|
Anidav posted:Trump for the Turbografix 16 was a weird platformer You know, a 8 or 16 bit game starring Trump would not surprise me, hell they had California Raisins and the Noise back then.
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 01:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 07:35 |
|
|
https://twitter.com/NewYorker/status/790934741843337216 https://twitter.com/NewYorker/status/791041684096385025 e: I just realized it, but the classic "Christ, what an rear end in a top hat." thing works with both of them, of course. frankenfreak fucked around with this message at 02:26 on Oct 26, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 02:03
|
|
|
seiferguy posted:I hate the Cubs and want nothing but misery for them especially since Cubs fans made the MLB thread unreadable, but then again, these are Cleveland fans:
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 02:12
|
|
|
Cleveland Clowns has a great ring to it. Just erase the feather and headband and change the skin tone to white and it's perfect.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 02:42
|
|
|
seiferguy posted:I hate the Cubs and want nothing but misery for them especially since Cubs fans made the MLB thread unreadable, but then again, these are Cleveland fans: I feel like I've seen this guy in a star wars prequel...
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 02:57
|
|
|
Trogdos! posted:
Does this rear end in a top hat even explain how he uses donation money to fight the How does this dude use the money he gets? More propaganda I assume? Does anyone know? 
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 03:31
|
|
1
15
|
Here's another "Obamacare Bad" cartoon, and for once it's relating to what's in the news (they announced that the premiums are going up in 2017):
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 03:44
|
|
|
achillesforever6 posted:Yeah this is why I wishing for a meteor, because I'm still mad at what the Cubs did to the Pirates last year
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 03:46
|
|
|
What are politicians "exempt" from with Obamacare? Are they allowed to go broke or just die, free from the tyrannical yoke of government forcing them to buy insurance if they can afford it or pay a fine?
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 04:02
|
|
|
Johnny Walker posted:What are politicians "exempt" from with Obamacare? Are they allowed to go broke or just die, free from the tyrannical yoke of government forcing them to buy insurance if they can afford it or pay a fine?
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 04:18
|
|
|
Johnny Walker posted:What are politicians "exempt" from with Obamacare? Are they allowed to go broke or just die, free from the tyrannical yoke of government forcing them to buy insurance if they can afford it or pay a fine? No they get a health care package as part of their total compensation and therefore do not have to buy a plan on the exchange. If you are an intellectually dishonest GOP pol you say they are exempt because Obamacare bad!
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 04:20
|
|
|
kaschei posted:Members of congress get access to some really sweet subsidized insurance... as do all federal workers Members of congress are the only people in the united states that were, by law, kicked off their employer's insurance program and forced to buy off the exchange. But since they got to keep the employer subsidy, they're clearly exempt from the law. Shillary posted:No they get a health care package as part of their total compensation and therefore do not have to buy a plan on the exchange. If you are an intellectually dishonest GOP pol you say they are exempt because Obamacare bad! Republicans inserted a poison pill saying congress had to use the exchanges, hoping the Dems would object and they could use this as a point against the ACA. It backfired as Dems were fine with it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 04:25
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 04:39
|
|
|
I don't know who this "Ack Ward" person is, so I'm just going to pretend it says "CATTLE FUTURES" since I can't find it anywhere else.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 04:50
|
|
|
After The War posted:I don't know who this "Ack Ward" person is, so I'm just going to pretend it says "CATTLE FUTURES" since I can't find it anywhere else. I think that's supposed to be "awkward" on two lines.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 04:53
|
|
|
frankenfreak posted:e: I just realized it, but the classic "Christ, what an rear end in a top hat." thing works with both of them, of course. Where does "Christ, what an rear end in a top hat" come from. I've loved it for ages but have never know how it got started. I feel like it's the sophisticated version of adding "in bed" to a fortune cookie.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 05:04
|
|
|
Svenator posted:Where does "Christ, what an rear end in a top hat" come from. I've loved it for ages but have never know how it got started. I feel like it's the sophisticated version of adding "in bed" to a fortune cookie. New Yorker used to do these caption contests, where they would take an old cartoon, remove the original dialogues, and ask readers to send in their own words to go with it. Somebody found that writing "Christ, what an rear end in a top hat" works on most New Yorker cartoons, and it became a meme.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 05:14
|
|
|
Bobbin Threadbare posted:I think that's supposed to be "awkward" on two lines. S'posed to be, but it ain't.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 05:34
|
|
|
Wait, help me out. Is this anti-Clinton?
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 05:46
|
|
|
What's in the wagon? A baby?
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 06:11
|
|
|
 1 2 3 4
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 06:38
|
|
|
Yes ... ha ha ha! Yes! There's the Ramirez "my candidate is obviously going to lose so I better point out how bad they are in comparison" pre-election cartoon!
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 06:45
|
|
|
If there are people like this, then I 100% guarantee you there are far more people who'd say "I know nothing about the issues, but I don't think a woman should be president."
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 06:46
|
|
|
Moon Slayer posted:Yes ... ha ha ha! Yes! There's the Ramirez "my candidate is obviously going to lose so I better point out how bad they are in comparison" pre-election cartoon!
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 06:47
|
|
|
Ah. Hmm.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 06:47
|
|
|
It's better 6 bullets are better than 3 in a gunfight, An Old West Cartoon
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 06:50
|
|
|
kaschei posted:What's in the wagon? A baby? His own third party candidate - "Nun of the Above." A penguin dressed as a nun.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 06:53
|
|
|
Pakled posted:If there are people like this, then I 100% guarantee you there are far more people who'd say "I know nothing about the issues, but I don't think a woman should be president." I'm pretty sure that "low-information voters" skew Republican for basically any reasonable definition of "low-information."
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 06:55
|
|
|
kaschei posted:Do you know the rules of Russian roulette? Note that, on the Trump gun, there are 3 guns (out of 6) loaded. On the Clinton gun, all six are filled.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 07:01
|
|
|
Low information voters merely wanting to vote for Clinton because she's a woman are a largely nonexistent, overhyped phenomenon, not unlike the scary clowns. AGC.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 07:04
|
|
|
Those guns seem oddly detailed down to minor mechanical differences that Ramirez doesn't normally bother drawing. I wonder if those are actually specific models (if nothing else, they were probably drawn from reference images) with some kind of buried joke about what kind of gun each candidate is. That's probably giving Ramirez too much credit, though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 07:07
|
|
|
kaschei posted:Do you know the rules of Russian roulette? It's Ramirez. He's trying to say "Yeah, Trump may be bad, but Clinton is way worse! You'll regret this!" but he sucks at symbolism.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 07:13
|
|
|
A vote for the lesser of two evils is still a vote of conscience.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 07:16
|
|
|
Picnic Princess posted:It's Ramirez. He's trying to say "Yeah, Trump may be bad, but Clinton is way worse! You'll regret this!" but he sucks at symbolism. While I disagree with the message, I think this is a pretty good metaphor. He's saying choosing a president is always a risk, but with Trump there's a fifty-fifty chance things go well, while Clinton is guaranteed to be a disaster. I'd say that's dead wrong, but it's a pretty good way to deliver the idea.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 07:27
|
|
|
Voyager I posted:Those guns seem oddly detailed down to minor mechanical differences that Ramirez doesn't normally bother drawing. I wonder if those are actually specific models (if nothing else, they were probably drawn from reference images) with some kind of buried joke about what kind of gun each candidate is. Can openers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 07:41
|
|
|
Jurgan posted:While I disagree with the message, I think this is a pretty good metaphor. He's saying choosing a president is always a risk, but with Trump there's a fifty-fifty chance things go well, while Clinton is guaranteed to be a disaster. I'd say that's dead wrong, but it's a pretty good way to deliver the idea. On the other hand, if America forces their opponents to take the first shot, it's a guaranteed success. A surprisingly pro-Clinton cartoon.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 07:44
|
|
|
Jonas Albrecht posted:A vote for the lesser of two evils is still a vote of conscience. YEAH BUT IT'S STILL A VOTE FOR AN EVIL HURR BLURR IDEOLOGICAL PURITY
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 07:46
|
|
|
Man, I really hate Prickly City. Every time I see "Hunny Bunny" I think, "Oh, that's kind of cute," and want to read it, and it's always awful. The guy's arguing with a completely imaginary version of Hillary to show how terrible she is, despite nothing that's happened in the strip lately having any connection to reality, and is really smug about it for some reason. Also, as people pointed out before, the "white man writing a female POC as a mouthpiece for his views" thing is pretty disgusting. It's not the worst strip in this thread or anything, but how utterly pathetic the whole thing is really struck me. It's like the comic is a way for the author to win all the arguments he can't in reality.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 07:51
|
|
|
Roland Jones posted:It's not the worst strip in this thread or anything, but how utterly pathetic the whole thing is really struck me. It's like the comic is a way for the author to win all the arguments he can't in reality. I think you may have just summed up the overwhelming majority of the comics in this thread.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 07:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 07:35 |
|
|
Roland Jones posted:the comic is a way for the author to win all the arguments he can't in reality. At least with Kelly that's the whole drat point.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 08:09
|
|