Well either way distance is important. It can be easy to be shortsighted when you’ve been in the same situation for awhile. If you feel sad, change the situation. I think you’d find your perspective would change too.
I know what a broken heart feels like. I know that you don’t want people to tell you to get over it, because you don’t want to get over it (at least I didn’t). And you may never fully get over it. But finding some distance can end the cycle, and will almost certainly begin to mend the heart. It’s a tough thing to do, but it is true, and it will make you feel better.
Rian Johnson is Gen-X and I doubt he has anything to do with when the foreign translations are revealed.
But sure. Let’s keep criticizing a film (that, again, isn’t out for another 10 months) for the most inane reasons.
Wow! Oh my god! The company marketing the biggest film of the year has a strategy for how to market it? How devious.
Yeah Mattis is pretty reasonable, despite the nickname (and I can only assume that’s why Trump picked him, not realizing he isn’t actually insane).
To be fair, he is most certainly a piece of shit.
Woops, Fake News!
CNN or Vox?
A Rey parentage reveal is needed at some point, after what was set up.
As I said for “last Jedi living in nowhere”, just because it was thrust upon by TFA it does not mean it is not a rehash.
And what if the reveal is a character we never met before? Still a rehash?
Honestly, unless she ends up the kid of the main villain who supposedly killed her dad, I don’t see how the reveal would be a rehash.
I see TFA and the ST as less a direct sequel and more a continuation further down the line with a new generation.
Well regardless of how you see it, the truth is that TFA is more of a soft remake than sequel.
I think soft reboot is a bit closer to the truth.
The truth is a proper restoration would look miles better than anything Harmy has done or can do (and his stuff looks pretty damn good). This is easily discerned from looking at the best blu-ray transfers of films from the same era, or watching Mike Verta’s clips. These films deserve the attention and resources that would only come with professional involvement.
For now, Harry’s work is just a fantastic way to bide our time until real justice is done.
Fuck, yes that is what my second link was supposed to be.
Also this was a fun thing that happened:
http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/16/politics/donald-trump-news-conference-anti-semitism/index.html
Wait does this mean Fox News is fake news now too? Is nothing sacred?
https://twitter.com/FoxNews/status/832396832974131200
https://twitter.com/FoxNews/status/832396832974131200
This is when you know shit is fucked
Trump flailing so he’s making his cronies fall back on their treasured classic “Crooked Hillary’s damn emails.” Because that’s still the biggest source of corruption in Washington.
I had a thought, and probably totally off base but I think it would be pretty cool. We’ve seen the toy packaging and the poster. And the teaser crawl photo was B&W. Why? RED OPENING CRAWL. Totally not going to hapoen, and I’m sure a lot of people would find the break from tradition off putting. But I’d dig it.
https://mobile.twitter.com/rianjohnson/status/823770053971578881
Some of that stuff is just obvious.
A Rey parentage reveal is needed at some point, after what was set up.
Kylo was pretty prominent in TFA anyway, it’s only logical to assume he’ll be a big player here and more powerful (with his training).
As for the TIE advanced, I don’t see how that has anything to do with ESB.
Luke being more mysterious surely comes with the Jedi wizening. He was already somewhat mysterious to other characters in ROTJ.
Resistance being underdogs isn’t hard to see. We still don’t know how far reaching the FO is, and the Republic has just lost its capital and its fleet.
The rehash complaints are bullshit and will continue to be because there’s no substance to any of these details.
As for destroying the end of Jedi, if that’s how you want to see it, so be it. I see TFA and the ST as less a direct sequel and more a continuation further down the line with a new generation. Everything that ROTJ “accomplishes” happens off screen between trilogies. If you don’t like that, fine. But it’s no real measure of quality.
As for the ghosts, I’m kind of hoping they don’t play much of a role in the ST at all. If they do show up, there had better be a good reason.
They’re all pretty fun, yeah.
It’s guaranteed! Disney has no ideas anymore. I bet there will also be a romance and that the characters will be split up with multiple storylines. What are the storylines? Doesn’t matter. All that matters is rehash and thus it is crap.
Easy to talk out of your ass when it isn’t on the line.
The specifics of the two leaks doesn’t help him either. Hacker does not equal whistleblower. The act itself of the former being worse while with the latter, the act implies the info being leaked is worse.
I bet there will be a light saber fight too. Rehash everywhere.
Ever??
Also, they changed the stormtrooper designs after ANH so this is yet another ESB rehash.
Obviously states aren’t a hive mind, but there are plenty of clear divisions between states and regions of the US; it’s why the interior of the country usually swings red while the coasts swing blue. You don’t really solve Texas being a red state or California being a blue state if you remove the electoral college.
I said pretty much the same thing, here was Dom’s response.
We don’t live in a country anymore where different states have wildly different make ups and concerns.
Texas, California, and Florida would like a word.
That’s simultaneously not what I meant and exactly what I meant, if you know what I mean.
Tyrphanax said:
Majorities are things to be wary of in my opinion, regardless if it’s today or 1850. It’s not a hive mind, sure, but people follow packs and that can lead to bad things and in my opinion, it’s better to plan for the possibility that two thirds of the country might indeed eat the other third; after all, people didn’t expect the revolution or the civil war or Trump’s presidency. We’re always simultaneously not as homogeneous as we think and more homogeneous than we think.Whole heartily agreed, this is something the Founding Fathers feared themselves, human nature has not changed as much as we might like since then. I said something similar earlier and Dom blew it off.
I don’t think we’re one continuous country. I think living in different states has a great deal to do with that, and it’s only getting worse as people move to ideologically similar areas. So your assertion doesn’t really make sense to me.
A liberal in Texas is more likely to move to Austin than Boston.
Short responses get short responses. Sorry if you feel like I blew you off, but I think my response there was a succinct way to say what I wanted to. If you want me to elaborate just say so.
Also, I don’t think human nature has changed so much as I think the way the our states and their interaction as a nation has changed.
Many of the arguments posted here for the electoral college are countered by Koza in the debate I posted earlier - in most cases there is data to the contrary. I strongly recommend watching it in its entirety, as many of these arguments - as well as many assumptions posted here about the underlying bases for the EC - are not well founded.
As for the argument that a popular vote would result in some states not having a voice, well, that’s certainly the case now (only it’s a different set of states).
I’ll have to check it out. I’m sure my arguments don’t really measure up to those from people who are far smarter and more informed than I.
If a majority isn’t a majority then what is it?
What if, in your scenario, millions lived in that one city and the boonies, all put together, amounted to a dozen, total. What gives those people more of a voice than a dozen in the city? Just because people live in a city, doesn’t mean they all think alike or want the same things.
If the people want a cat, they’ll elect a cat. Whether there’s an electoral college system in place wouldn’t change that. There’s nothing about cats that’s going to make everybody in the cities vote for it and no one in the boonies.
Yes there are more liberals in the cities, but if liberal candidates started pandering to only those in the cities they would lose a lot of other votes fast. As is, we have conservative candidates who don’t consider those in cities at all because they don’t have to (well besides corporate fat cats). Our current system gears elections to a small amount of states, not the whole country. Why should people in the rust belt and Florida have control over the country?
Yeah, but how does a straight popular vote not just do the same thing? Why focus on some podunk state in the Midwest when you can just win the most populous states (which would be the ones with the largest liberal metros) and take the election? Again, the idea behind the electoral college was to make candidates focus on the whole country and not just the most populous states, and to make voter fraud more difficult.
I just worry about a majority dictating terms to a minority is all. It’s the old “two wolves and a sheep deciding what’s for dinner” adage. We have checks and balances all over government and going with a straight popular vote does away with that entirely.
I’m not saying the electoral college is a perfect system at all, and there are definitely ways to modernize it and bring it up to code, it’s just that I feel that it was put in place for a reason and that I believe it more or less serves that purpose. I also reject NPV as subversive of the constitution verging on fraud.
States aren’t a hive mind though. There’s no such thing as focusing on the most populace states alone. There are voters in New York State who vote a lot closer to those in North Dakota than NYC.
The EC was put in place because of the North/South dichotomy where there were clear divisions between the wants and needs of Northern and Southern states. We don’t live in a country anymore where different states have wildly different make ups and concerns. Two thirds of the country isn’t going to eat the other third, that’s just not going to happen. But when the EC was put in place, the North fucking the South over was a legitimate concern (and it still happened anyway, if you ask the South why they seceded). What happens with policy now affects every state, and every voter.
I just don’t see how this boogeyman hypothetical of a popularly elected president a thing.
There’s already state governments and Congress in place to ensure the individual states get what they need. But at the end of the day we’re supposed to be a democratic nation so everyone should get a say. As is my vote means diddly fucking squat.
Forgive this European if he misunderstands the US Presidential election setup but…
Isn’t the “less populated States and rural areas” argument only a thing if the popular vote had gone against them all the time without the EC system?
The reverse is true…
In the last 100 years the popular vote has given the same result as the college in all but two extremely controversial occasions (Bush in 2000 & Trump in 2016). The idea that there would never be a Republican President again with the Popular vote is nonsense and the opposite of the reality. So why not go with the popular vote?
All but two of our fifty states are winner-takes-all, which means that the candidate with the most votes in that state wins that state’s electoral votes, so the popular vote is almost always going to mirror the electoral college votes.
Obviously states aren’t a hive mind, but there are plenty of clear divisions between states and regions of the US; it’s why the interior of the country usually swings red while the coasts swing blue. You don’t really solve Texas being a red state or California being a blue state if you remove the electoral college.
Majorities are things to be wary of in my opinion, regardless if it’s today or 1850. It’s not a hive mind, sure, but people follow packs and that can lead to bad things and in my opinion, it’s better to plan for the possibility that two thirds of the country might indeed eat the other third; after all, people didn’t expect the revolution or the civil war or Trump’s presidency. We’re always simultaneously not as homogeneous as we think and more homogeneous than we think.
As it stands, you can win all the big 15+ electoral votes states (California, Texas, Florida, Ohio, New York, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia, and North Carolina) and still lose the election. But you probably won’t win all of those states because some are red and some are blue, not to mention swing states and flipping states (which played a big factor with Bush and Trump), so the small states where “your vote doesn’t matter” are still incredibly important. In a straight popular vote, why even think about states with a population less than 9 million? Under the current system it can come right down to a state like Montana or Alaska; with a straight popular vote, nothing matters but winning the biggest, most populous states in your constituency, not so much winning a broad variety of different voters.
As with any system, there are of course places that “matter” more than others, but in the current system, which states are important can change from election to election. A pure popular vote just means the biggest states and cities keep getting more important.
I used to be big on abolishing the colleges until a few years ago. Is it perfect? Far far from it, but the importance it places on the voice of the smaller states and minorities in the larger scheme of the governance of the nation as well as the steps it takes towards preventing and containing possible election fraud to the state where it occurs are all important to our elections and should be preserved rather than just outright abolishing the system. It’s checks and balances, which is one of the biggest ideals that the nation was founded upon.
The thing is, no matter what you can’t just pander to the states with the largest populations because ultimately what they want is not going to be the same all one thing, regardless of how many people live there. Even if you ignore a small state (which by the way already happens on the campaign trails, basically none of the small states get any attention - I doubt any candidate has ever campaigned in Alaska or Montana), you’re still going up against policies that they want that extend to other states. Just because California’s always going to be blue and Texas is always going to be red doesn’t mean everyone inside thinks the same way each election. Both states went far bluer for Clinton than they ever did for Obama, and look how much that mattered. I think the issue with the minority argument is in many ways these geographical boundaries are arbitrary, and what sepearates one state from another, ideologically, is becoming more muddled. Liberals are a minority in Texas but the EC only gives voice to the majority every time, no matter what the margin.
I truly believe the thinking in pack arguments is moot these days. If the fear is that we elect a populist disaster, well then it’s clear now that the EC will do nothing to stop that.
Article about this and the Silver Screen edition (and a little bit of Legacy):
http://moviemezzanine.com/the-fans-who-saved-star-wars/
Here’s a thing
http://www.people-press.org/2017/02/16/1-early-public-attitudes-about-donald-trump/Something is wrong with the percentage under Trunp. When you add up the % that approve (39), to the % that disapprove (56), to the number that don’t know (6), you get 101%. That does not make sense.
Presumably some rounding is happening.
Here’s a thing
http://www.people-press.org/2017/02/16/1-early-public-attitudes-about-donald-trump/
