Bernie Sanders Appears on Joe Rogan Experience, Rogan Later Endorses Sanders for President

Bernie Sanders appeared on The Joe Rogan Experience (Episode #1330) on August 6, 2019, during his 2020 presidential campaign. The 1-hour-13-minute interview covered healthcare, climate change, criminal justice reform, and Sanders’ anti-establishment political message. Months later, in January 2020, Rogan stated “I think I’ll probably vote for Bernie. Him as a human being, when I was hanging out with him, I believe in him, I like him, I like him a lot.” The endorsement became controversial when the Sanders campaign promoted it, but the episode demonstrated that principled progressives could reach Rogan’s massive audience and genuinely influence his political views.

The Interview Content

Sanders used the platform to articulate core progressive positions:

Medicare for All: Explained single-payer healthcare as more cost-effective than profit-driven insurance system

Climate Change: Discussed Green New Deal as economic opportunity and existential necessity

Criminal Justice: Condemned mass incarceration and for-profit prison systems

Corporate Power: Attacked billionaire class and corporate control of politics

Anti-Establishment Message: Positioned campaign as movement against political corruption

The interview was substantive, policy-focused, and allowed Sanders to explain complex positions at length—a format traditional cable news rarely provides.

Rogan’s Genuine Response

Rogan’s January 2020 endorsement suggested the August interview had genuine impact:

Personal Connection: “Him as a human being, when I was hanging out with him, I believe in him, I like him”

Authenticity Assessment: Rogan valued Sanders’ consistency and perceived authenticity

Anti-Establishment Alignment: Both shared skepticism of establishment institutions and corporate power

Policy Persuasion: Rogan found Sanders’ healthcare and economic arguments compelling

The endorsement wasn’t transactional or performative—Rogan appeared genuinely convinced by Sanders’ argument and character.

The Controversy

Sanders faced backlash from some Democrats after his campaign promoted Rogan’s endorsement:

Past Statements: Critics cited Rogan’s history of racist, homophobic, and transphobic comments

MoveOn Criticism: Progressive group called on Sanders “to apologize and stop elevating this endorsement”

Strategic Defense: Sanders campaign argued reaching Rogan’s audience (primarily young men outside liberal mainstream) was essential to expanding electorate

Engagement vs. Boycott: The controversy highlighted tension between engaging problematic platforms to reach persuadable audiences versus boycotting them on principle.

Strategic Rationale: Meeting People Where They Are

The Sanders campaign’s decision to seek Rogan’s platform reflected cold political calculation:

Audience Demographics: Rogan routinely ranked among most-listened-to podcasts in U.S., with massive reach beyond Democratic Party’s base

Young Male Voters: Core Rogan demographic (young men) historically difficult for progressive candidates to reach through traditional media

Authenticity Premium: Long-form conversation format allowed Sanders to demonstrate authenticity that short cable news hits couldn’t convey

Persuadable Audience: Unlike Fox News viewers locked into conservative identity, Rogan’s audience was anti-establishment but politically fluid

The strategy bet that going into the “belly of the beast” could win converts—and Rogan’s endorsement proved the bet correct.

Comparison to 2025: Persuasion Still Works

The 2019 Sanders interview established crucial precedent: Rogan could be persuaded by principled arguments from trusted voices.

This pattern would repeat in 2025 when:

• Bono (May 31, 2025) influenced Rogan on Trump administration’s USAID cuts
• Sanders (June 24, 2025) warned Rogan about Trump’s authoritarian tendencies
• Rogan (July 2, 2025) subsequently criticized Trump’s “insane” ICE raids

The 2019 interview wasn’t anomalous—it revealed Rogan’s actual openness to persuasion when engaged by figures he respects making substantive arguments. This made him neither “captured” by any ideology nor immune to influence, but rather highly malleable based on most recent compelling conversation.

The “Last Guest” Phenomenon

The Sanders endorsement highlighted what would become a pattern: Rogan often adopts positions of his most recent compelling guest.

2019: Sanders persuades him on progressive economics → endorses Bernie 2021-2022: COVID contrarians persuade him → promotes ivermectin, vaccine skepticism 2024: Trump persuades him during 3-hour interview → endorses Trump 2025: Bono and Sanders persuade him on Trump excesses → criticizes ICE raids

This isn’t ideological consistency—it’s susceptibility to persuasive conversation. Rogan functions less as ideological ally of any movement and more as high-bandwidth persuasion surface: whoever gets his ear with compelling narrative can shift his public positions, which then influence millions of listeners.

Significance: The Platform as Contested Space

The Sanders-Rogan episode proved major media platforms aren’t permanently “captured” by any political faction—they’re contested spaces where persuasion still works:

Progressive Success: Sanders reached millions, earned genuine endorsement from influential host

Model for Engagement: Demonstrated that boycotting problematic platforms cedes ground; engaging them contests for influence

Malleable Rather Than Captured: Rogan’s subsequent rightward drift wasn’t inevitable—it reflected who sought his platform and made compelling arguments

Human Agency Preserved: People can still choose, minds can be changed, even massive platforms respond to persuasive engagement

The 2019 interview mattered not because Rogan remained progressive (he didn’t), but because it proved the principle: respected figures making strong arguments on even problematic platforms can genuinely change minds.

The Road Not Taken

Sanders winning Democratic nomination might have maintained Rogan’s progressive alignment. Instead:

Biden Nominated: Establishment Democrat with whom Rogan had no connection Progressive Boycott: Many progressives refused to engage Rogan after controversy Right-Wing Engagement: Conservatives (Tim Pool, Ben Shapiro, Jordan Peterson) filled vacuum COVID Contrarians: Fringe doctors found platform for ivermectin advocacy Trump Campaign: Recognized Rogan’s influence, sought platform strategically

By 2024, Rogan had drifted far from Bernie endorsement—not because persuasion doesn’t work, but because progressives largely stopped trying after 2020 while right-wing figures continuously engaged his platform.

Context: Pre-Capture Baseline

The August 2019 interview represents pre-capture baseline—before:

• COVID misinformation crisis (2021-2022)
• January 6 false flag conspiracy promotion (July 2023)
• Trump 3-hour interview (October 2024)
• Russian propaganda amplification (November 2024)

In 2019, Rogan was reachable by principled progressive arguments. The subsequent rightward trajectory wasn’t deterministic—it resulted from specific influences (COVID contrarians, Trump campaign) filling vacuum created when progressives disengaged after 2020 primary.

Lasting Questions

Would sustained progressive engagement have maintained influence? If Sanders had won nomination and presidency, would Rogan have remained progressive-aligned?

Did boycott strategy backfire? By refusing to engage Rogan after 2020 controversy, did progressives cede platform to right-wing influence?

Can 2025 recapture 2019? Bono and Sanders’ 2025 interviews showed Rogan still persuadable—is sustained engagement a viable counter to right-wing capture?

Is Rogan’s platform worth the legitimacy cost? Sanders faced criticism for validating Rogan through engagement—but was the electoral reach worth it?

The 2019 Sanders interview proved persuasion works. The 2020-2024 rightward trajectory proved disengagement has costs. The 2025 Sanders and Bono interviews proved persuasion still works. The lesson: platforms aren’t permanently captured—they’re temporarily influenced by whoever engages most compellingly.

When progressives meet people where they are, even in the “belly of the beast,” human beings can still choose. The 2019 Sanders-Rogan episode stands as evidence that engagement beats boycott when the goal is persuading millions of persuadable people consuming alternative media.