, not Shane.

6

u/EchoFieldHorizon 14h ago

How do you propose we “stop” people like this? I’m as liberal as it gets, but it is really tiring seeing you guys always in some kind of outrage.

-8

u/No_Morning5397 13h ago

I mean he was fired from SNL for racist and misogynistic jokes. So maybe we dont need to give these kinds of comedians constant second chances. I mean if I got fired for this at a job, I would then be hired to freelance for them 

2

u/EchoFieldHorizon 13h ago

There’s an entire thread of people arguing about him here. You’ve already lost that proposition. The best way to make him go away is to just consume other content and not be offended on other peoples’ behalf.

1

u/jamerson537 13h ago

Well, why didn’t you?

4

u/MonteroUruguayo 13h ago

No you were just outvoted. Welcome to the marketplace of opinions/ideas

-2

u/Quankers 13h ago

> No you were just outvoted. Welcome to the marketplace of opinions/ideas

Your two sentence cognitive dissonance is impressive. What do you think ‘the marketplace of ideas’ consists of? Brogansohere is a major factor in this.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-10-25/popular-podcasters-calling-out-trump-male-listeners/105863690

https://preprints.apsanet.org/engage/api-gateway/apsa/assets/orp/resource/item/68e92317bc2ac3a0e052c4eb/original/from-punchlines-to-politics-the-joe-rogan-experience-as-a-case-study-of-the-politicization-of-apolitical-spaces-in-the-us.pdf#6%231

2

u/MonteroUruguayo 12h ago

The paper you shared has a legitimate research question and some credible findings, but its evidence is much stronger for “Joe Rogan became more political” than for “Joe Rogan influenced the 2024 election.” Probably the most important part is that it cant establish wether Rogan changed anyones vote.

And as a matter of principal I don't put much stock in the shitrag that is ABC (Australia). That article has some very selective "framing" and "expert perspectives".

1

u/geaux124 2h ago

If going on Joe Rogan was that influential and held that much sway in the election then maybe Harris should have gone on his show. If Rogan is to be believed he even agreed not to discuss certain topics and she still avoided him like the plague.

15

u/internettyper 14h ago

You didn’t try hard enough it’s all your fault!

-17

u/Quankers 14h ago

Not my fault at all, but the point is ignoring the elephant in the room clearly doesn't make the problem smaller, let alone make it disappear.

4

u/Isuckatreddit69NICE 13h ago

Bro if you think Rogan helped get Trump in more than the DNC you’re in denial. This was a very winnable election if the DNC actually gave a competent nominee.

-3

u/Quankers 13h ago

Both are true. Bro.

1

u/Isuckatreddit69NICE 13h ago

I’m sorry, even without Rogan saying anything, Trump still gets in. Rogan and the other podcasters aren’t responsible for Trump.

-1

u/Quankers 12h ago

They partially, I would argue significantly, are.

1

u/Isuckatreddit69NICE 12h ago

I would say influenced younger demographics to vote.. But overall, Trump would have one regardless the border situation, inflation and many other factors are why this happened. Also the abysmal performances by Biden in the debates and following up with the worst replacement imaginable are what sealed this countries fate.

1

u/CeemoreButtz 13h ago

You clearly didn't. And that's on you. Nobody else.

0

u/Quankers 13h ago

I clearly did to the extent it is possible to. People with a megaphone can be heard whether you wear earplugs or not.

-52

u/AvailableReporter484 14h ago edited 14h ago

Look Rogan is a fucking moron but it’s extremely disingenuous to say he’s the reason trump won. He’s also not a comedian.

Ok apparently he’s a standup. That doesn’t make anything else I said less true as much as you want to believe it does lmfao

9

u/MongoBongoTown 14h ago

Rogan started as a stand-up comedian.

Then became host of Fear Factor, then UFC Host; then Podcaster

-10

u/AvailableReporter484 14h ago

Right. He’s not a stand up comedian.

1

u/dunkinhonutz 14h ago

He still does all that except fear factor. I despise the guy and still know what he does. Take your head out of the sand before you speak aloud.

-2

u/AvailableReporter484 14h ago

This is such a hilarious gotcha. As if me saying he’s not a standup, which I retracted, somehow destroys my entire premise, which I won’t change.

0

u/dunkinhonutz 5h ago

Honestly I don't give a shit whatever message you were trying to push but saying he's not a stand-up comedian was just inaccurate.

He's not a very funny stand-up comedian but he does it.

0

u/MongoBongoTown 5h ago

He owns a comedy club in Austin and regularly does sets there.

He is actively a stand up comedian.

0

u/AvailableReporter484 5h ago

Yes yes this has been pointed out ad nauseam and I’ve retracted my previous statement

11

u/anuncommontruth 14h ago

Rogan is a comedian. He does stand up comedy. He just fucking sucks at it.

-16

u/AvailableReporter484 14h ago

Great. I’m glad we cleared up that very important distinction.

7

u/JustFourLetters 14h ago

Who said he’s the reason trump won? Helped isn’t the same as the reason lol

7

u/Zomburai 14h ago

This is three kinds of wrong in two sentences. He's not the reason Trump won, but Quankers didn't say that. He was, however, a huge positive impact for Trump in getting him elected. And he is actually a comedian (at least in that he takes gigs for stand-up comedy; the presence of any jokes is debatable).

4

u/Quankers 14h ago

It is extremely disingenuous to say that. Who said that? Not me.

2

u/sharkinaround 14h ago

he’s a comedian lol, he has multiple standup specials and owns a comedy club where he regularly performs. having said that, i think he’s a way better podcaster than comedian.

-4

u/AvailableReporter484 14h ago

I thought he was just a podcaster. That’s how little I know or care about him.

Fine. He’s a comedian. To say he’s the reason why trump won is still a hysterical opinion.

3

u/LitBastard 14h ago

He is not THE reason Trump won, he is a reason.

0

u/AvailableReporter484 14h ago

> a reason

Ok well there are millions of variables you can attribute MAGA too so what’s even the point of this statement? I’m sure there’s a correlation between drinking soda and trump presidency if you look hard enough

1

u/LitBastard 12h ago

JRE has around 20M followers. 18M on Spotify and 21M on YT.

He was one of Trumps most vocal supporters.

There is a correlation.

1

u/AvailableReporter484 12h ago

Only if the implication is that he is directly responsible for causing people to pull the trigger for red and not that they were already conservative voters who were doing it before my man ever picked up a microphone.

I’m sure he helped swayed people, but an insignificant amount and tbh if those people were swayed by a podcaster then they probably were never going to vote for Hilary or Harris to begin with.

-4

u/Decadoarkel 14h ago

I don't like the guy, but: Literally asked Kamala to interview. She wanted to do it her terms.