Seriously, this was a dick move. No content at all. Nothing useful said. Nothing we didn’t already know. And seriously, Hodgman is in favor of the TPP? Very depressing. I guess he is an actor, so maybe he buys into the whole copyright maximalism thing.
Okay, you’re not totally dead to me, John, because I never took you that seriously anyway and you’re entitled to vote for whomever you prefer, and you can be pretty funny, but seriously, this was a really pathetic “I, for one, welcome our insect overlords.” It will make it a lot harder to laugh at your humor in the future, because it will be difficult to tell if you are being ironic, or earnest.
Meh, if you go to the bother of making a public statement about who you support you’re doing it to influence people. And that’s what he’s done. Just in the wrong direction. And equally, you can decide where to spend your money. If you don’t like someone’s political opinions, you don’t have to keep supporting them.
(granted, it might be a bit strong of a response. I stopped listening to Judge John Hodgman because I found it really boring, which I think is a better reason)
Sure, we can all cut off people who we disagree with, for any reason, at any time. That’s not the point I think @nungesser was trying to make though. These kinds of absolutist reactions are symptomatic of an attitude of not being able to reasonably disagree with someone. To not listen. To reduce a person to one position on one issue. It’s the very thing that dragged down Congress in the last 10 (or more) years, it’s what’s rotting out the Republican party from the inside, and it’s the kind of thing that we shouldn’t fall in to ourselves.
I kinda thought he was using his ironic voice here. Actually, I don’t personally know Mr Hodgman, and every time I’ve seen him on a screen, he’s been playing a pompous ass, so as far as I’m concerned, this is Boingboing.net unironically forwarding an ironic endorsement of Ms Clinton, who seems immune to irony herself.
If Hillary Clinton’s campaign thinks it has sewn up the black vote in the city, it has not visited the Gabaron Barber Shop on 116th Street in Harlem. The men getting their hair trimmed as well as those wielding the razors took turns expressing strong support for Senator Bernie Sanders. Even the sidewalk near the shop has the likeness of Mr. Sanders drawn in chalk, the silhouette of his hair perhaps in need of a trim of its own.
“Bernie supports black people, plain and simple,” said Corey Smith, 30, a hotel worker in the midst of a shave. “I’ve seen the photos of him marching back in the day, and now I’ve seen him all over Harlem.”
Mr. Smith has an 8-year-old son and he said Mr. Sanders’s plan for free college tuition appealed to him. Besides, he added, he couldn’t get past Mrs. Clinton’s support of the 1994 crime bill signed by President Bill Clinton, which set lengthy prison sentences and flooded the streets with police officers.
First the Republicans are still a threat in the general election even with Trump /Cruz. You don’t want to risk a candidate who’s never really been attacked from the right and looks very vulnerable on that front.
Second, even if you can take advantage of Republican weakness to elect a far-left candidate it’s not the right thing to do. The President is supposed to represent the whole country, not just the fringe of their party.
Third she seems extremely competent and a lot of the country is still skeptical of Obama’s accomplishments, she’s the best candidate to show the county that social liberalism isn’t scary and can be done effectively.
Okay… That’s neither here nor there on the issue of what endorsements are, first of all.
Second of all, none of the gaffe reports had anything in them about Sanders discounting the Black vote. He said he got killed in the South and that those states are conservative. Neither of these things are untrue. There is, to a gifted spin artist, a lot of little insinuations that can be made in that, but that’s what they are: insinuations. I think the straight reading is that Bernie is talking about his appeal in the general and in swing states, in large part because people keep wanting to make it an issue. This isn’t even dog whistle territory, the context of the race and the criteria people use against Sanders (i.e. electability in the general) make it fairly clear this is what he’s talking about. I understand gaffe-hunting is a popular election past time, but it is a sort of meaningless activity. Like I give a shit if Clinton ever really rides the subway. I realize that the presence of Trump confuses the issue somewhat, but it’s an election, not performance art. Bring it down to brass tacks.
thanks for the breakdown! I can disagree with each of those MUCH more persuasively!
First, to make the assumption that Bernie hasn’t weathered Republican attacks ignores his long political career and minimizes the overwhelming power the Republicans have brought into bear in local elections. Underestimating the Republican party on a local level has been a consistent and marked problem for the Democratic party overall, There’s a reason he’s done things like oppose strict gun controls.
Second, to presume that Bernie is some wingnut lefty is to make the same mistake with him that the Republicans are making with Trump: critically underestimating the candidate’s populist appeal. If you’re serious about winning against Trump, Bernie is your best bet.
Third, her trust is her weak spot. She’s not great at selling (or even, really, defining) The Hillary Clinton Dream. People aren’t getting ill-advised tattoos of her face. She’s not getting opponents on board. I mean, if they weren’t on board for Obama’s tepid centrism, what makes anyone confident they’ll be on board for Hilary’s tepid centrism?
If those are his arguments, he just seems ill-informed. That doesn’t seem much like John Hodgman to me, but maybe he’s well-insulated in that way that the mildly successful can be. Hillary’s got actual virtues over Bernie, but the ones floated here don’t hold up to much scrutiny.
Yes, she has wanted this job for a long time. There is no crime in that. It’s in the constitution! I think she’s earned it. And while I cannot predict the future, I am curious and eager to see what she does once she gets it.
Another passionate, heart felt and deeply reasoned endorsement for Hillary.
She certainly knows how to make people look inside themselves and find their grudging acceptance of the status quo.
Each time an endorsement for Hill is released, I can spend hours or days wondering how someone can recite the issues, but then proclaim the person to fix it is Hillary. George Clooney’s fund raising dinner for Hillary to fight against big money in politics is a great example. It is baffling to me!
Clinton is a far-from-perfect candidate and I very much hope Bernie wins, but this vitriol is getting over the top. The idea of having Hillary in the White House doesn’t exactly excite me but it doesn’t outright terrify me either. We’ve had a lot worse.* She’s an establishment candidate for sure but she’s not a frickin’ Trump or Cruz.
*(If anyone wants to use “We’ve had a lot worse!” as a campaign slogan that’s cool with me.)
