General Discussion

We're talking about comedians in the context of comedy. It has nothing to do with how Trump voters respond to Trump. Those are completely different contexts.

I would put people like Stewart in a different category. Similar to Maher. They're comedic political commentators. They aim for a specific audience. Whereas the late night shows used to be for more general audiences, but they've devolved over time to being nonstop partisan political commentators.

The problem with that is audience capture. They now mostly play to Democratic viewership, and so their material now revolves around their politics being palatable to that specific audience.

The truth of this lays in the Stewart example. Say what one will, he's not audience captured. He says what he thinks regardless of palatability. And what's the response? Well, the response you just gave. Every time Stewart moves a smidge off the partisan grounds, there's a meltdown. The expectation isn't whether or not he's funny. The expectation is that he has to have the correct politics.

The comedy becomes secondary to the partisan consideration - the partisan demand.

And that's where late night has started failing as comedy. They made their brand partisan commentary that is secondary to the comedy. Sure, sometimes it can be funny. But if you're seeking pure comedy, it gets real tedious real fast. Why do I want to tune into a comedian to give me lukewarm comedic takes and anger when I'm trying to unwind from an already stressful day? It feels like the people who watch them are already pissed off 24/7 and need their comedy to be pissed off 24/7. They desire clapter over laughter.

It's not my bag and not what I consider good comedy. But this is all very subjective.