• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2016 |OT5| Archdemon Hillary Clinton vs. Lice Traffic Jam

Status
Not open for further replies.
So I'm working through Animaniacs on Netflix, and I find it funny Bill Clinton is in every single episode, and referenced by name. He's in the theme song! Playing the sax.

I can't imagine a cartoon these days have Obama in the opening theme song of every single episode.

There's also a Reagan joke in the very first episode!
Yeah I feel like most kids cartoons nowadays explicitly avoid direct pop culture references, maybe so they don't date themselves.

Regular Show will have parodies of nerd things (like an expy of Billy Mitchell showing up in a few episodes, and the episode that parodies The Wizard) but overall it's pretty timeless.

Fun fact, the "While Bill Clinton plays the sax" line was penned by the writer's son. He also plays Slappy Squirrel's nephew.
 
I love Aunt Slappy. The episode about 90's junk tv shows is hilarious.

Such a cool cartoon...

Slappy, the Good Feathers and Pinky and the Brain.

I actually dislike that the Warners are in every episode. Some of their skits are just... not funny, and somewhat predictable. Just an entire 21 minutes of Slappy would make me happy. Haven't found an episode of those three segments I don't like, yet, while there's been a few duds. And every time the Hippos come up, I just fast forward.

Watching this show also made me realize it likely could never happen again. The Warners being wacky and weird would come across as "lolol so random look at how random I am" even though in the Warners' case, it works well because it's not terribly overused, but it would go so wrong these days, because they wouldn't "get" what makes it work. There's also quite a lot of musical numbers, but unlike Family Guy, they're used well and work because the Warners are singing them at strangely inappropriate times while a "normal" person sits and wonders what the heck they're even doing singing. That's another part of the show that could have gone horribly wrong, and likely would be a lot more awful if the cartoon came out these days.

Yeah I feel like most kids cartoons nowadays explicitly avoid direct pop culture references, maybe so they don't date themselves.

Regular Show will have parodies of nerd things (like an expy of Billy Mitchell showing up in a few episodes, and the episode that parodies The Wizard) but overall it's pretty timeless.

Fun fact, the "While Bill Clinton plays the sax" line was penned by the writer's son. He also plays Slappy Squirrel's nephew.

The nice part of the pop culture references in the show is that they're "timeless" references. Nods to old movies, cartoons, actors, stuff that remain relevant and well known forever, versus very specific 90s jokes (unless they're explicitly making fun of 90s culture).

Like, there's a parody of Jerry Lewis in the show as a re-occuring character. What 90s kid even knew who Jerry Lewis was? There's an entire sub character arc about birds reliving old mafia movies and are parodies of the Good Fellas. There's an Orson Welles mouse (and a full on War of the Wolf's parody! And a line by line reproduction of the pea commercial). Stuff like that works to not make the show feel dated. Versus having random 90s crap in there that nobody even remembers anymore.
 

watershed

Banned
I'm super late to this, but Cruz's desperation is hilarious. What the hell does Fiorina do for him anyways? She did nothing as a candidate.
 

NeoXChaos

Member
Neera Tanden
‏@neeratanden
A long investigative piece on what happened to Salon could be fascinating.

Walter Shapiro ‏@MrWalterShapiro 2h2 hours ago
@neeratanden As their Washington bureau chief from 2005-2008, it's too sad to contemplate. I can only guess it's crazed lefty desperation.

lol
 

jaekeem

Member
The detestable thing is that I doubt he even believes the spiel he's writing at this point.

He's just doing it to try and raise his profile by using bernie supporters. Shameless.
 
Check out @mn4bernie's Tweet: https://twitter.com/mn4bernie/status/725426919873736704?s=09

Lol Bernie people in MN think franken and klobuchar need to go.

Ha ha siiiick bern.


Ha ha that tweet is getting fucking roasted.

Yeah, S4P is a lot more rational now too. I mean, there are still crazy conspiracy theories everywhere, but the signal to noise ratio is surprisingly better than I thought it would be. I think what did it was the targets from a few weeks ago said that Sanders was able to lose a few states (I think the worst projection said he could lose 4 more) and to his supporters who aren't super familiar with the system, it's not about delegates or margins. It's just best 26 out of 50.

So being able to lose a few helped since they were all saying they'd lose NJ, PR, Guam, etc.. They were really banking on flipping PA, CT, and DE (and keeping margins down in MD). Since that didn't happen, any targets that I've seen (including the ones made by posters there) basically have to admit that if he loses a single contest from here on out, it's over (I mean, it's been over for weeks, but y'all know what I mean). They know he's got no shot in NJ, PR, Guam, and DC (and a few others, but I'm granting a giant swing for CA to prove the point), so he's toast. He'd need to make Clinton non-viable in like 5 contests to win. It's not happening, especially once she hits the magic number (even if it's with supers, it'll be a big deal in the media. Sanders would have to respond, and the only possible answer would be, "We'll flip supers" which is bonkers).

This is our white whale.

If TX ever became a swing state, the GOP would implode as an organization. That would put Dems in such an insane position nationally that we could move strategically with the assumption that a Dem would be in the White House for decades. Instead of being in the situation where the GOP needs every swing state, they'd be in the situation where the traditional swing states become secondary to fighting over TX. If they ever lose TX, we can call the election on that result.
 

Jackson50

Member
Salon.com is the biggest joke of all time:



Trump was in favor of the Iraq War.
Unfortunately, there is a general tendency among the media to portray Trump as a serious candidate whenever he says something that's not patently dumb. And this will only worsen during the general election.
It is past time, to make a broader point, that one can dismiss all Trump says simply because it is Trump saying it.
No, there is no point where Trump should not be summarily dismissed as a candidate. He's forfeited the right to be taken seriously. As for the substance of his speech, Trump was hardly impressive. But again many people will aggrandize him for simply not saying something dumb and heinous.
 
If Texas ever became a Swing State, it would cause the GOP to go into crisis mode and they'd have to rethink their entire platform because at that point it becomes an emergency situation. They couldn't just keep putting it off hoping it worked itself out.

Texas is really the only shot the GOP has to remaining at least somewhat competitive in the presidential races. If it ever went Democrat, they'd lose instantly.
 

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
There is still no thinkpiece on why Millennials have been enthralled with economically illiterate old men in Ron Paul and Bernie, boooooo.

The overlap must be understated, it's the most likely explanation for the difference between closed and open primaries. and those fucking caucuses that Ron Paul loved.
 

ivysaur12

Banned
ChDmmrRWYAAZAGa.jpg:large


ICON

HEIDI IS A FUCKING ICON
 

Paskil

Member
Yeah, S4P is a lot more rational now too. I mean, there are still crazy conspiracy theories everywhere, but the signal to noise ratio is surprisingly better than I thought it would be.

If nothing else, their call total in their banner should speak volumes about the state of the Bern (6,171/35,000).
 
Flashback:

It’s accurate that the two congressmen co-sponsored the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act, first in July 2010 and again in January 2011. Both original versions of the bill limited federal funding for abortions to pregnancies resulting from "forcible rape" and certain other circumstances.

The term "forcible" was later removed from the bill, allowing federal funding for abortions in all cases of rape. But when Ryan and Akin originally signed on, the legislation included the phrase "forcible rape."

http://www.politifact.com/new-jerse...yan-and-todd-akin-co-sponsored-bill-limiting/

That Paul Ryan didn't drown with Todd Akin is honestly amazing. His good looks and good speaking skills have gotten him so far despite him being so insane.
 

Wilsongt

Member
Flashback:



http://www.politifact.com/new-jerse...yan-and-todd-akin-co-sponsored-bill-limiting/

That Paul Ryan didn't drown with Todd Akin is honestly amazing. His good looks and good speaking skills have gotten him so far despite him being so insane.

Easier to throw the old people in your party under the bus because losing them won't matter. However, if you fuck with the young ones you start messing with your future.

Not everyone can be Eric Cantor and primaried into obscurity.
 

hawk2025

Member
There is still no thinkpiece on why Millennials have been enthralled with economically illiterate old men in Ron Paul and Bernie, boooooo.

It's the uncanny valley of economic knowledge, but in my view for completely different reasons.

It's very understandable and relatable, but much more so from Bernie's side.

For Ron Paul, it's a mixture of the easy answers of Economic Libertarianism and Mises nonsense that's appealing to middling, incompetent, and incomplete education in economics. It's 101ism taken to its absurd extreme.

For Bernie, it's a significantly more important and precise point: Millennials have been relatively screwed in different ways by increasing economic inequality, student debt, and the economic crisis that has impacted a lot of their job market prospects. Latching on to Bernie's message is understandable, then, even if it makes them shoot at mostly the right targets, but with the completely wrong guns. Their economic rage has been largely fostered by our own failure to address income inequality with the tools we have (and we do have them) in a timely fashion.

They do have some awful policies in common like auditing the FED and being proud of voting against the bailout, though.

Ultimately, I imagine that a portion of them do overlap, and their main idea is to simply rage against the machine.
 

Trancos

Member
I really get the impression that there is a lot of confusion between brokered and contested convention.

Republicans may go into a brokered convention: it is possible (but less likely every day) that no one will get the majority on first ballot.
Delegate vote again in further ballots, and delegate get unbound until someone gets the majority.

Democrats may go into a contested convention if Sanders doesn't concede before. \
Which is basically just a public recount of all the pledged delegates and super delegates that we already know each candidate has.
Reading a few blogs and post online I get the impression that some Bernie supporters think they are the same thing.
That they will be no winner on first ballot and that Sanders can outmaneouver HRC campaign on the following ballots.

They won't be a second ballot, because super delegate vote on first ballot.
It think they get confused with all this talk about republicans preparing for a brokered convention.

I understand that Weaver is asking about flipping super delegates before the convention,
but most people think that because no candidate will reach 2383 in pledged delegates alone,
then there is going to be a free for all battle in further ballots during the convention.
 

Clefargle

Member
I really get the impression that there is a lot of confusion between brokered and contested convention.

Republicans may go into a brokered convention: it is possible (but less likely every day) that no one will get the majority on first ballot.
Delegate vote again in further ballots, and delegate get unbound until someone gets the majority.

Democrats may go into a contested convention if Sanders doesn't concede before.
Which is basically just a public recount of all the pledged delegates and super delegates that we already know each candidate has.
Reading a few blogs and post online I get the impression that some Bernie supporters think they are the same thing.
That they will be no winner on first ballot and that Sanders can outmaneouver HRC campaign on the following ballots.

They won't be a second ballot, because super delegate vote on first ballot.
It think they get confused with all this talk about republicans preparing for a brokered convention.

I understand that Weaver is asking about flipping super delegates before the convention,
but most people think that because no candidate will reach 2383 in pledged delegates alone,
then there is going to be a free for all battle in further ballots during the convention.

Yet another Undemocratic event from the republicans I've seen Bernie supporters pushing to happen. How much do they really know?
 

border

Member
I love how the camp that has spent the entire campaign complaining about how undemocratic superdelegates are is openly discussing how they can convince superdelegates to vote against the candidate who has the popular vote.
 

hawk2025

Member
I love how the camp that has spent the entire campaign complaining about how undemocratic superdelegates are is openly discussing how they can convince superdelegates to vote against the candidate who has the popular vote.

The contradiction of righteous indignation regarding the system: It no longer matters, because the cause is more important than the supposedly crooked system itself.

If you believe the rules are rigged and your cause is just, you try to rig it yourself.
 
If TX ever became a swing state, the GOP would implode as an organization. That would put Dems in such an insane position nationally that we could move strategically with the assumption that a Dem would be in the White House for decades. Instead of being in the situation where the GOP needs every swing state, they'd be in the situation where the traditional swing states become secondary to fighting over TX. If they ever lose TX, we can call the election on that result.
I think in the context of modern politics, Georgia is in a similar position (I know Clinton won it once in the 90s).

My personal theory is that the GOP can slightly offset their losses in the South with gains in the Midwest - say if OH, IA and WI became safe red states and MN, MI and PA became roughly competitive. But if that happened at the same time as FL, VA and NC becoming safe Dem states then it's pretty much a wash and Dems have 250some EVs locked down every election. They're just in the same position they're in now where they can't lose a single big swing state.

ChDmmrRWYAAZAGa.jpg:large


ICON

HEIDI IS A FUCKING ICON
Man I kind of hope the gay rumors about Booker are true. First gay president and first gay black president, let's cross both of those bridges, baby!
 

dramatis

Member
This morning I said Nintendo was a bigger loser than Cruz, but that's been completely flipped today. I thought Cruz was supposed to be smart.
 

watershed

Banned
Yeah it's crazy. Cruz gets nothing out of this besides 1 day of shock headlines. Not even good headlines, just shock and everyone noting his desperation and the lack of impact Fiorina will have.
 

danm999

Member
On the plus side a wild Fiorina appearing might tip Donald into saying something that further blows up his unfavourables with women.
 

watershed

Banned
On the plus side a wild Fiorina appearing might tip Donald into saying something that further blows up his unfavourables with women.

I'm pretty sure that's bound to happen but at the same time, what's left for Trump to say that he hasn't already said?

Edit: I'm sure that is something Cruz considered. I'm sure Fiorina is going to attack and bait Trump, hoping he finally goes to far.
 

thcsquad

Member
I'm pretty sure that's bound to happen but at the same time, what's left for Trump to say that he hasn't already said?

It's less about saying something new and more about having him continue to say it. The electorate's memory is short, and they need to continually reminded of how bigoted he is.
 

danm999

Member
I'm pretty sure that's bound to happen but at the same time, what's left for Trump to say that he hasn't already said?

Oh nothing campaign ending, I'm sure. Just a death by a thousand cuts thing.

It's less about saying something new and more about having him continue to say it. The electorate's memory is short, and they need to continually reminded of how bigoted he is.

Yep. HRC, Megyn Kelly, Carly Fiorina.

Just continually reinforce who this guy is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom