5 ms·

Despite the text-not-subtext political message, it still somehow occasionally gets willfully misinterpreted. Trump, of all people, came out to it in rallies in

Despite the text-not-subtext political message, it still somehow occasionally gets willfully misinterpreted. Trump, of all people, came out to it in rallies in 2020 (https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/john-fogerty-cease-and-desist-order-trump-fortunate-son-1076914/ https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/john-fogerty-c...).

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
drcode 4y ago
I think Trump was intoning that he was just a regular guy, not part of the elite - so I'm not sure it qualifies as "misinterpreted" as opposed to simply a lie.
TedDoesntTalk 4y ago
That’s like Reagan using Born in the USA, a song critical of America, as a campaign theme.
- elgenie 4y ago
  It's a bit different. First, Reagan only referred to Springsteen as a hopeful songwriter in a speech on the campaign trail, and that was about it, since Springsteen didn't authorize use of the song on the trail. It should also be noted that the incident came in the context of a presidential campaign ('84) in which Reagan likely would've gotten reelected doing anything short of using the Soviet national anthem in his ads. Second, "Born in the USA" wasn't critical of Reagan (or Reagan-like figures) specifically. Meanwhile, Trump used the song without asking (of course) and received a cease-and-desist, in the context of a very close election campaign, and as a "Fortunate Son" that dodged the draft for the exact war the song was written about.
  - gadders 4y ago
    I don't know what songs Biden chose, but he dodged the draft as well.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - kennywinker 4y ago
      The song is a fairly important part of the equation - because it’s the hypocrisy part of it. To be privileged isn’t necessarily wrong - it’s usually something that you didn’t have control over and its hard to fault an 18 year old kid from choosing school over war - even if many others couldn’t afford that choice. To claim you’re not privileged (“it aint me”) when you clearly are… that’s wrong.
      - gadders 4y ago
        Was Trump a "Fortunate Son" during the Vietnam War? Most likely he was. Was he a "Fortunate Son" during the 2016 election, with all of the establishment Republican party, 90% of the media, big tech etc against him? It's arguable that he was not.
        kennywinker 4y ago
        If you’re running for president backed by one of the two parties, you’re a fortunate son. You’re buying into an underdog narrative that doesn't match with the facts. Also the media may have been “against” him but they gave him thousands of hours of free coverage. “Big tech” may have been against him, but they handed him his platform in the first place.
        gadders 4y ago
        >> If you’re running for president backed by one of the two parties, you’re a fortunate son. Agreed, but it's all relative :-) Would have been more or less favoured than Jeb Bush, for instance? >> "Big tech” may have been against him, but they handed him his platform in the first place. They definitely ripped that back off him.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

drcode 4y ago

I think Trump was intoning that he was just a regular guy, not part of the elite - so I'm not sure it qualifies as "misinterpreted" as opposed to simply a lie.

TedDoesntTalk 4y ago

That’s like Reagan using Born in the USA, a song critical of America, as a campaign theme.

elgenie 4y ago
It's a bit different. First, Reagan only referred to Springsteen as a hopeful songwriter in a speech on the campaign trail, and that was about it, since Springsteen didn't authorize use of the song on the trail. It should also be noted that the incident came in the context of a presidential campaign ('84) in which Reagan likely would've gotten reelected doing anything short of using the Soviet national anthem in his ads. Second, "Born in the USA" wasn't critical of Reagan (or Reagan-like figures) specifically. Meanwhile, Trump used the song without asking (of course) and received a cease-and-desist, in the context of a very close election campaign, and as a "Fortunate Son" that dodged the draft for the exact war the song was written about.
- gadders 4y ago
  I don't know what songs Biden chose, but he dodged the draft as well.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - kennywinker 4y ago
    The song is a fairly important part of the equation - because it’s the hypocrisy part of it. To be privileged isn’t necessarily wrong - it’s usually something that you didn’t have control over and its hard to fault an 18 year old kid from choosing school over war - even if many others couldn’t afford that choice. To claim you’re not privileged (“it aint me”) when you clearly are… that’s wrong.
    - gadders 4y ago
      Was Trump a "Fortunate Son" during the Vietnam War? Most likely he was. Was he a "Fortunate Son" during the 2016 election, with all of the establishment Republican party, 90% of the media, big tech etc against him? It's arguable that he was not.
      - kennywinker 4y ago
        If you’re running for president backed by one of the two parties, you’re a fortunate son. You’re buying into an underdog narrative that doesn't match with the facts. Also the media may have been “against” him but they gave him thousands of hours of free coverage. “Big tech” may have been against him, but they handed him his platform in the first place.
        gadders 4y ago
        >> If you’re running for president backed by one of the two parties, you’re a fortunate son. Agreed, but it's all relative :-) Would have been more or less favoured than Jeb Bush, for instance? >> "Big tech” may have been against him, but they handed him his platform in the first place. They definitely ripped that back off him.