Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
Comments
Maybe a thread discussing the whole debate then
@ post #2: If you make a general US elections thread, or even US presidential debate thread, please don't make it like the one back on TVT. It, the echo chamber that it's been, is horrifying.
The echo chamber, if it means what I think it means. I mean, c'mon. Icalasari is willing to agree the debate ended in Romney's favour. Folks there, if you allow me to exaggerate for the sake of better-sounding comparison, were willing to redefine favour and victory so they didn't have to attribute them to him.
Both, but mostly the latter. Vitriol from the overwhelming majority consensus is rather poorly moderated and "debates" mostly consist of people dogpiling the token conservative who hasn't been scared off yet while rationalizing away any aspect of their hero they don't like.
^ Like yeah, I'm annoyed people are saying Romney won the debate because people were impressed by "dynamic speaking" and shit when it basically means he was obnoxious and talked over the moderator, but good lord.
^^, ^So, TvT is doing the exact thing that GBS is?
I have no idea what you mean by GBS, so I'll assume it means gastric bypass surgery and say yes.
I'd say it's that the fanboyism, inherent in such a nerdy community as TVT, found yet another vent, now centered on politics and economy instead of mathematical theory of probability. Luckily, this time they confine themselves to two or three megathreads I don't have to visit.
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_21696057/fact-check-presidential-debate-missteps?source=most_viewed
Useful.
Heck, even I say that Romney did decently well in his arguing. Obama seemed tired of him.
This says nothing about truthfulness or anything though.
And of course, given my own political leanings, I hope that changes by the second debate.
@Bee:
If you mean StarshipMaxima, he had a realization regarding LGBT rights and was astounded that someone as right-wing as he was was tolerated by a left-leaning community, but this was an entirely different thread.
I was actually talking about Grizzly. I haven't seen Maxima around lately, or at least haven't been paying attention to the same threads as him.
Really, my activity on TV Tropes anymore is mostly limited to like 2-3 OTC threads, the WA Pony thread ever since the YF one got utterly hijacked by the not-pony stuff formerly in the WA one, and IJAM. Most of the people I hung out with left during the main upheavals.
THE WORLD WE KNEW IS GONE
Don't know if I've seen anyone named Grizzly, but my OTC focus is also narrow.
These fucking kids... *everywhere* on my lawn... I make jokes about missing Nornagest, but really I mostly miss the kind of TVT forum that had that calibre of discussion.
What the hell is TVT.
/feigned ignorance.
Anyway, why would you cut PBS' funding? I cannot imagine it is anywhere near significant.
Also, I am told Romney won the debate. I didn't actually get to see it, so I don't know how true that is, and honestly, unless Obama does something insanely stupid, I already know I'm voting for him. Even if he does do something insanely stupid, I'll just vote third party.
RALPH NADER POTUS 4 LYFE
^It translates to " Romney was more aggressive while Obama just looked tired of being the same room as him."
I dunno, I can buy that Romney won. I just don't particularly care whether or not he did.
Really, I sort of doubt most do. This is going to be among the most polarized elections in a very long time. I really doubt many people are undecided at this point.
Considering that there are maybe about 5% of the voting population that are undecided at this point...yeah, nothing much is going to budge at all anyway, short of either candidate suddenly being outed for a "dead girl or live boy" situation.
As for PBS...here's PBS's statement about what was said in the debate.
I think Neil DeGrasse Tyson had the perfect comparison that eliminating PBS to cut the budget was like deleting text files to save computer space.
Yeah, sounds about right.
But of course, more than likely the budget is just an excuse and really Romney just doesn't think public broadcasting (or, for that matter, public anything) should exist.
Why would he think that?
I mean don't get me wrong, if the guy gets elected I'm heading to either Canada or Mexico, whichever one has cheaper bus fare. But I don't see why he'd hate PBS.
There's always paranoia that federal-funded broadcasting can turn into a propaganda machine. Which isn't exactly a thing to not be wary of or prepared to deal with -- it's happened before -- but PBS has a pretty stellar record, and the news outlets have turned into worse propaganda machines, so it's kind of like roach-proofing your house by burning it to the ground.
I mean really, this is a channel whose main editor moderated the debate where one of the candidates basically told him "yeah I want to shut you down" and didn't retaliate at all. I somehow don't think he's going to turn into the Ministry of Love.
Isn't PBS mostly known for its children's shows anyway?
I mean, I guess hypothetically you could say that Sesame Street is pushing some liberal agenda or whatever, but that's conspiracy theorist territory, ain't it?
Really though, PBS is pretty careful not to piss off anyone in its children's programming, and to be academically neutral in its other educational stuff. It's like the least inflammatory channel ever. That's most of why Romney caused such a stir saying he wanted to cut it -- it's like decking the cheerful kid who's friendly to everyone in the class and tutors them for free.
@ Super Lazuli:
Because small government and blah blah blah.Let's be honest, if you're taking the position that the government shouldn't be providing its citizens with fucking health care, it's pretty hard to argue that it should be providing TV channels.
I suppose that makes some sense.
From his point of view anyway.
Well, it's completely absurd when you still support having a military budget bigger than the next twenty countries combined, but somehow the Republican Party has convinced itself that that doesn't count as excessive government spending while PBS and health care do.
I can honestly sort of understand the logic there (defense=important, Sesame Street=notsomuch). I still don't agree with it though and think we go way overboard on military spending.