Bill Maher, demonstrating surprising confidence during a panel discussion on his HBO show, Real Time With Bill Maher, has made a bold claim. Despite the nervous anticipation of many Americans about the outcome of the presidential election, Maher seemed completely relaxed. His casual attitude caught his co-discussants off guard. These panel members included Fran Lebowitz, the renowned writer, Yuval Noah Harari, a noted Israeli historian, and political consultant, Ian Bremmer.
In a conversation that was meant to discuss the gravity of the situation, Maher’s unconcerned demeanor was disconcerting for some. Fran Lebowitz, known for her sharp wit and insightful takes, was quick to challenge Maher’s lighthearted approach. ‘Are you really not worried at all?’ she asked, to which Maher effortlessly replied, ‘Not in the slightest.’
Maher’s confidence went beyond mere apathy when he prophesied the loss of President Trump. ‘No doubt about it, he will lose. I could feel it,’ he asserted. In response, Lebowitz appeared hopeful with a simple, ‘I sincerely hope you’re correct.’ It is surprising that a professional like Lebowitz, would base such a severe issue as the nation’s leadership on hope, rather than concrete and substantial evidence.
Ian Bremmer, however, found Maher’s dismissal of Trump’s chances hard to digest. Bremmer entered into a theoretical dialogue with the panel, discussing the potential for the American electorate to make the ‘error’ of re-electing Trump to the Oval Office. ‘Only time will tell. We can’t know yet if we’re going to commit the same mistake,’ he commented. To this, one is prompted to ask, would welcoming back a leader who has significantly improved our nation’s economy and international standing genuinely be considered a mistake?
Maher confidently responded to Bremmer, ‘No, we would not.’ His declaration does not hold much weight, considering the subjective and opinionated premise it has been attracted from. Maher claimed to have fully reconciled with the outcome that the voters would not make the so-called ‘mistake’ again.
Maher also had a perplexing take on the usefulness of polls. According to him, polls would continue to show a neck-and-neck race leading up to the election. ‘The polls will even out,’ he said, a statement that might give the illusion of the Democrats comparatively keeping up with Trump’s popular demand. The reality of the matter is that polls can often be misleading, and sometimes, they’re merely echo chambers which reflect the bias of those who conduct them.
He added, almost jovially, ‘I assure you, don’t sweat it.’ The spurious assurance from Maher seems to be a desperate attempt to calm the Democrat nerves, acknowledging that the contest with Trump will indeed be a tough one.
Towards the end of the discussion, Maher made a comment that seems to undermine the relevance of the electoral process. He stated that if President Trump wins again, then at least the panelists wouldn’t have to deal with the anxiety that accompanies waiting for the election outcome.
Through this declaration, Maher seems to echo a sentiment often seen in individuals who are aware of their impending defeat. He conveys a suspiciously unfazed outlook towards the possibility of Trump’s victory, which can be construed as a pre-emptive self-consolation. Clearly, Maher has an exaggerated sense of comfort and security regarding the election’s potential outcome, which appears to be based on wishful thinking rather than objective indicators.
Maher’s blatant dismissal of the importance of the election’s outcome and his dismissive attitude towards the possibility of a Trump victory reveal more about his fear of Trump’s potential victory than they do about a fair assessment of the situation.
His seemingly unflustered attitude and audacious predictions may lend an air of confidence, but they are devoid of merit when you consider the substantial and evident progress that has been made under Trump’s leadership. Wishing and hoping are not valid methods to predict an election outcome, nor the means to plan a country’s future.
Moreover, dismissing a Trump victory as a ‘mistake’ demonstrates an alarming lack of respect for democratic processes and the choice of the American people. This reflects a troubling trend among Democrat supporters to underestimate the intelligence of regular voters by suggesting they are capable of making ‘mistakes’ in their choices.
The featured panelists seem unaware of the growing support for Trump and the practical, effective policies his administration has put in place. Once again, these commentators represent an entrenched bias against Trump, echoing the sentiment within large sections of the media establishment.
Lastly, the efficiency and success of the Trump administration in both domestic and international spheres have solidly legitimized his run for a second term. The apparent wishful thinking on display by Maher and others seems rooted more in fear than in an objective assessment of the reality.