|
Arcsquad12 posted:Is there a reason why LWT has been so stingy on uploading stories to YouTube this season? Are you in Canada? They've been uploading the main story every week as usual but for some reason they are blocked here (you can get around it pretty easy by just going in through a US proxy). It may be blocked in other countries as well. I don't know why.
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 21:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 21:42 |
|
|
The Cheshire Cat posted:Are you in Canada? They've been uploading the main story every week as usual but for some reason they are blocked here (you can get around it pretty easy by just going in through a US proxy). It may be blocked in other countries as well. I don't know why. Must be it. A few stories pop through but they don't even appear though I'm subscribed to the channel
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 21:06
|
|
|
Honestly, the Iowa stuff seems more suited to the main segment than to the brief round up segment.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 21:34
|
|
|
Rarity posted:The UK clearly saw John's main piece this week and were feeling sad about the lack of attention Yeah, my immediate reaction on reading that news was "well, that's one John Oliver segment taken care of for next week."
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 21:40
|
|
|
Am I the only one who fast forwards through the "And Now This" segments? I know they're relatively short and I shouldn't care, but good god they're painfully unfunny...
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 23:01
|
|
|
I don't watch the show, just the main segments on Youtube, but I've seen a few of them and they always seem kind of stupid to be honest. One of them I recall seeing was complaining about the people hosting morning shows getting flirtatious. Yea, out of context newscaster getting sexually suggestive in their language with each other is weird, but it's just people at a job trying to enliven things and make it more tolerable and fun for themselves. Who cares?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 23:26
|
|
|
"How stupid are the people of Iowa?"
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 23:46
|
|
|
tsob posted:I don't watch the show, just the main segments on Youtube, but I've seen a few of them and they always seem kind of stupid to be honest. One of them I recall seeing was complaining about the people hosting morning shows getting flirtatious. Yea, out of context newscaster getting sexually suggestive in their language with each other is weird, but it's just people at a job trying to enliven things and make it more tolerable and fun for themselves. Who cares? No one cares or is complaining it was a funny little segue to pad between segments maybe you are looking too hard into it. I think everyone here is expecting a bit much from a 30 minute a week comedy news show, they can't address every single issue in every state nor can they ignore the poo poo Trump is doing because other people happen to cover it as well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 00:56
|
|
|
Yeah, the newscaster type segments are just goofy transition pieces to separate his real segments. Taking them out of that usage and watching them as stand alone segments on YouTube WOULD make it seem like an incredibly stupid show. The "Too Much Trump" debate though has been had every week so we're really not going to get anywhere with it. For better or worse, it's clear Oliver doesn't intend to stop covering the big stories out of the White House.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 01:28
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:Yeah, you should call him by his preferred "rat-faced bastard". I always liked 'English Parrot dressed like an accountant'.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 03:42
|
|
|
I dunno, I laughed pretty hard at the descriptions of the Queen's hats whenever that was
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 04:27
|
|
|
Numberwang posted:Am I the only one who fast forwards through the "And Now This" segments? I know they're relatively short and I shouldn't care, but good god they're painfully unfunny... You don't like the XXX Today Show?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 07:12
|
|
|
Too much Trump. It's so relative to the amount of sheer craziness coming from every facet of this administration. So much, that it almost seems like the sort of tactic a reality star turned politician would use to keep their political machine from coming to a screeching halt. You can't ignore president Snooki.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 09:00
|
|
|
tsob posted:I don't watch the show, just the main segments on Youtube, but I've seen a few of them and they always seem kind of stupid to be honest. One of them I recall seeing was complaining about the people hosting morning shows getting flirtatious. Yea, out of context newscaster getting sexually suggestive in their language with each other is weird, but it's just people at a job trying to enliven things and make it more tolerable and fun for themselves. Who cares? The main segment is usually the worst part because it's poo poo you should really already know about unless you're an ignorant bumblefuck. It was a lot better in the first season when they tried to mix in some comedy. More Trump, I say.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 13:48
|
|
|
The main segment normally cover stuff I don't know given that I don't live in the US and most of it concerns the US in some manner.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 13:55
|
|
|
tsob posted:The main segment normally cover stuff I don't know given that I don't live in the US and most of it concerns the US in some manner. I amend my comments regarding the main segment to include "if you live in the US."
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 14:05
|
|
|
IRQ posted:The main segment is usually the worst part because it's poo poo you should really already know about unless you're an ignorant bumblefuck. It was a lot better in the first season when they tried to mix in some comedy. Most college educated people only have a glancing knowledge of most of it at best because it doesn't effect their normal lives. It's important to now because hints like gerrymandering are insinuous at breaking a good normal life.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 15:19
|
|
|
IRQ posted:The main segment is usually the worst part because it's poo poo you should really already know about unless you're an ignorant bumblefuck. It was a lot better in the first season when they tried to mix in some comedy. I too smugly look down on people who aren't aware of hot-button issues like civil forfeiture, native advertising, and the plight of military translators.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 16:18
|
|
|
Baronash posted:I too smugly look down on people who aren't aware of hot-button issues like civil forfeiture, native advertising, and the plight of military translators. I know right?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 16:33
|
|
|
If you have a problem with "And Now This" you must have missed the "The Most Patient Man on Television" segments.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 18:30
|
|
|
SurgicalOntologist posted:If you have a problem with "And Now This" you must have missed the "The Most Patient Man on Television" segments. John had to stop because it was considered poor form to show recorded footage of purgatory.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 18:34
|
|
|
With O'Reilly being fired I hope Fox and Friends needs some Catheter Cowboy as money too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 21:13
|
|
|
And Now This segments are amazing and I laugh every time.  MiddleOne posted:John had to stop because it was considered poor form to show recorded footage of purgatory. Hahahah
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 01:24
|
|
|
Earlier ITT, someone made the assertion that young leftists drank some sort of koolaid that magically made them hate the democratic party and it went unchallenged. But I sincerely wonder what mythical sugary drink one would have to chug, what drugs you would need to spike it with, to somehow mentally ignore every good reason the various elements of the obama coalition that didnt back Hillary had by the time November rolled around. The sins of that campaign resulted in many opting to either stay home, or otherwise telegraph to a failing center-right democratic party that they are no longer worth the tacit support of just anyone left of center. You don't even have to like the fact that some people dont feel a debt to democrats or anyone under the coalition when their needs are utterly failing to be met, but you'd better mentally prepare yourself for the same thing happening in 2020 if you're not even prepared to admit that Clinton's loss rests squarely on the shoulders of her campaign and their incredibly lovely, alienating behavior. Begging the liberal funnymen to help you laugh about this without learning the lesson is gonna leave you dissatisfied. I don't think john oliver, funny as he is, can save you from the inevitable need for introspection about what happened and the price we're all paying because of it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 04:28
|
|
|
I kinda liked this interview on that subject https://thisishell.com/interviews/947-thomas-frank To me, at least, it really helps explain the loss of the Rust Belt and how many Democratic leaning sources seem to not really understand what is going on.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 07:35
|
|
|
Solvent posted:You can't ignore president Snooki. The thing about Trump is there's so much boring disregard for rules or policy that it's hard to understand what you should be angry about if a comedian on a tight schedule gives everything equal weight. A good example in what's to come: Nothing involving Spicer's disdainful attitude to the press or Ivanka's broad daylight corruption with China is as ridiculous as Trump calling the newly minted Turkish dictator and congratulating him on setting up a dictatorship, undermining our State Department's unease with the whole event. It's not that Ivanka's profiting from government access wouldn't be worth talking about 9 times out of 10 in Washington, but this Turkey thing is the one in ten that deserves the whole spotlight. And on top of that it probably makes for better comedy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 09:01
|
|
|
basic hitler posted:Earlier ITT, someone made the assertion that young leftists drank some sort of koolaid that magically made them hate the democratic party and it went unchallenged. But I sincerely wonder what mythical sugary drink one would have to chug, what drugs you would need to spike it with, to somehow mentally ignore every good reason the various elements of the obama coalition that didnt back Hillary had by the time November rolled around. The sins of that campaign resulted in many opting to either stay home, or otherwise telegraph to a failing center-right democratic party that they are no longer worth the tacit support of just anyone left of center. So maybe I'm not getting what you're saying but as the winner of the popular vote can't we infer that her campaign wasn't at fault, our arcane electoral college system is? Like Hilary won, but then Trump got it due to slipshod mechanics from 100 years ago that haven't mattered since before women & minorities could vote. I feel like 'Apathy' is the reason Trump won, not Hillary's lizard person persona. This election was such a farce from the get go it just never seemed real. I'm HAPPY to be wrong, just curious about your position. I only hang in the Trump LoLs thread, I'm not tough enough for D&D
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 13:39
|
|
|
Bust Rodd posted:So maybe I'm not getting what you're saying but as the winner of the popular vote can't we infer that her campaign wasn't at fault, our arcane electoral college system is? Like Hilary won, but then Trump got it due to slipshod mechanics from 100 years ago that haven't mattered since before women & minorities could vote. I think it's arcane undemocratic garbage but Hilldawg knew the electoral college existed, and while I'm all for reminding trump that he lost the popular vote at every possible opportunity, he did win the election within the parameters that constitute winning it. So is her campaign to blame? Yeah in large part it is. Instead of campaigning in the rust belt she put resources into solid states like CA to run up the vote total hoping for a mandate. A lot of that surely was based on the polls that turned out to be closer to trump than everyone thought (although largely within the margin of error of the polls). I don't know how the gently caress they felt like those midwest states were her "firewall" when they didn't even bother with them. That terminology alone belies how much the party establishment takes certain groups for granted. I think disaffection, rather than apathy, was that part of the problem. But there is no one single cause of why Hillary lost. Sexism, a relentless 20 year smear campaign, HER EMAILS, russian meddling, trump talking populism in a political climate where that's what people wanted (Bernie did the same), you could write a book about it, and many will.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 14:01
|
|
|
Bust Rodd posted:So maybe I'm not getting what you're saying but as the winner of the popular vote can't we infer that her campaign wasn't at fault, our arcane electoral college system is? Like Hilary won, but then Trump got it due to slipshod mechanics from 100 years ago that haven't mattered since before women & minorities could vote. So, given that both Trump and Clinton were well aware of the rules they were playing under, as was, or should have been, every voter, trying to judge the game by different rules is worse than useless, as it prevents you from addressing mistakes under the rules you're actually playing under. Saying Clinton won the popular vote is as meaningful as saying Clinton was handed more water bottles during the campaign by staffers than Trump was; possibly an interesting footnote, but not a metric or indicator of anything that matters. So, either Clinton understood the EC, and Trump out played her, or Clinton didn't understand the EC, and shouldn't have been playing in the first place. The correct one, of course, is the first one. So why did she lose? The average voter doesn't want nuanced explanation and reasoned stances. They want to be told they're right, it's not fair, and it's not their fault, and it'll get fixed. For example: The US isn't going to become a manufacturing powerhouse again. That ship has sailed. But four states worth of underemployed factory workers don't want to hear about new economies and economic transitions and retraining programs and future opportunities. They want to hear that it's not fair, and it's not their fault, and it's somebody else's fault, and the guy in charge will fix it. TheCenturion fucked around with this message at 20:12 on Apr 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 14:05
|
|
|
Trump just needs to pull the "factory jobs" lever, it's simple! That being said, the popular vote is meaningless to the system but does hold meaning with people. If the polls had been dodgy in the other direction Clinton could have claimed a mandate because the popular vote count was a blowout. But in our post-facts world Trump can just claim 3 million martians voted illegally so idk anymore.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 14:38
|
|
|
I think the biggest depressing thing about all of this is that there have been a number of smaller special elections since November and even with the protests and the calls to action, Democrats STILL aren't loving going to the polls. So, I'm losing faith that were going to have any significant congressional turnover in 2018. Republicans are hosed since they let a racist, narcissistic, demagogue, child hijack their party. Democrats are hosed since they can't mobilize anyone to meaningful action. Forget wanting a third party, I would take just the two at this point if they were functional.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 16:26
|
|
|
That's not true, strictly speaking. Those elections are all DEEP red areas that trump won by 20 points or more sometimes, and in the special elections the dems are performing way way better than that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 16:33
|
|
|
IRQ posted:That's not true, strictly speaking. Those elections are all DEEP red areas that trump won by 20 points or more sometimes, and in the special elections the dems are performing way way better than that. This. All of these special elections are mainly because Trump appointed someone to the Cabinet or some other other federal agency. He's not going to appoint someone in a swing state or some poo poo like that so these are all deep red areas that are holding these special contests. While it is nice that Democrats are doing better than expected, I don't think it should be seen as a negative if the Dems don't win any of them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 17:27
|
|
|
I'm not faulting them for not winning in deep red areas, I'm faulting them for turnout. That said, even if these are deep red areas, they could win these races if the had Democratic turnout in the 80-100% range. There's no 2nd place consolation prize. A somewhat close loss for the Dems for these races just means that extra effort will be made next time to suppress turnout. There's an extreme disconnect when millions can be rallied to march and protest but we can't even half of registered voters to the polls. If people aren't pushed to action now when things are still raw, we're hosed later when people normalize to the insanity.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 18:02
|
|
|
You're assuming that the millions of non voting people are democrats and not just apathetic.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 18:40
|
|
|
Does it matter? If anyone participated in any recent protest but didn't participate in the election (assuming you weren't suppressed in some fashion), it's all lip service no greater than liking something on Facebook. The Louisiana Senate runoff was fairly telling. The Republican candidate got 50k more votes in the runoff as opposed to the general election where the Democratic candidate only got 10k more. Had all of Caroline Fayard's voters turned out to the polls for Foster Campbell, there would be one less Republican seat in the Senate. This could have been an easy win. But in the end 1.1 million people failed to return to the polls, a good chunk of them Democrats. Plenty to have won the runoff.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 19:21
|
|
|
Bust Rodd posted:So maybe I'm not getting what you're saying but as the winner of the popular vote can't we infer that her campaign wasn't at fault, our arcane electoral college system is? Like Hilary won, but then Trump got it due to slipshod mechanics from 100 years ago that haven't mattered since before women & minorities could vote. Her campaign was terrible. They basically wanted nothing the Sanders people had to offer, wrote off parts of the country Obama didn't do well in because they expected to rebuild the Obama coalition of minority and under-reported voters. That didn't happen because, surprise, minorities and the 19-25 year olds who were voting for the first time in their lives for Obama aren't going to show in as massive numbers for a candidate with 30 years of broken promises and questionable ethics. (On top of that her campaign thought these voters would be equally enthusiastic about a white candidate as the first serious black candidacy.) She did basically no events in Wisconsin compared to Trump. My understanding is Mook & co wrote the state off as a lost cause due to the rightward shift since Walker came into office and tore up public unions, but that math suggests a typical Republican candidate and not a divisive naive buffoon running for dictator. Bill Clinton saw which way the political winds were blowing, and tried to hold events in these states and the campaign had this attitude of "okay fine whatever Bill you go grasp at straws". Basically if Hillary had listened to her husband more than her paid advisors she would have run a better campaign. The electoral system worked as designed, but the Clinton team was incredibly stupid and should be ashamed of themselves. They did the same sort of poo poo during the 08 primaries. There's other things that went wrong. Obama is partially to blame because he died on the hill of TPP, and Clinton couldn't politically oppose the President she was promoting herself as a follower of until months too late. They basically campaigned her as Barack Obama The Second to leverage his approval ratings and it didn't work mostly because people know by now that Hillary Clinton is not Barack Obama. Craptacular! fucked around with this message at 19:43 on Apr 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 19:36
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:There's other things that went wrong. Obama is partially to blame because he died on the hill of TPP TPP was a hill worth dying on, unless you seriously think ceding our international political influence to China is a good idea.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
Bust Rodd posted:can't we infer that her campaign wasn't at fault, our arcane electoral college system is? Like Hilary won, but then Trump got it due to slipshod mechanics from 100 years ago that haven't mattered since before women & minorities could vote. She was an unelectable turd, and it took her loss in November for people to finally see it. People hate the DNC establishment because they don't represent the people but corporations, wallstreet, big business and big pharma and practically handed Trump the presidency by deliberately elevating him in the media. This is why there is a worldwide garbage right-wing uprising and people need to start acknowledging it and stop making excuses.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 21:42 |
|
|
Baronash posted:TPP was a hill worth dying on, unless you seriously think ceding our international political influence to China is a good idea. Maybe a good idea but it definitely needed more work. The EFF was firing the old SOPA/PIPA alarm bells over what it meant for intellectual property.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 20:51
|
|