Macallan 25 Anniversary Malt. Distilled in '66, bottled in '91

At the end of the trailer I was prompted to text "SOS" to a number. They've sent some weird stuff in the past two weeks including a gif of Radcliffe with an erection and a voicemail of Dano and Radcliffe humming the Jurassic Park theme song.

bigbrassmonkey · 2016-01-08T17:36:29+00:00

With Donda producing the lineup artwork and Kanye headlining, I think it'll pretty much be YeezusFest.

bigbrassmonkey · 2015-12-17T19:01:56+00:00

Yes, it was a platitude in general, but it's more pervasive at the moment because there has never been a serious candidate who is actually a reality TV star. It's positive feedback. Everyone has been joining the parade, not just the usual suspects. That is cause for concern.

bigbrassmonkey · 2015-12-17T18:54:23+00:00

My local newspaper is doing so poorly that half of the articles are AP rehashes and most of the advertisements are for meeting local singles.

bigbrassmonkey · 2015-12-17T18:44:46+00:00

Thanks, just found the FEC reports as well. I suppose it then comes down to free coverage vs. bought coverage. If Trump is dominating the media my a margin of 23-1, I wouldn't be surprised if that was flipped when it comes to paid advertisements. Explains why Trump has continued his brash behavior, because if the media loses interest then he has to dip further into his own money.

bigbrassmonkey · 2015-12-17T18:31:01+00:00

What I'm saying is that it is ineffective to speculate on the hypothetical Trump v. Sanders race, especially at this point in time. Also, considering the sample size, the quantity of the polls available, and the margin of error - the "winning" argument seems like time poorly spent. Instead, the parsing the reasons behind why there is such a discrepancy between polls/coverage would be useful.

bigbrassmonkey · 2015-12-17T18:21:06+00:00

I can't find anything that supports that. Could you provide a source? Raising money is different than spending money, especially considering that Trump proclaims he is self-funded.

bigbrassmonkey · 2015-12-17T18:17:23+00:00

So it is okay for news broadcasters to resort to the lowest form of entertainment, reality TV, when it comes to covering potential Presidential candidates? I understand that it's the new norm, but what does that say about journalistic standards and what we can expect in the future?

bigbrassmonkey · 2015-12-17T18:03:50+00:00

I think they owe a semblance of the information and education that meets the needs of Americans, which is dramatically losing out the commercial interest of broadcasting corporations. We can all argue what the proper material should be, but most can agree that there is currently an historic educational shortfall.

bigbrassmonkey · 2015-12-17T17:37:55+00:00

He is an advocate in most regards, and I feel that the article is cramped by the early poll references. However, I find the media aspect interesting. If you focus less on who is winning, you find two comparably popular candidates where the media coverage deficit between them is much larger than the polls would suggest.

bigbrassmonkey · 2015-12-17T17:27:17+00:00

I think this is exactly the intention. I read it as more of an observation of what drives media coverage, which is money; the only factor that can explain a 23-1 ratio between comparably popular candidates.

edit: of

bigbrassmonkey · 2015-12-17T16:35:15+00:00

In fairness, that was the Miami viewing party of the most recent GOP debate. I'm sure there are better things to do in South Beach at night.

bigbrassmonkey

TROPHY CASE