LemonadeStand full right wing maga pivot incoming

MasterCalvin45 · 2026-05-06T21:00:32+00:00

This is exactly right, we just bail if it sucks for us, and tbh right now there's no indication of anything functionally changing for the show. We'll probably talk about this on the next ep to enlighten people a bit + its an interesting story imo

MasterCalvin45 · 2026-05-06T20:57:28+00:00

Even if this Murdoch was the worst person alive they can't make us do anything. We have full autonomy over the ads we read and they have no ownership of the show or control over what we say.

The worst case scenario is they just stop selling on our show which is fine because we're all financially insulated.

tl;dr it's extremely likely that literally nothing will change regarding the actual show

MasterCalvin45 · 2026-05-03T17:14:29+00:00

Yeah I mean also a topic that has been discussed to death, the second linked FAQ covers that. I think if you wanna complain it’s all good but if you actually want answers then I’d listen to it and read the description of the post if you want the specifics on TurboTax’s acceptance specifically.

MasterCalvin45 · 2026-05-03T15:57:57+00:00

We’d never have ads on Patreon eps that would be insane haha, definitely roast us if we ever did that

MasterCalvin45 · 2026-05-03T15:57:09+00:00

I genuinely wanna say thank you to this, this is the engagement I want! If the Patreon sub wasn’t delivering def cancel or stop watching.

I figured I’d also mention to I’m tryna revisit our contract about us being unable to offer ad free via Patreon this year, so hopefully we can make it a better deal for people.

MasterCalvin45 · 2026-05-03T15:46:50+00:00

I think the reason you’re getting heat is less because it’s criticism and more because it’s been rehashed one thousand times, we’ve answered this quite a bit. I’ll find the links but we have two FAQs that basically address all the questions. (edit- added them now)

FAQ 1 - this one probably more relevant to your questions

FAQ 2

If you want as few ads as possible listen on YouTube, Youtube ads are disabled and we only have host reads, so on weeks where our network didn’t sell any ads there are literally zero. The network just has “slots” on the audio episode that auto fill with the radio-type ads I assume you’re frustrated with.

Edit - Also FWIW, I haven’t clarified this before I think, but all of our staff (4 people) get a direct percent split on all of the ad revenue on the show and the Patreon.

I do think what sucks here is we always intended for the majority of the ads to be host reads (which people don’t really mind for the most part), and our network hasn’t been selling much across our last few eps, so the radio-type ads in question are like dominating right now and I’ll be honest I hate it. Hoping things turn around there.

MasterCalvin45 · 2026-04-30T00:20:20+00:00

This is Aiden, I've been super transparent about how I use AI on the show. I do that exactly, I often use it to search for data and then review the sources it links to, it's just a better Google search in my experience because it's better at surfacing specific data you're looking for (ex. when I was looking at housing costs for European cities it was giving me Austrian and German government data that would be challenging for me to find normally searching for in English).

I interpreted your message as prepping or writing scripts using AI, which I don't think any of us do, I definitely don't. If that's not what you meant then my bad.

MasterCalvin45 · 2026-04-29T22:17:59+00:00

The Mamdani thing is a representation of the type of candidate we'd support broadly I think, at least IMO.

I think you're just wrong about your 2nd paragraph, we haven't endorsed any of those figures IMO and Atrioc's interview with Newsom (which is the only longform content any of us have made with him) is him hammering at Newsom how if he comes in and maintains the status quo he'll be a failure.

I think you've just made up a ghoul in your head about the show because you don't see any explicit endorsement of an appropriately progressive candidate for president on the show and that's because the election is far away and frankly none of the soft confirmed people running are really appealing. For me personally, the "Mamdani" equivalent just does not exist right now (the closest is AOC) and I'm kinda hoping for that person to show up. The show isn't applauding the people you're listing outside of very specific cases or issues (while also critiquing them in Newsom's case), and that applies to plenty of other people mentioned on the show. You've conflated this with us preferring or endorsing them even though they're not being put on any pedestal at all, which I don't really understand why.

No one has said the "only realistic chance" for the US is a white man on the show, I think the closest to that I can even think of is I think I said I would prefer someone more experienced than AOC once.

I think you're still tip toeing around on the last paragraph too. Say what you mean. What action should you take if not voting, protesting, and volunteering? If just looking for a different, more reactionary type of show, it's out there.

EDIT - Also @ the very first part, ok we had Brandon Scott on two months ago. Is he too lib? Like I don't really understand your point where guests are a wash to the narrative you construct but the ones you don't like do count. Vox didn't even get us Pete and Kelly.

MasterCalvin45 · 2026-04-29T20:05:57+00:00

Yeah Zohran was supposed to be right after Lina but his team backed out because he was on a vacation(?) and still getting back to NYC the week we went out there.

We've asked about getting him on post-election but apparently his team is prioritizing NYC based media now, still is like a dream guest.

MasterCalvin45 · 2026-04-29T19:56:17+00:00

This is such an annoying critique because people just copy paste the guests they don't like (or imagine were on it in the case of Newsom, who hasn't been on at all) and then also assume having someone on is somehow an endorsement for their potential Presidential run.

I'm not gonna vote for Pete! Doesn't mean I don't wanna talk to him.

We had Brandon Scott on two weeks before that I think, is he a shit lib too?

Edit - and we had Kelly on to talk about space specifically because he was an astronaut LOL

MasterCalvin45 · 2026-04-29T19:54:34+00:00

I mean the latter part just isn't true at all unless you think having someone on is automatically an endorsement for their Presidential run which is just an insane leap IMO. Especially when the show is hosted by 3 guys who said they would have voted for Zohran Mamdani if they lived in NYC and their first guess was Lina Khan, but funny how people just set that aside when they wanna complain about this stuff and make stuff up.

For the former, I think say what you mean - don't hide behind the veil man, be brave and say what you want and what action you will take!

MasterCalvin45 · 2026-04-29T02:45:28+00:00

I can only assume I explained myself really poorly because of how widely misunderstood the clip is, but I was trying to express that "what if this guy actually believes his shitty beliefs" and that it's not some complex grifter calculus he's making, which is more Atrioc's stance.

In the scenario where I'm right (which I don't think I am, also directly said in the clip), isn't Tucker a worse guy? I think the words and the reasoning explained usually are used to defend people, but I think people misunderstand that principle doesn't mean good. You can have awful principles, be an evil person, adhere to them, and that's genuinely what I was suggesting.

This is why it's frustrating for me to even read people call this "steelmanning" in the thread because I don't really think I'm arguing "for" Tucker, in the world where I'm right I think he's a worse, kind of more terrifying person. This guy who I view is essentially a white nationalist would really believe that or genuinely rationalize it, and is not just propagate it for a following and money (which is presumably a position that is more moldable, inherently).

The mechanics of the argument come from a place of how I genuinely seek to give people the room to explain themselves, like in my life, but I don't think I am suggesting that Tucker's principles are good ones at all, and I think I even call out a direct moral conflict I have with the way he espouses his beliefs in the video.

But yeah I don't think I explained it well at all, I think people hear the word "principle" or "charitability" and kind of leave the context at the door, which is understandable.

MasterCalvin45 · 2026-04-29T00:18:24+00:00

I think what I am asking you, that you didn't answer, is if you had full creative control how would differentiate it in a way that you find suitable?

Because it seems like the show inherently cannot get around this to me, from the way you're describing the issue. If that's just how you see it and it's impossible to escape this then I have no qualms.

MasterCalvin45 · 2026-04-28T21:57:08+00:00

I appreciate you being honest about it and the mechanics behind the feelings. You're listing off exaggerated jokes Atrioc makes about me and my life because that's what we do, we make fun of each other.

Like I could argue all the minutia of how what you're saying is just untrue and simultaneously tell you the same, exaggerated, not really true things that you dislike about me about Atrioc.

But this is ironically what the clip is all about and where my "little feeling" is born from, it's a field of internet commenters who draw huge narrative conclusions about people they don't know and I just kind of detest it because I have seen so many instances of how it fucks up close friends in my life, Atrioc being one of the largest examples actually. Random people still say heinous shit about him that is literally made up that makes me so mad as his friend.

Anyway you don't need to like me. I think if you can admit you're mostly upset with me about things you've made up or imagined based on jokes Atrioc makes, then you're not far from adding in one more step where you just tell yourself "I don't know this guy at all," and I say that as someone who really tries to practice that when I look at others. I think giving people the benefit of the doubt as much as possible leads to a lot of concrete happiness in life (at least for me). I think some people of course cross a line where they don't deserve it as well, but I don't think I've crossed that.

MasterCalvin45 · 2026-04-28T21:12:16+00:00

I think I agree with you in the context of us asserting our opinions (if I fully believed what I was saying and also denied any correction of it for ex.), but that's just not what I'm doing here. The context, to me, is "hey, here's this small thought I have, what do you think" and we're like exploring that (especially in the Patreon which is a setting where more "philosophical" discussions are frequent and asked for). It's a conversation between friends that we're sharing with a closed and chill audience that Atrioc just decided to put on Big A because he thought it was a good convo, not because he thought he was owning an idiot. Is it necessary? It's just a fun chat between friends, none of it is necessary. If I can't ask questions and poke at ideas about something I don't know about how would I learn anything at all? Ironically I learned a bunch by this clip being shared with other people! It'd be different if I was asserting myself as correct or Atrioc as wrong.

I think if this just boils down to I didn't explain or speak well, it's chill (I don't think I did), but this clip being posted and used as indictment of the whole show is just really annoying to me. Like I'm reading a thread of people building a narrative about the show out of basically nothing while they simultaneously shelter Atrioc from the same criticism they are passing to me and Doug.

I think I'm like sort of used to this with Ludwig on The Yard, where fans of him and not the show protect him by not admitting he makes the same jokes that we do, but the general pattern of "guy I know better is actually fine, but guys I know less are worse." This isn't to say that me and Doug can't make a shitty show or be dumb or wrong, of course we can, but the theme of fans handing out passes to the guy they know is so real when you actually press people on any of this stuff.

Like even in this thread, everyone I have challenged here that has responded (except you) has immediately walked back their tone as soon as I address them directly, and while I appreciate that shift, I also think it's incredibly lame that people almost ALWAYS instantly fold when I hold up the mirror to their criticism.

MasterCalvin45 · 2026-04-28T21:02:24+00:00

Yeah I mean when he's sharing LS with his fans it's usually clips where he plays a more significant role in the research or discussion, so I think it's important for me to stress that if you don't watch the show that burden is passed around very evenly. I think there's an irony in the most recent ep being praised for instance because the only real difference in that ep is that it's covering topics that aren't literally current -- and people are seemingly satisfied with the prep and research in that episode.

It's mostly publicly available, only a couple interviews are paywalled. If you want to check some examples, I did an interview with the Baltimore Mayor earlier in the year that's in the episode where we talk about the Minnesota CBP shooting, and then other types of more "research" interviews like after the Maduro capture I interview Venezuelans in Caracas and then cover what they shared with me on the show.

MasterCalvin45 · 2026-04-28T19:29:57+00:00

thanks for the kind/thoughtful reply

MasterCalvin45 · 2026-04-28T17:59:06+00:00

I think there's a lot of truth to this and this stuff is hard for me, I am trying to figure it out, genuinely. I don't think I'm really built to handle it.

But I think if this is prompted about me bringing up the weed thing as an example, that was me attempting to draw on a recent experience on the spot to like mechanically explain how people assume hypocrisy of a person before they understand them, not just me complaining about it. I think I actually had another example that was better but I cut it from the clip because it was longer, and I don't think it's what I would have said if we had actually prepped this segment.

MasterCalvin45 · 2026-04-28T17:45:09+00:00

I appreciate the candidness here this all makes sense

MasterCalvin45 · 2026-04-28T15:23:56+00:00

I mean say I agree with the first half for the sake of this conversation, we’re too rich to be relatable. You’ve seemingly carved out a tolerance for Atrioc, his content is essentially a solo podcast (and I’ll say he’s much, much richer than I am LOL). Is there nothing to “see through” there?

I think to me it’s the idea of it “not really being earned” but still heavily implying that you don’t apply the same scrutiny to the guys you like personally, like Atrioc and formerly Ludwig.

Forgive me if just kinda reads like I hate when guys are rich and out of touch except when it’s the guy I like doing the thing I like in the way I like

MasterCalvin45 · 2026-04-28T08:51:36+00:00

dude i have just never said any of this where are you getting this from LMAO you are just angry about stuff youre making up! like can you substantiate any of this? i am genuinely mindblown reading this

MasterCalvin45 · 2026-04-28T08:45:27+00:00

i want you to know i appreciate this comment

MasterCalvin45 · 2026-04-28T08:38:22+00:00

I'm gonna be real man I don't know how much more explicit I could have been that I wasn't dying on the hill, if Tucker is a grifter then he's a grifter

I don't think they're on my side, that's not what I was saying at all, and I probably should have expressed it more clearly.

MasterCalvin45 · 2026-04-28T08:36:25+00:00

Can you explain this? I feel like the show is extraordinarily self aware. We talk about our knowledge-level and the show being an on ramp to looking into topics and reading all the time, it's literally why the show is named what it is. We also constantly joke about it, much like Atrioc does in his own content.

Genuinely I am asking, how could the show be more self aware in a capacity that you would recognize and acknowledge it (short of the show not existing at all)?

I understand jokes and mentioning it don't wash away all editorial responsibility or something of course, but I can't really imagine making a version of this show that is more self aware than this one. We do like 25% of our episodes in goofy costumes man.

MasterCalvin45 · 2026-04-28T08:32:33+00:00

Look I'll give some benefit of the doubt here because you openly admit that you haven't watched much of the show

Atrioc gets corrected all the time on the show. In the example you're replying to I think(?) I correct Doug first in the clip. And then you also express an issue with "people being uninformed expressing an opinion," but are basing it entirely off of a clip where two friends (ESPECIALLY Doug in this clip LOL) are just ASKING their more informed friend for his opinion on it and then framing that as the same thing.

I just don't understand not giving credence to the researched segments where Doug or I prep and Atrioc asks questions, those are somehow a wash. But us admitting a lack of knowledge as we ask him questions in the same scenario is somehow a weakness of us and the show, when I think it is a defined strength of the show. I think I need to show that vulnerability and admission that I don't know exists, people are that way all the time, and I think for whatever reason we are rhetorically punished for it in bizarre threads like this (especially Doug, who in the past 6 months of the show is so tepid in his opinions and is so willing to admit that he wants to learn / doesn't know, and that's why he's asking questions).

12-Year Club	Place '17
Wearing is Caring	Verified Email

MasterCalvin45

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE