It’s embarrassing that it is so obvious that the way to manipulate Trump is by stroking his ego. And that he is so easily manipulated! We cannot trust that he will do what he says that he will do, because the next person in the room may make him feel even more self-important. How it is not immediately obvious to any rational person that Putin played him masterfully by directly validating all Trump’s most self righteous lies is beyond me.
Thank you for honestly reporting on what transpired in Alaska and DC, and outlining why this is concerning.
At this point, when the whole election ran on ending wars, the way he negotiated ending the Afghanistan war, and the way he uses "peace" in his own country, we should all know better than to leave him in a room to negotiate peace. He bows to shallow compliments and says and does things to pump up his own ego (a red carpet and bomber flyover to show Putin how classy he is) and logic plays no part in the art of his deal.
Meanwhile Republican-led agencies are demanding Obama be jailed with literally zero evidence against him. Gabbard and others are throwing around words like “treason” and “coup” without presenting a single document, recording, or witness testimony. Their entire case amounts to: Obama’s administration monitored contacts between Trump’s team and Russian officials - you know, literally the job of counterintelligence when foreign adversaries are attempting election interference. They’re treating standard FISA procedures and intelligence briefings as if they’re crimes, while refusing to explain what law Obama supposedly broke or what he should have done differently when presented with evidence of Russian interference. And the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling means Obama couldn’t be prosecuted for presidential actions anyway, making this entire exercise performative rage costing taxpayers for sham investigations.
Compare that evidence-free theater to Trump’s actual documented behavior with Putin. After Helsinki 2018, when Trump sided with Putin over the consensus of our own country that Russia interfered in our 2016 election, saying “I don’t see why he would have done it” in front of Putin, even Trump’s own party couldn’t stomach it. John McCain called it “one of the most disgraceful performances by an American president in memory.” Lindsey Graham - who normally defends Trump reflexively - said it was a “missed opportunity” and that the president’s weakness was “doing a lot of damage.” Paul Ryan insisted there was “no question” Russia interfered and Trump needed to acknowledge it. Even Newt Gingrich said Trump needed to clarify whether he actually intended to prefer Putin’s word over our country. These were Trump’s own party leaders watching their president side with Putin over American intelligence agencies on live television. And then Trump sheepishly “corrected” with something like: “Oopsie I meant to say “wouldn’t” not “would” - I meant to call Putin out for just one sentence but I used the wrong word and therefore everything I said was in Putin’s favor, my bad.” Totally absurd and proves that Trump prefers Russia to America. We were totally justified in investigating this strange relationship Trump has with Russia.
Now Alaska proves nothing has changed. Within 48 hours Trump abandoned coordinated Western positions to parrot Kremlin talking points. The same president who brands himself as “no new wars” is blaming Obama for not bombing Russia over Crimea in 2014. So which is it: peace candidate or hawk? His supporters somehow hold both positions simultaneously without their heads exploding. The podcast bros who sold Trump as anti-war have gone mysteriously quiet on Ukraine. I checked in yesterday, and it seems Trump’s base is still more preoccupied with their civil war over whether their president is a pedophile than with foreign policy reversals.
But here’s what should terrify everyone: Putin just demonstrated to every authoritarian on earth that a few hours of psychological manipulation can get an American president to abandon his allies and echo enemy propaganda. If this is what Putin achieves in one afternoon, what’s Xi Jinping learning about Taiwan? Putin published a how-to manual for exploiting American weakness that will be studied in Beijing, Tehran, and Pyongyang for decades.
Thank you, Timothy, for connecting the past, present, and future.
The only clarification I would offer is the difference between what used to be referred to as Republicans and MAGAs.
We all know what Republicans used to stand for. They were never “Trump’s party.” They were the party in power during his first term. That’s why they called him out. They either no longer exist, or are no longer relevant.
The party in power is MAGA. We all know what they stand for. They are Trump’s party.
Hi Gina! You’re right that the party has fundamentally changed since 2018 and they won’t criticize Trump directly anymore. But their praise is so empty. In 2018 they could say “this was disgraceful.” Now they can only praise the red carpet and fighter jets (the theater that showed us as wanting to impress Putin) while carefully avoiding any mention of what was actually accomplished. MAGA knows it was a failure, even if they dont admit it.
And I had another thought that showed the contrast between now and 2018: at least back then they were transparent enough to take questions during their meeting. This time all we have is their vague self-summaries and unnamed sources describing the day. I bet if they had taken questions and Trump said to reporters in front of Putin "We aren't interested in a ceasefire anymore" the Rs who say they are pro-Ukraine wouldn't be able to dodge questions on what their feelings about the meeting was.
That’s why vague self-summaries and unnamed sources are a dictator’s best friend.
But I do not believe it would make a difference to the MAGA/R’s who lie they are pro-Ukraine. Remember when he said he believed Putin over our own intelligence? It made zero difference.
As the most excellent Fiona Hill said, “and here we are.”
This: "Putin just demonstrated to every authoritarian on earth that a few hours of psychological manipulation can get an American president to abandon his allies and echo enemy propaganda."
Trump, no matter how he sees it, is bad at dealmaking. I mean, the pressure was on Russia - they're cash-strapped and unpopular, and Trump couldn't or wouldn't leverage any of that.
“American commitments are negotiable, Western unity is fragile, and patient manipulation can achieve what military confrontation cannot.”
This is nothing new. It’s as old as broken treaties with Native American tribes, and as recent as our abandonment of Afghan allies.
Ukraine, and the rest of the world, know there is no such thing as a security agreement. Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons in exchange for one, and as the prescient Fiona Hill would say, “and here we are.”
I love Fiona Hill. The world would be a better place if she were our president. Heck, the world would be a better place if almost anyone else were our president.
I think a discussion of the book choice is warranted. Dozens of people I know are upset not only about the choice but how any feedback has been handled. A supreme court justice is a huge get, but a refusal to acknowledge that platforming a person who has contributed to weakening the rule of law and dismantling constitutional rights will help that person become a NYT bestseller, as well as refusing to acknowledging the very valid feelings people have about the choice has been causing a lot of OG members to decide to end their membership.
I’m a current Insider, and she did address both of those issues you raised: she directly responded to the ‘platforming’ comment and she acknowledged the feelings some people have about the choice. She shared her thoughts on both those counts. Respectfully, I don’t think it’s accurate to say she refused to acknowledge these things. I suspect the people who continue to be upset are dissatisfied with what she had to say in response. It seems, for some, that anything short of her pulling that book is unsatisfactory to those who have an issue with it.
Respectfully, saying that ACB won’t benefit financially isn’t true, so that wasn’t addressed. And comparing the situation to Septima Clark is disingenuous since we won’t be allowed to have an actual conversation with her. Maybe some would’ve quit no matter what, but that’s definitely not the case for a lot of folks who were willing to listen and understand.
Thank you for sharing those specifics. As a long-time SCOTUS enthusiast (for lack of a better term), I welcomed ACB’s book and the author meet up. And as a conservative leaning independent who is an OG member and an early Preamble subscriber, I was surprised to see it included but not at all surprised to hear some were disappointed. I believe she expected it. I don’t agree with Sharon’s take on many issues, but I feel like I learn much, understand more, and every so often walk away with a different perspective. Not everyone feels that way about her work though, and they want to see/support only certain viewpoints. I get it. To me, including this book is aligned with the “America’s government teacher” I was originally drawn to follow.
I’m late to the discussion! I have never joined the book club but I did this time because of Ken Burns. I was intrigued about Amy Barrett. I find some of her voting very interesting and am willing to listen to her. I don’t know if I will buy her book though.
Same, I won't buy it (still trying to figure out how to read it, but I am sure I will figure it out), but I am very intrigued to hear what she has to say. I am very left leaning and am often angered by ACB's actions but I think it was a bold choice and I commend Sharon for doing it. For me, I was satisfied with her responses to the feedback and do not think she should bow down to any pressure. Hearing from someone we disagree with is super important and I look forward to it. She is practising what she preaches and I respect her for it.
This does seem to demonstrate that Europe is now the primary democratic global power. America can earn back its leadership role but only if MAGA is out. I hope the Democrats can capitalize on this. I pray they can demonstrate that they have the leadership ability that trump does not.
Hard to believe there would not be one opinion about this book pick. I am an annual member of the book group but I don't plan to read ACB's book or involve myself in anything related to it.
There are two books this coming season: Listening to the Law and Between Two Kingdoms. There are five pretty incredible workshops. There's the Ken Burns special event. And lots of deep dives, private Instagram account only stuff, and more. I've been an Insider for all but one season since its inception and renewed just this morning for another year. You don't have to buy the book, or participate in the book club for that one if you choose not to. I'm looking forward to both books, and another interesting season she has lined up.
It is not necessarily the choice of book that turned me away from this semester! I checked and was told that Amy Coney Barrett was not being paid for the book club appearance, which I do admire. The rollout of the season and behavior surrounding it is why I decided not to participate this season. I’ve been part of the club for ages and I love Sharon and her work. I’m sitting this one out and that’s something I’m well within my rights to do without needing an explanation about what each book club season entails.
Can I ask what turned you off about the 'rollout of the season and behavior surrounding it'? I'm genuinely curious, because I'm not sure I'm tracking anything different this time. And in case your last line was directed at me personally (I'm not sure), my response wasn't to you - it was to the original poster's question because I didn't know if she (or others who might be unfamiliar with each season) was aware of all that's included.
The rollout of the season has felt much different this time around! Books haven’t been officially posted to the grid of the private account or the main one, when I checked earlier. And I’ve heard (unconfirmed) that comments have been deleted that were critical and refunds automatically issued - that’s secondhand and did not happen to me, so take that with a grain of salt. The Supreme Court Justice book pick was off-putting to me but the rest of it hasn’t rolled out like previous seasons and feels off, personally. I needed my $60 anyway but I did not feel like supporting Amy Coney Barrett’s appearance, regardless.
I'm not falling for the whisperings of deleted comments or refunds being issued. When people don't agree with something a creator does they get so suspicious and this rumor starts. Even if someone did get a comment deleted or a refund issued it's probably because the way they were showing their disapproval with this book choice was toxic.
I agree. I am quite disappointed in the reactions to this season. I thought we were all better than that. Sharon's main message has always been to listen to everyone and that everyone gets a seat at the table, not just those we agree with. That is supposed to be the whole vibe of being a Governerd. The reactions are very off putting to me. Everyone has the right to not participate either for this book specifically, or for the season as a whole and I respect that. But wow, can we move on?
Ah, got it. Admittedly, I'm on an annual-renewal, so I probably am not aware of the season-to-season transitions as much as I could've been. Thanks for sharing.
I’m staying for the workshops. I live in Charleston, so one hits close to home. I think Sharon is a great teacher and I have respected her for many years, but if she wasn’t someone I have enjoyed learning from for so long I would not have renewed.
I don't feel blindsided. Sharon has never shied away from knowledge or discouraged us from learning about someone we don't agree with. If we ignored all the perspectives we don't agree with we'd be in an echo chamber so all of this is very on brand for Sharon. No need to read it but reading the book doesn't "require anyone's approval" of it, including Sharon's.
This comment section has become an echo chamber and is now quite boring. The number of comments on any given day has dwindled so much since the beginning. It is very on brand for this comment section to start running around like chickens with their heads cut off over a book they disagree with, yet are in no way being forced to read.
I get that. I just assume everyone is flawed, so I don’t get too upset when they disappoint me. Definitely a coping mechanism, but I’m never going to fall for a cult. Haha
This type of internet comment is so predictable, when anyone does something y'all don't agree with the first step to trying to cancel them and feel validated by what you think is your moral superiority is to ask if they're deleting comments. Also, proximity to a book you don't agree with does not make the contents contagious. Don't read it if you don't want to but don't make this a moral stance and try to ban a book for the rest of us in Sharon's book club.
I know this wasn’t directed toward me but I am a librarian and the most anti-banning books person you could ever meet, lol. I’m just choosing not to engage in this semester for a variety of reasons and I think claiming that anyone doing that is trying to ban a book is a stretch.
I'm saying those trying to cancel Sharon/force a book change for the rest of us are essentially banning a book. I don't think those who want to skip this semester are banning books.
I’m sorry, I should’ve said those *who would* force a book change because this all started with a prediction on my part. A ✨hypothetical future.✨Time will tell if it’s relevant and if you’re not going to try to cancel Sharon, you don’t need to keep thinking my comments apply to you.
My experience is that Sharon has rarely used a heavy hand of moderation in the spicier discussions (what happens under her Substack posts is usually quite tame compared to the live chats, and leagues away from the tone of discussions under her Instagram grid posts...) Removing the option to comment at all was why it clearly stood out to me.
I am actually excited about ACB’s appearance being someone who leans Democrat. I don’t know if I’ll buy her book yet but I’ve been in book club for over a year now and I’ve finished one book lol! I understand people not wanting to renew because of her but there’s so much content this semester! Don’t read her book, don’t come to the zoom meetings about her book or the author appearance. I think a lot of conservatives have been silent about more “liberal” authors so now it’s my turn to listen to someone they’re excited about. While I don’t agree with ACB on a lot of issues, I do think some of her decisions are interesting and she has sided with liberal justices on some cases unlike 2 other SCJ who seem bent on giving MAGA a win every time. Lastly, Sharon says she heard ACB is a great teacher and all her students loved her so I’m sure we would all learn something!
I don’t think any book is liberal. I put “liberal” in quotation because I know how some conservatives can read something and don’t understand it the way liberals do. For example: A Fever in the Heartland or The Distance Between Us. Both talk about issues that I think are real and I agree with but I can definitely see conservatives saying “well don’t come to the US illegally if it’s so scary.” I expect to be uncomfortable with ACB’s book and her author appearance but I still am excited because I’m curious about her
I see. I would hope Fever in the Heartland wouldn't be too liberal, even for conservatives, the KKK is pretty bad. (And I understand you were not talking about yourself.) Thanks for answering!
Wasn’t it Hillary that said Trump was Putin’s puppet? I know Kamala said that Putin would have Trump for lunch. These women were right. Trump is so easily manipulated and Putin has been playing the long game. It’s really bad when I am hoping the European leaders prevail over our own President. For what it’s worth, if Trump were to somehow get that war to stop I would be ecstatic and proud of him.
Can someone explain to me how Governerds Insider works? I sighed up for the first time. How do we access the content? When do we receive a schedule of events? I did give them my Instagram account and am following the Instagram account given. Are we given Zoom links?
I've been unable to create an account on Sharon McMahon's website. I'm concerned I won't be able to access the content after paying.
If you can't create an account on the website I would email them (the general email is on their site I think it's info@sharonmcmahon.com) they can help you set one up. There is also a contact form on the website you can use. The calendar with links to events, like Zooms, will be made available after the semester starts. They will also email you Zoom links for events as they happen as well. Recordings would be made available in your account on the website to view after. And the instagram account for next semester won't be active until the first day. Sometime towards the end of this week you'll see an accepted invite from that account and it will get a photo with a welcome post.
It’s embarrassing that it is so obvious that the way to manipulate Trump is by stroking his ego. And that he is so easily manipulated! We cannot trust that he will do what he says that he will do, because the next person in the room may make him feel even more self-important. How it is not immediately obvious to any rational person that Putin played him masterfully by directly validating all Trump’s most self righteous lies is beyond me.
Thank you for honestly reporting on what transpired in Alaska and DC, and outlining why this is concerning.
At this point, when the whole election ran on ending wars, the way he negotiated ending the Afghanistan war, and the way he uses "peace" in his own country, we should all know better than to leave him in a room to negotiate peace. He bows to shallow compliments and says and does things to pump up his own ego (a red carpet and bomber flyover to show Putin how classy he is) and logic plays no part in the art of his deal.
Meanwhile Republican-led agencies are demanding Obama be jailed with literally zero evidence against him. Gabbard and others are throwing around words like “treason” and “coup” without presenting a single document, recording, or witness testimony. Their entire case amounts to: Obama’s administration monitored contacts between Trump’s team and Russian officials - you know, literally the job of counterintelligence when foreign adversaries are attempting election interference. They’re treating standard FISA procedures and intelligence briefings as if they’re crimes, while refusing to explain what law Obama supposedly broke or what he should have done differently when presented with evidence of Russian interference. And the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling means Obama couldn’t be prosecuted for presidential actions anyway, making this entire exercise performative rage costing taxpayers for sham investigations.
Compare that evidence-free theater to Trump’s actual documented behavior with Putin. After Helsinki 2018, when Trump sided with Putin over the consensus of our own country that Russia interfered in our 2016 election, saying “I don’t see why he would have done it” in front of Putin, even Trump’s own party couldn’t stomach it. John McCain called it “one of the most disgraceful performances by an American president in memory.” Lindsey Graham - who normally defends Trump reflexively - said it was a “missed opportunity” and that the president’s weakness was “doing a lot of damage.” Paul Ryan insisted there was “no question” Russia interfered and Trump needed to acknowledge it. Even Newt Gingrich said Trump needed to clarify whether he actually intended to prefer Putin’s word over our country. These were Trump’s own party leaders watching their president side with Putin over American intelligence agencies on live television. And then Trump sheepishly “corrected” with something like: “Oopsie I meant to say “wouldn’t” not “would” - I meant to call Putin out for just one sentence but I used the wrong word and therefore everything I said was in Putin’s favor, my bad.” Totally absurd and proves that Trump prefers Russia to America. We were totally justified in investigating this strange relationship Trump has with Russia.
Now Alaska proves nothing has changed. Within 48 hours Trump abandoned coordinated Western positions to parrot Kremlin talking points. The same president who brands himself as “no new wars” is blaming Obama for not bombing Russia over Crimea in 2014. So which is it: peace candidate or hawk? His supporters somehow hold both positions simultaneously without their heads exploding. The podcast bros who sold Trump as anti-war have gone mysteriously quiet on Ukraine. I checked in yesterday, and it seems Trump’s base is still more preoccupied with their civil war over whether their president is a pedophile than with foreign policy reversals.
But here’s what should terrify everyone: Putin just demonstrated to every authoritarian on earth that a few hours of psychological manipulation can get an American president to abandon his allies and echo enemy propaganda. If this is what Putin achieves in one afternoon, what’s Xi Jinping learning about Taiwan? Putin published a how-to manual for exploiting American weakness that will be studied in Beijing, Tehran, and Pyongyang for decades.
Thank you, Timothy, for connecting the past, present, and future.
The only clarification I would offer is the difference between what used to be referred to as Republicans and MAGAs.
We all know what Republicans used to stand for. They were never “Trump’s party.” They were the party in power during his first term. That’s why they called him out. They either no longer exist, or are no longer relevant.
The party in power is MAGA. We all know what they stand for. They are Trump’s party.
Hi Gina! You’re right that the party has fundamentally changed since 2018 and they won’t criticize Trump directly anymore. But their praise is so empty. In 2018 they could say “this was disgraceful.” Now they can only praise the red carpet and fighter jets (the theater that showed us as wanting to impress Putin) while carefully avoiding any mention of what was actually accomplished. MAGA knows it was a failure, even if they dont admit it.
Timothy, it’s almost like they’re two different parties.
And what does failure even mean to them?
We see Trump abdicating to Putin (autocorrect typed sputum). But they see European leaders scrambling to Washington.
It’s two competing visions. It’s almost like a global civil war has already begun.
You are so accurate about China, North Korea, etc., rubbing their hands in glee.
And I had another thought that showed the contrast between now and 2018: at least back then they were transparent enough to take questions during their meeting. This time all we have is their vague self-summaries and unnamed sources describing the day. I bet if they had taken questions and Trump said to reporters in front of Putin "We aren't interested in a ceasefire anymore" the Rs who say they are pro-Ukraine wouldn't be able to dodge questions on what their feelings about the meeting was.
Timothy, yes! Democracy dies in darkness.
That’s why vague self-summaries and unnamed sources are a dictator’s best friend.
But I do not believe it would make a difference to the MAGA/R’s who lie they are pro-Ukraine. Remember when he said he believed Putin over our own intelligence? It made zero difference.
As the most excellent Fiona Hill said, “and here we are.”
This: "Putin just demonstrated to every authoritarian on earth that a few hours of psychological manipulation can get an American president to abandon his allies and echo enemy propaganda."
Trump, no matter how he sees it, is bad at dealmaking. I mean, the pressure was on Russia - they're cash-strapped and unpopular, and Trump couldn't or wouldn't leverage any of that.
“American commitments are negotiable, Western unity is fragile, and patient manipulation can achieve what military confrontation cannot.”
This is nothing new. It’s as old as broken treaties with Native American tribes, and as recent as our abandonment of Afghan allies.
Ukraine, and the rest of the world, know there is no such thing as a security agreement. Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons in exchange for one, and as the prescient Fiona Hill would say, “and here we are.”
I love Fiona Hill. The world would be a better place if she were our president. Heck, the world would be a better place if almost anyone else were our president.
I think a discussion of the book choice is warranted. Dozens of people I know are upset not only about the choice but how any feedback has been handled. A supreme court justice is a huge get, but a refusal to acknowledge that platforming a person who has contributed to weakening the rule of law and dismantling constitutional rights will help that person become a NYT bestseller, as well as refusing to acknowledging the very valid feelings people have about the choice has been causing a lot of OG members to decide to end their membership.
I’m a current Insider, and she did address both of those issues you raised: she directly responded to the ‘platforming’ comment and she acknowledged the feelings some people have about the choice. She shared her thoughts on both those counts. Respectfully, I don’t think it’s accurate to say she refused to acknowledge these things. I suspect the people who continue to be upset are dissatisfied with what she had to say in response. It seems, for some, that anything short of her pulling that book is unsatisfactory to those who have an issue with it.
Respectfully, saying that ACB won’t benefit financially isn’t true, so that wasn’t addressed. And comparing the situation to Septima Clark is disingenuous since we won’t be allowed to have an actual conversation with her. Maybe some would’ve quit no matter what, but that’s definitely not the case for a lot of folks who were willing to listen and understand.
Thank you for sharing those specifics. As a long-time SCOTUS enthusiast (for lack of a better term), I welcomed ACB’s book and the author meet up. And as a conservative leaning independent who is an OG member and an early Preamble subscriber, I was surprised to see it included but not at all surprised to hear some were disappointed. I believe she expected it. I don’t agree with Sharon’s take on many issues, but I feel like I learn much, understand more, and every so often walk away with a different perspective. Not everyone feels that way about her work though, and they want to see/support only certain viewpoints. I get it. To me, including this book is aligned with the “America’s government teacher” I was originally drawn to follow.
I’m late to the discussion! I have never joined the book club but I did this time because of Ken Burns. I was intrigued about Amy Barrett. I find some of her voting very interesting and am willing to listen to her. I don’t know if I will buy her book though.
Same, I won't buy it (still trying to figure out how to read it, but I am sure I will figure it out), but I am very intrigued to hear what she has to say. I am very left leaning and am often angered by ACB's actions but I think it was a bold choice and I commend Sharon for doing it. For me, I was satisfied with her responses to the feedback and do not think she should bow down to any pressure. Hearing from someone we disagree with is super important and I look forward to it. She is practising what she preaches and I respect her for it.
This does seem to demonstrate that Europe is now the primary democratic global power. America can earn back its leadership role but only if MAGA is out. I hope the Democrats can capitalize on this. I pray they can demonstrate that they have the leadership ability that trump does not.
Theresa, that’s a big ask for hope and prayers.
First- I had not seen that when I wrote it! And still working in my small way to do the next indicated thing.
Thank you, Theresa, for doing what you can.
I agree, the US/Trump has abdicated their role, and Europe is now the primary democratic global power.
Sharon tells us hope is a choice. I would add: a brave one.
Are comments about the book choice being deleted?
Hard to believe there would not be one opinion about this book pick. I am an annual member of the book group but I don't plan to read ACB's book or involve myself in anything related to it.
This. Same.
There are two books this coming season: Listening to the Law and Between Two Kingdoms. There are five pretty incredible workshops. There's the Ken Burns special event. And lots of deep dives, private Instagram account only stuff, and more. I've been an Insider for all but one season since its inception and renewed just this morning for another year. You don't have to buy the book, or participate in the book club for that one if you choose not to. I'm looking forward to both books, and another interesting season she has lined up.
It is not necessarily the choice of book that turned me away from this semester! I checked and was told that Amy Coney Barrett was not being paid for the book club appearance, which I do admire. The rollout of the season and behavior surrounding it is why I decided not to participate this season. I’ve been part of the club for ages and I love Sharon and her work. I’m sitting this one out and that’s something I’m well within my rights to do without needing an explanation about what each book club season entails.
Can I ask what turned you off about the 'rollout of the season and behavior surrounding it'? I'm genuinely curious, because I'm not sure I'm tracking anything different this time. And in case your last line was directed at me personally (I'm not sure), my response wasn't to you - it was to the original poster's question because I didn't know if she (or others who might be unfamiliar with each season) was aware of all that's included.
The rollout of the season has felt much different this time around! Books haven’t been officially posted to the grid of the private account or the main one, when I checked earlier. And I’ve heard (unconfirmed) that comments have been deleted that were critical and refunds automatically issued - that’s secondhand and did not happen to me, so take that with a grain of salt. The Supreme Court Justice book pick was off-putting to me but the rest of it hasn’t rolled out like previous seasons and feels off, personally. I needed my $60 anyway but I did not feel like supporting Amy Coney Barrett’s appearance, regardless.
I'm not falling for the whisperings of deleted comments or refunds being issued. When people don't agree with something a creator does they get so suspicious and this rumor starts. Even if someone did get a comment deleted or a refund issued it's probably because the way they were showing their disapproval with this book choice was toxic.
I agree. I am quite disappointed in the reactions to this season. I thought we were all better than that. Sharon's main message has always been to listen to everyone and that everyone gets a seat at the table, not just those we agree with. That is supposed to be the whole vibe of being a Governerd. The reactions are very off putting to me. Everyone has the right to not participate either for this book specifically, or for the season as a whole and I respect that. But wow, can we move on?
I was very clear that wasn’t the driving force behind my reasoning for not participating in this semester.
Ah, got it. Admittedly, I'm on an annual-renewal, so I probably am not aware of the season-to-season transitions as much as I could've been. Thanks for sharing.
I’m staying for the workshops. I live in Charleston, so one hits close to home. I think Sharon is a great teacher and I have respected her for many years, but if she wasn’t someone I have enjoyed learning from for so long I would not have renewed.
Interestingly, I’ve been here since pandemic Sharon which is why I feel so blindsided by this book choice and her behavior this week.
I don't feel blindsided. Sharon has never shied away from knowledge or discouraged us from learning about someone we don't agree with. If we ignored all the perspectives we don't agree with we'd be in an echo chamber so all of this is very on brand for Sharon. No need to read it but reading the book doesn't "require anyone's approval" of it, including Sharon's.
This comment section has become an echo chamber and is now quite boring. The number of comments on any given day has dwindled so much since the beginning. It is very on brand for this comment section to start running around like chickens with their heads cut off over a book they disagree with, yet are in no way being forced to read.
I get that. I just assume everyone is flawed, so I don’t get too upset when they disappoint me. Definitely a coping mechanism, but I’m never going to fall for a cult. Haha
As a many year book club member I can say people are not happy.
It’s suspicious and part of why I didn’t renew this semester.
This type of internet comment is so predictable, when anyone does something y'all don't agree with the first step to trying to cancel them and feel validated by what you think is your moral superiority is to ask if they're deleting comments. Also, proximity to a book you don't agree with does not make the contents contagious. Don't read it if you don't want to but don't make this a moral stance and try to ban a book for the rest of us in Sharon's book club.
I know this wasn’t directed toward me but I am a librarian and the most anti-banning books person you could ever meet, lol. I’m just choosing not to engage in this semester for a variety of reasons and I think claiming that anyone doing that is trying to ban a book is a stretch.
I'm saying those trying to cancel Sharon/force a book change for the rest of us are essentially banning a book. I don't think those who want to skip this semester are banning books.
Where did anyone in this thread try and ask for a book change, though?
I’m sorry, I should’ve said those *who would* force a book change because this all started with a prediction on my part. A ✨hypothetical future.✨Time will tell if it’s relevant and if you’re not going to try to cancel Sharon, you don’t need to keep thinking my comments apply to you.
Because I would agree with you!
Who is this “y’all” you speak of?
I’m guessing Sharon had to turn off the comments on the Insider registration because of the “y’all”.
This post? https://thepreamble.com/p/what-happens-when-you-put-the-right
As someone who checks Substack early and saw it shortly after it was published, I'm quite certain that the comments were never open.
Yes, oh okay I just assumed since the comments were turned off people were getting rude about the book choice.
My experience is that Sharon has rarely used a heavy hand of moderation in the spicier discussions (what happens under her Substack posts is usually quite tame compared to the live chats, and leagues away from the tone of discussions under her Instagram grid posts...) Removing the option to comment at all was why it clearly stood out to me.
That’s a none answer. No one knows why Sharon does what she does, but Sharon. The weird parasocial relationship some people have is concerning.
I am actually excited about ACB’s appearance being someone who leans Democrat. I don’t know if I’ll buy her book yet but I’ve been in book club for over a year now and I’ve finished one book lol! I understand people not wanting to renew because of her but there’s so much content this semester! Don’t read her book, don’t come to the zoom meetings about her book or the author appearance. I think a lot of conservatives have been silent about more “liberal” authors so now it’s my turn to listen to someone they’re excited about. While I don’t agree with ACB on a lot of issues, I do think some of her decisions are interesting and she has sided with liberal justices on some cases unlike 2 other SCJ who seem bent on giving MAGA a win every time. Lastly, Sharon says she heard ACB is a great teacher and all her students loved her so I’m sure we would all learn something!
Which books were liberal?
I don’t think any book is liberal. I put “liberal” in quotation because I know how some conservatives can read something and don’t understand it the way liberals do. For example: A Fever in the Heartland or The Distance Between Us. Both talk about issues that I think are real and I agree with but I can definitely see conservatives saying “well don’t come to the US illegally if it’s so scary.” I expect to be uncomfortable with ACB’s book and her author appearance but I still am excited because I’m curious about her
I see. I would hope Fever in the Heartland wouldn't be too liberal, even for conservatives, the KKK is pretty bad. (And I understand you were not talking about yourself.) Thanks for answering!
Unless you’re in the KKK 😬 some conservative rhetoric these days do mimic the KKK (I think Sharon confirmed that)
It sure does!
ACB is the reason I signed up for Governerds Insider. I'm curious what she has to say.
Love the Governerd Insider community. I have been here since day 1 and always re-register.
Wasn’t it Hillary that said Trump was Putin’s puppet? I know Kamala said that Putin would have Trump for lunch. These women were right. Trump is so easily manipulated and Putin has been playing the long game. It’s really bad when I am hoping the European leaders prevail over our own President. For what it’s worth, if Trump were to somehow get that war to stop I would be ecstatic and proud of him.
Why isn’t there one sane person in this administration who will put a stop to the DT madness?
Because of Project 25 and the willingness to cower. Republicans don't exist anymore.
Can someone explain to me how Governerds Insider works? I sighed up for the first time. How do we access the content? When do we receive a schedule of events? I did give them my Instagram account and am following the Instagram account given. Are we given Zoom links?
I've been unable to create an account on Sharon McMahon's website. I'm concerned I won't be able to access the content after paying.
If you can't create an account on the website I would email them (the general email is on their site I think it's info@sharonmcmahon.com) they can help you set one up. There is also a contact form on the website you can use. The calendar with links to events, like Zooms, will be made available after the semester starts. They will also email you Zoom links for events as they happen as well. Recordings would be made available in your account on the website to view after. And the instagram account for next semester won't be active until the first day. Sometime towards the end of this week you'll see an accepted invite from that account and it will get a photo with a welcome post.