Except the very first post in this thread, no.
2 Likes
Well, if the main criterion is impact: Breitbart / Bannon.
The list is quite interesting, actually:
Doh. Well, I did say I was for not paying attention.
1 Like
This post is a joke premised on Time magazine selecting its person on the exclusive basis of what would aggravate Trump.
Kaepernick would be a good choice, though.
I’d bet on “women speaking out” this year. It’s hard to embody the moment in a single person.
12 Likes
I’d missed that and took it overly seriously because I really think Kaepernick would be a great choice.
I can be a little thick-headed at times.
3 Likes
Scroll-happy index finger syndrome…
Looking through that list, I’m not sure how much I like the fact that the president automatically gets the spot in election years. No reason the president shouldn’t be in the running, of course, but it seems like they just full-on give it to them.
1 Like
Yeah, luckily Drump isn’t like that. 
1 Like
Movers and shakers. She moving, and she’s shaking that digit.
Tiffany Trump.
7 Likes
A man of principle and decency. A woman who out polled the person who became POTUS because of an anti-democratic, vote-nullify system.
And anyone things a do-nothing hateful blowhard and imbecile should be person of the year? Even Time’s?
That’s why I’d say Putin, because everything Trump does can be laid at his feet. It’s a two-fer.
3 Likes
Nobody trying to make the world better is going to cut it in this paradigm, because the criterion is most influential 
1 Like
Yep, but here’s a pretty good rationalisation for it:
Given what a… momentous occasion the 2016 election was, you could say it warrants two years’ PotY; so Clinton for sucking so hard she couldn’t prevent this farcical timeline.
1 Like
I want to amend my choice from a few days ago.
I think the best pick for Time’s Person Of The Year would be “The Russian Propagandist”.
I mean they are picking the most influential person(s) of the year. What we know now about what happened in November in the states to the Catalan referendum to encouraging Brexit to eastern Ukraine/Crimea to that hearing on the hill with social media companies about fake news to Russia putting new restrictions on foreign & independent media within their own borders to the Kremlin cooking up nonsense to justify crackdowns on dissent to trying to put a cheery face on syrian war crimes to RT/Russia Today being made to register as foreign agents to the White House echoing much of what the russian state media says even to the faces of White House reporters who knows they’re spewing bullshit.
Time has used that cover before not to honor that person, but put that person in a glaring spotlight.
2 Likes
Okay, this is clearly going nowhere.
Let’s wrap it up.
I’m willing to take one for the team, nominate me.
3 Likes
I say we award it to Ted Benteley.
So I was clicking through no, no, no, looking for someone I thought was worthy of a yes.
Hilary Clinton comes along, and her pictures is a little taller than the other pictures, which repositions the yes and no buttons, so that if I had continued to click without paying attention I would have clicked yes instead of no. The was only one other person out of alignment in this way, and they would have had me click between the buttons, not on yes.
It’s a conspiracy!!!
(The real conspiracy is that the highest yes vote is 26% except for the Saudi prince who is over 50%. Come on with the bots!)
Charlie Manson, whose death was a bright spot in an otherwise gloomy year?
1 Like
