No, the primaries are over and Trump and Biden are the candidates. The only way that won't be true is if one or both of them die. There is no magic Democrat waiting in the wings to usurp Biden's place that will appear if we just drag Biden hard enough. TDS also doesn't understand this fact, given the Conan the Barbarian analogy at the end of their episode.
The primaries aren't over. There weren't any primaries to begin with. And fundamentally, that Biden gets to be the nominee because he says so is a real problem.
Look no other candidate of any worth challenged Biden in the primaries.
Go complain to the alternative candidates who didn't challenge him or shut up.
That requires there to be a primary in the first place. I'm going to go ahead and say Obama couldn't have beaten Biden this year, because it wasn't actually an open contest to begin with. I mean, for gods sake the primary process makes a mockery of democracy most years to begin with.
No, the primaries are over and Trump and Biden are the candidates. The only way that won't be true is if one or both of them die. There is no magic Democrat waiting in the wings to usurp Biden's place that will appear if we just drag Biden hard enough. TDS also doesn't understand this fact, given the Conan the Barbarian analogy at the end of their episode.
The primaries aren't over. There weren't any primaries to begin with. And fundamentally, that Biden gets to be the nominee because he says so is a real problem.
Look no other candidate of any worth challenged Biden in the primaries.
Go complain to the alternative candidates who didn't challenge him or shut up.
That requires there to be a primary in the first place. I'm going to go ahead and say Obama couldn't have beaten Biden this year, because it wasn't actually an open contest to begin with. I mean, for gods sake the primary process makes a mockery of democracy most years to begin with.
Obama is ineligible. He served two terms.
I am not a fan of term limits but it's literally an amendment.
Do better, there is no primary candidate that isn't a joke and you know it. Not even old as fuck Bernie giving a last toss in.
I love how you're all pretending not to understand the point I was making so you can just snark about hur dur not eligible instead. You weren't even the first to do it. I just called the last guy out on it. Try arguing in good faith instead next time.
Why is so hard for people to admit that there wasn't a primary process to speak of this year, and that the entire thing was never anything more than going through the motions? Short of Biden literally dropping dead, even Obama (by which, you silly geese, I mean "someone with Obama's charisma and campaigning ability" because apparently you're bound and determined to misinterpret me) would have just been ignored by the media entirely. It isn't that there aren't any alternative candidates, it's that it's functionally impossible for someone to run against an incumbent with establishment support.
Or is that the staple argument of "vote your conscience in the primary" falls apart if you admit there wasn't a primary to speak of? It's not that there's no good candidates, it's that the game is rigged badly enough that nobody wants to run.
Why is so hard for people to admit that there wasn't a primary process to speak of this year, and that the entire thing was never anything more than going through the motions? Short of Biden literally dropping dead, even Obama (by which, you silly geese, I mean "someone with Obama's charisma and campaigning ability" because apparently you're bound and determined to misinterpret me) would have just been ignored by the media entirely. It isn't that there aren't any alternative candidates, it's that it's functionally impossible for someone to run against an incumbent with establishment support.
Or is that the staple argument of "vote your conscience in the primary" falls apart if you admit there wasn't a primary to speak of?
Because people say "there was no primary this year" like some sort of shocking revelation rather then treating it as the "no shit, there's an incumbent president" it actually is.
Nobody was bitching there was no primary in 2012. Or, rather, the people that were bitching about it were laughed at and/or ignored as cranks.
I love how you're all pretending not to understand the point I was making so you can just snark about hur dur not eligible instead.
Look dude you make a bad point we don't have to pretend it's good.
Very few candidates to zero candidates historically have ever had any chance challenging their parties incumbent.
And there certainly none this cycle.
Have the clout and ability and will to take on the incumbent.
So it's pointless to talk about if you are doing more than navel gazing hypotheticals.
No, you misunderstood the post. Obama's name was brought up because out-of-context he is the strongest possible democratic candidate that could be imagined, thus used to illustrate the point that the contest was not serious.
Like for good or for ill Stewart and Colbert were the Edward R Murrow’s of my generation, which is a fucking indictment of the 4th Estate, when we had to rely on a comedian on a dedicated comedy channel to be trusted to speak truth to power.
Having one of them back is equal parts relief and terror because on the one hand it’s Jon Stewart and on the other hand, things are looking grim enough that Jon Stewart decided to strap back in to TDS
It is Jon Stewart though. And I agree when you said earlier it feels like old Jon Stewart back again without missing a beat. But old Jon Stewart had lots of blindspots. I love the guy but he had some seriously bad takes in his time too. I think he understood the conservative media machine better then anyone on TV other then other people from his show. But watching him talk about, for example, economics post-2008 was frequently incredibly painful. Seeing Jon back is equal parts "I love this guy and he's pretty funny" and also "Goddamn Jon, this crap again....".
I mean, counterpoint, and this was kind of a thing going all the way back to his appearance on crossfire (which kind of makes last weeks show about Tucker's visit to Russia doubly funny), is for some reason the guy on Comedy Central is CONSISTENTLY held to a higher standard than almost anyone else. I mean, he's an older, wealthier white guy. Unsurprisingly he's got some blind spots on economics/etc. He's more on and insightful than he's off by a LONG shot, and so far, he's been right on the money in his whopping 2 appearances, especially when he's been FAR harsher about the very same subjects to the right than he was on Biden.
What higher standard is he being held to here exactly?
The fact that a guy whose entire program has been about pointing out the incredibly ridiculous things in the news (especially political ones) has to be taken as a full on serious journalist because people get their news from him as a primary source. There is always going to be a gulf between comedians and serious journalists in terms of how they present and their takes. One has an obligation (Within the framework of their programs) to be funny, and that can mean tailoring their content to make sure the jokes are there and land (without lying, I would hope). Whereas a serious journalist has a responsibility (At least supposedly) to present the news and ideally present it without bias/spin/focus on the comedy. The sheer number of people who get their knowledge via comedians is outright scary, and Jon Stewart, as essentially the vanguard of this style of comedy tends to get picked on more so for it. Ironically, I hold John Oliver to a higher standard than most of the rest of the comedy journalists because of the nature of his program vs a "news" show (in terms of need to be timely and in depth).
But this is the same standard he's always been held to. And the same one any other comedy/news type host or podcaster or whatever is held to. There's nothing exceptional about Jon Stewart here or what people are expecting of him or complaining about.
Shit, people are giving the media shit for the same thing.
Why is so hard for people to admit that there wasn't a primary process to speak of this year, and that the entire thing was never anything more than going through the motions? Short of Biden literally dropping dead, even Obama (by which, you silly geese, I mean "someone with Obama's charisma and campaigning ability" because apparently you're bound and determined to misinterpret me) would have just been ignored by the media entirely. It isn't that there aren't any alternative candidates, it's that it's functionally impossible for someone to run against an incumbent with establishment support.
Or is that the staple argument of "vote your conscience in the primary" falls apart if you admit there wasn't a primary to speak of? It's not that there's no good candidates, it's that the game is rigged badly enough that nobody wants to run.
The primary happened.
Turns out there were no other legitimate candidates or challengers.
@Polaritie who is your challenger and why were they undemocratically denied a chance in this primary?
Would you prefer pre68 where the electorate has no say at all? Which is what a brokered convention would be, by the way?
The electorate has no meaningful, practical say this year.
Let’s not pretend this farce of a primary is anything but coronating Biden to do Him Vs Trump Round 2, except now he’s going into it with the vast disadvantage of stark public disapproval.
The point being that 1980 is a good template for Democratic electoral success?
The point being the party is running a man who has some of the worst approval ratings going into a reelection, that a solid chunk of the country has a foot in the grave, and whose base is splintering because of his shitty policies means that for the party to have a meaningful success against Trump they need to run someone without half a dozen millstone’s hanging from his neck
Would you prefer pre68 where the electorate has no say at all? Which is what a brokered convention would be, by the way?
The electorate has no meaningful, practical say this year.
Let’s not pretend this farce of a primary is anything but coronating Biden to do Him Vs Trump Round 2, except now he’s going into it with the vast disadvantage of stark public disapproval.
Who is your challenger and how were they denied a chance to take Biden on in the primary states? I'll wait for your answer.
Would you prefer pre68 where the electorate has no say at all? Which is what a brokered convention would be, by the way?
The electorate has no meaningful, practical say this year.
Let’s not pretend this farce of a primary is anything but coronating Biden to do Him Vs Trump Round 2, except now he’s going into it with the vast disadvantage of stark public disapproval.
Who is your challenger and how were they denied a chance to take Biden on in the primary states? I'll wait for your answer.
If Joe Biden were not running, there would be multiple democrats, primarily popular figures such as Whitmer, Pritzker, Newsome, etc, who would likely join Harris in an actual primary season, had Biden chose to sit this out and serve as a bridge candidate.
They are denied this chance by the informal but quite real intraparty politics of the Democratic Party that for the last few decades of the party held very much to a sense of internal hierarchy and political “turns” regarding who does and does not get to step up to the plate.
No one is able to run because the internal party politics demands that the incumbent president be allowed a clear shot through the primary season to take on a second general election, regardless of the candidates continued viability in said general election.
Like for good or for ill Stewart and Colbert were the Edward R Murrow’s of my generation, which is a fucking indictment of the 4th Estate, when we had to rely on a comedian on a dedicated comedy channel to be trusted to speak truth to power.
Having one of them back is equal parts relief and terror because on the one hand it’s Jon Stewart and on the other hand, things are looking grim enough that Jon Stewart decided to strap back in to TDS
It is Jon Stewart though. And I agree when you said earlier it feels like old Jon Stewart back again without missing a beat. But old Jon Stewart had lots of blindspots. I love the guy but he had some seriously bad takes in his time too. I think he understood the conservative media machine better then anyone on TV other then other people from his show. But watching him talk about, for example, economics post-2008 was frequently incredibly painful. Seeing Jon back is equal parts "I love this guy and he's pretty funny" and also "Goddamn Jon, this crap again....".
I mean, counterpoint, and this was kind of a thing going all the way back to his appearance on crossfire (which kind of makes last weeks show about Tucker's visit to Russia doubly funny), is for some reason the guy on Comedy Central is CONSISTENTLY held to a higher standard than almost anyone else. I mean, he's an older, wealthier white guy. Unsurprisingly he's got some blind spots on economics/etc. He's more on and insightful than he's off by a LONG shot, and so far, he's been right on the money in his whopping 2 appearances, especially when he's been FAR harsher about the very same subjects to the right than he was on Biden.
What higher standard is he being held to here exactly?
The fact that a guy whose entire program has been about pointing out the incredibly ridiculous things in the news (especially political ones) has to be taken as a full on serious journalist because people get their news from him as a primary source. There is always going to be a gulf between comedians and serious journalists in terms of how they present and their takes. One has an obligation (Within the framework of their programs) to be funny, and that can mean tailoring their content to make sure the jokes are there and land (without lying, I would hope). Whereas a serious journalist has a responsibility (At least supposedly) to present the news and ideally present it without bias/spin/focus on the comedy. The sheer number of people who get their knowledge via comedians is outright scary, and Jon Stewart, as essentially the vanguard of this style of comedy tends to get picked on more so for it. Ironically, I hold John Oliver to a higher standard than most of the rest of the comedy journalists because of the nature of his program vs a "news" show (in terms of need to be timely and in depth).
But this is the same standard he's always been held to. And the same one any other comedy/news type host or podcaster or whatever is held to. There's nothing exceptional about Jon Stewart here or what people are expecting of him or complaining about.
Shit, people are giving the media shit for the same thing.
Suffice it to say, I disagree and I think you are very wrong, even about your own stance, but I don't feel like going to pull quotes from threads and media so I'm willing to agree to disagree at this point.
Would you prefer pre68 where the electorate has no say at all? Which is what a brokered convention would be, by the way?
The electorate has no meaningful, practical say this year.
Let’s not pretend this farce of a primary is anything but coronating Biden to do Him Vs Trump Round 2, except now he’s going into it with the vast disadvantage of stark public disapproval.
Who is your challenger and how were they denied a chance to take Biden on in the primary states? I'll wait for your answer.
If Joe Biden were not running, there would be multiple democrats, primarily popular figures such as Whitmer, Pritzker, Newsome, etc, who would likely join Harris in an actual primary season, had Biden chose to sit this out and serve as a bridge candidate.
They are denied this chance by the informal but quite real intraparty politics of the Democratic Party that for the last few decades of the party held very much to a sense of internal hierarchy and political “turns” regarding who does and does not get to step up to the plate.
No one is able to run because the internal party politics demands that the incumbent president be allowed a clear shot through the primary season to take on a second general election, regardless of the candidates continued viability in said general election.
But Biden has just as much right not to sit this out as they have to challenge him?
Would you prefer pre68 where the electorate has no say at all? Which is what a brokered convention would be, by the way?
The electorate has no meaningful, practical say this year.
Let’s not pretend this farce of a primary is anything but coronating Biden to do Him Vs Trump Round 2, except now he’s going into it with the vast disadvantage of stark public disapproval.
Who is your challenger and how were they denied a chance to take Biden on in the primary states? I'll wait for your answer.
If Joe Biden were not running, there would be multiple democrats, primarily popular figures such as Whitmer, Pritzker, Newsome, etc, who would likely join Harris in an actual primary season, had Biden chose to sit this out and serve as a bridge candidate.
They are denied this chance by the informal but quite real intraparty politics of the Democratic Party that for the last few decades of the party held very much to a sense of internal hierarchy and political “turns” regarding who does and does not get to step up to the plate.
No one is able to run because the internal party politics demands that the incumbent president be allowed a clear shot through the primary season to take on a second general election, regardless of the candidates continued viability in said general election.
But Biden has just as much right not to sit this out as they have to challenge him?
One supposes Biden has the right to do many a stupid, foolish and short sighted thing.
Whether he should exercise such a right to the detriment of the entire country is the source of much disagreement.
With a handful of exceptions, that's about two dozen off topic posts in a row. Refocus, please.
Organichu, not questioning the mod decree in asking this but seeking further clarification: is there a way y’all could help us on where the line is/should be between where on topic vs off topic is for the subjects that the shows are covering?
The nature of TDS/LWT as Comedy News Commentary and Comedy Investigative Reporting makes things a bit blurred since they’re covering real world issues outside their own productions, so more guidance on where the line is on that could help tamp down off topic tangents
I think it's pretty difficult to try and frame it in objective terms. Necessarily, there will be some drift- 'haha good jokes last night, and [x opinion]'. Then someone responds- without referencing the show or the industry at large- 'actually, [y response to x opinion]. That's heading towards bad. In terms of enforcement, my thought is that it's about trends. One post here and there, or one post followed by a response by another user- with a quick return to the topic at hand- seems okay. But in this thread, it's been over 20 posts (with I think three exceptions) not discussing comedy news, Jon Stewart, or John Oliver.
I'd further add that election year fatigue is going to lead to a stronger push back against the electioneering of every single thread. Making the movie thread a Star Wars thread for 20 posts is less of a concern than literally every political thread in the subforum slowly morphing into arguments about Democratic strategy and campaigning and electability.
Like for good or for ill Stewart and Colbert were the Edward R Murrow’s of my generation, which is a fucking indictment of the 4th Estate, when we had to rely on a comedian on a dedicated comedy channel to be trusted to speak truth to power.
Having one of them back is equal parts relief and terror because on the one hand it’s Jon Stewart and on the other hand, things are looking grim enough that Jon Stewart decided to strap back in to TDS
It is Jon Stewart though. And I agree when you said earlier it feels like old Jon Stewart back again without missing a beat. But old Jon Stewart had lots of blindspots. I love the guy but he had some seriously bad takes in his time too. I think he understood the conservative media machine better then anyone on TV other then other people from his show. But watching him talk about, for example, economics post-2008 was frequently incredibly painful. Seeing Jon back is equal parts "I love this guy and he's pretty funny" and also "Goddamn Jon, this crap again....".
I mean, counterpoint, and this was kind of a thing going all the way back to his appearance on crossfire (which kind of makes last weeks show about Tucker's visit to Russia doubly funny), is for some reason the guy on Comedy Central is CONSISTENTLY held to a higher standard than almost anyone else. I mean, he's an older, wealthier white guy. Unsurprisingly he's got some blind spots on economics/etc. He's more on and insightful than he's off by a LONG shot, and so far, he's been right on the money in his whopping 2 appearances, especially when he's been FAR harsher about the very same subjects to the right than he was on Biden.
What higher standard is he being held to here exactly?
The fact that a guy whose entire program has been about pointing out the incredibly ridiculous things in the news (especially political ones) has to be taken as a full on serious journalist because people get their news from him as a primary source. There is always going to be a gulf between comedians and serious journalists in terms of how they present and their takes. One has an obligation (Within the framework of their programs) to be funny, and that can mean tailoring their content to make sure the jokes are there and land (without lying, I would hope). Whereas a serious journalist has a responsibility (At least supposedly) to present the news and ideally present it without bias/spin/focus on the comedy. The sheer number of people who get their knowledge via comedians is outright scary, and Jon Stewart, as essentially the vanguard of this style of comedy tends to get picked on more so for it. Ironically, I hold John Oliver to a higher standard than most of the rest of the comedy journalists because of the nature of his program vs a "news" show (in terms of need to be timely and in depth).
But this is the same standard he's always been held to. And the same one any other comedy/news type host or podcaster or whatever is held to. There's nothing exceptional about Jon Stewart here or what people are expecting of him or complaining about.
Shit, people are giving the media shit for the same thing.
Suffice it to say, I disagree and I think you are very wrong, even about your own stance, but I don't feel like going to pull quotes from threads and media so I'm willing to agree to disagree at this point.
We're literally complaining about the same shit from other people in this thread. These are the same complaints people have made at Jon Stewart before (you can even find them from like 10+ years ago on this forum) and that people make about other people doing this kind of thing. Look at what people were saying about Stewart and his COVID remarks for a recent example. He's being held to the same standard he always has been. The fact that he's a comedian has never absolved him of criticism.
shryke on
+2
Options
KoopahTroopahThe koopas, the troopas.Philadelphia, PARegistered Userregular
edited February 27
Jon's dog passed. Here's Jon honoring his memory as a member of the OG Daily Show Dog Crew.
Jon's dog passed. Here's Jon honoring his memory as a member of the OG Daily Show Dog Crew.
Content warning : Will hit you in the feels.
It's rough. I thought the episode itself was a little hard being Israel Palestine focused, and the possible solutions. Then they end with this heartbreaker.
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
“Two diasporas don’t make a right”
Fucking wow - Stew Beef really is the king of this format.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
+1
Options
amateurhourOne day I'll be professionalhourThe woods somewhere in TennesseeRegistered Userregular
I'm not gonna post the video because it's fucking sad but also Stewart's dog died yesterday, who he rescued when he was still on TDS and was one of the office dogs.
Goddamn I cried like a baby at that.
are YOU on the beer list?
+4
Options
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
I'm not gonna post the video because it's fucking sad but also Stewart's dog died yesterday, who he rescued when he was still on TDS and was one of the office dogs.
Goddamn I cried like a baby at that.
I just watched this. Crying as well.
Holy shit. What an amazing eulogy for a good boy.
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
+4
Options
amateurhourOne day I'll be professionalhourThe woods somewhere in TennesseeRegistered Userregular
I'm not gonna post the video because it's fucking sad but also Stewart's dog died yesterday, who he rescued when he was still on TDS and was one of the office dogs.
Goddamn I cried like a baby at that.
I just watched this. Crying as well.
Holy shit. What an amazing eulogy for a good boy.
Dude one of my favorite things about Stewart is he is emotionally honest.
It doesn't matter if it's 9/11 or a dog dying, fucker is gonna cry and be mad about it on air, and I respect that.
I'm not gonna post the video because it's fucking sad but also Stewart's dog died yesterday, who he rescued when he was still on TDS and was one of the office dogs.
Goddamn I cried like a baby at that.
Also it was already posted like 7 posts before yours.
I have to say, after years of basically relying on a "comedy" show for more reliable news that most news outlets, it's refreshing to hear Oliver just come out and own it. Between this and calling out Justice Thomas, I am 100% here for him fully committing to "stirring shit up".
"Let's take a look at the scores! The girls are at the square root of Pi, while the boys are still at a crudely drawn picture of a duck. Clearly, it's anybody's game!"
Posts
You know exactly what I meant you silly goose.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
Obama is ineligible. He served two terms.
I am not a fan of term limits but it's literally an amendment.
Do better, there is no primary candidate that isn't a joke and you know it. Not even old as fuck Bernie giving a last toss in.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
Look dude you make a bad point we don't have to pretend it's good.
Very few candidates to zero candidates historically have ever had any chance challenging their parties incumbent.
And there certainly none this cycle.
Have the clout and ability and will to take on the incumbent.
So it's pointless to talk about if you are doing more than navel gazing hypotheticals.
Or is that the staple argument of "vote your conscience in the primary" falls apart if you admit there wasn't a primary to speak of? It's not that there's no good candidates, it's that the game is rigged badly enough that nobody wants to run.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
Because people say "there was no primary this year" like some sort of shocking revelation rather then treating it as the "no shit, there's an incumbent president" it actually is.
Nobody was bitching there was no primary in 2012. Or, rather, the people that were bitching about it were laughed at and/or ignored as cranks.
No, you misunderstood the post. Obama's name was brought up because out-of-context he is the strongest possible democratic candidate that could be imagined, thus used to illustrate the point that the contest was not serious.
But this is the same standard he's always been held to. And the same one any other comedy/news type host or podcaster or whatever is held to. There's nothing exceptional about Jon Stewart here or what people are expecting of him or complaining about.
Shit, people are giving the media shit for the same thing.
The primary happened.
Turns out there were no other legitimate candidates or challengers.
@Polaritie who is your challenger and why were they undemocratically denied a chance in this primary?
The electorate has no meaningful, practical say this year.
Let’s not pretend this farce of a primary is anything but coronating Biden to do Him Vs Trump Round 2, except now he’s going into it with the vast disadvantage of stark public disapproval.
The point being the party is running a man who has some of the worst approval ratings going into a reelection, that a solid chunk of the country has a foot in the grave, and whose base is splintering because of his shitty policies means that for the party to have a meaningful success against Trump they need to run someone without half a dozen millstone’s hanging from his neck
Who is your challenger and how were they denied a chance to take Biden on in the primary states? I'll wait for your answer.
If Joe Biden were not running, there would be multiple democrats, primarily popular figures such as Whitmer, Pritzker, Newsome, etc, who would likely join Harris in an actual primary season, had Biden chose to sit this out and serve as a bridge candidate.
They are denied this chance by the informal but quite real intraparty politics of the Democratic Party that for the last few decades of the party held very much to a sense of internal hierarchy and political “turns” regarding who does and does not get to step up to the plate.
No one is able to run because the internal party politics demands that the incumbent president be allowed a clear shot through the primary season to take on a second general election, regardless of the candidates continued viability in said general election.
Suffice it to say, I disagree and I think you are very wrong, even about your own stance, but I don't feel like going to pull quotes from threads and media so I'm willing to agree to disagree at this point.
But Biden has just as much right not to sit this out as they have to challenge him?
One supposes Biden has the right to do many a stupid, foolish and short sighted thing.
Whether he should exercise such a right to the detriment of the entire country is the source of much disagreement.
Organichu, not questioning the mod decree in asking this but seeking further clarification: is there a way y’all could help us on where the line is/should be between where on topic vs off topic is for the subjects that the shows are covering?
The nature of TDS/LWT as Comedy News Commentary and Comedy Investigative Reporting makes things a bit blurred since they’re covering real world issues outside their own productions, so more guidance on where the line is on that could help tamp down off topic tangents
I'd further add that election year fatigue is going to lead to a stronger push back against the electioneering of every single thread. Making the movie thread a Star Wars thread for 20 posts is less of a concern than literally every political thread in the subforum slowly morphing into arguments about Democratic strategy and campaigning and electability.
We're literally complaining about the same shit from other people in this thread. These are the same complaints people have made at Jon Stewart before (you can even find them from like 10+ years ago on this forum) and that people make about other people doing this kind of thing. Look at what people were saying about Stewart and his COVID remarks for a recent example. He's being held to the same standard he always has been. The fact that he's a comedian has never absolved him of criticism.
Twitch: KoopahTroopah - Steam: Koopah
Content warning : Will hit you in the feels.
It's rough. I thought the episode itself was a little hard being Israel Palestine focused, and the possible solutions. Then they end with this heartbreaker.
Twitch: KoopahTroopah - Steam: Koopah
Fucking wow - Stew Beef really is the king of this format.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Goddamn I cried like a baby at that.
I just watched this. Crying as well.
Holy shit. What an amazing eulogy for a good boy.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Dude one of my favorite things about Stewart is he is emotionally honest.
It doesn't matter if it's 9/11 or a dog dying, fucker is gonna cry and be mad about it on air, and I respect that.
Also it was already posted like 7 posts before yours.
Just incredible journalism. Calling them out with total confidence.