Search options (Page 8 of 58)

I think Democrats will still be engaged because Trump is running.  I think enthusiasm might have dampened, but that will disappear as it gets closer.  There are very few human beings that I wouldn't vote for above Donald Trump, and that includes other MAGA republicans.  I maintain that Trump himself is more dangerous than most other people in the party so even if someone I really hate was running against him (like Ted Cruz), I'd vote for them over Trump.  MAGA Republicans are opportunistic cowards who are willing to do or say anything to stay in power, but I don't think they'd actively destroy the country.  Trump would.  I think there are exceptions, but I really do believe that Trump is a truly unique villain.

So whether it's Biden or Harris or Newsom or Whitmer or whoever, I think Democrats will show up and be enthusiastic because of who they're up against.  What I'm worried about is independents and Republicans that hate Trump.  We need all of them to vote for Biden too, and a lot of apolitical people I talk to hate both of these candidates.  I think if the Democrats ran someone that they'd never heard of, the freshness of a new person might be enough for them to vote for them.

I still maintain that's why Kennedy is still polling around the same.  I think, when pressed, people are willing to whatever the alternative is, no matter who that is.

I think in that plan, the VP needs to be Whitmer or Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania.  I think it should be someone who can bring in votes from a swing state.  Any swing state they can get "for free" they should take.  I don't think America is ready for a double female ticket (they're barely ready for one woman on the ticket) so I guess I'd pick Shapiro or Raphael Warnock.

I do wonder why the polling for non-Biden candidates is so much worse.  This was the results of a recent Ipsos poll (July 1-2)

- Pritzker is losing by 6
- Whtimer is losing by 5
- Beshear is losing by 4
- Harris is losing by 1
- Biden is tied

Biden is the highest rated candidate of that group.  What's the reason?  Well here are the vote numbers:

Pritzker 34 Trump 40
Whitmer 36 Trump 41
Beshear 36 Trump 40
Harris 42 Trump 43
Biden 40 Trump 40

So for simplicity, let's say this was 100 people.  If we use Trump/Biden as the base, then six people went from Biden to undecided when it was Pritzker.  Four went from Biden to undecided for Beshear.  Three went from Biden to undecided when it was Whitmer (and perhaps one undecided went to Trump since he gained a vote.  For Harris, everyone seemed to stay on their side but two extra people went to her and three went to Trump. 

Trump's support basically stayed the same.  For the two women, he gained a vote or two, but that was it.  So Trump's support was pretty flat.  So are those 4-6 people that didn't vote for Pritzker/Whitmer/Beshear just not sure who those people are and can't commit?  I assume if they ran for 4-5 months, those people would find out who the nominee is and go home to the Democratic ticket.

I'm not sure why more people are decided on Harris/Trump than Biden/Trump, but that seems to be the case.

Now here's the weird one.  Michelle Obama *crushes* Trump 50-39.  She's the only one who beats him, and she does it decisively.

Now Michelle Obama isn't running.  But it's a really interesting stat because what is she providing that the others aren't?  I would say she's as well known as Biden and Trump - is it name recognition?  She's probably more well known than Harris, and I assume she's more liked than her.  But is there something else at play?  And is that "something else" that can be harnessed in a different candidate?

That's what I assume the Democrats need to figure out.  What does Michelle Obama have that caused a 10% bump in her vote share compared to Biden (and a one percent DROP for Trump), and do they have anyone else that has whatever that is?

I'll have to listen to that.  I want to be clear, again, that I really like Joe Biden.  I remember watching him in 2008 and sorta liking what he had to say.  If I wanted him off the ticket, it has nothing to do with Joe and everything to do with winning.  Age catches up with everyone, and sometimes people can be really good at something and it can still be time for them to move on.  Especially in something as public as politics.

I have no doubt that Joe will live four more years and that he has a lot to give the country.  But he doesn't have to be president for that to happen.  If Kamala Harris or someone else wins the presidency in 2024 for the Democrats, Joe Biden would be a great advisor.  Just like Barack Obama has been a great advisor to Joe. 

I'm sure Joe believes in himself and thinks he can do it.  I'm sure he's willing to gamble that he's got one more win in him.  Which is fine...but he just needs to understand that a lot is riding on this election.  Donald Trump won in 2016, perhaps, because the Democratic nominee was handed the nomination.  Ego, I believe, played a part in that.  I'm just hoping Trump doesn't win again because he ran against the person who wanted it the most and not the one who would have the best chance at winning.

(The last couple sentences was, very much, me editorializing.)

I usually scan the polls that came in on 538 (I know some of them are partisan but it's still an interesting exercise).  As I said, Biden had taken the lead nationally, in Wisconsin, and in Michigan.  He was basically tied in Pennsylvania, and he was making gains in Nevada.  Now, all that progress is gone and Trump has taken a 1%+ lead in all the swing states.  It all happened right after the debate so it looks like a direct result of that.

To be fair, they also did a poll against every possible Democrat that could replace Biden and Trump was winning against all of them too.

As I said, these polling averages can be fickle and maybe all these polls are worthless.  But it's frustrating that we were basically ready for Biden to take the lead (maybe for good?) and the debate performance appears to have knocked back all the progress.  Maybe speeches like tonight's will help.  Maybe the Supreme Court coming to Trump's aid will help.

I really don't know.  But I wish I felt as good as I did last week.

The post-debate polling is bad.  Biden went from a lead nationally, in Michigan, and in Wisconsin to losing all three.  Any gains he had in the other swing states is also gone.

None of this needs to be permanent, but it's really bad right as things were starting to turn in his favor.  Its certainly not over, and things could easily swing in the other direction, but they can no longer count on the courts to do any more damage to Trump.  They can only count on the country continuing to approve or Trump shedding support.  That's it.

Whatever they do, they need to do it quickly.  If they go with someone else, they are going to need time to familiarize themselves with the American public.  I think a lot of the Biden support transfers immediately to the new guy, but I'm sure there will be people that are hesitant.  But the people that aren't supporting Biden because he's too old aren't going to be convinced by anything.  The economy could significantly improve, immigration could be improved substantially, the wars in Gaza and Ukraine could end, etc and it's not going to matter.  This isn't based on results, it's based on vibes.  And that disadvantage immediately disappears with any of the people that would be running if Biden stepped down.

The coalition would be Democrats, anti-Trumpers, people happy with how the country is doing, and people that thought Biden was too old.  Even if those people are a small part of the electorate, it could make more than enough difference.

I support Biden no matter what.  If he wants to run, he's got my vote.  I'm just very nervous that Trump will win, wreck the country, continue to stack the courts with insanity, and more...just because Biden doesn't want to step down.  If Biden can win, Biden should run.  If Biden can't win, Biden shouldn't allow the country to be destroyed because of his ego.  I'm also nervous because we don't just need Trump to lose - we need Trump to lose convincingly enough that he can't steal this thing.  270-268 is stealable and that feels like Biden's ceiling at this point.

Biden's legacy is cemented.  He beat Trump, turned the economy around, ended Covid, etc.  He was a great VP.  He was a great congressman.  I don't think he has anything left to prove, and I don't think anything he could do from 2025 to 2028 would help or hurt his legacy.  If he walks away now, he can keep his head high.

I guess my questions is why Biden looked so tired and weak on debate night and then twelve hours later looked like a completely different person.  Did they give him cold medicine that made him drowsy?  Did he get different cold medicine the next day that amped him up?

If Biden will not step aside, is there some way to replace Harris without causing an issue?  I wonder if the American public would be happier with Biden if they liked his VP and thought he could be president.

Another thought experiment.  If Biden replaced Harris with Raphael Warnock or Gretchen Whitmer, would that ease people's concerns?  Could it help Biden get Georgia or Michigan, respectively?  Maybe Biden could promise Harris a spot on the Supreme Court?  Attorney General?  I don't know what it would take for Harris to gracefully take a demotion, but if Biden won't step down and people are upset with Biden for his age, I feel like VP is the only lever left to pull.

*******

What's frustrating about this is that I don't think people seem all that upset with Biden's policies.  It seems to be mostly Biden's age, something Biden has no control over.  Biden wouldn't have to retire from politics if she stepped down, just like Bill Clinton and Barack Obama are still active in politics.  Is this ego, or is this a career politician going with his gut that he's the only one that can win?

Because this election is winnable with a candidate that 72% of people think is too old to run.  If they pivot to Warnock or Newsom or Whitmer, I don't know how many people that are currently voting for Biden are going to be upset.  There's going to be less name recognition, but that may be the reason why someone like RFK is getting any votes at all.  "Anyone but Trump or Biden" could mean any other candidate the Democrats choose.

So you'd get 1) people that hate Trump and 2) people that hate Trump and Biden, and then it would just be a matter of getting people that like Biden.  I think you just have the candidate you pick campaign with Biden and promise to stay on the same track.

The more I think about it, the risk of moving away from Biden goes away.  My concern is for the Democratic Party to generate a ticket that no one voted for, but I'm guessing people aren't really going to care if that ticket wins.

I think one thing to remember is that Trump didn't actually have a great debate either.  Not only did he lie, but he lied about things that are pretty easily verified.  That might've turned off voters in the same way that Biden being old did.  In fact, like I said before, those are two very similar things.  People know Biden is old and *looks and sounds* old.  People know Trump is a liar.  Which one bothers people more?

When Trump said that "everyone wanted Roe v Wade overturned" that's both a lie and one that's easily known by the majority of Americans, including conservatives, that supported Roe before and after Dobbs.  When he said that babies are being killed after birth, that's a common sense thing that most people wouldn't believe.

Trump could easily say that "illegal immigration is bad" or "the border is not as secure as it should be" and people would probably agree with him.  The problem is that he says that millions of people are coming across the border and are killing people in ways that we could've never even considered in our worst nightmares, and people can easily verify if that's true.  The population of Arizona is 7.4 million people.  People in Arizona might notice if 1 out of 7 people were illegal immigrants.

It would be like if Biden said that climate change is a problem and that 2/3 of the country is now uninhabitable.  Or that most coastal states are now underwater.  It's a real problem that a lot of people agree with, but he's now taken it to such an insane level that he'd probably start to lose people.

So if people care about the lies, that's one thing.  Biden may be old but he's also president right now.  A Biden presidency isn't a hypothetical.  It's happening right now.  And if things keep going okay, I think people will be more okay with more of it.

*****

I say this as someone who's now made a few donations to Biden, but the idea of a Newsom/Whitmer ticket really comforted me after the debate.  The fiery Biden we saw recently has calmed me down a bit, but we need to keep seeing it.  I think the Democrats need to think long and hard about whether they should go all in with Biden.  I'm voting for the Democratic ticket no matter what (I'd vote for Hunter Biden and any running mate) and I'll enthusiastically support Biden if he's the guy.

But as someone who wants to win at (almost) any cost, I think it's prudent to consider alternatives.  Especially after post-debate polls start cementing.  I love Joe, and I want him to succeed.  But this is bigger than Joe or his ego or his pride.

Yeah, I'm hoping that's the case.  We need him to be this version.  Both as president and in the second debate.

Sent him some money

Well, yeah.  This, forever.  Nothing about last night could've changed that.  Biden has my vote, and I'll enthusiastically vote for him.  One thing that made me sad a little bit is that Biden from 8-12 years ago would've wiped the floor with Trump last night.  He wouldn't have let Trump get away with any of that BS.  But he's lost his fastball.  Pitchers can pitch for a decade after they lose their fastball, but sometimes, people need their fastball.

I'm with Biden until the end.  I would just feel a little better if there was someone else running.  As I said, that person couldn't just be anyone, and that isn't happening in either way.  So it doesn't really matter either way.

Oh for sure (and I referenced that).  But I don't think him lying is good enough for Biden to score points.  We know Trump lies, and a decent amount of the voter base doesn't care.  The ones that do may not know he's lying.  Without a true live fact check, there's no way for viewers to know what's true and what isn't.  I assume well-educated people know that no states allow post-birth abortions, but I don't know if everyone knows that.  When Trump says garbage about the successes he's had, people may not know better.

What Biden needed was for Trump to not be a liar but to be crazy.  He seems to go on these weird rambling stories when he does rallies, and it turns people off (even MAGA people).  A lot of times, MAGA people leave his rallies early because they're tired of hearing him ramble on about sharks and showers.  Debates aren't really a good format to expose people to that, but it's the best chance that people have to see what a lunatic he is.  I was truly hoping he'd say some bizarre nonsense because I think that's the best way to peel off people from Trump.  They might even know he's a liar, but they need to also know that he's crazy.

There's another debate.  If Biden does well in the next one, this one won't matter.

It's going pretty bad so far.  Biden looks old and Trump has been staying on point and not acting like a lunatic yet.

Still lots of time but I'm not loving it so far.

*Please note that my fundamental understanding of Clark Kent / Superman is partially created by the thoughts of an accused rapist.  And I guess partially by a guy we all know who ended up being an extremist.*

To me, Clark Kent shouldn't give up on people.  Clark never gave up on Lex in Smallville even when Lex showed his true colors.  Clark wasn't naive about Lex - I don't think Lex would ever surprise Clark.  But I think Clark still had hope that his friend would return some day.  I think this is one of Clark's superpowers in Smallville - he has the ability to see the good in people and he refuses to give up on anyone, even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Cavill's Clark seems a lot more distant.  He doesn't seem to have any friends at all.  He has Lois, but that seems like his only friend.  He doesn't seem like he's friends with Perry.  He's never shown outside of work with any of his colleagues.  I guess Bruce is the closest thing to a male friend, and they barely have any scenes together.  So when Clark goes evil in the "Knightmare" scenario, there's more evidence that he's just really mad ("She was my world and you took her from me") than any sort of mind control.  It's less Anti-Life Equation and more Anakin Skywalker.

In fact, Cavill's Superman reminds me of Anakin.  He really only cares about one thing (Padme/Lois) and as soon as  he loses that, he goes full evil.  He's heroic, but he doesn't seem to be in it for any particular reason.

And that's my thing with Cavill.  I think he's a really good actor, and he does a lot of heroic things but look at him in the scenes where he's saving people.  He looks distant, cold, uncaring, alien.  I feel like Welling's Clark genuinely wanted to help people.  I think he would have fun being Superman.  I think he would smile as he was doing it.  Even if he was concerned, I think he'd put on a brave face.

A lot of people point to Cavill's Superman killing Zod, but I don't think that's a problem.  I can't remember all 217 episodes of Smallville, but I know most of the Monsters of the Week ended up dead.  All of the season-long villains ended up dead.  Even some of Clark's friends ended up dead.  Smallville's Clark wasn't perfect or a saint, but I think he tried.  If the Battle of Metropolis had happened to Smallville's Clark, I feel like he would've either been seriously injured trying to save innocents, or he would've tirelessly worked to clean the city up until everything was done.

There's no evidence that Clark helped after the city was basically destroyed.  The city is cleaned up so someone must have done it, but I can't imagine that Bruce would've been so angry if Clark had spent weeks super-building the city back up.  The movies imply that Clark just sorta left when it was over (although Clark does stick around after the bombing in the Capitol so maybe that's not what happened - either way it's just something that Snyder didn't seem to care about).

So I'm okay with Cavill killing Zod.  My issues with Cavill are:

- Cavill doesn't really seem like he cares about people or saving them.  He does it, but it seems like it's a job, not a calling.  I think his view is the same as Snyder's - this is dangerous work and people are going to die (and that's okay).  I don't think Smallville's Clark would think that way.

- Cavill seems more alien than human.  I think Smallville's Clark embraced his humanity, even when he was exploring his alien origins.  I think Clark would think of himself as human, even after he found out he wasn't.  Just like an immigrant might consider himself to be American, even if he was born elsewhere or had foreign-born parents.  I think Cavill would consider himself to be a Kryptonian living on Earth.  And I think this connects to the first point.  I think Smallville Clark would think of saving fellow human beings.  Cavill Clark would be saving people that are either "under his protection" or, worse, inferior beings.

I will say that I also don't think Smallville's Clark would've been so adversarial against Bruce.  Bruce is undoubtedly an idiot in BVS because he does almost not detective work.  I think an intelligent Bruce would've found out who Superman was and would've gone back to Smallville to do some research.  BvS Bruce turns around when he finds out about Clark's mom, but I think Bruce should've *interviewed* Clark's mom long before a fight.

Likewise, I don't think Smallville's Clark would've been so adversarial.  There would be no reason to.  Clark doesn't need to intimidate Bruce or destroy the Batmobile or threaten him.  Clark knows that Bruce knows how powerful he is.  And since Smallville Clark wouldn't give up on Bruce, Smallville Clark would always come from a place of diplomacy.  He would've been talking the whole time.

Please note that this is all based off memory of Smallville (which I haven't watched since it came off the air) and Man of Steel (which I haven't seen since it came out).  I'm essentially writing off Clark's characterization from BvS (which I haven't seen since it came out) or Justice League (either version) because Clark is barely in it.  Maybe there are tons of examples of Smallville Clark acting like Cavill Clark.  But I know there aren't many versions of Cavill Clark acting like Smallville Clark.

I'm interested in your response as well.  Especially since I would be willing to bet you remember the actual Smallville Clark better than my headcanon, which could be being overly generous to Welling.

Some of this might end up regressing back to the original mean, but it feels good for now.  There's also evidence that Americans (non-MAGA at least) are starting to realize that the economy is either getting better or isn't as bad as they thought.  Which would be huge - I assume a lot of Biden's retreating approval and votes are economy based.  Even a small increase in American confidence in the economy would really help.  Same with immigration.

That being said, I'm getting very nervous about the first debate.  A lot is riding on it.  If Trump rambles about nonsense or has his own senior moment, it could hurt him with independents.  After all, half the reason people are voting for "not Biden" is that he seems old.  If they both seem old or if Trump somehow comes across as old and crazy, then Biden's advantage returns.

That being said, if Biden comes out looking old and/or feeble, then that opinion of Biden could be frozen and some of those voters may never come back.  Biden needs a strong performance.  That being said, apparently Biden has been doing a ton of debate prep, and Trump has been doing almost none.  If that's true, Trump could struggle and Biden could impress.  We'll see.  I'll be very nervously watching.

I'm not sure if it matters, but there's still undecideds and Kennedy voters that are up for grabs.

https://x.com/DCU_Updates/status/1801255196393349609

Apparently James Gunn's Superman film will feature LuthorCorp.  Gunn has previously said that his favorite on-screen Luthor is Michael Rosenbaum's version (now he said it directly to Rosenbaum on his own show so maybe he was being overly nice) so I have to assume this is a reference to Smallville or at least an admiration for the Smallville version of Lex's backstory.

I do love the Rosenbaum Lex, and I do love the idea of Lex taking his father's company and reshaping it into his own image.  As a fan of Smallville, I think it's cool that the show is influencing the next generation of DC films, however small.  Welling is also my favorite Clark so if Gunn's version can also be more like him than the Cavill version, even better.

That helps.  538 came up with their forecast and when it launched there was a 52% chance that Biden wins.  They explained that, while Trump is leading nationally and in the swing states, the model takes other factors into play.

To me, I think the election rides on a number of things (not necessarily in order):

- The economy.  I think the economy needs to improve.  It seems like interest rates might drop before the election, and the stock market continues to soar to record highs.  I assume prices are going to stay high, but if Americans can consistently feel better about the economy, Biden will be fine.  I still think there's gotta be something that Biden can do about prices, but maybe there isn't.

- Immigration.  Does the recent executive order move the needle?  If not, would a drastic drop in immigration coverage over the next six months move the needle?

- The debates.  This might be the first time people see Trump talk in years.  Will he talk about the 2020 election that seems to turn off swing voters?  Will he ramble about sharks and other nonsense?  Will Biden be able to get through the election without looking overly old or feeble?  Any of those things could shift favor to Biden.  Of course, a Biden frailty moment could absolutely crush things so it's huge risk for both.

- The DC trial.  Will it happen at all?

- Which side can coalesce their base.  Can Biden get all the young people back?  Can Trump get the Haley people back?

- RFK Jr.  Can Biden voters who are currently picking RFK get turned off by him?  Can RFK get any Trump voters that are turned off by him?

If Biden is currently winning, these things can all drive more voters to him.  I think the things that can pull votes from him are basically a) if the economy starts sputtering or b) Biden tanks one of the debates or a major speech.  Right now, I think Trump has more to lose but I wish there was more losing happening at the moment

I don't understand that argument.  Friday Night Lights had the exact same situation that year.  They had a bunch of second-half stories they were going to tell but had to quickly wrap up their season.  When the season returned, they didn't go back to the previous year/season - they moved on (each year was a new football season / school year).  But they quickly caught viewers up on what happened, even filming some things that "happened in season two" that we didn't get to see.  As I said in a different post, they essentially pretended like the season happened and moved forward with the aftermath of the events that would have happened.  People that weren't together when the last season ended are together.  People that were together are broken up.  Games happened that we never saw.  A really big injury happened.

And that was because FNL was stuck with a format that made sense.  Time had to move on.  But Heroes wasn't.  They could've done anything.  Even if they didn't want to use Caitlin anymore or couldn't use the actress, there could've been a throwaway line where Peter mentions that he went to the future and either brought her home or left her there or whatever.

Seems like a lazy answer based on either forgetting to resolve it or not caring enough.

Apparently Trump's final four picks for VP are Rubio, Burgum, Scott, and Vance.

Which I say....good.  I was worried he'd pick a female VP (he can still pick Stefanik but apparently Noem is now out) which could help him with conservative female voters that hate Trump.  I guess Scott could help him with black men (who he's aggressively targeting).  Rubio could hypothetically help him with Hispanics, but Trump or him would have to change residency (and I think Rubio would have to leave the Senate to do that) so I don't know how that makes sense.

I don't see how Burgum helps him electorally at all.  Vance might help him win Ohio (which could be slightly more tossup with the abortion vote there), but it could also potentially lose them a senate seat if they win.

If Trump was smart, Haley would be the pick.  I know VP matters almost nothing electorally, but I do think the VP candidates in both cases would be helpful considering the age and unlikability of the candidates.  I do think Biden would be slightly more palatable with people if they loved his VP.  Since people hate Harris more than they hate Biden, that makes it feel like Biden has no one behind him if he does die in office.

I think the problem with this is that there's an expert willing to sign off on any opinion these days.  There are doctors who are willing to advocate for anti-vax concerns.  There are doctors willing to speak out against masks, against social distancing, against basically anything.  I'm sure there's a "medical expert" with a YouTube channel advocating for smoking.

And those are all credentialed people.  That doesn't even include the "experts" who are lying about their credentials.

I always sort of laugh when ignorant people say to "do their own research" but it's a Rashomon situation sometimes.  Depending on which path you take, you could come to two different concerns.  Both which could be backed up by evidence that seems to point to the conclusion you're looking for.

Documentaries usually seem pretty definitive, and I think we've been conditioned to believe them.  But there are documentaries that "prove" that 9/11 was in inside job.  There are documentaries that "prove" that the 2020 election was stolen.  Backed by video and expert testimony.

Fact checking is a useful tool, but people don't trust fact checks if they disagree with their desired result.  Twitter does community notes when people outright lie, but people just ignore them if they love the lie.

I don't think people are intentionally ignorant or dumb.  Back in the day, there were plenty of people like that.  But there was less information, and the information they received was properly filtered.  Now, any idiot can be on YouTube or Reddit or whatever and can spread their misinformation to millions.  They can be a true expert with a slanted agenda, or they can just lie and say they're an expert.  By the time you've found out which is which, your opinion could be slanted.

I don't have a solution for this.

Thank you, Quinn!  As I was so many years ago, I am inspired by you and will continue to believe in you!

Convicted felon Donald John Trump.

Hmmm, it's hard for me to say.  So much of Dexter was Michael C Hall's performance.  He was able to capture a serial killer and make him cheerful and charming and funny while also being terrifying.  The show was funny but also very dark.  Even if the writing is good, I think the actors have to sell it.

I'm interested, but I guess I'd have to see what people think.

I watched Madame Web.  It wasn't great, but I do think something good was hidden.  Spoilers if anyone cares:

S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S

Okay so Madame Web is convoluted and stupid and no one in the movie (the actors or the characters) seems to want to be there.  But I think some of the ideas in the movie really work. 

Ezekiel Sims is a dumb character, but the *idea* of Ezekiel Sims works.  He's an evil Spider-Man.  We are used to a Spider-Man who is good and willing to make the ultimate sacrifice, but he's also a guy who pulls his punches can hide in the shadows and drop on you from hundreds of feet in the air. 

What if that guy was a bad guy, and there was no Spider-Man so save you?  And what if vague future powers were the only thing that could save you?  In fact, no one gets super powers to save the day.  I think there's something there.  I think the movie just doesn't lean into this concept enough.  If it had focused on being a horror movie, I think it could've been good.  I also think maybe you just focus on one Spider-Woman.  Maybe kick up the gore in the scenes where Cassie doesn't save someone.

And since all the actors have talked about the bait and switch they all seemed to have experienced, I wonder if that was originally the plan.  You can see the bones of something different when you watch it.

Nando v Movies did a video about all the ADR in the movie that I haven't watched yet.  I'm hoping he has some answers on what it could've been.

Yeah I think there's reasoning why the polls might be wrong, but it doesn't really make me feel better.  It's a nice Hail Mary if the polls look the same way they do in November, but I'd rather the polling be wrong *and* Biden be ahead.

What's frustrating is that people seem to be completely ignoring all of Trump's nonsense.  Not just the trials but all of the crazy things he says, all the egomania, all the threats he's made.  They seem to be yearning to return to 2019, but they're forgetting completely about 2020.  And even if they miss 2019, they're just assuming that Trump will automatically fix everything to their liking.  Spoiler: the president can't make prices go down to 2019 levels.  The president can't undo the pandemic. 

Maybe the debates will help.  Maybe getting closer to the election and seeing more of Trump will help.  Maybe another six months of solid economy will help.

I just don't know.  I'm starting to lose faith that my fellow Americans know how to think through this.

So I'm pretty frustrated.  Today, Nikki Haley came out and said she was going to vote for Trump.  I don't know what percentage of the protest vote we've been seeing was based on Haley's actual opinion, but I hate that she did that.  I hate the reasoning she used, most of which Trump isn't actually supporting.

I want to be optimistic.  I want consider how much polls underestimated Biden and overestimated Trump.  I want to think about those Haley voters that keep voting for her instead of Trump long after she dropped out.  I want to think that my fellow Americans aren't all crazy enough to vote for a lunatic wannabe dictator.  And, heck, I want to believe that even if Trump wins, he can't be as bad as I'm worrying about.  That we lived through four years of him already and that the system will hold and he won't be able to do all the crazy things he keeps hinting at doing.

But I am not feeling it right now.  Trump keeps leading poll after poll.  No one in the Republican party seems to want to stand up to him.  His VP potentials keep talking about how they won't accept the results if Trump doesn't win.  It's out of control, and I don't like it.  I feel like we're so close to being able to put Trump in our rear view mirror.  He's already slipping mentally, and in four more years, I can't imagine he'll be in any state to run again.  And at some point, the majority of Republicans will get tired of losing.

But if he wins, things won't go away.  They could get so much worse.

I want to be optimistic.  But right now I see the storm clouds on the horizon, and it feels inevitable.

I think that's totally fair, but then I needed a scene between Alfred and Bruce where they talk that through.  Maybe Affleck's Batman was always rough around the edges and always blurred the line between hero and psychopath, but I assume that Bruce was, at some point, idealistic.  I assume he was a good guy (basically, who he is in Justice League) and lost his way.

And if that's the case, I just feel like the audience deserved a scene where Alfred makes some sort of attempt to save Bruce's life.  Basically the same kind of scene from Dark Knight Rises where Alfred leaves.  He thinks he has one chance to save Bruce from himself, and he sacrifices everything to do it.

I don't really get Snyder's Alfred.  He seems angry at Bruce and disappointed in Bruce and seems to disagree with everything Bruce is doing...but he's just doing it anyway.  I needed Alfred to confront Bruce.

"Master Wayne, I work for you.  If you want me to help you kill yourself by fighting this man, I will do it.  And I will do it without so much as another complaint.  But I owe it to your father to tell you that you have lost your way."

"Alfred..."

"No, Master Wayne.  You owe it to me to let me finish.  When you started this insane journey of yours, I supported you because I felt like if you got it out of your system, it would be over and you could move on.  But instead of getting it out of your system, you got it into mine.  I saw the good we were doing.  The people we were saving.  But somewhere along the way, you lost sight of the goal.  The people you saved no longer mattered.  It was about the punishment you were dishing out.  And you lost Master Grayson and it got worse.  I thought some day you'd turn it around.  When you killed Mr. Dent, I thought it would snap you out of it.  When Ms. Kyle died, I thought that would do it.  But nothing worked.  Nothing helped.  You were consumed.  You are consumed.  And if none of that helped, maybe this won't either.  But damn it, I have to try.  You're the only thing I have left in this world, and that...man will kill you if you stay on this path.  Or you'll be so lost that you might as well be dead."

*Bruce doesn't say anything.*

"Okay.  It's said.  Now what's next?"

Something like that where we understand that Bruce was one thing and now he's something else.  Instead, it's all so vague.  We don't know what Bruce was like before or, if he's changed, what changed him.  Honestly, I'd be okay with whatever the answer was, but I just would've preferred an answer.

It didn't look cheap.  I thought the movie looked really nice, especially for the price that it apparently cost.  Cheap in the sense that it wasn't really even trying to be its own thing.  You can see the seams of an attempted Star Wars movie with some simple alterations to make it the minimum legal requirement for it not to be Star Wars.  One person uses lightsabers but not really.  The bad guy uses a Star Destroyer but not really.

If you think about it, you can see how it would've worked if it was a Star Wars movie.  There's some stuff he obviously added after it was no longer Star Wars involving a royal family.  But I think even that stuff probably could work depending on when the movie is set.

As I said in my alternate history essay, I watched Rebel Moon part 2.  It was definitely better than part one, but I still do not get this.  I actually think he took more chances and did more interesting things with Army of the Dead, and I think that should've been the project he hooked onto.  Robot zombies and time loops and all that is interesting (if we ever get those movies).

Rebel Moon is a very cheap knockoff of Star Wars that adds nothing.  It's just bad Star Wars with more cursing.  Part One is boring.  Part Two is more interesting (because it's the part of the story where things happen) but it's just Seven Samurai.  Nothing about it is original.

He has ambitious stories, but the problem with Snyder is twofold:

- He likes to tease things rather than actually get there.  He doesn't make a movie about Robot Zombies and Time Loops.  He makes a movie that teases those things.

- His execution when he actually does the thing he's teasing is underwhelming.  BvS is one huge tease for Batman to fight Superman, but when he gets there, it's just nothing.

If I were advising Snyder, I'd abandon Rebel Moon.  If he really loves the universe, give it to someone else to try.  Lucas only made one Star Wars movie in the original trilogy.  Own the story if you want but let someone else do the directing.  Focus on Planet of the Dead and that universe.  It might not be great but at least it's something new.

Yeah I don't really know what to make of the polls.  I listen to a lot of the 538 politics podcast.  They obviously depend on the polls for their accuracy, but they acknowledge that something about Trump makes the polls less accurate.  In elections where Trump isn't on the ballot, the polls have been really accurate and reliable.  When he's on the ballot, something is awry.

In both 2016 and 2020, the polls underestimated Trump.  The only real theories I saw were the ideas that:

- Trump voters were undersampled.  In 2016 this could've been the result of shifting demographics.  Since people that traditionally voted Democrat were voting Republican and vice versa, maybe their sampling techniques underrepresented Trump voters.

- "Shy Trump voters" - people that were always going to vote for Trump but were unwilling, due to the social pressures to not admit you're going to vote for Trump.

So if the polls underestimated Trump in 2016 and 2020, why would they suddenly be overestimating him?  Could really be the same reasons, just in reverse.

- Pollsters oversampling from Trump voters.  Maybe in an attempt to fix the sampling problems they had in the past, they overcompensated and started oversampling Trump voters. 

- "Shy Biden voters" - maybe people see polls that say Biden is unpopular or his approval rating being in the 30s and think "I can't admit that I like Biden."  I guess it's possible.  I think there's a difference in stigma in admitting you like Trump vs admitting you like Biden.  I guess there's also the idea that a lot of 2020 Biden voters are saying they won't vote for him or will even vote for Trump, but they could all come back by November. 

But when you look at actual results in these primaries, it's hard to see bad news for Biden.  Huge percentages of Republicans are voting for people other than Trump.  Even people voting after Nikki Haley dropped out.  Even in closed primaries where you have to be a Republican to vote?

Are these eventual Trump voters that are casting some kind of protest vote?  Maybe?  But if so...why?  What do they hope Trump will do?  People protest voted Biden in Michigan in hopes that he'd change his stance on Palestine.  I don't know what protest votes against Trump would even hope to accomplish.

Or are these Biden voters who are voting against Trump to make him look bad?  Either, in open primaries, Democrats actually crossing party lines or, in closed primaries, voting for the Trump alternative?  That seems to be what Trump wants people to think.  But if that's not the answer and these are eventual voters for RFK, Biden, or another alternative (empty top of the ballot), I don't know how Trump has the votes to win.  Especially if Biden can win back some of the 2020 voters he lost.

The trends have been good for Biden in the last couple of months (although that trend is reversing a bit recently).  But I'm not comfortable simply thinking that the polls are wrong.  I would like the polls to be underestimating Biden *and* for Biden to be winning polls.

Well, one thing I go back to is that most of the conservative majority in SCOTUS is fairly reasonable and has sided with reason most of the time.  Alito seems like an absolute right-wing nutjob, and Thomas is completely compromised when it comes to Trump.  But Kavanaugh has ended up being somewhat moderate, and I think Barrett hasn't been the complete nightmare she appeared to be. 

I think sometimes there's this thought that SCOTUS is full of Trump sycophants, and there's two reasons not to think that.  One, I think Roberts (despite everything) is trying to make the court not completely insane.  If Thomas or Alito was the chief justice, I think this gets so much worse.  Second, there's not really a quid pro quo here.  There's no real reason or incentive for them to be loyal to Trump - unlike people in Congress, there's not anything Trump can give them that they don't already have. 

(Note - I'm not saying SCOTUS hasn't been horrible.  Obviously, they've made some world-changing decisions for the worse.  I'm just saying a) they could be worse and b) the two oldest justices are also the two worst judges.  If Biden wins, there's not a zero chance that this flips back to 5-4 liberals in the next four years).

It's probably best long term for SCOTUS to clarify this as much as possible considering the idea that the next Trump could be much better at crime than Trump is.  But...man, I wish they'd carve out this DC case and let it move forward and let the documents case determine the high-level questions since I assume Cannon will never let that case be a thing anyway.  SCOTUS will never delay this case more than she will.