Jon rolling a crit on his History check didn't really work for me. That felt like a smarter character got written out of that scene.

That's where this show will hopefully get great. Watching characters we love killing characters we love. I hope they have the balls for it. Bronn is awesome, but it felt like he shoulda died in this ep.

I think the TV reviews here have gotten worse. I too prefer this to the ones where they just repeat what happened and make some stray observations. HOWEVER, an even better third option would be like… critically evaluating the piece.

Hahah, Jesus. Try enjoying yourself sometime.

This is silly. I am an anonymous blob and you are a guy who mostly pretends to be a character from an 80s cartoon. The idea that you would condescend to me about not measuring my words enough for anti-vaxers on a pop culture website is the kinda arrogance that can only come from a boring work day and not enough…

What the fuck gives us any compulsion to live our lives publicly? What good comes from it? Anonymously commenting while I am bored at work is one thing…

I'm not really sure endangering your kid over lies is a "team" anymore than burning them with cigarettes to protect them from the devil is.

Loved these books growing up. It's a shame they aren't adapting the books i grew up loving.

Google dragonbinder if you are curious. It's a fun rabbit hole of some crazy magic shit in the books that doesn't seem like it's gonna be in the show unless they wanna bust it out as a surprise twist that will feel wacky.

I wonder that as well. Narratively the moot was the time and place to show it. Unless that same is carrying it around (he has a similar object from an early season) and they do something really weird.

********VERY MINOR BOOK SPOILER ALLUSIONS******* The dragons have a weakness in the books. A pretty huge and game changing one. Seems way to late to introduce it though. I don't think we'll see that introduced.

I kinda think GoT works best when it's a show about backstabbing and political maneuvering so sure.

I'm sure you understand how abstract this comparison is for the sake of this conversation and what I am getting at. If not, no worries, but it's not really something I'm in the mood to dive into. It's not that important. My overall point is that Clinton's platform didn't shift to the right from where Dems were in 2008…

Oh yeah totally. I agree with all that. My posts in this thread were talking to someone who had voted 3rd party so that's what made me curious about the specifics of her failings. She was a pretty bad campaigner. It's a fucking bummer that it was even close enough for that to matter, but clearly it was.

I mean, I voted for Bernie in the primaries despite his idiotic views on nuclear power and climate change. and I was willing to (in retrospect naively) look past his inability to play "the game" effectively so I kinda get it… BUT… It just feels like we're wringing our hands about a too modest 5% improvement vs…

Calling someone a period over this seems harsh

Mkay cool. Thanks!

Not trying to hold you to the fire and fish for some gotcha. Just curious, honestly. Is this getting at the idea that if she were more charismatic you would have potentially been like "eh well fuck it." and held your nose as you voted for her instead of 3rd party? Or were there policy concerns with her you didn't have…

…I suggested *I* was being defensive rather than offensive. EDIT: Sorry, I can see how that previous post came across. I know trolls say this all the time but I'm being sincere here: If you are reading any passion or malice on my end there really isn't any. I just felt like your initial response was trying to put a…

Yeah, but then I woulda' had to work. I don't really think I said anything offensive though right? Defensive maybe?