Chapo Trap House and the rise of the dirtbag left

ok god willing this is my last post on this thread ever. i listened to the d'souza episode. they are terminally unfunny. they're constantly laughing at their own jokes which entirely amount to /references/. "better call saul." "better call saul alinsky!" ahahahahaha "episode title!" for all of u that enjoy them tho, as someone who often likes things that other ppl don't enjoy, i say go for it. but the problem for me at least is not narcissism of small differences. it's just unfunniness.

duly noted!

"it's the first cuck campaign violation" AHAHAHAHA "it's like moneyball - cuckball."

(ok sorry that's the last one)

would a new yorker article have been written if one of their dads wasn't a publishing executive and new yorker editor for 20 years?

― marcos, Wednesday, 18 January 2017 19:28 (eighteen minutes ago) Permalink

nah, i don't think it's relevant. the new yorker article was part of a p low-key web-only profile series, and it was written by a former Gawker writer (other profiles i've seen were also written by ppl who run in the same circles on twitter) so imo it's just writers in the same clique writing about each other at the earliest whiff of significance

was gonna say, tolentino seems more significant there than menaker's dad

are determined to relive the '16 dem primary for all of eternity

This ain't going away anytime soon, but as you have plenty of people still slinging " Berniebro" as it were a valid descriptor or insult, I would posit not being people who voted for Sanders in the primaries being the cause.

Plus, as mentioned plenty of times on our board, there are a great many well-heeled stakeholders who ain't giving up control of the Democratic Party. Christ, the Third Way types just dumped $20M into the mix.

the effusive praise from like the av club and paste magazine is very suspect imo

o really? You think the Chapo guys have some tapes?

also I don't know if you guys knew this but regularly recording, editing, uploading, and promoting podcasts if you're not already getting paid for it is a tremendous pain in the ass

Fuck yeah it is. I gave up trying to stay on schedule with mine.

I have a weekly thing starting soon (not relevant to tt) and I am already dreading the workload.

is that a film podcast, Simon?

I'm planning to do a Twin Peaks thing with a friend of mine who has written for Film Comment, MORE I CANNOT SAY

Are you going to edit it yourself? Editing for me is the hardest part due to how much I detest my voice and speaking habits.

Also because all the shows I recorded were like 2 hours and change, and cutting that down to something decent and inserting relevant audio takes me something like 8-10 hours an episode.

Yeah I'm gonna have to do all the work, cause my partner is way too busy with school etc to put in any extra time. I try to keep a pretty strict 60 min time limit for this reason.

This ain't going away anytime soon, but as you have plenty of people still slinging " Berniebro" as it were a valid descriptor or insult, I would posit not being people who voted for Sanders in the primaries being the cause.
THE SKURJ OF FAKE NEWS. (kingfish), Wednesday, January 18, 2017 11:55 AM (ten minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I've never called anyone a Bernie Bro (I'm aware that's hurtful)but we can acknowledge both sides perpetuate this. Seems unreasonable not to. I mean just recently I had to see so many people seemingly way more outraged with Booker for voting against Bernie's amendment (despite voting for a similar one w tougher measures the same night) then they were about the GOP taking people' healthcare away, removing protection for pre-existing conditions, disassembling the C.H.I.P program etc the same night. Not to say there aren't unreasonably anti-Bernie Dems making extreme claims right now too.

It seems like every time I object to anything a democrat does, someone jumps in with "Why do you care more about that than x bad thing GOP is doing?" Who says I care "more" about it? I still care about it. No way I'm getting on board with a democrats-are-off-limits policy no matter who's in office. Also, can't help but think the response would be different if it were Joe Manchin instead of Cory Booker. Booker is both targeted and defended because he's seen as a contender for 2020. Some of us don't really think he's an ideal choice. Some people who do seem to think the strategy should be exactly what it was in 2016 -- shoot down anyone who disagrees because they're fucking up the plan.

I mean there's already starting to be this familiar attitude around Booker of "I, professional urban person who inherently knows 'electability' better than anyone else, have already determined that this is our guy for four years from now, so you'd better not tarnish him."

the gop taking people's healthcare away is a given. that's what the gop is for. democratic voters being outraged at the gop doesn't make them stop taking people's healthcare away. being outraged (not on twitter tho) at the clinton/booker wing of the dems for its constitutional inability to effectively oppose fascism has some glimmer of a chance of making them more effective.

despite voting for a similar one w tougher measures the same night

I spotted what must have been an attempted debunking of this but no way I'm digging through the twitter archives to find it

i agree w man alive that Dem party need to 'stress test' their candidates more. but there will be a lot riding on who the Bernie contingent will be willing to endorse or vote for in 2020, and who they will see as beyond the pale. after the last primary everyone's hoping for a good unifying candidate. so far the tone of anti-Booker stuff i've seen from left has suggested he won't be that

I'm not particularly a fan of Booker or think he's a great candid choice either but (maybe I was the only one who saw this idk) certain people seemingly way more mad about that particular vote then the stripping of health care. That seems like taking primary grievance pretty far.

A lot of it seems like a reflex. This for example. The idea that HRC would have nominated someone just as bad as DeVos, like this is even a fair comparison.. Are Dems critical of Trump going to be consistently undercut by the left? https://twitter.com/baltimorematt/status/821533320383254528

(maybe I was the only one who saw this idk) certain people seemingly way more mad about that particular vote then the stripping of health care

Republicans gonna Republican - they're doing exactly what they said they were going to do - beyond a blanket "fuck them" (which I saw everywhere) there's not much reason for a progressive voice to go on about it, whereas the guy who's positioning himself to run in 2020 is going to get criticism for coming out of the gate doing the wrong thing.

Agree that it's better Booker is subject to those criticisms sooner than later. He should have just voted for Bernie's amendment since it was symbolic anyway

jfc that tweet

that tweet is awesome, brad

clean shot

Jeet Boy, Jeet Girl

effective ruling politics is not built on members of the ruling party voting for their "local interests" on national issues.

TBH, I was pretty amused that democrats lambasted Trump for picking the Hardees CEO for secretary of labor, and then the wikileaks email showed that Clinton was likely going to select Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz. Our fast food is more progressive than theirs I guess.

Yes, it is. Howard Schultz isn't perfect, but he's worlds better than Andrew Puzder. (and love how Mike Allen has become a go-to source when it serves an end)

Starbucks is not fast food

(says the guy who can count the number of times he has been inside a Starbuck's on one hand)

Starbucks is totally fast food, come on.

Yeah Bernie supporters aren't reliving the primary at all, that's only Hillary supporters. Now let's talk about these supposed "ghost cabinet" appointees to say "Hillary would have been bad too" while people who want to destroy government are being confirmed.

lol

Our fast food is more progressive than theirs I guess.

I mean ... yes? Like, Starbucks has benefits packages for part-time employees while Carls Jr. is famous for violating laws mandating that employees get a tiny break during the day?

the HRC ghost cabinet isnt about them being as low as Trump's, it's just an indicator that "Sanders is pushing her to the left" was Guess What?

What?

it was bs

Guess Jeans?

so close
http://shop.nordstrom.com/s/richer-poorer-poindexter-socks/3159594

Anyway back to Chapo, this radio play episode kind of sucks. Can't stay with it.

Would've been better if they were actually into the game while folding in all the fan service.

yeah i can't get through it

The Eminem bits may well have been the show's nadir.

Enh, I liked this ep, but I'm a Lovecraft fan, and dug that they did something this dorky.

ok I did lol at "Go Miskatonic U! The fightin' squid!"

i thought matt's stoned-on-pizza voice was funny but that's p much all i got.

Maybe I need to give it more time, I only made it about 10 mins and there was something exhausting about it. It seemed like something that would be really funny and clever at a family gathering but not something I wanted to listen to on the radio.

no it's definitely bad

I went back and listened to the Freeway Ross episode that keeps being recommended, and while it eventually got pretty funny there were 15 minutes of boring shit-shooting at the beginning. Pretty standard for a Guys-in-a-living-room podcast. I can see how people can't hang with this.

I also didn't know that half of that episode was a relatively sympathetic convo about Sean Hannity