kimmy

It has been documented that the Trump boosters in the 4Chan and Reddit communities made an organized effort to spam online polls. 4chan has a long history of doing this, and are so good at it that they once got 4chan's founder voted as "Man of the Year" in Time's online poll. As most 4chan members are 400 pound basement-dwelling teens who aren't old enough to vote, it's unlikely their votes count much in the general election. For a couple of days after the election, every political site I visited had a banner add inviting me to click on the ad to register a vote that Trump won the debate. I didn't click on the ad, but I imagine that if you did you were taken to a Trump campaign donation site rather than an online poll. -k

This kind of comment adds nothing to the topic and only serves to provoke an angry response. Stuff like this gets deleted. If you're not happy about discussing US politics with Canadians, perhaps you've come to the wrong forum. -k

Ok, and since you're the accountant here, can you now factor depreciation into that analysis? Infrastructure build back in the free-spending hey-day of Boomer Fun Times is now crumbling due to the spending cuts of the past 20 years. Hospital beds and schools now being shuttered due to cost-cutting measures, tuition fees in Canada have gone up by a real-dollars factor of 4 or 5 in the past 20 years... this great infrastructure that we've been handed down by the Boomers reminds me of my first car, my mighty Dodge Reliant that was older than me and needed continual maintenance to keep functional. -k

As I already explained, it's not the rhetorical style I am pointing out, it's the complete lack of substance underlying it. Yes, this is what I am talking about. Trump knows that a vote from a gullible, simple-minded voter counts just as much as a vote from a well-informed one. And he's banking that America has more of the former than the latter. -k

I'm saying that as Canada's home of populist politicians, we appreciate "straight shooters". And have probably had more practice than most Canadians at trying to differentiate "straight talk" from BS. I interpret this to mean "no, I don't know how Trump plans to 'stop jobs from leaving' or 'bring jobs home' or why his neck-ties and shirts are made in Bangladesh." -k

Definitely... it's not a question of how media analysts and fact-checkers saw it, it's a question of how undecided voters saw it. The Guardian's undecided voter panel gave Hillary the edge, but others might have seen it differently. -k

I recently got around to watching "Captain America: Civil War", and thought it was pretty good. I thought it was a very interesting contrast with the Batman vs Superman movie, because they bear some striking similarities. Both movies are centered around conflict between two good-guys that's set in motion by a "who watches the watchmen?" type issue. In the Batman vs Superman movie, it was outrage in the aftermath of the destruction brought to Metropolis in wake of Superman's battle against General Zod and the other renegade Kryptonians. In Civil War, it's international demands for oversight over the Avengers in wake of the devastation brought to the tiny country of Sarkovia in the Avengers: Age of Ultron movie. Bruce Wayne (in B vs S) and Tony Stark (in Civil War) are both confronted face to face with the human cost of superhero shenanigans and realize that things have to change. That brings them into heated conflict with Superman, and Captain America, respectively. In B vs S it's a case of two guys who only know each other by reputation and decide that they don't like each other... in Civil War, it's two guys who have been close friends and allies for several films reaching an irreconcilable difference in their relationship. Enter the villains! In B vs S, we had Jesse Eisenberg in a scene-chewingly wretched performance as Lex Luthor. In Civil War, we have Daniel Bruhl as Helmut Zemo. Daniel Bruhl might not be a household name, but many people will remember him from the movie Inglourious Basterds as Freddy Zoller, the Nazi sniper turned propaganda hero. I felt that he was "just right" in this performance. This version of Zemo is extremely different from the comic-book version, where the character Baron Zemo is an ex-Nazi with a mutilated face who wears a purple mask, a golden crown, has all kinds of hi-tech weapons. The movie version is none of that. He's Colonel Helmut Zemo, a former Sarkovian intelligence officer with absolutely nothing remarkable about him, aside from being an extremely capable individual with an extremely large grudge to bear. The character, like Daniel Bruhl's performance, is understated and plausible and has a ring of authenticity that's the exact opposite of Jesse Eisenberg's incredibly awful performance in Batman vs Superman. The tone of Batman vs Superman was relentlessly grim-- apparently it's always raining in Gotham City-- and nobody cracks a smile. Civil War has a much more varied feel. Guest appearances from light-hearted characters like Ant-Man and the Marvel/Disney debut of Spiderman provide a lot of levity. And yet, in some ways, Civil War is the darker film. In B vs S, spoiler Batman and superman arrive at a reconciliation that feels forced and somewhat corny. In Civil War, spoiler Tony Stark and Steve Rogers never do reconcile. They don't end as friends. The bad-guy wins. It's a decidedly less feel-good ending than you expect in this sort of film. In a genre known for black-and-white, Civil War ends up in shades of grey... Tony Stark and Steve Rogers are both right... and they're both wrong as well. Sooo... I quite liked this, actually. -k

I wonder if we'll get 2.7 million new accounts from Reddit and 4chan users voting for Trump? -k

His pitch is aimed straight at the simple-minded. His style of communication is aimed straight at the simple-minded. His whole campaign is aimed at the simple-minded. Simple-minded people are the only ones who believe his simplistic catch-phrases are real solutions to real problems. Folks with common sense know that the problems America-- and the rest of the western world-- face are not easy to solve. I'm a pretty plain-folks type of person-- I'm an Albertan, my parents are both from farm families, and all my relatives are from farm families... and I understand the appeal of "plain talking", "straight-shooting" type politicians... But plain-talking and straight-shooting with no ideas behind it is just a load of what us prairie folk call "bull shit." Trump isn't a straight shooter, he's a bullshitter pretending to be a straight shooter. It's not the simple language that I object to. It's the simple ideas. "I'm gonna stop jobs from leaving America and bring jobs back to America!" Yeah? Is he going to call up Apple and tell them "stop building your phones in China and build a factory in America"? And what's he going to do when they explain to him that real-world economic forces make that economically impossible? He knows why companies moved their low-skill jobs off-shore, because his own business did the same thing. If it's that easy, why is Trump's own Trump-branded merchandise made in China and Bangladesh? As I keep pointing out, Hillary might be a big fat liar, but she's only the 2nd most dishonest person in this race. There's simply no words to describe the logic that people should support Trump because Hillary is dishonest. "Hillary is dishonest... that's why I'm supporting the biggest scam-artist and con-man in America!" The cognitive dissonance is YUUUUUGE! -k

Only if I got to fist-fight him afterwards. If I got to fight him afterward, it'd be a definite yes. But as Moonlight says, what's that got to do with anything? -k

Indeed. I think everybody agrees that the secret to Trump's success has been simple messages that appeal to simple people. -k

Howard Dean is asking. He's not saying yes, he's not saying no, he's just asking questions. YEAAAAAGH! -k

We're just rough-housing a little. It's all in fun. No need to worry! -k

I'm hearing a lot of people saying they think Trump might have had a stroke before the debate. I don't know if he did, I don't know if he didn't. But that's what I'm hearing. A lot of people are saying it. -k

Not exactly a new pattern... Boomers still reminisce about the idealism of the 1960s, but look how that turned out. If the Woodstock generation had known that they would turn into the worst collection of scumbags the world has ever suffered through, I imagine they'd have probably shot themselves in the face. -k

Whenever I respond to ignorant old-people spouting crap, people always assume I'm unemployed or broke or something. This isn't particularly about me, but because people seem to have assumptions about me, I'll make a few comments about my personal circumstances. I'm 33 years old, own my own apartment and my own vehicle, and earn about $50k per year, which I gather is a little above the Canadian average. I have no debts, aside from my mortgage which is about 1/3 paid off. I'm certainly not wealthy, but I am doing "ok" by the modest standards of today, and I've gotten this far without a penny of help from anyone. So when I lash out at posts like Cum Laude's, it's not an unsuccessful person lashing out at successful people. I don't hate what Cum Laude wrote because I'm bitter, I just hate it because it's stupid and all-too-typical of the smug idiocy I hear all the time from Boomers. I'm knee deep in the lifetime of labor thing, as are most of my peers. The lifetime of labor part isn't what people are upset about, it's that it's going to bear much less "fruit" than previous generations. -k

I do find it either hilarious or disturbing that people who are so concerned about Hillary's dishonesty and her scandals have decided to support a compulsive liar, a scam-artist, a con-man, a crook, such as Trump. -k

"I started out working in the mail-room, and 5 years later I was the VP of Mid-West Sales!" -typical Boomer nostalgia story Stuff doesn't work that way anymore, gramps. Maybe once upon a time an entry-level job was the first step on the path to a long and rewarding relationship with an employer that would train and invest in employees and reward loyalty in kind. Now your entry-level job is the first step on the way to a slightly more senior menial job that pays slightly higher, and that's about it. You can start off as the burger flipper, and if you stay at it long enough you can work your way up to ... shift supervisor! That career path comes to a dead end. Normally if I want to hear old-people spout ignorant crap on a Sunday morning I have to head to Denny's and sit at a table near a group of seniors. So thanks for saving me $12 and stomach cramps, I guess. Got any other Boomer advice for us? "I'm tired of hearing about student loans! When I was that age, I paid my tuition by getting a paper route! Why don't kids just get paper routes?" "The problem is, kids these days won't roll up their sleeves and work! I told my grandson, you go in there and flip burgers like there's no tomorrow, and you'll be the boss before long!" -k

Perhaps he just meant that she's honest by Florida standards. -k

I thought the part 2 WikiLeaks Hillary blockbuster was those emails from Colin Powell revealing that he didn't like her very much. -k

I'm always somewhat baffled by the decision to reboot franchises that are this old. What was the thought process? Were some middle-age TV execs sitting around talking over beers about films they loved when they were teenagers? Is the target audience people in their 40s who have fond memories of the first run of Lethal Weapon movies, or is this aimed at people in their teens and 20s who aren't even old enough to remember the original movies? Is the assumption that the name recognition will guarantee an audience that a new property wouldn't have? In my recollection, these attempts to reboot old properties seem to fail as often as they succeed. I suspect many who fondly remember the original movie will simply smile and say "yeah, I liked those when I was a kid. But I'm an adult now," while the value of name recognition isn't nearly as strong for people in the age group that this kind of program is targeted at. I gather there's going to be a new MacGyver TV show and a new Bladerunner movie coming soon. Does the world really need either? I had a similar discussion in the Hillary's Health thread a while back. Some Trump supporters believe Mrs Clinton is on death's door, and my opinion is that it doesn't matter because everybody in the line of succession-- including the Secretary of HUD-- would be a better President than El Cheeto Grande. However, I think many would bristle at the idea that the presidency being taken over by an unelected official regardless of what the rules of succession say. In such a circumstance the new leader's legitimacy would be most likely under attack right from day one, and I imagine that's one of the themes the show will keep in mind as it moves forward. Also, keep in mind that the first episode of a show is often pretty clunky and isn't necessarily a great barometer of what the series is going to be like. It does sound like an interesting show, and I might give it a look. -k

If it turns out that she has some debilitating neurological illness, then yeah, I'll be surprised. Still wouldn't change which side I support, though. -k

Definitely. She has gotten him back in the race with one simple recipe: get him to stop running his mouth so that people can forget what an imbecile he is and let people remember how much they hate Hillary. If she actually pulls this off, I imagine there will be book deals and maybe even a movie about her. She could become a yuuuuge celebrity. -k

Indeed. Getting pretty tired of people trying to deflect criticism of Justin Trudeau by trying to point out something Harper did that may have been similar, because 1) a big part of Justin's spiel is that he is supposed to be different/better/more honorable than Harper 2) not everybody you're responding to is necessarily a Harper supporter in the first place. -k