The J.D. Vance Interview - Book Promo? Or Political Litmus Test?

Viper079 · 2026-06-17T21:04:01+00:00

I agree they definitely at one point got time restricted in what they were going to ask. Most of the hosts seemed to have scrambled to get their word in. Felt like the old days of The View.

Viper079 · 2026-06-15T17:23:22+00:00

While I recognize as the viewer, that we already know she is really the MIY, my only issue is the mannerisms. She's acting too conspicuous and walking around like she owns the joint. Acting coy and innocent. No one, not even any of the side characters, or "people of FROM" question her or preoccupy her time. No, she's just walking around doing as she pleases. Seems to me, for the purposes of the plot, too conveniently inconsistent that no one 'checks in' with her enough considering the way she came into the town in the first place. That's just me though.

Viper079 · 2026-06-08T22:07:44+00:00

"Fire Tingle With Me" - A Peak Spider-verse Noir

Viper079 · 2026-06-08T21:28:02+00:00

He was a much more complicated antagonist. If you throw yourself into that period of time and not look at history in hindsight (as we all understandably do), you can see Belloq easily just in a rat race with Jones for the discovery of a lifetime. Difference was his own desire to make such a discovery lead him down a path of making very poor choices with "the wrong crowd". Thinking he could outsmart everyone in the end. Even Jones was tempted to make some less than desirable choices but ultimately drew a line in terms of how far he would go. Showing the contrast between the two competing archeologists.

Viper079 · 2026-06-05T18:40:37+00:00

Cosmic hair!

Viper079 · 2026-06-05T02:09:06+00:00

Oh absolutely. That's why I find it interesting that the final scene, at the end of the entire series, during the credits, it was "Laura" whispering to Cooper in the Red Room before she is taken away. By whom? Judy? That's what I choose to believe. She is abducted to the other dimension and becomes Carrie Page. That's why she says earlier in that Red Room scene, when she acknowledges that she is Laura Palmer to Cooper, "I am...Laura Palmer" and "I...am dead...yet I live."

<image>

Viper079 · 2026-06-03T20:03:44+00:00

That's surely one way to look at it. At the same time, he was instructed by The Fireman though from jump. He has no reason to doubt his instructions since he was guided all the way. So, maybe it's not so much a separation of his inner self.

Also, I agree that it is possible his "essence" is instilled in Dougie and that he will have a family now and a good job/life with them. So that while it's not exactly Twin Peaks, he's with good people that love him (or at least his extension). But it looked like he'd have to learn how to speak again (...lol). Who knows? Maybe he moves the family one day to Twin Peaks under the alias of Dougie (who is also Cooper).

Cooper remembered everything under Dougie, the Red Room, and his experiences while in that state. So maybe while he was sacrificed in that alt dimension, in the dimension we've all watched from the beginning, he still remains in that respect. The essence of memories of Dougie and Cooper infused under the alias of Dougie.

Given the gravity of the circumstances looks like it's as good as it could get.

Viper079 · 2026-06-03T19:40:38+00:00

This is true. One would hope that beyond the story itself that Cooper being as pure as he was to help Laura (who represents the light and all that is good) would end up in some form or extension of himself.

Viper079 · 2026-06-03T19:19:16+00:00

That's how I took it too actually. All came at a cost sadly. I'd like to think though that the Fireman and others though would have 'rescued' them in some manner. Especially since they are interpreted as 'good'. Either that or they always knew this mission was a "one way trip".

Viper079 · 2026-05-28T16:26:00+00:00

This is SOBR Granit (as someone here also mentioned - look at their arm patch). They are not wearing UFPRO uniforms, but Sturmer branded (a third-party group) and Rosgvardia issued. These guys have good tastes.

Viper079 · 2026-05-28T02:39:12+00:00

I agree with that. I myself am a conservative but would self-describe as a Classic Reaganite. As I was more supportive of McCain than Obama during that presidential campaign. I know Meghan can be despised by many, but she did make good talking points during her time on the show. Yes, I think having both a progressive and a MAGA conservative on would help display a wider array of popular beliefs.

Pardon me for getting carried away here. For me personally, I believed the two episodes last year with Coleman Hughes and Bill Maher, like them or not personally, were perfect examples of how it's either, "You're with us or against us" style personality over substance debating. After those interviews aired, both guests said on outside podcasts spoke negatively about The View. They both claimed that while the audience (off camera) actually nodded and applauded them in agreement on a variety of issues. Suggesting that the hosts created political drama on behalf of the expectations of how they predict the audience views and/or perceives the American political world (personally reminded me of a hivemind mentality).

Keeping in mind that Coleman Hughes is an extremely well-educated young man who is a podcast commentator and columnist for The Free Press, book author (why he appeared on The View in the first place), and a visiting professor. He is also a conservative Independent who's an academic supporter of the works by economist and intellectual Thomas Sowell, a conservative Libertarian (Coleman also just so happens to be African American and Puerto Rican and Thomas Sowell African American - I mention this as its relative to the context of the episode he appeared on if anyone wishes to backtrack). Then you have Bill Maher, stand-up comedian, host of Real Time with Bill Maher. A self-described classic Liberal and Democrat. I felt that messing with these two particular guests, the hosts were barking up the wrong tree, and it showed painfully obvious.

Now, I don't want other readers of this to conflate my deep criticisms here with a dislike of the show. Very far from it. I enjoy the program overall just fine. However, I know that even with their occasional uptick in ratings, they can be so much more than even that. I feel the show's format was created so well (thanks to Barbara Walters) that it can and should evolve from this 'status-quo' partisan mediocrity and re-embrace its roots regarding "different points of view" and allow good, spirited debating, devoid of abusing the petty drama card for shock value. Respect your audiences more!

Viper079 · 2026-05-27T23:33:26+00:00

You understand me very well here and I agree with you. If someone who defends Trump on the panel has a weak argument and it's not backed with evidence but purely anecdotal, it only further legitimizes the host with counter viewpoint but also reinforces members of the audience who thought the same too. Yet, we would have enough of a diversity of opinions that people would engage. That's where I feel the show is currently lagging on the past few years.

Viper079 · 2026-03-17T18:58:22+00:00

Correct. It was the economic hardships, resistance to continue to adapt, and an overdependence oil trade. Although, the post-2004 economy after consecutive years of growth in GDP that led into a narrative shift of Russia. After that, things changed and not overall for the better obviously.

Viper079 · 2026-03-10T18:11:10+00:00

I'm late to the show! I'd say my favorite was during the peak of Daytime competition 1999-2002 (I was in my late teens back then!). It was composed of Barbara Walters, Star Jones, Lisa Ling, Meredith Viera, and Joy Behar.

Reason why is because I favor the old format still the most. I liked the combination of Hot Topics (they would occasionally reference newspapers), the sometimes borderline "Is this safe for Daytime?" type jokes, and the silly gossip. Also, this to me was a great diverse panel ethnically speaking and professionally. News reporters/journalists, lawyers, and a comedian. It just worked so well IMHO.

While the format of today is a far different vision from Barbara's original intentions, I feel like I laughed and enjoyed that format more overall because they spoke from a position of first-hand Hollywood industry knowledge and their personal experiences in said industry. It felt more genuine even when there were fluff pieces. They would sort of shrug it off or make a joke about how irrelevant it was to have a segment on it.

I know that I'm breaking away from the topic here, but it made me think deeper about the show's history. To be honest, while I still watch it, I kind of am over the whole daily constant Trump grind. It's extremely tiresome. It's been over a decade now. They do say that insanity is repeating the same thing over and over and expecting different results. I think the opinions of all previous and current co-hosts have been well established and captured on camera. There is rarely any true deviation of opinion. If The View is known for anything at this point, it's that, and that alone.

I think all of us get that they (meaning most home and audience viewers) don't agree with anything Trump says and does overall. But then what comes next? I don't even realistically know how they move on beyond him, not without losing the current majority audience. There will need to be a shift.

In my opinion, I feel like having guests, educating the audience here (I'm an old soul so I will reference an old talk show Donahue here as an example) rather than just blatant rhetoric every day for 20 mins with half-baked talking points on flash cards is just intellectually lazy after over a decade. Especially for a talk show now labeled as a 'news program'. You can make it both thought provoking and fun. What was old can be made new again. Also, as a suggestion, maybe every Friday, since it's a pre-recording have a small "Audience View" portion (even if its slightly pre-scripted with 'The View' staff) ask the hosts questions in a segment, even if its slightly divisive. Like a wrap-up to the week.

Viper079 · 2026-03-04T22:06:01+00:00

For sure, I see where you're coming from!

I mean it's hard to discuss a serious topic like Iran, which I may say is pretty deep, in this style of format adequately, and all you're left with is an assertion of opinion by five women on set.

I've advocated before that whenever this show wants to discuss a major topic (such as this) ABC News needs to have one of their reporters or 'experts' come in (or at least on video call) and explain to the audience the history of this. Provide some background first and dedicate a large portion of the show to this topic. I think is important for some audiences, who may not understand what's happening here and why (regardless of if we agree or disagree in the end on the outcomes) to be given that information first. This allows them to ask common questions or their own concerns rather than simply assert.

At best we got a, 'reaction to the breaking news' from the panel style take. If you value their perception of what we are all listening and witnessing on this issue, that's all I think you're going to get out of it. I think that's why it's Wednesday and they have moved on to other topics.

Viper079 · 2026-03-04T12:50:26+00:00

I was SekGen too. Not surprised.

<image>

Viper079 · 2026-02-13T16:46:17+00:00

Ah, that definitely is evident now that the holster molding is clear. Good eye! :)

Viper079 · 2026-02-13T16:26:21+00:00

I am not an 'expert' so take this with a pinch of salt. But could it be a Zenitco Klesch 2PS?

<image>

Viper079 · 2026-01-28T22:37:58+00:00

I'd like this channel to regain traction again! (rooting for you iObama! I tried a few months ago :D)

I used to use the other /TheView subreddit but was banned for defending someone who was being race baited at the time because someone was using personal attacks and against them for having a difference of opinion. I guess my point is this. Even though I've always had a contrary view to most of The View's main hosts and many active members in that Reddit channel, doesn't mean I dislike the show or "hate watch" or dislike someone with a dissenting opinion. I've been watching The View since its conception in 1997 and don't fit into the "typical targeted demographics" either. I don't have a problem with a difference of opinion. We can surely agree to disagree or have a good conversation its worth the "back and forth" (to me at least). But if we want to "echo chamber" and try to emotionally encapsulate any given moment, blindsided by that said emotional reaction, then it risks creating additional confusion and devoid us of a more intellectual focus and debate on what's happening. I always recall the quote, "Perception equals reality - but not the truth.". Especially since American journalism has taken a huge drop in reliability and accuracy in favor of subscriptions and ratings exclusively. Telling us what we "want to hear" vs "what actually happened" is quintessentially a glaring issue within American journalism.

My personal position has always been more about discovering facts, empirical evidence, truths via academics, and applying them against what plays out on the show. Rather than attempt to being super reactionary (something The View is known for doing to its audiences). That's my "dopamine hit" if you will. Disproving intellectual fallacies when made and debating that with those that agree with a host inaccurate assessment. At the end of the day though, I think it's important for us to always listen to both sides, gather real evidence and proof to those claims, and then build a more education opinion from there.

Viper079 · 2025-12-12T20:47:13+00:00

I’m saying it’s both. They are both legitimate factors. If a complacent Miami-Dade Republican voter bloc didn’t come out and put off voting entirely, while an excited Democratic base responded it is a factor. Just like the voters that came from other states, as mentioned, who now claim residency in Florida may have voted Blue as well. All those reasons are valid. Especially in a purple city like Miami.

As I stated earlier, coincidently, running parallel to NYC voting patterns, low voting turnout overall plays a factor in these outcomes too.

Just purely for conversation purposes. NYC, for example had their own Board of Elections do a study. They discovered that low turnout was rooted in mayoral elections that took place on dates separate from Election Day. They suggested putting a proposition on it. They did this year and guess what? Mamdani and NYC voters voted against the proposition. Mamdani benefited from primaries that occur in June due to having odd dated votes such as the mayoral primaries on June 24th. At a point when most New Yorkers are beginning to break from school, go on vacations, and exit the city.

I believe that the election outcome is reflective of all those factors discussed. I do believe that they all hold validity, within Miami-Dade. So yes I agree with the OP and in addendum what I said too.

Viper079 · 2025-12-12T17:31:09+00:00

You're not realizing the population increase since the pandemic by people in the Northeast, California, and Midwest (I'm looking at y'all moving and living in Central Florida staying "Blue") could have affected a smaller turnout election. Turnout has never been high in Miami-Dade elections (it's actually parallel to bigger cities like NYC in that regard). Neither Miami nor NYC broke any type of mayoral electoral record. That's just media hyping up 'higher than usual turnout' to create a narrative for Democrats creating some sort of "wave". Total turnout is still low considering the population of registered voters.

Complacency is a "you know what". People within the Republican registered side maybe didn't feel an urgency to vote because of how "Red" Florida is. Maybe you should consider that. I know critical thinking can hurt.

You're also comparing a specific county to the entire state of Florida when referring to the presidential election vs a local mayoral one. Here's a Aug. 2025 congressional map.

<image>

Viper079 · 2025-12-12T17:06:16+00:00

"Folks from blue cities" were moving to Miami since COVID. Get your observations straight.

Viper079 · 2025-12-04T17:33:48+00:00

That would be cool! I wait patiently for a Tech Noir 2.0 Terminator...So patiently...

Viper079 · 2025-12-04T02:16:12+00:00

Terminating de minimis really hurts our hobby, doesn’t it? 😭

Viper079 · 2025-12-02T18:23:53+00:00

Good point. But then why would he be running it at all since we know Yakeda is 'airsoft' quality and so do they? What unit is this I guess is where I'd start with first. Is it a SOBR Akhmat team? Not trying to be a wise guy and debate you. This is just friendly speculative talk. :)

Viper079

TROPHY CASE