|
I do the same thing I did for the daily show and report, watch the 5-15 minutes of good segments and skipping the filler and skip the interview unless it's someone I recognize or that might be interesting.
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 08:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 14:43 |
|
|
Samantha Bee seemed to get that Trump was dangerous and not a joke before John Oliver did, and definitely before either host of TDS or Colbert. The way she went about her Clinton cheerleading was pretty bad, though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 09:26
|
|
|
Dr Christmas posted:The way she went about her Clinton cheerleading was pretty bad, though. No, it was the right thing. A feminist woman, making a clearly feminist comedy show, cheering on a woman who has the chance to be US President? I would have been extremely disappointed if she didn't root for her, despite her numerous flaws. Especially running against a clear misogynist who thinks of women as objects and alleged rapist. Decius fucked around with this message at 10:27 on Nov 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 10:22
|
|
|
Drifter posted:The premise is "Wow, Gee, that Donald Trump guy is horrible, remember? And, oh yeah, Hillary is a woman. Gooo Team!" Decius posted:No, it was the right thing. A feminist woman, making a clearly feminist comedy show, cheering on a woman who has the chance to be US President? I would have been extremely disappointed if she didn't root for her, despite her numerous flaws. Especially running against a clear misogynist who thinks of women as objects and alleged rapist. Dr Christmas posted:Samantha Bee seemed to get that Trump was dangerous and not a joke before John Oliver did, and definitely before either host of TDS or Colbert. The way she went about her Clinton cheerleading was pretty bad, though. Nichael fucked around with this message at 11:30 on Nov 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 11:24
|
|
|
Nichael posted:I agree with this. Clinton's "flaws" were that she simply wasn't engaging enough, and frankly, I find that to be a flaw of the American people more than Clinton as a person (though obviously, the Democrats need to retool their future messaging strategy to reflect the data learned from this election). Her platform was suitably liberal, she was prepared, and she had massive experience. Also, her opponent was a literal rapist. Bee made the right choice in championing her aggressively, and this never actually compromised her ability to be funny, as Full Frontal was the most consistently funny of any of the faux news shows. Clinton and the media (and I'm including Sam here) could have destroyed Trump if they pointed out his own corruption (like donating 25k to get a 90+ million tax rebate) and how he kept gaming the system while constantly failing at being a businessman. But that would have exposed both the system they're so desperately clinging to and their own corruption, so they instead stuck to pointing out his sexism and racism, which did nothing to discourage his supporters from voting for him.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 13:34
|
|
|
Vodos posted:Clinton and the media (and I'm including Sam here) could have destroyed Trump if they pointed out his own corruption (like donating 25k to get a 90+ million tax rebate) and how he kept gaming the system while constantly failing at being a businessman. But that would have exposed both the system they're so desperately clinging to and their own corruption, so they instead stuck to pointing out his sexism and racism, which did nothing to discourage his supporters from voting for him.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 13:41
|
|
|
Liberal as in "social liberal", like allowing gay and trans people and anyone who loving pleases live their lives according to their plans, with the same rights as everyone else. Allowing women to make decisions about their own body, making sure minorities get the same chances at life. The basic stuff that generally defines liberal outside of economics (without verging too far into the libertarian territory).
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 13:43
|
|
|
Decius posted:Liberal as in "social liberal", like allowing gay and trans people and anyone who loving pleases live their lives according to their plans, with the same rights as everyone else. Allowing women to make decisions about their own body, making sure minorities get the same chances at life. The basic stuff that generally defines liberal outside of economics (without verging too far into the libertarian territory). The path forward for the Democrats is pretty clearly to go more economically liberal, and pair that with a candidate who can deliver messages well. It's abundantly obvious now that no matter how bad the opposition gets, people can't be relied on to vote "negatively" en masse.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 13:49
|
|
|
Nichael posted:The path forward for the Democrats is pretty clearly to go more economically liberal, and pair that with a candidate who can deliver messages well. It's abundantly obvious now that no matter how bad the opposition gets, people can't be relied on to vote "negatively" en masse. Picking a candidate with a more solidly populist message *about* the economy would help. I think it's clear that Bernie Sanders would've connected with blue collar workers in PA and OH in ways Hillary did not. In my mind, democrats did exactly what they did in 2004: selected a vaguely left-centrist candidate with a legacy record whose messaging was about as exciting as that sounds. People point to the "Dean scream" as what tanked Howard Dean's primary campaign, but I'm convinced Kerry just seemed more "electable" and the DNC pushed that option instead. The lesson of this election should be, "choosing based on 'electability' is a tone-deaf strategy." I mean, Hillary tapped Tim Kaine. Choosing a soft-spoken white moderate as your hype man says it all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 14:25
|
|
|
Decius posted:Liberal as in "social liberal", like allowing gay and trans people and anyone who loving pleases live their lives according to their plans, with the same rights as everyone else. Hillary came around on gay marriage like 15 minutes ago. She crossed over not at the point when it became politically acceptable to do so, but really only when it started becoming politically unacceptable for a Democratic politician not to do so. I don't think whitewashing a candidate is a good idea. HRC was always going to have massive authenticity problems and challenges in connecting with the left, and Sam Bee's show echoed a lot of Democratic institutions and voices in ignoring these issues, turning a blind eye to her problems, and mocking people who were warning about them. I say this as someone who voted for HRC, even though I live somewhere that was 100% going to go for her anyway. Things like Sam Bee being a sore winner about 'Bernie Bros' months into the general election, and mocking millennials with a whiny baby voice saying "Waaah wahhh, I don't care enough to vote!" was never going to turn out a single loving voter. In an election that ended up hinging on low Democratic turnout compared to Republicans, her show didn't help at all and may have hurt, to whatever extent it actually had any impact.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 14:30
|
|
|
Decius posted:Liberal as in "social liberal", like allowing gay and trans people and anyone who loving pleases live their lives according to their plans, with the same rights as everyone else. Allowing women to make decisions about their own body, making sure minorities get the same chances at life. The basic stuff that generally defines liberal outside of economics (without verging too far into the libertarian territory). I think part of the issue is that you have two groups of voters who can't be appealed to with the same message. The rust belt or Brexit voter is concerned about gloablisation and the economy and unemployment. The urban liberal/Remain voter is more likely going to feel those things are OK so are focused on social issues. So what happens is you get a populist who uses the economic stuff and packages it with social conservatism/regressivism and it's a perfect strategy to both appeal to disenfranchised people AND galvanise them against the other side because while we might be saying "But this will be terrible for women/gays/trans people/ethnic minorities", they're hearing us saying that we don't want the people who will fix the economy and give them their jobs and prospects and future back. Which leads to entrenching and then the liberal side get frustrated and start tarring people with one brush because they're technically voting for the whole package even though most people vote based one or two issues that are important to them. Plus the Fox-ification and Facebook-ification of news media to the 'fair and balanced' model of giving every side an equal platform regardless of evidence and taming of coverage so as not to upset advertisers, executives and sources plus the bubble effect, means it's very easy for each group to think the big social problems are solved. It's just that on the one hand you get the message that racism/sexism/homophobia is either over or "SJWs are going TOO FAR" (the reason for bathroom bills, for instance) and on the other hand there's the prevailing message that most ordinary people understand these issues still exist and it's just total evil assholes who are fighting change. All of this doesn't excuse the utter transparently infeasible incompatiblity and incoherence of some of these campaign promises. Like Trump's promise to rebuild infrastructure and use that to stimulate employment and industry and the economy is great, but it can't be done if he and the GOP do their tax break for corporations and the rich. Gaz-L fucked around with this message at 15:44 on Nov 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 15:41
|
|
|
Generic American posted:Colbert's been a LOT better lately, but man, there were a few times where I got sick of his new Very Serious Person interview tone. Like when he had Ted Cruz on as a guest and the audience booed once he started answering every question with transparent bullshit of the highest grade. Cue Colbert chastising the audience for disrespecting his guest. If you invite someone onto your show and then allow your audience to openly disrespect them, not only will it mean they and others will be less likely to come on your show in future, it's also just a lovely thing to do. If that's how you feel, don't pretend you're going to have a reasonable discussion, just don't invite them on.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 16:21
|
|
|
I have a lot of mixed feelings. I've been a fan of Samantha Bee since she first appeared on The Daily Show back in 2003. I'm an Asian male and I'm glad she hasn't had a "white feminist" backlash moment like Lena Dunham, Amy Schumer, or Tina Fey; and I sincerely dread if it happens. But I really don't think she "got" this election beyond recognizing that Trump was huge threat early on and that the standard bearers like Kasich were also terrible. There has been a lot of complaints about of how she handled Bernie Sanders, and I don't really want to regurgitate them. It felt like she was talking down to the progressive flank and young voters; even the ones who switched from Bernie to Hillary for the general, for not believing in Hillary hard enough. I really didn't want to be at odds with Bee. Yes, I do respect Hillary Clinton as a political survivor. She was lightning rod of misogyny in the sexist-as-gently caress 90s. She was a proto-"woke" feminist before she was a creature of the political class. As a senator, she was known for being excellent with constituents. I wished more young people appreciated this. And she would have been a way less reactionary commander in chief than Bill Clinton. But she didn't realize (or didn't want to realize) how much the electorate has changed during the Obama presidency. Bernie understood what was going on in the rust belt, and had the potential (though I don't want to overstate it) of bridging their anxieties with the radical politics of Occupy and BLM. Hillary Clinton, for both reasons within and outside of her control, was the wrong messenger with the wrong message. I graduated college back in 2009, and I still haven't found a decent full time job, and I don't like being told that things are fine and we need to stay the course. Nonetheless, young people did overwhelmingly prefer Clinton over Trump, but it wasn't enough. Clinton suffered a surprise backlash in Michigan in both the primary and the general. I wonder how many of those "invisible voters" would have supported Bernie over Trump. I'm inclined to think Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and perhaps Ohio might have stayed as blue states. And Sam Bee wanted me to believe I was working with misogynists (granted, there are real Berniebros and insufferable alt-left types) and naive freshmen poli-sci majors (granted, I have a political science degree). Also, that I'm supposedly white. Comedy wasn't cathartic in those bits where she weighed in on infighting in the left. I'm glad in her election autopsy, she didn't try to shift blame to the usual suspects the way many other liberals did; but pointed out that Trump would have won anyway if only white women voted. Most people have deflected blame to other [mostly young] people's SOCIAL MEDIA BUBBLES, but some self-awareness on Bee's part is encouraging. Echo Chamber fucked around with this message at 16:53 on Nov 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 16:36
|
|
|
Rabbi Raccoon posted:I don't think Oliver, Colbert, and Bee are the problem themselves, but they enabled it. When you have so many people telling you Hillary is gonna win and Trump is going down over and over it makes you feel more confident in what's gonna happen and less likely to feel line your vote will really matter If you're relying on other people to go out and vote against the White Nationalist Avatar of Corruption, while you stay home or vote Jill Stein because you think The Misogynist Advocate for Global Destabilization is going to lose anyway, you're a loving idiot.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 17:02
|
|
|
Vodos posted:Lol? I don't know what your definition of "liberal" is, but more war, more corporate blowjobs (tax holidays, more mergers etc.), more pipelines, more fracking, more "free" trade, more Wall Street "self-regulation" and "big changes aren't possible, gently caress your dreams and be content with nibbling at the edges" aren't liberal in my book. 51% of American workers earn 30k or less per year (in the richest country ever) and the Democrats pushed a candidate earning 250k per hour-long speech and who thinks the economy is in great shape (because all her friends in Washington and New York think so too!). She's a woman, so ignore that she's not going to do poo poo for you, you're a misogynist if you don't vote for her! How dare you call the Clintons corrupt, they've raised over 3 billion dollars in donations throughout their careers, but that can't possibly have influenced their decisions! Ignore that she doesn't stand for anything and switches her positions as soon as polls or lobbyists tell her to do so while running against a fascist, nativist populist with a clear message. None of this reflect reality, find what policies or platforms she was pushing that backs even 5% of this up. She had plans to raise the minimum wage and get people the training they need to get better jobs why do you think she didn't care about people making 30k or less because you feel it to be true? This is why she needs a cheerleader or two because I've never seen anyone in politics or otherwise get so much false accusations thrown at them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 17:23
|
|
|
socialsecurity posted:None of this reflect reality, find what policies or platforms she was pushing that backs even 5% of this up. She had plans to raise the minimum wage and get people the training they need to get better jobs why do you think she didn't care about people making 30k or less because you feel it to be true? This is why she needs a cheerleader or two because I've never seen anyone in politics or otherwise get so much false accusations thrown at them. She was pushing 12$ an hour (which is 25k/year) and only went up grudgingly to 15 because Sanders dragged her there. Most of the other stuff can be found in the Podesta emails. Here's a pretty good summary, 65-90 for the economic/trade etc. stuff but I recommend reading the whole article if you really think Clinton and her staff a poo poo about the working class or even middle class and actual liberals.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 18:00
|
|
|
That was a big ol' wet fart of an episode last night.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2016 18:42
|
|
|
GobiasIndustries posted:That was a big ol' wet fart of an episode last night.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
Rerunning the refugee piece was important in the same way John Oliver running down all the orgs that need donations. It's easy to wallow in our own misery right now, but there's a ton of others that are going to be impacted far worse. Anything that can be done to raise awareness of that and help is worthwhile.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2016 21:12
|
|
|
JazzFlight posted:Kind of annoying that the 3rd segment wasn't new. I'm thinking the writers weren't in a mood to do much this week (and frankly, who is?), so they made their case to the producers to just re-run that refugee piece. I personally think the refugee piece was good and important, but it's telling that they didn't have something in the hopper to fall back on. There are plenty of horrible people and things going on right now to do a segment on (and plenty of uplifting things too), and honestly 'I'm not in the mood to do much this week' is a sorry excuse.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2016 21:43
|
|
|
Full Frontal renewed for season 2, moving to Wednesdaysquote:One of the few women in late-night television will be back for another year as TBS announced the second-season renewal of “Full Frontal with Samantha Bee” on Wednesday. http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/tv/showtracker/la-et-st-full-frontal-tbs-season-two-20161116-story.html
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2016 01:51
|
|
|
“identity politics is the dismissive term for what we used to call ‘civil rights’” Alright then.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2016 19:01
|
|
|
shades of eternity posted:“identity politics is the dismissive term for what we used to call ‘civil rights’” Yeah. You can feel the writing staff trying to be funny at this point, but the show has gone from being a comedy focused on politics to angry political people sometimes writing jokes at the last minute to justify being angry. I get it, but jesus this needs to correct course. The Mr. Robot skit fell flat on me as well (despite having some good points), but that might just be because I never saw Mr. Robot so the parody went right over me...? I fear it's just because it wasn't all that well done.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2016 00:31
|
|
|
Shlomo Palestein posted:angry political people sometimes writing jokes at the last minute to justify being angry Shlomo Palestein posted:I fear it's just because it wasn't all that well done.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2016 03:32
|
|
|
shades of eternity posted:“identity politics is the dismissive term for what we used to call ‘civil rights’” I think between that and using a clip completely misstating what Sanders said about "Identity Politics", I wasn't too thrilled with that segment.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2016 06:54
|
|
|
Shlomo Palestein posted:The Mr. Robot skit fell flat on me as well (despite having some good points), but that might just be because I never saw Mr. Robot so the parody went right over me...? I fear it's just because it wasn't all that well done.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2016 06:59
|
|
|
Anti-integration Samantha Bee sure loves civil rights when it involves beating up on an elderly Jewish man. Not that she'd understand that, having moved from Long Island to the UWS.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2016 08:02
|
|
|
Yikes this thread
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2016 12:23
|
|
|
I worked on the HRC campaign and Sam's cheerleading can get a bit much even for me. I think we absolutely SHOULD examine what Sanders has been saying - but just saying he's a pissy old white man and moving on irks me. A day or so ago a big headline blared SANDERS BLAMES POLITICAL CORRECTNESS FOR LOSS. And then you read the actual quote and Sanders goes on to narrowly define political correctness as authenticity. I understand that the rolling poo poo spectacle of the Trump administration must be talked about, but the "Democrats in the wilderness" piece felt underwritten.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2016 13:26
|
|
|
That Glenn Beck interview was something else.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2016 06:44
|
|
|
bull3964 posted:That Glenn Beck interview was something else. Not really sure what it accomplished.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2016 17:21
|
|
|
The general point is that we are all going to have to reach out to unlikely bedfellows in order to limit the damage of what's coming. Glenn Beck is a wackado nutjob that contributed to getting us where we are today, but even he's gazing into the abyss and not liking what he's seeing. Ironically, Trump's greatest achievement may in fact be unifying people. It's just that they are going to unify against him to ensure there's something left after 4 years.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2016 17:32
|
|
|
It's strange to watch this knowing Sam was once Sailor Moon
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 13:23
|
|
|
Rabbi Raccoon posted:It's strange to watch this knowing Sam was once Sailor Moon *checks wiki* Wow.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2016 16:40
|
|
|
Here's the bonus clip they didn't have time for yesterday in case anyone missed it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nE8nQZPfYpY
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 08:13
|
|
|
That was pretty good. I really need to catch up on Full Frontal but I keep forgetting it exists
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 14:16
|
|
|
Full Frontal got put aside in my post Election "stop obsessing over the news to dig myself out of depression" period but now that I think I'm mostly past that I really need to get myself back into the show. But yeah, when you're not watching it for awhile you kind of forget its a thing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 14:34
|
|
|
jojoinnit posted:That was pretty good. I really need to catch up on Full Frontal but I keep forgetting it exists I'm glad they put up all the best bits on YouTube, otherwise I'd probably forget too. Which is sad, because I think it's generally a better show than The Daily Show at this point. That's not a knock on Trevor Noah - I love the guy - just saying that Sam and her writers are killing it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 21:36
|
|
|
Full Frontal has long switched over to uploading entire episodes to YouTube.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 22:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 14:43 |
|
|
precision posted:... I think it's generally a better show than The Daily Show at this point. That's not a knock on Trevor Noah - I love the guy - just saying that Sam and her writers are killing it. Also, doing a daily show is a lot more difficult than doing a weekly show.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2017 21:11
|
|
