POLITICS & DONALD Annoying Orange MEGATHREAD

[Nonnel]

It was just started in 2012

[Ad Bot]

[Decepticon]

if you actually think Annoying Orange didnt fail horribly last night then you're in heavy denial

i wouldn't say he did great, but he definitely didn't 'fail horribly'

[otto-san]

Did we see a "REGISTER TO VOTE" obsession on Youtube in 2012? I don't remember even knowing "National Voter Registration Day" was a thing.

This is very clearly a scheme to get people to vote for Clinton. No celebrities would even DARE endorse Annoying Orange in the type of climate Hollywood is.

or it's the more likely case, which is that this is just a highly competitive election and a lot more voters are probably engaged this year than in 2012...

also mostly this i guess lol
https://youtube.googleblog.com/2016/09/voting-matters-now-register-youtube.html

[SeventhSandwich]

Can we switch topics to this "REGISTER TO VOTE" obsession on Youtube right now?

What does it tell you when you're afraid of having more people register to vote? Like, step back and realize what you're actually saying here.

[Tactical Nuke]

What does it tell you when you're afraid of having more people register to vote? Like, step back and realize what you're actually saying here.

That's not the problem

The problem is when they say, "Hey, you should register to vote, do it for your country" and then paint a disgusting picture of one of the candidates without even touching on the other one.

[SeventhSandwich]

The problem is when they say, "Hey, you should register to vote, do it for your country" and then paint a disgusting picture of one of the candidates without even touching on the other one.

It's unfair, but at the same time, there's literally no excuse for vouching for less people voting. If someone truly supports Annoying Orange, then a bunch of celebrities in a Youtube video is unlikely to sway their opinion. And if someone supports Clinton and is motivated to vote because of this video, then our Democracy is more representative than it was before. There is no reason to complain about more voters.

At the same time, I doubt that every single one of those videos is a plot to indoctrinate people into voting for Clinton. There are plenty of people passionate about voter engagement for reasons that aren't strictly partisan.

[Poliwhirl]

more fresh Funnies hot off the presses

[Akio-]

not like u could Vote anyways

[Tactical Nuke]

It's unfair, but at the same time, there's literally no excuse for vouching for less people voting. If someone truly supports Annoying Orange, then a bunch of celebrities in a Youtube video is unlikely to sway their opinion. And if someone supports Clinton and is motivated to vote because of this video, then our Democracy is more representative than it was before. There is no reason to complain about more voters.

At the same time, I doubt that every single one of those videos is a plot to indoctrinate people into voting for Clinton. There are plenty of people passionate about voter engagement for reasons that aren't strictly partisan.

Those celebrities and I are not talking about and to people who are already into Annoying Orange or Hillary, we're talking about and to people who don't follow politics in the slightest. It's extremely disingenuous to tell those people that they should make a decision and then only tell them one side of the story. You're essentially lying if you do that; lying to the people and lying to yourself. By the way, this is the same kind of stuff they pull in the news and it's what they did during the debate; people have pointed it out already, but Lester Holt did not grill Clinton NEARLY as much as Annoying Orange. News stations will call the Charlotte rioters "violent protesters" and they'll obsess over menial things every time someone kills tens of people, like what gun he was using or what video games he played. It's a loving business at this point to not tell it like it is.

Yes, there are the videos that don't get political. That being said, I haven't seen a single video in the "REGISTER TO VOTE #HYPE2016" line of videos that explicitly said, "Hey, you should register to vote, by the way, one of the candidates is a corrupt establishment politician who accepts bribes from oppressive regimes and has a list of political enemies that die suddenly 'by coincidence'." They don't do that because they're popular Youtube channels and if they did they'd become essentially censored for holding different opinions than that of Google.

[SeventhSandwich]

Those celebrities and I are not talking about and to people who are already into Annoying Orange or Hillary, we're talking about and to people who don't follow politics in the slightest. It's extremely disingenuous to tell those people that they should make a decision and then only tell them one side of the story.

That it is, but it's still a better system to have 100% of people voting rather than the paltry 60% we've got right now. Yes, there might be uninformed voters swayed only by a Youtube video, but I'm willing to bet that most people already have established opinions on the candidates.

By the way, this is the same kind of stuff they pull in the news and it's what they did during the debate; people have pointed it out already, but Lester Holt did not grill Clinton NEARLY as much as Annoying Orange.

I agree to some extent. I feel like the part where Holt grilled Annoying Orange the worst was over the Iraq War, but that's literally just because Annoying Orange lied about what he said in the past. As a moderator, his question was based on the fact that Annoying Orange did support the Iraq War. He wanted Annoying Orange to answer the question, and instead of answering the question, he went off on a ridiculous tangent about one of his friends 'arguing for the war' in a private conversation, which conveniently casts him as anti-Iraq War.

Yes, Holt pressed Annoying Orange far more than Clinton, but I feel like he would have been grilled by almost any fair moderator during certain parts of the debate. Holt totally could have pressed Clinton harder about her position on the TPP though.

"Hey, you should register to vote, by the way, one of the candidates is a corrupt establishment politician who accepts bribes from oppressive regimes and has a list of political enemies that die suddenly 'by coincidence'."

Those are less criticisms of the Clinton campaign and more so conspiracy theories. There is pretty much no sane person that would vote for Clinton if they accepted any of that as true. So what you're really asking for here are voter engagement ads with a strong Annoying Orange-bias, which probably already exist tbh.

[McZealot]

I think one of the biggest differences between liberals and conservatives is that liberals can accept when they lose and recognize it--while conservatives throw a tantrum and lie to themselves.

[Nonnel]

idk if i agree with that. both groups are full of whiny babies

[SeventhSandwich]

I think one of the biggest differences between liberals and conservatives is that liberals can accept when they lose and recognize it--while conservatives throw a tantrum and lie to themselves.

Tactical Nuke does have a point, which is that Annoying Orange might have done better in this debate if the moderator was a little bit more aggressive towards Clinton. I kind of doubt it would make a big difference, but it's something to improve on for the second debate.

[Red Spy]

I think one of the biggest differences between liberals and conservatives is that liberals can accept when they lose and recognize it--while conservatives throw a tantrum and lie to themselves.

Did you gain this knowledge from the alt-right

[McZealot]

Did you gain this knowledge from the alt-right

Uh? What?

Tactical Nuke does have a point, which is that Annoying Orange might have done better in this debate if the moderator was a little bit more aggressive towards Clinton. I kind of doubt it would make a big difference, but it's something to improve on for the second debate.

Either way--from a pure speaking standpoint, Annoying Orange was a snivelling mess, and the crowd was wild for Clinton. Which is very unusual, and I don't think anyone was really expecting him to do so poorly. I went in ready to say Annoying Orange won.

Liberals tend vote for who won. Conservatives tend to vote for who they wished would win.