DRW50

I wonder how he feels about Newt repeatedly calling him "little Trump." Newt is a passive-aggressive, mean man, so I imagine he knows how much that must rankle. Someone here already mentioned it, I think, but apparently Ailes and Trump are no longer speaking. Good luck with that TV network.

Speaking of Texas, it's voter suppression time: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/tarrant-county-gop-poll-watchers The village will have an idiot tonight, rest assured. http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/sarah-palin-donald-trump-debate-230007?lo=ap_a2 A woman who is accusing Bill of assault will be at the debate tonight: http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2016/10/former-tv-reporter-accuses-bill-clinton-of-sexual-assault-229987 The problem with this, even if you believe it's true, is that we have heard time and time again that sexual assault against women doesn't matter. It's all lies. It's a conspiracy. Yet here we are saying it does matter if it involves Bill. I notice they aren't claiming this woman was silenced by Hillary - they must have gotten bad feedback on that one.

Moonves tries to claim his giddy Trump comments early this year were fine because he was different then. (he really, really wasn't) http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2016/10/cbs-ceo-les-moonves-clarifies-donald-trump-good-for-cbs-comment-229996

More childish antics from Trump before the debate. A good writeup on what this is really about: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/the-clintonites-rat-s-ass (I don't even remember her on GH - she must have had a bit role)

The lead contaminated soil in poorer neighborhoods in Indiana is every bit as awful as the lead contaminated water in Flint but you wouldn't know this judging by how little press it gets. I know a VP isn't running for President but Pence has gotten the least amount of scrutiny of any VP candidate that I can remember! The press has daddy issues galore - it's one of the reasons they loved Mitt Romney so much. Pence is the only candidate who fits those issues. He is their hero.

I didn't realize how much Olivia Birkelund patterned her work on Phyllis Lyons until watching this. And the Dixie vs Brooke bit early on sort of shows why Dixie was such a...polarizing character.

Another example of what a petty, tiny little man he is. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/obamas-half-brother-to-attend-presidential-debate-as-trumps-guest/

I already posted that on the previous page, but thanks.

I don't really care about him as much as I'm just annoyed that this gives more of a cover for voter suppression laws.

Another example of why Twitter "comedians" do damage. http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/ohio-secretary-of-state-tennessee-gop-voter-fraud-twitter-jokes

Isn't that what iZombie does? I've never watched so I don't know.

More media gushing over Rubio. They just can't quit him. From the day of the election on expect a full court press saying he's the 2020 frontrunner. I haven't seen Chris Cillizza this enraptured since his hilarious years cheerleading for "T-Paw," who was going to win because he's the "blue-collar" "Sam's Club Republican." https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/10/18/72-seconds-that-prove-why-republicans-would-have-been-way-better-off-nominating-marco-rubio/

1984 episode. Can't remember if this is a reupload.

1984 episode. Can't remember if this is a reupload.

Someone must be laughing at Porsha.

When I thought this couldn't get any more weird... http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/10/17/conspiracy-theorists-pamela-anderson-poisoned-julian-assange-with-a-vegan-sandwich.html

Poor Helen Worth gave away a spoiler there Kate Oates is always so glam looking and poised. I think that's one of the reasons the press likes her.

Rove worked hard to drum up outrage, like the "Brooks Brothers Riot," with the men in suits protesting in Florida. I think we may see a much uglier version of that. I expect a slew of vandalism and hate crimes. I also imagine many will never accept Hillary won, although they won't whether she wins by 1 state or 15. If I'm worried about anything it's intimidation at the polls and vote rigging.

Some are, yes. It would never happen and Robert was always straight and it makes him a child abuser, and so on. I think if I hadn't actually watched the episodes, I would be more upset. As I actually have (the ones I could find, anyway), it doesn't surprise me that much, because Jack had a lot of anger issues. What did you think of the episode? I thought it was patchy and they didn't quite seem to know how to edit properly, but I'm glad they had Robert as bi and that they seemed like an actual couple. The guy who plays Lachlan was also very good, as always. I have no idea where this character is going though. The only complaint I have with Robert as bi is that he is a cheater, and he will likely cheat again at some point, which will be seen as a stereotype, when really, he's always just been a cheater. I'm not sure how I feel about that part of it. But I'm glad they acknowledged his feelings for women as well.

That second tweet is...well. Not to be rude but is Mark Helperin on the spectrum?

So…the only thing I could really think about with the episode was Robert’s story about Jack catching him with a boy and beating him. Some of that matches up to my headcanons (that Robert was crushing on a boy and terrified of his father’s reaction). Some does not (the beating). I wasn’t surprised at the outrage and thumb-sucking at Digital Spy, especially because I have a feeling some of those people may not have actually seen most of Jack’s actual material on the show (I even saw someone claiming that it’s a retcon to say Jack preferred Andy to Robert…). It’s also fun and fast to remind everyone again about how Emmerdale is laid to waste for Robron and their army of “teenage girl” fans (God knows it’s always fun to hate teenage girls, isn’t it…it’s not like they don’t have enough problems in our society). The truth isn’t quite that simple. I could have done without the story. It is a retcon, obviously, as Robert was canonically straight until 2014. While Jack was never shown as a huge booster of gay rights, he wasn’t homophobic (although you can support gay people and flip out when your own child is queer). The imagery of Jack beating his son for being in bed with another boy is searing, and I’m sorry that this is how many fans who will never watch old Emmerdale material will remember him. Yet, I also have no real time for the claims that Jack was a “lovely” father who would never hit or hurt Robert or any of his children. Or that Jack was a man of the world so would never react. The Jack of the mid-90′s to 2008 (when Clive Hornby sadly left and soon passed away) was a very different man to the worldly, haughty writer or even the relatively jovial man who returned in 1980. He was often hard-headed, bitter, and deeply selfish as a father and husband. He did beat and punch Robert - I’m pretty sure when he was 14 and upset over Andy being adopted, and again when he found out Robert had threatened Victoria into mutism. He got into a nasty fight with Sarah the day before she died that involved him hurting her arm so badly she had to seek medical attention. He frightened Victoria by smashing up her doll in a rage. He terrified Diane more than once, complete with bringing a huge, heavy cabinet full of dishes down when she wasn’t that far away from it. He was not an “abuser” in the easy, quick sense of the word, but he lashed out with his fists. He got violent and then thought later. Do I believe Jack would have abused Robert for years or gone on a homophobic rampage? No. Do I believe Jack would have beat Robert up in a hot temper and then tried to block the whole thing out? Sadly…I probably can. Emmerdale has [!@#$%^&*] on the Sugdens time and time again over the years, and often seems ashamed of its own history. Jack was a big part of Emmerdale’s history, and the best of it. I can imagine many would see Robron as a passing fad and be incensed at Jack’s name being besmirched. All I will say is to listen to what Robert actually said and go back and look at the man Jack actually was, and then tell me whether you think it’s that much of a “character assassination.”

I remember reading about that a few years ago and was surprised by it. I guess it worked out for them.

Chris Cillizza can't hide his drool over the latest Clinton e-mail "scandal." Oh that liberal media. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/10/17/hillary-clintons-email-problems-just-came-roaring-back/?tid=pm_politics_pop_b#comments

McCain gives the game away - the GOP in the Senate will not support any Clinton nominee for SCOTUS. http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/mccain-republicans-will-remain-united-against-clinton-supreme-court-nominee He tried to walk it back, but too late. He's lucky that most people won't notice or care, but I hope enough people do to make sure the Senate flips, even if just by 1 or 2 seats. Otherwise we are in for 2-4 years (at least) of no judges being put through.