Search options (Page 22 of 58)

Trump's only path to victory is to make incredibly big improvements across the board by November.  Improvements in the economy, in jobs, in housing, in healthcare.  He might need to completely end the Pandemic by November if he wants to win.

Since he doesn't know how to do any of that...

What's funny is that Trump's best chance was to do his job well, and he still couldn't do that.

If Biden wins, it'll be up to a lot of people to hold him to any progressive ideals he's discussed.  Even if they're not in his cabinet or administration, he's going to need to listen to all the progressives that have helped him get elected.  A man of his age in whatever health he's in is going to need a lot of help, and I'd like to see his administration full of young and diverse people looking to make positive change and undo any harm Trump has done.  We may not expect Biden to get a lot of change done himself, but people he hires can absolutely help.

Putting a sign in your yard is one thing, but an anonymous poll?  I don't know if there's enough people that trend that way.  And if they did, where would they end up?  Would they go as far as to say they're voting for Biden?  To impress some random pollster?  Or would you say undecided?  Or say they won't vote?  Because Biden is usually winning states by higher than the undecided level of votes.

Are Trump voters screwing with the polls to make it look like Biden is going to win?  Maybe.  But I also don't see the point in that.  Because voter suppression works the other way.  Why would fiscal conservatives that don't like Trump that much bother going to vote if he's going to get crushed?  You'd only hold your nose and vote if you thought it would matter.  Sure, the hardcore MAGAs will go no matter what, but how many of those people are there?

I absolutely agree that Biden isn't doing much to gain votes, but Biden was winning before this all started.  So was Bernie.  So was Warren.  So was Mayor Pete.  So was Yang.  They were all winning.  "Vote Blue no matter who" was and still is in full force.  So whether it was Biden or Popeye or Tony Soprano or John Kerry or Liz Warren or or whoever, the result was trending the same way.

Can it turn around?  Sure.  Can Biden mess it up?  Absolutely.  But Biden has so many things going for him. The one (1) thing that Trump can brag about is the economy, and it's only going to get worse.  Covid isn't going to get better no matter how much he decides to flip-flop on masks.  The school thing can only backfire on him (if nothing happens, he won't get enough points - if anything goes wrong, it torpedoes him with the middle class).  And Trump isn't going to be able to get the level of crazy momentum he got from rallies because people are going to be just as hesitant to show up as they were in Tulsa.  Biden has BLM rallying for his cause, and Obama is already more active for him than he was for Hillary so I would expect the black vote to be back in play (which helps him in Michigan and Pennsylvania).

Yes, Trump is losing more than Biden is winning.  But ireactions is right, this is the strategy that anyone would've taken.

The whole Trump experience is exhausting.  I am pretty level headed and have a high tolerance for stupidity so I don't have a problem reading comment sections and going Twitter diving to try and understand what people see.  What drives me the craziest is the backwards logic people are willing to use.

Sleepy Joe.  Biden has dementia.  He's so old.  Trump is also old.  Trump took a dementia test for some reason.  And Trump is constantly golfing, either because he needs to de-stress or because he wasn't working hard in the first place.

Tara Reade.  Biden is a rapist.  Biden is a pedophile.  Trump has a whole wikipedia page devoted to his rape accusations.  He has ties to Epstein.  He regularly dates women decades and decades younger than him.

Biden was VP for 8 years.  Why didn't he fix anything?  Trump is in office *now* and isn't doing anything.

I'm sure Biden isn't a saint.  I'm sure Trump isn't actually the devil.  I'm sure there are anecdotal stories that could make both sound like either.  Sure, Biden could've done more in 40 years of service.  But at the end of the day, he at least knows what he's doing and will hire people who know what they're doing.  I watched the entire Wallace interview, and Trump is just a buffoon.  Even when he's making good points, he's a buffoon.

Two different times, he stopped the interview to fact check something he'd said.  Both times he was wrong.  But something was striking about it - he was *so* convinced he was right.  And both times, he inferred that he was *told something* about it.

It's been said many times that Trump doesn't read his briefings.  It's been surmised as well that Trump could either be illiterate or at least functionally illiterate.  My thought is that a lot of Trump's "lies" are actually things he was told by someone that he believed.  I think Trump likes to hear good news and people tell him good news to keep him in a good mood.  Or he reads it on some conservative site and believes it.

Either way, we need a change.

Well, remember the virus evolves as well.  A "smart" virus evolves to be less deadly.  A virus that kills a bunch of people is a "dumb" virus, and evolution tends to keep those down.  Not only that, a quick-killing virus is less likely to spread.  A no-killing virus is more likely to spread and survive.

I think coronavirus will survive but like with the common cold and the flu, we'll find an equilibrium with it.  We'll live and it will live.  Yeah there will be a cold/flu/corona season, but we'll have a vaccine.  So when you get it, it'll knock you on your butt for a few days but it won't kill as many people or be as big of a problem.

I don't regret being against her.  She was a bad candidate and deserved to lose.  And she played a role (if not a key role) in convincing Trump to run.  She got the exact opponent she wanted, and we're paying for it.  And I think she stymied democracy in the Democratic Party for two decades to get elected.  Obama being a miracle candidate was the only reason it didn't show up earlier.  I don't believe in any of the crap coming out of the right about her being a killer or a sex criminal or anything, but I think she's a bad person.  And I don't believe in voting for bad people.

I'm glad she lost.  I wasn't thrilled that Trump won, but I'm less mad at him and more disappointed in everyone else.  I thought the leaders in Europe and the rest of the West would step up and do more in the US' absence.  They really haven't done much.  I thought a clear enemy like Trump would spawn a new generation of politicians that want to be everything Trump isn't.  I haven't seen that.  I thought the GOP would stab him in the back the first chance they got.  They didn't.  I thought the loss would be a wakeup call that would get the Democrats to clean up their own house.  They haven't.

I think President Hillary would have done significantly better than Trump on the virus.  I think she would've listened to scientists earlier, and I think she would've worked better with everyone to get better materials and better protection.

But I think America was in a bad place for this.  People were worried about America's readiness for a pandemic in the Obama era.  Hillary wouldn't have dismantled the task force, but I don't know how much good that would've done.  America's healthcare problem would've continued under Hillary because the Republican Senate would've killed everything she tried to pass.

I think Trump has been terrible, but our problem is societal.  The problems in New York would've still happened.  And I think the issues in the South would've been worse.  People in the South are resistant to government-based lockdowns and mask requirements and school closings with Trump.  How bad would it be with Hillary?  George Floyd still would have died with Hillary so the protests would still be happening, causing issues politically.

America is really big and with really high global traffic and a citizenry that doesn't like being told what to do.  Wearing masks in Asia is commonplace.  More socialist places in Europe and Canada are more happy to follow government instructions for the common good.  America still has that rebellious spirit, and that would've happened under Hillary or Obama or Bush or whoever.  Trump made it worse, but I don't know how much worse.  The tests would've been better.  The doctors would've been more prepared.  The scientists would've been up front.  But I honestly can't say whether or not there'd be less deaths or less cases.  I think we were in trouble either way.

We love alternate history here, but I honesty don't think it'd be noticeably different if Hillary had won.  Trump is an all-time crook and phony, but he's been very ineffectual politically.  I think he's done some economic and global things that will have ramifications down the road, but I'm not one of those people that think it's going to take decades to get passed.

I don't know if that answers your question.  I don't think I would vote for her in 2016 if I had the chance, and my vote wouldn't have mattered either way if I did.

Did you like season one?

Here's a question I read online:

If Trump agreed to quit today, but in exchange, he got a 30-minute variety show that would be aired nightly until he died on *every* channel....would Americans be okay with that?  He gets to be on TV every night (with 100% ratings) for the rest of his life, and we get rid of Trump.  I'm 100% sure he'd do it - he brags about TV ratings for his briefings so I think the part he likes most about being president is the fact that everything he does is newsworthy.

But if he quit today, people would still have to call him Mr. President for the rest of his life.  He'd still have unlimited business opportunities.  And everything he did would still be newsworthy.

I figure he'd take that trade, especially if it meant he didn't have to lose.

The question I have to ask is this: if Joe Biden truly felt that he was cognitively unable to do the job, would he both 1) allow that to be tested and 2) step aside if it was deemed that he was?

Then ask the same two questions about his opponent.

Joe Biden is old.  He's not going to be as sharp as he once was.  And when that stuff happens, it happens fast.  But Biden also cares about the office and the country more than Trump does.  So I'm willing to trust that he'll know when he can't handle the job.  Trump hasn't realized in three and a half years that he can't handle the job, and that hasn't stopped him from trying for eight.

If we don't want crazy old men, we should stop nominating crazy old men.  Until then, we'll have to do the best with what we have.

See, I think the ego would stand in front of that.  Trump is the kid who would turn the video game off before the end of the game so that it doesn't record a loss.  If he drops out, he can claim fraud without officially having had lost.  His election record would be undefeated.  Gore may think he won in 2000 and might tell people that he probably actually won, but the history books record that he did.  But they don't record that LBJ lost in 1968 because LBJ dropped out.

This is all 100% dependent on him knowing that he will lose.  If he thinks he has a shot, he's staying in the race.  But I don't see him sticking in an election that he knows he's going to lose, even if he can claim shenanigans.  Because he can claim shenanigans and (truthfully) say that he never lost by dropping out.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/04/upsh … p-out.html

This was a discussion back in 2016.  It obviously didn't happen then (and hurts the argument that he would), but it also shows that it's something that has been discussed before.

The other sort of long shot theory behind it is all the charges that potentially await Trump if he doesn't win.  The best way for him to escape that is to literally escape that.  Wouldn't it be wild if he did a "diplomatic" trip to Russia, announced he was not running, and then never came back?  His old pal Vlad could protect him, and there's nothing the US government could do about it.  A trip to Russia as president could be suspicious but at least has a reasonable explanation.  A trip to Russia after losing the presidency is going to be harder to pull off.

I'm to season five of Clone Wars.  I always thought of it as a kids show, but it deals with a lot of fairly adult topics.  The show isn't sexual or overly violent (and with clones and droids, the show kinda gets away with the violence that's there) but they deal with just about everything else you'd expect in an adult TV show.  I think it's done a pretty good job of fixing the mistakes of the prequels - they make Anakin and Obi-Wan seem like true friends, and they flesh out much of the time between episodes II and III.

I'll have some more commentary when I finish, but one thing I'm struggling with is the hopelessness of it all.  Every victory for the "Republic" is a victory for the Empire (and to a lesser but still true extent, the First Order).  When a planet is won or converted to be under Republic rule, I understand that they'll soon be under the boot of the Empire.  Big wins for the clones are big wins for future stormtroopers.

When you start looking at it that way, it's less fun. 

Other than that, I'm really enjoying it.  And I'm excited to see the sister series in Rebels when I'm done.

(All this is in preparation for Season 2 of the Mandalorian)

I can't speak to the black experience so I won't even try.  I think the majority of protesters are legitimately trying to drive real change.  I also acknowledge that a *ton* of people are using the protests for their own gain.  Yes, there are people who are taking advantage of the situation to loot.  Yes, there are people on the ends of the political spectrum that are trying to seed chaos.

I wish the protests had been different.  When doctors and scientists went from saying "no one should gather" to "well, some people can gather" to "Trump's rally is ridiculous", they've politicized science.  And that's counterproductive.  I don't like Trump.  I support the protests (at least, for the most part).  But hypocrisy is hypocrisy.  And whether the Memorial Day parties are to blame, or the protests are to blame....the result is more dead Americans.

But the hypocrisy is giving the Trump people ammunition.  It does look like the scientists are picking and choosing what people are allowed to gather and who isn't.  I get that people felt the need to gather for the protests, but we need to acknowledge that the Trump people feel the same way. 

Trump is 100% making it worse but people that were disgruntled to lock down (but did it, for the most part) are now refusing to wear masks and refusing to lock down ever again. And while I think they're wrong, I sse their point.

I tend to agree.  I think Flash has a better chance that Cyborg, and I think the only reason for that is that a Flashpoint movie does make a "soft reboot" easier.

But if I were writing it, I'd use "flashpoint" as a way to recast Ezra too.  So I'd make Flashpoint the plot of Aquaman 2.  Just create some sort of time travel mechanic in Atlantis.  He messes with it and suddenly he's in a war with the Amazons.  And now Batman is either Jeffrey Dean Morgan or Michael Keaton, and the Flash is (insert actor we all still like).

I think Jason Mamoa would be great for the comedy and action, and I think it works for Aquaman as much as it does for Flash (as long as you get the right mcguffin)

It isn't a matter of it being worth his time.  The coronavirus affects his chances at re-election.  The lockdown hurts the economy, which is his number one talking point.  With a pandemic, he can't hold his rallies...which is one of 1) his favorite things to do but 2) his best way to stir up support and get people excited to vote.  Them there's the idea that his major followers either don't believe in the virus at all or don't believe it's that big of a deal. 

So even if Trump were a good president who wants what's best for people, it's counter to his entire re-election campaign to do anything about it.  I'll give him credit for going along with the lockdown on any level, but he's essentially hoping to just ride out the storm and pretend that if he acts like things are back to normal, they'll be back to normal.

Well I think you have to look at a couple things with Biden:

1. His campaign has been much more friendly with the Sanders campaign than Hillary's was.  I've said it before - Hillary should've run the primary by sucking up to Bernie.  She could've essentially said "I love Bernie, but the people are voting for me.  I have to listen to them" and she would've easily won.  Whether you want to say it was rigged or not, she had essentially won the primary without having a single vote cast.  She'd been working on it for 8 years.  It was in the bag.  Why she ever went dirty against Bernie was beyond me.  It cost her votes.  Bernie Bros may still be mad now and may hold it against Biden, but Bernie (and Yang) have been out in front of the campaign.  I think by November, the party will be more unified than it was in 2016.

2. I'm hoping (fingers crossed) that people see Biden as a hard reset.  Rewind the clock back to 2016.  Use the typical American theory that a popular president's VP will run after his term is over, and assume that Biden ran in 2016.  And just feel normal.  They can even pretend Obama is there while it's happening.  It really doesn't matter.  It also represents a hard stop because he's already said he was only going to be a one term president.  Get a female VP for the first time and then have an open race in 2024 (with the female VP being the leader in the clubhouse for that race).

So whether you see Biden as being too conservative or too old or too boring or too creepy or whatever, I think people will just see him as "Not Trump" when November rolls around.

I mean I just don't agree with this.  I'm no fan of Biden but he's got so many things in his favor.  Trump's base is nebulous at best because people assume there are 60 million Evangelicals that are loyal to him, but that's not true.  His "base" from 2016 was evangelicals, fiscal conservatives, and people that straight-up hated Clinton.  Two-thirds of that group is wavering at best.  The economy is floundering and will only be worse in November so the fiscal conservatives aren't going to rush out for four more years of that, and Biden's own right-leaning ways help with that.  And I don't think people hate Biden the way they hated Hillary.  The best they can come up with is that he's sleepy.

Then there's the math.  Biden has 183 electoral votes today locked up.  No question.  Done.  The west coast and Illinois and New England are blue, period.  You have your Minnesotas and your Nevadas and your Virginias and your Colorados that are probably blue.  It essentially gets him to Hillary's 232 without breaking a sweat.

Trump?  He has the heartland and Dixie, but those states barely add up to more than California alone.  Even Texas is borderline purple (and if he loses Texas, both he and the Republicans are done for a very long time).  Everyone laughs at Texas as a republican stronghold, but I live here and I don't know a single person who's going to vote for him.  The cities are overwhelmingly blue.  And the demographics are changing.  The farmland is overwhelmingly Trump, but steer don't vote.  I think Texas goes blue in 2024 or 2028.  And if it went blue in 2020, it wouldn't surprise me.

But let's say he gets Texas.  And let's say he gets Ohio, which could easily be a battleground state.  And let's say he gets Georgia (which could easily flip with all the activism happening there) and Iowa.  Even then, he's barely at 200.

It leaves Arizona, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Wisconsin, and Florida as your battleground states.  Trump won in 2016 because he won all those states.  He won North Carolina by 150,000.  Arizona by 100,000 votes.  Florida by 100,000.  Pennsylvania by 50,000.  Wisconsin by 20,000.

So he needs every one of those people that voted for him to vote for him again.  He might be able to lose one of those 5 and still win, but he probably needs a full sweep.  During a pandemic he made worse.  During a recession.  After four years of doing nothing he said he'd do.

I'm very much looking forward to the return of the Orville

I guess we'll see what happens.  I would think Candice Patton is the type who would say something if she felt he was racist or sexist.  I also think Jesse L. Martin as the paternal figure on the show could speak for him or Jessica Parker Kennedy or Danielle Panabaker or Danielle Nicolet or anyone on the show.  There's a lot of women and a lot of people of color on that show, and I hadn't heard a thing about it.  Unless he completely hid his sexism and racism, I think TF is right...it would've come out.  So I guess we'll see if it comes out now.

I hope Hartley can work again.  He lost this job but Gunn got his job back.  Even Mel Gibson made a comeback.  I don't think his career has to be over - especially if his change is real and his apology is genuine.  People love to tear celebrities down, but we also like a real comeback story.  He's young and I think he's at least CW talented.  If he wants to claw his way back, I think he can.

That's upsetting and disappointing about Hartley Sawyer.  I think he's a fun actor who thrived in the Arrowverse with a character that doesn't have much going for it.  I understand why they did what they did, with the Arrowverse working very hard to be inclusive.

That being said, the article lists tweets that go up to 2014.  I know he deactivated his twitter so it doesn't mean he's changed in six years, but what are the terms we're using to cancel people?  How do we decide who gets a second chance (like James Gunn) and who doesn't?  I'm assuming that this isn't politically based (no idea if he's a Republican), but it's hard to say if Sawyer is getting the Dean Cain treatment.

It does sound like he's sorry.  And I'll never understand why it was okay to hire him after these tweets happened and it's not okay now.  I assumed he made a tweet in the last couple of weeks, but to see that it was six years ago before he even joined the Flash is a tad troubling.  If he learned from it and has been good around his female and black costars, I'd think he'd have been treated differently.  But that's not my call.

I think the main problem is that the show is set up in a way where Kate has an emotional connection to everyone on the show.  She's Beth's sister.  Commander Kane's daughter.  Mary's step-sister.  Sophie's ex.  Luke's partner.  And that's the whole main cast.

A new character could certainly work with all these people, but you can't replicate those relationships.

I have a friend whose mother is a diehard MAGA person.  Evangelical.  Nationalist.  Boomer.  I've always thought she was a very sweet lady.  Her husband is even older and is a very sweet, gentle, quiet man.  It bothers me that she's been swept up in all this crap.

It bothers me more that I never would've figured she would.  Maybe she wasn't a very sweet lady.

I had a long conversation with my own mother.  She voted for Trump in 2016, but it never seemed like she voted for him because she liked Trump.  I think she was raised to vote Republican, and I think she's always had an issue with the Clintons.  She's not political at all so it's more of one of those people that hates them "just because."  She's regretted her Trump vote and has listened to increasingly less conservative talk radio (thank you, true crime podcasts!), and I'm about 95% of the way getting her to vote for Biden.

I think this is a story of two people.  My friend's mom won't change.  My friend is worried that if Trump loses, it will be the end of his family.  My mother has changed.  She might vote Democrat for the first time in her life (I had to explain to her that there were huge chunks of the 90s where she should've but that's a story for another day).

Too often, we focus too much on the people like my friend's mother.  They're, in a way, brainwashed.  That's not to say that she's a victim, but I don't think they're salvageable before 2020.  I think we need to try and remember the people like my mother.  The people that thought maybe Trump would work.  The people that thought it was time to hand the job to a non-politician.  The ones who like the idea of draining the swamp.  The ones who liked the idea of a Republican during a good economy.  The ones who just didn't like Hillary Clinton and have not liked her since 1992 for various contradictory reasons.

As I've said, he didn't win by that much.  He hasn't converted many to his side in four years.  He can't afford for too many people to be like my mom.

I really don't understand the support for Trump.  I understand the support for conservative politics, and I understand that he's the best bet for conservative judges and conservative-ish policies (although I'm not sure there's much conservative policy being generated during this administration - it's mostly the judges).  I understand that he says a lot of things that sound good to both conservatives and Christians (pro-life and 2nd amendment protection).  I understand that it makes the libs mad, and that makes conservatives feel good after Obama.

But 90% of that is obvious bullshit.  The reason there hasn't been any marquee conservative legislation is because Trump doesn't stand for anything.  The reason he talks about Christian values without displaying any of them is that he doesn't care.  At the end of the day, all he has is the blustering of a bully and hatred on his side.  He's abandoned any notion that he cares about anyone but white people, and he's focusing his campaign on white supremacy and trying to trick Christians.

I still don't think that all Trump supporters are evil, but I don't get following this guy.  He's not a leader, and he's not particularly good at pretending that he is.  And Republican leaders that supported him can stop whenever they want.  They don't have to openly condemn their own president, but they can stop with the positives.  Stop with open support.  Do not help elect.

Trump is doing too much damage to the Republican party, and he's not doing anywhere near enough good to recoup it.

I don't think Trump has nearly enough votes to get elected (and I'm in TEXAS), but even if he does, the Republican party is robbing Peter to pay Paul (a reference Trump wouldn't get) in a really dangerous way.  Because if they really pivot to a party for only white people, Democrats will dominate in a country of shifting demographics for decades.  They have a chance to say "we made a mistake, we sold our souls, but enough is enough" and pivot to a platform that stands for conservative politics but not white politics.  And, honestly, if they start now and really work at it, I think they could have things (mostly) cleaned up by the time the election happens.

But it won't matter.  They won't.  They feel like they're in too deep and have to see the bullshit all the way through.  Sad.

This is actually a really good question.  Movies aren't structured the same way as miniseries/TV shows.  I would think he'd have to structure it in a way where the "episodes" (if that's how it's done) have a beginning, middle and end.  As much as shows like to tout themselves as "10-hour movies" they have to have a certain structure.  Even when Kill Bill was broken into two volumes, each movie had to have a beginning, middle, and an end.

Will the Snyder cut do that?  They could possibly do a Bruce hour, a Diana hour, a Clark hour, and a finale.  With Bruce recruiting Barry and Arthur in the Bruce hour and the Cyborg stuff in the Diana hour.

Other than that, just release it as a 4-hour movie like they did with the Irishman.

If you're asking me, if recasting is the route, I hire the best person.  I watched Ashley Platz' audition tape, and she looks and sounds nothing like Ruby Rose.  But if she's the best Kate, go with it.  Long hair, short hair.  Tall, short.  To me, it doesn't matter.  Edward Norton and Mark Ruffalo don't look anything alike, and they both played Bruce Banner in the same continuity.  If you want to say that Incredible Hulk is only partially continuity, then I'll counter with Terrance Howard and Don Cheadle.

In the interests of representation, it should be a lesbian actress.  And if they really want to go authentic, a Jewish lesbian.  But other than that, we're going to have to suspend our belief either way.

Hasn't this been confirmed?  There's an explosion in the trailer, and I thought I saw something about her stopping one bomb but missing the other.

I respect Snyder's vision.  I respect that he wants to create a realistic world where gods walked the earth.  They'd be controversial.  They'd be human.  They'd be fallible.   Superman would be frustrated and would miss a bomb going off.  Wonder Woman would save one group but miss another.  Batman would certainly kill people, either accidentally or on purpose.  If Superman fought another Kryptonian in a major city center, it would cause immense damage.

My only problem with Snyder's movies is that he doesn't give any of those things the proper weight.  Because I don't think he has any emotional tie to any of it.  I think he thinks its cool when two Kryptonians destroy a city, and I don't think he cares about the "people" in the buildings.  I think he thinks its cool when Batman uses Arkham-style violence to break spines, but I don't think he worries about the paralyzed "person" afterwards.  I'm putting "person" and "people" in quotes not because Snyder doesn't care about people, but I'm just not sure he's concerned with extras and faceless people in movies.  They don't have names, we don't see them for the most part so I don't think he cares.  Which I think is fair.

And honestly if he'd made an original property like The Boys, I think it would've been fine.  The problem is that he decided to twist *established* characters and didn't bother explaining anything.  He wanted cool shots and didn't want a scene where Alfred and Bruce talk about why he's changed so much.  He didn't want a scene where Superman actually rescues people.  He likes cool shots where Superman is dragging a tanker or slow-motion flying someone out of a burning building or floating above a flooded house.

I think BvS is *this close* to being a great movie.  I think the 5% that it's missing is 5% of the movie that Snyder didn't care about.  Its why I didn't have a huge uptick from watching the Ultimate version.  Yeah there's 40 minutes more but he didn't use any of those minutes to address what I think are huge problems.  And in my opinion, it's because he doesn't care.

I think that's fair.  No worries.

But when you feel better with it, the table read was really well done.  It was nice to see the cast interact with each other and crack up.  Pedro Pascal was very fun.

Um....so Ruby Rose quit Batwoman.

I've been mildly impressed on how the Arrowverse has been able to work to make their final episodes into season finales.  It's clear that there was going to be more in each season, and these are all going to make for interesting "next seasons".  For example, will the Flash be dealing with the new Mirror Master as a season-long villain?  Or will they wrap her story up quickly and move on to their next story?  Same could be said of Batwoman/Alice/War with Kane and Supergirl/Leviathon/Lex.

I guess it shows that most of these shows end on cliffhangers most of the time.  So in essence, it could've worked with any episode they ended on.  But it's interesting...the Walking Dead chose to delay their season finale until it could be completed.  I wonder if that was an option for Flash or Batwoman (it wasn't an option for Supergirl unless Melissa Benoist could work while pregnant).

I wish they'd get out of the TOS era.  If Picard doesn't want to do any Starfleet action, I'd rather have a companion piece on a Starfleet show that takes place during the Picard era.

Well that's the funny thing.  Han Solo talks about how he's been all around the galaxy and hasn't seen anything that would lead him to believe that the Force is real.  But the Jedi were *everywhere* 30 years earlier.  Even if he never saw a Jedi, there would be *tons* of living beings that would've been alive at the height of their power.

I wonder if the prequels should've gone in a different direction.  Maybe the Jedi officially ended in the Old Republic and the Sith/Jedi were fighting a secret war.  Obi-Wan worked in secret, and he finds Anakin.  The two of them fight for a couple decades, until Anakin is seduced by their rival faction.