1,081 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Transmodiar wrote:

One party does control everything. Just because it has two names doesn't mean it's not one entity, out to screw us all.

I get it.  I really do.  And I agree with you.  I've said that Democrats didn't do enough to stand up to Trump because, deep down, they're all the same.  I understand that.

The problem is....there's no point in discussing that.  If it's Deep State or one party or one world government or whatever you want to call it, that's not something we can fight or stop.  If they have all the money and all the power, we could rise up and vote them out or rise up and kill them all and it won't matter.

It's like being mad at God.  You can curse him.  You could scream at him.  You can find those he loves the most and take it out on them.  You could destroy his symbols and his places of worship.  But at the end of the day, God holds all the cards.  And unless you're a Winchester living in the Supernatural universe (hi, ireactions), we play his game by his rules.  That's how I see politics.  You can hate the system, but the system is the system.  And it's the same system in Canada and Europe and Australia and Africa and Asia and the whole world.  We can hate it and spit on it and complain about it, but it doesn't matter.

And we can vote for Bernie or Pete or Yang, but they're all the system.  And if they're not, as soon as they get where you want them to go, they're the system.  So we just do the dance. 

But just because the game is dumb and the rules are stacked against us, there's still a way to win and a way to lose the game.  And at the end of the day, that's all we can focus on.  Because it's the only thing that's even theoretically possible to affect.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,082 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Yeah, no more kid gloves in the name of unity.  Trump and Trumpism need to face serious consequences.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,083 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

To quote Bobby Singer....

Idjits.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,084 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

They haven't been called but experts in the field have already stated that not only will both win, but that they'll both win by margins exceeding the amount to get a recount.

We can wait until it's official, but in my opinion (*not the opinion of Sliders.tv*) it's over.

This dog and pony show is such a waste of time.  I cannot wait to assist the campaign of whoever runs against Ted Cruz next.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,085 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

GEORGIA!

I don't want one party to control everything.  I'm moderate enough that a lot about conservatism appeals to me.  But Trump has to be eliminated.  He'll keep the evangelicals and the radical right until he's dead, but there aren't enough of those people to make a big enough difference.  Most of the GOP establishment has moved away from him already (I expect tons of republicans to vote to certify Biden today), and others will fall in line once they see that it doesn't benefit them anymore.

We have to remain vigilant.  We need to support anti-Trump republicans and defeat Trump republicans.  And we need to shore up the electoral process so that we can't get this close to chaos ever again.

But today will be a great day

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,086 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Grizzlor wrote:

They can't "overturn" the election, there's nothing to change.  The Senate cannot touch the results once the states have certified them.

They can't this time.  But if the one dude in Michigan hadn't gone against the wills of Trump, Michigan wouldn't have certified.  If the secretary of state in Georgia had done what Trump asked him to do, Georgia would've been certified for Trump.  There were a number of lawsuits in Wisconsin that were decided by a single judge's vote.  In 2020, there's no way to overturn.  In 2024, there absolutely could be.

I think both sides are ready for a change in elections.  The electoral college won't go away, but they can work on shoring up some glaring holes in the system that could've easily led to Trump stealing the election.  Both sides could easily claim wins, and we can prevent a situation where either side actually pulls off what Trump tried.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,087 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I'm not sure anything will come from that.  Nothing seems to stick to Trump, and he could get a pardon for anything federal.  I did see that Georgia might go after criminal charges of electoral tampering, but I'd be shocked if that went anywhere.

But I do wonder if the scandal makes the GOP opposed to the electoral vote work harder to convince Cruz, Hawley, and his cronies not go go down that road.  Probably not, but I just can't wait for Wednesday to be over and we can start the final countdown. 

I think after Covid and undoing some of the Trump madness, Biden should focus on election integrity.  We need to make sure this is as close to a constitutional nightmare as possible.  I don't think a simple majority in both chambers should be enough to overturn an election.  I do think we need to work on getting as much transparency as possible into the process so that if someone else tries this crap again, it can be shot down immediately instead of dragged out for months.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,088 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Grizzlor wrote:

WW84 was vapid, and like everything else these days, 45 minutes too long.

It's interesting for you to say that because I had the opposite thought.  I think somehow this movie needed to be longer - which I know is crazy.  But I feel like if you chopped out 45 minutes, it would suffer from the BvS syndrome of the plot no longer making sense.  I think there's a version of this film that makes sense and be 45 minutes shorter, but I think you'd need to completely remove the Cheetah subplot.  Then the movie loses a couple action sequences and the climax is Wonder Woman making an empassioned speech.  I think it's more likely that they'd cut the Steve Trevor stuff, which is really where the movie works best.

I think the BvS Ultimate Edition is a great comparison because I think the movie is really compelling but falls apart when under scrutiny.  It also has an insane runtime but also doesn't spend the time wisely or efficiently.  BvS had several scenes with Batman and Alfred, but almost none of it helps explain why Batman is acting the way he's acting or whether or not things were ever different.  There's a ton about Superman but almost nothing in it humanizes him.  A ton with Lex but very little to explain his motivations.

So you have a bloated movie that tells a big story but struggles to answer any questions.  And that's what happens with WW84.  I have a ton of questions about how the Dreamstone works, and despite a 150 minute runtime, they don't seem terribly interested in explaining it.  Did Lord have a supernatural understanding of what people cherish the most, or was he randomly picking things he wanted?  With the first Arab oil baron, he asks for the oil without knowing the the oil wasn't his.  Then he takes the security team.  So it seems like he can just take what he wants but he doesn't have any supernatural knowledge.  But then at the end, how does he know what to take?

Are Diana's powers really what Diana treasures the most?  That seems odd.  I know she likes being a hero, but maybe she should've lost her concern for civilians?  Her heroism? 

And what did Lord lose?  I kept thinking that he'd lose his son, but that never happened.  I'm sure they didn't want to kill a kid, but it seems weird that Lord didn't seem to have any downside to his wish.  Did he also lose his humanity?  He definitely went power hungry, but was he always like that?

And the rules seemed different.  Some people lost everything immediately.  Barbara and Diana seemed to lose their treasured thing gradually.  But Max's partner was taken to jail almost immediately.

What was the point of Steve inhabiting some stranger?  Even the movie seemed to forget that plot point at times.

All in all, I don't think cutting things would work unless you cut things and then added other things.  The dreamstone part was the part that was the most confusing, but you can't cut that part out or the movie makes even less sense.  Again, you could cut Barbara, but you lose some fun scenes and lose some action beats.

TemporalFlux wrote:

First that comes to mind is Lobo.  It would fit perfectly with his visions of violence, blood, gore and surrealism.

I actually had that thought.  I think that would be really interesting.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,089 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

ireactions wrote:

I think that a creator who feels he has to show Superman and Batman killing should simply say that these are his versions of Superman and Batman, but Snyder actively attacking the non-lethal Superman and Batman presented elsewhere shows a marked disrespect for the characters and other creators. And creators who create based on contempt and trying to denigrate other creators are fundamentally cynical and defeatist and that's also not really why superheroes appeal, at least not to me.

If this were Marvel, I'd just give him the Punisher.  Who would be a good DC character that would work for Snyder?

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,090 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I feel like Jenkins was just supporting Snyder.

I do think Snyder should have a place at DC if he wants.  He's got talent.  He's a good filmmaker.  It certainly doesn't make sense for him to make another Justice League movie (even if the Snyder Cut is successful and becomes canonized).  But if he wants to make a Booster Gold movie or a Batfleck movie or a Red Hood movie - go for it.  It'll make money if the budget doesn't explode out of control, and that's on WB to make work.

For what it's worth, WW84 also massively contradicts BvS.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,091 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(687 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

ireactions wrote:

Ah, I see. I've never seen any of it. But I wondered what you would have made of trying to wrap up a show with the abrupt absence of the lead actor. A bit of a Quinn-in-Season-5 situation.

Yeah, its a good question.  Unfortunately, you asked about one of the few shows I walked away from permanently.

It's funny.  I can stick with just about anything, but there has to be a reason to stick around.  I'm going to spoil what I've seen of House of Cards so stop reading if you care, but the show is centered around Frank and his wife.  They're modeled after the Clintons (red flag one) as charismatic southern Democrats who lust for more power.  She's using him to get power.  He's using her to get power.  It's the Clintons.

The first season has Frank being investigated by a female reporter.  I forget exactly what he's being investigated for at first, but she's on his tail.  And even though I hated Frank, I could root for him to be taken down.  As Frank gains power, she's hot on his tail.  There's some cat and mouse.  It was fine.  Then, early in season two, he murders her.  I'm sure it was supposed to be shocking in a Game of Thrones way, but she was my reason for watching.  Her investigation was picked up by some guy but he wasn't as fun as her and it didn't work the same.  Instead of him, the foil in season two is some billionaire who is using Frank to make money or something.  And since I hate Frank, and I have to "root" for someone, I started hoping that the billionaire could take Frank down.  But it's only season 2 and House of Cards is popular and of course the billionaire got his by the end of season two and Frank has killed anyone interesting and the new reporter still isn't interesting and now Frank's going to be president or something and it was just too much. 

I can watch a show with an evil protagonist.  I watched Breaking Bad and Sopranos and stuff like the Wire and recently Oz.  But while I never liked Walter White on Breaking Bad (even at the beginning, I could tell he was a narcissist who wasn't doing things for his family), I had Jessie Pinkman as an everyman who got in over his head.  While Walter reveled in the evil, you could always tell that Jessie never really liked the evil stuff (and maybe wasn't smart enough to fully comprehend the evilness of selling drugs in the first place).  If Jessie had died in season one as was the original plan, I might not have enjoyed it as much.

I do this with sports too.  I have my teams that I love.  But the sport itself isn't interesting to me.  I will watch hours of my team, but if my team isn't playing, I can't watch.  I haven't watched the Super Bowl in years because my team wasn't playing in it.  If I don't have someone to root for, I can't watch.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,092 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(330 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I agree.  I think season two had a decent amount of fan service, but I think it made sense for the plot.  Boba Fett is absolutely fan service, but he's wearing Mandalorian armor so it makes sense that Mando would run into him.  Same with Bo-Katan.  And Bo-Katan would reasonably lead him to Ahsoka.  And Ahsoka leading him to a Jedi relic that sent out a signal across the universe would certainly come to the attention of Luke.

I think it all made reasonable sense, even all happening in one season.  I do worry about watering down the quality of the shows with *so many* spinoffs.  It makes me think of the dropoff from Family Guy spinoffs or the decrease in the quality of the Arrowverse.  But I assume they'll all be 8 episode seasons so instead of 100+ episodes a year, we're only talking 20-40 a year maybe?  Possibly less if they stagger the episodes.  I think Filoni can manage that fairly easily and there should be enough writers to make it work.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,093 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I understand why they're saying that, but I think it's typical WB/DC overreacting.  Did Justice League fail?  Absolutely.  But it didn't fail because fans don't want connected stories.  It failed because fans didn't connect with Zack Snyder's vision and....nothing else?  Fans generally liked the non-Snyder films, and the Snyder films still had a huge following.

If I were running WB, I wouldn't have the same kind of reaction.  Obviously I wouldn't have done the same thing that they did from the beginning but I think, even now, they could be doing a much better course correction:

STEP ONE - I like the multiverse concept.  Run with it.  If you want to do a Robert Pattinson Batman with no connection to the main universe, go for it.  If you want to do JOKER or Heart of Ice or DC Universe shows, go for it.  Marvel essentially had different multiverses for Agents of SHIELD, Runaways, the Netflix shows, etc.

STEP TWO - Do not abandon the shared universe.  People didn't love Joss Whedon's Age of Ultron movie either, and they didn't abandon the MCU - they moved to a different visionary.  See if Patty Jenkins would do Justice League 2.  Or James Wan.  Or find someone else.  It shouldn't be Zack or nothing.  We should have another movie with Gadot and Mamoa together.  If you want Cavill back, bring him in.  If Affleck is out or in, you don't need Batman for it to work.  If you need to scale back the budget, scale it back.  If you want to just pair certain people together, throw Cavill in Shazam 2.  Put Cyborg in Aquaman 2.  Introduce Green Lanterns in Flashpoint.  You can enrich your universe without spending a billion dollars.

STEP THREE - Give Snyder another project.  Again, scale back the budget if you want.  Give Snyder a Batman movie and see if Affleck comes back.  Or give him something else.  Do what you did with James Gunn and say "what do you want to do?"  It's obvious that some fans like Snyder DC movies.  It doesn't have to be Justice League 2.  Especially if the Snyder Cut works, give him something else.

If you want movies to be standalone, that's fine.  But it shouldn't have to be a decision between ONLY STANDALONE and BILLION DOLLAR CROSSOVERS.  Thor Ragnarok teamed up two people and it was fun.  Same with Spider-Man Homecoming.  Not every Marvel movie is Civil War.  Black Panther was huge and was barely connected.  Their big cameo was the barely-named federal agent and Bucky in a post-credits scene.

Don't learn the wrong lessons.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,094 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I watched WW84.  Non-spoiler review: I really liked so much of it.  I thought the performances were fun.  I thought the story was compelling.  I loved how they seemed to have fun with the 1984 setting, and the romance stuff was good. 

But while I liked all the pieces, the overall movie just sorta didn't work for me.  I was excited to come back and watch (I watched it in three sittings), but when it was over, I felt disappointed.  I thought they spent a lot of good time making everything worked, and I felt like the ending was completely rushed and unsatisfying.  And while I liked Pedro Pascal, I didn't buy Max Lord as a character for about 2/3 of the movie.  I also think the dynamic with the dreamstone didn't quite work.

Patty Jenkins is a good filmmaker and I think a lot of it worked.  But something about it bothered me enough to not really love the film as a whole.

Anyone else see it?

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,095 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(330 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Mandalorian is a really nice show because it's fun and breezy.  I think it's essentially everything that I wanted from the sequel trilogy but didn't get.  Even as the Mandalorian's story gets more complicated and more tangled in the bigger Star Wars universe, it doesn't have the same level of burden that you get with the movies.  It all feels like A New Hope, and I think that's very fun.

Minor spoilers but I assume everyone knows about the Mandalorian season 2 finale by now:

S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S

There are people who are upset about the Luke appearance.  I don't get it.  It made me so happy.  It's funny - I've consumed a lot of Star Wars content and I guess I like it more than I thought, but I've never considered myself a big fan.  But I absolutely love Luke Skywalker.  One night before The Last Jedi, I couldn't sleep because I was worried Luke would be evil.  And to see him finally get a huge fun heroic moment of dominance was so satisfying.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,096 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(687 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

ireactions wrote:

What did SliderQuinn21 think of the final season of HOUSE OF CARDS?

I never finished season 2.  Frank bothered me too much, and when I found myself rooting for the evil businessman in season 2, I cut bait and never looked back.  I very rarely quit shows, and House of Cards is probably the biggest and most prominent example of that.  I always said I'd go back and watch when the show ends so I can see Frank get his comeuppance but then Kevin Spacey went and ruined that too.  So I think I read what happened and never gave it another thought.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,097 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(330 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Mandalorian season 2 was very well done.  I think Dave Filoni may need to be the Kevin Feige of Star Wars.  I think he has the right appreciation for the universe and the stories that need to be told.

It was a little too fan servicey but it was still a lot of fun.  I also appreciate that they aren't bound to any sort of episode length so it's usually solid story from start to finish.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,098 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

There's been a lot of chatter about how one Senator and one Democrat can challenge the results and then it's voted on by individual states (which the republicans control more of).

From everything I've read, before it goes to that step, both the House and Senate have to approve it.  So even if Rand Paul and the congressman from Alabama object on January 6, several Democrats would need to agree with the objection for it to pass.  Even then, apparently McConnell has privately told Republican senators not to go along with it.

We'll see.  Twenty days.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,099 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Not at all.  I was listening to a podcast and they talked about how the structures of democracy held....something that has helped calm my fears.  The Supreme Court didn't entertain him.  The state legislatures didn't try anything funny with electors.  All states certified their votes.  Even now, the GOP is starting to accept the results publicly.

....but

The podcaster followed that up with the idea that it only held up because of a few people.  The republican governors in Arizona and Georgia didn't blindly go along with Trump.  That one republican in Michigan didn't blindly vote against certification.  A lot of these lower level court cases have been decided by a single vote.  The system held, but a person here or a person there and things might've gone differently.  Maybe not differently enough to change the election but even one state going against the people is terrible for democracy.

I think the thing that makes me feel better about the long-term future is that Trump is unique.  Even Trumpist politicians down ballot didn't do this kind of thing.  We don't have 200+ contested elections in the House and Senate.  There's not fraud allegations and lawsuits in every election that far right politicians lost.  It's just Trump.  This seems unique to him, both because he has the power to screw with people who don't support him and because he's a child in a man's body.

If this doesn't work, and it looks like a one in a trillion chance now, then I think more established politicians (Rubio, Cruz, DeSantis, etc) wouldn't even go that route.

What worries me in the short-term is someone like Don Jr or Ivanka trying it again.  Not because I think they could win (I don't, they don't have the same power of persuasion that Trump has) but because I think they'd be more willing to try and would have nothing to lose.  And even if it was a colossal landslide, we could see chaos if they're able to get more Trump loyalists in places like Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, and Arizona.  Some of those one-vote decisions could go the other way and then I don't know what happens.

That's why it should be a priority to go after people who participated in this attempt.  Either politically or legally, there should be consequences so that there isn't the same problem next time.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,100 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Grizzlor wrote:

Or his Deep State Attorney General.  It's pure comedy that everyone is wrong but he is right.

And now McConnell is Deep State too.

It would not surprise me to see Trumpists break off to form their own party.  Everyone can't be a RINO.  I guess they could just capture more of the party, but I can't get a good sense of whether or not traditional Republicans outnumber Trumpists.  They both are happy/willing to vote for him, especially over any Democrat, but if push came to shove, would it be easier for Trump's agenda to do his own party (and destroy everything) or to try and primary anyone who didn't support him (which is going to end up being most of the Republican senate and House)?

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,101 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Biden got to 270 again!

The republican electors are sending their own votes to Congress in the hopes that it'll cause some problem.  From my understanding, Congress can retaliate.  Even if Congress fails to certify, the Democrat-led House can stall until Pelosi becomes president.  Or the House can just name Biden the Speaker of the House and he'd become president that way.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,102 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

And Trump is handling it very well.  Probably shouldn't have nominated three Deep State judges.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,103 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(9 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

ireactions wrote:

It occurs to me that we could write a script called PARALLELED or we could still get UNPARALLELED. But we'd all better do it fast because there are only two of these titles left to us!

Could we just pull a Luuke (https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Luuke_Skywalker) and call our movie Paralllel?

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,104 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

A bunch of House members are getting on board.  I assume to stay on Trump's good side?  I don't see any other reason for them to do it.

I almost feel bad for Trump, who clearly doesn't have the cognitive ability to understand any of this and certainly has a bunch of yes men telling him that there's a real chance of it working.  He probably thinks he has a real chance of staying, and no one has the balls to tell him the truth.

I almost feel bad.  I'm still hoping they have to taze him on the way out.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,105 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Grizzlor wrote:

Sen. John Cornyn of Texas said the following...."I read just the summary of it, and I frankly struggle to understand the legal theory of it.  Number one, why would a state, even such a great state as Texas, have a say so on how other states administer their elections? It's an interesting theory, but I'm not convinced."

The suggestion that one state has any say in how another state conducts its election is laughable.  The Trump legal team (whoever isn't COVID positive) is now 1 for 55 in court.

Yeah I can't believe I'm agreeing with Cornyn, but it's very important that he speak up like this.

Again, if other states were suing Texas, Texans would be freaking out and threatening to secede.  And what's so stupid is that Republicans don't see how short-sighted this is.  This will bite one of them in the butt at some point.  There will be a close race and some BS lawsuit is going to cost them the election.  This stuff always comes back around and always bites the other party in the butt.  I just cannot understand how people who won elections this year can go along with the idea that their own election wins could've been fraudulent.

Although I heard an interesting stat on a podcast (I do not have a source, unfortunately) that said that while the majority of republicans think something fishy happened in the election, something like 90+% of republicans believe that their vote was counted correctly.  Which tells me that most people believe in elections as a whole and that this might be Trump-related.

Since, as far as I'm aware, this kind of stuff isn't happening down ballot, it gives me a bit of hope that this is Trump-specific and not something we'll be dealing with every election forever now.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,106 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Well the Attorney General of Texas is Ken Paxton.  Look up his very extensive list of crimes if you're interested.  But the theory I've seen is that he's just doing this to try and get attention from Trump so he can get a pardon.  Makes sense - although Paxton also faces state-level crimes and this wouldn't solve all his problems.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,107 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(934 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Well they want a live-action Spider-Verse movie.  Sony probably pushed for it, and it actually works with Phase Four and Peter's arc.  We know that something is happening to the universe in WandaVision.  We know that Wanda will be in Dr. Strange 2 subtitled The Multiverse of Madness.  And we know that Peter's world was thrown into chaos when his identity was revealed.  My guess is that Dr Strange is going to end up bringing Peter to other multiverses, either to escape the chaos in his own life or to teach him some sort of lesson about his own circumstances and how they could be worse.

If I had to guess, the guest characters will be more "Tom Welling in Crisis" than key parts.  Relevant and significant scenes but just scenes - not "Tom Holland and other Spider-Men team up to fight the Sinister Six"

Although do we know how many Sony/Disney Spider-Man movies they've agreed to make?  If this is the last one, maybe they will just throw everything against the wall and see what sticks (pun intended)

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,108 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

This fucking state.

Yes, things were changed.  But there's a pandemic.  People are staying home.  The rules have been known for months.  Sue then.  Get things straightened out then.  Doing it after the fact makes people like me (since they're doing it on my behalf) look like sore losers.  And for this state of all states to cross the line into other states' politics is insane.  How would Texas feel if California said they didn't like how they were doing something and sued to the Supreme Court?  They'd be pretty pissed off.

I don't know where I'll be in 2024, but I know what I'll be doing.  Actively working on the campaign of whoever runs against Ted Cruz.  He's embarrassed me enough.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,109 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Huh.  And they picked Cardassians for their picture?

I think Trump would've blabbed it.  I just don't think he's capable of keeping a secret like that

**********

Word came out today that Trump is planning on taking Air Force One to Florida to run a competing rally on January 20th to announce his 2024 campaign.  Cool.  Fine.  Whatever.  Let's just move forward.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,110 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Grizzlor wrote:

Trump has proven he can't win with simply his base.

He can win a primary with it.  He has a stronger base now than he did in 2015/2016 when he won the nomination.

And you don't have to take my word for it - look around.  The whole party is still deferring to him.  Either he's still the king or he's the kingmaker.  And either way, he still has the most influence.  Again, the person to look at is Ted Cruz.  Cruz wants to be president.  If Cruz thought that Trump was wounded, dying, or dead, he'd be pouncing.  He's not.  In fact, he's doubling down - pushing conspiracy theories and backing Trump's plays.

Why would he do that?  It doesn't necessarily help him in Texas, where Trump still won but not hugely.  Trump continued to lose major cities in Texas, and that would put Cruz in a dangerous spot next time he's up for reelection.  Cruz could easily separate himself as the next big thing by rallying Republicans around him.

But he's not.  And I think he's not because he's angling.  Maybe he's hoping to be the VP candidate in 2024 and logical successor in 2028?  Or maybe he's just trying to continue to show loyalty so Trump will anoint him as the next step in Trumpism.  I don't know.  But Cruz certainly is acting like Trump will be the nominee in 2024.

Maybe he's wrong.  But he's working against his own interests so he must be pretty convinced.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,111 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(267 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I have trouble with God in a lot of senses.  When you look at the world and see all the bad stuff, it's easy to see how it's possible that God could be the villain.  Or, at best, gone.  I could understand the villain God from Supernatural or the villain God from Preacher as beings that were "gone" but also, when confronted, were villainous.  There's so many things that happen in life that are both unfair and independent from the free will of others.  I decided at some point that a god that was all powerful couldn't be all good and vice versa.  If he was all powerful and all good, there wouldn't be nearly as much bad.  The all-knowing also bothered me, as God would've known before he created the world all the bad things that would happen as a result.

So I think my version of a fictional God wouldn't be all-knowing or all-powerful.  And probably not all-good - but maybe just very naive when it comes to bad.  He's a being that existed but was lonely.  So he used his immense power to create the universe.  Angels and life.  But it drained him, badly.  And when bad things started happening - rebellion and anger and hate, he was taken aback by it.  And then, whatever happened in the holy texts (whether Christian or Jewish or Muslim) sapped the rest of his power.  And now he can watch humanity and hear humanity but he can't do much else.  He's Oppenheimer - forced to watch whatever happens to his creation with little power to do much else.

And I think if I were writing Chuck, that's what I'd do.  Chuck still has influence.  He can still pop in and out and Heaven still listens to him.  But it'd be interesting if he could be killed.  Or at least overpowered by a demon or even a human.  They get him to show up in Season 11 and he's just essentially Garth.  No skills, no power - just doing his best.

I don't know how that helps with a 15-season arc.  When the devil was defeated in Season 5 and the show kept going, the show never had a logical ending.  And the only thing bigger than beating the devil is beating God.  So I see why they did that.

Although I don't know why the CW would wince at a dead God but be cool with an evil one.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,112 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Grizzlor wrote:

2-3 years of him and his family bitching about their legal issues, crying the election was rigged?  People are already sick of hearing it.

I don't expect his base to be sick of it.  People stayed angry for four years of Trump.  I expect the GOP to stay angry for four years.  And while polls show that most don't buy Trump's bull, Trump can keep his base angry, either popping on OAN randomly, having a homebase there (or Newsmax), or on his own network.

But again, Trump's future depends on his own endurance, his own mental acuity, and his personal freedom.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,113 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Maybe.  That would surprise me a bit, but New York will throw everything at him.

Two questions that I can't seem to get answers to:

1. All but one of Trump's lawsuits have been knocked down, but if you listen to what his lawyers say, this is all part of the plan to get things to the Supreme Court.  I know the Supreme Court picks their own cases and it only takes four justices to decide to hear a case - which I'd think they'd easily get with six conservatives.  But is there any sort of deadline on that?  The electoral college votes in 10 days.  I'd think the longer this goes, the harder it would be for the Court to overturn.  I'm assuming the Supreme Court would either reject the cases entirely (as they've been knocked down pretty seriously by lower courts), but aren't we on some sort of clock?  Even if they wanted to, could the Supreme Court overrule the election in March?  How would that even work?

2. Trump is thinking about pardoning himself and his children.  Let's assume that the self-pardon works or that Trump does the "resign and Pence pardons him" trick.  What would that eliminate?  What federal charges are there looming over all their heads?  Would that eliminate all the impeachment stuff?  All the Mueller stuff?  Or is any of that state-level crime?  Is the Ivanka Trump lawsuit a federal or a state issue?  I guess I'm just wondering what that would clear the Trumps of and what would still be outstanding if he gave himself and everyone around him a blanket pardon.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,114 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

TemporalFlux wrote:

https://mobile.twitter.com/ditzkoff/sta … 3838488576

Very interesting.

I think the next four years will be really interesting for Trump.  I think he can essentially write his own plan.  He has the support inside the Republican party to do whatever he wants.  If he wants to run in 2024, he doesn't need all 74 million people that voted for him to support him - he just needs enough to win a primary.  And the Republicans in power seem to be kneeling to that idea.  That while he won't be in office, Trump will still be in charge of the party for the next four years.

But, and I've said this a bunch, does Trump want to run again in 2024 or does he just need to say that to do what's next?  If he said he was done, he doesn't really have any power.  If he says he's running in 2024, whether he is or not, he has enough power to have all the power.  And everything that comes with that.  But, and we've seen this in the last few weeks, he doesn't really seem particularly interested in doing the job.  He likes that he travels the world and gets to do what he wants.  And I think, once he's out of office, he'll realize that he gets all the "president" stuff without having to do the work.

And while everyone talks like it's a certainty, Trump will be 78 in 2024.  The same age Joe Biden is.  Biden has obviously slowed mentally since 2016 (not to the level everyone says but it is obvious).  Trump gets by because he's quick on his feet - if he slows, he's not Trump anymore.  Barry Allen without his speed is just a guy.  Trump who takes a second to come up with a zinger or who can't speak for an hour off the cuff is just a guy.

And that's if he's alive.  I don't want Trump to die, but he's coming across the average lifespan.  And he's not exactly in great shape.  If he's truly had a stroke or truly showing signs of dementia, all the money in the world may not save him.  Especially if he spends all his time traveling and speaking and all that.

The thing that gives me peace, at least for now, is that no one has really stepped up to take Trump's place.  None of his kids are capable of doing what he did.  I think Ivanka probably has the best chance to follow in her dad's footsteps, but she has zero of his charisma.  She'd be a different type of politician, and that means she's vulnerable to things that he wasn't vulnerable to.  She'd need to build up herself and her public image for a while - running for Congress or governor might work for her first.  I don't think any of the other Trumps could win a real election outside of areas where Trump was popular - they'd win on their dad's name - not theirs.

So if Trump were to die or before 2024, I think the Republicans would struggle - do they try to carry Trumpism without Trump?  Is there Trumpism without Trump?  If Trump decides not to run in 2024 because he can't or doesn't want to, he could pick his successor, but the successor still has to be the person.  I don't think Ivanka could do that.  Jared certainly couldn't.  Eric and Don Jr are laughable compared to Donald.

It'll be interesting.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,115 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I think Trump is slowly getting where he needs to get.  He admitted at his Baby Table press conference that he'd leave the White House if the Electoral College voted him out - he said all the Trumpy things about how it'd be the wrong decision and it's a fraud and all that.  He also admitted this weekend that his Supreme Court plan may not ultimately work, saying "it's hard to get to the Supreme Court"

I don't really need Trump to concede.  Or for him to pay for his crimes.  I really just need him to leave the White House, and I need the GOP to clean up as much of his mess as they can.  I need McConnell or someone else to admit that the election was fair for anyone who will listen.  Of course, there will be those that don't.  There will be people who have their doubts or flat-out believe that the election was a sham.  I'm hoping the GOP does their best, once they've gotten everything they can out of Trump, to convince Trump voters that their voice was heard.  If a segment of the GOP doesn't want to believe the results and won't listen to their own leadership, then I don't think there's anything people could do to convince them.  Republicans were big winners this election so it's not like they can even claim the whole election was a scam.  Or even that the Democrats were very good at it.

And I think a lot of those people will move on too.  Just like the pissed off liberals who eventually just went back to life with Trump as president, most of the Trumpists will eventually forget how mad they are now.  OAN and Newsmax and Fox News will go after the Biden administration instead of harping on the election.  I'm sure the Republicans will try and impeach Biden for something weak.

But not hearing Trump's name in the news every day will be nice.  That's all I really need right now.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,116 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(267 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I've already given how I would do it - which actually isn't all that different from how they did it.  I would've ended with Sam or Dean dying the same way they did, and the other raising the two boys they found as hunters.  A new John and two new Winchester boys.  I think there's a symmetry to that that I like.

I think my other alternative would've been to have Jack erase all the monsters.  End the hunt for good.  And the finale plays somewhat similar - the brothers are bored, Dean gets pie, and then Dean dies saving someone.  Maybe they starts tracking down human monsters, and they get in over their heads.  Or maybe it's just some sort of accident in a burning building or on the side of the highway.  And keep the rest the same.

I think either keeping up the family business or closing it up for good are the only better endings.  For me, at least.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,117 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I've seen the "how did Biden get 80 million votes" question a ton from conservatives.  But the 74 million Trump got are never questioned.  Are we saying that Trump, in the middle of a pandemic that he's done almost nothing to help and during a time where he's done nothing to help get a second stimulus bill passed *convinced* an additional 12+ million voters to vote for him?  He's done almost nothing - were 12 million people convinced by Space Force?

If Biden's 80 million votes are in question, so are Trump's 74 million.  As we've discussed, Trump usually accuses people of doing what he's already done.  I'd be willing to bet that Trump and the Republicans engaged in plenty of election shenanigans.  Seeing what Lindsey Graham tried in Georgia tells me that he tried the same stuff in South Carolina.  Did he succeed there?

I've seen polls that half Trump's voters don't believe Biden won.  I've seen polls where about a quarter of Trump voters believe it was legit.  Either way, it's not half the country.  We're talking 35-60 million people.  Which is significant but not overwhelming.  I'm interested in seeing what the Republicans do after Georgia.  It doesn't help McConnell for people not to believe in elections.  I would assume once they've gotten everything they can get out of the Trump people, the GOP will drop the fraud business.  They aren't really helping with it in the first place, and I think they'll let Trump embarrass himself in court and then they can distance.

I still don't understand why people like Ted Cruz are helping.  Doesn't Cruz want to run in 2024?  If he's content with being where he is, I guess it makes sense.  But he's actively helping his competition which is bizarre to me.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,118 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

TemporalFlux wrote:

I do believe it’s important to clear up.  If a Secretary of State or lower court is going to have the power to change rules (like signature verifications) unilaterally, then that can later swing against Democrats as easily as it swung in their favor.  It’s all in the whims of one person, and that’s not the system of government we’ve had.

I agree with this.  The problem is that it's not just a matter of the law.  It's a matter of much more than the law.  And while Supreme Court robots might be able to see it black and white, I think there's so much riding on it that no one really wants to get involved.  If you look at the major players, they're silent.  Pence, Pelosi, McConnell, even Harris and Biden.  The crusaders are outsiders or medium-level people like Ted Cruz.

So while I believe ACB is not going to take her job seriously, is she really going to want to mark her entire career on a decision that disenfranchises millions?  Even if she believes it's the right thing to do, can she be the tiebreaking vote in a situation like that?  Could Kavanaugh?  Could any of the Republicans?  Not only would they have to face Roberts, they'd face that scrutiny for the rest of their lives.

The problem, at least to me, is timing.  I know Republicans sued pre-election regarding the extensions, and Democrats and Pennsylvania voters were given time to adjust.  The votes happened.  I think at that point, it becomes more than the law.  I don't think it's fair to give someone a ticket for speeding, even if the law has officially been changed, before there was a chance to update the speed limit sign.  Maybe it is fair.  I just wouldn't think that would be fair.

It's like the drive-thru law in Texas.  Did they illegally change the law?  I don't know.  But people came and voted.  If they didn't know they were voting illegally, I don't see why *they* should be punished.  My argument then, if the votes were thrown out, was that anyone who voted and had their vote thrown out should be able to vote again legally.  That would be my same argument if mail in ballots were thrown out.  Give them a reasonable amount of time (a week?) to go in person and vote legally.  Because if they were told that it was legal and it was legal at the time per state law, then they didn't know they were breaking the law.

So since I don't think the Supreme Court would say "okay, let them vote again", I think their only option is to either punt the case or rule against it.  Maybe in their decision they say "if this had been pre-election, maybe you would've won but we can't overturn the election on a technicality - fix this" and then the states can fix it.

I agree that elections probably need help.  The problem is that both sides want different things.  Like it or not, Republicans want less people to vote.  Democrats want more people to vote.  And that ends up meaning that Democrats are okay with some illegal votes getting through, and Republicans are okay disenfranchising people.  Until both sides decide to work together, I think elections will remain a huge problem.

I wonder what would happen if Biden made his term about cleaning up elections.  Would Trump people feel better about democracy or worse?

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,119 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(267 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

ireactions wrote:

In addition, Dean has died 112 times: 106 freak accidents in "Mystery Spot," a car accident, dragged to hell, shot to death, becoming Death and self-induced death to talk to Death (twice).

Maybe it was in the episode where Dean died a bunch of times, but didn't a reaper or Death tell the boys that they'd died many more times than that?  I can't remember the context but I keep having this thought that the universe was repeatedly fixed numerous times so that the Winchesters wouldn't die.  So whatever situation would happen where Sam and Dean would live, that's the situation that would happen.  I feel like it was pre-Chuck storyline, but I can't guarantee the scene ever even happened.

Either way, I think the "unlucky" episode proves that the Winchesters, while very talented, aren't the incredible hunters that we've been led to believe.  They have infinite deaths on, and anyone can beat any game if you have infinite chances.  And in addition to being in a very dangerous line of work, I felt like the brothers were also pretty impulsive and reckless.  Even in the final confrontation, they aren't doing much recon, and they go in just expecting to come out the other side.  With no cheat code on, one of them didn't.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,120 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(267 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Yeah that's kinda how I felt.  And it's a 15-year show with two leads.  I think it's perfectly fine to make the show about them.  Cas got his finale.  Jack got his finale.  Bobby got more than one finale.  John got a couple.  Mary got a couple.

Again, the only real complaint that would make any sense is Dean's death.  One that it happened and two that it happened the way it did.  And I maintain that if Dean could write his ending, dying after saving a couple of kids from some legacy vampires is probably pretty high on his list.  Even if Sam had died and Dean had lived as a John figure to those boys he saved, Dean needed to go out in a blaze of glory like John and Bobby and Rufus did.  It's the hunter way, and Dean was a true hunter.  Sam didn't care as much, which is why you could easily see Sam go into retirement.  I mostly agree with ireactions regarding whether Sam retired, but my head canon says that he stopped hunting as soon as Dean was born.

Did they pick the best way to kill Dean?  I don't know.  Again, it was a case from John's book, and a vampire is formidable.  The rebar part is a little off, but it needed to be a death that allowed Dean to win the fight decisively and then have time to talk to Sam.  And a death where Sam doesn't have reason to rush him to the hospital.

The other question is - could Jack have saved him?  Could Cas?  And I think the answer to that is that Dean needed to die right then.  He'd done his work.  And he could've lived for another 20 years and saved a few hundred more people, but there are other hunters that could do that.  And Dean deserved an eternity of happiness.  He'd earned it, and there was no reason to make him wait any longer.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,121 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Nothing is over until McConnell says it is.  And he still must think there's something to be gained in Georgia by backing Trump.

Funny thing is that a lot of Trump people on Parler are talking about skipping the runoff entirely or writing Trump's name is.  It probably won't be a lot of people, but if it's enough for one or both of the Democrats to win, that would be the funniest story of the decade.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,122 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I think there's a chance that Thomas would too.  Roberts would almost certainly vote against.  So they'd just need one of Gorsuch or Kavanaugh to take their jobs seriously, and I think they'd have to put up with a ton of scrutiny to do so.  I even think ACB could fold under that kind of pressure and vote against.

Best case scenario in my mind is for them to refuse to take the case.  I know they can, and I doubt they will.  But that's the best case scenario to put this whole thing to bed.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,123 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Like pre-election, I'm now varying between wildly contradicting feelings.  On one hand, Trump's legal efforts are his only shot.  If he can get enough doubt, they can either get to the Supreme Court or get results un-certified.  Both are still fairly bad options unless the Supreme Court goes super-politicized (I think the Pennsylvania case could go 8-1 with ACB being the only Trump vote with the incredible lack of evidence they're presenting).

But I still fear hijinks.  And I'm not entirely sure why the Supreme Court would even entertain such a case.  And I don't like that Michigan is entertaining any of this.  And I don't like that Georgia is so politicized.

I get super-confident...then I dig a little deeper into the crazy, and I get nervous.  I need to just stop paying attention.  Soon enough, it'll be over and Biden will be president.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,124 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(267 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I do wonder what would've been the original plan for the finale.  Because I don't think the ending felt stretched out.  It might've been Eileen in the scene where Sam dies and the scene where Sam is playing with Dean?  I never really thought that we'd seen John and Mary and Rufus in Heaven.  They needed a messenger, and while all of them would've made sense, I think Bobby made the most sense (you could make a really good case for John, but I think Bobby meant a ton to Dean).

The more I think about it, I think the ending makes a lot of sense.  Sam wanted a family and peace - Dean just wanted everyone to be safe.  Sam got to live in peace, and Dean got to rush to the big family reunion. 

One question I had coming out - did Sam stay a hunter?  Looks like Dean had the anti-possession tattoo, but I think it could've easily been just to get one like his dad's.  Or, even if they weren't hunting, Sam could've made him get the tattoo just to make sure demons stayed away from his son.

So if they ever do want to come back, Sam and Dean (the son) hunting could work.  I also assume they could bring Sam and Dean out of Heaven for one last job.  That could make some sense.  Because, yeah, all the spinoffs area dead, but if the actors get the itch, the CW would love a limited series return or a movie of some sort.

Did you read that Jensen was dissatisfied with the finale?

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,125 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(1,683 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Grizzlor wrote:

Stargirl ran on CW during season 1 anyway, so I doubt the budget will be all that different.

I think CW just bought Stargirl from DC.  It was still produced for DC Universe.  Kinda like how Swamp Thing is airing on the CW even though it was produced (and released on DC Universe).  I think DC probably saw the writing on the wall and decided to sell it off, but I'm pretty sure it was already complete when CW got involved.

I do think there are ways to make the show work without changing much, but we'll have to see.

*********

On Titans.  I get what you're saying.  I think the show hasn't done a great job of explaining why any of them work together.  The "multiple generations working together" aspect doesn't truly work, but I think the younger generation with Dick does.  He wants to prove he can lead a team, and they look to him for guidance.  I think it would make more sense if Kory was a teenager, but that's really the only issue I have with it.

I just like the vibe of the show.  It feels like it belongs.  I buy that it's a universe with Superman and Constantine and Green Lantern.  I buy that the sidekicks decided back in the day that they wanted their own Justice League.  It all made sense to me.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,126 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(267 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

So regarding Dean....

.
.
.
.
.

I think the death made sense.  I wish he'd had a bit more happiness, but he needed to die a warrior's death.  If you'd flipped Sam and Dean in the finale, Dean would've been depressed.  He tried the normal life, and it wasn't what he wanted.  Some people can't die quietly at home - they need to go out fighting.  I thought it was a little odd that he died the way he did, but he won the war.  I think Dean would've been content with just about any death after defeating Chuck.

One thing I thought was interesting is the two boys.  When they pulled up to the barn, I started worrying what would happen.  The story I wrote for them was that the Winchesters would end up taking the boys in and training them to be hunters.  When Dean died, I thought Sam would.  Train the next generation of hunters.  I think that could've been a fitting ending.  Maybe even switch the deaths and have Dean be the new John. 

The odd thing about the finale was how open-ended it was regarding the universe while being fairly closed for the brothers.  I guess they could do a Sam and Dean (the son) movie, but Dean's definitively dead.  I think they left the universe open (Jack didn't destroy all the monsters) so that they could revisit the universe, but it was odd that they didn't definitively leave open any way for Jensen and Jared to both come back.  But the universe is still ready if any spin-off ever wants to happen.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,127 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(267 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Oh man, I thought the finale was really touching.  I'm a bit surprised but not at all ashamed to say that I shed some tears.  I can wait until people have watched it to do any full commentary.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,128 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(1,683 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I really liked Titans season 2.  I think Harley Quinn gets to have the most fun of the DC Universe shows and all of them have their own charm (even Swamp Thing, which is my least favorite of the bunch), but I think Titans is the best one.  It's believable that the DC universe is out there, and it does a great job of teasing it without actually showing it.  I think the characters are strong, and I loved finally seeing Nightwing come to life.

The Donna death was....bizarre.  Beyond bizarre.  I get that she's probably not really dead, and they did enough to tease that Rachel is going to help her.  But they literally had two different Big Bad fights.  If they didn't want Connor to kill her, they could've easily had Slade do it.  And the fact that she randomly died way after the fight was over - especially when she wasn't even the most qualified to catch the beam.  Or even catch it in the first place.  That's not even lazy writing - that's....all I can think of is "bizarre"

But I'm glad it's back for season 3.  I liked what I've seen of the concept art.  I have to ask that they bring in Tim Drake, though.  Maybe they will.  I think he could be great, and it might be the best place for a Bat-family.

ireactions wrote:

Glen appears in a subsequent episode as a hallucinatory Bruce Wayne, and this time, his accent is much improved, but he's playing a sardonic, comedically mocking figure who voices Dick's insecurities. He doesn't seem like Batman. Later in the season, however, Dick hallucinates Bruce again and imagines Bruce beating him up -- and suddenly, Glen displays a stunning physical prowess. He dodges Dick's blows with instantaneous speed. He throws single punches that knock Dick and the camera to the ground. He counters attacks with a controlled ferocity.

I liked these scenes with Bruce.  I'm still not 100% sure that I see him as Batman, but the fighting scene was cool.  It's hard, since it was a hallucination if that's how Dick sees Bruce or how he is.  In the finale, Bruce is hijacking Luthor's auction, but he's just hanging out in the cave.  He seems more like Batman Beyond Bruce than "active" Bruce.

I wonder if he's essentially retired, maybe running some sort of Batman, Inc.  Maybe he's just a consultant for the Justice League now.  The only time we saw him as Batman was also in a dream.  I'd be interested if we could ever get Diana or Clark or Arthur on the show.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,129 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(1,098 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I just can't get myself excited about this.  I didn't even hate Justice League, but I've seen it.  And while not scientific at all, I've read all there there is from research on what was cut, and it doesn't seem all that different.

I'll definitely watch it, and I think it could be better.  But I wish Snyder had done a new project entirely in animation.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,130 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(2 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

In the show I was watching, the character was already in prison and it was so fast that no one knew it happened

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,131 Topic by Slider_Quinn21

(2 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I was going to add this to the DC post, but I think this is an interesting topic that probably has a ton more examples than I can think of.

But I'm watching a certain DC show and a certain character got himself intentionally arrested (there, I'm being vague enough not to have to put spoiler tags).  And the whole thing is sorta played out in the cold open as a musical montage.  Getting booked, going to trial, and getting shipped off to jail. 

It's fine to move the plot along.  But at the same time, events that were happening elsewhere seem to have *just* happened.  This character was arrested, booked, went to trial, was convicted, and was sentenced in a few days?  Maybe?  Based on what's happening in other stories, it might've only been one day.

According to some very lazy research, from start to finish, the average time from crime to prison is six months.  Even if you plead guilty (like this character did), it still takes a while to get in front of a judge.  The definition of "speedy trial" seems to be about a month.

And I see this a lot.  I'm sure it happens a lot in shows like Law and Order, but one show I watched over the summer was Oz.  That was a show that tried to focus on the reality of live in prison, but they had death penalty cases that are tried and sentenced and carried out over the course of maybe a few weeks?  It got to be pretty laughable as people are shuffled in and out of jail with essentially no time passing.

I get that shows like these don't want to sit around for weeks and months for the legal process to work itself out, but it seems like something that most shows are happy to fast-forward through unless that's essentially the whole point.

Anyone else have any examples of crazy-fast legal proceedings on TV?

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,132 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Yeah they say 60% of it goes to pay off campaign debt, but from what I read, anything under $8000 they can do whatever they want with.

I'm wondering if they have to legally pay the money back if they don't do the recount in Wisconsin.  It feels weird for Trump to pay $3.5 million to do a pointless recount if he can just pocket it.  I wonder if he'll concede right around then and just walk away with all that money.

In other news, Trump is hinting that he may not even come to these Stop the Steal rallies.  If he won't even come to a lovefest rally, we know he's in terrible shape emotionally.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,133 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

ireactions wrote:

I think the more Trump focuses on his pointless lawsuits, the less time he has for governing and screwing up America.

Well that's the thing.  Other than the attention and inability to be prosecuted, what is Trump wanting out of the job?  It's been a week and he's done *nothing*.  I don't remember who I'm quoting, but he seems to be doing everything he can to keep a job he doesn't even want.

That said, he is also laying the groundwork for a future authoritarian dictator to use the same playbook to steal an election but with more competence than Trump possesses.

This is my real fear.  I guess the good news is that such a person isn't really on the horizon.  If Trump is truly talking about 2024, then I think he's almost certainly the nominee.  No Republican has stood up to him yet, and I don't think anyone will between now and then.  If Trump runs again in 2024, then I think he'll do everything he can between now and 2028 to set up Don Jr. and Ivanka to run in 2028. 

None of Trump's kids are capable of anything like their father so I'd think we're at least 2032 before there's anyone who can follow in Trump's footsteps.  Hopefully 12 years down the line, we'll have the US in a more secure place.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,134 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(1,683 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Yeah, I thought that was strange too.  I also don't know what Starman had to say about it, either.  Especially since the staff seems to react to certain people and not to others.  Sylvester could've passed the staff to Pat, and it could've rejected him.

I thought the joke was funny, but it was also unnecessarily cruel.

* Spoiler for one of the final 3-4 episodes *

S
P
O
I
L
E
R

I wonder if part of it was to sell the idea that Sylvester could be the kind of guy who could essentially be a deadbeat dad that lied to his family.  If he was kind of a jerk to his friend at the end, you could see him having a daughter and not being around until he died.  He wasn't on screen enough to get any sense on why Sylvester and Pat were even friends.  I got the idea that maybe Sylvester just let him tag along but probably made fun of him behind his back.

I'd be interested in seeing flashbacks to see what their partnership really looked like.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,135 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(1,683 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I do remember that now (and almost certainly based some of my opinion on that memory).  I didn't read all of it so I'll respond back next week or so once I've finished season two.

The CW is showing Swamp Thing.  Like with Stargirl, the episodes are edited so I'm not sure if I'm getting the full show as intended, but it kinda drags a bit.  I still think it's watchable and compelling enough to stick with, but I think it's certainly the weakest of the DC Universe shows and I can see why it wasn't renewed.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,136 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

TemporalFlux wrote:

The Hail Mary:

https://www.axios.com/trump-electoral-c … e5149.html

Last night, I stumbled on this guy's feed:

https://twitter.com/greg_doucette?ref_s … r%5Eauthor

He was talking about how the Hail Mary hits a roadblock - even if Trump gets the results delayed, the matter goes to Congress, and the way they do it is the key.  They do it separately - so if Trump tries the Hail Mary, the Senate and House retreat to their separate chambers and come up with a solution.  And while the Republicans would move quickly in the Senate, there's literally nothing they can do about the House.  They could simply play bridge in the chamber for a month and then when 1/20 hits, Trump's term ends whether they have a solution or not. 

And this is where it got sorta interesting to me.  Everyone mentions this is where Pelosi becomes president, but they wouldn't have to vote Pelosi in as Speaker of the House.  Apparently you don't even have to *be* in the House to be Speaker of the House.  So if the Democrats are worried about this, they would just vote in Biden as Speaker, and if the Republicans try it, he becomes acting president when January 20th happens.  There'd be no difference between Biden as president or acting president, and then they could either stalemate it or the Republicans would just give in.

I have no idea if any of that is true, but his arguments were smarter than anything I could come up with.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,137 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(1,683 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

I'm glad you liked it!  I think Stargirl has the most heart of all the DC Universe shows.  I think it'll slide pretty easily into the Arrowverse, but I agree with you - I think the production value will suffer in the same way (maybe more?) that Supergirl did.

I'm now halfway through the second season of Titans.  It's my favorite of the DC Universe shows (although Harley Quinn is so good), and I'm excited to see how it continues to grow.  I thought it was nice to bring Bruce Wayne in, although I don't buy Iain Glen in the role....at all.  I know he's supposed to be an older Bruce, but he's also supposed to be an active Bruce.  Iain Glen is almost sixty - was Batman 40 when he took in Dick?  Seems like a really weird casting choice, and I just can't see him being Batman.

It's a lot of fun.  I look forward to it every time I get a chance to watch.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,138 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Yeah and if the Hail Mary happens, elections are essentially over.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,139 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

ireactions wrote:

I sense that Slider_Quinn21 is frightened and afraid that Trump will sue his way into a second term.

Oh, not at all.  I'm no legal expert, but I've read more than enough people who are say that the lawsuits are a waste of time.  It's placating Trump, it's following orders, and at the end of the day, it will mean nothing.  I'd still like to have an active tracker of which lawsuits are ongoing and which have been denied.  Just for my own amusement.

What I am concerned about is what in the hell the Republicans are doing.  When Mike Pompeo says that there will be a transition to a second Trump administration, I really don't care.  He's a Trump employee, and if Trump doesn't win, he loses his job and all the perks that come with it.  He's hoping for a second Trump term because it benefits him.

What confuses me is why other Republicans are going through with all this.  I can kinda see how McConnell is doing it - he's the face of the Republican Party besides Trump, and if he doesn't toe the line, he's going to spend his whole day fielding angry calls from Trump.  So even if professionally he knows he needs to say the right thing, I can forgive him if he's just trying to make sure he can still get through the day.

But why are other Republicans going along with this?  Why is my asshole senator, Ted Cruz, *STILL* working for the guy who called his wife ugly and said his dad was part of the Kennedy assassination?  Why is Lindsey Graham allowing talk of voter fraud when he won an election *this year*?  Is this what they're going to be doing for the next four years?  Because when you hear the rationales, some of them make sense:

- Keep Trump happy until he's officially gone
- Keep the focus on the election so that republicans can stay focused on the Georgia runoff so they can keep the house
- Fundraising

Which all make sense - but they don't have to say anything, and all those things still happen.  Trump can still fundraise, at least one of the Republicans is almost guaranteed to win, and none of them need Trump in the next 70 days.

Either way, when it's over, we need everyone not named Trump to come out and say "we did a full audit - the election was done correctly - our democracy is secure" - that's the only way we move forward.  But that means Graham and Cruz are going to have to walk back their statements.  And the fact that they made the statements at all means a) they believe this crap or b) they knew it was wrong and said it anyway.  And both of those are terrible and dangerous.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard

1,140 Reply by Slider_Quinn21

(3,535 replies, posted in Sliders Bboard)

Okay, reading all that made me feel better.

I also looked up Informant's twitter.  That made me feel worse.

********

So now the only real threat to Biden is faithless electors.  But there hasn't been any legit concern about that - yet.  I'm assuming it'll ratchet up a bit in December.

Go to forum: Sliders Bboard