General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhy do they make Jackie out to be a cartoon version of a liberal on Roseanne ?
I live in SoCal so I come into contact with a lot of women who are anti-Trump. I have yet to meet one outside of a march who was wearing a pussy hat as if it's part of everyday garb.
Is she going to be Roseanne's foil ?
B2G
(9,766 posts)They are supposed to completely change her show personality? How believable would that be?
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)Now Roseanne is a sane character and Jackie is a bit of a loon and her foil.
Keeping with the theme of demeaning liberals Roseanne will "school" her liberal granddaughter in the next episode:
Link to tweet
EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)Oh, wait a minute. Her black daughter-in-law is out of sight and silent.
How conveeeeeenient.
B2G
(9,766 posts)You have no idea how they might develop the character.
Demsrule86
(68,667 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)I haven't watched any of this but am getting intrigued. DJ married the black girl he didn't want to kiss in a play.
I want to hear, though, that there's at least one normal liberal like most of us, not a flaky right-wing charicature of the left, in the main cast and that this isn't Roseanne agitprop trying to fly under the radar as comedy.
B2G
(9,766 posts)And she's the smartest one of the bunch.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)B2G
(9,766 posts)Her character is hilarious.
B2G
(9,766 posts)There was little to no politics even mentioned.
I saw the tweet. It sounds like she'll be schooling her on respect, not politics. I'll let you know since you won't be watching. Although I'm sure you will have a plethora of opinions.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)Why would I watch when she suggested all opponents of Trump, which I presume includes every member of this board, are pedophiles :
B2G
(9,766 posts)Just a thought.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)How do you have an intelligent discussion with someone who suggests all opponents of a political figure are pedophiles ?
B2G
(9,766 posts)And I will continue to watch because I love the writing and the cast, most of who are liberal.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)I won't put money in the coffers of someone who suggests Trump opponents sexually assualt children.
Ratings = Money
cwydro
(51,308 posts)no one knows or cares what you watch.
Jackie was NOT portrayed as unhinged.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)Thank you in advance.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)but reading from people who don't agree with her personally that the first episodes are good has changed my mind. I'll check it out. But otherwise, I'm inclined to agree on the value of opinionating on a show we haven't seen and don't intend to.
The original Roseanne show routinely addressed issues of working class life. I disagree with B2G that it didn't have a political agenda just because it didn't mention political labels. I saw it as a counterpoint to the uber-perfect picture being portrayed of the lives of upper-class Claire and Heathcliff Huxtable running mostly concurrently.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)The Cosbys existed to portray African Americans as successful and serious as an antidote to the sitcoms where they weren't. It was an aspirational program.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)scrupulously cleanly both because it comes naturally to them but also in good part for much the same reasons -- to not provide enemies ammunition and as living examples of who successful black people are.
But the fact is that in portraying the Huxtables that way, The Cosby Show was more than a little bit a 1980s black version of the 1950s' Adventures of Ozzie and Harriet. Claire was a career woman who didn't need a housekeeper because her beautiful home was always immaculate and whose children never got away with anything--she maintained connections with a web of spies in her neighborhood. I often felt they were giving parenting lessons.
When the Roseanne show started a few years later, it provided a strong working class counterpoint to all that unattainable upper middle class perfection and complete lack of financial worries. No accident.
misanthrope
(7,428 posts)I recall an episode wherein one daughter and her son wanted to take a break from pursuing careers in medicine and law in order to open an "outdoors store." Claire and Cliff made their condescension and disapproval known.
I found it odd parents would be so negative about their child wanting to branch into entrepreneurship. You would think they would be willing to help them craft a business plan and approach it in a reasoned fashion rather than reflexively look down their noses at them.
When considering it further, it was an odd behavior to write into a script considering Cosby's path to success -- stand-up comedy and entertainment -- is so tenuous and flighty as to make retail ownership look rock steady in comparison.
misanthrope
(7,428 posts)were the white folks I knew who used it as rationale for their willful ignorance toward racism. "See, all them blacks is doing just fine. Ain't no problems no more."
RandomAccess
(5,210 posts)I'll look forward to your review. I've seen people trash the whole show because of Roseanne, without having seen it or even read decent reviews. It's their choice, but they're speaking out of a certain level of ignorance on the subject. Heck, I think even the writers are the original ones.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)I missed that.
jumptheshadow
(3,269 posts)Our entertainment choices are monitored down to the Nth degree, and not just by Nielsen, for advertising, decision-making and contract negotiation purposes. You think that the dish networks and cable companies don't monitor or care about which programs we watch, especially when there are millions of dollars riding on our decisions? Is it your view that they don't care about which platforms -- live TV, on demand, or apps -- attract the most usage?
AdamGG
(1,294 posts)If cable/satellite companies are monitoring what you watch, it's not the data that is used for the ratings that matter.
jumptheshadow
(3,269 posts)Indeed, TV seems poised to enter a post-Nielsen era in which networks use their own methods to arrive at different types of ratings. Nielsen may no longer be a one-stop shop for measurement at a time when the industry is eager to go beyond simple demographics. But such overall ratings likely will remain a key ingredient amid a more diverse mix of metrics that could also mean more influence for measurement rivals like comScore. To keep the mass numbers that big-spending advertisers need, media companies are likely to broaden the set of tools they use to verify audiences scattered across the plethora of screens.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Some of us to separate. shes truly gone round some sort of brainwashed bend. So shes on a list of things Im not going to normalize or support.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)I am doing my best not to respond in kind.
Next thing you know they will be attacking me for not patronizing the work of Scott Baio, Ted Nugent, Antonio Sabato, and Kid Rock.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)I was never a huge fan, so its easy for me. But yeah, the comments here are pretty mean spirited. I think people are a feeling a bit defensive about it, and its weird. Fans, meh.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)It would be nice if the people here who like her extended the same courtesy to me and the others who don't.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)My thinking is either she is cynically trolling us to appear relevant, or shes really gone round the bend. Either way, theres too much rancor and ignorance out there now to think theres anything special or interesting about it.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)The interesting thing is how many of them she has deleted. This suggests she knows what she's doing.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Which is why I just SMH and ignore her.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)Trump and Roseanne should upset everybody with a sense of right and wrong, not just liberals.
Demsrule86
(68,667 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)I did watch the first iteration of Roseanne from time to time but I was never a devoted viewer.
AdamGG
(1,294 posts)I don't have much patience for normalizing Trump, but she did some quality work in the past.
Demsrule86
(68,667 posts)was never a fan of the first show for the same reason I didn't like Married with Children...it seemed to celebrate ignorance.
Cha
(297,655 posts)between the CT Lying trump pushing idiot and her stupid show pushing to normalize trump.
Link to tweet
Why give that shite for brains ratings for abc.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)it. I really dont care if shes greedy or lost part of her mind. The results the same, its flinging the same hateful propaganda.
lunatica
(53,410 posts)I dont see a long run for this show. Trying to unite the Trumpites with liberals (everyone else) wont work for the same reason we dont like it, only the reasons are from the other side.
Any attempt at showing the middle in our polarized populace will fail on both sides.
Demsrule86
(68,667 posts)Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)That's no accident.
It doesn't matter what the supporting cast is. All that matters is Roseanne. She controls everything, even the writing.
She called Huma Abedeen, Hillary's assistant married to Anthony Weiner, a "filthy Nazi wh__re." https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/30/opinions/trump-likes-roseanne-barr-of-course-he-does-obeidallah/index.html
A person who said that, in public no less, has started a show that contains pro-Trump propaganda, that will last leading up to the 2020 election. And some Democrats are saying they're okay with that?
Advertising works. That's why companies spend billions on it. Roseanne show is one long advertisement, and it WILL have an effect. It already has.
Kath2
(3,089 posts)She has totally lost it.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)CatMor
(6,212 posts)of a scene with her wearing the hat and t-shirt and she looked ridiculous. I do think it's being done deliberately. It's one thing to wear the hat and t-shirt in a march but to portray it as every day attire is not realistic.
B2G
(9,766 posts)Not to portray it as 'every day attire'. They hadn't spoken since the election, so she had them on when they first met after a year.
Which you would know if you had seen the show.
CatMor
(6,212 posts)but it's only a TV show, not worth fighting over.
cwydro
(51,308 posts)Those of us who are not obsessed with this are being called names now.
B2G
(9,766 posts)Paper thin skin is running rampant.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)and speaking in a normal voice tone with a smile on her face.
That's called advertising and propaganda.
But you know that. And you approve, apparently.
Proud liberal 80
(4,167 posts)Seems like they want to make liberals look crazy and irrational, while trump supporters are calm and rational
Cary
(11,746 posts)"They" know suckers when they see them.
Demsrule86
(68,667 posts)ornotna
(10,807 posts)After all, in real life Roseanne is a cartoon character of a human being.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)B2G
(9,766 posts)Her very liberal daughter.
Tipperary
(6,930 posts)How funny you keep commenting on something you have not viewed.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)I will be the bigger poster, take the high road, and not respond in kind, for now.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)https://www.esquire.com/entertainment/tv/a19635281/roseanne-reboot-2018-review/
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)In fact, someone who likes truth cannot, by definition, be a Trumper.
It's fake. It's propaganda. One long Trump advertisement.
Apparently it's working. Advertisements work. That's why Trump loves it. He's pushed the show twice on stage, that I know of. And called her to congratulate her. He knows what you do not, apparently. Advertising works.
Look for his poll numbers to go up. And Democrat success in the mid-terms to go down, as Roseanne pushes Trumpers to be enthusiastic and vote.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)In the series Roseanne, the Deplorable, is portrayed as grounded. Jackie, a member of the #resistance, is portrayed as unhinged.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)She is not in reality a "sensible" person, since she's a Trumper. But they're TRYING to present her in a way that glorifies Trumpers and presents her as someone who a Trumper wants to be or sees themselves. But she does not portray the average working woman, in reality. Most average working women are not Trumpers.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)That being said I have a lot of faith in the resistance. It will take more than her series to derail us/ them.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)Advertisement WORKS. It absolutely does. It doesn't have to be true to work.
"A great time for my new/old tv show!"
https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/30/opinions/trump-likes-roseanne-barr-of-course-he-does-obeidallah/index.html
I don't know why I bother, if Democrats now are supporting Trumpers.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)-Honeycombe8
Is it not our job to lead these poor misguided souls out of the darkness ?
I feel like the Apostle Paul. I fought the good fight. I finished the race. I kept my faith.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)are responding, "Well, we should consider all theories." Even when posters are citing as sources RW hack sites that plainly state "Donald Trump for President."
Seriously...the infiltration is amazing. I don't see a way around that, when even Democrats are now going along with Trump.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)My work here has become even more important.
jalan48
(13,883 posts)mucifer
(23,565 posts)jalan48
(13,883 posts)mucifer
(23,565 posts)B2G
(9,766 posts)Not a sitcom per se, but comedy just the same.
jalan48
(13,883 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)There was an episode where one of the characters was searching for his roots and went back to his home in the Holler. It was funny.
nolabear
(41,991 posts)Its a perfect role for her.
jalan48
(13,883 posts)leftynyc
(26,060 posts)Is overtly liberal.
jalan48
(13,883 posts)leftynyc
(26,060 posts)of "flyover" country since the last time the show was on - as New Yorkers have been known to do.
Tipperary
(6,930 posts)They also have a pro-trump character.
jalan48
(13,883 posts)former9thward
(32,077 posts)If you showed people as they really are it would be boring and unfunny. That model doesn't work for a sit-com.
Lint Head
(15,064 posts)regnaD kciN
(26,045 posts)...IF All in the Family had instead been The Carroll O'Connor Show, IF the aforementioned lead actor had been an outspoken racist and right-winger in real life, and IF the show was therefore designed so that the star's character always got the good lines and always prevailed in debate.
Not. Quite. The. Same. Thing.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)The ironic thing is a lot of people empathized with Archie. I would also add Archie grew in his role and wasn't same bigot at the end he was in the beginning.
Lint Head
(15,064 posts)and the producers and money folk think All in the Family was a hit so they intended to use that formula. Not realizing that the actor and the role mean something in this situation.
Formula is the stuff made of television. Television productions will run a formula into the ground to the point where there is no longer a formula just a stain of its former existence.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)In the trailer I saw, it was the opposite. Jackie and her views were portrayed as wild eye and wacko, complete with a pink knit cap worn inside to eat dinner with family, while Roseanne (seated, speaking in a normal voice, with a smile) is portrayed as the sensible one.
We have come full circle. What should be horrendous viewpoints (like Archie) are being normalized and portrayed as the sensible viewpoint. Trump is portrayed as the good guy. It's an advertisement for Trump.
Advertisements work. That's why companies pay billions for them. And this one will last for months or years, right up to the 2020 election.
This is why Trump called Roseanne to congratulate her, and pushed the show at least twice on stage.
Lint Head
(15,064 posts)nolabear
(41,991 posts)Jackie has been an enthusiastic supporter of everything shes ever done. She was a cop and plunged into that every much as fully. It was funny but admirable. It still is. She reached out to her sister and apologized and loved Roseanne anyway when she couldnt.
I cant understand why our liberal brethren insist on being offended by her. Jackie was, and is, a decent, funny, emotional human being who has a huge heart and is the perfect foil for Roseannes tight, bitchy conviction that its her way or the highway-which is never, of course, the case. And thats the point.
B2G
(9,766 posts)nolabear
(41,991 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)Thank you in advance.
nolabear
(41,991 posts)Punch up. We can take it because we are mighty.
Tipperary
(6,930 posts)You have not seen the show. How silly to comment on it.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)Thank you in advance.
Tipperary
(6,930 posts)Why is Roseanne more important to you than Stephon Clark? Did she refuse you an autograph at some point?
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)Never had the displeasure of meeting her. I do have Muhammad Ali's autograph. That's worth 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 Roseanne's autographs. That being said I will take the high road, be the better person, and not respond in kind.
GusBob
(7,286 posts)Perhaps you could answer this:
It has been reported as an "incredibly honest" and "accurate" portrayal of family life in Trumps America. Trump himself in a recent speech says "it's about us! ......they don't get it" (they being the 18 million viewers, I guess....interesting choice of words given the post 32 above)
Yet the lead character is toned down from her real-life points of view and the liberal character is amped up to be made a jester and a fool
Do you think it is an accurate depiction of family life in Trumps America?
nolabear
(41,991 posts)There are many, many Trumps Americas. I think the show is a story about one type of family that could be Trump voters. And it tries to show that particular type with possible options.
My impression of the Connors is theyre shown as people who cant manage their own convictions, for bad and good. Theres a scene where they go looking for their gun because there are kids around now. They have one (a philosophical choice) but its in the freezer in an ice cream container that theyve long forgotten (they cant live up to the philosophical ideal). They clearly would oppose Obamacare but cant afford their meds so have to share (which is so sad and stupid).
Note that I think Roseanne herself is and has always been an interesting kind of crazy. She seems to have a really compartmentalized mind and when shes in one state shes in it all the way. And the states dont have a lot of continuity.
People will project what they respond to into the characters and flesh them out far beyond what they actually show. Its what we do. Will Roseanne normalize 45? No, I dont think so. At one time she might have but there are too many characters out there now. Shell be a character and no more. The people doing actual good and harm in real life are a whole different story.
GusBob
(7,286 posts)RandomAccess
(5,210 posts)Exaggeration and caricature are widely used in comedy.
This is wrong too:
Again, it's not a documentary so Roseanne's character doesn't need to match her real life persona. Nor is Jackie "amped up to be made a jester and a fool." Its a comedy. For the most part, they are ALL likely to get to play the fool eventually (well, maybe not the little kids).
I can tell you this -- I have never considered myself working class (blue collar), but I've always found humor and entertainment in the show. Some of Roseanne's cracks, or Jackie's, or Dan's have resonated with me. I think that means that it reflects one layer of life in America whether Trump's POTUS or not, and that the writers are very talented.
GusBob
(7,286 posts)Take it up with VOX, the NTTimes and Trump
And I didn't call Jackie a jester or fool. Read that here too. Post 33
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)Since this is Easter let me say you fought the good fight, you finished the race, and you kept your faith.
Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)I have family more liberal than me, and I make that distinction for a reason as I am probably moderate in comparison and they really liked the show and understood it was all caricature in parts and equally so because that's how we laugh at ourselves. When it mattered, like when she had a "heart to heart" with Jackie and accompanied Mark to school the show got it right. I think an overreaction on our part would not serves us in the end. Aside from it being absurd, in my own opinion. I was actually not a fan of the original for reasons not related to politics as I was mostly apolitical at the time it ran, and I really enjoyed it this time.
Tipperary
(6,930 posts)It is sad that people who have not seen the show keep on making comments on it.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)the brand right up to the 2020 election.
Popaganda is something people want to watch. Otherwise, it wouldn't work. No matter it present a false view (like Roseanne's pro-Trump views being presented as the sensible viewpoint, with her seated & speaking in a normal voice, while Jackie is presented standing up, acting wildly and wild-eyed, speaking loudly but no facts stated).
It's so obvious. But apparently it's working. Look at the Democrats in this forum who can't see it for what it is. Gotta hand it to 'em. They finally found a way to crack the wall against authoritarianism, Trumpism, and Russia.
Watch for his poll numbers to go up.
Blue_Adept
(6,402 posts)It's meant to go beyond the norm while playing with heart in the mix.
There are a range of sitcoms, and we've seen more "dramedys" in the last decade that changes the perspective a bit.
It's also a very basic thing in that the longer a series runs, the more cartoonish it gets. Compare first and ninth seasons of Modern Family for example.
onecaliberal
(32,894 posts)There is no good Republican voter. Not one.
BannonsLiver
(16,448 posts)What Ive also noticed is the show primarily appeals to low info types which exist in every corner of the political spectrum.
cwydro
(51,308 posts)Classy.
And pathetic.
BannonsLiver
(16,448 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)The only difference between some posters and the poster you are deriding is he doesn't couch his attacks in passive aggressive language.
Tipperary
(6,930 posts)have posted numerous threads. You say you have not seen the show, so you are commenting without knowledge.
Funny, I have seen a gazillion threads on Roseanne, but few on the Stephon Clark shooting. Apparently, many here are simply obsessed with celebrities and their idiocy, while ignoring real life injustice and true outrage,
Blue_Adept
(6,402 posts)I keep wishing that the Elections 2018 forum would open so I could put this one on ignore for awhile.
Tipperary
(6,930 posts)Close to a dozen ops by my count, numerous postings of the despicable cookie photo. Not a peep about Stephon Clark. Priorities I guess.
LAS14
(13,783 posts)... is a topic where DUers can legitimately disagree. There's the "artist vs art" thing. There's the "it's comedy vs why is Jackie portrayed so crazy" thing. There's the "real life vs not in my world" thing. There's not much to debate on DU about Stephon Clark. We pretty much agree and are limited to expressing our outrage.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)Close to a dozen ops by my count..."
-Tipperary
But as I have repeatedly said I will take the high road, be the bigger poster, and not respond in kind, for now.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)Thank you in advance.
regnaD kciN
(26,045 posts)Seriously, this "why should anyone talk about a TV show because Stephon Clark?" line is really Whataboutism at its "finest."
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)"Whataboutism " is the usual province of what group ?
Oneironaut
(5,524 posts)LAS14
(13,783 posts)BannonsLiver
(16,448 posts)Reading some of the passionate defenses of an obvious low brow trump humping shit stain on humanity like Roseanne, Im reminded of this character:
The devotion gets creepier by the minute.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)I am reluctant speak ill of our fellow members but it is interesting to see Roseanne/Trump detractors derided on a progressive board
nolabear
(41,991 posts)I think in part its a very understandable fear, and a real problem. Its that poem/song that asshole likes to quote. If youre liberal and progressive youre the woman who takes the sneaky, venomous snake in and you sow the seeds of your own destruction. But if you seek to destroy those who want to oppose your ideals and rights you become them.
Its a dilemma far more for liberals than right wingers, who do indeed seem happy to let a fascist government suppress others and cant imaginr the price theyll ultimately pay.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)For that reason alone I won't watch her series. More than one poster in this thread has personally attacked me for holding those views. I have done my best to not personally attack those here who like her.
I am not calling for a boycott because I believe it would be futile. I am using this forum to vent about her.
LAS14
(13,783 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)nolabear
(41,991 posts)Ill watch because Im really curious and as a writer I have a lifelong fascination with why. Why everything! 🤔
misanthrope
(7,428 posts)I've seen that distinction made clear in the past when posters have shown allegiance to progressive ideals over party loyalty.
Cha
(297,655 posts)"Progressive".. We want Progress and we go about working for it.
nolabear
(41,991 posts)Speaking for myself, I dont give her that much power. Shes an interesting topic for conversation right now mostly because of all the sturm und drang surrounding her. Shell provide that and someone else will provide something else and well go on. With luck in real life we'll go on to make life better for ourselves and others. Even the ones who fight us on it.
liberalnarb
(4,532 posts)I remember reading an article that called her "The Red Queen" as she once described herself as a Socialist.
GusBob
(7,286 posts)If you haven't watched the fictional TV show, shut up about the real person
That's when it's time to put down your remote
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts) Roseanne Barr (@therealroseanne) December 28, 2017
http://www.towleroad.com/2017/12/roseanne-trump/
Demsrule86
(68,667 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)Is a pussyhat part of your everyday attire ?
What do you think is the motive behind suggesting that it is everyday attire for women with liberal views ?
Demsrule86
(68,667 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)Demsrule86
(68,667 posts)it to the death kind of liberal". I wear my pink sweatshirt and hat at protests against Trump and for immigration...I didn't wear it at the March for our lives protest in Youngstown...because it is about the kids. I merely carried a sign. Roseanne has every right to attempt to 'normalize' Trump, but I have the right not to support it....same with Laura Ingraham.
HopeAgain
(4,407 posts)samnsara
(17,635 posts)benld74
(9,909 posts)Archie loved, America, Nixon, the flag
Hated people the opposite of himself
Roseanne isnt as bad
She voices similar things
Intelligent people should be able to
Read between the lines
I did as a teen with Archie,,,,
BannonsLiver
(16,448 posts)First, Caroll OConnor was actually talented. Two, in real life he was a liberal. In real life Roseanne is a goose stepping fascist halfwit.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)JI7
(89,264 posts)with roseanne it's the opposite. real life ass while trying to make her and other trump supporters out to be something other than what they really are.
"we almost lost the house" bs.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)ChoppinBroccoli
(3,784 posts)The political stuff was crowbarred into the show in such a hamfisted way that it lost all its authenticity. It felt like if your friend invited you to a get-together, and then when you got there, you found out the get-together was just a ruse to sell Tupperware or Avon or Amway or whatever people try to foist on their friends these days. It was like, "Oh, you liked the potato salad? Well just think how much you'll like it TOMORROW when you enjoy it out of your.........brand new Tupperware food storage system!!!"
The reason people liked the old "Roseanne" show years ago because it felt authentic, like a real, working class family. This version of the show is written so terribly, that it just feels like a vehicle for SOMEONE to force their political beliefs on an unsuspecting audience.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)However why is a boycott of Laura Ingraham for her noxious tweets justified but a boycott of Roseanne for her noxious tweets not justified ? Is it because some people find the latter funny?
Oh, they both attacked David Hogg in a tweet. Ingraham attacked David for not getting into the college of his choice, Barr said Hogg gave a NAZI salute.
customerserviceguy
(25,183 posts)Also, the Jackie character was written to be a bit flighty, always trying to find herself by trying out various occupations that she ended up leaving. The "life coach" theme fits in with that, especially since Jackie has never been a 100% stable individual.
The pussy hat and the T shirt were not meant to be "everyday garb", but a political statement for meeting up with Roseanne for the first time since the election. It was a pre-planned visit to pick up Darlene for a job interview.
I was amused by the show, I can laugh at humor from whatever side it's presented from.