Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[froot loops]

I haven't laundered meth money in awhile, Oracle. Sorry.

Froot:

Rake, huh? Serious?

Not the cancelled Greg Kinnear version, the Australian series.

[CGVT]

Ok. 538 says there was no significant difference in unemployment rates in the counties that voted for Hillary than the counties that voted for Trump. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...omy-is-weaker/

So why would anyone think that everyone that voted for Hillary was on the dole?

Because that is the narrative that the right has been pushing for the last eight or twent years or so.

[SeattleLionsFan]

The first season of BCS actually caused me a bit of anxiety. The brother in that was a pretty ok depiction of some lawyers I've worked with. (Less agoraphobic obvi)

[CGVT]

I don't know those nerds. I know you nerds.

"this forum" and "savvy" should never be used in the same post...ever...

Ha!

[iam416]

The first season of BCS actually caused me a bit of anxiety. The brother in that was a pretty ok depiction of some lawyers I've worked with.

The first season was really good. I thought the climax was brilliant. And it is a testament to the show that such a relatively minor thing -- as far as dramas go -- could pay off so well. And the montage of Jimmy doing public defender work was superb.

I wasn't quite sold on dovetailing Mike and Jimmy, but I love Mike and they're doing a good job with it. I can't imagine adding Gus to the mix is going to make things any worse.

There's a ton of skill that goes into making a successful prequel because, well, once you get to a certain point then the story has to be over -- I wouldn't be shocked if Cranston did a cameo for the final scene or something. But being able to draw out that story to it's natural end -- to bring the audience up to speed -- in a perfectly paced story arc has to be really hard.

[THE_WIZARD_]

STFU

[iam416]

Heh. Andrew Sullivan has zero patience for any more HRC and her excuse-making: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer...y-clinton.html

Let us review the facts: Clinton had the backing of the entire Democratic establishment, including the president (his biggest mistake in eight years by far), and was even married to the last, popular Democratic president. As in 2008, when she managed to lose to a neophyte whose middle name was Hussein, everything was stacked in her favor. In fact, the Clintons so intimidated other potential candidates and donors, she had the nomination all but wrapped up before she even started. And yet she was so bad a candidate, she still only managed to squeak through in the primaries against an elderly, stopped-clock socialist who wasn?t even in her party, and who spent his honeymoon in the Soviet Union. She ran with a popular Democratic incumbent president in the White House in a growing economy. She had the extra allure of possibly breaking a glass ceiling that ? with any other female candidate ? would have been as inspiring as the election of the first black president. In the general election, she was running against a malevolent buffoon with no political experience, with a deeply divided party behind him, and whose negatives were stratospheric. She outspent him by almost two-to-one. Her convention was far more impressive than his. The demographics favored her. And yet she still managed to lose!

?But ? but ? but ?? her deluded fans insist, ?she won the popular vote!? But that?s precisely my point. Any candidate who can win the popular vote by nearly 3 million votes and still manage to lose the Electoral College by 304 to 227 is so profoundly incompetent, so miserably useless as a politician, she should be drummed out of the party under a welter of derision. Compare her electoral college result with Al Gore?s, who also won the popular vote but lost in the Electoral College: 271 to 266. For that matter, compare hers with John Kerry?s, who lost the popular vote by 1.5 percent ? 286 to 241. She couldn?t even find a halfway-decent speechwriter for her convention speech. The week before the election, she was campaigning in Arizona, for Pete?s sake. And she took off chunks of the summer, fundraising (at one point, in the swing states of Fire Island and Provincetown). Whenever she gave a speech, you could hear the air sucking out of the room minutes after she started. In the middle of an election campaign, she dismissed half of the Republican voters as ?deplorable.? She lost Wisconsin, which she didn?t visit once. I could go on.

And so I find myself wondering at odd times of the day and night: Why is Trump in the White House? And then I remember. Hillary Clinton put him there.

Hard to really argue with almost any of that.

He also ridicules DJT and takes issue with some idiotic pieces about the United guy in terms of "white power" and such, and points out what a problem Asians (and Jews) are for the "the US is racist and only white people can succeed" crowd. A little bit of everything!

[THE_WIZARD_]

Spot. On.

[crashcourse]

I see Geezer and Crash think the only people that voted for Hillary don't work and those that voted for Trump do.

I don't want to deal with his "points" because they are based in fantasy. Pretty much not worth a rational thinking person's time.

perhaps this says it better

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/08/12/a-massive-new-study-debunks-a-widespread-theory-for-donald-trumps-success/?utm_term=.451cd9115bf4

those points are based on everyday contact with middle America.

this board being from Michigan and having the volume of ohio/Nebraska etc posters on it the reasons trump won were just as I outlined. working America or wanting to work America sick an tired of bearing the brunt of not wanting to work america

trump was the only game in town giving a voice to working America
Hillary concentrated on special interests

"Pretty much not worth a rational thinking person's time"

views like yours are why trump is in office. holier then thou we know better maddoe/Matthews dribble belittling anybody not seeing things their/Hillary's way. You just proved to be another voice to ignore

[SeattleLionsFan]

What does this mean? "working America or wanting to work America sick an tired of bearing the brunt of not wanting to work america"

If you believe that democrats or democratic voters work less than republican voters that is a false belief. Why do you think it's true when it is clearly not true?

[Da Geezer]

So why would anyone think that everyone that voted for Hillary was on the dole?

Because the unemployment statistics only count those who are looking for work. Next question?

[crashcourse]

throw in the fact you had a bankrupt government in 25-30 years due to entitlements which Hillary was not going to touch

[Dr. Strangelove]

The white working class might have the most enormous sense of entitlement of any group in America. They want to goof off all through high school, be lazy as shit when it comes to school, live in a remote-ass place, and be rewarded with a high-paying job that requires virtually no knowledge or skills, with the security that a labor union provides but without having to actually pay union dues. Oh and the fewer trouble-making minorities that are around, the better.

These are the Trump base. They want everything for no effort.

...Since we're throwing around exaggerations and all..

[Wild Hoss]

Hard to really argue with almost any of that.

2016 was the 1984 Holiday Bowl of presidential elections.

[iam416]

2016 was the 1984 Holiday Bowl of presidential elections.

It was, I think, a total failure on the part of HRC. Total.

The new book on the disastrous campaign has a nice tidbit. The Ds quit doing polling. They had no idea they were losing Pennsylvania or Michigan. None. The RNC was getting polling data from those two states right before the election and couldn't believe it. They, in fact, didn't believe it. But, they knew the states were close. And they were campaigning hard in them.

Meanwhile, HRC campaigned in motherfucking Arizona more than she did in Wisconsin. ARIZONA. Un-fucking-fathomable.