Gus Chiggins
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2023
- Messages
- 898
The End
- Thread starter The Hedgehog
- Start date
- Status
Nick87
Well-known member
Different strokes I guess. I've seen better comedy at open mic night.
Matthew57
Active member
Trevor Noah was one of the least funny comedians I’ve ever seen so I guess it’s all relative.
Nick87
Well-known member
I was trying to remember his name earlier. Yah he was hard to watch.
SAJ-99
Well-known member
Maybe political satire isn't your thing?
ismith
Well-known member
Has to be funny to be considered satire, no?
Nick87
Well-known member
Or those guys are hacks. You ever watch Bill Burr or George Carlin?
SAJ-99
Well-known member
Uhhh, no. You can laugh at the stupidity of people, and it certainly helps get the message across for TV, but that doesn't have to be the intent to be satire.
Yes. I'm a fan of both. But not exactly the same thing as The Daily Show. Like you said, Different Strokes. The problem is TDS is 25+ years old. It isn't new anymore. We are now all aware of the stupidity and hypocrisy in politics. I guess the masses have moved on to being entertained by Tik Tok.
Nick87
Well-known member
SNL is still good from time to time.
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
Carlin, literally the greatest. I mean everyone is going to fall short of that bar.
Burr is kinda more an a-hole comic like Dennis Leary rather than a political comedian.
Some of Stewart’s jokes don’t land but he scores pretty regularly for doing that many shows and writing that many bits, kinda hard to compare him to Carlin in that regard as well. Plus Stewart has a team of writers…
Over all it’s been good to have him back for this fall, Noah cratered during the pandemic IMHO.
Unlike other talkshow hosts/comedians, John Stewart does a better job of being able to poke fun at/with either side. And both sides need heaps of poking fun of, because we’ve got a whole bunch of idiocy on both sides.
ismith
Well-known member
Our future will likely rhyme with this……
SAJ-99
Well-known member
I have to agree with the article that you have to view it as voting for more than just a President at this point. This is situations we have put ourselves in - Choosing between two candidates largely disliked and considered unqualified for the job by the majority of voters. I would hope for some changes to the election process to encourage participation of other candidates. We seem to be moving in the opposite direction, to the delight of our enemies I'm sure. It's going to be a long 8 months.
Nick87
Well-known member
No hope for the third guy?
noharleyyet
Well-known member
Only if you count Kamala as the third guy...
Big Mike?
Nick87
Well-known member
Lol. I plead the 5th
SAJ-99
Well-known member
None. Kennedy is a bit of joke. Younger, but no more coherent than the other two on the issues. Any reasonable third person (think Manchin or Cheney) has to ask if their participation would change the results for what they are running against. Hard to image the 3rd party getting 270, but imagining a scenario where the third party candidate won a state and kept either other candidate from getting 270 is possible. We are almost divided straight down the middle by population, but only a few states will actually determine the outcome. That is a problem.
Nick87
Well-known member
That's the spirit.
- Status
Similar threads
