Did you think Gaga would be more outspoken during this political era?

[Robo Ga 14,435]

PLEASE KEEP THIS CIVIL / NORMAL DISCUSSION

Did you expect Gaga to be more or less political than she is now, if you're comparing how you thought of her in 2016 to now? Gaga was very outspoken and political early in her career and also did democratic campaigning. However during the Trump era she has been less so (even though it is clear that she does not in anyway condone or support him - she has said this in the past)

There have been times where she has explicitly held back from political statements and I think it was the right decision - especially in the case of the Superbowl. However there have been also been extreme political events she has remained relatively quiet about.

Sometimes I wonder if her next album will be more political, seeing as we only got glimpses of that on Joanne (Angel Down) and she has remained more reserved the past couple years.

Thoughts? Do you think she will be more or less political going forward? Do you think we may get protest songs on LG6? 

[Bio 23,538]

But the Superbowl intro had a political statement, it was just not confrontational. 

[Modern Ecstasy2 1,313]

Don’t forget “Donald Tr*mp if u pay me” during Government Hookah at Enigma! 

[LilyLark 9,694]

No. I think in some ways, however unfair, the celeb endorsements hurt Clinton. It was one of the many things the press focused in on to bash her with (look, Hillary had a sh*t ton of flaws and I am far from a fan..... but going "this movie star endorsed her so "corporate"" was a dumb as f*ck take that happened....a lot).

And I hate to say it because I think bad people often use the excuse of "cancel culture" or "twitter mobs" to get out saying sorry when they f*ck up—but it does happen and cancel culture/twitter mobs do exist. Sometimes things get taken out of context, or it's a clueless but not that bad of a mistake, and the twitter mob gets their pitchforks. The first example that  comes to mind is Alyssa Milano, but there are others.

Gaga's a wealthy white woman, she's a bit out of touch, and she means well and has improved on social justice issues outside of LGBTQ rights—but she's not going to get it right 100% of the time by nature of the position she is in. In 2008-2015, it wasn't such a big deal, it 2020, a minor misstep could become a trending topic on twitter and get her a sh*tload of negative PR. There's also the fact that if someone is that political, in the age of social media their past can become a weapon against them due to twitter "sleuths" (like what happened to James Gunn). Not going to mention it even though it's all been exposed by tabloids and twitter because of lurkers, but Gaga does have skeletons in her closet (like most pop girls) and I doubt it would be good for that to be rehashed.

For her own sake, I kind of hope she stays out of it except to endorse whoever is the Democratic nominee, set up a thing for people to register to vote at her shows, and to stay in her lane where she knows her sh*t (LGBTQ rights).

[Twitter 14]

She was quite vocal during the 2016 election tbh.

If she gets any more vocal than that then it’s time for her to run for president. 

 

[Blahwhatever22 7,991]

7 minutes ago, Twitter said:

She was quite vocal during the 2016 election tbh.

If she gets any more vocal than that then it’s time for her to run for president. 

 

I'd be here for it!

[Zander 14,817]

32 minutes ago, LilyLark said:

No. I think in some ways, however unfair, the celeb endorsements hurt Clinton.

This. It’s what happened in the U.K. People just don’t care about millionaire celebrities telling you who to vote for because in some ways it’s completely out of touch.

I have no issue with Gaga speaking about politics but you also don’t want to be so overbearing to the point people are put off.

[Sickness 1,978]

She's almost a completely different person now so I don't know what to expect anymore if we're being honest.

[Siena 4,867]

I honestly hope she just doesn’t say anything. Personally music is an escape and when I’m frustrated about things I love to just focus on that to make me happy. After the 2016 election I was just so sick and tired of everyone only talking about it for months and months, and Gaga  posting about it and discussing it didn't make it better. Suddenly there was no longer an escape from hearing about politics. I know many people don’t agree and I get it, and obvs she can talk about whatever she wants. 

[Kindness Ponk 2,994]

Unfortunately the political climate in 2016 is very different from what it is today. Some of you may notice that she is not as vocal as she used to be but this is the world we're living in.

[BlingNotTheMusic 25,580]

3 hours ago, Robo Ga said:

PLEASE KEEP THIS CIVIL / NORMAL DISCUSSION

Did you expect Gaga to be more or less political than she is now, if you're comparing how you thought of her in 2016 to now? Gaga was very outspoken and political early in her career and also did democratic campaigning. However during the Trump era she has been less so (even though it is clear that she does not in anyway condone or support him - she has said this in the past)

There have been times where she has explicitly held back from political statements and I think it was the right decision - especially in the case of the Superbowl. However there have been also been extreme political events she has remained relatively quiet about.

Sometimes I wonder if her next album will be more political, seeing as we only got glimpses of that on Joanne (Angel Down) and she has remained more reserved the past couple years.

Thoughts? Do you think she will be more or less political going forward? Do you think we may get protest songs on LG6? 

Gosh I hope so  I'm ready for more bitchy power Gaga back...

[Guillaume Hamon 5,540]

4 hours ago, LilyLark said:

Gaga's a wealthy white woman, she's a bit out of touch, and she means well and has improved on social justice issues outside of LGBTQ rights—but she's not going to get it right 100% of the time by nature of the position she is in. In 2008-2015, it wasn't such a big deal, it 2020, a minor misstep could become a trending topic on twitter and get her a sh*tload of negative PR.

Just like the last time she asked persons victims of racism what were the best ways to fight it and immediately a part of twitter said she was "putting the burden of racism on racism victims" and it was more drama against her not helping anyone at the end of the day.

I really think she should rather be an activist defending the causes that touch her like LGBT+phobia/ bullying/ depression cause people will listened to her on these ones. For the rest it gonna just backtrack against her.

4 hours ago, LilyLark said:

4 hours ago, LilyLark said:

 the celeb endorsements hurt Clinton. It was one of the many things the press focused in on to bash her with.... "this movie star endorsed her so "corporate""....

There's also the fact that if someone is that political, in the age of social media their past can become a weapon against them due to twitter "sleuths"

Yeah nowadays celebs endorsement make you appear out of touch except if the celeb' is a C or D list one...
Or if this celeb' is REALLY famous for being an activist as well as for their craft or always mixed their art and political message à la Michael Moore.

You also have to be  perfect since you're born  if you're a celeb' who support a candidate indeed or your support gonna become a bad thing both for you and the candidate so... She should really just give her views but not start making speeches about what the country needs politically etc.

[Ziggy 10,339]

9 hours ago, Bio said:

But the Superbowl intro had a political statement, it was just not confrontational. 

I think they mean something a bit more overt and less covert. I loved that statement and sentiment but it was a far cry difference from the kind of loud politics she used to do (not saying good or bad, just very different style).