Jump to content

Tryhard

Member
  • Content Count

    4,667
  • Joined

1 Follower

About Tryhard

  • Rank
    messenger of the gods
  • Birthday 02/12/1994

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Scotland

Previous Fields

  • Favorite Fire Emblem Game
    Gaiden

Member Badge

  • Members
    Edelgard

Recent Profile Visitors

16,266 profile views
  1. I think Don might be giving Antifa a bit more credit than they deserve, honestly.
  2. i don't think he knows anything about FE. so yeah he isn't even looking at the numbers yet. I struggle to think what it would be like if he played the older games where you had to do calculations manually I don't know anything that happens in Three Houses but his chat will undoubtedly tell him the optimal way to play the game because they are boring not sure how hard normal is but I can't imagine it's super difficult so he'll probably just bumrush everything when he gets a few levels
  3. Normal/Classic a lot of talking and little gameplay because he's the master of stretching things out. there's a lot of talking in three houses and he's just so boring but he hasn't really run into anything other than the first combat trial so far and it's been four hours ...which he managed to game over on because edelgard died pictures moments before disaster "no, he survived with one hp?!"
  4. @Nobody well, looks like phil is actually going to play a fire emblem dun dun
  5. I suppose I'll also give the hot take that it truly is a sad day when/if the so-called left begs social media corporations to step in and believes they have the authority or impartiality to make the call on what are the facts. Trump is a liar, this is undoubtedly true, but the left should place no faith in social media corporations actually to represent the truth. If this was just going to be on this claim (which is demonstrably false) only, then maybe it wouldn't be an issue but from what Twitter said, they implied it would be a thing going forward.
  6. No. But she did like to tout the whole 'first female president' title more than was necessary, and some of the sexism claims made by her and people close to her campaign are/were just lame as hell. Except that's what she actually said. “They're racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic.” It's not me making up anything. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCHJVE9trSM Her entire persona unfortunately came across as an out-of-touch cold politician. One that was quite arrogant. It wasn't just that one instance. It's actually fortunate that Biden tends to be a little more likable, even if he does challenge random people to push up contests and tells them to vote for other people. I'm just kinda amazed that we're still talking about this four years later. Hillary was a horrible candidate who was up there talking about how Pepe the frog is a hate symbol, for fucks sake. Not saying you were personally shamed into it but she did seem to like using that tactic quite a bit, or just unknowingly did it, I have no idea. EDIT: I did like some of her policies! Her plan to re-train coal workers was certainly a lot more based in reality than Trump magically bringing coal back. It's just the place where most people were most likely to see some of those things (which I still think was less than other candidates) isn't one that was particularly widely watched, or cared about, it seems. Debates seem to tend to make little difference in the outcome from even past elections. I don't know, I think having the worst record on ads even below Trump, who is pretty much the king of ad hominems, is pretty worrying. I don't mind pointing out the flaws of your opponents but you do need to balance that with what you actually want to offer in exchange, and it seems like those moments were too far and few between.
  7. Several claims by herself and people who supported her that the reason people won't vote for her is because she is a woman and they are sexist. Several attacks against Bernie Sanders, his campaign, and his supporters and alleged claims of her being far more "electable". Her entire campaign really not focusing so much on her policy or what she's going to do, but rather how awful Trump is (she had the least amount of policy substance in TV ads compared to every other presidential candidate including Trump). The comments about Trump's 'basket of deplorables' are pretty much the quintessential aspect of this, even if you actually believe this is the case (she did regret this, but a generalisation like this still isn't going to go over well since she was calling people who supported her opponent 'racist', 'sexist', 'homophobic', and 'xenophobic' en masse). Why isn't she 50 points of ahead of Donald Trump? Et cetera. You really going to argue this with me?
  8. I do have to wonder if Trump does win re-election, if you will blame the voters. It doesn't seem like a very rewarding strategy, considering Hillary tried to shame people into voting for her and enough people in the right areas did tell her to kick rocks. To make it clear, I would vote for Biden if I would be eligible, but it seems like the exact same conversation is happening over and over again, and some would be so oblivious to why people are disillusioned. I'm not really as confident as I probably should be heading into the potential re-election of a game show host buffoon who talks nonsense 90% of the time, yet still has the awful policies of past presidents if not worse. There is no reflection, no introspection on the part of the Democrats. And if they lose again? Well, nothing else to blame. Dr Ford also had almost the same story to tell, including the fact that she told others at the time. If you remain skeptical I wouldn't mind as long as you didn't also jump to conclusions in that case. (This is ignoring the fact that Kavanaugh was unfit to be in his position outside of that)
  9. 'Twas not really the focus on the old white male part, because that was Sanders too, but rather on the fact that I have spoken with feminists that view Biden egregious enough to write off voting for him. Hard to argue against it without bringing up Trump as if that's some kind of gotcha. You could say that it's irresponsible for them to be concerned with that when there are people who suffer at the end of policy at no choice of their own, but it's hard for me to tell them that they're wrong and instead of voting for Trump, who they already know is extremely dubious when it comes to sexual conduct, they should vote for Biden instead, who they are personally disgusted by as well. The result? People who don't vote at all.
  10. The sad part is that I believe that without this whole corona business, Trump would probably win re-election against Biden. An incumbent is already hard to beat, unless the economy suffers under them i.e Jimmy Carter. It just so happens that bungling the response to this is something that doesn't swing in his favour. I thought the Republican party should have been unviable for a long time after Dubya Bush, and yet that didn't really happen. I don't remember Bush being so liked in 2004, and yet he still was re-elected against an uninspiring John Kerry. My biggest concern is that it is easy to make arguments against Biden that I can't really contest. I have seen sentiments from feminists I know that said they can't vote for Biden because of his behaviour. Their choice is essentially two old men who have been accused of sexual assault, and even if you are skeptical of the accusation (I am), there's no denying that Biden really has no concept of personal space from the public videos there are of him. And can I really argue against this refusal to support Biden for this reason? No, not really. And when voters are disillusioned and more dont vote, Republicans win. Perhaps I am a pessimist but I don't think Biden or the Democrats are really in a commanding position at all. (And sadly, if policy was what mattered, I don't think Trump would have been elected in the first place)
  11. sounds like crusader kings all over again
  12. My question is does it matter? Roger Ebert was infamous for claiming that video games could never be art, and yet movies which is the main thing he critiqued, were not considered 'art' for a long time compared to books. Perhaps the same will be considered in the future by most for video games. Frankly, discussions about what 'counts' as art by people are usually pretentious, so I'll wonder if the question is even worth merit.
  13. Surprised no-one mentioned it yet, but Sanders has suspended his 2020 campaign. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/bernie-sanders-drops-out-presidential-race-n1155156?cid=public-rss_20200408
  14. The implication is more about the folks the NRA and the like choose to peddle when they suggest things like teachers having guns as a solution, or the fact that having more guns than people makes America safer, when there's nothing to suggest that's the case. Those are the real hardliners that are looking for justifications about why they should own firearms, not that they just have them as a hobby.
  15. These days I can't really be bothered arguing about where gun control should go in the US - but one thing that I always despise is the notion that somehow more guns and a more armed populace makes the population safer. Which as we can tell from the US, is not true, unless the implication is that the US would be at troubled third-world country homicide status without guns. A lot of the common "reasons" to own a gun are pretty flawed in nature.
×
×
  • Create New...