|
Post by queshank on Nov 11, 2024 15:00:31 GMT
Didn't you?
Queshank
|
|
genesee
Participant
More mellower
Posts: 185
|
Post by genesee on Nov 11, 2024 15:30:02 GMT
They're extremely influential people. But I see what you mean.
|
|
RWB
Legend
Posts: 12,761
|
Post by RWB on Nov 11, 2024 15:36:21 GMT
They're extremely influential people. But I see what you mean. BUT both are unliked by more people than like them so maybe they hurt harris more than helped
|
|
petep
Legend
Posts: 25,957
|
Post by petep on Nov 11, 2024 16:36:26 GMT
They're extremely influential people. But I see what you mean. BUT both are unliked by more people than like them so maybe they hurt harris more than helped Hollywood in general and these singers believe they have far greater influence than they do. And the democrats believe an endorsement from a singer will outweigh what we all see and experience daily.
|
|
|
Post by Ducksfan on Nov 11, 2024 18:06:32 GMT
Both were paid very well for their endorsement.
Meanwhile the shlubs that actually worked the campaign were stiffed lol
|
|
|
Post by Maestro on Nov 11, 2024 21:53:15 GMT
Endorsements are patronizing, especially from entertainers. It would be awesome if the general response from celebrities to someone asking whom they support in the election were, "None of your business."
|
|
|
Post by queshank on Nov 11, 2024 22:03:16 GMT
Endorsements are patronizing, especially from entertainers. It would be awesome if the general response from celebrities to someone asking whom they support in the election were, "None of your business."
Sadly I realized just how bad these endorsements are when Robert DeNiro started his tough talk nonsense.
He looks so sad and pathetic. I can't even take him seriously anymore. Now when I see him in a re watch of Casino, I cannot escape that "he's an actor pretending. Because I know the real one now. And he's kind of a goofy dipshit."
Queshank
|
|
|
Post by Maestro on Nov 11, 2024 22:11:12 GMT
Endorsements are patronizing, especially from entertainers. It would be awesome if the general response from celebrities to someone asking whom they support in the election were, "None of your business."
Sadly I realized just how bad these endorsements are when Robert DeNiro started his tough talk nonsense.
He looks so sad and pathetic. I can't even take him seriously anymore. Now when I see him in a re watch of Casino, I cannot escape that "he's an actor pretending. Because I know the real one now. And he's kind of a goofy dipshit."
Queshank
WhatI always think is, "Would this celebrity be remotely interested in hearing about my endorsement?" The answer, of course, is "no." And that's the correct answer. Why should they care? It goes both ways.
|
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,194
|
Post by demos on Nov 11, 2024 22:11:34 GMT
|
|
|
Post by queshank on Nov 11, 2024 22:37:11 GMT
lol those are fun reads.
"GIRL POWAH GONNA SAVE US FROM BAD MAN ORANGE!"
Queshank
|
|
|
Post by DaveJavu on Nov 12, 2024 0:43:02 GMT
Endorsements are patronizing, especially from entertainers. It would be awesome if the general response from celebrities to someone asking whom they support in the election were, "None of your business." It would be a little absurd coming from someone whose profession consist in putting themselves in display for the entertainment of others. You do realize that, don't you?
|
|
|
Post by Maestro on Nov 12, 2024 0:52:07 GMT
Endorsements are patronizing, especially from entertainers. It would be awesome if the general response from celebrities to someone asking whom they support in the election were, "None of your business." It would be a little absurd coming from someone whose profession consist in putting themselves in display for the entertainment of others. You do realize that, don't you? I disagree. What is absurd is expecting people to be moved to vote the same way entertainers do. When Swift first made her endorsement, people here were giddy over it. It seems to have amounted to nothing, which is as it should be. I have no issues with Swift. She appears to be a talented entertainer and certainly and attractive and charismatic person. My daughter adores her music. I'm happy my daughter finds enjoyment in that. I listened to these guys at her age. I can only imagine what my parents must have thought. But I think it is logical for me to be as interested in Swift's political endorsement as she would be mine. Which is to say, not at all. And I think that is the mature and preferred attitude for a free people.
|
|
|
Post by DaveJavu on Nov 12, 2024 1:09:50 GMT
It would be a little absurd coming from someone whose profession consist in putting themselves in display for the entertainment of others. You do realize that, don't you? I disagree. What is absurd is expecting people to be moved to vote the same way entertainers do. When Swift first made her endorsement, people here were giddy over it. It seems to have amounted to nothing, which is as it should be. I have no issues with Swift. She appears to be a talented entertainer and certainly and attractive and charismatic person. My daughter adores her music. I'm happy my daughter finds enjoyment in that. I listened to these guys at her age. I can only imagine what my parents must have thought. But I think it is logical for me to be as interested in Swift's political endorsement as she would be mine. Which is to say, not at all. And I think that is the mature and preferred attitude for a free people. I don't think you're getting my point. What I am saying is that it would be unnatural for Swift or any other person in the entertainment business to refuse to comment and give her opinion. I am acquainted with struggling actors and I can tell you that life has conditioned them to look at any interest of the media as free advertisement. So they will give their opinion when asked, about pretty much anything, making sure that their name is spelled correctly.
|
|
|
Post by Maestro on Nov 12, 2024 1:17:01 GMT
I disagree. What is absurd is expecting people to be moved to vote the same way entertainers do. When Swift first made her endorsement, people here were giddy over it. It seems to have amounted to nothing, which is as it should be. I have no issues with Swift. She appears to be a talented entertainer and certainly and attractive and charismatic person. My daughter adores her music. I'm happy my daughter finds enjoyment in that. I listened to these guys at her age. I can only imagine what my parents must have thought. But I think it is logical for me to be as interested in Swift's political endorsement as she would be mine. Which is to say, not at all. And I think that is the mature and preferred attitude for a free people. I don't think you're getting my point. What I am saying is that it would be unnatural for Swift or any other person in the entertainment business to refuse to comment and give her opinion. I am acquainted with struggling actors and I can tell you that life has conditioned them to look at any interest of the media as free advertisement. So they will give their opinion when asked, about pretty much anything, making sure that their name is spelled correctly. Swift actually demurred for years (decades maybe?) when pressed about her political opinion. So privacy for her was quite natural for a while. But that's not really the point. I described what I would like to see, not what I do see. And what I would like to see is adults behaving like adults who know that a entertainer's political endorsement should be meaningless to the formation of their own opinions. That goes both for the entertainer and his or her fans. The recent election suggests that the endorsement of an entertainer actually is meaningless. I hope so. That's a sign of maturity. Now we just need to act like it is.
|
|
bama beau
Legend
Fish will piss anywhere. They just live in water.
Posts: 11,579
|
Post by bama beau on Nov 12, 2024 1:25:46 GMT
It would be a little absurd coming from someone whose profession consist in putting themselves in display for the entertainment of others. You do realize that, don't you? I disagree. What is absurd is expecting people to be moved to vote the same way entertainers do. And I think that is the mature and preferred attitude for a free people. Even after political phenomena like Reagan and trumP? The GOP seeks out borderline entertainers to make not only POTUS, but also as their talisman or their lodestar. Prediction: If trumP vacates the office, Vance will make Elon Musk his new VP.
|
|
|
Post by DaveJavu on Nov 12, 2024 1:33:27 GMT
I don't think you're getting my point. What I am saying is that it would be unnatural for Swift or any other person in the entertainment business to refuse to comment and give her opinion. I am acquainted with struggling actors and I can tell you that life has conditioned them to look at any interest of the media as free advertisement. So they will give their opinion when asked, about pretty much anything, making sure that their name is spelled correctly. Swift actually demurred for years (decades maybe?) when pressed about her political opinion. So privacy for her was quite natural for a while. But that's not really the point. I described what I would like to see, not what I do see. And what I would like to see is adults behaving like adults who know that a entertainer's political endorsement should be meaningless to the formation of their own opinions. That goes both for the entertainer and his or her fans. The recent election suggests that the endorsement of an entertainer actually is meaningless. I hope so. That's a sign of maturity. Now we just need to act like it is. I think the main problem for Kamala is that she had far too much against her election, even if she had been perfect in her every move and choices, she likely would have lost anyway.
First there's the overhanging gerrymandering that requires a Democrat to have way more votes than a repub. to be elected, which I find personally ridiculous. We have our flaws here, but at least a French president doesn't need more votes for election no matter what party he represents.
Second, there's the fact that some Americans are reluctant to vote for a black person. I don't how many but certainly it's enough to make a difference.
Third, no woman has ever been elected as president of the US and to be the first one EVER she'd have to be exceptional, not just acceptable.
Fourth, she didn't go through the primaries and some people resent that.
Fifth, her candidacy has been known way too late (excuse the phrasing).
For these and a couple of other reasons, she couldn't win these elections, no matter how meritorious she was.
So there is no need to see other causes for the failure. the ones I've listed are more than enough to explain it.
|
|
|
Post by Maestro on Nov 12, 2024 2:02:29 GMT
I disagree. What is absurd is expecting people to be moved to vote the same way entertainers do. And I think that is the mature and preferred attitude for a free people. Even after political phenomena like Reagan and trumP? The GOP seeks out borderline entertainers to make not only POTUS, but also as their talisman or their lodestar. Prediction: If trumP vacates the office, Vance will make Elon Musk his new VP.I was speaking of endorsement. I have no complaints about entertainers serving in office any more than I would someone from almost any other profession. If my mechanic wants to run for office, I'll pay attention to his political views. If he wants to fix my car, I'm not interested at all to hear whom he endorses for office. I have the same view of my entertainers.
|
|
|
Post by Maestro on Nov 12, 2024 2:05:05 GMT
Swift actually demurred for years (decades maybe?) when pressed about her political opinion. So privacy for her was quite natural for a while. But that's not really the point. I described what I would like to see, not what I do see. And what I would like to see is adults behaving like adults who know that a entertainer's political endorsement should be meaningless to the formation of their own opinions. That goes both for the entertainer and his or her fans. The recent election suggests that the endorsement of an entertainer actually is meaningless. I hope so. That's a sign of maturity. Now we just need to act like it is. I think the main problem for Kamala is that she had far too much against her election, even if she had been perfect in her every move and choices, she likely would have lost anyway.
First there's the overhanging gerrymandering that requires a Democrat to have way more votes than a repub. to be elected, which I find personally ridiculous. We have our flaws here, but at least a French president doesn't need more votes for election no matter what party he represents.
Second, there's the fact that some Americans are reluctant to vote for a black person. I don't how many but certainly it's enough to make a difference.
Third, no woman has ever been elected as president of the US and to be the first one EVER she'd have to be exceptional, not just acceptable.
Fourth, she didn't go through the primaries and some people resent that.
Fifth, her candidacy has been known way too late (excuse the phrasing).
For these and a couple of other reasons, she couldn't win these elections, no matter how meritorious she was.
So there is no need to see other causes for the failure. the ones I've listed are more than enough to explain it.
I didn't give reasons for Harris's failure. But the benefit of her celebrity endorsements seemed to be negligible. And I approve of that.
|
|
|
Post by Fiddler on Nov 12, 2024 4:15:06 GMT
Meanwhile the shlubs that actually worked the campaign were stiffed lol Like Trump's vendors..?
|
|
|
Post by queshank on Nov 12, 2024 14:16:09 GMT
Meanwhile the shlubs that actually worked the campaign were stiffed lol Like Trump's vendors..? Keep the dream alive Fidds.
Queshank
|
|