After interviewing Obama, Bill Maher had on his panel three once-Canadians: Martin Short, Jennifer Granholm, and David Frum.
Frum was introduced as having already voted for Clinton, even though he describes himself as a neoconservative. One cool thing about neocons is that they get that Russia is a bad hombre these days. So maybe that is what motivates Frum.
From the panel discussion, I could not tell. Frum spent the whole time slagging liberals for attacking the “institutions of democracy”, which he claims would be our only hope were Trump to get in. Every time Maher or one of the other panelists went after Trump, it seems he tried to walk them back to the truth he uniquely sees. He carries a heavy burden. Must be tough and we are all so impressed down here.
FWIW, I agree with him on the institutions of democracy shtick. But you have to make a distinction between complaining, for example, that CNN is not doing its job and attacking the institution of a free press. (Do not watch this within an hour of eating.)
Same for the Supreme Court, which it would be nice to see fully staffed, incidentally. You can disagree with decisions made by the Court without challenging the Court’s legitimacy. Sorry, Frum, but the armed insurrectionists are all stacked up on the Republican side. They, not “we”, are threatening to go around the Court and torch the constitution.
Aside from protecting his brand as the neocon with the guts to tell the truth (he actually bragged about losing a job over some stand he took), it’s not clear what he was up to. A public intellectual need not spout pure political propaganda just because we are four days out from an election. But away from self-promotion and intentionally confusing the issues, it was impossible to tell what his point was.