Wow! So I guess this is a thing......
Fragile White Men Are Eagerly Downloading A Version Of ‘Avengers: Endgame’ With All Of The Non-White Male Characters Edited Out
Wow! So I guess this is a thing......
Fragile White Men Are Eagerly Downloading A Version Of ‘Avengers: Endgame’ With All Of The Non-White Male Characters Edited Out
Pull List: Barbaric,DC Black Label,Dept. of Truth,Fire Power,Hellboy,Saga,Something is Killing the Children,Terryverse,Usagi Yojimbo.
What does '16 seeders 4 leechers' mean? Is that the number of people who have uploaded or downloaded the edit? I feel like that's a pretty small number of people even if it's grown in the 2 weeks since this apparently became a thing. But then I'm not really familiar with Torrent terms. From what I can gather from google a leecher is a downloader.
Torrents work by downloading files off of other peoples' computers through a dedicated program, rather than off of some server as is usually the case. "Seeders" are people who currently have the file available to download, "Leechers" are people currently downloading the file. Though it's more complicated because after you've downloaded part of the file you can seed that specific part to others, in fact you have to because you're not given the option to stop seeding the file until after your download is complete.
It not a great indicator of total downloads, that number would have to be tracked separately.
Biden worries me
Democrats were said to be furious and hungry for change. Then Biden jumped in.
PHILADELPHIA — Former vice president Joe Biden defends his support for the 1994 crime bill that many blame for mass incarceration of blacks. He declares that most Americans are “satisfied” with a private insurance system reviled by the left. He justifies the North American Free Trade Agreement as a pact that “made sense at the moment.”
And to the dismay of many liberals, he won’t call for a study of slavery reparations, saying the nation has other ways to fight racism.
In his opening weeks as a presidential candidate, Biden has rejected much of the conventional wisdom that drove the first stretch of the Democratic nomination fight, refusing to play to the party’s liberal wing, focus on the wrongs of the past or call for revolutionary transformation.
To the surprise of many, he has been rewarded with a lead in the polls that, so far at least, has proven durable and steady. As a result, his candidacy is challenging assumptions about what Democratic voters want in the era of President Trump.
Original join date: 11/23/2004
Eclectic Connoisseur of all things written, drawn, or imaginatively created.
I think this highlights how much people were wrong about what the typical Democrat wanted.
It's rather dumb for almost everyone else to leave the moderate lane available for the guy with the highest name ID. He probably had some lucky breaks with Sherrod Brown opting not to run, and Klobuchar imploding after the staff abuse stories but it is a big chunk of the party no one was going for.
Sincerely,
Thomas Mets
In other news, the Republican Governor of Vermont became the first statewide official to back Trump primary challenger William Weld.
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/...-trump-1331312
These are small steps but it's been a while since we've explicitly had anything like this. No statewide officeholder backed challengers to Clinton, W or Obama. I don't know if Pat Buchanan had any governors or senators endorse him, and he got 38 percent in New Hampshire.
Sincerely,
Thomas Mets
Why worry? The election is still a year and a half away. Plenty of time for candidates, including Uncle Joe to rise and fall in the polls. It’s far too early to take any numbers seriously. By the by, not every Democrat obsesses over stuff like slavery reparations, something I’ve always found to be borderline idiotic and a waste of time, and I agree with Biden’s stance on combatting racism. Someone has to appeal to voters who are moderate like I am, aren’t rabid one way or the other, and, so far, Joe is doing just that.
Avatar: Here's to the late, great Steve Dillon. Best. Punisher. Artist. EVER!
Sanders' gun votes are again a potential liability among Democratic base
WASHINGTON — Sandy Phillips, who lost her 24-year-old daughter, Jessi, in the mass shooting at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado seven years ago, can’t forgive Sen. Bernie Sanders, now a top-tier candidate for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination.
Sanders, in the House at the time, supported a 2005 law backed by the National Rifle Association granting gun manufacturers broad legal protections and was one of 59 Democrats to vote for the legislation in the GOP-led House. Sanders and Rep. Tim Ryan of Ohio are the only Democratic presidential candidates to have voted for that bill, which Phillips said nearly bankrupted her family.
Phillips says she called Sanders during the 2016 presidential primary campaign when he was competing against Hillary Clinton, asking for an explanation of his vote.
“He was like ‘I’d love to talk to you about this, but I’m really busy,’” Phillips told NBC News, describing him as “extremely dismissive and arrogant.”
In early 2016, days before the Iowa caucuses, Sanders, a Vermont independent, announced he would co-sponsor a repeal of the law as he faced criticism over his position. Weeks later, he contradicted himself, saying gun crime victims should not be able to sue — only to reverse course again days later during a debate by saying, “They have the right to sue.”Phillips’ story reveals a potential political liability for Sanders, who has at times backed the NRA’s agenda over his decadeslong congressional career. In addition to his support for legislation limiting lawsuits on gun-makers, Sanders also voted against a 1993 bill that would have established national background checks.
He now faces a large, diverse primary field and an activist party base empowered by a youth-driven demand for new gun safety measures — seen in the student-led demonstrations after the 2018 mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida.
Original join date: 11/23/2004
Eclectic Connoisseur of all things written, drawn, or imaginatively created.
Inside the White House’s Quiet Campaign to Create a Supreme Court Opening
WASHINGTON — President Trump singled him out for praise even while attacking other members of the Supreme Court. The White House nominated people close to him to important judicial posts. And members of the Trump family forged personal connections.
Their goal was to assure Justice Anthony M. Kennedy that his judicial legacy would be in good hands should he step down at the end of the court’s term this week, as he was rumored to be considering. Allies of the White House were more blunt, warning the 81-year-old justice that time was of the essence. There was no telling, they said, what would happen if Democrats gained control of the Senate after the November elections and had the power to block the president’s choice as his successor.
There were no direct efforts to pressure or lobby Justice Kennedy to announce his resignation on Wednesday, and it was hardly the first time a president had done his best to create a court opening. “In the past half-century, presidents have repeatedly been dying to take advantage of timely vacancies,” said Laura Kalman, a historian at the University of California, Santa Barbara.
But in subtle and not so subtle ways, the White House waged a quiet campaign to ensure that Mr. Trump had a second opportunity in his administration’s first 18 months to fulfill one of his most important campaign promises to his conservative followers — that he would change the complexion and direction of the Supreme Court.
Original join date: 11/23/2004
Eclectic Connoisseur of all things written, drawn, or imaginatively created.