|
KillerQueen posted:Okay I can actually kinda get on board with this. In 2017 whenever I hear that polls are showing someone losing I'm just going to assume they're about to waltz to victory. Bad lesson to learn from that. The polling wasn't that bad. Even before the election, the race was close enough that pollsters knew Trump could still win.
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2017 21:28
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 6, 2024 01:14 |
|
|
Cloud Potato posted:Stephen Collins: This cartoon is so unrealistic. There's no way Trump would name something "TRUMPCO" and not just "Trump."
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2017 14:29
|
|
|
Yeah, that's why in response to Texas's bathroom bill, they've pulled PAX South out of - just kidding. It's staying in Texas, regardless of any bathroom bill. Because they care.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2017 01:19
|
|
|
Just a reminder that the original cartoon is from 2002. So, um, yeah, the more things change...
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2017 22:41
|
|
|
Doc Hawkins posted:It always looked more like Pelosi to me, but then it's clearly not supposed to be one specific person. Like I said, the cartoon is from 2002, which is when Pelosi became the House Minority Leader. It's almost certainly based on her, although yes, I'm pretty sure they're supposed to be generic caricatures. Tim Kreider's artist statement for that cartoon posted:That said, though, I have to admit the Democrats deserved to lose. Although my own Senators (Sarbanes and Miukulski) are pretty progressive and were both vocal opponents of the invasiaon of Iraq, the Democratic Party hasn't really stood for anything at all in decades, not since America's labor force was shopped out to Mexico and Reagan/Bush made it okay to hate coloreds again. Their craven support of Bush's Iraq resolution was their official announcement of death. The best thing they can do now is for their last withered remnants to die off quickly and make way for some new party that does stand for something. In the meantime I think we can safely count on the Republicans to behave so vilely--giving themselves and their corporations a few hundred billion dollars in tax breaks at our expense and sending a couple thousand expendable working-class kids to get killed in the Gulf for oil profits--that finally even the American people might notice. Seems not that different from now - although that was a midterm election, so maybe this should be saved for the inevitable Democratic loss in 2018.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2017 23:26
|
|
|
They accidentally announced La La Land for Best Picture because they had the wrong card.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2017 06:38
|
|
|
santanotreal posted:Did anyone say he didn't? Lol The point is that Obama giving good speeches "doesn't count" to Republicans because he has teleprompters. That's a real talking point, by the way, not a joke: there were plenty of cartoons about how the only reason Obama is such a good orator is teleprompters.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2017 16:17
|
|
|
Titus Sardonicus posted:And Trump is almost mediocre at best, even with teleprompters. It's not a good talking point. It never was a good talking point, but it's not about comparing Obama to Trump. It dates to the 2008 election and was a racist dog-whistle to suggest that Obama wasn't really an excellent speaker, he only sounded that way because of the teleprompter. It's way a certain cartoonist (McCoy, I think?) would always show Smug-bama with teleprompters: the dog whistle is that Obama can't possibly really be a great speaker, it must be the technology.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2017 17:31
|
|
|
21 Muns posted:Coal jobs will disappear, dude. It's an obsolete industry. I don't think Hillary was particularly "gleeful" when she said that, but if she was, it was because coal mining is a lovely, dangerous job that directly increases the likelihood that life on Earth dies out in the next millennium. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhKA1uX2UmI Seems pretty happy to me.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 21:26
|
|
|
Oh please, she basically blamed everyone but herself and then threw that in as a footnote.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2017 18:56
|
|
|
Cheen posted:wait who won the election Hillary just gave an interview where she blamed Russia and Comey for her loss. If you watch the interview it's very clear that she doesn't really think she had anything to do with her loss and it's all on Russia and Comey. The cartoon is "a thing happened."
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2017 19:10
|
|
|
SwitchbladeKult posted:Look at the numbers! Hillary did as well as the last three Democrat candidates while Trump did incredibly better. How do you explain the surge of voters for Trump if not racists coming out on record numbers to vote for a candidate that finally speaks their awful language? I don't see how Hillary being lukewarm drove 250k voters to Trump while still matching Gore, Kerry, and Obama 2013. Third party candidates were up 185k votes in Pennsylvania compared to 2012. Could she have gained all those voters? Could she have convinced some Trump voters to vote for her? Who knows. Maybe it wouldn't have been enough to win the state. But it was very, very close.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2017 23:14
|
|
|
Improbable Lobster posted:E: Of course, conservatives are huge baby bitches and their "campaign" against Colbert is particularly dumb and petty. Yeah, you'd think the show being boring and uninteresting would be reason enough for CBS to fire Colbert.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2017 05:03
|
|
|
Electric Phantasm posted:Wait, I though that still has to go through senate before it actually happens. Did I misunderstand something? It does, and apparently the Senate is planning on just scrapping the House version and writing their own, but it's still going to happen.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2017 19:54
|
|
|
Because presumably eventually someone else will be President in there.
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2017 23:25
|
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:This argument might make sense if the Trump campaign was like a well-oiled machine, but Trump made a gaffe a minute, came across as a maniac, constantly fired campaign staff and still won. Except for the part where Trump campaigned in key states while Clinton ... didn't, not to mention the bit where on national television Clinton flat-out told a voter "my policies will put you out of a job." Literally: she answered "we're going to put a lot of coal miners out of work" to a coal miner asking about what she would to to help people like him. Trump had a superior campaign strategy to Clinton, whose strategy appeared to be "of course I'm going to win, time to try and run up the score."
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2017 15:15
|
|
|
Kit Walker posted:"...and into a better job since your current job is going to disappear soon regardless of anything we do" But that's not what she said. She lead with "we're going to put a lot of coal miners out of a job" - specifically stating that her policies were going to be doing it, not general trends. (Of course, general trends are killing the coal industry.) She should have led with "we're going to create job training programs" and then explained how the coal industry was faltering. She didn't. She flat-out said, and this is a direct quote, "we're going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business." Not "the market" is doing it or that it's going to happen, that she was going to do it.
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2017 15:29
|
|
|
Regalingualius posted:Who is she and what'd she (allegedly) do? She did a photoshoot where she held up a decapitated and bloody head of Trump. Just Google it if you want to see it, it's not hard to find. She got exactly what she wanted out of it, too: people are talking about her again. Edit: Oh, and the Secret Service is now investigation her, so she accomplished that, too. Xenoveritas fucked around with this message at 17:23 on May 31, 2017 |
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 17:19
|
|
|
Yeah, when I first saw the picture, I thought it was a melting Jello cast of someone's head with a Trump wig slapped on top.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 18:21
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 6, 2024 01:14 |
|
|
Nihilarian posted:but enough about Trump C'mon now, be fair, that head is in no way fat enough to realistically be Trump's.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 18:38
|
|