kimmy

Based on what I've read, she and Jared Leto have very little screen time. Is that the case? I had a hunch earlier on that we've already seen all Harley Quinn's speaking parts in the trailers... -k

I was thinking McGovern, but Dukakis might be a better comparison. I believe Gore came within a few electoral votes of winning, which I expect is a pipe-dream for Trump. -k

The guy was talking about breaking out the nuclear weapons last week. Clearly things could get a lot worse, and Trump is just the guy to make it happen. Clinton now has a significant lead in the polls and the key battleground states are now all leaning her way. If Trump can't turn this trainwreck around in a hurry, he's in for a 'UUUUUGE defeat. He's already making up excuses, claiming that the Democrats are going to rig the election. Sean Hannity, who is I think the only mainstream media guy on Trump's bandwagon, is already blaming Paul Ryan and John McCain for the inevitable Trump defeat. A Politico.com survey of Republican insiders revealed that the mood at Elephant Team HQ is nearly suicidal, that they're worried that Trump's unpopularity is not only going to ruin their campaign for the White House but also cost down-ticket races in the Senate and Congress, and that insiders are researching whether there's anything they can do to replace Trump or what the process would be for choosing a replacement in the fortuitous event that Trump bails from the campaign. And while the Elephant Team booster club here at the MLW is going to be crying "media bias!" as the explanation for the Republicans' troubles, the truth is that they've made a historically bad choice of candidates. -k

I am thinking this sounds like the email that I receive when somebody sends me a private message. If that's what you're describing, Scott, you can edit or disable this function by going to your user profile page, and selecting My Settings, then My Notifications, and unchecking the check boxes beside the email notifications. -k

As I already mentioned, black people are often described as "chocolate" or "coffee" without "the left" freaking out. I'm not sure why you feel that "pavement" or "ape shit" are a more applicable comparison, but it's not. -k

Bernie supporters have been angry with the Democratic National Convention for months over a number of incidents they said show the DNC was biased in Hillary Clinton's favor. They have been portrayed as being poor sports who are angry that their team lost, but the WikiLeaks DNC emails have to some degree vindicated them. Bernie supporters may, eventually decide to vote for Hillary to avoid a Trump presidency, or they may vote for third-party candidates like Green Party candidate Jill Stein or Libertarian Gary Johnson. Some Bernie supporters may even vote for Trump, as Trump embodies one element of Bernie's campaign that appealed to many: he's not from the political establishment, and he's not beholden to the usual lobbies and sponsors. I saw a poll recently indicating that 57% of Bernie supporters intend to vote for Hillary with the remainder split among the other 3 possibilities. For the time being, however, the Democratic National Convention is reaping the rewards of its own actions. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz and her cronies were laughing down their sleeves at Bernie and his supporters the whole time, and they got caught. 40% of the delegates at the convention are Sanders supporters, and I can't imagine why anybody expects them to silently accept the disrespect they and their candidate have been treated with by DWS and the DNC executive. -k

Non-white people's skin is often compared to food-- "chocolate", "coffee", "mocha"... is it just that "mayo" isn't very dynamic-sounding? If I had picked something more action-packed, like perhaps cocaine, would that be better? Anyway, this seems rather thin-skinned. I thought you right-wingers were sick of political correctness. -k

Yes. The DNC's job is to ensure a fair and unbiased primaries process. Former DNC chair Ed Rendell, a Clinton ally, said what's revealed in the emails was improper. Former DNC chair Terry McAuliffe, another Clinton ally, said he'd have fired these guys on the spot. It was improper. Full stop. No amount of rationalizing it changes that. I get that you have a low opinion of Sanders and his platform, but it was Hillary's job to defeat him, not the DNC's. Hillary probably would have won anyway, which makes it really weird that the DNC felt compelled to assist Hillary in this way. -k

I don't think it's racist to point out the small number of non-white attendees at the Republican convention. Which is, no doubt, the source of the commentary on Ryan's selfies (not that he was seen in public with white people, as taxme would suggest.) -k

I am currently half-way through the new Netflix miniseries Stranger Things. I am really enjoying this! The story is set in 1983, and in many ways is a lovingly-created homage to science-fiction and horror movies of that era. Just watching the opening credits sequence-- with its vintage look, the droning synth soundtrack, and a celluloid "speckle" effect added-- is like stepping into a time machine. Stranger Things borrows many story elements from era movies you've seen before-- E.T, Poltergeist, It, Star Man, Close Encounters, The Goonies, The Lost Boys, and others. But it stands on its own as a really enjoyable, suspenseful, entertaining show in its own right. Like some of those shows, it's not just a suspense story, but also a coming of age story as the main characters are adolescents and teenagers who have enough scary things going on in their lives even without a creepy monster lurking close by. Wynona Ryder and Matthew Modine are the most recognizable names on the credits, but the real stars of this show are definitely the unknown young actors. I don't think I've ever seen a show with such uniformly great performances from such a young cast. They're outstanding, especially the Dungeons and Dragons kids, our dorky but courageous heroes, and Eleven, the mysterious girl who arrives in their midst. She is nearly mute, but watching her emotions play across her face and in her body language makes words completely unnecessary. This is sometimes scary, but not really terrifying. I am a horror film wimp, and I can watch this with the lights off, so most people should be fine. It's also not gory (so far, at least.) The scares come from suspense, not violence and blood. -k

Regarding this "the Russians!" thing the Democrats keep saying in response to the email leaks, I think RNC chairman Rince Priebus said it best: "The Russians didn't write those emails." Rince is a dumb-ass, but he nailed it. Regardless who leaked the emails, we know who wrote them. To Argus, regarding the issue of whether the accusations against the DNC executive are serious: “You have to be neutral and if I found out my staff had written those kinds of emails where they were denigrating his religion, I would have fired them right on the spot It’s just outrageous. You have to be neutral and if you can’t be neutral you can’t be in that job.” -Virginia governor Terry McAuliffe, long-time Clinton ally and 2004 DNC chairman. "Myself and other Democrats who were Clinton supporters, we have been saying this was serious. It truly violates what the DNC’s proper role should be. The DNC did something incredibly inappropriate here." -former Pennsylvania governor, former DNC chairman, and Clinton ally Edward Rendell. (both quotes from here.) -k

The DNC has no obligation to be neutral towards Trump. They did have an obligation to be neutral in the Democratic primary process. This is comparable to catching NHL referees discussing ways to help one team win. -k

So I assume that this alleged "flak" Paul Ryan allegedly took is because he couldn't find any non-white people at the whiter-than-mayo Republican National Convention? -k

The emails certainly show Debbie Wasserman-Schultz and her top staffers were hostile to the Sanders campaign. Probably the most damning I've seen is from DNC CFO Brad Marshall who proposes: DNC CEO Amy Dacey replies: "AMEN" To me, that's pretty damning for two reasons. First off, the DNC is supposed to be a neutral body trying to ensure a fair and unbiased primaries process. Why are the CFO and CEO discussing ways to undermine one candidate's support? And secondly, not only are they clearly trying to undermine Sanders, they're proposing to appeal to religious prejudice to do so. That's pretty odious, don't you think? Brad Marshall feels really bad about it, as you can imagine. That's not the only instance either. It seems that the DNC and Clinton campaign were closely coordinated, and that the DNC top-level staffers were involved in assisting Clinton as well as attempting to undermine Sanders. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz has resigned-- she's been "quarantined" in the words of a Democrat source. She won't be allowed to even appear at the convention this week-- she's so toxic and divisive that she would derail any hope of party unity. She has resigned as DNC Chair, effective at the end of the convention. And from there she starts her new job: Hillary Clinton's Honorary Campaign Chair!! Yay!! It's nice that she landed on her feet! -k

Kaine came out against the TPP this weekend, which is pretty funny, because he was in favor of it on Thursday. Just like Hilary, who was in favor of it, until it turned into a major campaign issue, at which point she decided she was against it. Clinton and Kaine will be against the TPP as long as they need to be to keep the Bernie supporters from abandoning ship. If she wins the election, she'll be for it again. "I was against it due to some grave concerns! But now those concerns have been addressed, and I am now supporting this partnership!" Count on it! -k

This really doesn't change anything, young Squidward. The Republicans already know that they are going to be massacred badly among non-white voters, non-Christian voters, and voters under 30. Their calculus depends on two things. One: can we get older white people out to the polls in sufficient numbers? Two: will non-white and non-Christian and under-30 voters be so apathetic to Hilary Clinton that they don't bother voting on election night? -k

Do you ask that of every non-LGBT person? -k

I think Betsy's post sums up the overall credibility of this source. -k

Bigoted against bigots! Intolerant of the intolerant! :) -k

Cruz was invited... but not to disrespect Trump at his own convention. The Bush family-- all of them-- took the high road by declining to attend Trump's coronation. Cruz, on the other hand, didn't take the high road. And the sheer audacity of what he did-- agree with him or not-- took balls. Watch the video of the end of the speech, where he smirks defiantly as thousands of people boo and howl at him, looking like he is savoring the moment... and tell me that didn't take balls. There's no doubt in my mind that it was personal, but I also read some comments from Cruz earlier this week. He was doing some post-mortem of the campaign, where he complained that he was portrayed as an intolerant nut-case televangelist... and he drops this in his speech last night: "Freedom means religious freedom, whether you are Christian or Jew, Muslim or atheist. Gay or straight. The Bill of Rights protects the rights of all of us to live according to our conscience." ...it makes me think he's already positioning himself for 2020. I think he's banking that Trump's campaign is going to go down in flames in a Hindenburg type disaster, and that there won't be any political retribution for refusing to endorse the Hindenburg. -k

Even though I loathe Ted Cruz, I have to admire the sheer amount of balls this took. -k

Yes, after the Braidwood Inquiry, we in BC saw that the RCMP culture is so vile and corrupt that even the RCMP themselves had to concede that there was no way anybody in this province could trust them to "self police" themselves again. I think there's a world of difference between policemen protecting each other in a potentially dangerous situation, vs having the techie from the police IT lab come to a business to scrub potentially damaging information off the business's security DVR system in the aftermath, or having the department's communications officer hold a press conference to spread deliberately false statements about the incident the day after, and so-on. Which is completely irrelevant when it comes to the issue of covering up wrongdoing by their peers. I think if I knew so many people were watching, I'd be less likely to soccer-kick prone suspects in the face, administer numerous taser-shots to helpless victims and lie about it afterwards, and so-on. Don't like it because they don't like what happened, or don't like it when the public finds out? I suggest that if it were the former, they'd spend more effort trying to root out the "bad apples", as opposed to covering up for "bad apples" and lobbying for laws against filming police and so-on. -k

"All the information that our critics have is wrong! Cops are awesome! Everything was awesome until Black Lives Matter started spreading hateful rhetoric! There was no problem! We don't accept any responsibility for anything! We deny any responsibility for anything, ever!" Exactly the kind of mentality you'd expect from the police, and exactly the kind of mentality that has brought things to this point. -k

Then what exactly did you guys mean with these posts: ... How am I supposed to read that, other than to mean "if you're going to criticize the police, we should take away the police and see how you like it then?" If that's not what you were trying to say, please explain what you really meant. Cheap slogans or not, they're right. I think BLM are a bunch of buffoons too, but there's a real problem here. As I've said before, my main objection to the BLM message is that trying to blame it on racism is just too simplistic an explanation-- it misses the real problem. The real problem: no accountability from the police has resulted in no trust from the public. Each time one of these incidents happens, the police chief and the mayor get on a podium and say "Please! Do not rush to judgment! Trust the system!" After seeing the disgusting, despicable reality of the system exposed in the Braidwood Inquiry, how much do you trust the system, Argus? -k